News & Discussion: Trams

[rubberman]

Listen. There is no other obahn busway in the world. No one else bought it. Only us forty years ago. Similarly there are other guided busways in the world tried with similar results. It was a novelty that failed hence there are not many examples of them and they have been all but put out of business by trams. Can you split those hairs or is critical thinking not possible for you.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

Wrong forum. There is an O-bahn forum where you can argue that point forever. What relevance it has to trams is obscure.

It hasn't been put out of business by trams, and if it ever happened, the arguments would revolve around costs or speeds, or capacity. Whether it worked somewhere else or not is unlikely to be the deciding factor.

[SouthAussie94]

Listen. There is no other obahn busway in the world. No one else bought it. Only us forty years ago. Similarly there are other guided busways in the world tried with similar results. It was a novelty that failed hence there are not many examples of them and they have been all but put out of business by trams. Can you split those hairs or is critical thinking not possible for you.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

That's like saying that because there's no other Glenelg Tram that the Glenelg Tram is a failure. What if another city built a guided busway and called it the P-Bahn. It's not an O-Bahn so I guess that means its a failure.

A tramway is a tramway, with the exact implementation varying from place to place. A guided busway is a guided busway, with the exact implementation varying from place to place

[citywatcher]

Other people bought it up and I responded. Go back and check.
Your last paragraph is nonsense.
Put the obahn in where we currently have our trams. End of argument.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[citywatcher]

You take the cake mate.
Glenelg is just where the tram is. It is not a " Glenelg tram " . You'll find trams everywhere. If it was the Glenelg obahn then it most definitely would be a failure and the only one in the world.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[SouthAussie94]

You take the cake mate.
Glenelg is just where the tram is. It is not a " Glenelg tram " . You'll find trams everywhere. If it was the Glenelg obahn then it most definitely would be a failure and the only one in the world.

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

Okay, there are no other 3000/3100 class trains, therefore they're a failure.

What are there differences between the O-Bahn and other guided busways which make it a vastly different system? Why is it a failure? Is global uptake the only measure of failure which you're using?

[citywatcher]

There you go sweetie
Start researching

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

[SouthAussie94]

There you go sweetie
Start researching

Sent from my GT-S7275T using Tapatalk

I completely agree. The Adelink Tram extensions will be a fantastic addition to the public transport system within Adelaide. It will really compliment the existing public transport network. I'm looking forward to when construction starts!

[bits]

The same argument of if o-bahn is a failure(it is not) applies to the fleet of trams.

All tram types used in Adelaide are heavily used. I do not believe people are planning routes based on the model of tram used.
Citidas vs flexi vs other has not proven to be a significant factor for if people will use the service.

There is theory about price differences, theory about maintenance costs, theory about better rides, lots of untested theories about why we should buy an alternative tram model.

The opposition would struggle to win more than a handful of votes from rubberman and his friends based on an alternative tram model policy.
It is a very weak political point if it is even there at all.

[rubberman]

The same argument of if o-bahn is a failure(it is not) applies to the fleet of trams.

All tram types used in Adelaide are heavily used. I do not believe people are planning routes based on the model of tram used.
Citidas vs flexi vs other has not proven to be a significant factor for if people will use the service.

There is theory about price differences, theory about maintenance costs, theory about better rides, lots of untested theories about why we should buy an alternative tram model.

The opposition would struggle to win more than a handful of votes from rubberman and his friends based on an alternative tram model policy.
It is a very weak political point if it is even there at all.

You totally miss the point.

The point is that oppositions get in by doing two things: convincing the electorate the government is doing things wrong, AND they have a better alternative. It has worked over and over again for the Coalition.

It doesn't matter whether you are talking trams, education, health, trains, whatever. They just use the formula: here's what the government is doing wrong, and we have an alternative that's better because of some plausible reason.

Trams are just a small part in this, or maybe not if Jay decided to make a pre-election announcement about it after opening the North Terrace extension. My point was that the government has set the bar so low, a competent Opposition could use the formula above. A formula that has proven to be successful in the past.

[[Shuz]]

Some of you guys are giving the Opposition way too much free advice. You do realise this is what they pay political consultants six figure sums to do. Shush, the lot of you.

[fishinajar]

Haven't the opposition already put forward their big super good idea? $4b to take the freight trains out of the peaceful Unley suburbs and put it through the northern suburbs where they belong [sarcasm]?

[PD2/20]

...

In the case of trams, the ALP has set a low bar. The works at Jetty Road could have used Whyalla steel, same for works in South Terrace and North Terrace. How hard would it be for the Opposition to fly the SA Whyalla flag and point that out?

...

Since the reconstruction of the Glenelg terminus in early 2000s grooved rail has been used for all street running tram tracks in Adelaide. The same rail is used in Melbourne. Unfortunately grooved rail has not been manufactured in in Australia for quite a few years now and only plain rail. Grooved rail is preferable as it gives a defined and long lasting groove whereas in street track with plain rail the base and one side of the groove consist of concrete.

[rev]

Some of you guys are giving the Opposition way too much free advice. You do realise this is what they pay political consultants six figure sums to do. Shush, the lot of you.

You could give either party a complete manifesto of how to rebuild South Australia, with a population and economic boom, and they'd both *@#$ it up.

[rubberman]

...

In the case of trams, the ALP has set a low bar. The works at Jetty Road could have used Whyalla steel, same for works in South Terrace and North Terrace. How hard would it be for the Opposition to fly the SA Whyalla flag and point that out?

...

Since the reconstruction of the Glenelg terminus in early 2000s grooved rail has been used for all street running tram tracks in Adelaide. The same rail is used in Melbourne. Unfortunately grooved rail has not been manufactured in in Australia for quite a few years now and only plain rail. Grooved rail is preferable as it gives a defined and long lasting groove whereas in street track with plain rail the base and one side of the groove consist of concrete.

Hi, it is true that using steel rails from Whyalla eliminates steel from one side of the groove. That's one of the advantages. Steel rail head and grooves and bikes, especially in wet weather don't mix all that well. Eliminating as much steel surface as possible is therefore a good thing. Plus the fact that this type of construction has shown to have a life of fifty years in Melbourne. I can only think that this is just an example of consultants not really being up to speed on what's possible.

[mshagg]

I really don't think the Opposition has any interest in the tram network whatsoever and I can't therefore see them allocating resources to formulate an alternative proposal as my understanding is their preference would be no new trams and no new tram lines. Suggesting an alternative would mean they would need to show some genuine interest in expanding the system which, other than trashing the proposed Unley and Prospect Road extensions, they have rarely ever mentioned.

Plus, has the purchase price actually been revealed yet?

Isn't opposition policy on this guided by wowsers who complain about disruption trams cause to their single-occupant daily drive to the city?

"Trams?!? What are youse gonna do about the price of parking?"