Hills Rail services

[Pat28]

Acknowledeging the fact that the current aligment past Belair is windy, long, time consuming and very much of a detour, maybe a realigned straighten route for the train from Coronmandel Station to Heathfield Station on the other side of the hill could work. The route would deviate from the current line a coromandel station go virtually along Main Rd headin east then over to the Blackwood forest, maybe a tunnel, then the alignment would rise slightly and follow along the Sturt River and then maybe another tunnel (under Heathfield High School) then join up to the current line at where the Heathfield Station was. I'll get a map up in a bit, but i hope you get the picture. I think the route would be straighter and porvide an opportunity for rail passenger services in the Hills suburbs.
Discuss.

[monotonehell]

While you do this, you'd need to look at not only a flat map, but a terrain map to appreciate how a route would be able to negotiate the slopes involved. There's probably a terrain reason why the route is the way it is.

[Somebody]

And I'll chip in the map I post on Railpage when this shows up - but at least you aren't like Wilfy who sees nothing wrong with the alignment as "people prefer trains". I have actually travelled on the line - yourself?


Looking at my map, I see the following issues with that idea:

- It would still take longer than the bus does.
- Not enough people/potential passengers to make the massive cost viable just for passenger trains - ESPECIALLY as there is a direct road route, which simply needs more frequent buses.
- Possible issue of grades
- Still a dog leg & indirect route through Goodwood, Mitcham, Lynton, Coromandel.
- Still an awfully indirect route past Mount Lofty to Mount Barker (just as bad as the first part)
- It is a single track SG freight line run by the ARTC. Can't run passenger services on that unless it's double minimum which would be extremely expensive to construct - see point #2
- It would still take longer than the bus does.

Basically, unless you are like Wilfy and think a once a day train is better than any frequency of buses, those suburbs/towns are best serviced by bus.

[Shuz]

Well, I do know something. Running trains via Brownhill Creek Valley is possible using the inner-city alignment, but after Mitcham station wouldn't service another stop until Crafers. The environmental implications of such construction would be nothing short of distastrous.

[Pat28]

While you do this, you'd need to look at not only a flat map, but a terrain map to appreciate how a route would be able to negotiate the slopes involved. There's probably a terrain reason why the route is the way it is.

Ill have to find a fairly decent topographical map - as it may or may not work. the map is coming

[Pat28]

And I'll chip in the map I post on Railpage when this shows up - but at least you aren't like Wilfy who sees nothing wrong with the alignment as "people prefer trains". I have actually travelled on the line - yourself?


Looking at my map, I see the following issues with that idea:

- It would still take longer than the bus does.
- Not enough people/potential passengers to make the massive cost viable just for passenger trains - ESPECIALLY as there is a direct road route, which simply needs more frequent buses.
- Possible issue of grades
- Still a dog leg & indirect route through Goodwood, Mitcham, Lynton, Coromandel.
- Still an awfully indirect route past Mount Lofty to Mount Barker (just as bad as the first part)
- It is a single track SG freight line run by the ARTC. Can't run passenger services on that unless it's double minimum which would be extremely expensive to construct - see point #2
- It would still take longer than the bus does.

Basically, unless you are like Wilfy and think a once a day train is better than any frequency of buses, those suburbs/towns are best serviced by bus.

Yes i travel to Blackwood quite reguarly and yes it take a blooody long time and that is why looking at a flat map a simple idea was to bascially avoid the National Park and go on the other side of the hill. If my asumption is correct the old line only went to National Park because of Old Government House. Another problem with the bypass route i chose is that Mt lofty Station will be bypassed.

[Shuz]

http://www.atlas.sa.gov.au should help you out with topographical information.

[Pat28]

The map:
another prob, seeing that any bypass or new alignment will require the space for double stacking for freight, this one has 2 tunnels

[Pat28]

http://www.atlas.sa.gov.au should help you out with topographical information.

Thanks for the help anyway, Google seemed suffice

[Ho Really]

Interesting Pat28, what's the gradient?

Cheers

[Pat28]

Gradient? no idea i would think it would slowly rise upward until to reaches the Heathfield end. Anyway i think the route would shave about 20+ minutes of the current travel time.

[Shuz]

I was having a look into it as well, and I think there is one other very viable route - via Waterfull Gully. It's not so much a problem gradient-wise, which can be eliminated by use of bridges and tunnels, its more of the impact onto the environment, considering it runs course adjacent a watershed, through Cleland and Mount Lofty National Parks. And then theres the issue of accessing it into the city (after it finishes navigating the Hills) I know Linden Avenue in Hazelwood Park was designated as the original Hills Freeway corridor as part of the MATS 1968, hence why the road is seemingly wide! And would be able to support a train line in its median, but once it reaches Greenhill Road - it would have to be undergrounded.

Cost: $1-1.5b. Environmentally, you'll have the Greens waging jihad.

[Will409]

Gradient? no idea i would think it would slowly rise upward until to reaches the Heathfield end. Anyway i think the route would shave about 20+ minutes of the current travel time.

Just to give you an idea as to what you are facing up against, the current alignment has a ruling gradient of 1 in 45 (45 feet forward raises or lowers the line by 1 foot). Most of the line from Belair to the summit at Mt Lofty (actually Stirling) is only on a 1 in 45 gradient because it is compensated ie, full of curves. If the line was uncompensated, the gradient would be a brutal 1 in 37.

[Pat28]

Any other ideas about shaving time of rail services into the hills? If rail had to go to Mt Barker how where would it go?

[Somebody]

Yes i travel to Blackwood quite reguarly and yes it take a blooody long time

So basically you've never travelled on the Adelaide Hills Line, minus a short section of it. Have you travelled on the SG freight line which you are proposing running trains on? I have - infact I have travelled the entire Adelaide-Melbourne route twice.

If you want to experience it - go for a trip on GSR's Overdue to Murray Bridge and get the bus back.

Any other ideas about shaving time of rail services into the hills? If rail had to go to Mt Barker how where would it go?

Look, I think it would be possible to run a reasonably fast passenger train to there with a massive amount of money on infrastructure.

To put it simply, it would not be viable, and some places are best serviced by bus, and some are best serviced by heavy rail. The Adelaide Hills are the former.