Well only two sleeps to go and we may get the Trains back to G and OH.

During the week I got held up by a few strange events at level crossings. Went to cross between Grange and East Grange and the boom gates dropped. Waited and waited, the gates went up and while going over the line could see a 3000 disappearing towards the city.

I am wondering if the train had left grange, passed the crossing and retriggered as it went past the down trigger point. This would normally not happen, but am wondering if somebody in a road rail or similar threw the sequence out. or if there was bad contact on the rail

Same day at Alberton stopped for a van to go past. the gates stayed down, down, down longer down. By the time they lifted up the vehicle was past St, Clair.

At Bunnings on Friday, a train went over Port Road, and the gates seemed to take forever to lift.

Seems strange that they played trains during the week, cut the rust, got things refocused, then left the lines empty for two days with wet weather to bring the rust back and hope like blazes that everything works on Monday.
Surely they could have had a weekend of trains to support the Greek festival at Semaphore this weekend.
You know extra trains, some strengthened consists and some novelty buses to ferry people to Semaphore.  

Sorry I just remembered, public transport is not for the public Is it?

Is the first train to Grange an empty movement or can I get on from Adelaide?

If the system does not work properly fairly quickly I know several people who will be looking for pollies with baseball bats.
They may not wait for the election.

Is anybody willing to have a wager on when the Torrens junction duck pond fills for the first time?
I travelled on the Ghan on the first train through Marla when the first flood proof Ghan went through after it got flooded out the first time!

One other thing I laughed at during the week.

Our esteemed transport minister said the new system would mean that trains would no longer have to slowdown at level crossings?

Does any body out there understand what he means?

He was referring to how interstate freight trains on the ARTC line will no longer need to slow / stop for AdMet railcars crossing the old Torrens Jn, which used to cause serious congestion at the Torrens Road & Hawker St LCs.

I have possibly overlooked this several times, but have the new Citadis been officially commissioned yet?

Last I heard they were still in storage - presumably they'll want them out and about for the opening of the extensions.

He was referring to how interstate freight trains on the ARTC line will no longer need to slow / stop for AdMet railcars crossing the old Torrens Jn, which used to cause serious congestion at the Torrens Road & Hawker St LCs.

Not to mention the ongoing closure of the pedestrian crossing over the ARTC at Mile End Station.

Around the network there are also a number of pedestrian crossings, some at road crossings, where speed restrictions apply because of sighting limitations.

The current project has seen or will see the establishment of gated pedestrian crossings at Torrens Jn, West St, Coglin St and Queen St.  West of Torrens Bridge the line speed will be 90 kph on both the Gawler and Port lines.

I have possibly overlooked this several times, but have the new Citadis been officially commissioned yet?

Last I heard they were still in storage - presumably they'll want them out and about for the opening of the extensions.

In the week or two before Christmas these trams were being prepared for service at the depot.  There was probably a lull in activity over the holiday period. Since then, with the trams terminating at Victoria Sq, the limited turnback facilities in the City could be restricting test running.

If anything, at least the Flexities didn't become 4000 class series trams, with the Citadis becoming 5000. It is so boring and monotonous seeing each new train type entering service just being numbered _001 with the first number being 1 higher than the previous type of trains delivered. This was inspired initially by the Jumbos and the new millenium, but the novelty of it wore off decades ago. To me, 31/12/1999 and 01/01/2000 are just separate days with no significance to me whatsoever.

The DPTI needs to be more productive with the numbering. Cities like Sydney and Melbourne have alpha numeric numbering, so why not Adelaide? Are we going to have 10000 class trains by the year 2220?

Walked past Bowden just now. Temporary signage is up. Fencing is being rearranged. Lighting and landscaping is almost complete. It will be open from first service tomorrow, even got confirmation from one of the workers there.

He was referring to how interstate freight trains on the ARTC line will no longer need to slow / stop for AdMet railcars crossing the old Torrens Jn, which used to cause serious congestion at the Torrens Road & Hawker St LCs.
If that was what he was referring to it was rather awkward language.

If he was referring to removal of speed restrictions at pedestrian crossings it is still awkward language.

His comment was that trains would no longer need to slowdown at level crossings.

Still quite awkward.

Spoke with some people this afternoon wearing vests of invincibility and their comments were also rather awkward.

Pics from Bowden Station from this morning. Still some bridges to be opened, but good to get up close and personal with it today.

If anything, at least the Flexities didn't become 4000 class series trams, with the Citadis becoming 5000. It is so boring and monotonous seeing each new train type entering service just being numbered _001 with the first number being 1 higher than the previous type of trains delivered. This was inspired initially by the Jumbos and the new millenium, but the novelty of it wore off decades ago. To me, 31/12/1999 and 01/01/2000 are just separate days with no significance to me whatsoever.

The DPTI needs to be more productive with the numbering. Cities like Sydney and Melbourne have alpha numeric numbering, so why not Adelaide? Are we going to have 10000 class trains by the year 2220?

To be honest who really cares what or how they number the railcars it is only for accounting purposes really and the simple things in life are often the best, well that is what Kellogs used to tell us. I could not give a fig what number a railcar is really just as long as it comes along at the appointed time and gets me where I want to go. The only people (public) that is that would be concerned about  railcar numbers are those that take down numbers for what ever reason as a hobby. And even then a simple system is still helpful to them.

The DPTI needs to be more productive with the numbering. Cities like Sydney and Melbourne have alpha numeric numbering, so why not Adelaide? Are we going to have 10000 class trains by the year 2220?

Yes, DPTI totally has nothing more important to do and should put all hands to the pump to deal with this.

Anyway, productive? The approach you suggest is already the most productive, it's the simplest method which takes the least amount of time to complete the task and allow the relevant staffer to move on to other work. After 9xyy could move on to Axyy, allowing 36 generations of stock (about 540 years worth) before coming back around to the start again, which seems like an extremely well thought out system to me.

There is a bit more detail to it, anyway. The second digit of the 2xyy and 3xyy cars broke them down into sub-classes, while the 4000 sets are the first fixed-formation units in SA and accordingly have unit numbers with letter suffixes rather than individual car numbers.

Who knows, if an updated version of the A-City is selected for the next order of 15 units (to serve the Gawler line) they might have them numbered as 41xx to denote the updated versions as opposed to those which were delivered and later had the updates (e.g. stronger floors, directed horns, quieter air conditioning) retro-fitted.

Who knows, if an updated version of the A-City is selected for the next order of 15 units (to serve the Gawler line) they might have them numbered as 41xx to denote the updated versions as opposed to those which were delivered and later had the updates (e.g. stronger floors, directed horns, quieter air conditioning) retro-fitted

It would be interesting if a later series of A-City railcars has a fourth segment. How it would be done is another question. The current setup distributes the mass fairly evenly between the three segments and as a result a fairly controlled handling. If an unpowered trailer of different mass were added this can cause strange oscillations and limit speed. If a powered car was added the trailer car would maybe need heavier power supply items and upset the balance as well. A few years ago a hybrid/mixed power sourced train came unstuck in Spain. I can't help but think that the unbalanced nature of the railcar had something to do with it.

The new Bowden Station has a few cctv cameras that are very reachable. I wonder how long before they are vandalized?

The new Bowden Station has a few cctv cameras that are very reachable. I wonder how long before they are vandalized?

I am just wondering how long not only the station gets vandalised but how long the station and the cutting get graffitied badly the mural only lasted a matter of days West of Chief Street before it had graffiti on it. Just because it is at track level will only encourage them more so the fact that they are out of sight of the public as well while doing it!

Who knows, if an updated version of the A-City is selected for the next order of 15 units (to serve the Gawler line) they might have them numbered as 41xx to denote the updated versions as opposed to those which were delivered and later had the updates (e.g. stronger floors, directed horns, quieter air conditioning) retro-fitted

It would be interesting if a later series of A-City railcars has a fourth segment. How it would be done is another question. The current setup distributes the mass fairly evenly between the three segments and as a result a fairly controlled handling. If an unpowered trailer of different mass were added this can cause strange oscillations and limit speed. If a powered car was added the trailer car would maybe need heavier power supply items and upset the balance as well.

That would be quite easily sorted out. For all the problems with the A-City design that made for such a lengthy gestation, they have been well-specified in terms of allowing for future expansion.

Remember that the A-City is basically an Electrostar with a different body shell, and Bombardier have managed to make Electrostar EMUs in 3/4/5/6 configurations over the years without any problems. They've also handled post-sale addition of extra cars into sets as well, in case that becomes a possibility here.

The A-City design does have the advantage of the unit having bar couplings, which brings handling closer to that of a single vehicle than a train with couplers between each carriage.

Were fourth cars to be ordered, they would be either a ballasted trailer or a motor car. If a motor car were to be inserted into the formations, the control software would be reconfigured to change the governing of each car's motors. Happily, the theoretical maximum power of 1.6MW on the A-City is quite sufficient for a four car version (the performance is already heavily governed) and there wouldn't need to be any changes to the supply kit..

If a ballasted trailer were to be picked, the 'ballast' should actually be a battery pack which would allow the trains to:
- drive to the next available station in the event the wind dies down and a cloud floats over at the same time, and
- cover short single-track sections like Gawler-Gawler Central, Gawler-Roseworthy, Alberton to Port Dock and Woodville-Grange without needing overhead wiring, and
- allow the Belair line to be upgraded to discontinuous electrification and battery power to be used through the tunnels.

It's something that will have to be addressed at some point, since nobody will be making DMUs any more when our current DEMU fleet finally reaches life expiry.

Bombardier do have some experience in this area, they have been working on a prototype B-EMU using a Class 379 Electrostar unit in the UK. That's a further good result for us from selecting an Electrostar with an Australian-spec body shell.

A few years ago a hybrid/mixed power sourced train came unstuck in Spain. I can't help but think that the unbalanced nature of the railcar had something to do with it.

A Talgo high speed set is basically a loco-hauled train with very lightweight coaches, not an EMU with a combination of motor cars and trailers.

The derailment happened because the train went around a sharp curve at over twice the speed limit thanks to the driver (since charged with 79 counts of homicide) being on the phone and reading a map instead of keeping an eye on the route ahead. A normal EMU would have handled that crash far more safely.

The issue there (and with the recent Amtrak Cascades derailment) is more about the safety of the Talgo coaches, in both incidents there were cars that were literally ripped open and people ejected. I would not ride a Talgo train if you paid me to.

Are there many platforms on the Gawler line that would allow 6-car running? Personally I think the mixture of 3 and 4 car EMU's as justapassenger discusses above is probably the future anyway - we aren't Melbourne, we don't need huge trains (with no seats!) - increasing the frequency and having no more than 15 or 20 minute waits off peak is more important in my opinion.

Are there many platforms on the Gawler line that would allow 6-car running? Personally I think the mixture of 3 and 4 car EMU's as justapassenger discusses above is probably the future anyway - we aren't Melbourne, we don't need huge trains (with no seats!) - increasing the frequency and having no more than 15 or 20 minute waits off peak is more important in my opinion.

They used to run 6 car Jumbo sets at one stage on the Gawler line in peak hour but that is going back quite a few years now. Even Red Hen sets if you want to go back even further have been run in 6 car sets or over. The Maximum was nine cars I think that could actually be run together as it was supposed to to be a limit for the electrical and air controls on a Red Hen set.

But as you said with more frequent service you can do it with less cars per train.

The higher the frequency the harder you're going to be pushing the boundaries of your allowable headways. You then risk opening up the possibility for individuals delays such as those caused by loading passengers/wheelchair access etc cascading across the line. This is particularly important during the peak when frequency is already close to maximum as it is.

Much better from a timetabling perspective to increase capacity via bigger trains then pushing frequency up. Out of peak capacity doesn't really become an issue anyway, by all means decrease passenger waiting times with more frequent trains if that's what you want to achieve.

You don't have any frequency in Adelaide so what boundaries are you pushing? With the separation from the SG line it allows Admet to increase frequency and provide better services.

In peak services from Seaford and Tonsley are terminating in Platforms 1 & 2 of ARS every 3-6 minutes and operations struggle enough as it is to make that happen.

https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/index.php/stephen-mullighan-news-releases/8552-contract-signed-gawler-electrification-works-to-begin-within-weeks

For all the naysayers!

Are there many platforms on the Gawler line that would allow 6-car running? Personally I think the mixture of 3 and 4 car EMU's as justapassenger discusses above is probably the future anyway - we aren't Melbourne, we don't need huge trains (with no seats!) - increasing the frequency and having no more than 15 or 20 minute waits off peak is more important in my opinion.

There is (or was) a rolling programme of station upgrades over the whole network. All staions on Seaford and Gawler will be 160m for 6 car sparks, all stations on OH and Belair will be 120m for 4 cars. Oaklans was the hard one to extend, but that will be addressed in the sinking.

Are there many platforms on the Gawler line that would allow 6-car running? Personally I think the mixture of 3 and 4 car EMU's as justapassenger discusses above is probably the future anyway - we aren't Melbourne, we don't need huge trains (with no seats!) - increasing the frequency and having no more than 15 or 20 minute waits off peak is more important in my opinion.

There is (or was) a rolling programme of station upgrades over the whole network. All staions on Seaford and Gawler will be 160m for 6 car sparks, all stations on OH and Belair will be 120m for 4 cars. Oaklans was the hard one to extend, but that will be addressed in the sinking.

Marion is now too short for 6 car trains since the redevelopment. Mile End is also too short, but services stopping at Mile End could easily not use 6 car consists.

Not a problem at Marion and Mile End, as the A-City EMUs have carriage-level SDO to allow the doors to be open on the front four cars (i.e. first unit and first car of second unit) to open the doors. People requiring assistance for disembarking a wheelchair are asked to travel in the front car, so they won't be marooned on the train.

They've successfully run double unit consists after football games, they could also do it for selected premier peak services.