Sensational-Adelaide.com

Over complicating, over engineered. Trams down Port Road.
Completely unnecessary, as PeFe has said there's a train line that services most of it. Its not a high density area.

There's areas of Adelaide without adequate public transport that the tens of millions that it would cost for these ideas for Port Road would be better spent in.

In the coming decades there's going to be tens of thousands of new residents living around the Northern Expressway. It will be an area that desperately needs a train line.

Hear Hear Rev


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, nothing needs to be done until the diesels have expired but unless they're refurbished again that's only 10 or so years away so I would have thought a decision needs to be made within the next 3-5 years. I had a chat with a friend who is connected to the very early planning stages a few days ago so there is definitely some work happening on this front.

I don't know how much was shared to me in confidence so my very general understanding (and this is largely echoed by recent news reports anyway) is that battery-electric options are the current prime candidate whilst hydrogen's probably too experimental so isn't really getting much focus. A battery-electric option might potentially only require a small section of the line at one or both ends to be electrified (e.g. as far as Bowden or Croydon) - this would deliver enough charge for a train to run the rest of the route under its own power.

Of course, as with everything this will be completely at the mercy of future governments so who knows what will actually end up happening here - I can easily see a future Liberal government simply replacing the fleet with new "low emission" diesels. Unless Labor suddenly falls in love with trams again (which seems sadly quite unlikely under Malinauskas) I would have thought the corridor will definitely remain as heavy rail in one form or another. Plus, if trams were back on the table I'd rate the Prospect and Norwood lines as a far higher priority given their lack of existing dedicated PT corridors.

If there were to be trams down the OH line's corridor then it would make far more sense to me for the railway to be an express service through to the peninsula and let the trams handle inner suburbs traffic.
But as rev said, it's just not a good use of money. Other areas need the investment far more.

Well the most exciting part of this year's State budget in terms of trains is probably that "Renewal SA has been given $15m over three years to waterproof Adelaide Railway Station." While necessary, I look forward to the Premier selling this as a "game-changer" and the "biggest investment since.... " etc. etc.

Waterproof buildings? What will they think of next?

They should look up upgrading the lighting above the platforms at the ARS too.

A-Town wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 18, 2023 3:26 pm

They should look up upgrading the lighting above the platforms at the ARS too.

The entire ceiling above the platforms at ARS should be torn out and rebuilt. It’s dingy, dark and very low.

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 18, 2023 11:05 pm

A-Town wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 18, 2023 3:26 pm

They should look up upgrading the lighting above the platforms at the ARS too.

The entire ceiling above the platforms at ARS should be torn out and rebuilt. It’s dingy, dark and very low.

I agree

a prominent youtuber who reviews railways all around the world remarked on the depressing ceiling at ARS... I don't think there's much they can do about it now though... the only solution I can see would be to excavate the land underneath the rails and platforms. I can't see them doing that any time this century.

Belair Line out of service due to rock slide. I've never heard of this happening on the Belair Line before.

abc wrote:

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 18, 2023 11:05 pm

A-Town wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 18, 2023 3:26 pm

They should look up upgrading the lighting above the platforms at the ARS too.

The entire ceiling above the platforms at ARS should be torn out and rebuilt. It’s dingy, dark and very low.

I agree

a prominent youtuber who reviews railways all around the world remarked on the depressing ceiling at ARS... I don't think there's much they can do about it now though... the only solution I can see would be to excavate the land underneath the rails and platforms. I can't see them doing that any time this century.

I can see the Riverside Centre being demolished. This would be at least a partial opportunity for this.

I don't think it needs anything near that level of work to make it a more appealing place to be. The colour scheme could be brightened up for a start, together with some clever use of LED lighting features. Once (hopefully/presumably) the entire fleet is electrified the fume hoods won't be required which might open up some opportunities there.

I'd also like to see the platforms opened up to the main concourse around platforms 7-9. There seems to be a very disused retail tenancy behind the coffee shop in the former ticket kiosk so I don't think that would be too large a task.

The main concourse is, luckily, quite grand and certainly better than many stations I've visited around Europe so I don't think all is lost. The platform areas are mainly functional space so I don't feel need to have tens of millions spent on them just for aesthetics.

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 19, 2023 9:39 am

The platform areas are mainly functional space so I don't feel need to have tens of millions spent on them just for aesthetics.

If that was true, the Torrens Footbridge would be a boring straight concrete path because it's "functional, not aesthetic".

Public spaces are allowed to be both functional AND aesthetic. I doubt it would cost tens of millions of dollars to find a way to make the platforms brighter and more welcoming.

Spotto wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 19, 2023 3:05 pm

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 19, 2023 9:39 am

The platform areas are mainly functional space so I don't feel need to have tens of millions spent on them just for aesthetics.

Public spaces are allowed to be both functional AND aesthetic. I doubt it would cost tens of millions of dollars to find a way to make the platforms brighter and more welcoming.

No, but it would cost a huge amount of money to either raise the ceiling height or lower ground/track level which is what was proposed above. Absolutely agree that an aesthetic uplift is needed but I don't think massive civil works are. The height is far from the main problem.

There are plenty of aesthetically pleasing stations with low-ceilings around the world and I've actually always felt the tunnel-like qualities make it feel more like a busy European-style metro hub than the relatively sleepy terminus it actually is. I also think the stark difference in spaces between the main concourse and platforms opens up possibilities for an uber-modern design as there are fewer reasons to keep in line with the heritage style in the remainder of the building.

Something along the lines of this should be perfectly achievable with a relatively minor facelift.

Llessur2002!! I agree with so much of this!

Yes to opening up platforms 7-9 to the concourse! I was actually looking at the boarded up concourse access for these platforms the other day and thinking this.

Yes to this comment “the tunnel-like qualities make it feel more like a busy European-style metro hub than the relatively sleepy terminus it actually is.” It’s so true.

And yes to that minor facelift idea. The photo shows exactly what’s needed within the realms of possibility.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk