Sensational-Adelaide.com

Yeah, teasing projects for a Com Games bid that we won't necessarily win. Not to show a lack of enthusiasm but if a part of this package for our bid includes rail extensions, sporting infrastructure upgrade etc, if we lose that bid, none of these things will happen.

rubberman wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 22, 2019 8:15 pm

[quote=Nathan post_id=181702 time=<a href="tel:1561180959">1561180959</a> user_id=2067]
We're "technology neutral", except cars are totally the best.

Well, that's what the numbers are showing. I have bored people to death previously saying that high cost for tram projects will kill them. And here we are, high costs for tram projects are giving the government a reason to kill them.

Want to kill the North Adelaide extension? Spend tens of millions strengthening a bridge designed to carry H cars coupled.

Look at the new tram stop and relay at $17m. You could build 35 houses for that, each of which would require foundations needed to carry a house. Ask yourself whether the materials and intricacy of work are more to build a house or a slab of track and a tram stop.

I cannot fault the Minister for making a decision that tram costs are so high that it's not worth it compared to cars.
[/quote]

Totally agree. It is hard on paper to justify the cost of steel rails in any transport equation with the rediculous way these projects are rolled out. Knoll will use cold hard facts to pick and choose what suits. What is hard to show in cost v benefit scenario is the " ambience" that trams provide, people love them, and will use them over buses any day. Quiet efficiency. At least with the Liberal bias for buses, it is not expensive to stop a bus service, once they are out of power next time. Not likely the Libs will build a Motorway or Obahn track up king William street.

Stephen Knob, the minister for Uber

How long until we can vote these hopeless charlatans out again?

Patrick_27 wrote:Yeah, teasing projects for a Com Games bid that we won't necessarily win. Not to show a lack of enthusiasm but if a part of this package for our bid includes rail extensions, sporting infrastructure upgrade etc, if we lose that bid, none of these things will happen.

I get the feeling if we bid, we win.

I don't think there is a hell of a lot of competition.

I hope that Fed $ for PT then flows and is used properly

Extending the O-Bahn to GG should be a priority. The land is there.

The old mob could have built that instead of the tram to nowhere along North Tce which took away a lane and all the right turns and U-turns.

That project alone would take more cars off the road than that tram has done in its entire fleeting existence.

OlympusAnt wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:30 pm

Extending the O-Bahn to GG should be a priority. The land is there.

The old mob could have built that instead of the tram to nowhere along North Tce which took away a lane and all the right turns and U-turns.

That project alone would take more cars off the road than that tram has done in its entire fleeting existence.

One of the reasons I favoured the city link tram service was that it would allow passengers to get off the O-Bahn at the intersection of Grenfell and East Terrace if they wanted to go to North Terrace, Hutt St and King William St South without having to negotiate a rather congested Grenfell Street. Of course, with fewer people on the bus going down Grenfell, it means stops are quicker there too.

In other words, a decent interchange and city link tram would enhance O-Bahn operation. It's a system approach we need, not an either/or approach.

Govt unveils board to reform SA public transport

https://indaily.com.au/news/2019/06/27/ ... transport/

Bob wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:52 am

Govt unveils board to reform SA public transport

https://indaily.com.au/news/2019/06/27/ ... transport/

Ryu is a former partner and global co-head of new mobility practise at multinational consulting firm L.E.K. Consulting, with expertise in surface transport, rail, freight and logistics, aviation and infrastructure.

She is also co-author of a 2012 paper that argues private companies deliver public transport better than governments can.

“There is a considerable weight of evidence to demonstrate that, relative to government-run public transport services, the private sector has stronger incentives to use infrastructure more efficiently, deliver better operational performance, and improve the customer experience,” the paper, Public Transport, Private Operators: Delivering Better Services Through Franchising, reads.

“Private companies are able to deliver these benefits because they can leverage significant, often global, experience from involvement with multiple public transport networks, and they are better equipped to attract and retain high quality staff,” the paper reads.

“This can be reinforced by financial incentives to realise efficiencies and deliver high levels of customer satisfaction. In contrast, public operators in monopoly markets tend to lack strong incentives to improve services for customers and increase efficiency.”

Talk about stacking the numbers

The order for new electric trains for the Gawler line has just been cut from 15 3-car sets down to 12.

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:18 pm

Bob wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:52 am

Govt unveils board to reform SA public transport

https://indaily.com.au/news/2019/06/27/ ... transport/

Ryu is a former partner and global co-head of new mobility practise at multinational consulting firm L.E.K. Consulting, with expertise in surface transport, rail, freight and logistics, aviation and infrastructure.

She is also co-author of a 2012 paper that argues private companies deliver public transport better than governments can.

“There is a considerable weight of evidence to demonstrate that, relative to government-run public transport services, the private sector has stronger incentives to use infrastructure more efficiently, deliver better operational performance, and improve the customer experience,” the paper, Public Transport, Private Operators: Delivering Better Services Through Franchising, reads.

“Private companies are able to deliver these benefits because they can leverage significant, often global, experience from involvement with multiple public transport networks, and they are better equipped to attract and retain high quality staff,” the paper reads.

“This can be reinforced by financial incentives to realise efficiencies and deliver high levels of customer satisfaction. In contrast, public operators in monopoly markets tend to lack strong incentives to improve services for customers and increase efficiency.”

I mean, the whole public service is better delivered by the private sector thing has been disproved at every single instance since the concept was invented, but they're just gonna keep on blowing that horn.

Nathan wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 28, 2019 1:12 pm

The order for new electric trains for the Gawler line has just been cut from 15 3-car sets down to 12.

Stupid decision, we'll need more trains not less.

I remember the last Labor govt were attacked by the Liberals for not buying enough trams and ended up grabbing some second-hand from Madrid for double the price. I can see something similar happening with trains.

I wish we could just electrify the whole network and use electrics on the Belair Line. But this is Adelaide, so that'll never happen.

Trains and trams to be privatised

That's worked sooooooo well for our buses. Absolute fucking idiots.