News & Discussion: Trams

[thecityguy]

Having a tram down the middle of port road would make the stations much safe and more appealing for people to use. If you have seen the railway stations atm, they aren't something you feel safe at, especially not at night


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Llessur2002]

and more appealing for people to use

Only if they do something significant with regards to pedestrian crossings near the stops. At present some of the pedestrian actuated crossings on Port Road can take up to two minutes to give a green walk signal after being pressed. I understand that traffic flow between intersections has to be taken into account but this length of wait is ridiculous and either encourages people to cross on the red signal (with then an associated pointless red light for traffic long after the pedestrian has already crossed) or would increase overall journey times for tram users.

If crossing light changes aren't made pretty much instantaneous then I can see real potential for accidents to happen as people chance it by running across three lanes of peak hour traffic as they try to catch a tram that's about to depart.

This is one of the reasons I'm really not a fan of tram stops in the middle of the road. If anything, I'd rather see two separated tram lines running down each side of Port Road next to the pavement, with replacement vehicle lanes being added to the centre median. Obviously this then presents other problems with cars needing to turn across tram lines as well as further logistical problems with Port-bound trams turning north onto Kilkenny Road....

[Westside]

When talking about an existing rail right-of-way, the differences between light rail and heavy rail are very minimal, so I'm not sure why the hubbub about light rail vs heavy rail on the Port corridor. Firstly, light rail vehicles can be chosen that maximise seating capacity and can even be coupled to provide capacity similar to heavy rail. Light rail vehicles can travel at distances far greater than the OH line. You can also provide greater express services for the longer journeys where the lines converge. So the real difference comes when the rail line reaches the end points. Currently, the NW rail line cannot deliver passengers into the heart of Port Adelaide or to the future population centre in West Lakes. Also, the station in Adelaide is well known to be in the wrong place to conveniently serve the population centre in the cbd (although hopefully in my lifetime I'll live to see a rail tunnel under the Adelaide cbd). Secondly, the line has stations that are much better suited to light rail owing to the short distances between the stations.

Effectively we have two choices, upgrade the line for electric heavy-rail and forgo any extensions into population areas of Pt Adelaide and WL or upgrade to light rail and extend the track into these areas to provide much greater catchment of the line. The third option of rebuilding the line in Port Rd seems like a complete waste of time for me. The advantage of the current line is it's right-of-way, so routing trams off this right of way to compete with crossing traffic on Port Rd seems like a significant downgrade to me!

So whether this line is serviced by heavy rail trains, light rail vehicles or 'train-trams' is of very little consequence to me. What needs to happen is an upgrade to the infrastructure on the line and a commitment from the government to put a strategy in place and stick to it. We'd all be better off once a plan is announced and silly ideas of running trams down Port Rd are put to sleep!

[PeFe]

And dont forget that all journeys between Bowden and the Adelaide train station will be ten minutes longer under the light rail plan (as the tram leaves the dedicated rail corridor before Bowden station to enter Port Rd and continue the journey through traffic)

[phenom]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenger ... y-comments

And the Norwood extension should be off limits because... [shakes random excuse ball]... 'landmark' trees would have to go.

Yes, 'landmark' trees that haven't actually been there that long.

Summarising the case 'against' is this AdelaideNow commenter (who had received multiple likes):

"Take the trees down then you will not need a tram as the place will run down and become a dole suburb like others that have been ruined by no jobs available."

As someone who lives in the CBD and makes reasonable use of the tram (despite lots of bus services), I can assure the naysayers of Norwood that they will very much prefer a tram to a bus... it's quieter, less polluting, more urbane, easier to board/alight from and I'm sure whatever trees are removed can be made up for with plantings elsewhere.

[I Follow PAFC]

Norwood residents say The Parade’s landmark trees must stay in any plans to extend tram line

AXING The Parade’s landmark ironbark trees to make room for a tram line would “rip the heart out of Norwood”, residents have told a public forum.

And locals have questioned the need for a tram given The Parade is already well served by buses.

http://www.news.com.au/national/south-a ... a470685d3c

[Brucetiki]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenger ... y-comments

And the Norwood extension should be off limits because... [shakes random excuse ball]... 'landmark' trees would have to go.

Yes, 'landmark' trees that haven't actually been there that long.

Summarising the case 'against' is this AdelaideNow commenter (who had received multiple likes):

"Take the trees down then you will not need a tram as the place will run down and become a dole suburb like others that have been ruined by no jobs available."

As someone who lives in the CBD and makes reasonable use of the tram (despite lots of bus services), I can assure the naysayers of Norwood that they will very much prefer a tram to a bus... it's quieter, less polluting, more urbane, easier to board/alight from and I'm sure whatever trees are removed can be made up for with plantings elsewhere.

Never argue with an AdelaideNow poster - they'll only drag you down to their level and beat you on experience

[Llessur2002]

Ah yes, I only ever go to Norwood to look at the landmark trees along the Parade.

Oh wait - I actually hardly ever go to Norwood because there's no public transport other than buses that goes there. I can't wait until they put in a landmark tram line to make it easier for me.

[thecityguy]

I always wonder what these kind of people would be like in a relationship? If you can't let go of a tree how do they cope with a breakup? #clingy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Waewick]

Norwood residents say The Parade’s landmark trees must stay in any plans to extend tram line

AXING The Parade’s landmark ironbark trees to make room for a tram line would “rip the heart out of Norwood”, residents have told a public forum.

And locals have questioned the need for a tram given The Parade is already well served by buses.

http://www.news.com.au/national/south-a ... a470685d3c

the problem with these forums is you only get the whingers.

the trees should be planted along the footpaths anyway, but I'd hardly call them part of the Norwood DNA.

[claybro]

And dont forget that all journeys between Bowden and the Adelaide train station will be ten minutes longer under the light rail plan (as the tram leaves the dedicated rail corridor before Bowden station to enter Port Rd and continue the journey through traffic)

Unless they ran trams at the speed by which they are actually designed to go, rather than trundle along at 40km/h. ALSO Many is the time on the OH line the train is stuck in Adelaide yard waiting for the green light, or stuck outside Adelaide Yard waiting for clearance. The journey from Bowden to the city could be MUCH quicker than it is currently by tram, and more frequent when they added the extra light rail sets. Trams running at 5 minute intervals and taking 10 minutes Bowden to Nth Terrace V heavy rail running at 20 minute intervals but taking 5 minutes....cant really see the difference. Most people just want to walk up to their stop/station and not wait too long for the next service. Even 10 minutes can seem an eternity to wait, so smaller more frequent services ie trams are popular, and with trams running from Grange/West Lakes/Semaphore/ Port Adelaide, the corridor from Woodville to North terrace would be very high frequency, much more so than a heavy rail service.

[rubberman]

And dont forget that all journeys between Bowden and the Adelaide train station will be ten minutes longer under the light rail plan (as the tram leaves the dedicated rail corridor before Bowden station to enter Port Rd and continue the journey through traffic)

Unless they ran trams at the speed by which they are actually designed to go, rather than trundle along at 40km/h. (Snip)

Plus, of course, given the relatively short spacing of the stations along the Port line, and the relative potential acceleration of the trams vs the heavier railcars, if operated at spec, trams should be able to out sprint railcars from the Port to Bowden. Given that, times could well be pretty damn close.

Furthermore, if they purchased trams such as the Škoda 15T, with more doors, and shaved even 10 seconds per stop, there's another few minutes saving in addition.

[thecityguy]

Probably a stupid question, but is a monorail type arrangement out of the question? Could raise the rail to go over whatever roads it needs to go over, and then bring the height back to ground level for all stops so elevated stations aren't needed?

Once at ground level you wouldn't know the line is there, you would only see the rail infrastructure when it is elevated over roads.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Patrick_27]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenger ... y-comments

And the Norwood extension should be off limits because... [shakes random excuse ball]... 'landmark' trees would have to go.

Yes, 'landmark' trees that haven't actually been there that long.

Summarising the case 'against' is this AdelaideNow commenter (who had received multiple likes):

"Take the trees down then you will not need a tram as the place will run down and become a dole suburb like others that have been ruined by no jobs available."

As someone who lives in the CBD and makes reasonable use of the tram (despite lots of bus services), I can assure the naysayers of Norwood that they will very much prefer a tram to a bus... it's quieter, less polluting, more urbane, easier to board/alight from and I'm sure whatever trees are removed can be made up for with plantings elsewhere.

Never argue with an AdelaideNow poster - they'll only drag you down to their level and beat you on experience

Having grown up in the eastern suburbs near Norwood, I really wish these local retirees who start all of these protest groups regarding stupid matters would go reemploy themselves somewhere. Every person I've met living in the area hates those trees, they're messy, unappealing to the street scape and they've destroyed the concrete for the traffic island time and time again. Now yes, I will admit that the street will get hot from the lack of shade (which those trees currently provide) however this is what good planning can do... If the tram line is not due for construction for another four-five years, start upgrading the strip now planting new trees that will have matured enough by the time the iron bark trees need to go... It's not that hard.

[Goodsy]

What if instead of converting the OH to tram they rebuilt the Port Adelaide station and terminated the OH line there, then built tram lines that feed into the station