[U/C] Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
Message
Author
dbl96
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 232
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 4:31 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#376 Post by dbl96 » Sat Mar 09, 2024 4:07 pm

MT269 wrote:
Fri Jan 19, 2024 12:34 am
In response to the above, I meant via extending it beyond Port Dock, and connecting it to the OH line somewhere near Peterhead. The current alignment via Commercial Rd and Ethelton would be closed. A new station near Glanville could be built. The issue is it creates a second short working on a line in which is not practical for. How many lines of about 20kms in length have 2 short workings with moderate patronage levels at best?

I doubt it would be financially viable to connect these lines in such a manner. If in the unlikely event it's ever done, it would be practical to include a Semaphore extension in the budget, with only one corridor and not two.

The extension to Semaphore would probably cost upwards of $40 million with near zero patronage, excluding Easter and the NY events. But if ARTC/whoever can construct a new bypass route, then why can't the DIT?

All you really get is a station slightly closer to the bus interchange, and even further away from the shopping centre which has money spent on it in the last two or so years IIRC. And increased running costs as well. Running a 3 car electric set from Port or Semaphore or somewhere to Virginia with patronage that wouldn't even fill a minibus would be absurd.

Also, having checked the length, a bird has to fly around 14kms to Virginia. Yet a train has to backtrack by quite a bit, go east, northeast. then northwest again in a journey which amounts to about 40kms. I doubt one could justify running a 3 car set on such a service. Having fixed 3 car sets is definitely progress. But can have its downsides as well.
For a long time I thought along the same lines - the best option would be through-running trains through Port Dock (renamed Port Adelaide), then via a bridge or tunnel across the river to Glanville area and then onwards along the existing alignment to Outer Harbor. The existing Port Adelaide viaduct would be closed. However, I now agree this most likely just wouldn't be worth the cost.

The Outer Harbor line beyond Port Adelaide is better suited to light rail than heavy rail. It has a relatively small catchment area, as the Lefevre Peninsula simply isn't very wide, and as has been discussed many times over on this forum, station spacing is also particularly close on the Glanville-Outer Harbor section. Then you have the conundrum of how to serve Semaphore if the Outer Harbour line is heavy rail.

I think that the best outcome, and a compromise to solve the eternal dilemma of light vs heavy rail on the Outer Harbor line, is for the line from Adelaide to Port Dock to remain a heavy rail trunk line, and the Glanville-Outer Harbor section to be converted to light rail. A new tram branch would be built from Glanville to Semaphore, and trams from both lines would enter Port Adelaide via St Vincent Street to interchange with heavy rail in the heart of Port Adelaide. The Port Adelaide Viaduct would be closed.

This interchange based feeder line solution also solves the frequency issue associated with separate heavy rail branch lines all travelling into the city.

Ultimately, as you have discussed, it might be worth extending the heavy rail trunk line across the Port River to follow the freight route to Osbourne shipyards and then across Barker Inlet to St Kilda, interchanging with the proposed Virginia/Two Wells/Riverlea line. On the Lefevre Peninsula, this line wouldn't have too many stations - its primary purpose would be providing a quick connection to key employers like the shipyards and getting people between the northern suburbs (particularly the north-west growth corridor) and Port Adelaide. Shorter, local trips would be served by the trams running along the current Outer Harbor line alignment.
1NEEDS2POST wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2024 1:14 am
Spotto wrote:
Mon Jan 15, 2024 12:37 am
1NEEDS2POST wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2024 9:44 pm
Next step, I'd like to see this turned into a terminus for trains to Dry Creek as well via the now disused goods line.
Would’ve be easier to convert in future if they hadn’t dumped a load of earth between Russell Street and the mainline junction
There are two routes to Dry Creek, one being the Rosewater Loop that lasted a lot longer than the other. The other was through Gilman Railyards and there is still a path between there and the line to Dry Creek. This is shorter and it might be easier to rebuild than the Rosewater Loop. It also wouldn't have as many level crossings, I don't think re-opening the Grand Junction Road level crossing would be appealing.
I'm fairly agnostic about whether an east-west Port Adelaide-Modbury link via the Roseworthy Loop/Dry Creek line should be light rail or heavy rail. Heavy rail might make sense because of speed considerations and the lack of need for many stops (it mostly passes through low density industrial areas). But passenger volumes will likely be fairly low so light rail might make more sense (at least economically). Either way, both are compatible with the plan I have outlined above. If it is heavy rail, it would terminate at Port Dock station. If it is light rail, it would be through-running with Outer Harbor and Semaphore services via Commercial Road and St Vincent Street.

I tend to favor using the Roseworthy Loop rather than the direct Gilman line, as the Roseworthy Loop serves more residents - Roseworthy is the only residential area along that alignment between Port Adelaide and Pooraka.

User avatar
MT269
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2022 1:14 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#377 Post by MT269 » Sat Mar 09, 2024 9:56 pm

I assume you mean Rosewater. Roseworthy is in the lower north of the state. Will be surrounded by shoeboxes within 10 years at the most though. Unless the government wants to solve the housing crisis by decreasing the number of properties.

I think somebody needs to have the guts to increase the spacings between stations on the OH line. But obviously this will be political suicide. The OH line is not suitable for heavy rail as it is. But the pollies don't give a stuff.

What is the solution that will keep the nimbys, residents, and the budget happy?

There is no way that a tram line will improve travel times. This is because the DIT has a fixed unchangeable policy of a one size fits all timetable for tram lines. They have their heads somewhere between their backside in regards to any passenger complaints, including the retarded hourly frequency on weekends for Ovingham to Kilburn on the GC line. So unless one wants 46 minute journeys to the terminus, then retaining the tramline as heavy rail is the only interim solution.

Unless there are endless mass protests outside that box on North Tce, or it costs them an election, then they don't give a bloody rats.

There is a massive contrast between an ideal set up, and the reality. This is because it's SA.

rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 6040
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#378 Post by rev » Sun Mar 10, 2024 8:53 am

PD2/20 wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:22 pm
rev wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2024 1:37 pm

Is it just me or does that curved section look odd? I'm assuming they haven't finished perhaps?
The track requires the use of a tamping machine to consolidate the ballast under the sleepers to establish the correct vertical and horizontal alignments of the track. It is only more recently that the track has been laid across the the old access road to the Aviation Museum to the new platform. The connection to the main line will also require tamping. The completion of the junction will allow the tamper to be brought in by rail.
Cheers for the explanation.
I assume when you say tamping machine you mean those odd looking yellow "trains"..?

I Follow PAFC
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 422
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 7:23 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#379 Post by I Follow PAFC » Sun Mar 10, 2024 3:22 pm

Rail corridor night works.
More: https://ptpa.com.au/resources/news/rail ... ight-works

What's happening
Works will take place within the rail corridor in Port Adelaide, Alberton and Rosewater. Works will be undertaken at night to minimise disruption to the Outer Harbor train service.
Works include:
Removal of temporarily concrete barriers.
Rail signalling changes.
Installation of rail infrastructure (including ballast, sleepers and rail track).
Connection of new rail track to existing rail track.
The rail works will take place within the rail corridor between, Belgrave Street, Alberton and Old Port Road, Port Adelaide.
WORK HOURS
From Monday 18 March to Thursday 21 March 2024, works within the rail corridor will take place each night from 9pm to 4am.
From 11.30pm Friday 22 March until 4am Monday 25 March 2024, works within the rail corridor will take place continuously throughout the day and night.
OUTER HARBOR LINE SERVICE IMPACTS
During these works there will be some impacts to the Outer Harbor train services.
From 9pm until the last service each night between Monday 18 March to Thursday 21 March, the Outer Harbor rail line will be partially closed between Woodville and Outer Harbor Railway Stations. Outer Harbor train services will continue to operate between Adelaide Railway Station and Woodville Station with substitute buses operating between Woodville and Outer Harbor Railway Stations.
From Saturday 23 March until Sunday 24 March 2024, the Outer Harbor rail line will be partially closed between Woodville and Outer Harbor Railway Stations. Outer Harbor train services will continue to operate between Adelaide Railway Station and Woodville Station with substitute buses operating between Woodville and Outer Harbor Railway Stations.
There will be no impacts to the Grange line services.
Please observe rail service signage and visit www.adelaidemetro.com.au for the latest information.

See the notification below.
https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com ... PROVAL.pdf
I Follow The Port Adelaide Football Club
https://www.facebook.com/IFollowThePAFC/

PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 364
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#380 Post by PD2/20 » Sun Mar 10, 2024 3:40 pm

rev wrote:
Sun Mar 10, 2024 8:53 am
PD2/20 wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:22 pm
rev wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2024 1:37 pm

Is it just me or does that curved section look odd? I'm assuming they haven't finished perhaps?
The track requires the use of a tamping machine to consolidate the ballast under the sleepers to establish the correct vertical and horizontal alignments of the track. It is only more recently that the track has been laid across the the old access road to the Aviation Museum to the new platform. The connection to the main line will also require tamping. The completion of the junction will allow the tamper to be brought in by rail.
Cheers for the explanation.
I assume when you say tamping machine you mean those odd looking yellow "trains"..?
Yes. Wikipedia has an article "Tamping Machines". A ballast regulator is another track machine that tidies the ballast formation after tamping. It has a wire brush drum and ploughs.

I Follow PAFC
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 422
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 7:23 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#381 Post by I Follow PAFC » Wed Mar 13, 2024 9:47 am

Monday 18 March 2024 to Friday 22 March 2024
Rail closure - Outer Harbor Partial Line Night Closures - from 9pm each weekday 18 - 21 March.
https://www.adelaidemetro.com.au/servic ... 8-21-march

Saturday 23 March 2024 to Monday 25 March 2024
Rail closure - Outer Harbor Weekend Partial line Closure 23-24 March.
https://www.adelaidemetro.com.au/servic ... l-closure-
I Follow The Port Adelaide Football Club
https://www.facebook.com/IFollowThePAFC/

User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 6393
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#382 Post by Norman » Fri Mar 22, 2024 11:44 am

From yesterday. The platform looks to be almost complete, and the car park is almost done. Still some work to do on the bus interchange.

Image

Image

Image

Image

User avatar
1NEEDS2POST
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 471
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 5:01 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#383 Post by 1NEEDS2POST » Sat Mar 30, 2024 8:01 pm

PD2/20 wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:22 pm
rev wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2024 1:37 pm

Is it just me or does that curved section look odd? I'm assuming they haven't finished perhaps?
The track requires the use of a tamping machine to consolidate the ballast under the sleepers to establish the correct vertical and horizontal alignments of the track. It is only more recently that the track has been laid across the the old access road to the Aviation Museum to the new platform. The connection to the main line will also require tamping. The completion of the junction will allow the tamper to be brought in by rail.
Do they have a dedicated broad gauge tamper or is the machine they use also used on the standard gauge lines?

PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 364
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#384 Post by PD2/20 » Sun Mar 31, 2024 1:24 pm

1NEEDS2POST wrote:
Sat Mar 30, 2024 8:01 pm
PD2/20 wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2024 3:22 pm
rev wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2024 1:37 pm

Is it just me or does that curved section look odd? I'm assuming they haven't finished perhaps?
The track requires the use of a tamping machine to consolidate the ballast under the sleepers to establish the correct vertical and horizontal alignments of the track. It is only more recently that the track has been laid across the the old access road to the Aviation Museum to the new platform. The connection to the main line will also require tamping. The completion of the junction will allow the tamper to be brought in by rail.
Do they have a dedicated broad gauge tamper or is the machine they use also used on the standard gauge lines?
There are a tamper and a ballast regulator dedicated to broad gauge which are stabled in the south east yard at Dry Creek depot.

User avatar
baytram366
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 419
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:06 pm
Contact:

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#385 Post by baytram366 » Tue Apr 02, 2024 10:19 am

I really don't understand Adelaide's obsession with building tiny platform shelters that don't even offer any protection or even look good. So many of these useless shelters across the Adelaide Metro network.
Baytram 366's Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/34520752@N07/collections

A-Town
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 362
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 10:14 am

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#386 Post by A-Town » Tue Apr 02, 2024 11:41 am

baytram366 wrote:
Tue Apr 02, 2024 10:19 am
I really don't understand Adelaide's obsession with building tiny platform shelters that don't even offer any protection or even look good. So many of these useless shelters across the Adelaide Metro network.
Agreed, and it most likely just comes down to money. They really should invest in making railway stations more appealing for customers. Who wants to wait for a train in the middle of winter when it's windy and raining and the only shelter available is a bus stop on steroids already crammed with people?

User avatar
MT269
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2022 1:14 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#387 Post by MT269 » Tue Apr 02, 2024 12:56 pm

Being in a museum, it would be fitting to build a short ramp for accessibility instead of a platform, that only enables one door on the train to be accessed. It would be a huge money saver for this joke of a government.

Alyx
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 267
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:49 pm
Location: Adelaide

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#388 Post by Alyx » Tue Apr 02, 2024 4:28 pm

MT269 wrote:
Tue Apr 02, 2024 12:56 pm
Being in a museum, it would be fitting to build a short ramp for accessibility instead of a platform, that only enables one door on the train to be accessed. It would be a huge money saver for this joke of a government.
What drugs are you on?

rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 6040
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#389 Post by rev » Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:54 pm

A-Town wrote:
Tue Apr 02, 2024 11:41 am
baytram366 wrote:
Tue Apr 02, 2024 10:19 am
I really don't understand Adelaide's obsession with building tiny platform shelters that don't even offer any protection or even look good. So many of these useless shelters across the Adelaide Metro network.
Agreed, and it most likely just comes down to money. They really should invest in making railway stations more appealing for customers. Who wants to wait for a train in the middle of winter when it's windy and raining and the only shelter available is a bus stop on steroids already crammed with people?
I think it's more an issue of our state governments don't properly invest in/fund public transport. We just have really bad politicians in this state.
What are the biggest investments we've had in PT in the last 25 years? A tram line extension, the electrification of some rail lines and removing three level crossings?
Most stations wouldn't need a significant sized shelter, but they should have already identified which stations are the busiest and likeliest to see an increase in passengers and significantly upgraded those.
As usual they'll wait until they absolutely need to do something before they do it, much like our road infrastructure 99% of the time.

I Follow PAFC
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 422
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 7:23 pm

[U/C] Re: Port Adelaide Dock Spur Line

#390 Post by I Follow PAFC » Fri Apr 12, 2024 1:04 pm

New track and signal sighting tests were undertaken today, at the Port Dock railway station project site. The NRM Redhen railcars were utilised for those tests. Once the track ballast sweeping is completed the additional two rails will be installed, creating the narrow and standard gauge tracks on the same roadbed (ie gauntlet style) as always designed - and a great addition.
https://www.facebook.com/NRMPortAdelaide
I Follow The Port Adelaide Football Club
https://www.facebook.com/IFollowThePAFC/

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 135 guests