The tram network in melbourne works because it was never removed, it wasn't replaced by cars or busses. instead of building more tram lines build new O-bahn lines. (main north road, Port Road, Adelaide Airport, etc. It's cheaper to build and maintain and busses can over take each other at interchanges)

I wouldn't recommend building more O'bahn style routes, as the DPTI continues to use unreliable off the shelf buses that catch fire and occasionally have electronics failures which leaves the passengers stranded inside the vehicle with no way out. And not to mention the appalling ride quality.

Unless there is a solution to this, I'll say no to such a concept. It's only a matter of time until there is a fatality on the O'bahn due to the terrible design of the current death traps that operate along it. I think 2 or 3 artics have already been withdrawn due to catching fire. It's only money that matters to the government, not passenger comfort, safety or usability.

Yes, I have mentioned this before, but the point is still valid and probably will be until the 2030s when the current fleet is withdrawn.

They will have to custom-engineer another fleet or possibly just forget the whole thing and turn the OBahn track into a light rail.

As I've said before the noise and vibration sitting at the back of an articulated bus is shocking especially as it pushes uphill towards the Plaza; you almost can't talk to the person sitting next to you. It's a sure fire sign that there's something not right.

why would you replace the only public transport system that works with light rail? replace the Glenelg tram with an Obahn.

The tram network in melbourne works because it was never removed, it wasn't replaced by cars or busses. instead of building more tram lines build new O-bahn lines. (main north road, Port Road, Adelaide Airport, etc. It's cheaper to build and maintain and busses can over take each other at interchanges)

I wouldn't recommend building more O'bahn style routes, as the DPTI continues to use unreliable off the shelf buses that catch fire and occasionally have electronics failures which leaves the passengers stranded inside the vehicle with no way out. And not to mention the appalling ride quality.

Unless there is a solution to this, I'll say no to such a concept. It's only a matter of time until there is a fatality on the O'bahn due to the terrible design of the current death traps that operate along it. I think 2 or 3 artics have already been withdrawn due to catching fire. It's only money that matters to the government, not passenger comfort, safety or usability.

Yes, I have mentioned this before, but the point is still valid and probably will be until the 2030s when the current fleet is withdrawn.

They will have to custom-engineer another fleet or possibly just forget the whole thing and turn the OBahn track into a light rail.

As I've said before the noise and vibration sitting at the back of an articulated bus is shocking especially as it pushes uphill towards the Plaza; you almost can't talk to the person sitting next to you. It's a sure fire sign that there's something not right.

why would you replace the only public transport system that works with light rail? replace the Glenelg tram with an Obahn.

The last lot of O Bahn buses had to be modified specially from standard ones as no one in Australia makes O Bahn type buses any more unless they get paid extra to modify them. It would be better and simpler to convert the O Bahn to a tram line than to do what you suggest. Concrete on the tracks wears out as well and rails are a lot easier to replace than great slabs of concrete.There are no other O Bahn operators in Australia and Adelaide is the only one, so bus manufacturers charge through the teeth if they have to modify buses, some even use second hand or third hand guide wheel assemblys as well I think someone said on here once a while back. So they are robbing Paul to pay Peter really, better to get rid of it and put in something that does actually do the job needed. It was only put in, in the first place because it would make Adelaide the only city at the time to have one, but overseas later longer ones did get built. So really it is sort of an orphan in the public transport in SA.

It is a bit like a car sooner or later you have to bite the bullet and replace it.

why would you replace the only public transport system that works …

Because that's what Liberal governments do in SA, right back to Playford's vandalism.

… with light rail?

Not without finding a new route to get it around the Hope Valley Reservoir.

Better solution is to bite the bullet and use a suitable chassis bought from overseas next time around. Keep the assembly, coachwork and fitout in Adelaide.

There are faults with the current o'bahn busses etc, but replacing it with trains or a tram won't work. it will be slower and not to mention pointless. Then again building a tram line to service 3 stops is what the state government is good at. it would get rid of a lot of busses in the city if they become feeder services, how ever you'd end up with very crowded trams. A train line would be more economical, how ever because Don Dunstan had that eye soar known as the festival plaza built it meant an end to a subway tunnel under the east of Adelaide to the eastern suburbs.

Also trains cost more to run as do trams. busses are cheap to build and run they use the existing road network

Better solution is to bite the bullet and use a suitable chassis bought from overseas next time around. Keep the assembly, coachwork and fitout in Adelaide.

The government doesn't have to bear the cost of replacing engines, differentials and other expensive components on the same bus every 6-12 months. This is handed over to the operator. All that mattered to them when replacing the old Mercedes-Benz buses was the price. Passenger comfort, reliability, and safety? Not their problem.

And besides, this retirement of the current fleet will more than likely occur in the early 2030s when the track could be nonexistent by then. Problem solved without even having spending a cent to provide suitable buses.

Turn the O-bahn in to a T-way and remove the articulated sections.

Better solution is to bite the bullet and use a suitable chassis bought from overseas next time around. Keep the assembly, coachwork and fitout in Adelaide.

The government doesn't have to bear the cost of replacing engines, differentials and other expensive components on the same bus every 6-12 months. This is handed over to the operator. All that mattered to them when replacing the old Mercedes-Benz buses was the price. Passenger comfort, reliability, and safety? Not their problem.

And besides, this retirement of the current fleet will more than likely occur in the early 2030s when the track could be nonexistent by then. Problem solved without even having spending a cent to provide suitable buses.

Is there any suggestion that the track itself has deteriorated? My understanding is that it was recently treated for corrugation in a couple of spots but otherwise it's still going strong. Surely that reinforced concrete will have a lot more life left in it yet - unless it gets the dreaded 'concrete cancer'.

Jumping of the bus/O'bahn topic. I remember reading somewhere that Mawson Interchange was likely going to be demolished and rebuilt to make a bigger station and to allow the Elder Smith bridge to be widen, anyone know what's happening?

The bridge was designed with passive provision for a future duplication and space left in the corridor for it, but that can be done without any impact on the station other than temporary changes during construction and realignment of the access roads.

It's a case of passive provision, not an upcoming project high on any agenda.

The platforms are too short to have doors open on all six cars of a double A-City EMU consist. That's no big deal as there are quite a few stations on the Gawler line with that issue and the previous government had the foresight to ensure that the A-City had Selective Door Opening included.

If there's a significant increase in train patronage I think we're more likely to see additional centre cars inserted than orders for more whole three car units to allow regular operation of six car trains.

The bridge was designed with passive provision for a future duplication and space left in the corridor for it, but that can be done without any impact on the station other than temporary changes during construction and realignment of the access roads.

It's a case of passive provision, not an upcoming project high on any agenda.

The platforms are too short to have doors open on all six cars of a double A-City EMU consist. That's no big deal as there are quite a few stations on the Gawler line with that issue and the previous government had the foresight to ensure that the A-City had Selective Door Opening included.

If there's a significant increase in train patronage I think we're more likely to see additional centre cars inserted than orders for more whole three car units to allow regular operation of six car trains.

Foresight for selective door opening but NOT foresight to make platforms readily extendable. It's not rocket science to make platforms six cars long when trains are multiples of three cars in length.

The Seaford line would work better with 6 car trains rather then increasing the frequency to traffic choking levels.

I don't think there is enough space anymore to duplicate without removing the station due to the local council selling and allowing over development. I definitely read that they train station was going to be demolished and rebuilt.

the government might have had foresight once, but I don't think they kept their eye on the long term goal. Unsure why they even built it the way they did.

I don't think there is enough space anymore to duplicate without removing the station due to the local council selling and allowing over development. I definitely read that they train station was going to be demolished and rebuilt.

the government might have had foresight once, but I don't think they kept their eye on the long term goal. Unsure why they even built it the way they did.

Govt foresight here only extends to the next election no further unfortunately just in case the other mob get in. Unfortunately it is the same everywhere these days.

I'd certainly agree about going to six cars for selected peak services on the Seaford line, as there are only a couple of legacy stations where SDO would need to be used - Mile End (minor issue, and should be mainly served by Flinders Line trains), Marion (southern end could be extended with prefab concrete segments) and Hove (no point touching when a future grade separation is inevitable).

115m is the standard platform length on the Gawler line, with Mawson Lakes having been the last new station built to that length before 75m EMUs were settled on as the future plan. It certainly could be extended out to 150m on each end using prefab concrete segments (perhaps even recycling some from the present Oaklands platforms) and without any additional disruption to service if it is done with night works or coordinated with other track/signalling/electrification works.

Where the Gawler line does have a problem is at the legacy stations with short platforms, especially those with curved island platforms.

I don't think there is enough space anymore to duplicate without removing the station due to the local council selling and allowing over development.

On the northern side mate.

The corridor is very well preserved, and the council can't sell it off because it is owned by DPTI. They even built the western abutment when they did the original bridge.


See larger image.

If they touch it at all, the quick fix solution of just building the extra bridge and not touching anything else will be quite attractive to the current austerity government.

I don't see crossing T2T as a fatal flaw, an embedded rail solution has low construction depth. Run along Port Road, then Woodville Road, then convert Grange to LR and put in a new branch from Albert Park to West Lakes. The rail reserve is wide enough for 2 tracks between Woodville and Albert Park. Restore the old Finsbury platform and have an interchange with one island HR and one LR. If you want a faster trip, change to rail, if you don't like changing, stay on. This gives a stop convenient for QEH. The OH line has services from OH, Osborne, Glanville and soon Dock 1, so more trains can run express.

Alternately, nuke the present Woodville station from orbit and build a modern interchange with the railway in a trench.

Have the tram stop at street level, enabling the line to cross the railway and fan out to a couple of different lines on the northern side of the railway, e.g. Arndale and The Parks. Focus on local connectivity with trams, and use interchanges to provide the CBD connection rather than a tram bouncing and rattling all the way.

You Phillistine! How dare you suggest that the ramshackle piece of architecture be even scratched! You deserve to be given a Thourough Beating with a soggy asparagas!......

With all the money they're hoping to save by slashing bus services they might want to use that money to properly train bus drivers not only how to drive but what to do when a passenger presses the buzzer to get off, It means stop at the next stop (and I mean the next stop, not the one after) and open the doors, this is the essential part if you don't open the doors passengers can not get off.

Also they might want to consider removing those stupid round buzzers that don't work 90% of the time and requiring pressing 19212913829 times or pushing another one.

Also they might want to consider removing those stupid round buzzers that don't work 90% of the time and requiring pressing 19212913829 times or pushing another one.

These are the ones that just require a tiny bit of motion to activate. But unfortunately, they easily become faulty.

The buses in question are the V1 CB80s, and Jackpot (V2) CB80s. These flaws along with all the other defects in these have caused the company to go bankrupt. I have even gotten slight headaches from the loudness of the jackpot bell tone on the newer sh*t.

The DPTI just wants the cheapest option available, and hence won't source new bus bodies from Volgren in Melbourne. Instead they are ordering dreadfully built time machine like buses from a factory in Edinburgh, SA. These are horrible things to ride, but then this is going off topic.

Also they might want to consider removing those stupid round buzzers that don't work 90% of the time and requiring pressing 19212913829 times or pushing another one.

These are the ones that just require a tiny bit of motion to activate. But unfortunately, they easily become faulty.

The buses in question are the V1 CB80s, and Jackpot (V2) CB80s. These flaws along with all the other defects in these have caused the company to go bankrupt. I have even gotten slight headaches from the loudness of the jackpot bell tone on the newer sh*t.

The DPTI just wants the cheapest option available, and hence won't source new bus bodies from Volgren in Melbourne. Instead they are ordering dreadfully built time machine like buses from a factory in Edinburgh, SA. These are horrible things to ride, but then this is going off topic.

I've literally had to punch one to get it to work

If you look at the photo you will see the platforms end where they meet culverts, actually 2 culverts on separate flows! Extending south on lightweight platforms is no big deal. There is scope to extend the Adelaide platform to the north but the Gawler bound platform is constrained by the lift shaft, so it has to extend towards Adelaide.

See larger image.

If they touch it at all, the quick fix solution of just building the extra bridge and not touching anything else will be quite attractive to the current austerity government.

Flinders Link will go to the State Planning Commission Assessment Panel tomorrow morning, and will presumably be rubber stamped.

Unless of course that is the method the Marshall Government will use to outsource the cancellation of the project

Flinders Link will go to the State Planning Commission Assessment Panel tomorrow morning, and will presumably be rubber stamped.

Unless of course that is the method the Marshall Government will use to outsource the cancellation of the project

Okay, interesting thanks for letting us know. As a former Flinders student I was disappointed to see the choice of location so far down the hill that access is quite difficult from the university itself. It would have cost a lot more $$$ to tunnel under or around the Flinders Medical Centre but at the very least the terminus should have been in one of the lower car-parks to make it more central.

Flinders Link will go to the State Planning Commission Assessment Panel tomorrow morning, and will presumably be rubber stamped.

Unless of course that is the method the Marshall Government will use to outsource the cancellation of the project

Okay, interesting thanks for letting us know. As a former Flinders student I was disappointed to see the choice of location so far down the hill that access is quite difficult from the university itself. It would have cost a lot more $$$ to tunnel under or around the Flinders Medical Centre but at the very least the terminus should have been in one of the lower car-parks to make it more central.

I was actually looking at the proposal video a week ago and looked on google maps and noticed that they could quite extend the line further up and even beyond the uni

Flinders Link will go to the State Planning Commission Assessment Panel tomorrow morning, and will presumably be rubber stamped.

Unless of course that is the method the Marshall Government will use to outsource the cancellation of the project

Okay, interesting thanks for letting us know. As a former Flinders student I was disappointed to see the choice of location so far down the hill that access is quite difficult from the university itself. It would have cost a lot more $$$ to tunnel under or around the Flinders Medical Centre but at the very least the terminus should have been in one of the lower car-parks to make it more central.

I was actually looking at the proposal video a week ago and looked on google maps and noticed that they could quite extend the line further up and even beyond the uni

That is most likely an option for the future for that line if possible. Just a thought scrub the new station and track going to Port Dock and use that money to extend this line a bit further. The Flinders link line would be more used than the Port Dock extentsion ever would be of 1/2 a kilometre (500 metres) at $16.4 m.

I was actually looking at the proposal video a week ago and looked on google maps and noticed that they could quite extend the line further up and even beyond the uni

There was a proposal to extend past FMC and link up with the old railway. There was to bw a staion at Aberfoyle Hub. It would be at ruling grade in tunnel as far as Happy Valley and you have the little matter of Sturt Gorge, either viaduct across it or tunnel below. Look in the too-hard basket for a copy of the report.

Flinders Link will go to the State Planning Commission Assessment Panel tomorrow morning, and will presumably be rubber stamped.

Unless of course that is the method the Marshall Government will use to outsource the cancellation of the project

Okay, interesting thanks for letting us know. As a former Flinders student I was disappointed to see the choice of location so far down the hill that access is quite difficult from the university itself. It would have cost a lot more $$$ to tunnel under or around the Flinders Medical Centre but at the very least the terminus should have been in one of the lower car-parks to make it more central.

I was actually looking at the proposal video a week ago and looked on google maps and noticed that they could quite extend the line further up and even beyond the uni

That is most likely an option for the future for that line if possible. Just a thought scrub the new station and track going to Port Dock and use that money to extend this line a bit further. The Flinders link line would be more used than the Port Dock extentsion ever would be of 1/2 a kilometre (500 metres) at $16.4 m.

the port dock line is a joke but will happen so they can sell off more land for housing. the Flinders extension will be done to the current plans with "future" expansion available, just like the Seaford extension which will eventually go to Aldinga and beyond.