Sensational-Adelaide.com

timtam20292 wrote:I side with Norman.

Everyone loves Norman.

claybro wrote:I have to put my hand up and say I am not a fan of Obahn, but understand the usefulness and relative lower cost. MY main objection is the quality of the ride and noise levels as compared to light rail, however much of the argument here, seems focused on capacity and one seat door to door rides. With this in mind, is there any figures relating to the percentage of commuters using the Obahn as park and ride, or from connecting services to various stations? (I may have missed this in the heat of this thread). If a larger percentage of patrons are using the service from connections or driving to their nearest station, then it sort of negates the door to door benefit.

Anecdote time, but I used to live up near the Old Spot Hotel (Elizabeth/Salisbury border) and would catch the Obahn bus into the CBD every morning. Even accounting for it having to drive up to TTP first it was still quicker than going along the road, and the bus was always busy at that point.

I know I'm coming in late here, but the idea of ripping up the one piece of Adelaide infrastructure that works really well to replace it with trams is just baffling.
My entire uni degree was studied with me catching the bus at Greenwith and it then meandering to TTP picking up people and whizzing us all into the city from TTP in about 15 minutes. I like trams, I'd love to see Adelaide's tram network increase in size, but O-bahn works. A tram would require every single person who is currently picked up as the bus meanders through the NE suburbs to drive and then park at TTP or paradise.

We didn't argue about ripping up the obahn just whether a rail or bus way would have been better

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

citywatcher wrote:We didn't argue about ripping up the obahn just whether a rail or bus way would have been better

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

Who cares about might have beens? The O-bahn works, it's popular and with a few (minor) improvements would be perfect.

I'm thinking proper stations at paradise and TTP with multi-storey parking and a station concourse with small shops etc.

Kasey771 wrote:

citywatcher wrote:We didn't argue about ripping up the obahn just whether a rail or bus way would have been better

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

Who cares about might have beens? The O-bahn works, it's popular and with a few (minor) improvements would be perfect.

I'm thinking proper stations at paradise and TTP with multi-storey parking and a station concourse with small shops etc.

Good for you
I see that uni ed wasn't wasted

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

Kasey771 wrote:

citywatcher wrote:We didn't argue about ripping up the obahn just whether a rail or bus way would have been better

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

Who cares about might have beens? The O-bahn works, it's popular and with a few (minor) improvements would be perfect.

I'm thinking proper stations at paradise and TTP with multi-storey parking and a station concourse with small shops etc.

Hey Kasey, thanks for weighing in. Transit enthusiasts care, its just a bit of harmless debate about what could have been, and what would technically have been better.

If it had have been a light rail line, the current network would have probably been buses as they currently are to the interchange, where passengers would transfer to a tram. High rise carparking at interchanges would only encourage car dependency.

As others and yourself has said, the current o-bahn works well. The main benefit I see that would have come from light rail would have been the significantly lower number of buses on the CBD streets. Other than that their function is very similar, excepting that the o-bahn doesn't require passengers to transfer.

fishinajar wrote:
If it had have been a light rail line, the current network would have probably been buses as they currently are to the interchange, where passengers would transfer to a tram. High rise carparking at interchanges would only encourage car dependency.

As others and yourself has said, the current o-bahn works well. The main benefit I see that would have come from light rail would have been the significantly lower number of buses on the CBD streets. Other than that their function is very similar, excepting that the o-bahn doesn't require passengers to transfer.

The O-Bahn buses also travel much faster on the O-Bahn track than trams do on the reserved track to Glenelg. Even allowing for the need to stop more frequently, the trams don't push it between those stops. There's no way the existing tram operation could improve on the O-Bahn unless there was a big change in the tram operation. I don’t see that happening.

rubberman wrote:The O-Bahn buses also travel much faster on the O-Bahn track than trams do on the reserved track to Glenelg. Even allowing for the need to stop more frequently, the trams don't push it between those stops. There's no way the existing tram operation could improve on the O-Bahn unless there was a big change in the tram operation. I don’t see that happening.

The Glenelg tram comparison is often mentioned here, but not really relevant. The operation of the tram, both on the reserved corridor and the streets is a complete joke, and not an accurate guide as to what would be possible. Reading through all of the responses on this thread, the main perceived benefits of OBahn seem to be
1. single seat journeys.
2. flexibility of destinations.
3. cost.
And fair enough. But something really needs to be done about Grenfell street if they are to commit to OBahn- it really diminishes the whole thing.-A light rail on this stretch would be running on its own reserved corridor.

claybro wrote:

rubberman wrote:The O-Bahn buses also travel much faster on the O-Bahn track than trams do on the reserved track to Glenelg. Even allowing for the need to stop more frequently, the trams don't push it between those stops. There's no way the existing tram operation could improve on the O-Bahn unless there was a big change in the tram operation. I don’t see that happening.

The Glenelg tram comparison is often mentioned here, but not really relevant. The operation of the tram, both on the reserved corridor and the streets is a complete joke, and not an accurate guide as to what would be possible. Reading through all of the responses on this thread, the main perceived benefits of OBahn seem to be
1. single seat journeys.
2. flexibility of destinations.
3. cost.
And fair enough. But something really needs to be done about Grenfell street if they are to commit to OBahn- it really diminishes the whole thing.-A light rail on this stretch would be running on its own reserved corridor.

I catch the 559 from Grenfell St .
This leaves the track at Paradise and travels through Dernancourt Hope Valley Highbury and Vista.
It's not hugely patronised. Yesterday it went straight past me with the sorry full sign. Can guarantee it would have emptied at Paradise and there's me for whom the service was designed stranded back in the city. ...

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

citywatcher wrote:I catch the 559 from Grenfell St .
This leaves the track at Paradise and travels through Dernancourt Hope Valley Highbury and Vista.
It's not hugely patronised. Yesterday it went straight past me with the sorry full sign. Can guarantee it would have emptied at Paradise and there's me for whom the service was designed stranded back in the city. ...

Is that because the main routes are too busy and people are going to the 55* stop to 'sneak' on to the 559? That's not a system flaw, that's a scheduling issue.

Also 559 used to start at Paradise and you'd have to get a connecting bus from Grenfell Street. Similar problem offpeak when the main route bus that "connects" to your feeder service is full and you have no choice but to wait for another half hour for the next feeder.

claybro wrote:...something really needs to be done about Grenfell street if they are to commit to OBahn- it really diminishes the whole thing.-A light rail on this stretch would be running on its own reserved corridor.

citywatcher wrote:I catch the 559 from Grenfell St .
This leaves the track at Paradise and travels through Dernancourt Hope Valley Highbury and Vista.
It's not hugely patronised. Yesterday it went straight past me with the sorry full sign. Can guarantee it would have emptied at Paradise and there's me for whom the service was designed stranded back in the city. ...

As volumes increase I predict we'll eventually see some bus routes going to feeder roles only and terminating at the interchanges. Generic higher capacity "O'bahn busses could then run to the interchanges, either all 3 and then turn around at TTG, or could run express to one interchange only.
Such dedicated high capacity buses could be built extra long with multiple articulated sections. Modification might be required at the interchanges to allow such busses the turning circle required to turn around. Buses could utilise Light Sq to turn around at the city end.

claybro wrote:

rubberman wrote:The O-Bahn buses also travel much faster on the O-Bahn track than trams do on the reserved track to Glenelg. Even allowing for the need to stop more frequently, the trams don't push it between those stops. There's no way the existing tram operation could improve on the O-Bahn unless there was a big change in the tram operation. I don’t see that happening.

The Glenelg tram comparison is often mentioned here, but not really relevant. The operation of the tram, both on the reserved corridor and the streets is a complete joke, and not an accurate guide as to what would be possible. Reading through all of the responses on this thread, the main perceived benefits of OBahn seem to be
1. single seat journeys.
2. flexibility of destinations.
3. cost.
And fair enough. But something really needs to be done about Grenfell street if they are to commit to OBahn- it really diminishes the whole thing.-A light rail on this stretch would be running on its own reserved corridor.

It's relevant because that's the real alternative to the O-Bahn. Some idealised operation that would never have happened is not an alternative. Remember, we're still getting Citadis! LOL!

I believe that DTPI and Light-City Buses are working on an overhaul of O-Bahn bus timetables to operate when the new tunnel opens in late December(hopefully it is ready on time!)
They along with the City Council are looking at plans to reduce vehicle traffic in Currie and Grenfell Streets(between Hindmarsh and Light Squares) so that it becomes a bus/pedestrian/bike mall at peak times to improve bus flow, especially with more buses using these streets. Could be an interesting 6 or 7 months.

Definitely a systematic shortfall and putting band aids on the problem and not comparing like for like won't solve it. A tram is a tram wether it goes to Glenelg or anywhere else.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk