News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[SAR526]

Goodwood isn't useless; it serves the surrounding suburbs and the swimming centre nearby, It's receiving a much needed upgrade, however; I do feel that consideration should be made for a tram station on the overpass with lift access to the train platforms bellow. Sure, it would mean another station within close proximity of Forestville and Goodwood Road, but it would serve a purpose for beach/race goers coming from the hills and other suburban areas services by the train network.

Except that also adds another stop to our over regulated tramway. So, just for the sake of keeping Goodwood we have train stations within about 400m of each other and two tram stops within the same distance. I thought we are supposed to be speeding things up here?

I believe that there are several bus routes passing through the Mitcham area, so why don't we close the 1883 heritage station so that even more people can ruin our beautiful hills with their rash of highly inflammable homes and ride express through the suburbs where the people who paid (and continue to pay) for the suburban railway system have lived for 177 years. If he doesn't like the buses provided for his use, I'm sure that claybro will assist by riding his bike, or driving his car to add to the pleasant ambience of the city, rather than travel a whole dozen times a year from such an unnecessary and dated facility. The time spent while trains cross could be shortened if the doors were to be kept closed while they were there.

Facetiousness aside – there are far too many people who write on public transport topics who seem to want trains to pass express through other peoples' stations for the sake of shortening their own journeys to the city. If prospective passengers have to walk for more than about ten minutes to their nearest station, the chances are that those who can will drive their cars. Many drivers don't have the option of convenient access to their destinations because the radial system serves only those who wish to travel into or through the CBD or places en route, but it is idiotic in the extreme to make less than the maximum use of the facilities that are there to lessen the number of unnecessary car journeys to the city that clutter up its streets and make it less than the pleasant people place that it can and should be. It will be those who are young, disabled or old who pay the price of the closure of their stations, not the single-occupant car driving commuters. If Goodwood were to be closed, my walk to Wayville from the Goodwood shops would be 1.4 km. That would make it impossible for me to use the train to get home, three blocks from a station which the speed freaks also want closed, but which has had a dramatic increase in its surrounding population in the last few years. It would also guarantee that there would be almost no rail use by the residents of the ONLY inhabited area for a considerable radius around Wayville.

If Goodwood is closed, interchange with the trams to Glenelg and the southern CBD will be forever impossible. I fear that the loss of Keswick is already a fait accompli, and yet a golden opportunity still exists to connect under the highway to the show grounds, by lift and proper 'next train' signage from the Belair and Seaford platforms to the overhead walkway, and a subway to the interstate rail facility which will one day again be used as it should be. Access to Adelaide Central for long trains is not now an option, but I'm sure that the many travellers lugging cases or back-packs, on whom I used to take pity and pick up as they hiked up Anzac Highway to the city, would approve of the convenient rail connection which could exist if a relatively small expense were to be added now to the track replacement project. The mess at Keswick is the result of a culpable lack of fore-sight and sheer official bloody-mindedness. Why are we about to lose the opportunity to ameliorate it just a little?

Yes the distance between Wayville and Goodwood is short (660m, a walk about which Clayboro complained), but electric trains have quick acceleration, and both stations are needed.

[monotonehell]

^ this

Some services should be express and serve outlying areas (like heavy rail) some should stop all stops and not travel too far (like trams, our Glenelg route is run too much like a train, it's quite wrong).

...but I'm sure that the many travellers lugging cases or back-packs, on whom I used to take pity and pick up as they hiked up Anzac Highway to the city...

Just as an aside, did they all make it to their destination?

[rubberman]

SAR526, another version of the NIMBY effect.

Having said that, heavy rail really only makes sense with relatively long distances between stations so that the vehicles can get 'wound up'. Intermediate points should be served by lighter systems such as buses or trams. Trouble is, people don't want to transfer between modes, putting political pressure to shorten the station distance. That then becomes self defeating as travel times dive.

Also, people in the inner suburbs such as Wayville and Goodwood generally have a better travel time to the CBD than people from suburbs such as Noarlunga and beyond. In that case, there is an argument that using the train to give people from Noarlunga and Elizabeth/Gawler a better service by closing inner suburban stations whose local residents can still get to the CBD more frequently and quickly is more equitable and efficient use of heavy rail.

[SAR526]

... heavy rail really only makes sense with relatively long distances between stations so that the vehicles can get 'wound up'. Intermediate points should be served by lighter systems such as buses or trams.....Also, people in the inner suburbs such as Wayville and Goodwood generally have a better travel time to the CBD than people from suburbs such as Noarlunga and beyond. In that case, there is an argument that using the train to give people from Noarlunga and Elizabeth/Gawler a better service by closing inner suburban stations whose local residents can still get to the CBD more frequently and quickly is more equitable and efficient use of heavy rail.

Generally I would agree with this. Emerson, for instance, has frequent nearby bus services and Goodwood has tram and bus access to the city. It is travel to outer destinations that is the nigger in the wood pile. For this, there needs to be a mix of short working stoppers as well as express services for long distance travellers, such as those that we have enjoyed for many years with all or limited stops Tonsley and Brighton trains following a block or so behind an express. For middle distance suburbs like Oaklands and Warradale the train is twice as fast as available bus services, which take 40 minutes every half hour, and on one route no buses at all from 2.30 to 6.30. With a stabled train in the middle road, expresses from Seaford can drop passengers for intermediate suburbs and proceed at top speed. I am sure that the provision of short working facilities at Elizabeth, Salisbury, Mawson Interchange and Dry Creek on the Gawler line could allow for a similar regime.

The tram service could be improved by a mix of short workings to South Terrace and the rarely used crossover at Beckman Street, preceding the Glenelg trams which could have a first set down at South Plympton, giving those travelling the furthest a greater chance of not having to stand all the way.

I am concerned about the maximum benefit to the maximum number. What lights my wick is an ill thought out comment which is the product of a selfish lack of consideration for the needs of others, or a lack of rigorous research and thought before putting fingers to the keyboard. I am therefore happy to have my own contributions examined and rationally disputed as has been the case here with Rubberman, but I have long been dismayed by the shallow thinking and flippancy displayed by some on this site and on Railpage, which I have read daily for many years. I know that this sounds pompous, but I can't think of any other way to ask some contributors to take the privilege of discussion on this excellent site a little more seriously.

[SAR526]

....Some services should be express and serve outlying areas (like heavy rail) some should stop all stops and not travel too far (like trams, our Glenelg route is run too much like a train, it's quite wrong).

I agree with you. See my reply to Rubberman.

...but I'm sure that the many travellers lugging cases or back-packs, on whom I used to take pity and pick up as they hiked up Anzac Highway to the city...

Just as an aside, did they all make it to their destination?

Yea, they did, and there was a surprising number of them. I cannot however guarantee that they were not forever traumatized by their first experience of travelling with an Adelaide driver. Perhaps they left Adelaide with profound gratitude that they were still alive. An American friend and I both still laugh at his cry of 'OH, MY GAHD!", with his face covered by both hands, when we were both driven into the traffic on the Tullamarine Freeway and he thought that we were on the wrong side of the road. Still there's little danger of my killing any one now. My electric chariot can only give you a gentle little bump.

[rubberman]

Actually SAR526, I apologise if the tone of my post led you to think I was disputing what you were saying. I actually was agreeing with the thrust of your comment. My post was meant to expand on what you were saying, rather than disagree.

As you point out, there are a number of suburban stations which are strategically placed, and with a bit of common sense and coordination of rail, bus and tram, could drastically improve the public transport experience of thousands. I exaggerate not.

[claybro]

Commuter Trains (which our system is) are best suited to maving large volumes of cummuters over relatively long distances to major destinations/attractions with limited stops. Trams are ideal for moderate length journeys with reasonably distanced stations/stops when on a dedicated track and closer stops on streets. Buses are more suited to shorter journeys with frequent stops. In Adelaide we seem to have it arse about. We transport commuters long distances on express busses, from outer suburbs, all the way to the CBD clogging up the cty centre, and use trains to stop at every tinpot siding in the system, slowing the whole thing down.The tram, while having reasonably spaced stations, is run at snails pace already, and further slowed by overkill controlls. It seems the main reason most want to keep Goodwood is to facilitate some sort of interchange with the tram. Unfortunately due to the location of the junction, this just is not practical in terms of station placing for the trains and the trams. Stations 500m apart on both rail modes is not practical in an already slow network.

[SAR526]

Actually SAR526, I apologise if the tone of my post led you to think I was disputing what you were saying. I actually was agreeing with the thrust of your comment. My post was meant to expand on what you were saying, rather than disagree.

No offence was or is taken. I appreciate the tenor and content of your comments.

]As you point out, there are a number of suburban stations which are strategically placed, and with a bit of common sense and coordination of rail, bus and tram, could drastically improve the public transport experience of thousands. I exaggerate not.

I agree with this also, and with Claybro's point about the use of express buses to or from various destinations which could be better served by guaranteed connections with fast trains. The provision of express trains to outer suburbs is absolutely necessary. It is possible to time-table short-working stopping trains between them, as has been done successfully for years on the Noarlunga/Brighton/Tonsley services. He is also right in suggesting that a few inner stations could be closed because they have frequent close-by bus connections, though passengers in the down directions would inevitably be disadvantaged. The dividing line comes when a particular suburb would have significantly poorer services were the local station to be closed. It is unacceptable for people who have the disadvantages of a rail route passing through their neighbourhood to be precluded from using it. And as for Goodwood, I'm far from the only one who wants a South Road style lift connected interchange between trains and trams. It should have been provided 83 years ago. Commercial Road Station had a lift when I was a boy, not much less than that number of years ago - and electrification of the whole suburban network would almost certainly have been undertaken if Commissioner Webb had stayed in office a few years longer.

An afterthought. I forgot the rivalry between the SAR and the MTT under William Goodman. They had battles about level crossings, and when the Glenelg Tramway was installed to replace the King William Street line, owned by the SAR and crossing the Melbourne line on the level at Goodwood with stations at Goodwood Road and Forestville, there was another railway route from North Terrace via Thebarton station, a stone's throw from Mile End, and on to Glenelg. A platform is still extant at Marion Road in Plympton. I used to play sometimes in the signal box there, pulling at the disconnected levers. This is more than likely why an interchange was never built at Goodwood, which in steam days had a curving alignment over the station subway and around to the Glenelg line which never received track connection. It was intended that the North Terrace line also be electrified by the MTT, but the 1930 depression put paid to that.

[Tonsley213]

Here are some photos I took today,

most are of the viaduct,

IMG_7615 by Tonsley, on Flickr

IMG_7614 by Tonsley, on Flickr

IMG_7595 by Tonsley, on Flickr

IMG_7609 by Tonsley, on Flickr

IMG_7611 by Tonsley, on Flickr

IMG_7607 by Tonsley, on Flickr

[AG]

Must be the first time I've seen wires strung since the electrification process started. How far along the Seaford Line have the stanchions been completed so far if anyone has seen any beyond the extension?

[Patrick_27]

Just a thought.

I know the amount of re-structure it would involve to undertake such a project.

But has it been considered to move Interstate rail back into Adelaide railway station?

Obviously, a standard gauge line would need to be constructed to allow such a task, and they'd have to build a platform long enough to cater for the Ghan, etc, and separate passengers from regular Metro trains but it would bring tourists right into the CBD and not to a terminal located in an isolated location just out of the CBD. It works at Southern Cross (obviously a much bigger station, but it could still be achieved).

Ideally if the money was available and people were willing to just throw money at outrageous projects, I'd support a tunnel being constructed to the Adelaide Bus Terminal and making it duel interstate travel terminal for Bus and train services. But such an idea would sit in the billions.

[Patrick_27]

On another note.

Has consideration been made for potentially standardising the Belair line?

I know that all the new concrete sleepers have the ability to change gauge. And to me it seems stupid that they didn't attempt to do so in this rail renewal project (too late now). But at present, the Belair line won't be electrified because it isn't a duel track line the entire stretch, however, if it were converted to standard gauge from Adelaide Railway Station to Belair, it could be electrified, it could run on both tracks, they could consider re-opening beloved stations such as Millswood, and they could consider extending the line back out to Aldgate, Bridgewater, Mt. Barker, Murray Bridge and maybe even Strath and Victor Harbour. Therefore better connecting the CBD with these new communities forming in and around the Adelaide Hills. Now sure, Bus' operate, but Train services could prove a lot quicker.

[[Shuz]]

Patrick,

The single-track Belair Line, which is managed by Adelaide Metro, is owned by the State Government/DPTI.

The other track, the one which carries the frieght trains, is owned by the Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC).

ARTC don't like sharing tracks. So it won't happen.

[metro]

But has it been considered to move Interstate rail back into Adelaide railway station?

It sounds good but it would be a nightmare to try and make it possible, Adelaide station is just too small. To make it possible would be very complicated, very expensive, very disruptive and for a couple of trains that only run once a week. I think it would be better to get Light Rail going to the Airport down Sir DB Drive with a tram stop on the Hilton bridges next to a new Keswick station where both metro and interstate trains could call at. The surrounding area could be redeveloped into a Transit Oriented Development and/or Sporting precinct at some time in the future for a commonwealth or olympic games.

[mattblack]

Must be the first time I've seen wires strung since the electrification process started. How far along the Seaford Line have the stanchions been completed so far if anyone has seen any beyond the extension?

Just from the Northern end of the bridge to the Seaford medows station at this stage.