Inner West Light Rail observations

[Swift]

Slightly different kettle of fish to a De Havilland Comet.
There's no deadly pressure differential that will result in the tram exploding and passengers falling to their deaths.
That was a cruel R&D for the safe passenger jets we eventually got. Other manufacturers said if it wasn't for De Haviland taking the fall and the opportunity to learn from the findings later on, it likely would have happened to their early jet planes.

[Merc1107]

I don't know of any public transport vehicles with non-square windows or panelling though, nor have I ever seen cracked interior panels beyond heat/UV-damaged window sills and the flimsy plastic ductwork (especially in the "late" CR228L) which rattles about so much, it's surprising it doesn't disintegrate sooner.

[tonyp]

As I mentioned above, the same issue is evident in CDCNSW Region 4's Volgren CR228Ls, with cracked interior panels. The IWLR vehicles are arguably put under more stress than a 12.5m rigid bus, especially with those tight curves in the approach to Central and at Pyrmont.

Both the CAFs and the Citadis are the wrong type of trams for the Sydney lines. They need trams with swivelling bgoies. However, the deed is done for now and we'll have to wait another 20 years + for the opportunity to rectify that. Knowing NSW transport thinking, that opportunity won't be taken because they'll go for cheapest and nastiest again.

[MiCCROwavE_OVEN]

The CAFs already have very limited cabin space with the fixed bogies. I'm assuming that swivelling bogies will require much larger wheel wells, which would be almost impossible to fit into the Urbos 100 design.

I don't think the NSW government would be particularly keen on a 70% low-floor design as that would not only reduce passenger carrying capacity but it would also attract a lot of negative press attention, which, after the bungled opening of the Rozelle Interchange, is the last thing the Labor government needs.

Undoubtedly, similar concerns with passenger capacity played a role in State Transit preferring the low-entry B12BLEAs to the combo floor Scania artics back in 2009.

As for the Stadler trams, which have swivelling Jacobs bogies from memory, aftersales service in Australia is unlikely to be good, as Stadler has never had any Asia-Pacific customers. However, I've heard that Stadler is looking at establishing operations in India and Indonesia in the near future, so perhaps it could emerge as a possible alternative for Urbos 3 replacements.

[Swift]

Undoubtedly, similar concerns with passenger capacity played a role in State Transit preferring the low-entry B12BLEAs to the combo floor Scania artics back in 2009.

I thought it was supply issues from Scania at the time they wanted to order so switched to the second rate Volvo offering we got with less amenity and super thirsty derated coach engines over full low floor with more standee room, better passenger movement and very fuel efficient made for city bus low revving torque engines.

[tonyp]

The CAFs already have very limited cabin space with the fixed bogies. I'm assuming that swivelling bogies will require much larger wheel wells, which would be almost impossible to fit into the Urbos 100 design.

I don't think the NSW government would be particularly keen on a 70% low-floor design as that would not only reduce passenger carrying capacity but it would also attract a lot of negative press attention, which, after the bungled opening of the Rozelle Interchange, is the last thing the Labor government needs.

Undoubtedly, similar concerns with passenger capacity played a role in State Transit preferring the low-entry B12BLEAs to the combo floor Scania artics back in 2009.

As for the Stadler trams, which have swivelling Jacobs bogies from memory, aftersales service in Australia is unlikely to be good, as Stadler has never had any Asia-Pacific customers. However, I've heard that Stadler is looking at establishing operations in India and Indonesia in the near future, so perhaps it could emerge as a possible alternative for Urbos 3 replacements.

70% low floor is no longer necessary for swivelling bogies. That design constraint was overcome about 15 years ago.

Although Stadler does manufacture trams with swivelling bogies, the major manufacturer with the greatest sales and range of trams with swivelling bogies is Škoda Transportation. This variant in Plzen would be ideal for the Sydney lines. As you can see, plenty of aisle width even with swivelling bogies and this is in a model only 2.5 metres wide for the local structure gauge. A 2.65 metre wide version for our structure gauge would have an even wider aisle. Note evenly distributed double-leaf doors - the ideal in a public transport vehicle.





https://www.skodagroup.com/admin/wp-con ... -CZ-EN.pdf

[alleve]

I don't think the NSW government would be particularly keen on a 70% low-floor design as that would not only reduce passenger carrying capacity but it would also attract a lot of negative press attention, which, after the bungled opening of the Rozelle Interchange, is the last thing the Labor government needs.

Melbourne doesn't have that issue. Check out the videos of the new G class tram, it has swivelling bogies and a full low floor.

[tonyp]

Melbourne doesn't have that issue. Check out the videos of the new G class tram, it has swivelling bogies and a full low floor.

The E and G class are the same sort of mechanical platform as the Škoda tram illustrated above. Having an agency and operator that actually know what they're doing helps in selecting the right type of tram. Melbourne has also been better at choosing the right sort of train and now looking like they're moving ahead of Sydney on bus design and operation. Maybe we can ask them to design a better ferry too?

[Swift]

the major manufacturer with the greatest sales and range of trams with swivelling bogies is Škoda Transportation. This variant in Plzen would be ideal for the Sydney lines. As you can see, plenty of aisle width even with swivelling bogies and this is in a model only 2.5 metres wide for the local structure gauge. A 2.65 metre wide version for our structure gauge would have an even wider aisle. Note evenly distributed double-leaf doors - the ideal in a public transport vehicle.

But it's not a brand with enough street cred to the feeble Anglo saxon closed up minds who make the choices here and are content to settle for mediocre outcomes as long as it's expedient.
We are 'best in world' by virtue that this is NSW run by English speakers with UK descent. We can't go wrong.
How did that work out in 2020/21 when we got a taste on how dictatorial Australia actually is?

[tonyp]

But it's not a brand with enough street cred to the feeble Anglo saxon closed up minds who make the choices here and are content to settle for mediocre outcomes as long as it's expedient.
We are 'best in world' by virtue that this is NSW run by English speakers with UK descent. We can't go wrong.
How did that work out in 2020/21 when we got a taste on how dictatorial Australia actually is?

It's very well known across Europe, America and Asia and is supplying the traction motors for the Melbourne G class. CAF was unknown in Australia until ten years ago.

[Swift]

Must be cost. We love cheep cheep in Oz land.

[tonyp]

Must be cost. We love cheep cheep in Oz land.

Not that either. Just ignorance.

[Swift]

Worse.

[boxythingy]

new white text desto?

[boronia]

Looks like it, doesn't it? They are on the new cars.

[Randomness]

Does anyone know if they’re weekday peaks only? I’ve been unsuccessfully hunting them for a while.

[Linto63]

one of the new CAFs was out today, about midday.

[Transport Buff]

1 of the x4 new CAF Urbos 100 LRVs, which enables the boost in timetable services on the L1 that was just announced:

https://transportnsw.info/news/2024/l1- ... kday-peaks

[Swift]

Rubbish with a warranty period.

[Glen]

1 of the x4 new CAF Urbos 100 LRVs, which enables the boost in timetable services on the L1 that was just announced:

https://transportnsw.info/news/2024/l1- ... kday-peaks

Great to see the improvement but interesting that the announcement still suggests you consider walking between Central and Pyrmont as an alternative.

[Swift]

Having uncoupled Alstoms was an even better improvement, but now back to more of these pieces of mediocrity. In keeping with the way Sydney is as a whole.

[Transport Buff]

Another interesting point from above announcement:

"L1 light rail services are not equipped with real-time yet: the next service arrival times displayed on the information displays at stops, on Trip Planner or on transport apps are approximate. Always allow extra travel time."

Ummm, weren't they equiped with real-time before the cracking of the Urbos 3 vehicles??
Shouldn't take this long to re-implement since then, I would have thought, but I could be horribly wrong. I understand the L1 is now a multi-class line (Urbos 3, Citadis X05, Urbos 100), but i'm sure we have ample technology to provide real-time updates regardless of vehicle classes??

[Fleet Lists]

Yes I tried to track them yesterday and was surprised the best it could do was to show the types of trams and say it was one of the types listed.

[Randomness]

The real time position updates as a tram arrives at a stop except from Hay Street to Central where it’s approximations. I’d guess it’s because the street section works on Line of Sight compared to the railway section which uses signals. The only information you get is journey number.

I’m honestly more impressed that the X05s can sign on and track properly given the almost live tracking on the CSELR.

[boronia]

The next service display at Central shows “leaves in 1 minute” while the tram sits there for up to 7 minutes.