The door open button does serve to clean the gene pool, but the Melbourne Citadis have a request mode and an all-open mode, which I'm not sure whether it's possible to select on the Sydney's model.  

'Open on release' has been deliberately left off. Door opening MUST be requested by pushing the button.

This a, probably futile, attempt to increase the airconditioning efficiency.

This was tried with the C set and Tangara trains but Sydney commuters proved to be unable to grasp this concept.

The driver of the first public run (Departed CQ at 10:13, set 001 + 002) did announce several times, 'press button to open doors'.

The airconditioning doesn't actually turn off when the tram stops, that's the traction converter fans you can hear.

However, some of the units have an insufficient flow rate on the AC. The ThermoKing pods look big enough to be up to the task, so hopefully, they just need to adjust the fan speeds properly. They a probably automatic load sensing types similar to what are in the Waratah trains and some either need adjusting or have faulty sensors.

Well, it seems that the passengers' IQ is not ready to enjoy such a mode that improves their own riding comfort so let's make the doors open on release and give them some hot air.

Was there a breakdown at the quay over the launch day ?

Was there a breakdown at the quay over the launch day ?

It would appear the new Sydney tram is following the Metro on opening day with its own teething issues

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-14/sydney-light-rail-breaks-down-at-circular-quay-after-launch/11800434

Does anyone know what failed and how they fixed it? There's a cross-over near Martin Place but I don't think that it was used on Saturday.

I suppose with CBTC signalling the use of intermediate crossovers is more complicated than sight operation.

006 + 007 decided to take a break turning into George Street and stalled with the tail of 007 still on the crossover. This trapped another set waiting to make the turn into Alfred Street.

They are reporting a 'power module fault' and that recovery took longer than expected as someone decided to let themselves out and pulled an emergency door release. Subsequently, they couldn't get the brakes to release.
They had reconfigured to allow the good tram to tow the bad one, but it appears they missed needing to reset the door that had been 'EDRed' and the train computer wasn't going to let them move with an insecure door.

They did after about 10-15 minutes when they realised it was going to be limp mode job, open all the doors and let everyone out. They did the same on the tram set trapped up on George Street too.

They reportedly started turning back trams at Town Hall where a full signalised crossover is provided.

The 'Emergency Crossover' at Martin Place is manual and requires a point bar to operate. It's intended to aid them in 'recovery' of tram cars after a major 'incident' blocks the line further down for an extended period of time.

Nice to be see money being on PT however in this case I'm not sure it has been money well spent and nothing to do with breakdowns, these things happens.

L2 - Randwick to Town Hall, 34 min

Buses - vary from 25 to 30min

Extension of the ESR assume 6min to travel the 3km gap between Randwick and Bondi Junction (BJ), 16min, yes heavy rail stations are further apart and therefore require likely more time to get to the actual station.

Unfortunately there isn't much in the middle of the L3/L3 route to booster ridership outside the terminus stub termini, although the Kingsford branch maybe better off.

Considering the money $2.5B or more spent and yes I know the CBD looks better for it and future light rail projects will run off the Sydney LR lines with capital already sunk, I still tend to think dumping $3B on extending the ESR from BJ to Marooba would have been far better money spent.

7km, 4 stations, Waverley/Charling Cross, Ranwick, Kingsford, Maroubra, with future extension to Malabar.

’Open on release' has been deliberately left off. Door opening MUST be requested by pushing the button.

This a, probably futile, attempt to increase the airconditioning efficiency.

………………………………………………………………

Perhaps it’s similar to Melbourne trains, where if the train is stationary for more than a minute or two, such as at a terminus, the door closes and the button is ‘rearmed’ (until deactivated by the driver on departure).

Are the old trams 600 volt like most, as I'm pretty sure Sydney has been 750 volt for a while now.

Are the old trams 600 volt like most, as I'm pretty sure Sydney has been 750 volt for a while now.

Yes.

Nice to be see money being on PT however in this case I'm not sure it has been money well spent and nothing to do with breakdowns, these things happens.

L2 - Randwick to Town Hall, 34 min

Buses - vary from 25 to 30min

Extension of the ESR assume 6min to travel the 3km gap between Randwick and Bondi Junction (BJ), 16min, yes heavy rail stations are further apart and therefore require likely more time to get to the actual station.

Unfortunately there isn't much in the middle of the L3/L3 route to booster ridership outside the terminus stub termini, although the Kingsford branch maybe better off.

Considering the money $2.5B or more spent and yes I know the CBD looks better for it and future light rail projects will run off the Sydney LR lines with capital already sunk, I still tend to think dumping $3B on extending the ESR from BJ to Marooba would have been far better money spent.

7km, 4 stations, Waverley/Charling Cross, Ranwick, Kingsford, Maroubra, with future extension to Malabar.

Aside from when there were issues with medical emergencies or the sole breakdown on the day. I don't recall it taking 34 minutes form Randwick to Town Hall or maybe time flew by faster for me because I was enjoying the day. I did spend 10 hours or so along the entire route.

Most of the issues I noted on Saturday seemed to have been from having too many trams in the terminals. At some points of the day there was 3-4 trams waiting to get in to Randwick terminus.

I do agree that extending the ESR to Maroubra would have been the better solution but this government is not interested in supporting the sydney trains system.

It looks like they could do better with sight operation.  Melbourne has had two light rails for over 30 years with sight operation.  The A & C1 class get up to 70 km/h easily.  There have been a few accidents involving road vehicles driving around boom gates but those can't be avoided with CBTC either.  There was a car-ahead collision at Middle Park involving the driver of the aggressor looking at his pay roll while driving.  Non of these accidents happened due to the absence of CBTC.  If the Sydney drivers just observed the three-pole interval rule as the Melbourne drivers have to, they would have enough braking distance to safely stop a tram even if the previous tram stopped suddenly.  Of course there are no overhead poles along the ground power section but that's street running where the bigger concern is pedestrians rather than the tram in front.  There might be street lamp poles at similar interval anyway.

Nice to be see money being on PT however in this case I'm not sure it has been money well spent and nothing to do with breakdowns, these things happens.

L2 - Randwick to Town Hall, 34 min

Buses - vary from 25 to 30min

Extension of the ESR assume 6min to travel the 3km gap between Randwick and Bondi Junction (BJ), 16min, yes heavy rail stations are further apart and therefore require likely more time to get to the actual station.

Unfortunately there isn't much in the middle of the L3/L3 route to booster ridership outside the terminus stub termini, although the Kingsford branch maybe better off.

Considering the money $2.5B or more spent and yes I know the CBD looks better for it and future light rail projects will run off the Sydney LR lines with capital already sunk, I still tend to think dumping $3B on extending the ESR from BJ to Marooba would have been far better money spent.

7km, 4 stations, Waverley/Charling Cross, Ranwick, Kingsford, Maroubra, with future extension to Malabar.

Aside from when there were issues with medical emergencies or the sole breakdown on the day. I don't recall it taking 34 minutes form Randwick to Town Hall or maybe time flew by faster for me because I was enjoying the day. I did spend 10 hours or so along the entire route.

Most of the issues I noted on Saturday seemed to have been from having too many trams in the terminals. At some points of the day there was 3-4 trams waiting to get in to Randwick terminus.

I do agree that extending the ESR to Maroubra would have been the better solution but this government is not interested in supporting the sydney trains system.

Quoting from the published timetable https://transportnsw.info/documents/timetables/93-L2-Randwick-Line-20191214.pdf

44min end to end, 34min from Town Hall (TH) to end. The train is ~5min faster from Circula Quay (CQ) to TH, as you would expect due to tight bends in the tunnels.

I assume Kingsford terminus will be 45-48min, which means a future extension to Maroubra and Malabar will be around 50 to 58min respectively to CQ. La Perous likely 70-75min. Its 1.5h from Gosford to the Central!

I have no quarrel about the timing from the quay to town hall as the tram is extremely slow in this section. I also have no issue with suggesting the train would be much faster if the ESR was extended to Maroubra. I found that the most useful part of the light rail is Central to Randwick Racecourse. This only takes 14 minutes which is significantly faster in peak hour then the bus. Also I think the trams were spending way too much time at each stop on Saturday and especially entry and exit speeds. Time should resolve these issues and reduce these trip times.

Interesting article in the SMH today about the slow travel times. Basically TfNSW brought in a consultant to advise on operations which had no expereince in light rail at all. https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/why-sydney-s-south-east-light-rail-is-so-slow-and-how-to-fix-it-20191216-p53kd7.html

The result is the acceptance and development of operating procedures which do not make appropriate use of the modern tram and light rail infrastructure now available in Sydney.

Disappointing if true.

Cheers

Randwick – Central                 6 km          TT 24 mins              Avg Speed 15 km/h
Central – Circular Quay           3 km          TT 21 mins             Avg Speed    9 km/h

Gold Coast and Canberra average speed:          25+ km/h
Melbourne tram:                                                     16 km/h (11 km/h CBD).
Glenelg – South Terrace                                        22 km/h
South Terrace – Adelaide Station                        12 km/h

TT - timetabled

Captain's Log, Supplemental:

If the average speed from Randwick to Central could be raised to 25 km/h, the time interval would be 14 mins. The total journey time Randwick to Circular Quay would be 35 mins.

Ive skimmed over this thread for the last 10-15 and might have missed it, but if i may ask a possibly answered question again?

Service is by 2 sets linked together.  I understand there are probably MX reasons for doing this and also there might be times when a 4 car set is all that is needed, but why not add capacity and possibly lower cost by having fully connected 8 car sets, replacing the 2 driver cars in the middle with more middle cars?

Apologies if ive missed this on RP already.

I took the tram from Central to Wynyard yesterday morning in peak hour.

Irrespective of what the timetable says, it took 30 minutes. In addition, the indicator at Central showed the tram from Randwick as the next departure to CQ (in 4 minutes), while the CQ-Central shuttle tram would depart in 6 minutes.

Needless to say, the pax climbed aboard the Randwick to CQ tram, only to watch the shuttle leave first.

The seats were comfortable, and plenty of them as prospective passengers have already realised that it’s faster to walk than pay for the tram.

James - the service is two individual trams (each articulated into 5 sections) permanently joined. Not possible to do 8 car sets - we’re talking trams, not M,A or B sets.

I found this image from 1997, it is a map of the Sydney Light Rail network and what it could of looked liked. Is there anybody who knows more information about this project?

Inner West Light Rail: This was opened in 2000. Glebe is Bridge Road, and Lilyfield is Catherine Street.

City Loop Light Rail: This never started construction, if it did open: The line on George Street would have never opened.

The line goes on Pitt Street, Alfred Street, Young Street, Bent Street, Bligh Street, and Castlereagh Street.

These are all of the stops:

Campbell Street: Would of been right next to the Capital Theater. Would of been a waste, as it is only about 70 meters away from Capital Square.

World Square: You could change for the Monorail, and go to The Metro Theater. In fact, until Market Street, the monorail would be above you. Again, it would of been a waste.

Park Street: You can change here for the Monorail, and for trains at Town Hall. Again, it would of been a waste.

Market Street: There is a lot of things to do here, Sydney Tower Eye, State Theater, QVB, and more! Would of still had been a waste, as the monorail was on Pitt Street.

Martin Place: It's, well, Martin Place. It would of still been a waste, as because the trains went to Martin Place from Central. There were even plans to extend the Monorail to Martin Place!

Stock Exchange: Just before Bridge Street. It would of been at.... well..... the Stock Exchange! You can also go to the Opal Museum. It would of sort of been a waste as well.

Circular Quay: Would of been between Loftus Street and Young Street. You can go out and do EVERYTHING Circular Quay has to offer! Would have been one of the least wasteful stops in the whole line!

Bligh Street: Not that much around, but there is not that much transport. So it would be less of a waste.

MLC Centre: Named after the aforementioned shopping mall. Nearby another tram stop. So it is a bit of a waste.

Skygarden: Named after the aforementioned retail development. Skygarden has since closed down. It is not as much of a waste than others.

Hyde Park Square: It seems to be a very lonely stop, furthest from the others. Mostly for people who wish to go to Hyde Park. It is a bit of a waste.

Downing Centre: Named after the aforementioned courthouse. You can also change for trains at Museum, go to the ANZAC Memorial, and go to the Goulburn Street Car Park.                                                                                                                                                                              
Overall, I like anything new or old, so I would be happy. But not everyone would, as it would be a waste in the end, unless if the Monorail closed about 2 years after this line would of opened. Do you guys have any opinions or more information on this?

Perhaps the planner proposed the construction of the loop light rail and the dismantling of the monorail, but only the latter got approved.

Captain's Log, Supplemental:

If the average speed from Randwick to Central could be raised to 25 km/h, the time interval would be 14 mins. The total journey time Randwick to Circular Quay would be 35 mins.

It would appear reading the article that there is significant time savings to be had with grossly conservative safety margins for breaking and tram stop dwell times.

The govt will need to move quickly and perhaps call up one of the southerners to advise how to improve or worse, Qld, otherwise the new fangled toy will not be enough to wash away the tears of the last few years and good luck trying to do it again, especially Carlingford.

It seems that Sydney has always been overcautious about medium-scale transit vehicles operating through stops, including the then Monorail.

The govt will need to move quickly and perhaps call up one of the southerners to advise how to improve or worse, Qld, otherwise the new fangled toy will not be enough to wash away the tears of the last few years and good luck trying to do it again, especially Carlingford.

I think the authorities in Sydney would rather have a smeg service than ask Melbourne for advice!

I

Service is by 2 sets linked together.  I understand there are probably MX reasons for doing this and also there might be times when a 4 car set is all that is needed, but why not add capacity and possibly lower cost by having fully connected 8 car sets, replacing the 2 driver cars in the middle with more middle cars?

They are 5 section Citadis 305 cars. (3 bogies, series X05)

The reason they are running coupled sets is passenger load predictions exceeded the capacity of the largest car that Alstom built at the time - for various reasons Alstom would only go to 7 sections or approx 44m long and they were not felt to be big enough.
So since Alstom was not keen to extend their Citadis to 9 sections, they offered coupled sets instead - something they DO have experience with (Paris, Jerusalem, Tunis, Casablanca, Rabat, and probably others)

Alstom has since agreed to build a 9 section Citadis for Dublin, but I think they are still not keen - Dublin appears to have said them to them, make a longer car or we go to another supplier who will.

Incidentally, the coupled sets running in Tunisia and Morroco don't have redundant cabs - the cars are bidirectional single-ended - they HAVE to always run in coupled back to back pairs. So there is no space or expense wasted on rarely used cabs, They DO have a hidden set of 'back up controls' in the blunt end, they just can't be operated in service that way.

The cars are not permanently coupled either - they have the standard Alstom coupler and can be uncoupled/recoupled in a few minutes - someone has to get between the cars, pull the jumper cables out, and then the coupling pins and then fold and stow the couplers. In Sydney's case, someone has to remember to bring the coupler covers over from the storage rack in the depot to complete an uncoupling operation too. Fiddly but not a difficult or complex operation.