SA Budget 2016: Adelaide tramline to be extended to East End

[Norman]

I agree that the business case should have started sooner (i.e. after the ITLUP was released, along with one for the underground city loop), but it is what it is. At least this particular tram model will be good for the technicians, given that we already have them trained in maintaining this rolling stock.

The East End extension was hurried along to help with the sale/long-term lease of the old RAH site.

[Llessur2002]

Here is what I understood the grand junction could look like:

Wow, I got that completely wrong.

Weird as the bloke I spoke to definitely spoke about only the outside tracks being laid on a couple of the curves. Perhaps he was thinking of an old design...

Cheers for the info though, really looking forward to seeing this take shape.

[Norman]

Here is what I understood the grand junction could look like:

Wow, I got that completely wrong.

Weird as the bloke I spoke to definitely spoke about only the outside tracks being laid on a couple of the curves. Perhaps he was thinking of an old design...

Cheers for the info though, really looking forward to seeing this take shape.

Maybe we spoke to different people or he gave us both different answers. Who knows. wait and see I guess.

[timtam20292]

DPTI have purchased another 3 (secondhand)Citadis 302 LRV's from Madrid(exactly the same as our existing 200 fleet. This will bring the number of Citadis to 9.
The trams are due in late September.DTPI have called tenders for shipment from Madrid to Adelaide.

Forgot about the trams

Here is what I understood the grand junction could look like:

So are they definitely putting the full intersection of track in?

[Norman]

South Australian Government to spend millions of dollars to buy seven-year-old trams
DAVID NANKERVIS


MILLIONS of taxpayers’ dollars will be used to buy seven-year-old trams to service the expanded city network, the State Government has revealed.

The three trams – built in 2010 – will help carry passengers on the network that is set to grow this year with an extra 100m of line down King William Rd to the Festival Plaza and along North Tce to the East End.

The State Government confirmed yesterday it was planning to spend its $15 million budget on three French-built Citadis trams from Madrid’s transport body, MINTRA.

But the Opposition said the old trams were being bought for an inflated price because they could be delivered in time for next year’s state election in March.

Opposition spokesman David Pisoni said the New South Wales and ACT governments were buying newly built trams of similar capacity for $3.2 million each.

“The Government is saying it’s building first-class public transport but it’s buying seven-year-old trams to meet a political deadline,” Mr Pisoni said.

“They said the new tram lines would be completed by the end of this year and so they need the extra trams, but they can’t get new ones in that time frame.

“Obviously the intention is not having the best tram service but timing the cutting of the ribbon.”

Transport Minister Stephen Mullighan confirmed yesterday the Government was seeking to buy the 2010-built trams, which are the same model as the six trams bought from MINTRA in 2009 for $6 million each.

“While the bid process has not been finalised yet, if successful this will deliver exceptional value to taxpayers,” he said.

“The Citadis trams already in use in Adelaide are hugely popular with commuters and have delivered exceptional service since their introduction.”

Work has already begun on the 1km, three-stop extension along North Tce, worth $55 million. Work on the $5 million Festival Plaza stop is due to start in the first quarter of this year and be completed by the end of the year.

The State Government also has long-term plans for further lines branching out to Magill, Port Adelaide, Henley Beach and Mitcham.

When the first mothballed Citadis trams were bought, the then Transport Minister Pat Conlon said the $6 million cost for each tram was around the same as buying them new.

However, he added the deal would help solve capacity problems a lot more quickly than ordering new trams and waiting for them to be built.

The Transport Department said these trams “were great value for money, have performed extremely well and are very popular among Adelaide Metro patrons”.

[rubberman]

While the Citadis are well laid out, they are of a very old design, and at $5m are NOT a good buy.

The possible reasons to have bought them at such an outrageously inflated price:

Ignorance of what is in the market by the transport department., or
The Opposition being correct that we're paying an extra $8-9m so that the government can cut the ribbon on the tram extension before the next election, or
A failure to plan properly, or
All of the above.

I shudder to think how much extra we will also be paying for track construction.

The point though is this: if we actually bought vehicles wisely, and constructed using tried and true methods, we could probably have continued that North Terrace extension for another 800m or so...no extra to pay.

[Haso]

I am not defending anyone here but we do not have local Liberal party committed to the public transport. If we had, everything might be different, no rushing, no last opportunity to do something like that before the election, just competition who will deliver better for less money… Building this new tram line becomes now an election ping pong issue and less a step in the future…
.

[arki]

While the Citadis are well laid out, they are of a very old design, and at $5m are NOT a good buy.

There is a budget of $15m, they may have been bought for less than this. Mulligan stated that the deal has not yet been finalised.

The Sydney and Canberra fleet orders are much bigger than just 3 trams, and the tenders came with maintenance perks for the contractor as well...hence the cheap price of $3.2m each. When purchasing in such a small quantity do you really think we would have gotten a similar deal?

[rubberman]

I am not defending anyone here but we do not have local Liberal party committed to the public transport. If we had, everything might be different, no rushing, no last opportunity to do something like that before the election, just competition who will deliver better for less money… Building this new tram line becomes now an election ping pong issue and less a step in the future…
.

That's what I'd like to see.

A couple of random thoughts, politically speaking. The fact that a government cannot seem to plan well does not say much about its competence. However, going back to 1979, David Tonkin, then Leader of the Opposition, went to Germany, came back with the O-Bahn idea, won the election, and the O-Bahn was a success.

Is Stephen Marshall able to get on a plane like David Tonkin did, go overseas, say to the Czech Republic where they really know how to make trams, visit Škoda at Pilsen and Pragoimex at Ostrava, and come back with something a whole lot better than overpriced, outdated Citadis? If he can't, I guess it says something about the competence of the opposition.

So, are we going to see Stephen Marshall replicate David Tonkin's 1979 victorious efforts? Or is it going to be a mediocre government effort trumping (pun intended) an even more mediocre opposition?

[rubberman]

While the Citadis are well laid out, they are of a very old design, and at $5m are NOT a good buy.

There is a budget of $15m, they may have been bought for less than this. Mulligan stated that the deal has not yet been finalised.

The Sydney and Canberra fleet orders are much bigger than just 3 trams, and the tenders came with maintenance perks for the contractor as well...hence the cheap price of $3.2m each. When purchasing in such a small quantity do you really think we would have gotten a similar deal?

A few thoughts here. My approach would have been that with a better degree of planning, we could have tacked our order for trams onto those other orders. Not only would we have been able to get that lower price, maybe an extra few trams on the order would have made it cheaper as well overall. So, that's a lazy $5.4m right there saved. That's your taxpayer dollar. Additionally, there'd be better trams running here. Cheaper and better. What's not to like?

Another approach would be to say, if we are thinking of a future 50 tram purchase, then look round the world not only at Citadis and Flexity, but also Stadler, Pesa, Škoda, Pragoimex, Inekon. Evaluate them all. Then buy three of the most promising out of them all. Initially, for 3 it won't be cheaper, as you say, however, it would give several years of local operational confirmation of the initial assessment. Then when the order for another 50 or so trams comes up, we would be able to command the lower price over 50 trams best suited for Adelaide.

Most likely however, we will buy 50 Citadis for $90m more than we could have bought something better.

Another random thought. We could perhaps lease the trams from Madrid, just like Melbourne did with Citadis from Mulhouse. Then return them when no longer needed because better/cheaper trams became available.

[adelaide transport]

While the Citadis are well laid out, they are of a very old design, and at $5m are NOT a good buy.

There is a budget of $15m, they may have been bought for less than this. Mulligan stated that the deal has not yet been finalised.

The Sydney and Canberra fleet orders are much bigger than just 3 trams, and the tenders came with maintenance perks for the contractor as well...hence the cheap price of $3.2m each. When purchasing in such a small quantity do you really think we would have gotten a similar deal?

Strange that the deal has supposedly not been finalised,yet on the SA Government Tenders website ,tenders are being called for shipping the trams from Madrid to Adelaide?

[Goodsy]

too bad we can't build our own. If we're going to eventually have a fully fledged tram system we should be trying to tempt Bombadier to setup a base here in Adelaide

[Haso]

On the other hand… with such small network as in Adelaide, imagine having another three trams of some different type/manufacture and servicing costs that will carry with that. From what I can remember reading some European transport sites, Madrid has surplus of trams which are not used but stored and maintained.
We might pay a bit more but we will have some type of trams and that means everyone are familiar how to maintain and run these trams… and spare parts are already here.
.

[dbl96]

That's stupid....just bite the bullet and put the full grand union on to provide such an enormous amount of flexibility...the whole point of one stop north is to prevent digging the intersection up again...but without the full grand union they are gonna dig it up again away when they realised they actually need it

Not necessarily disagreeing here, but apart from the extra cost, pointwork slows trams down, is a location of potential derailments and wear and tear and ongoing maintenance. So, the design needs to be grounded in an operational need. The original grand union there needed a curve from North Terrace to the north because of traffic from Hackney Depot, for example. Or, as designed in Jim's diagram, trams could go across the intersection from North to South quite fast with no facing points. Put in a set of facing points, and each tram has to slow down, even if it hits a green light.

Sooooo. What that means is that the design of the intersection only needs to take likely operations into account based on likely routes.

So, the question I'd ask, is what routes would likely ever use the various curves?

At this stage it is not yet clear what the routes will be. As Tonsley213 points out, adding a full junction will provide for full route flexibility, which will be extremely useful once the full network is completed. Even if some of the tracks are not needed for the initial routes, by not constructing the switches, the possibility of running other potentially useful routes in future will be compromised, and will quite probably lead the kind of disruptive maintenance work which the Festival Centre line is supposed to avoid.

The other thing to bear in mind is the potential usefulness of such flexibility for not in service running. The additional switches would allow not in service trams to travel quickly and efficiently from one part of the network to another without lengthy detours.

As for what routes would likely ever use the various curves, it depends on many factors, most importantly on how the city circle line ends up being used. If trams to and from Prospect Road (and potentially the Port line via Memorial Drive) are directed onto the city circle line, this would be an obvious use. There are of course many other possibilities depending on how the actual routes are chosen. For example trams from the Parade could be directed to Prospect or the Port after reaching the city. Trams from Grange could be directed to Prospect. There are many possible configurations. It is also important to bear in mind that what seems like the best route configurations now will not necessarily always be the case. Just think about how often changes are made to bus routes. As the network evolves, it is important to have the infrastructure in place to allow for the most route flexibility.

I don't see how adding a couple of extra switches would increase the cost dramatically. Even if it does, it is only going to be more expensive and disruptive when they inevitably realise that the extra switches are needed and have to rip the intersecting up again.

Just out of interest, where is all this speculation about the intersection only being constructed in part coming from? All the information released by the government to this point would seem to indicate that there is going to be a full intersection at KWS/NT, and that allowing for the construction of such an intersection is the primary reason why the line is being extended to the Festival Centre at this point in time.

[citywatcher]

I am not defending anyone here but we do not have local Liberal party committed to the public transport. If we had, everything might be different, no rushing, no last opportunity to do something like that before the election, just competition who will deliver better for less money… Building this new tram line becomes now an election ping pong issue and less a step in the future…
.

That's what I'd like to see.

A couple of random thoughts, politically speaking. The fact that a government cannot seem to plan well does not say much about its competence. However, going back to 1979, David Tonkin, then Leader of the Opposition, went to Germany, came back with the O-Bahn idea, won the election, and the O-Bahn was a success.

Is Stephen Marshall able to get on a plane like David Tonkin did, go overseas, say to the Czech Republic where they really know how to make trams, visit Škoda at Pilsen and Pragoimex at Ostrava, and come back with something a whole lot better than overpriced, outdated Citadis? If he can't, I guess it says something about the competence of the opposition.

So, are we going to see Stephen Marshall replicate David Tonkin's 1979 victorious efforts? Or is it going to be a mediocre government effort trumping (pun intended) an even more mediocre opposition?

I think the question of Marshall's competence is already answered. Hence the government's desire to build the tram line now.