The one I was on was parked at the Bonython Park stop. It was only 10-15 minutes.MT269 wrote:I hope the passengers weren't imprisoned inside the trams for over an hour, in spite of platforms being a block or two away.
News & Discussion: Trams
- Nathan
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 3767
- Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
- Location: Bowden
- Contact:
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
- 1NEEDS2POST
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 471
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 5:01 pm
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
I know this forum doesn't like to hear this, but this is why trams were replaced with buses in the 50s and it's why the O-Bahn was built instead of rail.Nathan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 22, 2022 9:42 amWhile on one of the stuck trams, I overheard a message to the driver about an ambulance on the track about to clear soon. I suspect someone had a medical issue on one of the other trams.RetroGamer87 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 22, 2022 8:55 amAll trams have been stopped in the city. What happened?
-
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 1758
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
- Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
No it wasn't the reason. Unless you think that economics doesn't matter. By 1950, half of the trams were not only obsolete, but had suffered lack of maintenance through the Depression, WW2, and post war material shortages. Similarly, half the track was on its last legs. Plus, with post war expansion, parts of the system needed to be expanded, for example Walkerville, Richmond, Wayville and Findon. Buses were simply cheaper in the short term, and the Government had limited money. Period. That was the reason.1NEEDS2POST wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 6:34 pmI know this forum doesn't like to hear this, but this is why trams were replaced with buses in the 50s and it's why the O-Bahn was built instead of rail.Nathan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 22, 2022 9:42 amWhile on one of the stuck trams, I overheard a message to the driver about an ambulance on the track about to clear soon. I suspect someone had a medical issue on one of the other trams.RetroGamer87 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 22, 2022 8:55 amAll trams have been stopped in the city. What happened?
The O-Bahn was built purely because the Liberal Leader at the time wanted something different to the ALP NEAPTR project. There was zero other reason at the time. Now, as it turns out, it was a lucky choice because the O-Bahn works. But to say that there was any transport related reason is absurd. It was a political stunt that got lucky.
I'd thoroughly recommend anyone interested to buy Tom Wilson's excellent book covering Adelaide transport. Anything you want to know about transport in Adelaide from horse vehicles, trams, buses, trains, it's there.
https://www.wakefieldpress.com.au/produ ... uctid=1765
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
lol you sound like some hideous conservative transport engineer from the 50s. I guess you could be right as there are hundreds of obahns built in hundreds of cities around the world, hmmmm.1NEEDS2POST wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 6:34 pmI know this forum doesn't like to hear this, but this is why trams were replaced with buses in the 50s and it's why the O-Bahn was built instead of rail.Nathan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 22, 2022 9:42 amWhile on one of the stuck trams, I overheard a message to the driver about an ambulance on the track about to clear soon. I suspect someone had a medical issue on one of the other trams.RetroGamer87 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 22, 2022 8:55 amAll trams have been stopped in the city. What happened?
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
Yes, I’m totally sure he’s an eeeevil conservative, you know, because he doesn’t like trams. Although tbh, I don’t think there’s anyone on this forum that you haven’t called a conservative before.
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
This unfortunately seems to be the way that the current state Labor party has interpreted things.rubberman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 08, 2022 9:50 amThat was proposed by Labor in 2018. Unfortunately it was not a winning proposal. Further, the present Labor Government has other priorities in health. Finally, where there was money promised in 2018, by Federal Labor if they won, that didn't happen. Now, there's a trillion in debt and two elections lost by parties promising trams.MT269 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 07, 2022 8:15 pmIs there any chance whatsoever of trams returning to Norwood, now that the LNP is finally out of office for a few years?
I think a route along KW Rd where the 200 bus route goes could prove useful. But it has to be able to outpace the current bus service. It is quite a bit quicker on a bus from south of Greenhill Rd to stop X2 just north of Currie/Grenfell St than a tram.
I'd say the likelihood of any tram extensions are zero for the foreseeable future. There's no money, and people voted for no-tram parties. It's democracy. We had a small window of opportunity. We voted for no-tram parties. No money, no political support.
Getting back on topic in the rail forum, I'd say the tight financial situation and focus on aged care, NDIS and childcare will mean very little money for infrastructure. Much of that will be gobbled up by Inland Rail. So, much of the stuff like further electrification or new routes is unlikely. As for a city underground loop? Can anyone realistically say that the Liberals or the present Labor Government are even thinking about it?
In actual fact, I don't think there was mass opposition to expanding the tram network in the leadup to the 2018 election. The tram was basically opposed by certain vocal interest groups (primarily business owners on Norwood Parade) who, ignoring the benefits of the increased accessibility the tram would provide, put forward the deluded notion that the tram was going to destroy their businesses because it would have resulted in the removal of a handful of on-street carparks.
As for the question of there being no money, you are correct that there is less cash to splash around generally now, and that priorities have shifted to the health system. However, it has to be said that tram extensions are fairly cheap in the broader scheme of infrastructure spending. The 1.1km North Tce/King William Road extension, including the "grand junction" cost around 100 million dollars. Finishing South Road is currently estimated at costing something in the order of 10 billion dollars. Of course inflation has had a big effect, but based on those figures we could probably build 100km of tramlines or more for the cost of finishing those last 10km of South Road. It is all about priorities. Big infrastructure for cars is prioritised again and again over smaller and cheaper improvements to public transport, cycling and pedestrian infrastructure which could be more effective at reducing congestion.
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
The $10 billion motorway spend is not about cars over public transport as mentioned, it is about primarily facilitating faster flowing commercial traffic and is vital for tge SA economy. While people continue to expand their use of Amazon, UBER eats etc let alone the increase in commercial manufacturing logistics, exports income etc.. the expenditure on North/South cannot even be compared to light rail or any PT in importance. The motorway was never intended to be a commuter project, although obviously commuters will benefit. PT expenditure is something completely seperate, and should be considered seperately. Unfortunately politicking in SA always leads to an either or situation.
-
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 1758
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
- Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
I suspect it's because there's no strategic thinking going on. Much of what seems to happen is bits and pieces tied to local problems or specific bottlenecks in wider systems.claybro wrote: ↑Sun Sep 25, 2022 8:42 pmThe $10 billion motorway spend is not about cars over public transport as mentioned, it is about primarily facilitating faster flowing commercial traffic and is vital for tge SA economy. While people continue to expand their use of Amazon, UBER eats etc let alone the increase in commercial manufacturing logistics, exports income etc.. the expenditure on North/South cannot even be compared to light rail or any PT in importance. The motorway was never intended to be a commuter project, although obviously commuters will benefit. PT expenditure is something completely seperate, and should be considered seperately. Unfortunately politicking in SA always leads to an either or situation.
Years ago, it was popular for politicians to cut the public service. One of the easiest areas to cut was the long term strategic planning areas. That is, those who gather information and strategise thirty or more years ahead. Of course, there's no negative repercussion for decades, so it's easy politically. However, once you get to the point where a systematic problem occurs, there's no data, and a lot of baked in issues (such as having no land to build infrastructure because it was built on). Instead of the bits and pieces done year by year conforming to an overall plan, and coming together smoothly over time, we often have a mish mash of bits and pieces bearing no relationship to each other.
So. Too few long term planners, too little coordination, and here we are.
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
I saw this post minutes ago in the 'Womens and Childrens hospital thread, and thought I'd reply here.1NEEDS2POST wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 8:53 pm
Google Maps will route you this way during the day because it's faster. It's only a problem late at night when the tram is infrequent.
Unfortunately, there is still an ongoing issue with the pedestrian crossing at the EC tram stop. Sometimes, one ends up standing there for up to 5 minutes waiting for a green light to cross Port Rd, due to ongoing DIT ignorance. Unlike the crossing where Hindley and Bank Sts intersect, there is no near instant activation of the green pedestrian light. I'd be surprised if 85% of tram patrons don't jaywalk every day.
And in my opinion, the tram stop in the vicinity could be renamed Hindmarsh to denote the area more clearly.
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
The stop is in front of the Entertainment Centre, most passengers will be using it to go to/from there. Makes the network more easily navigable, like when the West Terrace stop was renamed to Royal Adelaide Hospital.
If you ask somebody in the outer suburbs where Hindmarsh is, most will probably scratch their heads; ask them where the Entertainment Centre is and they'll have a better idea.
- Nathan
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 3767
- Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
- Location: Bowden
- Contact:
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
Same issue applies to the Thebarton and Bonython Park stops. I've watched many a tram pull away while being stuck waiting to cross at the lights.MT269 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 09, 2022 6:50 pmUnfortunately, there is still an ongoing issue with the pedestrian crossing at the EC tram stop. Sometimes, one ends up standing there for up to 5 minutes waiting for a green light to cross Port Rd, due to ongoing DIT ignorance. Unlike the crossing where Hindley and Bank Sts intersect, there is no near instant activation of the green pedestrian light. I'd be surprised if 85% of tram patrons don't jaywalk every day.
(It also doesn't help that there is always at least one driver — although usually many more — that queue across the crossing)
-
- Gold-Member ;)
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2022 6:23 pm
- Location: Inner South
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
IMO tram stops in central dense areas should have the exact location rather than suburb/area be the priority in naming. Hindmarsh-Entertainment Centre would be my pick if the suburb name were to be included. The destination blinds show that anyway.
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
These stops are located in between a busy road where vehicles are likely to be doing 60kph, or whatever speed they deem appropriate. The EC tram stop is located in what is a much slower area of Port Rd. The other two also don't have large crowds as frequently.Nathan wrote: ↑Mon Oct 10, 2022 12:04 am
Same issue applies to the Thebarton and Bonython Park stops. I've watched many a tram pull away while being stuck waiting to cross at the lights.
(It also doesn't help that there is always at least one driver — although usually many more — that queue across the crossing)
But as long as the DIT doesn't care less, it will continue to be an issue unless there are multiple fatalities within a short period. There are plenty of other crossings in which the sequences could be refined as well.
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
Interesting read in the Guardian today about average tram travel speeds between now and 100 years ago.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... e_btn_link
Most of the focus is on Sydney and Melbourne, but Adelaide gets a (dis)honourable mention. Ours is shockingly slow compared to what it used to be.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... e_btn_link
Most of the focus is on Sydney and Melbourne, but Adelaide gets a (dis)honourable mention. Ours is shockingly slow compared to what it used to be.
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.
-
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 1758
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
- Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB
Re: News & Discussion: Trams
A big deal, not covered by the article is the Citadis. For all the fancy streamlining, they are basically fixed bogie "bib and bub" trams. They simply cannot travel fast on ballast track, because the laws of physics have them bouncing unacceptably. They also have to slow down for curves. Anyone in the front and rear feels that lurch as they turn. It's why they go so slowly through curves. Of course, you then have to have running times that suit the slowest vehicles.[Shuz] wrote: ↑Sun Jan 22, 2023 9:05 amInteresting read in the Guardian today about average tram travel speeds between now and 100 years ago.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... e_btn_link
Most of the focus is on Sydney and Melbourne, but Adelaide gets a (dis)honourable mention. Ours is shockingly slow compared to what it used to be.
Guess what? The Sydney trams mentioned were Citadis. The Melbourne routes mentioned also have their relatively fewer...Citadis.
The frustrating thing is that this technical argument, and the basic physics behind it, was worked out over 100 years ago. The last fixed bogie trams built in Adelaide were the C class in 1919, and that was only due to post WW1 material shortages. The MTT had actually proposed earlier versions of the F class drop centre, but had to, reluctantly, build fixed bogie cars until the parts became available. It was the same in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 22 guests