News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

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: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1696 Post by rubberman » Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:45 pm

ml69 wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:05 am
SBD wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:03 pm
Nathan wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:37 pm
The idea of not having to lay rails or any kind of other "track" in existing road sounds tempting, let's not forget how well Grenfell/Currie Streets have been holding up with buses. Running something the size of a tram on a normal city road isn't going to go be some panacea of cost savings.
If they are supposed to run on roads but with a ride as smooth as a tram on rails, I assume they need new special road laid.
I think the lane in which it is running will need to be constructed in concrete to prevent the wear and tear of buses on a bitumen surface. Will add somewhat to the cost but still be a heck of a lot cheaper than light rail.
Is it cheaper? Has it been proven? Is it reliable?

Wouldn't trolley buses do the same thing with proven technology, and presumably cheaper vehicles?

I'm all for trying new things, but only if the numbers stack up. Like I say, how is this better than a trolley bus? Incidentally, trolley buses were originally called "trackless trams" too.

ml69
Legendary Member!
Posts: 824
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 11:16 pm
Location: Adelaide SA
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1697 Post by ml69 » Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:05 pm

rubberman wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:45 pm
ml69 wrote:
Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:05 am
SBD wrote:
Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:03 pm


If they are supposed to run on roads but with a ride as smooth as a tram on rails, I assume they need new special road laid.
I think the lane in which it is running will need to be constructed in concrete to prevent the wear and tear of buses on a bitumen surface. Will add somewhat to the cost but still be a heck of a lot cheaper than light rail.
Is it cheaper? Has it been proven? Is it reliable?

Wouldn't trolley buses do the same thing with proven technology, and presumably cheaper vehicles?

I'm all for trying new things, but only if the numbers stack up. Like I say, how is this better than a trolley bus? Incidentally, trolley buses were originally called "trackless trams" too.
All good questions that need to be asked and answered.

As far as I'm aware, the system has only been piloted in one Chinese city at this stage.

You'd want to see the system implemented in a few different cities over a number of years to examine the pros and cons of daily operations, before considering adopting it here.

But in my opinion it could be a game-changing transport innovation.

User avatar
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 108 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1698 Post by PeFe » Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:39 pm

Article from In Daily discussing the road lobby's power versus the public transport lobby.
Adelaide's public transport users need a more powerful voice
OPINION

It’s no wonder that public transport users are the bottom of the policy pile when the best-connected and most well-resourced transport lobby group in South Australia represents motorists.

Image
Buses in the traffic queue on Morphett Street.

This might be the Adelaide media equivalent of shooting Bambi, but it’s time to question whether the RAA – an organisation that represents motorists – is the best organisation to guide debate on the city’s growing traffic congestion.

Every year the organisation releases congestion data for Adelaide’s key road routes, along with its prescription for what needs to be done to fix the problem. Last week, it neatly timed the release to coincide with street closures for the city’s V8 race – the most frustrating week of the year for Adelaide motorists.

Full article : https://indaily.com.au/opinion/2019/03/ ... ful-voice/

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1955
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1699 Post by claybro » Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:12 pm

PeFe wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:39 pm
Article from In Daily discussing the road lobby's power versus the public transport lobby.
Adelaide's public transport users need a more powerful voice
OPINION

It’s no wonder that public transport users are the bottom of the policy pile when the best-connected and most well-resourced transport lobby group in South Australia represents motorists.

Image
Buses in the traffic queue on Morphett Street.

This might be the Adelaide media equivalent of shooting Bambi, but it’s time to question whether the RAA – an organisation that represents motorists – is the best organisation to guide debate on the city’s growing traffic congestion.

Every year the organisation releases congestion data for Adelaide’s key road routes, along with its prescription for what needs to be done to fix the problem. Last week, it neatly timed the release to coincide with street closures for the city’s V8 race – the most frustrating week of the year for Adelaide motorists.

Full article : https://indaily.com.au/opinion/2019/03/ ... ful-voice/
Very good question raised. But no one else seems to be publicly agitating for better transport, road or otherwise. The former state government had some grand ideas, but no concrete plans. The Libs will pay lip service to PT, and just continue what has already commenced for roads. At least the RAA is highlighting a lack of action re transport in general, and I don't get the idea they are particularly adverse to PT.

mawsonguy
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:11 am
Been thanked: 84 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1700 Post by mawsonguy » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:17 pm

PeFe wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 3:39 pm
Article from In Daily discussing the road lobby's power versus the public transport lobby.
Adelaide's public transport users need a more powerful voice
OPINION

It’s no wonder that public transport users are the bottom of the policy pile when the best-connected and most well-resourced transport lobby group in South Australia represents motorists.

This might be the Adelaide media equivalent of shooting Bambi, but it’s time to question whether the RAA – an organisation that represents motorists – is the best organisation to guide debate on the city’s growing traffic congestion.

Every year the organisation releases congestion data for Adelaide’s key road routes, along with its prescription for what needs to be done to fix the problem. Last week, it neatly timed the release to coincide with street closures for the city’s V8 race – the most frustrating week of the year for Adelaide motorists.

Full article : https://indaily.com.au/opinion/2019/03/ ... ful-voice/
To quote from the RAA submission on the Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan https://www.raa.com.au/community-and-ad ... d-use-plan:
RAA acknowledges the importance of sustainable transport options including the integration of cycling and walking as vital components of the transport framework. RAA supports measures outlined in the Plan to create an expansive cycling and pedestrian network which provides safety for all users. ... RAA is supportive of public transport within both urban and regional areas of the state, and within an overall integrated planning and land use context.
I strongly suspect that the majority of Public Transport users also own a car.

User avatar
ChillyPhilly
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1337
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Has thanked: 252 times
Been thanked: 287 times
Contact:

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1701 Post by ChillyPhilly » Wed Mar 06, 2019 8:16 am

The RAA certainly aren't anti-PT. On many occasions they've advocated for improved public transport.
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.

User avatar
Nathan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3090
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Bowden
Has thanked: 188 times
Been thanked: 598 times
Contact:

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1702 Post by Nathan » Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:37 am

They're not anti-PT, but they'll never argue for PT at the expense of cars.

Eurostar
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 474
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 27 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1703 Post by Eurostar » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:33 pm

Well park n rides reduce the time on roads , the yearly mileage and the risk of crash for RAA customers, therefore reducing the customer's premium.

Marshall & Co should be securing funding for the Main Western and Inner West lines electrification

Verbatim9
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:26 pm
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1704 Post by Verbatim9 » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:43 pm

I read an article on the Grange line how it should be converted to Light Rail. I definitely agree. It would be cheaper to run. It could then be extended to Westlakes Shopping centre. The Outer harbour and Belair Line should be electrified ASAP. The Belair Line should be extended Murray Bridge and the Seaford line to Aldinga and Victor Harbour respectively.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 990
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 305 times
Been thanked: 76 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1705 Post by SBD » Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:36 pm

Verbatim9 wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:43 pm
I read an article on the Grange line how it should be converted to Light Rail. I definitely agree. It would be cheaper to run. It could then be extended to Westlakes Shopping centre. The Outer harbour and Belair Line should be electrified ASAP. The Belair Line should be extended Murray Bridge and the Seaford line to Aldinga and Victor Harbour respectively.
Suburban trains (especially as they are broad gauge, but timetabling too) can't be run further than Belair until the interstate freight has been rerouted somewhere else such as the GlobeLink corridor near Truro if that doesn't turn out to be too long. There's also the issue that the Southeastern Freeway has been upgraded (Heysen Tunnels etc) and now buses on the freeway will easily outperform trains on the winding Adelaide Hills alignment for anywhere past Bridgewater.

I expect there are several more pressing big-ticket infrastructure items to fund before commuter rail to Murray Bridge reaches the top of the pile.

From a regional development perspective, I'm not sure we want commuters travelling to Adelaide from Mount Barker and Murray Bridge anyway. It would be much better to encourage employment in those towns so that people who live there can be employed there, and the kids in the schools there expect to be able to grow up and have meaningful jobs in the district.

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1955
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 208 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1706 Post by claybro » Wed Mar 06, 2019 6:33 pm

SBD wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:36 pm
From a regional development perspective, I'm not sure we want commuters travelling to Adelaide from Mount Barker and Murray Bridge anyway. It would be much better to encourage employment in those towns so that people who live there can be employed there, and the kids in the schools there expect to be able to grow up and have meaningful jobs in the district.
Having said that, the regional rail upgrades in Victoria have provided a boom for such places as Ballarat, Bendigo and Geelong. These centres are now a commute from Melbourne, and far from just becoming dormitory towns, the additional influx of residents who maybe do commute, has created employment options for building services and trades, retail, health and education, to service all the extra residents and home building activity. The windy track is often mentioned as a reason not to run trains, but I wonder if there has been any study done to diverting the train to the centre of the freeway past Bridgewater. Expensive I'm sure, but so is building freeways to cater for never ending North and South sprawl.

OlympusAnt
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1707 Post by OlympusAnt » Wed Mar 06, 2019 6:36 pm

It will always be faster to drive from Mt Barker. The slow meandering up and down the hill just isn't worth it. The curves are too sharp even for 80km/h.
Follow me on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

Goodsy
Legendary Member!
Posts: 906
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:39 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 133 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1708 Post by Goodsy » Wed Mar 06, 2019 7:02 pm

claybro wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 6:33 pm
SBD wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:36 pm
From a regional development perspective, I'm not sure we want commuters travelling to Adelaide from Mount Barker and Murray Bridge anyway. It would be much better to encourage employment in those towns so that people who live there can be employed there, and the kids in the schools there expect to be able to grow up and have meaningful jobs in the district.
Having said that, the regional rail upgrades in Victoria have provided a boom for such places as Ballarat, Bendigo and Geelong. These centres are now a commute from Melbourne, and far from just becoming dormitory towns, the additional influx of residents who maybe do commute, has created employment options for building services and trades, retail, health and education, to service all the extra residents and home building activity. The windy track is often mentioned as a reason not to run trains, but I wonder if there has been any study done to diverting the train to the centre of the freeway past Bridgewater. Expensive I'm sure, but so is building freeways to cater for never ending North and South sprawl.
How about building railways to cater for the never ending north and south sprawl. A fast line following the standard gauge alignment to Mallala would make much more sense than a line up the freeway to Mount Barker, and it's on flat ground

OlympusAnt
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1709 Post by OlympusAnt » Wed Mar 06, 2019 7:27 pm

The government just announced that school down at Aldinga. Finish the railway line. The corridor is there.
Follow me on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 990
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 305 times
Been thanked: 76 times

Re: News & Discussion: Public Transport Service & Policy

#1710 Post by SBD » Wed Mar 06, 2019 8:08 pm

claybro wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 6:33 pm
SBD wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:36 pm
From a regional development perspective, I'm not sure we want commuters travelling to Adelaide from Mount Barker and Murray Bridge anyway. It would be much better to encourage employment in those towns so that people who live there can be employed there, and the kids in the schools there expect to be able to grow up and have meaningful jobs in the district.
Having said that, the regional rail upgrades in Victoria have provided a boom for such places as Ballarat, Bendigo and Geelong. These centres are now a commute from Melbourne, and far from just becoming dormitory towns, the additional influx of residents who maybe do commute, has created employment options for building services and trades, retail, health and education, to service all the extra residents and home building activity. The windy track is often mentioned as a reason not to run trains, but I wonder if there has been any study done to diverting the train to the centre of the freeway past Bridgewater. Expensive I'm sure, but so is building freeways to cater for never ending North and South sprawl.
I think Ballarat, Bendigo and Geelong also have their own significant industrial bases. Murray Bridge has Thomas Foods planning to rebuild and expand, and another abattoir too. Tailem Bend has The Bend motorsport park, I believe there are plans for more solar power stations in the area, Monarto has several warehouses and the Globelink proposal eventually includes an airport which would employ lots more people.

Overall, the state would be better off with a bunch of regional cities, then we could look at whether there are economies to be gained from creating/improving the regional intercity railways (I don't know if passenger rail on the Globelink route would be viable against buses on the freeway). Whyalla and Mount Gambier have (small) campuses of UniSA. Telepresence possibly means that soon students might be able to do almost any degree remotely, so a campus at Murray Bridge and other regional sites might be possible too.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: adelaide transport, Bing [Bot] and 7 guests