Sensational-Adelaide.com

Could be that they rev down more when idling compared to the old engine

Joelmark wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:03 am

The 3000 class- yes they are diesel trains but they are good trains. The majority were built in the 1990s- they were released progressively from 1987 to 1996. I remember as a kid waiting for the train at Munno Para and hoping we'd get either a "New Train" (the 3000 class) or "Jumbo" instead of a "Red Hen". London Underground still has trains operating from 1973 (!)
With this mechanical refurb and fresh coat of paint, they can continue to serve Adelaide well into the foreseeable future.
I support electrification big-time but safe and modern stations and clean and regular services are just as important in attracting and retaining passengers.

With the speed of the electrification rollout, they may well need to serving into the foreseeable future-but the 3000 series have worked well so far. Also agree that modern clean stations and environs are just as important as the trains themselves.
On the subject of train maintenance and manufacture, I am really surprised the state government did not press for some rail manufacturing in Adelaide, particularly with the demise of Holden, considering the new trains and trams that will be required. Bombardier make both, and already manufacture the new trains in Victoria.
The new state government here in WA made it an election commitment to not only spend billions expanding and cross linking the train network, they made a commitment that all new railcars for the new Metronet will be manufactured here in Perth. Not sure if that is assembly only, or bolt ons from Bombardier in Qld.

Electrification should have been done decades ago, perhaps in conjunction with the retirement of the Hens.

The 2008/9 state budget included converting 58 of the diesel trains to electric operation (pages 8-9), which is consistent with my recollection that was intended to be possible when they were new. It''s interesting that the rail upgrades seem to have all been allowed to slide, but the "major North‐South corridor study for South Road" has progressed to do all of the easy bits. The budget also provided for an upgrade of the Diagonal Road/Morphett Road intersection but didn't mention a railway line anywhere near it.

SBD wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 06, 2018 3:51 pm

The 2008/9 state budget included converting 58 of the diesel trains to electric operation (pages 8-9), which is consistent with my recollection that was intended to be possible when they were new. It''s interesting that the rail upgrades seem to have all been allowed to slide, but the "major North‐South corridor study for South Road" has progressed to do all of the easy bits. The budget also provided for an upgrade of the Diagonal Road/Morphett Road intersection but didn't mention a railway line anywhere near it.

Regarding the conversion of some of the 3000 series to electric, I believe this was a decision relevant to the then timescale of electrification of the whole network (excluding Belair). It was envisaged the supply and cost of the new 4000 series would not keep up with the timeline of the new electrified lines. This is now deemed irrelevant due to the snails pace of electrification of the system as a whole. I don't believe Dandenong will have any problems keeping up with Adelaides "rush order" of a handful of new trains every decade or so. Also, you seem to think that everything is being thrown at South road at the expense of the rail system....not sure if this is the case, but on a purely economic benefit to the state, the North/South link is becoming critical to the ability for South Australia's economy to expand.. the electrification...not so much so.

claybro wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:43 pm

SBD wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 06, 2018 3:51 pm

The 2008/9 state budget included converting 58 of the diesel trains to electric operation (pages 8-9), which is consistent with my recollection that was intended to be possible when they were new. It''s interesting that the rail upgrades seem to have all been allowed to slide, but the "major North‐South corridor study for South Road" has progressed to do all of the easy bits. The budget also provided for an upgrade of the Diagonal Road/Morphett Road intersection but didn't mention a railway line anywhere near it.

Regarding the conversion of some of the 3000 series to electric, I believe this was a decision relevant to the then timescale of electrification of the whole network (excluding Belair). It was envisaged the supply and cost of the new 4000 series would not keep up with the timeline of the new electrified lines. This is now deemed irrelevant due to the snails pace of electrification of the system as a whole. I don't believe Dandenong will have any problems keeping up with Adelaides "rush order" of a handful of new trains every decade or so. Also, you seem to think that everything is being thrown at South road at the expense of the rail system....not sure if this is the case, but on a purely economic benefit to the state, the North/South link is becoming critical to the ability for South Australia's economy to expand.. the electrification...not so much so.

I just noticed it was interesting that it was Labor cancelled the electrification of the Gawler and Outer Harbor lines, but have progressed much further on the road project. People on this forum usually say that it is Liberal that doesn't like funding rail, and puts money into roads instead. I suspect Labor will be quite comfortable sitting in the Opposition benches throwing mud at the Government when it decides to dig trenches across Henley Beach Road and Sir Donald Bradman Drive to put a road in a tunnel under them.

It may well be that the electrification will mean that no 3000-class trains need to be converted to electric, but nice to know that they can be if needed.

It was the newly elected Abbott Government who pulled complete funding for Gawler electrification in 2013 though.

ChillyPhilly wrote:It was the newly elected Abbott Government who pulled complete funding for Gawler electrification in 2013 though.

Was that because it was more advantageous politically to divert that money to the flood devastated Queensland in 2011-ish?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kasey771 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 06, 2018 7:30 pm

ChillyPhilly wrote:It was the newly elected Abbott Government who pulled complete funding for Gawler electrification in 2013 though.

Was that because it was more advantageous politically to divert that money to the flood devastated Queensland in 2011-ish?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wasn't that the money for the major O-Bahn upgrade that never went ahead? I thought it was Abbott who stopped the funding for the electrification works

Didn't Abbott insist on only using infrastructure funds on new roads for basically his entire term?

jorcoga wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 07, 2018 7:46 pm

Didn't Abbott insist on only using infrastructure funds on new roads for basically his entire term?

He claimed that public transport was 'the responsibility of the states'. Technically speaking, he was wrong - it's a national objective for a healthy population, and this involves reducing car use and getting more people on public transport and on bikes or other active forms of transport, such as walking.

But yes, he liked expensive road projects.

The majority of South Australians drive on roads, the minority of South Australians use public transport. South Road was proposed to be upgraded so best for the sa state goverment to take advantage of it whilst they could, get it built faster and win some votes whilst they can.

This state went into recession in early 90s, so why didnt governments at the time stimulate the state's economy by upgrading the railways, electrifying the network and extending the network.

Eurostar wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:53 pm

The majority of South Australians drive on roads, the minority of South Australians use public transport. South Road was proposed to be upgraded so best for the sa state goverment to take advantage of it whilst they could, get it built faster and win some votes whilst they can.

This state went into recession in early 90s, so why didnt governments at the time stimulate the state's economy by upgrading the railways, electrifying the network and extending the network.

Because the state government at the time was wearing the debt, had there not been similar issues interstate, the federal government at the time really should have given us funding to get those projects underway, then maybe almost 30 years later we wouldn't still be trying to resolve issues that were a problem even 40 years ago.

jorcoga wrote:Didn't Abbott insist on only using infrastructure funds on new roads for basically his entire term?

Abbott and many current politicians appear to have been fooled by the false productivity models used by proponents of big road projects. Models that have been eviscerated and exposed as false by new urbanism and the growing understanding of Induced Demand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In the UK the Motorway building boom started in the late 1950’s, got into full swing during the 1960’s and lasted about four decades, but only short links here and there have been added since. The stark reality become obvious, more motorways increased private car usage, more freight onto roads resulting in more and more congestion. During the 1960’s many of the UK lesser used rail links were closed, even dual lines were put back to single line in some cases.

Fast forward to the 21st Century, Rail transport uasge in the UK is higher now than at any time in the previous ‘golden era’ of 1920’s to 1950’s. New rail links are being built, some lines re-duplicated back to pre-1960’s configuration, upgrades to locos, rolling stock & infrastructure etc.

Yes Motorways are important but having key rail links have to be a key part of any transport plan and ignoring that as Abbott did has delayed Australia’s progress on that front. The National Rail Network even for freight requires billions of dollars in upgrades, route changes, all metro trains in high population areas (inc Adelaide) should be electric yesterday, especially when coupled with the renewable energy commercial boom transition in progress. Fast Trains have been nothing more than a discussion paper that gets rolled out every couple of years with no action, the inland freight rail link from Melbourne to Brisbane another, the Adelaide Hills rail bypass, and so it goes on. Yet Victoria took the bull by the horns and revived its key rail links, maybe they worked it out quicker or learnt from other examples elsewhere how key this transport mode is.

I do believe we need the essential vital Motorway links as the minimum, for example North-South Corridor etc, but look at Sydney building more and more Tolled Motorways that have created more and more congestion, if Sydney had expanded its Rail Network during the 1980’s & 1990;s when it should have, the increased population would have been served better now. The 21st Century has been playing catch up to build new rail links in Sydney that were needed decades ago.