I would like to see more Perth related content on this channel as long term improvements of Perth's train network are criminally underrated. The Australian media are focusing so much of the hype on Sydney Metro and Sydney's double decker suburban trains.
Hello, what do you think of Adelaide obahn, " Adam something " TH-cam Thinks they are gadgetbahns I think it works well, bus picks up in streets, then speeds in and the can drop off It gets rid of huge stations, and pedestrian congested Interested on your thoughts
Appreciate the response! Agree our current systems are reasonably similar, but the City Rail Link over here will make a huge difference once open. If you ever want to make a video on transport projects over here in Auckland, I am happy to help with scripting and footage :)
No for the tunnel. Population does not support it. Nore dose the traffic. But I think we need a loop line for bus transport in Adelaide. Not everyone needs to travel threw the city. Mt barker needs a train line. Rail loop is not feasible specifically underground. Mt barker will grow after we have better public transport access. We must link big cities, including Mount Gambier
Get the costs of underground railway construction in South Australia at a reasonable price. The North West Metro in Sydney, the Melbourne Metro tunnel and Cross River Rail tunnel in Brisbane are notorious for their insanely high cost on a per km basis. Currently as of July 2021, Western Australia is the Australian state that's able to build railway lines (entire) with lots of engineering challenges in tunnel at a reasonable price. Experienced contractors and stringent laws are necessary as seen in many developed European and Asian countries so that we in Australia can have vital public transport infrastructure. We cannot just rely on mixed traffic buses, regular busways/ BRT, O'bahn busway or even trams/ light rail in Adelaide. It's time that we stop making excuses about the population or density myth and start getting serious with a tunnel to link the Gawler (North) and Seaford (South) train lines. This gold plating of recent Australian railway lines in tunnel is such a massive problem as seen with recent projects. Only the USA currently more expensive to build railway lines in tunnel than Australia. It's a shame that this American disease of massive cost blowouts has infected Australia on a national level (except for Western Australia). grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/The-Rise-of-Megaprojects-Grattan-Report.pdf blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2012/02/15/why-do-subways-cost-so-much-to-build-here-than-elsewhere/ tunnelingonline.com/why-tunnels-in-the-us-cost-much-more-than-anywhere-else-in-the-world/ transitcosts.com/ (Worldwide) pedestrianobservations.com/construction-costs/ (Worldwide)
the current Australian government has promised to build more than 44 car parks at train stations which to me seems counter intuitive when we are trying to get people to use public transport
I'm late to the party as I have recently discovered your channel as early as yesterday, but talk about why the MTR (the Mass Transit Railway) in Hong Kong is the most reliable rapid transit and commuter rail system and how Australian rapid transit and commuter rail systems should live up to the MTR's example.
A tram/ light rail is equally as expensive to operate as a suburban train or a metro train. Route alignment, geometry, tight tolerances and right of way acquisition drive up the construction and operating costs regardless of the mode. When we build fixed guideway transit such as busways or railway lines, we try to use the surface (at ground level) as much as possible as its the cheapest long term option. Building a fully underground line for any fixed guideway should be avoided as much as possible at it's the most expensive long term option. Grade separation must be applied to all forms of fixed guideway regardless of route alignment to improve capacity, frequency, safety and reduce the number of conflict points and congestion at pinch points. A metro system consists of trains (usually high floor) that have a smaller loading gauge than suburban trains (mainline). Metros don't have to be fully underground, but they can be in various route alignments such as at ground level, elevated or underground. It's entirely possible to operate a third rail metro system (fully grade separated) at ground level with a lower frequency of 3 - 7.5 minutes and a lower capacity of 2,000 - 5,000 pphpd with 2 carriage trains as long the platform is long enough. In Adelaide, it's a viable option to have a metro system with a capacity of 2,000 - 5,000 pphpd as long the trains have good average occupancy. Outer sections of San Francisco BART, Washington Metro, Helsinki Metro, London Underground, Kiev Metro & some parts of Moscow Metro are examples of metros running at ground level.
@@MetroManMelbourne, Perth's Joondalup (North) and Mandurah (South) train/ heavy rail lines are an international success story despite the trains running in low density suburbia. All stations on the Joondalup and Joondalup train lines have high quality shelters with fully integrated bus and train interchanges to frequent feeder bus lines and large park n rides. A majority of Perth's South and North train lines operate in the median of Kinwana freeway and Mitchell freeway respectively with absolute grade separation. Elevated walkways (bridges) allow passengers to safely cross above the freeway. The secret to the success of the Joondalup and Mandurah train lines are the simple stopping pattern, high frequency of 5 minutes (peak) and large stop spacing of 3 km - 7 km which allows trains to move at 130 km/h between stations with a high average speed of 70 km/h - 78 km/h. This fast train operation in Perth with a 5 minute peak frequency allows trains to be competitive against cars on the freeway for long distance trips of 20 - 60 km. Trains/ heavy rail as seen in Perth can work quite well in low density suburbia as long trains are connected to frequent buses, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. A minimal train network like Perth is minimal but excellent in terms of legibility, frequency and usability unlike Melbourne's or Sydney's train network. Buses act as extension of the fast train line (trunk) to improve service coverage (2nd link below). Toronto Subway in Canada has metro line 1 (heavy rail) operating in low density suburbia along the outer sections. Yet, the stations of Toronto's metro line 1 in suburbia still have higher daily patronage than the lesser used stations of New York Subway due to extensive connections to the wider bus network (3nd link below). Density or a massive population are no destiny to achieving a good public transport system (1st & 2nd link below). Paul Mee's 2010 book on Transport for Suburbia clearly proved that there's no trend between public transport use and urban density. Los Angeles, has the largest urban density in USA with a greater population of 10,000,000, but it's public transport share is only 5% (4th link below). Helsinki, Finland is roughly the same size as Adelaide in terms of greater population, but Helsinki's public transport share is 22% whereas Adelaide's is only 10% (4th link below). Adelaide's public transport has lots of room for improvement. Trams/ light rail stopping every 400 m - 800 m in spread out Adelaide even with its exclusive right of way will do nothing to stopping road congestion. This means that the tram will move at an average speed of 20 - 25 km/h along the track. Factor in walking to the tram stop with a wait time of 5 minutes, then the door to door average speed by tram is only 12 - 15 km/h. A slow and expensive tram in Adelaide cannot compete against the car as cars can move at a door to door average speed of 40 km/h - 50 km/h under good road traffic conditions. www.ptua.org.au/myths/density/ humantransit.org/2010/09/the-perils-of-average-density.html en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_share danco.substack.com/p/why-i-dont-love-light-rail-transit
@@MetroManMelbourne, I'd suggest that Adelaide must drop the tram/ light rail fad and start some serious investment into redesigning the bus network (frequent grid) with busways/ BRT on existing roadways, upgrading the existing suburban train network (remove unnecessary stations at are too close and remove railway crossings) and converting the O'bahn to a metro system (steel wheeled, heavy rail). A tram is really just a luxury bus with steel wheels and railway bogies, not higher order public transport as claimed by tram proponents like you. Many cities around the world including Perth and Brisbane are not using trams/ light rail, yet they're still doing fine. A tram has none of the flexibility/ maneuverability as buses on street level (in their reserved lanes) and lacks the wide carriages of some trains while being so expensive to maintain and operate. A full blown train/ heavy rail (high floor) are similar in cost with trams/ light rail in terms of construction, maintenance and operation. There're underground trams (1st & 2nd links below) in Frankfurt, Vienna, Edmonton and Brussels which all use an inferior vehicle with none of the cost savings as claimed by tram/ light proponents. Some long distance lines in Germany use dual voltage trams known as tram-trains (3rd link below) in reserved corridors and street running. For grade separation and longer distance, a tram is outclassed a train. At street level and shorter distances, a tram is outclassed by a bus (electric battery buses or trolleybuses). en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_premetro_systems en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadtbahn en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram-train www.australian-trains.com/blog/is-a-tram-a-train.html
@@MetroManMelbourne, Build a FUCKIN steel wheeled TRAIN with electrification and full grade separation on HIGH CAPACITY and LONG DISTANCE corridors. Busways/ BRT (even with biarticulated buses) or trams/ light rail (big trams like Los Angeles) won't be an adequate long term solution for moving large volumes of people. Cost cutting measures with busways and trams will fail miserably with at grade operation on street level unless lots of money are spent on grade separation and special infrastructure for stations. High floor trains beat all kinds of trams. 🚉🚉🚉🚉
@@MetroManMelbourne, A busway/ BRT for low to medium passenger volumes are cheaper to build, maintain and operate than light rail or heavy rail. Only a high capacity BRT system (theoretical capacity of 10,000 - 40,000 pphpd) with two lanes per direction, passing loops through local stations and massive infrastructure like pedestrian overpasses as seen in Curitiba, Bogota and Guangzhou are expensive to build, maintain and operate. A very high quality BRT system with lots of dedicated infrastructure and special stations for just buses even biarticulated buses are not much cheaper than light rail or heavy rail in construction, maintenance and operating cost. Curitiba and Bogota use custom made (off the shelf) high floor buses, so the flexibility of these buses can't be used on city streets as they must use high floor platforms. BRT systems: Bogota: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransMilenio Curitiba: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rede_Integrada_de_Transporte Guangzhou: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangzhou_Bus_Rapid_Transit Global data on busways/ BRT: brtdata.org/
![[Full Episode] The Restaurant War Thailand ศึกพ่อค้าซ่าแม่ค้าแซ่บ Episode 2 | 29 ก.ย. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/r3lfLNH6Ke4/mqdefault.jpg)
I would like to see more Perth related content on this channel as long term improvements of Perth's train network are criminally underrated. The Australian media are focusing so much of the hype on Sydney Metro and Sydney's double decker suburban trains.
Hello, what do you think of Adelaide obahn,
" Adam something " TH-cam
Thinks they are gadgetbahns
I think it works well, bus picks up in streets, then speeds in and the can drop off
It gets rid of huge stations, and pedestrian congested
Interested on your thoughts
where do you get your info
Gov departments mostly, or employees of those depts if the info isn't publicly available
Congrats on the 1000 subs....here's to many more!
Appreciate the response! Agree our current systems are reasonably similar, but the City Rail Link over here will make a huge difference once open.
If you ever want to make a video on transport projects over here in Auckland, I am happy to help with scripting and footage :)
Congrats for 1k, looking forward to seeing your channel grow and get better through the future!
Your channel MetroManMelbourne is also good. It focuses on Melbourne's public transport similar to another channel called True Believers.
@@michaeleverett1479 thank you
No for the tunnel. Population does not support it. Nore dose the traffic. But I think we need a loop line for bus transport in Adelaide. Not everyone needs to travel threw the city. Mt barker needs a train line. Rail loop is not feasible specifically underground. Mt barker will grow after we have better public transport access. We must link big cities, including Mount Gambier
Get the costs of underground railway construction in South Australia at a reasonable price. The North West Metro in Sydney, the Melbourne Metro tunnel and Cross River Rail tunnel in Brisbane are notorious for their insanely high cost on a per km basis. Currently as of July 2021, Western Australia is the Australian state that's able to build railway lines (entire) with lots of engineering challenges in tunnel at a reasonable price. Experienced contractors and stringent laws are necessary as seen in many developed European and Asian countries so that we in Australia can have vital public transport infrastructure. We cannot just rely on mixed traffic buses, regular busways/ BRT, O'bahn busway or even trams/ light rail in Adelaide. It's time that we stop making excuses about the population or density myth and start getting serious with a tunnel to link the Gawler (North) and Seaford (South) train lines.
This gold plating of recent Australian railway lines in tunnel is such a massive problem as seen with recent projects. Only the USA currently more expensive to build railway lines in tunnel than Australia. It's a shame that this American disease of massive cost blowouts has infected Australia on a national level (except for Western Australia).
grattan.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/The-Rise-of-Megaprojects-Grattan-Report.pdf
blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2012/02/15/why-do-subways-cost-so-much-to-build-here-than-elsewhere/
tunnelingonline.com/why-tunnels-in-the-us-cost-much-more-than-anywhere-else-in-the-world/
transitcosts.com/ (Worldwide)
pedestrianobservations.com/construction-costs/ (Worldwide)
Metronet hey 🤤
I'd like to see you make a video on a hypothetical Adelaide City Loop.
1 billion subs congrats
Congrats on 1K! you are growing so fast and you deserve it!
I’m just bothered about how you’re playing the outdated Transport Fever rather than the up-to-date Transport Fever 2 lol
BTW I agree with the Elon opinion.
Hey Mr Wirraway
Can you cover a VFT on the Eastern Seaboard of Australia?
Thanks for the shout mate, Love the video!
2:58. Well in that case. Aldinga.
Perth content, Brisbane content and the least used station of each line in Adelaide? maybe?
the current Australian government has promised to build more than 44 car parks at train stations which to me seems counter intuitive when we are trying to get people to use public transport
Great to hear your opinions
I'm late to the party as I have recently discovered your channel as early as yesterday, but talk about why the MTR (the Mass Transit Railway) in Hong Kong is the most reliable rapid transit and commuter rail system and how Australian rapid transit and commuter rail systems should live up to the MTR's example.
What game is this?? Looks like a really cool game.
Transport fever 2
@@nm6805, Cities Skylines is another great game worth trying to build a complete transport network.
A tram/ light rail is equally as expensive to operate as a suburban train or a metro train. Route alignment, geometry, tight tolerances and right of way acquisition drive up the construction and operating costs regardless of the mode. When we build fixed guideway transit such as busways or railway lines, we try to use the surface (at ground level) as much as possible as its the cheapest long term option. Building a fully underground line for any fixed guideway should be avoided as much as possible at it's the most expensive long term option. Grade separation must be applied to all forms of fixed guideway regardless of route alignment to improve capacity, frequency, safety and reduce the number of conflict points and congestion at pinch points.
A metro system consists of trains (usually high floor) that have a smaller loading gauge than suburban trains (mainline). Metros don't have to be fully underground, but they can be in various route alignments such as at ground level, elevated or underground. It's entirely possible to operate a third rail metro system (fully grade separated) at ground level with a lower frequency of 3 - 7.5 minutes and a lower capacity of 2,000 - 5,000 pphpd with 2 carriage trains as long the platform is long enough. In Adelaide, it's a viable option to have a metro system with a capacity of 2,000 - 5,000 pphpd as long the trains have good average occupancy. Outer sections of San Francisco BART, Washington Metro, Helsinki Metro, London Underground, Kiev Metro & some parts of Moscow Metro are examples of metros running at ground level.
A light rail, however, is cheaper to build in the first place than heavy rail or metro rail.
@@MetroManMelbourne, Perth's Joondalup (North) and Mandurah (South) train/ heavy rail lines are an international success story despite the trains running in low density suburbia. All stations on the Joondalup and Joondalup train lines have high quality shelters with fully integrated bus and train interchanges to frequent feeder bus lines and large park n rides. A majority of Perth's South and North train lines operate in the median of Kinwana freeway and Mitchell freeway respectively with absolute grade separation. Elevated walkways (bridges) allow passengers to safely cross above the freeway. The secret to the success of the Joondalup and Mandurah train lines are the simple stopping pattern, high frequency of 5 minutes (peak) and large stop spacing of 3 km - 7 km which allows trains to move at 130 km/h between stations with a high average speed of 70 km/h - 78 km/h. This fast train operation in Perth with a 5 minute peak frequency allows trains to be competitive against cars on the freeway for long distance trips of 20 - 60 km.
Trains/ heavy rail as seen in Perth can work quite well in low density suburbia as long trains are connected to frequent buses, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. A minimal train network like Perth is minimal but excellent in terms of legibility, frequency and usability unlike Melbourne's or Sydney's train network. Buses act as extension of the fast train line (trunk) to improve service coverage (2nd link below). Toronto Subway in Canada has metro line 1 (heavy rail) operating in low density suburbia along the outer sections. Yet, the stations of Toronto's metro line 1 in suburbia still have higher daily patronage than the lesser used stations of New York Subway due to extensive connections to the wider bus network (3nd link below). Density or a massive population are no destiny to achieving a good public transport system (1st & 2nd link below).
Paul Mee's 2010 book on Transport for Suburbia clearly proved that there's no trend between public transport use and urban density. Los Angeles, has the largest urban density in USA with a greater population of 10,000,000, but it's public transport share is only 5% (4th link below). Helsinki, Finland is roughly the same size as Adelaide in terms of greater population, but Helsinki's public transport share is 22% whereas Adelaide's is only 10% (4th link below). Adelaide's public transport has lots of room for improvement.
Trams/ light rail stopping every 400 m - 800 m in spread out Adelaide even with its exclusive right of way will do nothing to stopping road congestion. This means that the tram will move at an average speed of 20 - 25 km/h along the track. Factor in walking to the tram stop with a wait time of 5 minutes, then the door to door average speed by tram is only 12 - 15 km/h. A slow and expensive tram in Adelaide cannot compete against the car as cars can move at a door to door average speed of 40 km/h - 50 km/h under good road traffic conditions.
www.ptua.org.au/myths/density/
humantransit.org/2010/09/the-perils-of-average-density.html
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_share
danco.substack.com/p/why-i-dont-love-light-rail-transit
@@MetroManMelbourne, I'd suggest that Adelaide must drop the tram/ light rail fad and start some serious investment into redesigning the bus network (frequent grid) with busways/ BRT on existing roadways, upgrading the existing suburban train network (remove unnecessary stations at are too close and remove railway crossings) and converting the O'bahn to a metro system (steel wheeled, heavy rail). A tram is really just a luxury bus with steel wheels and railway bogies, not higher order public transport as claimed by tram proponents like you. Many cities around the world including Perth and Brisbane are not using trams/ light rail, yet they're still doing fine. A tram has none of the flexibility/ maneuverability as buses on street level (in their reserved lanes) and lacks the wide carriages of some trains while being so expensive to maintain and operate.
A full blown train/ heavy rail (high floor) are similar in cost with trams/ light rail in terms of construction, maintenance and operation. There're underground trams (1st & 2nd links below) in Frankfurt, Vienna, Edmonton and Brussels which all use an inferior vehicle with none of the cost savings as claimed by tram/ light proponents. Some long distance lines in Germany use dual voltage trams known as tram-trains (3rd link below) in reserved corridors and street running. For grade separation and longer distance, a tram is outclassed a train. At street level and shorter distances, a tram is outclassed by a bus (electric battery buses or trolleybuses).
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_premetro_systems
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadtbahn
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram-train
www.australian-trains.com/blog/is-a-tram-a-train.html
@@MetroManMelbourne, Build a FUCKIN steel wheeled TRAIN with electrification and full grade separation on HIGH CAPACITY and LONG DISTANCE corridors. Busways/ BRT (even with biarticulated buses) or trams/ light rail (big trams like Los Angeles) won't be an adequate long term solution for moving large volumes of people.
Cost cutting measures with busways and trams will fail miserably with at grade operation on street level unless lots of money are spent on grade separation and special infrastructure for stations. High floor trains beat all kinds of trams.
🚉🚉🚉🚉
@@MetroManMelbourne, A busway/ BRT for low to medium passenger volumes are cheaper to build, maintain and operate than light rail or heavy rail. Only a high capacity BRT system (theoretical capacity of 10,000 - 40,000 pphpd) with two lanes per direction, passing loops through local stations and massive infrastructure like pedestrian overpasses as seen in Curitiba, Bogota and Guangzhou are expensive to build, maintain and operate. A very high quality BRT system with lots of dedicated infrastructure and special stations for just buses even biarticulated buses are not much cheaper than light rail or heavy rail in construction, maintenance and operating cost.
Curitiba and Bogota use custom made (off the shelf) high floor buses, so the flexibility of these buses can't be used on city streets as they must use high floor platforms.
BRT systems:
Bogota: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TransMilenio
Curitiba: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rede_Integrada_de_Transporte
Guangzhou: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangzhou_Bus_Rapid_Transit
Global data on busways/ BRT:
brtdata.org/