News & Discussion: Trams

[claybro]

That's true claybro. Unless they can get the tram costs down, the speeds up, and better utilisation of the tram corridor, trams don't have much advantage in Adelaide on the Otter Habber line.

The sad thing is tram costs could come down, speeds could increase, and corridor utilisation could improve if standard tramway standards and practices were used. However, for some reason, Adelaide uses a philosophy of designing and running a street tramway as if it were a railway. This makes trams an inferior proposition.

What it would take for Adelaide to instal and run a standard tram system is another William Goodman. They are in short supply though.

Not sure why it is so difficult. We buy trams from Europe, when they are already built 700km up the road, and employ people that apparently don't have much clue, when there must be dozens of them in Melbourne with the right expertise we could contract over for a while. surely it is not interstate snobbery? Surely it must not be so hard.

[Norman]

The railcars they used in those days were definitely smaller than the ones they use today. 5 railcars in the 60s is not the same as 5 railcars today.

[rubberman]

That's true claybro. Unless they can get the tram costs down, the speeds up, and better utilisation of the tram corridor, trams don't have much advantage in Adelaide on the Otter Habber line.

The sad thing is tram costs could come down, speeds could increase, and corridor utilisation could improve if standard tramway standards and practices were used. However, for some reason, Adelaide uses a philosophy of designing and running a street tramway as if it were a railway. This makes trams an inferior proposition.

What it would take for Adelaide to instal and run a standard tram system is another William Goodman. They are in short supply though.

Not sure why it is so difficult. We buy trams from Europe, when they are already built 700km up the road, and employ people that apparently don't have much clue, when there must be dozens of them in Melbourne with the right expertise we could contract over for a while. surely it is not interstate snobbery? Surely it must not be so hard.

Well, you've got me there claybro.

The price of a Škoda 15T, top of the range artic is about $4.5m...we paid $6m for the Citadis. Which is a bib and bub clone. Nice looking, well laid out, but a track grinder, witness the developing corrugations in the rails. You tell me why someone would pay $6m for an inferior model? It's like paying 50% more for a Yaris than a Celicia. Why do we have signals at the Entertainment Centre terminus scissors crossover, when the City Terminus never had them and there was never an issue? Why do we have signals at the entry of Morphettville depot, when there was never a signal to enter City Depot? Same at South Terrace sidings vs Morphettville Racecourse sidings. Why do the trams run slower than the H cars for all the excessive price we paid? Why is the overhead far more elaborate (and therefore more costly) than had vastly more trams running under it in the good ole daze?

There's a lot of money being spent on things that were never necessary, and proved not to be necessary in practice over decades, and inferior outcomes achieved. And people want a whole system with this baggage?

[Ho Really]

The railcars they used in those days were definitely smaller than the ones they use today. 5 railcars in the 60s is not the same as 5 railcars today.

Yes, I was referring to the "Red Hens". So roughly four of them would be equal to 3 x 2000 Class or thereabouts.

Cheers

[Llessur2002]

Give us your money Malcolm...

Costed plans for Adelaide tram network to be put to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull

PLANS for an Adelaide tram network will be put to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in a pre-election bid to seize on his demands for light rail to add value to cities.

Campaigning in the marginal western suburbs seat of Hindmarsh yesterday, Mr Turnbull said his government would not simply hand out cash but wanted infrastructure project like light rail to be treated as an investment.

Mr Turnbull said he had told Premier Jay Weatherill and other state leaders that light rail needed to be assessed on how it improved livability, home affordability and housing supply.

Responding to Mr Turnbull, state Transport Minister Stephen Mullighan said costed plans were being prepared for a “menu” of new tram lines to present to the Federal Government ahead of this year’s election.

This detailed business case for the AdeLINK tram network includes lines to The Parade, Henley Square and Adelaide Airport, Prospect Road, Mitcham, Port Adelaide and an Adelaide city loop.

Asked about his Tuesday night meeting with Mr Weatherill, Mr Turnbull said he wanted to see city infrastructure projects based on sound business principles.

“And so I’ve been saying to the premiers, if you want to build light rail, fair enough, (it) can add a lot of value to your city,” Mr Turnbull said.

“But look at it on the basis of how it will build amenity, improve livability, improve housing affordability, improve housing supply.

“Do all of those things that will create real value and ensure that we get projects that are genuinely economically positive for your state or your city.”

Speaking after touring a Plympton childcare centre, Mr Turnbull again highlighted that he would fund both road and rail projects — unlike the man he ousted, Tony Abbott, who pumped money only into roads.

Mr Mullighan said the state light rail business case would have to show how trams would improve the urban landscape and the community.

Local councils whose areas the proposed lines would traverse were involved in forecasting how trams would spur development.

“We’ve got the councils in the room collectively working on the right solution. So, when we ask the Federal Government for the money, they know that it’s the right solution for the city, it’s strongly supported by the state and the local government,” he told The Advertiser.

Mr Mullighan said the detailed business case would be presented ahead of the federal election, which Mr Turnbull yesterday said would be in the second half of the year.

Mr Mullighan said more detailed plans, involving forecasts of how specific stops would be located to drive economic activity and development, would be presented after the election.

The business case was commissioned last month after Infrastructure Australia listed the AdeLINK tram network as a priority project.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... b9f191fb6e

[I Follow PAFC]

http://messenger.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx

Port tramline debate is building up steam

The State Government plans to spend $4 million to design and cost tramline extensions across the city, including running trams to Port Adelaide and Semaphore. With this in mind the Portside Messenger asked a regular commuter and a Port Adelaide-Enfield co

WE’VE all endured the stress of traffic jams.

Even without seemingly endless road works and Clipsal 500 diversions, traffic congestion is getting worse every year.

The delays in our metropolitan transport network are worth over $1 billion, which will soar to $4 billion per year by 2031 according to last month’s Australian Infrastructure Plan.

Addressing this problem won’t be cheap, but the price of inaction is much more expensive.

The State Government’s plan to expand the light rail network not only has the potential to reduce time wasted in traffic, but to be a driver of urban renewal, sustainability and accessibility. Securing these economic, social and environmental benefits is critical to our future.

I understand the sceptical response to these plans.

We don’t want to end up like the residents of Springfield in The Simpsons, having been sold a dodgy monorail while there are other worthy projects to fund. But Adelaide remains the most car-dependent capital city in Australia, and to claim that our current public transport system effectively meets our needs is frankly absurd.

Residents interstate and all over the world are spoiled for choice when it comes to public transport options, with convenient and comfortable networks of trains, light rail and buses connecting them to wherever they want to go.

Replacing the trains to Outer Harbor with trams will grow patronage and connect more beachside suburbs to the network, attracting visitors and investment.

We must remember the roaring success of extending the tram through the CBD. An integrated tram network delivers less gridlock, better services and more choice.

Matt Osborn is a Port Adelaide-Enfield councillor

THERE is a downside if a tram to Port Adelaide replaced the train service.

Trams are slow by comparison and, using the timetable, it travels from Glenelg to the City at an average speed of 16km/h whereas the train has an average speed of 31km/hour.

On that basis, a tram replacing the train would take 75 minutes to go from Outer Harbor to the City on the existing track. Wandering around the Port’s streets would add to the time. Secondly, bicycles are not permitted on trams but are welcomed on the trains.

Many commuters and recreational cyclists (non-Lycra) use the train service.

But a local tram permitting bikes, making a connection to the train service would be an attraction to Port Adelaide and beach suburbs. Imagine not having to worry about car parking in the Port or at Semaphore?

A tram service proposed for Port Adelaide would provide this convenience. Parking at the Port or Semaphore can be almost impossible unless one finds a backstreet some distance away.

But if a tram service was provided as suggested by the Mayor of Port Adelaide then one could park near the tram line and cover the rest of the journey by light rail.

Such a service would be a win/win for passengers and businesses.

Rod Lenaine-Smith, of Semaphore, is a regular train commuter

[claybro]

Not sure how they can extrapolate the travel times for Glenelg, on to the Outer Harbour trip and come up with a 75min travel time! Firstly, what point to point are they using? Mosely SQ to Adelaide station?/South Terrace? Does it include street running through the city and Jetty road? the Glenelg Tram stops at EVERY stop. It is capable of significantly faster speeds than it currently achieves. Surely an Outer Harbour tram service could use an express service from Woodville and the rail corridor through the parklands if speed is an issue? This would significantly increase the average speed of the journey. Seems silly to me to have to get off one rail mode at Port Adelaide and onto another rail mode, with the associated transfer time etc. when it could be a seamless service if run properly.

[Waewick]

Given we have a Liberal Fed government, hopefully that means they go Norwood first just to shore up the leader of the oppositions seat first.

I mean, regardless of what they do, the most part of the west isn't going to vote Liberal anyway so I've got my fingers crossed.

[rubberman]

Given we have a Liberal Fed government, hopefully that means they go Norwood first just to shore up the leader of the oppositions seat first.

I mean, regardless of what they do, the most part of the west isn't going to vote Liberal anyway so I've got my fingers crossed.

Hindmarsh is a marginal seat.

Line to Henley and another to the airport.

Arrium to roll the tram rail.

Feds going to shore up a State politician vs marginal Fed seat when they know they are going to lose seats for sure, and maybe lose government?

My bet is on self preservation.

Of course, they can just do what they did at the last election, promise promise promise, and then promptly break those promises after the election.

In any case, there's sooo many, surveys, business cases, investigations, consultations, processes, reviews, designs and data gathering to do. Lol!

The good news is that with the Federal government having no intention of honoring its promises, it can promise to do the lot. Promises are cheap if you never intend to keep them.

Claybro, yes the tram could be quicker. However, the fact is that it isn't. So, if and unless they do speed it up, the slower figure is the one to work on, because it is what actually happens. Crappy as it is.

[Waewick]

Given we have a Liberal Fed government, hopefully that means they go Norwood first just to shore up the leader of the oppositions seat first.

I mean, regardless of what they do, the most part of the west isn't going to vote Liberal anyway so I've got my fingers crossed.

Hindmarsh is a marginal seat.

Line to Henley and another to the airport.

Arrium to roll the tram rail.

Feds going to shore up a State politician vs marginal Fed seat when they know they are going to lose seats for sure, and maybe lose government?

My bet is on self preservation.

Of course, they can just do what they did at the last election, promise promise promise, and then promptly break those promises after the election.

In any case, there's sooo many, surveys, business cases, investigations, consultations, processes, reviews, designs and data gathering to do. Lol!

The good news is that with the Federal government having no intention of honoring its promises, it can promise to do the lot. Promises are cheap if you never intend to keep them.

Claybro, yes the tram could be quicker. However, the fact is that it isn't. So, if and unless they do speed it up, the slower figure is the one to work on, because it is what actually happens. Crappy as it is.

I'm not sure which Government you are talking about last time I checked pretty much every Governmnet we have gets in on lies (SA Labor take the cake) - but still don't ruin it for me

[rubberman]

Given we have a Liberal Fed government, hopefully that means they go Norwood first just to shore up the leader of the oppositions seat first.

I mean, regardless of what they do, the most part of the west isn't going to vote Liberal anyway so I've got my fingers crossed.

Hindmarsh is a marginal seat.

Line to Henley and another to the airport.

Arrium to roll the tram rail.

Feds going to shore up a State politician vs marginal Fed seat when they know they are going to lose seats for sure, and maybe lose government?

My bet is on self preservation.

Of course, they can just do what they did at the last election, promise promise promise, and then promptly break those promises after the election.

In any case, there's sooo many, surveys, business cases, investigations, consultations, processes, reviews, designs and data gathering to do. Lol!

The good news is that with the Federal government having no intention of honoring its promises, it can promise to do the lot. Promises are cheap if you never intend to keep them.

Claybro, yes the tram could be quicker. However, the fact is that it isn't. So, if and unless they do speed it up, the slower figure is the one to work on, because it is what actually happens. Crappy as it is.

I'm not sure which Government you are talking about last time I checked pretty much every Governmnet we have gets in on lies (SA Labor take the cake) - but still don't ruin it for me

Sorry.

However, the recently announced $4m study is a feasibility report. It will probably take 6-12 months to prepare. So, unlikely to be available till after the election anyway.

What's the chances of getting the Feds to give any realistic $$$ before then?

Not much imho.

[Waewick]

Given we have a Liberal Fed government, hopefully that means they go Norwood first just to shore up the leader of the oppositions seat first.

I mean, regardless of what they do, the most part of the west isn't going to vote Liberal anyway so I've got my fingers crossed.

Hindmarsh is a marginal seat.

Line to Henley and another to the airport.

Arrium to roll the tram rail.

Feds going to shore up a State politician vs marginal Fed seat when they know they are going to lose seats for sure, and maybe lose government?

My bet is on self preservation.

Of course, they can just do what they did at the last election, promise promise promise, and then promptly break those promises after the election.

In any case, there's sooo many, surveys, business cases, investigations, consultations, processes, reviews, designs and data gathering to do. Lol!

The good news is that with the Federal government having no intention of honoring its promises, it can promise to do the lot. Promises are cheap if you never intend to keep them.

Claybro, yes the tram could be quicker. However, the fact is that it isn't. So, if and unless they do speed it up, the slower figure is the one to work on, because it is what actually happens. Crappy as it is.

I'm not sure which Government you are talking about last time I checked pretty much every Governmnet we have gets in on lies (SA Labor take the cake) - but still don't ruin it for me

Sorry.

However, the recently announced $4m study is a feasibility report. It will probably take 6-12 months to prepare. So, unlikely to be available till after the election anyway.

What's the chances of getting the Feds to give any realistic $$$ before then?

Not much imho.[/quote]
I as only joking !

but I agree, little of no chance IMO - the best we will get is some $$$ to do a city loop (which isn't bad)

[claybro]

The good news is that with the Federal government having no intention of honoring its promises, it can promise to do the lot. Promises are cheap if you never intend to keep them.

Specifically relating to transport infrastructure in SA, what broken promises are you referring to regarding the current FEDERAL term? I thought it was the STATE government that continually promises, rolls out studies and reports and then lets them quietly die. I am happy to be corrected though.

[rubberman]

The good news is that with the Federal government having no intention of honoring its promises, it can promise to do the lot. Promises are cheap if you never intend to keep them.

Specifically relating to transport infrastructure in SA, what broken promises are you referring to regarding the current FEDERAL term? I thought it was the STATE government that continually promises, rolls out studies and reports and then lets them quietly die. I am happy to be corrected though.

Here's the most important broken promise relevant to this:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-07/c ... ck/5850038

[Zills]

I used to think the trams were a neat idea but the more I look into it I just think they are a colossal waste of coin, mainly on the basis that they won't improve on existing travel times. The outer harbor line being the perfect example - OK, the 75 minute figure seems to be ripped out of nowhere yet my research at uni seems to justify that as on point. It just.. grinds my gears! lol

The whole tram debacle feels like a fad, a very expensive fad that perhaps we're going to look back on and think "what were we thinking??"

Let's spend 10 billion on high speed underground subways!!!