News & Discussion: Trams

Threads relating to transport, water, etc. within the CBD and Metropolitan area.
prometheus2704
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 3:54 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

Post by prometheus2704 »

ChillyPhilly wrote:
Fri May 07, 2021 10:08 pm
how good is he wrote:If the Crows HQs moves to Bowden (vs Thebarton) a new tram extension/stop down Port Rd (between say Chief St and Milner St) could service this and also Hindmarsh stadium.
I would also like one more tram stop to AO but I have read that just the bridge would first need $50m spent for this to occur.
That $50m figure is based on some erroneous early opinion, based on reinforcement for the bridge for 'heavy rail' - which a tramline is not.
I hope we’re not going to get into the argument about the structural integrity of the King William Street Bridge over the Torrens?

Maybe someone can answer these questions for me before the thread goes down that path again.
  • When was the bridge built?
  • When did the bridge last undergo major works?
  • What’s the average lifespan of a ridge of this type?
  • Why are heavy vehicles required to detour this bridge?
ChillyPhilly
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1936
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Contact:

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

Post by ChillyPhilly »

prometheus2704 wrote:
ChillyPhilly wrote:
Fri May 07, 2021 10:08 pm
how good is he wrote:If the Crows HQs moves to Bowden (vs Thebarton) a new tram extension/stop down Port Rd (between say Chief St and Milner St) could service this and also Hindmarsh stadium.
I would also like one more tram stop to AO but I have read that just the bridge would first need $50m spent for this to occur.
That $50m figure is based on some erroneous early opinion, based on reinforcement for the bridge for 'heavy rail' - which a tramline is not.
I hope we’re not going to get into the argument about the structural integrity of the King William Street Bridge over the Torrens?

Maybe someone can answer these questions for me before the thread goes down that path again.
  • When was the bridge built?
  • When did the bridge last undergo major works?
  • What’s the average lifespan of a ridge of this type?
  • Why are heavy vehicles required to detour this bridge?
No argument from me - the bridge will definitely need reinforcement.

Just not to serve heavy rail.
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.
rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1408
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

Post by rubberman »

ChillyPhilly wrote:
Sat May 08, 2021 12:10 am
prometheus2704 wrote:
ChillyPhilly wrote:
Fri May 07, 2021 10:08 pm
That $50m figure is based on some erroneous early opinion, based on reinforcement for the bridge for 'heavy rail' - which a tramline is not.
I hope we’re not going to get into the argument about the structural integrity of the King William Street Bridge over the Torrens?

Maybe someone can answer these questions for me before the thread goes down that path again.
  • When was the bridge built?
  • When did the bridge last undergo major works?
  • What’s the average lifespan of a ridge of this type?
  • Why are heavy vehicles required to detour this bridge?
No argument from me - the bridge will definitely need reinforcement.

Just not to serve heavy rail.
Amen. Plus, of course, let's face it, IF the bridge is past its use-by date, then lets upgrade it all at once, rather than half for trams, then another half some time later for cars and buses. That was the approach for the Port Road Bridge, and was sensible. Designing the Adelaide City Bridge for heavy rail, and also without taking the opportunity to upgrade for other traffic was destined to make trams uneconomic. Plus, I would point out that bus axle loads are pretty close to tram axle loads, so if the bridge really is that bad that trams can't use it without upgrading, it can't be that much further in time till an upgrade for them is required.
PD2/20
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 248
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

Post by PD2/20 »

rubberman wrote:
Sat May 08, 2021 9:57 am
Amen. Plus, of course, let's face it, IF the bridge is past its use-by date, then lets upgrade it all at once, rather than half for trams, then another half some time later for cars and buses. That was the approach for the Port Road Bridge, and was sensible.
...
I assume that you are referring to the Port Road Bridge over the Torrens (also known as the Hindmarsh Bridge) rather than the bridge over the railway near the Police Barracks. However wasn't it the case that both bridges were built with separate spans for the outbound and citybound lanes and that an additional span was added later in the median to carry the tram tracks. The present Hindmarsh Bridge was constructed in 1995-96. See Sections 5.6 and 5.7 in https://portal.engineersaustralia.org.a ... 202014.pdf for descriptions of the Hindmarsh Bridge work.
rubberman
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1408
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: ADL ex DRW, ASP, MGB

Re: News & Discussion: Trams

Post by rubberman »

PD2/20 wrote:
Sat May 08, 2021 2:16 pm
rubberman wrote:
Sat May 08, 2021 9:57 am
Amen. Plus, of course, let's face it, IF the bridge is past its use-by date, then lets upgrade it all at once, rather than half for trams, then another half some time later for cars and buses. That was the approach for the Port Road Bridge, and was sensible.
...
I assume that you are referring to the Port Road Bridge over the Torrens (also known as the Hindmarsh Bridge) rather than the bridge over the railway near the Police Barracks. However wasn't it the case that both bridges were built with separate spans for the outbound and citybound lanes and that an additional span was added later in the median to carry the tram tracks. The present Hindmarsh Bridge was constructed in 1995-96. See Sections 5.6 and 5.7 in https://portal.engineersaustralia.org.a ... 202014.pdf for descriptions of the Hindmarsh Bridge work.
Yes, as it was presented at the time, the only work to be done on the Adelaide Bridge was the tram track. No overall plan for minimising overall cost. The way the Hindmarsh Bridge was done was to leave a nice clear section to put trams on. There's no complaint about that from me.
Post Reply