How this strange line revived Sydney's tram network
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 06. 2024
- Sydney used to have the largest tram network in the Southern Hemisphere - but we demolished it. So how did this odd little light rail line kickstart its comeback?
Support me on KoFi! ko-fi.com/citymoose
Trams (also called streetcars, trolleys, and light railways) used to be a major form of public transport in most large cities on the planet. But, in the middle of the twentieth century, governments around the world ripped them up in favour of cars. Now many cities are starting to rebuild theirs - Sydney included. But what lessons can we learn from Sydney's first attempt to revive their tram network, by converting a disused freight railway into a tram line?
Sydney trains vlogs channel: / @sydneytrainsvlogs - Věda a technologie
![Eminem - Houdini [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/22tVWwmTie8/mqdefault.jpg)
I worked for Bruce Baird, the shadow transport minister, in 1987 as a young assistant. A retired engineer approached Bruce about turning the old goods line into a tram route and Bruce asked me to accompany the engineer on a tour of it. His vision was even grander - linking up with the line to La Perouse via Port Botany and then going through to Central following the old La Perouse tram route. It was a fasinating tour and I am glad that a lot of his vision came to fruition. I wish I could remember the engineer's name. He might no longer be with us, and I am grateful to him for showing me an idea which was at least partly realised.
Despite all the problems Sydney has with buses, it still gets decent bus+LR ridership and this will only improve by freeing up corridors like Parramatta Road and Oxford Street with light rail allowing buses to serve other areas with better frequency and reliability.
Compared to other cities - including Melbourne, in my experience the busses in Sydney are fantastic
@@willbaum5300 have to disagree, I think Brisbane, Gold Coast and Perth actually have better bus systems - or what is it about Sydney buses you find good? Having lived most of my life in Sydney in a number of locations then recently moving to Germany, the bus systems in all German cities are far better. For me the criteria has to be average speed, timetable reliability, comfort, passenger information (announcements and displays), quality of interchange, ease of boarding (so number of doors + all-door boarding + interior space at doors).
@@kyletopfer7818what I like about Sydney buses is the real time timetable provided by Apps. So even if the buses were late, you will know that and able to adjust your own time to catch it. Also the seats for Sydney buses are soft cushioned instead of hard plastic make it one of the comfortable bus seats. What I think Sydney buses need to improve is the information announcement. Again, I can use the real time tracker on apps to check where am I but it would be nice to have display on board.
Buses have always been good in the inner suburbs of Sydney, where until very recently they were run directly by the state government. In the Western Suburbs they've always been run by private operators and often not particularly well. Now everything is privatised and they can't find bus drivers@@willbaum5300
@@kyletopfer7818 In Brisbane Buses are Great if you want to go to/from the City but are almost useless otherwise and since the Council Run the Buses and the State Run the Trains you will usually have a long wait if you have to get a Bus/Train connection as the Brisbane City Council and QLD Government love to get into pissing matches with each other.
The loop doesn’t add as much time as it might appear… the scheduled time from Wentworth Park to Convention is 6 minutes. A direct tunnel under Allen St could probably cut it down to 1 or 2, but still, we are talking about a difference of 4 or 5 minutes.
That would also skip two of the busiest stops on the line, Fish Market and The Star. Yes, they’re more geared toward tourists, but they still see significant traffic during the morning peak. Even if you could, skipping the Pyrmont loop at peak times probably wouldn’t be much of an improvement to the overall service.
Right - the better solution is split the line in two at Lilyfield. The eastern section from Central to Lilyfield terminates there, whilst the Western section from Dulwich Hill to Lilyfield can leave the existing alignment from Lilyfield and run alongside the new Rozelle park in the former rail corridor to The Bays Metro station then on to Balmain to terminate. Light rail works best as a feeder for Metro lines and as a place-making tool, this is exactly the function the Outer section fulfills to both Dulwich Hill and The Bays.
0:23 "To make more space on the road for cars". Thank you +++✅. I keep hammering away with that truth wherever I can. It was never about improving public transport.
Here in Melbourne, we have 2 light rail lines; St Kilda and Port Melbourne. They use to be suburban train lines but they converted them to light rail. There double the number of stops, they are way more frequent and it goes straight through the CBD.
Those work much faster and go to more useful locations. I'd mark them as success stories, not like the Sydney L1 which suffers from a very slow commute, infrequent services, poor capacity and mostly (with some exceptions) badly located and supremely ugly stations that are difficult to access.
I think another large benefit of having a quick light rail win like this is that it starts to build up the institutional knowledge of light rail in the government. I.e. by having L1, NSW now had local drivers, maintainers, and managers who know how to work on a light rail system. This meant that opening up L2 and L3 would be less costly compared to a situation where these lines were built first.
Less costly? Are you kidding? Both the L2 and L3 were horrendously mismanaged with massive cost blowouts!!
@@peterbreis5407 The 'mismanagement' relates to sight unseen. George Street, for example, sported a labyrinth of gas lines, telecommunications lines, electrical lines, service tunnels and two sets of tram tracks from the old system which were never removed. All the tracks, sleepers and drains had to be removed and any services that were still in use had to be rerouted before the footings for the new tracks could be laid. That work constituted 2/3 of the project man-hours because many of the services were not documented and tracing them was too difficult for several reasons. The portion of the project that was outside the CBD was built close to time and budget.
L1 cost a lot less because the corridor was free of these obstructions and work was, for the most part, just removing old freight line tracks and replacing them with new tracks, platforms and signalling for trams.
@@peterbreis5407 Correct, but thankfully lessons have now been learnt from that, especially about the redirection of under-street power infrastructure. They have already been applying those lessons on the Parramatta line, so hopefully it'll help
@@lachd2261 Ah the "lessons learned"! or "That was then this is now".
I spent ten days in Sydney and used the L2/L3 from Town Hall to Circular Quay, pretty much all the time, and it was pretty cool, just seeing stations outside stores and when walking you could hear the Light Rail trams using their bell, which was just cool.
Even I as someone who services Sydney CBD in a truck 4.5 days per week the closure of George St (except to access docks) really isn't that bad either.
L2/L3: North of Central:
Publicly Subsidised Travellator
and I love it for that.
L2/L3: North of Central:
Publicly Subsidised Travellator
and I love it for that.
L2/L3: North of Central:
Publicly Subsidised Travellator
and I love it for that.
One of the major cons with converting disused freight corridors to LRT is that you have to actually have some disused freight corridors in the first place.
Brisbane doesnt even have a dedicated frieght corrdior through the inner city that is in use, let alone a disused one!
There have been some suggestions to convert the Doomben line to LRT (and extend it to Hamilton Northshore).
The busways are also meant to be one day converted to light rail.
@RowBr0 I don't really see the sense in linking the Doomben line to Northshore. It's an unbelievably circuitous route to the city that isn't going to stack up against a city glider service down Kingsford Smith Drive, so all you are left with is a 'suburban loop' esq service to link Northshore to anything north of Eagle Junction. I'm not sure that's all that useful at the present time.
@jayfielding1333 they never will be. It was a design consideration but the practical reality is that to do so would incur huge cost for very little return (arguably no return).
The way the busway 'cheats' capacity by having so many routes combine for almost continuous bus flow during peaks is difficult for any set up that excludes those extra bus routes from using the corridor. It's a key part of the reason why the initial Brisbane metro proposal (that was actually a rubber tyred metro) failed, the converted system would have actually have had less capacity then what we currently have. In its current set up, to replace the busway with an LRT isn't just replacing the busway, you'd basically be completly reworking Brisbane's bus network from the ground up just to make it functional at all post conversion.
For better or worse, the busways have basically made LRT in Brisbane unviable. The cost of a new LRT system compared to something compatible with the existing busways just won't ever pan out in favour of LRT.
I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. The busways are fine, and the decision to build them was sound enough. Whenever I look at potential routes for LRTs in modern Brisbane, i always end up coming to the conclusion that a (proper) metro would be the better option anyway. We don't 'need' lrt to have a good transport system.
@91Caesar yea, it is a bit of a circuitous route, although arguably, it would be better value in the long term rather than continuing to send 6 car trains down it. It could also be extended to Kedron Busway Station and provide a cross town trip.
Light Rail has been a massive success almost everywhere that it’s been built in Australia in the last decade. Almost every new and expanded line has either met or exceeded its patronage estimates - Gold Coast, Canberra, and all three new lines in Sydney all smashed their predicted patronage (before the pandemic). And more interestingly, patronage on light rail has rebounded more quickly than other modes.
You wonder how they were serviced beforehand though. How did people get around? Was there a bus that moved straight into the city. The thing with the Perth is that its very well serviced by train and bus, especially in the 15km radius from city. Then you have the corridors out. Considering the low density of population people are well serviced. In Perth the routes that would be serviced by a tram are already serviced by multiple bus routes every 5 miutes... at main times. So would more likely cause interruption to existing routes. A tram only benefits if its on a route that goes 18km from CBD to outer suburb. But now we're told that light rail isn't ideal for that purpose.
Sydney ran into a problem where there were so many buses in the inner city that they were causing traffic congestion. You couldn't increase the service frequency any further, which is why light rail was built@@BDub2024
@@BDub2024 Generally, yes, you build light rail where buses no longer meet demand. Those bus services are then changed to provide more frequent coverage in areas not served by light rail and directing passengers to stations instead of their final destination. That's what the Gold Coast did. The line goes through what was the main bus corridor.
@@jayfielding1333 I heard that Sydney had an issue with too many buses crowding out the main streets in the mornings. Its interesting in Perth actually. In last 20 years they've narrowed streets, widened footpaths and cycle paths and deliberately slowed the traffic down in the CBD. All part of deliberately making it car unfriendly and discourage people from wanting to drive in city. Obviously the problem is that offices do have carparks underneath. But increaingly they're removing the large parking areas that used to be there or making $30 a day parking.
@@jayfielding1333 I think in Perth there was a romantic ideal to link Curtin Uni to UWA/hospital precinct through the city. For me I'm not sure if was a definite required route especially considering universities are seasonal. Maybe if they ramped up density and employment. But it wasn't really required. Long term I think its required up to Eastern Wanneroo or Gnangara to the city. But maybe they'll try to use extensive rail tunnelling and spur lines in the future. The emphasis in Perth is absolutely developing a number of heavy rail routes.
Adelaide needs more light rail - the scrapped ADELink plan was awesome from 2014
If Pyongyang can rebuild its trams (which it had to after the city was completely destroyed during 1950s warfare), then so can Sydney. While Melbourne's network is impressive, at one point in time, Los Angeles had the largest trolley system in the world! The streetcar system was primarily operated by Pacific Electric (1901-1961) and developed into the largest trolley system in the world by the 1920s. This breadth of scale enabled residents and visitors alike to routinely traverse the Los Angeles region, from Santa Monica to San Bernardino. Many modern communities were built around the streetcar network and retain its influence in their gridded street network and relatively dense form. The system operated for over half a century, and at its peak included over 1,100 miles of track with 900 electric trolley cars!
This network produced a rate of public transit usage higher than that of modern San Francisco, on a per-capita basis. So what happened to them? During the war years, transit ridership spiked because of government gas rationing. But the streetcars emptied out again in peacetime. Between 1945 and 1951, the number of riders carried each year fell by nearly 80 million. Cheaper to operate and requiring less maintenance, buses began phasing out the streetcars very early. In 1926, 15 percent of the total miles traveled by Pacific Electric riders was along bus routes, that share would more than double by 1939. Large-scale land acquisition for new freeway construction began in earnest in 1951 which further killed them
Another great example of using existing right-of-way that wasn't used for trams or light-rail to revive them is the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail in New Jersey. Much of the HBLR is old right-of-way, like the main line of the Central Railroad of New Jersey (CNJ) between Bayonne and Liberty State Park, CNJ's Newark and New York Railroad right-of-way was used for the line west to West Side Avenue, the former Conrail River Line (originally NJ Junction Railroad) along the west side of Hoboken and using a tunnel that goes under the Palisades from the West Shore Railroad's main line yo reach Tonnelle Ave. With this tunnel, the system's only underground station was built at Bergenline Ave to serve Union City.
The right-of-way between Liberty State Park and Hoboken Terminal had to be built from scratch. It shares a lane with cars on a portion of Essex Street in Jersey City, but for the most part, does not operate with other traffic. At-grade crossings are equipped with transit-signal priority signals to automatically change traffic lights in favor of the light rail. The HBLR connects to the PATH at Newport, Hoboken Terminal, and Exchange Place, as well as to NY Waterway ferries at different stations, and even connecting to NJT commuter rail at Hoboken Terminal! The light rail has been a catalyst for both residential and commercial development along the route and has played a significant role in the revitalization of Hudson County.
One of the biggest losses ever. I still can’t believe the ripped out all the tracks. Breaks my heart, our city could’ve felt so different.
Agreed.
You can always trace every bad decision that affects the public back to money and greed.
L2/L3 has had more than 31M trips in 2023 with just 12km of line length. L1 has been considered a success, but it is still far from pre-Covid numbers.
Same goes for Adelaide. It was foolish to scrap our tramlines either. 😭
I would argue that the loop around Pyrmont is one of the L1’s most important features; it means the line is able to serve most the region’s points of interest more effectively than a direct route through the peninsula.
Aside from that, this is a great video! Thank you for covering this topic. It was very cool to see the Parramatta Light Rail project also adapt this strategy for Stage 2 by converting the disused Sandown line into light rail as part of its route towards Olympic Park.
the light rail is weird, yes - it ducks under the many freeways and apartments of pyrmont then along viaducts over parks and out along leafy corridors that could pass as a train or metro corridor, but it works - the stop spacing is useful for the areas it covers and its led the way for a reasonably modern and efficient mode of transport in sydney
As someone from that tram obsessed city to the distant south west of Sydney, I always wondered if it was possible to build a tram short cut on the street across the narrowest part of the loop. Is the road too steep, too narrow or is it just that the politicians thought they had a better use for the money it would cost?
Instead of going on the viaduct over Wentworth Park, the line could drop down to Pyrmont Bridge Rd and then do some street running to connect to the existing line at Darling Harbour. I don't think it is too steep, but I stand to be corrected. Despite the fact that Pyrmont will have a Metro Station, making that loop section of the light rail less important, I don't see this making it onto a high priority list any time soon. And it won't actually save that much time anyway. There are plenty of videos on YT showing you the whole trip, or just watch the part from Darling Harbour to Glebe to get an idea of the topography and urban environment.
It would have been possible twenty years earlier but major things were built that blocked the alignment before they thought of the light rail..
All cities owe it to their citizens to revive their tram networks to the best of their abilities...
We should bring back the entire old tram network, where buildings are now in the way, tunnels can be built so they simply go through the buildings.
Love the L1 its a great little line. As for Sydney's monorail most of us are glad that eyesore is gone.
And we didn't want them to build it in the first place!
Great video. The cost of L2,L3 would discourage future governments from opening new tram lines but hopefully the Parramatta to Carlingford line will persuade them otherwise
I'm from Sydney but haven't lived there for 13 years. The public transport in the 20km around the southern side of the harbour is extremely good nowadays, I was pleasantly shocked to discover on a recent visit.
especially compared with the situation 20 years ago. It's finally relatively cheap, simple and efficient to get around. Cars are for mugs! Electric car? you're a double-mug!
I used to have a house 5 doors down from the Glebe light rail stop, i had moved to tasmania but kept my house. What people who didnt like the idea of the light rail didnt realise was the development and housing that the light rail opened up, and for those people who owned a house in walking distance to the stops the increase in value people put on thos houses. Glebe b
Changed from being only served by buses to one where you had two modes of public transport. I just wish i had been able to use the light rail while i still lived there.
Trackless trams are considered a better option than trams. But you don't quite get the same kick that comes from putting in tracks, which then get private investors to invest instead of just government.
@@BDub2024 Umm, isn't a "trackless tram" a trolley bus? Or do you mean something else like Adelaide's O-bahn?
@@BDub2024a really large bus has other drawbacks, let maneuverability and reliability vs rail vehicles
@@Dave_Sissonhe means a really large bus, like a bi-articulated, "trackless tram" is just a political word for big bus😂😂
@@BDub2024 Trackless trams are worse than real trams in every possible way, except that they're cheaper. But you get what you pay for.
Very enjoyable , thanks for a great video. I remember and lament that extensive former tram network from my childhood some especially the Abbotsford and Dullwich Hill lines. The longest line the Ryde line could be heard from across the river at Abbotsford.
Hey mate I hope they bring the light rail to BALMAIN again
Seeing trams as light rail in Balmain would be great, though if they continued on to Darling Street Wharf, they may need to bring back the old tramway counterweight to handle the steep hill there.
Great video. The missing connectivity between the L1 and the western & northern rail line is a mystery.
When you do the L2 & L3 video, another mystery that needs to be addressed it to why the L2 mysteriously terminates 1km from Coogee Beach forcing people to change onto buses unnecessarily and why the L3 terminates at no-man’s land after Kingsford?
After Kingsford 1.5km further south is a major shopping district with many apartments (Maroubra Jct), a beach another kilometer away plus a very large shopping centre with thousands of apartments (Eastgardens) a short distance from Maroubra.
Again clogging up roads in the area as people just drive.
Both L2 & L3 need expansion yet nothing even though so many apartments are being built around major shopping centres and very popular beaches. There is plenty of space to build these lines so it’s a big mystery to me.
Completely agree! Both the L2 & L3 need those extensions asap!
L2 and L3 finishing at the points they currently do are the result of NIMBYs in the areas lobbying to keep the poors out of their walled garden. Maroubra council has already given green light to the extension which should meet with much less resistance since that was the original tram corridor before it was ripped out (on Google maps you can even trace the entire median strip down to La Perouse).
Coogee however is almost a lost cause, unless you have someone willing to risk their political career and battering ram the whole thing through, breaking ground and leading strong headway with the project before the end of their term.
Much better prospects would be to pedestrianise and build a light rail down Parramatta road.
Coogee has a problem of very steep gradients going down from Randwick - the old trams operated on some cable stayed sections. That makes the modern L2 difficult to extend.
On the other hand, the L3 should be very easy to extend to Maroubra junction as there is a median on Anzac Parade.
As for the L1, the answer is simple - the Goods line goes under the T1 and T9 lines 600m west of Lewisham station. There is a bad connection there because the Goods line was never intended to be a passenger rail line.
Something that I've wondered, but admitedly never looked into in any detail, is if a bypass branch was viable to boost speed to the city. The idea being a branch from Wentworth Park, linking directly to Exhibition. Likely cost prohibitive, as you'd likely need to tunnel, and coming with it's own signalling challenges. It's a fun daydream to have none the less
THat loop services a fairly dense residential area. Your shortcut could result in a reduction of services. The upcoming metro line addresses some of the issues I hope.
The problem is the proposed metro west and L1s do not have an interchange - same as applies to the Main west. These are major deficiencies. Lewisham Station should be repositioned - stuff the “heritage”.
@@reddust8649 The MW Pyrmont Station and L1 Pyrmont Bay will be about 400 metres apart. I'd be wondering what the demand for interchange would be. There a limitations as to where they can build stations in that area. They can't cater for the needs of every individual traveller, sometimes you've got to be adaptable.
@@brianb8516 Understood for Pyrmont although the point loop is a pain for city commuters from the inner west. My main point was the lack of interconnectedness with the main west line. An easy link from around Lewisham could feed quite a bit of patronage .
If only Brisbane had a freight rail network to convert
Ohh well giant bore tunnels it is.
So basically it’s a success
Like the DLR the L1 can and should evolve with some key investments. Not all would be cheap but could be transformational...
1. Short tunnel from Darling Harbour to Fish Markets, dividing L1 into a local Pyrmont service and an Inner West service.
2. Proper interchange between L1 and T2 at Lewisham. This would revolutionise interconnectivity and couls be paid for by property development.
3. Short branch from Lilyfield to Bays metro stop, also linking to light rail or BRT along Victoria Road.
4. Additional stop and under Glebe Point Road and better interconnection with buses there.
The largest tram network in the Southern Hemisphere was in Buenos Aries, which was over three times longer in total length than Sydney at its maximum extent.
The largest in the Southern Hemisphere claim for Sydney has been around for a while, and has been repeated by otherwise reputable sources, but conveniently ignores systems in non-English speaking counties. 😮
It was, however, the second largest in the British commonwealth after London.
@@lachd2261which is a very small portion of the World.
What happened to the Buenos Aries trams? B.A has some beautiful grand boulevards that would have suited street cars perfectly.
It also puts Melbourne's title as having the largest tramway system in the world into perspective. Melbourne is the biggest now because many other systems that were bigger have closed down.
Hi. Love your voice!!! Do you know anything about the tram line going to Zetland Sydney area?
I think it was just a idea floated by Clover Moore at one point, nothing much had been said about it in years. Doesn’t mean it’s not a good idea though, might make a good topic for a future video!
Have a look at the old tram map for Sydney prior to 1950. Basically you didn't need a car because the entire inner West, East and North was covered by tramlines.
Due to Bondi Junction residents complaining so much they could not extend the line to Bondi Beach. Sydney is too fast a city to put up with trams.
I grew up in Brisbane and remember the fury of many people when the Council decided to scrap the trams in favour of buses. This was at the recommendation of a U.S. traffic/transportation management company, makes me laugh now to think how misguided America was on this subject. In their opinion trams were old fashioned so had to go. Melbourne sensibly kept theirs and the rest is history.
The T2 and T3 blew out because TfNSW wouldn’t take responsibility for electricity utility relocations. Two of the three contractors pulled out for that reason. Get in touch if you want more details
you mean L2 and L3?
@@johnhamilton6003 You spotted my deliberate error..😂😂
Wasn't this also because overheard wires weren't used though?
Well in recent years in the Paris’ suburbs, there is a plan to convert old « grande ceinture » line, witch connects all mainlines witch starts in Paris to each other,
But those are still in use today for freight traffic,
So for the T11 line in the north, they did one interesting thing, that is to create two more tracks next to the ones existing for the new light rail,
So for sure it depends of the right of way that you have but it can be a solution for mix-use
Ah cause Seattle converted it's trams (streetcars in the US) into a special kind of bus namely Trolley buses which are buses but they are powered by overhead wires and have a pair of Trolley poles on the roof this allows the buses to climb extremely steep hills
Seattle also built a pair of Brand new Streetcar lines downtown which run alongside the trolley buses in addition seattle also has a metro-like light rail system
Sydney had trolleybus routes until the late 1950s.
Trolleybuses are great - if you've got them, don't rip them out. Instant electric bus network.
@@lachd2261 yep unfortunately some of the Trolley buses were ripped out in the 60s
Great video! I’m from Brisbane - enough shortsighted transit mistakes made up here for a quite a few vids. 😫
BTW, how goes development of magnetic induction power for trams/LR? I’m guessing the tram at about 9:39 in the video is using that?
Nah they just use 3rd rail in those sections. the 3rd rail both senses tram position and provides power to small segments of the rail the tram is over to power them and prevent electrocution
the Newcastle light rail is weird because it could have run down train line route but went off it on to hunter street. it was calmed that is was not to sell the land but a 5 story building was started a year later. 2.7 km long with a nominal costs of $600 million
You should do a video about the trains in South Africa!
A west concourse at Lewisham station and a pedestrian overpass over Canterbury Rd and Longport St would help connect it with the West Lewisham light rail stop. New west concourse at Dulwich Hill is living proof of this concept. Wait a few more decades for that one I guess...
Wow, first modern trams on that line looked like a box rail, not light rail vehicles! 😆
The tram lines were ultimately scrapped when the tram depot was demolished at Benelong Point to make room for the Sydney Opera House. Rather than relocate the depot it was decided to scrap the entire Tram network.
This wasn't the deciding factor - Bennelong Point was an important depot but there were plenty of other ones. Governments were interested in scrapping the tram system back in the 1930s, but the decision to do so was delayed by WW2. The system suffered enormous stress during the war from the extremely heavy patronage but little was spent on its upkeep during or afterwards, apart from ordering some new trams. The then state government also came under a lot of pressure from the car lobby and finally pulled the pin in 1953.
Bullshit. You should get your facts straight before you make such idiotic claims. The decision had already been made to close the tramways before the Opera House was even considered. The closing of the tram depot provided a convenient location for the Opera House, not the other way around. And even if Sydney had decided to keep its trams, it would be far easier and more sensible to build a replacement depot than to close the entire system just to make room for the Opera House. In fact a tram depot building already existed at Leichhardt - it would have been a relatively simple roster change to cascade operation of tram routes from Fort Macquarie Depot (Bennelong Point) to Ultimo Depot to Rozelle Depot to Leichhardt Depot, with minor alterations to 'fine tune' rosters at Dowling St Depot, Newtown Depot, Waverley Depot and Tempe Depot.
Calling the DLR a tram feels really weird, i think most would call it something like "automated light metro" etc, due to the grade separation along most of its corridor, its high frequencies, and automation
The issue is that terms like 'tram' are incredibly undefined. There is no formal system to what we call these things, just colloquial concensus (that is typically extremely inconsistant).
I find the most consistant way to view it is that you have Light Rail and Heavy Rail, and everything else is just a more specific term for something under one of those two banners.
So the DLR is 100% a light rail, even if it isnt really comparable to a tram.
Even then there are issues though, as many metros around the world really straddle the line between light and heavy rail, and then there are 'hybrid' rail set ups where trains run heavy rail style routes and services through a suburban area, the follow a more light rail style route and service once they reach a more urbanised area.
Basically, the terminology is not really worth overthinking
When did he call it a tram?
Melbourne, we cant let Sydney beat us
I’m from Melbourne and don’t care. We both should have amazing transport systems!
@@joshanderson9391Well said.
Melbourne has nothing to fear, we have the best system in the world....
@@noelroberts8199 I agree that it would be pretty hard for Sydney to catch up to Melbourne, but that doesn't mean they can't improve.
I would start by getting rid of cars in tram lanes wherever possible. Most of the streets they run down are at least two lanes wide, so please just get rid of the parked cars and then trams can have a dedicated lane, except for a right turning lane at some intersections (in cases where the right turn can't just be banned altogether). More parking can be added to the side streets by making them one way, allowing for angled parking. After that, since this would reduce journey times significantly, I'd be extending the lines to middle ring & outer suburbs, ideally where trains can't be accessed easily as it is a lot more feasible to extend a tram line than to tunnel underground to create new train lines in fairly low-density areas.
they built over it all and can never get it back
The decision to do away with trams wasn’t short-sighted, and made perfect sense at the time. Back then, they were operating single-car trams, as per your picture. Capacity was probably equivalent to a bus, or maybe an articulated bus today. Both the tram and the bus required a single operator. So the difference was maintaining the old cars and right of way. You can’t compare it to the six-car tram trains they run today. Removing them for a bus would be ridiculous, of course.
But couldn't the same tracks have run larger trams more akin to the modern ones though?
@@Pasta_Pirate They could, but at the time the decision was made, those longer vehicles hadn't been invented. All I'm saying is you have to look at the decision in the context at the time it was made.
The decision was short-sighted and made no sense at all. First, back then Sydney ran many trams as coupled sets. Second, even a single non-articulated tram has more capacity than a bus. Third, the decision to get rid of trams was not because buses were better (they weren't), it was to make room for cars. The irony is that the road lobby blamed the trams for the congestion that cars were causing!
The more light rail across Australia the better!
Problem is, how do we pay for it?
Send the bill to all the oil and motor companies and other parties who lobbied for and profited from the removal of trams.
The L1 line is packed during morning peak hours
Would it be possible to extend the platforms on the L1 to the same length as on the L2/L3?
The L1 trains are way too short
Not to the same length, but longer is possible. Some of the newer L1 stations like Leichhardt North were built with longer platforms that can take 7 car trams (up from the current 5 car), and others have left space to do the same. This is still shorter than the L2/L3 trams but would be in line with the new Parramatta line under construction. Some of the older stations would require big modifications though, Glebe and Wentworth Park being examples. I believe they'd also need to upgrade the power supply as well.
It's a ride well worth taking if you have the time. Beyond Pyrmont, it's surprisingly pleasant and picturesque. Certainly a more pleasant way than an overcrowded conventional train or sardine tin bus.
I just watched a video about vocal fry and didn't realise how irritating it becomes once pointed out (though not as irritating as high inflection). At least you have Closed Caption.
I think it'd make sense to send light rail back across the harbour bridge and into neutral bay and Mosman. Get rid of the Cahill expressway.
There used to be an Aussie saying: "took off like a Bondi Tram"..
Then Sydney got rid of Trams for 60+ years.
Funny how they now are re-building some Tram Routes.!
Maybe they see the benifits after Melbournes success. 🇦🇺👀
The city of Penrith needs it badly! Traffic is becoming worse and will get worse once the Airport is up and running.
Cool
I remember riding on the trams in Sydney quite well. I was 9 years old when the last tram ran. Amazingly enough, if the state government election voting had been different back in the late 1950's, some of the tram system may have been saved. There were even discussions by the opposition about using trams at the St James station spare platforms, heading underground to Darlinghurst and then joining up in Anzac Parade, heading above ground from there. The Dulwich Hill line could be connected to the Botney line via Marrickville, if goods trains ever stop using that line. Unfortunately, when I was last up in Sydney in January 2000, I could only travel from Central to Wentworth Park as the other line extensions were done later.
Actually different election results would not have changed anything. Basically there was not enough money is State Govt coffers to maintain the tram system, so despite whatever any party asserted, the course established as NSW Govt public policy in the early 1930s was going to run to completion.
Dock double tram buses from the upper second deck like a ferry with two storey building like with Victorian two storey building’s from the steel awnings balconies with the bridge extending out from the buildings & tram. While cutting cost in architecture where developers refuse to spend any additional money in avoiding to build platforms or stations.As has been proven in Hong Kong & parts of Paris.
Can Sydney become a double decker tram city like Hong Kong? since it costs as much or with double decker trolley buses & able to docked like Ferries are with ramps onto multi storey building’s & steel awnings
Sydney had a great Tram system but with no sight for the future the trams where removed . Now you live in your cars
Back in 1950's and 1960's Sydney had one of the largest tram network in the British commonwealth
So, do cars still have to pull onto the left lane to turn right at the traffic lights when trams run?
The hook turn. Not in Sydney. That's a Melbourne thing.
@@daveg2104
That's what I mean.
However, with the new "tram" lines servicing the Eastern Suburbs like Randwick, I thought they might borrow some rules from Melbourne.
@@RUHappyATM Our trams are separated from traffic, but they do share intersections, mostly on the L2/L3. I don't think we have enough tram lines to warrant introducing the hook turn. Maybe one day.
theres pros and cons to everything. ive commuted from the inner west before and buses were generally the best option. you have time to research the best route and it is generally quicker. light rail on the other hand has a convenience factor. whilst both buses and light rail run a fixed route, there are so many buses with intersecting routes it is hard to just jump on one without prior knowledge of route numbers, but with limited light rail lines a simple map at the platform will have you on your way with no prior knowledge.
thats one thing about the l2/3 that i like. they may be a lot slower than the buses they aim to replace, but if im standing on george street and want to get to randwick i only need to learn the difference between l2 and l3, i dont have to figure out which of the 10-20 bus routes passing by will get me to randwick. even better, i can jump on any tram to get from one side of the city to the other, not running the risk ive just jumped on a bus to bondi when i was wanting haymarket.
Lewis ham and West Lewisham needs sorting out as the connections are hopeless to the main western line.
CAPACITY/SPEED is the only issue
I live in the Inner West Sydney as an alternative route to the city for business, socialising with my kids or with community groups such as scouts or with my wife and family it is very useful. Lilyfield is very useful however so are other stops.
The new line in the city is even more useful as now Sydney has a pedestrian mall from Central to Circular Quay.
The new Parramatta one is likely to be like Sydney.
Newcastle. I have worked one hundred plus days in Newcastle NSW and know it well. It is useless. A longitudinal Carpark.
Your opinion.
I'm old enough to remember the largest Trolleybus network I. The world, LONDON., by 1962 all gone and bu March 73 no trolleybuses in the UK and thr only trams were in Blackpool.
Well I moved to Sydney in 1972 and was fascinated by the old tram network which finished in 1961.
It begs the question, why was the UK and indeed Australia so keen to get rid of its trams and Trolleybuses, even Welllington has on.y recent.y scraped it's trolleybuses.
No doubt the cost of the wiring wtc and inflexibility.
So why in 2023 is trams suddenly the flavour of the century, has there been some magical reduction in costs and of coursexlets not forget how wonderful battery buses are.
We have all been told fossil fuel is bad and how this utopian green electricity save the world better than superman.
I know this for an absolute fact that Volvo electric buses lease the batteries, also once the battery deteriorates to 85% they pension the, off for other uses., also I think batteries are a bit of recycling nightmare.
Why we scraped Trolleybuses and trams can't work out except the oil companies had a lot to loose .
Sadly here in Sydney in reality since Bradield had visions of a great railway network most of it never happened.
It took another 50 years for the line the train to Bondi Junction to get built and a n other 40 years for the metro.
Inthe meantime our politicians are allowing unchecked development of housing, high density medium density and house blocks so small a clothes line is a luxury and the train network is around 100 years behind the growth.
Cars are joking Western Sydney to death .
As I said, the real question is why did they get rid of them to begin with.
Personally I like the new trams in Sydney.,let's hope the network grows again.
Hope not. They just clog up the city.
4:08
Is it a tram or bu cuz it looks like a mix
Adtranz Variotram. Built in Melbourne and based on a modified German ABB prototype low floor design (Chemnitz TW601).
New York is trying to do with the IBX but i worry thay it will be overburdened
By too much demand?
How slow are trams , lightrails 😢
The absolutely useless State Labor Treasurer Roozendaal rejected just about every Public Transport proposal that was attempted during his tenure, burning Public Money by the truck load with stalled and cancelled proposals, one after another.
The Dulwich Hill line was proposed much earlier by a company, from memory in the '80s, that proposed building and operating it for less than a $100m. Something that was delayed and sabotaged for decades until the cost blew out enormously and a lot of potential had passed to redevelop the inner west in time to meet pressing demand.
The real reason for the congestion, poor planning, poor transport for most of the late C20th and subsequent lack of suitable housing in Sydney lies at the hands of the like of Roozendaal and a string of equally bad government hacks.
When the Dulwich Line finally got built it was a poor fudge, with a particularly bad connection at the Dulwich Hill end to the main Train Line, and a badly located, creeping, slow loop through the City to Central Station which still is an appalling transport "solution". It is infrequent and hard to get onto because it is crammed to the gills by people just wanting to get from Central to Haymarket with no room for people doing the full journey west. Thereafter each station is located in the worst, most inaccessible locations that make the slow trip even slower. Few stops are near anywhere useful. Those generally have convoluted hidden entry/exit points, like the one at the Fish Markets, which was bad before but will be even worse once the market moves further west away from the stop. The design and finish of the stops is mostly repulsive.
An object lesson in how NOT to do public transport and why I highly recommend NOT to reuse freight lines which are deliberately located away from where people live or want to go.
Dear god PLEASE NO
Captain mustache
light rail
Brisbane will never be again a tram city
Sydney has the worst city planning I have seen anywhere.
Sydney had no real city planning to begin with. The street plan mainly grew organically, or wherever the goats happened to make a path. Add to that the complex waterways and the hilly terrain, and there you have it - Sydney, the accidental city. It must be said that some of the early governors tried their bring some order to the place, but the politics of the early settlement was quite terrible at times.
Lovely people but there is a general low intelligence level.@@daveg2104
Lightrail -tram to slow
The L2/3 were a disaster
Learn the Melbourne lesson - we were idiots. Trams are amazing in the CBD. They’re fucking stupid as a way to get from the suburbs in.
For them to work, they need to be isolated from cars. We call these trains. Otherwise you have something that has all the worst bits of trains and all the worst bits of busses.
It’s hot, in Australia? Really? Too bad tracks overheated because they’re in the road. There’s a broken down tram… or truck… or yet another car was hit by a tram; too bad all the other trams are suck behind it.
They just plain suck in the suburbs and there’s a reason only Melbourne really stuck with it whilst the rest of the world got rid of them and then just brought them back in the CBDs. Trains and cars sharing the road is stupid.
What’s actually neeeded is a bigger fleet of electric buses that can go around problems and be dynamically increase or decreased in frequency depending on demand.
The 21st century doesn’t need a 19th century solution, it needs a 21st century on.
Trains have weaknesses, buses have weeknesses - build something that combines the strengths of both, not something that combines the weaknesses of both. If you need a train line, build a train line, don’t half arse it.
Hilarious accent
Melbournian here to tell you that you do not want this!
The tracks are a serious hazard for motorcyclist and cyclists, especially when wet.
Furthermore they stop both lanes of traffic every time they stop and this leads people to become impatient and make risky overtaking manoeuvres.
Theres a good reason why most major cities have metros and subways.
I don't think any of the trams in Sydney are running mixed in with traffic like Melbourne. They are using a segregated right of way (intersections exist of course), or like in George St, regular traffic is prohibited or restricted. I guess it's just as well we are also building a few metros.
Love your stuff. Just wish you would stop putting on the silly posh voice.
The new Sydney tram system is a total waste of money. It would not suprise me if they were the most expensive tramways ever built in the world per kilometer. It would have been far better to extend the Sydney heavy rail system. The trams are already at full capacity and are slower than the buses they replaced. Generally you are better off building trolley bus systems (1/3 the cost) if you do not have the demand for underground heavy rail.
Trams appear to be an old fashioned technology. Perth spent 20 years analysing sustainability and future routes. Then actually designed routes and were almost ready to build. Then in last 8 years they've worked out that its old technology and not the best option for the city. So no trams for Perth. Even former advocates of trams such as Peter Newman are now behind alternatives such as trackless trams and other technologies. So not sure why Sydney would want to put trams and cause further traffic chaos.
Modern light rail and old style street trolleys are about as different as night and day.
As for failed schemes in Perth, these are more likely to do with the specfic context of those schemes rather then some universal trait of the transit modes considered. Transport projects are incredibly context sensitive, what is the right choice in one case can be utter nonsense in a different case, because what defines the right choice is the needs of the project and not the traits of the mode of transport being proposed.
But even if the premise that 'Perth said no so trams are bad' made any sense, then the fact that Adelaide, Canberra, the Gold Coast, Newcastle, Parramatta and Sydney all opted to go with LRT (not to mentioned the regular work to improve Melbourne's network and the countless other LRTs being built worldwide) is clearly a contradiction to the idea that all trams are outdated technology not worth considering because one city decided not to build them.
It's nothing to do with the technology. Perth has very narrow streets, with much of its development pressing right up to the street fronts. In the old Perth tram system, trams sharing with other traffic in these narrow streets was not a problem, but the modern trend all around the world has been to separate trams and general traffic into their own lanes, something which is simply not possible on a lot of Perth streets. The government there are instead pouring investment into extending the excellent, fast rail network. Perth's bus system is also an excellent one and is designed to feed the rail.
A 'tram/streetcar' is a a light rail vehicle. A 'tram' network is a light rail network, there is no difference. If Perth has an aversion to the term 'tram' call it light rail.
By the way, light rail is is not old technology.
It’s a bi-articulated banana bus, trackless tram indeed.
Brisbane is getting those idiotic things. This is the LNP’s brain fart so it’s destined to be a boondoggle.
@@coasterblocks3420 It makes it sense to call it Banana bus being Brisbane. But not for other states. Vic and WA both Labor states having a push. Liberals in WA actually wanted trams in the northern corridors and between the unis, but in the end the mining bust and GST debacle in WA, delayed the trams and then they got canceled. Then Labor came in and trams definitely off the agenda. In Vic Labor are pushing for rail and trackless trams too. So nothing to do with Liberals vs Labor.