News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[mattblack]

I am very, very curious to know what is going to happen to the patch of land on the southern side of the rail tracks after all the electrification, hospital and convention centre works are complete...

Dont get to excited, last I heard it was going to be carparking for AO

[Archer]

By the way something caught my eye;

In this pic, you can see that the new overhead masts in the background span across the rail tracks in 2 segments, spanning 4 tracks each. Fair enough.

However, a bit closer to the foreground of the image, the southern most overhead mast spans 6 tracks, the two southern most tracks (closest to North Terrace) seemingly... disappear into the dirt? Can anyone explain this?

I think those two tracks might be what's left of the entry into the old Rail Yards? So a better question might be, why were they retained when this area was re-laid? Is enough of those two tracks potentially covered by overhead to provide a temporary storage area away from the main lines?

[SAR526]

....I am one to seek public transport rather than use my car. What I have observed , at show time, is hundreds of showgoers walking to the furthest point from the showgrounds, and also done the long walk to Goodwod station from the show in the rain carrying showbags and kids. As for Wayville not servicing any housing?? It is well known that the future plans for Keswick barracks is a TOD/mixed use dev. of sorts..... As for the lack of carparking at the new station...well that is an error of planning. All new stations should have ample parking.

I haven't opposed the building of Wayville (or the re-building of Keswick), but your suggestion that Goodwood be abandoned.

Passing through a dozen times a year hardly qualifies you as an arbiter of other peoples' needs, which I can assure you are not confined to my convenience. I live on the Seaford line, and like you have used Goodwood to return from the show. You complain about the walk in the rain but you want to add that walk to every journey of everyone who has already walked a considerable distance from the Goodwood housing and shopping areas, the only ones which now have any population at all. Its fine to use the tram if you are going to the city, but going in the opposite directions means changing trams for buses, with often long waits for connections. I have done that many times, when I live three blocks from my local station and can get home in a fraction of the time by train, because it is difficult for me to walk long distances.

I seem also to remember several times being one of the large crowds alighting at the platform right outside the main walk-way through the show grounds. That will be available to both of us at Wayville, and no-one will need to walk to Goodwood. I am also well aware of plans to build a T.O.D. on the barracks site. I hope that it a (and others like it) will go ahead, but your stated preference for public transport doesn't sit well with your desire to increase single car traffic congestion at Wayville, so close to the city, by building a parking station there. They belong at stations further out nearer the places of origin of that traffic. By definition, the parked car hasn't really been necessary to access the CBD like trade and delivery vehicles, and therefore is a sheer waste of road space for the convenience of individuals who prefer to avoid mixing with the rest of us on the public vehicles provided at huge expense. That impacts on the ability of the Government to provide greater train and bus frequency (or an underground through the CBD) because the fares they haven't paid have been subsidised by the rest if us in maintaining the roads on which the space taken by two or three one-passenger cars is the same as that by a bus.

[Phantom]

I am very, very curious to know what is going to happen to the patch of land on the southern side of the rail tracks after all the electrification, hospital and convention centre works are complete...

Dont get to excited, last I heard it was going to be carparking for AO

Do you know if this means a U-Park style multi-level car park, or one similar to the one they have now? I mean, building a car park there would look quite shitty, unless it was done exceptionally well. I mean, that picturesque view of Adelaide at night, driving over the river on Morphett St could easily look a ton worse if there was a hideous U-Park there!

[shaun]

I am very, very curious to know what is going to happen to the patch of land on the southern side of the rail tracks after all the electrification, hospital and convention centre works are complete...

Dont get to excited, last I heard it was going to be carparking for AO

I heard it was going to be converted into parklands?.

If a carpark is built, then it will be easier to develop that land in the future compared to destroying grass and trees. Though a carpark would be a very ugly sight, especially for people flying into Adelaide.

[Phantom]

I am very, very curious to know what is going to happen to the patch of land on the southern side of the rail tracks after all the electrification, hospital and convention centre works are complete...

Dont get to excited, last I heard it was going to be carparking for AO

I heard it was going to be converted into parklands?.

If a carpark is built, then it will be easier to develop that land in the future compared to destroying grass and trees. Though a carpark would be a very ugly sight, especially for people flying into Adelaide.

It will probably end out like the Oaklands Railway Station. Redeveloped into something and then torn down in 3 years to be developed into their actual design.

[[Shuz]]

By the way something caught my eye;

In this pic, you can see that the new overhead masts in the background span across the rail tracks in 2 segments, spanning 4 tracks each. Fair enough.

However, a bit closer to the foreground of the image, the southern most overhead mast spans 6 tracks, the two southern most tracks (closest to North Terrace) seemingly... disappear into the dirt? Can anyone explain this?

I think those two tracks might be what's left of the entry into the old Rail Yards? So a better question might be, why were they retained when this area was re-laid? Is enough of those two tracks potentially covered by overhead to provide a temporary storage area away from the main lines?

That's whats got me so confused. They are the entry tracks into the old railyards. I am baffled as to why they have been retained?

My only conclusion is the two tracks lead into Platforms 1 & 2 of the ARS, which I logically presume, are used for Seaford/Belair services. It could therefore hold two trains overnight for the first morning service everyday from Adelaide to Belair/Seaford, without the need for the trains to come from either Lonsdale or Dry Creek depots.

[bm7500]

What concerns me about the new A-City trains (4000 Class) is their significantly reduced seating capacity.

The current 2000 & 3000 class trains consist of mostly 2 + 3 seating layout. From the video's and other information i can find on the new Bombardier Electrics, they will only be supplied in a 2+2 seating layout.

It is hard enough now to get a seat in peak periods, especially on the express services. Whilst the reasoning may be to allow more standing room, why should around 50 seats be sacrificed for this?

I'm happy for someone to explain this logic (or lack there of) to me.

[Patrick_27]

On the topic of station proximity. Goodwood and Wayville stations are a lot closer, but both are important.

Keswick has had its time, it was run down, and poorly placed, and would cost more to refurbish than to build an entirely new station. Wayville will not only service the list of events that take place at the show-grounds throughout the year, but the nearby businesses, housing and the basketball centre.

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.

[Norman]

The refurbishment was only completed for the Nairne crossing, not the parts near the railway station

Sent from my RM-821_im_mea3_306 using Board Express

[neoballmon]

By the way something caught my eye;

In this pic, you can see that the new overhead masts in the background span across the rail tracks in 2 segments, spanning 4 tracks each. Fair enough.

However, a bit closer to the foreground of the image, the southern most overhead mast spans 6 tracks, the two southern most tracks (closest to North Terrace) seemingly... disappear into the dirt? Can anyone explain this?

I think those two tracks might be what's left of the entry into the old Rail Yards? So a better question might be, why were they retained when this area was re-laid? Is enough of those two tracks potentially covered by overhead to provide a temporary storage area away from the main lines?

That's whats got me so confused. They are the entry tracks into the old railyards. I am baffled as to why they have been retained?

My only conclusion is the two tracks lead into Platforms 1 & 2 of the ARS, which I logically presume, are used for Seaford/Belair services. It could therefore hold two trains overnight for the first morning service everyday from Adelaide to Belair/Seaford, without the need for the trains to come from either Lonsdale or Dry Creek depots.

That does actually sound very plausible if they aren't able to keep the electric trains over at Dry Creek. Would save a lot of un-neccessary travel from Seaford-Adelaide twice daily..

[AG]

What concerns me about the new A-City trains (4000 Class) is their significantly reduced seating capacity.

The current 2000 & 3000 class trains consist of mostly 2 + 3 seating layout. From the video's and other information i can find on the new Bombardier Electrics, they will only be supplied in a 2+2 seating layout.

It is hard enough now to get a seat in peak periods, especially on the express services. Whilst the reasoning may be to allow more standing room, why should around 50 seats be sacrificed for this?

I'm happy for someone to explain this logic (or lack there of) to me.

In Melbourne they had a similar experience with the Comeng and X'trapolis trains which were originally configured with a 3+2 layout. The 3+2 layout was increasingly ineffective during peak periods not only because there was limited standing capacity, but also because it impeded passenger movement through the aisles when boarding/alighting and causing passengers to congregate around the doors, resulting in longer boarding times and knock on delays around the network. The X'trapolis trains have been converted to 2+2 and as I understand it the Comengs are about to be as well.

[AG]

It's likely those extra sidings would stable trains between the peak periods as well to decrease the number of empty runs out/into the city during morning/evening peak hour. This allows the trains to be brought into service quickly during the evening peak hour rather than sending more empty trains in from further away.

With the Goodwood Junction grade separation under way, the Seaford and Tonsley Lines will end up using platforms 1 and 2 (currently used by the Belair Line).

[claybro]

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?

[bm7500]

What concerns me about the new A-City trains (4000 Class) is their significantly reduced seating capacity.

The current 2000 & 3000 class trains consist of mostly 2 + 3 seating layout. From the video's and other information i can find on the new Bombardier Electrics, they will only be supplied in a 2+2 seating layout.

It is hard enough now to get a seat in peak periods, especially on the express services. Whilst the reasoning may be to allow more standing room, why should around 50 seats be sacrificed for this?

I'm happy for someone to explain this logic (or lack there of) to me.

In Melbourne they had a similar experience with the Comeng and X'trapolis trains which were originally configured with a 3+2 layout. The 3+2 layout was increasingly ineffective during peak periods not only because there was limited standing capacity, but also because it impeded passenger movement through the aisles when boarding/alighting and causing passengers to congregate around the doors, resulting in longer boarding times and knock on delays around the network. The X'trapolis trains have been converted to 2+2 and as I understand it the Comengs are about to be as well.

Thanks for the background info AG. I still think its disappointing that so many seats will be left out as i believe there could be a compromise in layout, but i now better understand their reasoning.