Sensational-Adelaide.com

SBD wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 2:08 pm

Business travellers and inbound tourists might mostly want the CBD, but if they are not prepared to walk to SDBD to catch a passing tram, they probably don't want to walk far the other end either. The Melbourne Airport Bus system takes you right to the door of almost any CBD hotel you need, but not down St Kilda Rd, and only to the set list of places they go (I needed to name a hotel to use it to visit my Dad in hospital as they would not drop off at the hospital, but would happily drop me at the hotel opposite once I worked out its name). Many business travellers will use taxis as it saves them having to learn to navigate in a strange city at all.

Outbound passengers don't typically start from the Adelaide CBD, so having luggage support for the spoke from the CBD to the airport is only useful in our hub-and-spoke transport network if all the other spokes can handle us bringing our luggage to the CBD and transferring to the airport line. Adelaide doesn't generally deal well with bringing a big suitcase on our public transport, so nobody tries. We drive to the airport or lean on a friend to drop us off/pick us up if we don't like the taxi fares from home.

How many of what kinds of people might use a tram with a dead-end stop at the airport plaza/hotel? I doubt it's a whole tramload per day!

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:02 pm

SBD wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 2:08 pm

Business travellers and inbound tourists might mostly want the CBD, but if they are not prepared to walk to SDBD to catch a passing tram, they probably don't want to walk far the other end either. The Melbourne Airport Bus system takes you right to the door of almost any CBD hotel you need, but not down St Kilda Rd, and only to the set list of places they go (I needed to name a hotel to use it to visit my Dad in hospital as they would not drop off at the hospital, but would happily drop me at the hotel opposite once I worked out its name). Many business travellers will use taxis as it saves them having to learn to navigate in a strange city at all.

An airport tram link would more then likely go as close as possible to the terminal. The tram in the city already passes several of the city’s major hotels. Hilton, a whole host of hotels on north terrace, and several along king William st. A city loop would bring more hotels within the tram network.

Outbound passengers don't typically start from the Adelaide CBD, so having luggage support for the spoke from the CBD to the airport is only useful in our hub-and-spoke transport network if all the other spokes can handle us bringing our luggage to the CBD and transferring to the airport line. Adelaide doesn't generally deal well with bringing a big suitcase on our public transport, so nobody tries. We drive to the airport or lean on a friend to drop us off/pick us up if we don't like the taxi fares from home.

How many of what kinds of people might use a tram with a dead-end stop at the airport plaza/hotel? I doubt it's a whole tramload per day!

A lot of what I’m reading here amounts to “change, therefore locals won’t like it”. That’s exactly what’s wrong with this town. Too many scared of change too scared of moving an inch out of their comfort zone and daily routine. I’m surprised we even have any need for an international airport lol.

We need big bold projects to shock the towns folk out of their country town slumber.

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:02 pm

SBD wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 2:08 pm

Business travellers and inbound tourists might mostly want the CBD, but if they are not prepared to walk to SDBD to catch a passing tram, they probably don't want to walk far the other end either. The Melbourne Airport Bus system takes you right to the door of almost any CBD hotel you need, but not down St Kilda Rd, and only to the set list of places they go (I needed to name a hotel to use it to visit my Dad in hospital as they would not drop off at the hospital, but would happily drop me at the hotel opposite once I worked out its name). Many business travellers will use taxis as it saves them having to learn to navigate in a strange city at all.

An airport tram link would more then likely go as close as possible to the terminal. The tram in the city already passes several of the city’s major hotels. Hilton, a whole host of hotels on north terrace, and several along king William st. A city loop would bring more hotels within the tram network.

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:02 pm

Outbound passengers don't typically start from the Adelaide CBD, so having luggage support for the spoke from the CBD to the airport is only useful in our hub-and-spoke transport network if all the other spokes can handle us bringing our luggage to the CBD and transferring to the airport line. Adelaide doesn't generally deal well with bringing a big suitcase on our public transport, so nobody tries. We drive to the airport or lean on a friend to drop us off/pick us up if we don't like the taxi fares from home.

How many of what kinds of people might use a tram with a dead-end stop at the airport plaza/hotel? I doubt it's a whole tramload per day!

A lot of what I’m reading here amounts to “change, therefore locals won’t like it”. That’s exactly what’s wrong with this town. Too many scared of change too scared of moving an inch out of their comfort zone and daily routine. I’m surprised we even have any need for an international airport lol.

We need big bold projects to shock the towns folk out of their country town slumber.

rubberman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:40 pm

In one sense I agree. However, just look on the steel wheel on rail forums on this site:

A new tram system likely to cost $4bn based on the $100m/kM quoted for the North Adelaide extension.

Electrifying Gawler. Say half a billion?

City Loop underground. Got to be a couple of billion?

Regional rail. A billion?

This proposal. Half a billion? Paid for by excessive interest charges.

That's eight billion.

ml69 wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:49 pm

[...]

Trams running on roads can never truly be rapid transit.

ml69 wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:49 pm

rubberman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:40 pm

In one sense I agree. However, just look on the steel wheel on rail forums on this site:

A new tram system likely to cost $4bn based on the $100m/kM quoted for the North Adelaide extension.

Electrifying Gawler. Say half a billion?

City Loop underground. Got to be a couple of billion?

Regional rail. A billion?

This proposal. Half a billion? Paid for by excessive interest charges.

That's eight billion.

Electrify Gawler + then City Underground rail has the most potential to benefit the most people by providing a true rapid transit system to the southern, north-western and northern suburbs of Adelaide, which complements the Obahn to the north-east. I mean rapid transit that actually makes people want to shift from cars into public transport because it is a much faster way to get into the CBD.

Trams running on roads can never truly be rapid transit.

rubberman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:40 pm

I mentioned the possibility of cyclists paying for cycleways a couple of years back here. I was howled down. So, what chance anyone being willing to pay for these big bold projects?

Nort wrote:

rubberman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:40 pm

I mentioned the possibility of cyclists paying for cycleways a couple of years back here. I was howled down. So, what chance anyone being willing to pay for these big bold projects?

I think many cyclists would happily pay for cycleways if that is partnered with getting a tax refund on the part of their tax going towards normal roads.

Waewick wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 21, 2018 11:20 am

Nort wrote:

rubberman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:40 pm

I mentioned the possibility of cyclists paying for cycleways a couple of years back here. I was howled down. So, what chance anyone being willing to pay for these big bold projects?

I think many cyclists would happily pay for cycleways if that is partnered with getting a tax refund on the part of their tax going towards normal roads.

It is insane how many people imagine cyclists get this free hit on a road.

Nort wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 21, 2018 1:17 pm

Waewick wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 21, 2018 11:20 am

Nort wrote:
I think many cyclists would happily pay for cycleways if that is partnered with getting a tax refund on the part of their tax going towards normal roads.

It is insane how many people imagine cyclists get this free hit on a road.

Free hit?

Nort wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:53 am

rubberman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:40 pm

I mentioned the possibility of cyclists paying for cycleways a couple of years back here. I was howled down. So, what chance anyone being willing to pay for these big bold projects?

I think many cyclists would happily pay for cycleways if that is partnered with getting a tax refund on the part of their tax going towards normal roads.

rubberman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:40 pm

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:02 pm

SBD wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 2:08 pm

Business travellers and inbound tourists might mostly want the CBD, but if they are not prepared to walk to SDBD to catch a passing tram, they probably don't want to walk far the other end either. The Melbourne Airport Bus system takes you right to the door of almost any CBD hotel you need, but not down St Kilda Rd, and only to the set list of places they go (I needed to name a hotel to use it to visit my Dad in hospital as they would not drop off at the hospital, but would happily drop me at the hotel opposite once I worked out its name). Many business travellers will use taxis as it saves them having to learn to navigate in a strange city at all.

An airport tram link would more then likely go as close as possible to the terminal. The tram in the city already passes several of the city’s major hotels. Hilton, a whole host of hotels on north terrace, and several along king William st. A city loop would bring more hotels within the tram network.

Outbound passengers don't typically start from the Adelaide CBD, so having luggage support for the spoke from the CBD to the airport is only useful in our hub-and-spoke transport network if all the other spokes can handle us bringing our luggage to the CBD and transferring to the airport line. Adelaide doesn't generally deal well with bringing a big suitcase on our public transport, so nobody tries. We drive to the airport or lean on a friend to drop us off/pick us up if we don't like the taxi fares from home.

How many of what kinds of people might use a tram with a dead-end stop at the airport plaza/hotel? I doubt it's a whole tramload per day!

A lot of what I’m reading here amounts to “change, therefore locals won’t like it”. That’s exactly what’s wrong with this town. Too many scared of change too scared of moving an inch out of their comfort zone and daily routine. I’m surprised we even have any need for an international airport lol.

We need big bold projects to shock the towns folk out of their country town slumber.

In one sense I agree. However, just look on the steel wheel on rail forums on this site:

A new tram system likely to cost $4bn based on the $100m/kM quoted for the North Adelaide extension.

Electrifying Gawler. Say half a billion?

City Loop underground. Got to be a couple of billion?


Regional rail. A billion?

This proposal. Half a billion? Paid for by excessive interest charges.

That's eight billion.

Then there’s plenty of other groups with their hands out as well. I bet the RAA has a wish list of another eight billion. Bank on it.

Then there’s bikeways and more schools, and more sports grounds, and and.

There's people out there saying they want twenty billion dollars worth of projects. Many of them quite worthy, and some arguably more worthy than a line to the airport. In fact, the previous government spent something like $2.7bn on heavy rail. How bold is that? A new Adelaide Oval plus bridge. If that wasn't half a billion, I'd be surprised.



I have no problem with the State undertaking big, bold projects, like you say. But I can't see them spending $20bn. In that case, someone will miss out unless we all agree to some hefty tax rises. Hahaha.

It doesn't take much imagination to work out that the money will go to either something economically viable, or which gets a lot of votes. That second is your big, bold project classification.

I don't see the average punter out there thinking trams or heavy rail as being big, bold vote getters. So, unless the steel wheel on rail projects are economic, they realistically don't sit at the top of the pile.

I just don't see that the state can pay for most of these things without big tax rises. Can you really see that happening?

I mentioned the possibility of cyclists paying for cycleways a couple of years back here. I was howled down. So, what chance anyone being willing to pay for these big bold projects?

SBD wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:44 pm

If it's a dead-end tram terminus, then it needs enough passengers to justify its existence. My San Jose experience was that the airport was just one stop along a through route to other areas of the suburbs. Sir Donald Bradman Drive is no further than the long-stay car park. The successful examples in other cities are Sydney where the train also services other suburbs further out, and Brisbane, which is a dead-end but on a much longer route than just the Adelaide airport to CBD (it goes through Brisbane to the Gold Coast, and pre-booked trips get free transfers to the Gold Coast hotels and venues).

rev wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 21, 2018 5:40 pm

rubberman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:40 pm

rev wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:02 pm

An airport tram link would more then likely go as close as possible to the terminal. The tram in the city already passes several of the city’s major hotels. Hilton, a whole host of hotels on north terrace, and several along king William st. A city loop would bring more hotels within the tram network.



A lot of what I’m reading here amounts to “change, therefore locals won’t like it”. That’s exactly what’s wrong with this town. Too many scared of change too scared of moving an inch out of their comfort zone and daily routine. I’m surprised we even have any need for an international airport lol.

We need big bold projects to shock the towns folk out of their country town slumber.

In one sense I agree. However, just look on the steel wheel on rail forums on this site:

A new tram system likely to cost $4bn based on the $100m/kM quoted for the North Adelaide extension.

Electrifying Gawler. Say half a billion?

City Loop underground. Got to be a couple of billion?


Regional rail. A billion?

This proposal. Half a billion? Paid for by excessive interest charges.

That's eight billion.

Then there’s plenty of other groups with their hands out as well. I bet the RAA has a wish list of another eight billion. Bank on it.

Then there’s bikeways and more schools, and more sports grounds, and and.

There's people out there saying they want twenty billion dollars worth of projects. Many of them quite worthy, and some arguably more worthy than a line to the airport. In fact, the previous government spent something like $2.7bn on heavy rail. How bold is that? A new Adelaide Oval plus bridge. If that wasn't half a billion, I'd be surprised.



I have no problem with the State undertaking big, bold projects, like you say. But I can't see them spending $20bn. In that case, someone will miss out unless we all agree to some hefty tax rises. Hahaha.

It doesn't take much imagination to work out that the money will go to either something economically viable, or which gets a lot of votes. That second is your big, bold project classification.

I don't see the average punter out there thinking trams or heavy rail as being big, bold vote getters. So, unless the steel wheel on rail projects are economic, they realistically don't sit at the top of the pile.

I just don't see that the state can pay for most of these things without big tax rises. Can you really see that happening?

I mentioned the possibility of cyclists paying for cycleways a couple of years back here. I was howled down. So, what chance anyone being willing to pay for these big bold projects?

So needed infrastructure to improve our city shouldn’t be built because it cost too much, instead we should compromise(like they did with the one way southern expressway), and then one day in the future pay more to fix or adjust those things to the standard they should have been done originally?

The demands and whinging of various interest groups shouldn’t be what dictates policy and what gets done or how.

Big tax increases can be avoided or minimised by creating new industries and/or expanding existing industries to create jobs. More people working = more people paying taxes, levies, etc. A growing economy/jobs will attract new residents, therefore also growing the revenue pie for government.

rev wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 21, 2018 5:46 pm

SBD wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:44 pm

If it's a dead-end tram terminus, then it needs enough passengers to justify its existence. My San Jose experience was that the airport was just one stop along a through route to other areas of the suburbs. Sir Donald Bradman Drive is no further than the long-stay car park. The successful examples in other cities are Sydney where the train also services other suburbs further out, and Brisbane, which is a dead-end but on a much longer route than just the Adelaide airport to CBD (it goes through Brisbane to the Gold Coast, and pre-booked trips get free transfers to the Gold Coast hotels and venues).

Would it necessarily need to run only to the airport? Why not run down to West Beach and head north to Henley Beach and Grange, or even to Semaphore?