Started by The Love Guru, March 10, 2013, 09:09:34 PM
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: route56 on March 11, 2013, 11:38:49 AMYou can dismiss light rail, but what do you really want? More people using public transport or a lovely fleet of new buses, endlessly circling the city shiny but empty as patronage continues to decline? Thats a real great use of taxpayers money. The best system for Canberra is light rail for mass transit and buses for local services.
Quote from: ACTbusspotter on March 11, 2013, 03:44:02 PMAnd here we go again with statements being made that are not supported by facts.Your basic argument is bus = bad; bus = declining patronage; light rail = good; light rail = unlimited capacity. None of which are supported by facts.(A) Spend some time travelling on the "Rapid" bus services (200 & 300 series) during peak and tell me that patronage is declining.(B) If Light Rail is best for mass transit, then why is the line proposed for Northbourne Ave / Flemington Road? If you want a proper mass transit system, you need to minimise stops and provide a genuine express service between City and Gungahlin (or anywhere else you want it to go). Having a system which has to compete for traffic light priority and stop for passengers every 2 minutes is hardly an improvement over what buses can currently achieve.
Quote from: ajw373 on March 12, 2013, 09:44:47 PMI am coming in late here, but if the 200 is getting to be so popular AND more high density housing continues to be built along Flemmington Road, then as far as I can see that is a very good reason for light rail down that corridor.Elsewhere in Canberra (except maybe Molonglo in 20 years time) no chance what so ever though. Light rail won't work as a high speed intertown service in Canberra, say Belconnen/Woden or even Gungahlin to the City, where it works well is moving large numbers of people, hence a shorter high density corridor such as Northborne Ave and Flemmington Road. Now some may jump on me and say my last two paragraphs contradict each other, but really they don't. Light rail to Gungahlin to move those along the corridor, rapid express bus to move those from the burbs of Gungahlin.
Quote from: The Love Guru on March 13, 2013, 12:27:54 PMAgree with you totally there. Unfortunately the government and light rail lobby are selling the light rail idea as a fix all for BOTH Northbourne/Flemington as well as being able to act as a mass transit solution which buses can feed into at Gungahlin. There is a way in which this can occur however would require a lot more infrastructure as you would need 3 or 4 tracks the length of the line, or at least as far as EPIC.
Quote from: The Love Guru on March 13, 2013, 12:27:54 PMAs for the comment about trams getting priority at traffic signals on Northbourne Ave, you really think that there wont be a dramatic effect on traffic flow should lights just change mid cycle to let a tram pass. It would be a complete disaster for any traffic trying to cross Northbourne Ave in peak periods, particularly at the intersection with Antill/Mouat. Could all be solved by grade seperation. If only we could get the right plan to be built, rather than a compromise to save money, then the system could be a show case of how to do things right. Just think Brisbanes South East busway desgin for light rail.
QuoteConsidering all turning traffic off Northborne (except a couple in the City) now queues on Northborne, whereas before they would queue in the interestion I really don't see why trams would need any extra priority. No reason why trams and through Northborne traffic couldn't be on the same phase as they would be travelling in the same direction anyway and cross and turning traffic are minor phases.
Quote from: Robot on March 18, 2018, 02:46:59 PMOn the other hand what are they going to do with all the buses that will no longer go down Northbourne Ave after the light rail opens? They can keep old buses running until that happens but I doubt if that would be enough.
Quote from: Stan butler on March 18, 2018, 09:05:09 PMDo you recall when we got that deluge of rain a few weeks back and they had to close Parts of Flemington road for a while (and then divert the buses). Can't see how they can divert the light rail next time that low lying area of the road floods.So I am guessing they will need to keep a couple of extra buses on hand - just in case another flood comes along, or a car prangs into a train, or for any other reason the new train may have to stop. At least with a bus, if one breaks down - Then a new one can be called upon and then go around the one that is broken down. A broken down train/tram or whatever you call it will stop the network.
Quote from: Robot on March 18, 2018, 09:33:57 PMHopefully such things would be rare. No a broken down tram would be removed very quickly and so not cause much disruption. Do they ever break down?
Quote from: Robot on March 18, 2018, 09:33:57 PMDo they ever break down?
Quote from: Sylvan Loves Buses on March 19, 2018, 02:33:19 AMI've always wondered that myself, although they run on the current going through the lines above, so I would imagine if there was a city-wide blackout, that would cause them to stop.
Quote from: Stan butler on March 19, 2018, 03:49:44 AMHave you ever seen power out in one area of the city and not another?
Quote from: Swagman on March 19, 2018, 09:27:09 AMThanks for the fleet info BD, it'll be good to see these new ones out on the road. As for the 19th century transportation this Gvmt insist on installing I'll give it 20 years before it gets ripped up and a fleet of rapid high frequency, electric, autonomous buses are put in place....!
Quote from: Northside on March 27, 2018, 01:47:55 PM1. The rail bed sits much higher (in the middle of the road) compared with the outside of the road base on Northbourne, so if the road floods, the cars (and thus buses if there were any) would still be affected, but the tram will still go along its merry way.
Quote Generally speaking, tram lines have much greater reliability than any bus or any road network, so should decrease the chances of congestion caused by unforeseen circumstances.
Quote from: Stan butler on March 27, 2018, 07:55:03 PMI don't agree. If hypothetically the road was fully flooded across it to an extent that cars and buses were not allowed to use it, then they would still stop the tram. For safety sake. Even though the tram tracks are higher - in our case, maybe about about 60cms at the very most above the road. They would still need to ascertain whether there is any underlying damage to the foundations or integrity of the track before allowing further use. Water can seep into many unexpected places and this would need to be checked.
Quote from: Stan butler on March 27, 2018, 07:55:03 PMCan you please provide evidence on this claim. If a tram track is blocked, buckled, flooded or whatever then the tram is stopped. If a road is the same, then the transport using that road can be re-routed to another - therefore allowing the network to operate and improving reliability.
Quote from: Stan butler on March 27, 2018, 07:55:03 PMI don't agree. If hypothetically the road was fully flooded across it to an extent that cars and buses were not allowed to use it, then they would still stop the tram. For safety sake. Even though the tram tracks are higher - in our case, maybe about about 60cms at the very most above the road. They would still need to ascertain whether there is any underlying damage to the foundations or integrity of the track before allowing further use. Water can seep into many unexpected places and this would need to be checked.Can you please provide evidence on this claim. If a tram track is blocked, buckled, flooded or whatever then the tram is stopped. If a road is the same, then the transport using that road can be re-routed to another - therefore allowing the network to operate and improving reliability.
Quote from: Northside on April 03, 2018, 10:15:41 AMSo are you saying that whenever it flood currently, all roads in Canberra are suspended until they can be independently tested and verified that no water has seeped into the bitumen? Why do you think trams have special requirements? Besides, 60cm of water is a significant amount of water!For reliability - take a look at the reliability statistics for public transport in any Australian city. You will find that rail (tram and train) performs consistently higher than buses in all cities for at least the past decade.
Quote from: Busfanatic101 on March 28, 2018, 12:06:32 AMIf that was the case trams would need be stopped whenever it rained, not to mention all the roads that cave in, the buildings that collapse, the sinkholes that appear...
QuoteIf Northbourne floods, trams are stopped and buses are stopped. Services to the affected portion stop in both scenarios. Buses going on a completely different diversion does not count as the continued reliable operation of the network any more than trams going back and forth between the unflooded portion of the tracks.
Quote from: The Love Guru on April 05, 2018, 04:10:50 PMUnless of course you compare apples with apples and use bus rapid transit ways which have all the advantages of a light rail system without the limiting factors of being stuck on a steel rail. BRTs are a much better alternative to light rail, especially with electric only propulsion systems to be the norm in the very near future. 20m articulated buses would be a fine alternative, in a way taking the best aspects of both forms of transport and rolling them into one.