News & Discussion: Trams

[how good is he]

Yes I agree for long routes the light rail is to long/slow, I think that extending an (electrified) train to Semaphore, West Lakes etc is the best option. Also they should extend the Outer Harbor rail the 1km to the ASC/submarine Corp. in time to give the future (4,000?) workforce a PT option.

[claybro]

Yes I agree for long routes the light rail is to long/slow, I think that extending an (electrified) train to Semaphore, West Lakes etc is the best option. Also they should extend the Outer Harbor rail the 1km to the ASC/submarine Corp. in time to give the future (4,000?) workforce a PT option.

So you are advocating heavy rail down west lakes boulevarde and semaphore road? Not a good fit. Light rail is the only viable option for shared roadways and dense urban areas such as the cafe strip of semaphore.

[how good is he]

Yes not the best look vs light rail, but with new modern carriages & stations it could work. I think practicality and speed of service for this distance is more important. Further the cost would be less & each route would need only a 3-4km spur line. It could be built/running in 12 -18 months.

[SRW]

I could conceive of West Lakes having an electrified heavy rail extension, but I'd agree it's not desirable of for Sempahore.

I'm not yet persuaded on the benefit of a light rail conversion of the Outer Harbour line, and wonder if it's totally outside the realm of possibility to consider a standalone tram network servicing Semaphore, the Port and possibly Grange? Why must it connect through to the city? The transfer hurdle from tram to train for those wanting that destination or vice versa could surely be overcome by superior service each mode would provide in their respective networks?

[SBD]

I'm not yet persuaded on the benefit of a light rail conversion of the Outer Harbour line, and wonder if it's totally outside the realm of possibility to consider a standalone tram network servicing Semaphore, the Port and possibly Grange? Why must it connect through to the city? The transfer hurdle from tram to train for those wanting that destination or vice versa could surely be overcome by superior service each mode would provide in their respective networks?

Isn't that what we/they had in the "good old days"? Adelaide had a tram network for the (inner) suburbs and a train service that went out further, including Port Adelaide. Port Adelaide had its own tram network that didn't connect to the Adelaide tram network?

I think that at different times, the two networks might have both reached to somewhere near Cheltenham, but not at the same time to interconnect, but I'm not certain of that.

[Torrens_5022]

Removing the line from Albert Park to Grange is a bad idea, but leaving it in would cause issues with frequency. You could use the Albert Park to Grange line - and run a service Albert Park to the City via Grange or Henley Beach road. An example Portlink would go via Grange Road to Henley Square and Westlink would go to Albert Park via Henley Beach, Military Rds and the Grange line, this would link three lines together instead of just having them end.

[rubberman]

Part of the problem on the Port Line is the large number of stops. That means heavy rail is just too slow. It is also fiendishly expensive compared to light rail or trams.

Of course, light rail is also slow in the Australian context. However, that's something that could be corrected by operational knowledge relatively cheaply.

To make heavy rail work would require far fewer stations, and many more passengers.

We could then possibly use trams from Grange/West Lakes and beyond to feed the trains.

However, to make trams work, they would have to operate much faster than the present light rail, and be constructed far more cheaply.

The obstacles are threefold:

Managing the public outcry over closing stations.
Managing public outcry over having to transfer from trams to trains.
Managing the consultants and operators to gain the knowledge of running a faster and cheaper tram system.

[dbl96]

I feel like they have dug themselves into a bit of a hole by continually promising to the electorate these short spur lines to Semaphore and West Lakes. Those routes are not compatible with a heavy rail Outer Harbor line. Despite heavy rail being the best suited to a long mainline like Outer Harbor, it is going to be difficult for the government to walk away from the Semaphore and West Lakes promises, despite them being relatively useless. Both Semaphore and and West Lakes are already relatively closer to reliable fixed-line public transport (the Outer Harbor and Grange lines) than most other parts of the Metropolitan area. It seems unfair to put so much effort into ensuring that the Semaphore and West Lakes extensions can go ahead if this means that other less well served areas of Adelaide miss out, and if it means that the Outer Harbor line is downgraded to light rail.

[claybro]

Since running a hybrid corridor is proving to be prohibitively costly, (doubling up) and with our expertise actually unworkable we are left with 2 options:

1. Heavy rail, slightly higher speed, but with LESS frequency, terminating on the very edge of the CBD and requiring transfer to get into the CBD proper. Less flexibility of destinations ie. heavy rail will not be considered for Semaphore road or realistically West Lakes boulevard.

2. Light rail. Slower speed, particularly for those on Le Fevre Peninsula, but higher frequency, multiple possible destinations, and more options once arriving in the CBD.

for those who think OH is too long for a light rail, I would refer you to search the tram system in Dresden Germany. Longer lines, longer higher capacity trams, in a much denser more urbanised environment like the one we are trying to create in some of these areas.

[SRW]

I don't think the Outer Harbour/Grange line should be discounted for its current city's edge terminus. That that is an issue (and it is) should add impetus to the goal of an underground city loop for all the rail lines. Which IMO is a higher priority than PortLINK (though not higher than some of the other proposed tram lines) and would negate some the arguments for it.

[ChillyPhilly]

The tram network c.mid-1950s.

[rubberman]

The tram network c.mid-1950s.

I'm pretty sure the trams never got to Kilburn. Afaik, it was started, but never finished due to the decision to scrap trams.

[Zills]

Part of the problem on the Port Line is the large number of stops. That means heavy rail is just too slow. It is also fiendishly expensive compared to light rail or trams.

Of course, light rail is also slow in the Australian context. However, that's something that could be corrected by operational knowledge relatively cheaply.

To make heavy rail work would require far fewer stations, and many more passengers.

We could then possibly use trams from Grange/West Lakes and beyond to feed the trains.

However, to make trams work, they would have to operate much faster than the present light rail, and be constructed far more cheaply.

The obstacles are threefold:

Managing the public outcry over closing stations.
Managing public outcry over having to transfer from trams to trains.
Managing the consultants and operators to gain the knowledge of running a faster and cheaper tram system.

Some good points, Rubberman. I think that the issue of 'too many stops' is easily solved by having the train stop at every second station. Rather than remove half of the stations, each train will alternate between the stations that they service. This will reduce the frequency, but potentially makes the system more efficient as the trip time is significantly reduced. What do you think, guys and girls?

[claybro]

Just get rid of heavy rail and the number of stops on this line is fine. Except in the case of light rail, the OH originating services could run express from Woodville.

[ml69]

Just get rid of heavy rail and the number of stops on this line is fine. Except in the case of light rail, the OH originating services could run express from Woodville.

Agree with you Claybro, but I think OH originating tram services should run all stops to Port Adelaide, then Woodville > Bowden > CBD stops (via the War Memorial Drive route).

The Semaphore tram line should then be all stops (via Port Adelaide) into the CBD.

And of course each tram stop should be upgraded to an acceptable modern standard.