CBD & South East Light Rail
-
- Posts: 1799
- Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:50 pm
- Favourite Vehicle: Bicycle - no waiting - on time
- Location: Sydney
Re: CBD & South East Light Rail
[quote=lunchbox post_id=1090662 time=1655286737 user_id=2517]
MOORE PARK STAIRS - PONDING
After years of complaints, the ponding of rainwater on every one of the stairways has finally been fixed - we hope.
1035942
[/quote]
At some date prior to 15.6.22, the protruding nosing strip on the leading edge of every one of the 150-odd steps and landings was removed and lowered, making it flush with the surface of the step / landing. It hasn't worked - ponding still occurs on more than half the steps/landings. No doubt everyone involved has been paid......Incompetence, indifference, or both?
1037764
MOORE PARK STAIRS - PONDING
After years of complaints, the ponding of rainwater on every one of the stairways has finally been fixed - we hope.
1035942
[/quote]
At some date prior to 15.6.22, the protruding nosing strip on the leading edge of every one of the 150-odd steps and landings was removed and lowered, making it flush with the surface of the step / landing. It hasn't worked - ponding still occurs on more than half the steps/landings. No doubt everyone involved has been paid......Incompetence, indifference, or both?
1037764
- gilberations
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 12:36 am
Re: Parramatta light rail
It’s also possible they may do away with the wireless concept with the introduction of stage two and install wires along the currently unwired sections. Also possible for them to do that along George st too.
-
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:08 pm
Re: Parramatta light rail
While I praise all the infrastructure they’ve given us, on the Light Rail side of things, I really cannot fathom this current governments absolute obsession with wireless technology. Call me old school, but I really don’t see anything wrong with the tried and tested overhead wires. CSELR’s wireless section spanning over a trivial length of track ensures that IWLR trams (the original ones coming back soon, not the borrowed CSELR ones currently running it) can never run up to CQ. Then you have Newcastle Light Rail, whenever the tram stops at each stop, the pantograph has to go up to recharge the tram, sit for a while, and then pantograph down, and finally set off - it is so horribly inefficient.
And Parramatta? What the current plan says, it’ll bounce between wired and wireless power several times over the length of Stage 1.
IWLR might be the oldest, but I praise its consistency as the only Sydney line where the method of power supply is the same across the entire line.
And Parramatta? What the current plan says, it’ll bounce between wired and wireless power several times over the length of Stage 1.
IWLR might be the oldest, but I praise its consistency as the only Sydney line where the method of power supply is the same across the entire line.
Re: Parramatta light rail
Overcomes the aesthetics issue, one of the biggest objections to light rail networks is the ugliness of the wires.Jurassic_Joke wrote: ↑I really cannot fathom this current governments absolute obsession with wireless technology. Call me old school, but I really don’t see anything wrong with the tried and tested overhead wires.
There was never any intention that IWLR services be diverted down George Street, so a moot point.Jurassic_Joke wrote: ↑CSELR’s wireless section spanning over a trivial length of track ensures that IWLR trams (the original ones coming back soon, not the borrowed CSELR ones currently running it) can never run up to CQ.
Re: Parramatta light rail
Constance and Clover Moore were bedazzled by the marketing spin of manufacturers of proprietary technology.Jurassic_Joke wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 9:07 am While I praise all the infrastructure they’ve given us, on the Light Rail side of things, I really cannot fathom this current governments absolute obsession with wireless technology. Call me old school, but I really don’t see anything wrong with the tried and tested overhead wires. CSELR’s wireless section spanning over a trivial length of track ensures that IWLR trams (the original ones coming back soon, not the borrowed CSELR ones currently running it) can never run up to CQ. Then you have Newcastle Light Rail, whenever the tram stops at each stop, the pantograph has to go up to recharge the tram, sit for a while, and then pantograph down, and finally set off - it is so horribly inefficient.
And Parramatta? What the current plan says, it’ll bounce between wired and wireless power several times over the length of Stage 1.
IWLR might be the oldest, but I praise its consistency as the only Sydney line where the method of power supply is the same across the entire line.
Re: Parramatta light rail
Has wireless technology been an unmitigated disaster? Appears to be working ok on the CSELR.
- boronia
- Posts: 21589
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
- Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
- Location: Sydney NSW
Re: Parramatta light rail
Maybe not a "disaster", but there have been numerous weekend closures of that section for unspecified "maintenance".
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
@ The Museum of Fire.
Re: Parramatta light rail
There are very substantial extra costs for wire-free operation of trams, buses and trains. It's a fashion statement that involves foregoing investment on stuff like extra vehicles and facilities. The APS system has been estimated to be three to four times the capital cost of OHW and some 25 times the maintenance cost. In-motion or static charging carries significant extra capital and operational/maintenance costs. The more equipment you have, the more things there are to go wrong. It's typically wealthy countries and cities that go for this stuff. There are many downsides to wire-free operation and few upsides.
- Swift
- Posts: 13296
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
- Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
- Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.
Re: Parramatta light rail
It's usual political indulgent posturing at the expense of pragmatic outcomes. The usual tale of Sydney decision making.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
Re: Parramatta light rail
It costs more and obviously requires more maintenance. But I'm not aware of any unscheduled weekend closures.boronia wrote:Maybe not a "disaster", but there have been numerous weekend closures of that section for unspecified "maintenance".
Also wasn't exactly unproven, operating in four French cities and the entire Dubai routes, before Sydney ordered it, and a few more since.
-
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:08 pm
Re: Parramatta light rail
There was also never any intention to run CSELR Citadis trams on the IWLR in passenger service, this was outlined at the beginning when they were built to different standards, when no one saw the disaster that was coming with IWLR at the end of last year and the Citadis were only tested for passenger services when turmoil called for it. Lucky the Citadis were still able to be used viably in passenger service on IWLR after all, but I say it was a close shave, if the disparities were any greater regarding wheel profile and clearances/dimensions, it would’ve likely been a definite no and we’d still be travelling on those awful replacement buses today.
It’s wrong to rule something out just for the sake of doing so; you never know what the future will bring.
Re: Parramatta light rail
Exactly. Planners are good at short-sightedly closing off potential options. Then the doh moment comes a couple of decades later in the political cycle.
Re: Parramatta light rail
The general consensus appears to be that the CSELR is better engineered that the IWLR, so dumbing down the former to the standard of the latter on the off-chance something may happen makes little sense. The demographics of the inner west, cbd or inner east are unlikely to change sufficiently during the lifespan of the current trams for consideration to be given to divert IWLR services down George Street. If for whatever reason it was deemed necessary, the CAFs could be replaced by more Alstom trams. Yes it would cost, but it could be done.Jurassic_Joke wrote: ↑It’s wrong to rule something out just for the sake of doing so; you never know what the future will bring.
- Swift
- Posts: 13296
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
- Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
- Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.
Re: Parramatta light rail
What does demographics have to do with it? Why wouldn't there be demand to go down the CBD from the IWLR catchment? I doubt it's clear cut demarcated.
How would it be a dumbing down removing the ground based power for that short stretch and removing a point of failure? Or maybe just scrap the Cafs and replace them with new Althom Citadis units as an overall upgrade to the tram system?
How would it be a dumbing down removing the ground based power for that short stretch and removing a point of failure? Or maybe just scrap the Cafs and replace them with new Althom Citadis units as an overall upgrade to the tram system?
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
Re: Parramatta light rail
Don't think demographics has anything to do with it.
But it would be dumb to mix 35m and 70m trams.
And it would be very expensive to run longer trams on the IWLR..
The transfer could be better.
Now that they've closed off the rest of George St, maybe they might decide to shift Chinatown stop a block south and install side platforms as should have been done in the first place
But it would be dumb to mix 35m and 70m trams.
And it would be very expensive to run longer trams on the IWLR..
The transfer could be better.
Now that they've closed off the rest of George St, maybe they might decide to shift Chinatown stop a block south and install side platforms as should have been done in the first place
- Swift
- Posts: 13296
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
- Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
- Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.
Re: Parramatta light rail
If anything that would be a great way to distinguish IWLR services from CSELR ones. We all know how the basic brains of passengers don't like to read destos. This can appeal to their more rudimentary thinking.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
- boronia
- Posts: 21589
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
- Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
- Location: Sydney NSW
Re: Parramatta light rail
The L1 has its own little "niche market" at Central, with good loadings in both directions for most of the day. Diverting some of those services to Circular Quay could impact on the remaining services, esp in peak periods when they are needed most.Linto63 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 3:00 pmThe general consensus appears to be that the CSELR is better engineered that the IWLR, so dumbing down the former to the standard of the latter on the off-chance something may happen makes little sense. The demographics of the inner west, cbd or inner east are unlikely to change sufficiently during the lifespan of the current trams for consideration to be given to divert IWLR services down George Street. If for whatever reason it was deemed necessary, the CAFs could be replaced by more Alstom trams. Yes it would cost, but it could be done.Jurassic_Joke wrote: ↑It’s wrong to rule something out just for the sake of doing so; you never know what the future will bring.
The ability of CQ to handle more services in peak also has to be looked at. There are often 3x L2/3 services there at a time; trying to fit an L1 into the mix could create delays.
The interchange at Chinatown would be no further than the interchange between L1 and suburban train services at Central; that distance is not onerous. Yes, there is no weather protection at Chinatown, but how do people cope when they get off the tram further down George St?
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
@ The Museum of Fire.
Re: Parramatta light rail
Interesting to hear that they are suffering bunching already. The original design is that two platforms are sufficient to handle 4 minute headways. The additional platform here and at Central is for 2 minute headways. Central's third is already used for events, which was the plan. CQ's shouldn't be needed in regular service for many years. That means there is an operational issue.
- boronia
- Posts: 21589
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
- Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
- Location: Sydney NSW
Re: Parramatta light rail
I've got a few pics like this over the last couple of years. Mainly in the AM peaks. Usually 1 leaves straight after the 3rd one arrives.
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
@ The Museum of Fire.
Re: CBD & South East Light Rail
Demographics, as in the percentage of students, blue / white collar workers, retirees etc and where they are headed.Swift wrote: ↑What does demographics have to do with it? Why wouldn't there be demand to go down the CBD from the IWLR catchment? I doubt it's clear cut demarcated.
It was done for a reason, i.e. to improve the aesthetics.Swift wrote: ↑How would it be a dumbing down removing the ground based power for that short stretch and removing a point of failure?
Problem is if you move one stop then the distance to others gets out of kilter, although there admittedly already are inconsistencies. The interchange is only 100 metres.moa999 wrote: ↑Now that they've closed off the rest of George St, maybe they might decide to shift Chinatown stop a block south and install side platforms as should have been done in the first place
With long traffic light phases that don't give absolute priority to trams, that is inevitable.tonyp wrote: ↑Interesting to hear that they are suffering bunching already.
NB, none of the recent discussion on this thread has been of any relevance to the Parramatta light rail. Can admin please move the relevant posts since 22:44 on 21 July to the more applicable CBD & South East Light Rail thread?
-
- Posts: 388
- Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:13 am
Re: Parramatta light rail
It doesn't seem to help that the design of the track layout/platforms/signalling at CQ is not ideal for slick working, even noting the constraints of the location.tonyp wrote: ↑Sun Jul 24, 2022 5:31 pmInteresting to hear that they are suffering bunching already. The original design is that two platforms are sufficient to handle 4 minute headways. The additional platform here and at Central is for 2 minute headways. Central's third is already used for events, which was the plan. CQ's shouldn't be needed in regular service for many years. That means there is an operational issue.
Re: CBD & South East Light Rail
I think it needs one less platform and the missing half of the loop added instead.
Then the pedestrians can half the rest of the Quay back.
Then the pedestrians can half the rest of the Quay back.
- Swift
- Posts: 13296
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
- Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
- Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.
Re: CBD & South East Light Rail
So it's semi circular quay.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
-
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2015 10:08 pm
Re: CBD & South East Light Rail
Went and caught the light rail again after a short hiatus, it looks like in the time since they’ve reverted to opening all doors automatically again (I guess probably to do with the current Covid wave)
Re: CBD & South East Light Rail
Regarding doors, have they ever stopped opening all doors since Covid started in 2020?
The Star is an obvious patronage generator as well and they possibly could be induced to help cover some costs.
Above some poster mentioned "diverting" IWRL services to CQ not justified based on demographics - that shouldn't really be considered - it would be about adding additional services while maintaining existing capacity to Central. After the CAF's are returned to service, I feel a reasonable service could be run with Alstom's - The Star to CQ (turnback at John St Square). I get the point about capacity limitations at CQ though - again how terribly short-sighted it was not to build a loop
Regarding operating IWRL to CQ, I always thought a direct CQ to Darling Harbour service would be of advantage to tourists/visitors, something that has always been missing in the public transport network, outside of the ferries which are expensive and slow (but still popular). I am not clear why visitors are not more important in public transport planning for a city with so much tourism.. The demographics of the inner west, cbd or inner east are unlikely to change sufficiently during the lifespan of the current trams for consideration to be given to divert IWLR services down George Street.
The Star is an obvious patronage generator as well and they possibly could be induced to help cover some costs.
Above some poster mentioned "diverting" IWRL services to CQ not justified based on demographics - that shouldn't really be considered - it would be about adding additional services while maintaining existing capacity to Central. After the CAF's are returned to service, I feel a reasonable service could be run with Alstom's - The Star to CQ (turnback at John St Square). I get the point about capacity limitations at CQ though - again how terribly short-sighted it was not to build a loop