News & Discussion: Trams

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1282
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4081 Post by rubberman » Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:22 pm

SRW wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 5:25 pm
I guess it depends on whether the state libs will cooperate - Fed Labor can hardly promise a project the Libs won't build. But if that's the case I hope Labor still tosses some money to PT in SA, maybe by promising contributions to electrifying Outer Harbor line or upgrading Grenfell/Currie to a transit mall. The state couldn't refuse.
If the Liberals refused, then the ALP could make the offer, and then use the promise at the next State and Federal elections.

That would make it a story of Federal ALP offering money to a cooperative State ALP Government vs a Liberal Government refusing it.

It would be cheap for the ALP Feds - promises cost nothing, and if it's those nasty Libs stopping progress, vote us in next time, they can say. In fact, promise the Prospect Extension AND the City Loop. Then watch the State Libs squirm - either do something they will hate, which the ALP will still get credit for, or refuse a big employment generating project from the Feds. Either way, the ALP wins.

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 203 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4082 Post by claybro » Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:48 pm

The problem is, I don't think the trams are popular amongst liberal OR labor voters. The general population outside of those that use the CBD really don't get it and see the teams as a wasteful folly. the other issue is, as has been noted - the DPTI is woeful at costing and implemtation of the most recent extensions. and now the farcicle operation of the extension now running has not endeared the punters either.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 302 times
Been thanked: 74 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4083 Post by SBD » Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:30 pm

claybro wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:48 pm
The problem is, I don't think the trams are popular amongst liberal OR labor voters. The general population outside of those that use the CBD really don't get it and see the teams as a wasteful folly. the other issue is, as has been noted - the DPTI is woeful at costing and implemtation of the most recent extensions. and now the farcicle operation of the extension now running has not endeared the punters either.
A tram to connect Crows games to the Crows after-party has potential, especially if Port also had a party venue a short tram-ride away. The City of Adelaide also has a prime development site in North Adelaide that would benefit from having a tram stop out the front.

The next extension to the tram network will be expensive wherever it goes, as it will need more trams, and a new site to store/maintain them in. I wonder if the weekend-only use of the King William Road spur due to a shortage of available trams to ensure a reliable extra service at peak times. Buying and developing a new site and a few trams to use that spur would be silly, so it needs a decent extension to share the cost of the new site, wherever it ends up. Available land might guide where the extension can or should go. I doubt anyone would propose a residential tower above a tram barn, so it should be in a light industrial area somewhere. Do we still have industrial sites available in the CBD or North Adelaide?

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3444
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4084 Post by Waewick » Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:05 am

NTRabbit wrote:The state Libs have never wanted the trams, and would rather cancel them in favour of the 'trackless tram' brain fart if they could, so there won't be any more tram extensions until the next state labor government, unless the story about them being forced to build the North Adelaide extension by a Turnbull era federal funding package is true.
Funnily enough i have been driving near buses that also use the over head wires, so no tracks.

Odd to interact with them on the road.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3444
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4085 Post by Waewick » Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:05 am

Double post

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1948
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 203 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4086 Post by claybro » Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:16 pm

SBD wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:30 pm
claybro wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:48 pm
The problem is, I don't think the trams are popular amongst liberal OR labor voters. The general population outside of those that use the CBD really don't get it and see the teams as a wasteful folly. the other issue is, as has been noted - the DPTI is woeful at costing and implemtation of the most recent extensions. and now the farcicle operation of the extension now running has not endeared the punters either.
A tram to connect Crows games to the Crows after-party has potential, especially if Port also had a party venue a short tram-ride away. The City of Adelaide also has a prime development site in North Adelaide that would benefit from having a tram stop out the front.

The next extension to the tram network will be expensive wherever it goes, as it will need more trams, and a new site to store/maintain them in. I wonder if the weekend-only use of the King William Road spur due to a shortage of available trams to ensure a reliable extra service at peak times. Buying and developing a new site and a few trams to use that spur would be silly, so it needs a decent extension to share the cost of the new site, wherever it ends up. Available land might guide where the extension can or should go. I doubt anyone would propose a residential tower above a tram barn, so it should be in a light industrial area somewhere. Do we still have industrial sites available in the CBD or North Adelaide?
Any new Maintenance depot/barn does not need to go where a potential new extension goes. It can be anywhere that is connected to the existing system. Thebarton might be a good location.. light industrial, and accessible from the Port Road line. Also fairly central. Agree with your other points on the extra expense of the next stage though. Not really sure if Glengowrie is at capacity? , but at some stage another depot is definitely needed.

rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1282
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4087 Post by rubberman » Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:53 pm

claybro wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 1:16 pm
SBD wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 9:30 pm
claybro wrote:
Thu Apr 11, 2019 7:48 pm
The problem is, I don't think the trams are popular amongst liberal OR labor voters. The general population outside of those that use the CBD really don't get it and see the teams as a wasteful folly. the other issue is, as has been noted - the DPTI is woeful at costing and implemtation of the most recent extensions. and now the farcicle operation of the extension now running has not endeared the punters either.
A tram to connect Crows games to the Crows after-party has potential, especially if Port also had a party venue a short tram-ride away. The City of Adelaide also has a prime development site in North Adelaide that would benefit from having a tram stop out the front.

The next extension to the tram network will be expensive wherever it goes, as it will need more trams, and a new site to store/maintain them in. I wonder if the weekend-only use of the King William Road spur due to a shortage of available trams to ensure a reliable extra service at peak times. Buying and developing a new site and a few trams to use that spur would be silly, so it needs a decent extension to share the cost of the new site, wherever it ends up. Available land might guide where the extension can or should go. I doubt anyone would propose a residential tower above a tram barn, so it should be in a light industrial area somewhere. Do we still have industrial sites available in the CBD or North Adelaide?
Any new Maintenance depot/barn does not need to go where a potential new extension goes. It can be anywhere that is connected to the existing system. Thebarton might be a good location.. light industrial, and accessible from the Port Road line. Also fairly central. Agree with your other points on the extra expense of the next stage though. Not really sure if Glengowrie is at capacity? , but at some stage another depot is definitely needed.
Glengowrie is chockers. It's why the H cars were taken off site.

FWIW, from this pic, it looks like the North Terrace line is getting some good loads.
20190412_143609~2.jpg
University Crowds

NTRabbit
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:00 pm
Has thanked: 67 times
Been thanked: 29 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4088 Post by NTRabbit » Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:26 pm

Waewick wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:05 am
NTRabbit wrote:The state Libs have never wanted the trams, and would rather cancel them in favour of the 'trackless tram' brain fart if they could, so there won't be any more tram extensions until the next state labor government, unless the story about them being forced to build the North Adelaide extension by a Turnbull era federal funding package is true.
Funnily enough i have been driving near buses that also use the over head wires, so no tracks.

Odd to interact with them on the road.
I've seen such buses in Seattle, seemed to work fine, they had a whole network of overhead lines through the city proper that every bus ran on, and then switched to internal power, diesel at the time I think (2009), once they left the ciy for the inner suburbs.

Trackless tram aren't really trackless, they still have a track, it's just that magnetic material painted on the road. Which sounds fine in theory, but how long after the track is painted on do you think SA Water will swing past and dig sections of it up for repairs and maintenance they haven't coordinated with anyone :lol:

User avatar
Nathan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3088
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Bowden
Has thanked: 188 times
Been thanked: 596 times
Contact:

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4089 Post by Nathan » Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:59 pm

rubberman wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 4:53 pm
FWIW, from this pic, it looks like the North Terrace line is getting some good loads.

20190412_143609~2.jpg
I've been on the tram this week rather than riding, and have noticed the Botanic tram is much more popular compared to the first few weeks, still pretty packed standing past the railway station. University seems to be the busiest stop (I guess those getting off at Art Gallery have the option of either tram in peak so probably split with the Rundle Mall stop), but still quite a few going all the way to the end (particularly Adelaide Botanic High students).

User avatar
SRW
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 2217
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: City
Has thanked: 484 times
Been thanked: 189 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4090 Post by SRW » Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:33 pm

Apparently some idiot on a mobile phone lost control while driving and mounted the platform at the RAH stop, injuring a 60yo man. Fortunately the ER is just across the road.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-12/ ... atenews_sa
Image
Keep Adelaide Weird

adelaide transport
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 203
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 12:01 pm
Has thanked: 148 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4091 Post by adelaide transport » Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:45 pm

One of the victims was taken to the QEH.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3444
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4092 Post by Waewick » Sat Apr 13, 2019 6:02 am

NTRabbit wrote:
Waewick wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 6:05 am
NTRabbit wrote:The state Libs have never wanted the trams, and would rather cancel them in favour of the 'trackless tram' brain fart if they could, so there won't be any more tram extensions until the next state labor government, unless the story about them being forced to build the North Adelaide extension by a Turnbull era federal funding package is true.
Funnily enough i have been driving near buses that also use the over head wires, so no tracks.

Odd to interact with them on the road.
I've seen such buses in Seattle, seemed to work fine, they had a whole network of overhead lines through the city proper that every bus ran on, and then switched to internal power, diesel at the time I think (2009), once they left the ciy for the inner suburbs.

Trackless tram aren't really trackless, they still have a track, it's just that magnetic material painted on the road. Which sounds fine in theory, but how long after the track is painted on do you think SA Water will swing past and dig sections of it up for repairs and maintenance they haven't coordinated with anyone Image
Ive just driven through Munich and Lucerne.

Munich P/T was amazing, combination of underground train, tram and buses all sort of interacting. But for different purposes.

The bike lanes were on the foot paths in a semi marked zone, but they had right of way.

Speaking to locals in Lucerne, they had bikes on the footpath but it didn't work, they now have markings in the middle if the road. They also have buses which operate on overhead wires, rather than trams due to the hills.

The point being PT really needs to be customised. Rather than picking a favorite.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 302 times
Been thanked: 74 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4093 Post by SBD » Sat Apr 13, 2019 8:31 am

Adelaide had a trial of a trolleybus near a tram route from 1932 to 1934, then more trolleybuses then introduced regular services from 1937 until 1963. WIkipedia cites a book that says that that a few tram lines were converted, and new trolloybus-only routes opened such as Light Square to Tusmore, and then Light Square to Port Adelaide, Semaphore and Largs Bay.

rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1282
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB
Has thanked: 141 times
Been thanked: 227 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4094 Post by rubberman » Sat Apr 13, 2019 8:48 am

NTRabbit wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:26 pm


Trackless tram aren't really trackless, they still have a track, it's just that magnetic material painted on the road. Which sounds fine in theory, but how long after the track is painted on do you think SA Water will swing past and dig sections of it up for repairs and maintenance they haven't coordinated with anyone :lol:
Or the power mob who are now going to dig North Terrace up again. :roll:

The other thing about the "trackless trams" is that their claims that the roads don't need to be strengthened are quite false. Once guided by those lines, the wheels follow a very precise course. After a few months, grooves and humps start appearing in the road. This requires expensive and regular replacement. You can see this effect where buses cross over intersections in some areas, such as Grenfell/King William intersection. That's regularly replaced. Same in Frome/Rundle. With the more exact wheel tracks used by guided buses, you'd expect that to be much worse unless the road was concrete, like the O-Bahn track. And there goes the biggest part of the cost advantage.

ml69
Legendary Member!
Posts: 822
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 11:16 pm
Location: Adelaide SA
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

#4095 Post by ml69 » Sun Apr 14, 2019 8:06 am

rubberman wrote:
Sat Apr 13, 2019 8:48 am
With the more exact wheel tracks used by guided buses, you'd expect that to be much worse unless the road was concrete, like the O-Bahn track. And there goes the biggest part of the cost advantage.
Biggest cost advantage? Are you saying laying down concrete on the road is the major cost of a tram system? I’d have thought the combined cost of doing the overhead track, tram control systems, doing the steel rails themselves would cost more (I’m excluding fleet purchase costs and station costs which both systems require).

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Archer and 5 guests