News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[AG]

There seems to be problems with the 2000 class railcars. Apparently the problem appears to be a structural problem, and the entire fleet of 2000 class railcars have been sitting out of service since Friday afternoon. What the problem is exactly is not yet known.

[Al]

It's mentioned in todays 'tiser that the Government is about to look into electrifying the network and they estimate that it'll cost over $400mil to get it done.

[Edgar]

You mean as in electrifying the entire rail network in SA? Gosh that's going to be a lot of work!

[AG]

You mean as in electrifying the entire rail network in SA? Gosh that's going to be a lot of work!

No, just the Adelaide metropolitan area. The area served by TransAdelaide's suburban rail services.

[skyliner]

Greetings all from the outer perimeters (Queensland).

I note with great interesr the possible electrification of Adelaide's railways. I have followed Adelaide railway development from steam days. It had continually shrunk by the year as the city has over doubled in size. (interesting relationship). I gather Port Sanvac had a little sweetheart deal to supply oil while it was there, hence no electric trains. Now that has changed, fuel prices have gone up and SA has so much uranuim , the picture is very persuasive to develop more power for electric trains.

I had a conversation about 6 months ago with a CEO from Adelaide (who has the same interest as us all) who told me of a mineral find in SA that does the work of uranium at half the cost and half the risks. Does anyone know anything at all about this? SA stands to get enormous benefits - including power for the railways.

Elecrtification was planned around 1973 (I bought copies of the documents) - even the copper cables were in Islington. It all mysteriously fell over. Then there was the Adelaide underground under KWS. Back to the topic - electrification has verified itself over and over again. If public transport usage is to increase, the inpot is needed first I believe.

The current government wants to spend alot I gather. But then not a lot of transportation/infrastructure development has been done over the last 20 years. (I believe the state bank crash had a lot to do with it). It's high time the best Australian city (in my opinion) got on with it concerning the railway.

[AtD]

From what I've read at RailPage, Adelaide was to get electrification in the 1970's, but political support for it vanished during the constitutional crisis of 1975.

[bdm]

I've always thought the best option would be two lines, a Gawler-Noarlunga line and a Outer Harbour-Belair line. Instead of trains terminating at Adelaide Station, they continue underground down KWS. As there is less pressure on Adelaide station (and only a need for four broad gauge lines-two for each train line) it could again be used to host interstate trains.

Electrification and the closure of several low-patronage stations on the lines would speed up efficency on the service.

A rundle/grenfell station could be part of a large public transport interchange providing connectivity to light rail lines, the Northeast O-Bahn and a possible Southern O-Bahn.

[Tom]

A rundle/grenfell station could be part of a large public transport interchange providing connectivity to light rail lines, the Northeast O-Bahn and a possible Southern O-Bahn.

Why the Hell would you want to build a Southern O-Bahn. it is a huge waste of money and maintenance is expensive, you know what would be better a bus only Road - more efficient, cheaper to build and maintain....

The Current O-Bahn is a complete waste of space and of tax payer’s money for no real benefit

[bdm]

A rundle/grenfell station could be part of a large public transport interchange providing connectivity to light rail lines, the Northeast O-Bahn and a possible Southern O-Bahn.

Why the Hell would you want to build a Southern O-Bahn. it is a huge waste of money and maintenance is expensive, you know what would be better a bus only Road - more efficient, cheaper to build and maintain....

The Current O-Bahn is a complete waste of space and of tax payer’s money for no real benefit

Congratulations for displaying how naive you are!

I've spent days sitting in the State Library reading reports, pamphlets and information on the O-Bahn, and then I wrote an article on it. I consider it a superior form of transport in many situations, and a Southern O-Bahn (coupled with a dual carriageway Southern Expressway), would serve a region spanning from Belair / Blackwood to Reynella / Aberfoyle Park and be a great investment in an area that does not yet have efficient public transport.

It is the cheapest option given the complex situation: there is no wide transport corridor to the south, and given the O-Bahn can squeeze into an area a smidgen over 6m, it can be placed adjacent to the already existing rail tracks. If you think there's space for a road anywhere: think again. A Southern O-Bahn, even with a cost nearing $200m, is the cheapest and most effective solution.

The current O-Bahn costs very little to maintain and it's safety is far superior to rail and conventional busways. The track allows high speeds in a narrow corridor. The lack of stations allows a fast journey. The flexibility of services means you can catch ONE bus from your stop to the city.

The O-Bahn, in my eyes, only has one real flaw: the lack of a bus station in the city - which would alleviate the need to get 50+ people to slowly buy/insert tickets in the bus on the way in.

[AtD]

My pie-in-the-sky dream is to have an underground City-loop, with tracks dipping under Adelaide Station in the existing railyards, a station under Hindmarsh square, looping around for a station under Victoria Square, then coming back above ground in the west parklands and joining the existing line there.

Pigs might fly.

[rhino]

O-Bahn, I consider it a superior form of transport in many situations

So superior that since Adelaide built it's O'Bahn nearly 30 years ago, not a single other city in the world has built one, and the only city that had one before Adelaide has or is dismantling theirs.

If I'm wrong here, please feel free to name the other cities in the world that are being serviced by an O-Bahn bus system.

[l3etelgeuse]

My pie-in-the-sky dream is to have an underground City-loop, with tracks dipping under Adelaide Station in the existing railyards, a station under Hindmarsh square, looping around for a station under Victoria Square, then coming back above ground in the west parklands and joining the existing line there.

Pigs might fly.

Well we can always dream...

[bdm]

O-Bahn, I consider it a superior form of transport in many situations

So superior that since Adelaide built it's O'Bahn nearly 30 years ago, not a single other city in the world has built one, and the only city that had one before Adelaide has or is dismantling theirs.

If I'm wrong here, please feel free to name the other cities in the world that are being serviced by an O-Bahn bus system.

The technical advantage to the O-Bahn is simply that it can offer high speed in a narrow (~6m) corridor with higher safety and little impact on the environment. In places where there is ample space to build a conventional road-based busway there would be no use for an O-Bahn.

The Adelaide O-Bahn was originally only going to be 3km long, with conventional busway for the remaining 9km. It was extended to the whole route because of safety and environmental factors.

The buses cannot derail unless there is a large obstacle on the track. Buses can blow three tyres and still make it to the next interchange. There is no immediate danger if a driver falls asleep/has a heart attack while on the track.

Why not other cities? Because they have built freeways or conventional busways because they have the space to spend.

[rhino]

Why not other cities? Because they have built freeways or conventional busways because they have the space to spend.

Because Light Rail is a more efficient way to move large groups of people than busses. Consider that a 3-car light rail vehicle can hold approx 5 busses worth of people (including standers if they're packed in to the same degree) and can run at the same headways. That's more people, cheaper, and greener. Busses in the world's forward-thinking cities are used for connector services, but the bulk of the commuters are moved by rail. Even Los Angeles, the world's city most devoted to road traffic, moves more people on public transport by rail than by bus.

[bdm]

Why not other cities? Because they have built freeways or conventional busways because they have the space to spend.

Because Light Rail is a more efficient way to move large groups of people than busses. Consider that a 3-car light rail vehicle can hold approx 5 busses worth of people (including standers if they're packed in to the same degree) and can run at the same headways. That's more people, cheaper, and greener. Busses in the world's forward-thinking cities are used for connector services, but the bulk of the commuters are moved by rail. Even Los Angeles, the world's city most devoted to road traffic, moves more people on public transport by rail than by bus.

Sigh, you obviously couldn't counter the claims I made so you switched to something else. Again, you prove you don't know bugger-all about what you're talking about.

Light rail, in a different application, is the right choice. There are situations where busways, light rail and heavy rail would all be superior. In denser inner-city areas, light rail is supremo. In the sprawling suburbs, with many routes, busways are far superior due to their sheer flexibility (multiple routes). And by saying they're "not green" enough, you obviously don't realise that buses use significantly less energy than rail systems - and buses can be made to run on anything, even "green" fuels like hydrogen, electricity and natural gas.

And with regards to the capacity of the O-Bahn - if running at capacity it can shuttle 18 000 passengers in each direction every hour. That's 432 000 every day.

And the LA comparison is inherently flawed. LA has a huge freeway system and a pervasive car culture. It's metro system is new, shiny and efficient and not built to shuttle people from the suburbs. It has a population in excess of 20mil and many urban hubs, Adelaide is a small suburban city with most people living in suburbs and one central business district.