Your Email Address
Choose a Screen Name
Choose a Password
Leave This Blank
Forgot your password?
Remember me on this computer
Sure, to Leichhardt. A bit slow and also expensive.
Recently, State Government has included this tram in the 'my multi' ticket. But that's not much of a concession, a mymulti weekly costs $41, compared to a mybus 10 ticket, good for a weeks commute into the city at $26.40. Sure a mymulti ticket can be used more frequently, but who does?
I do. All the time. I don't make two trips a day - who does? I need to make at least two trips to get to work. I need to make another two - at least - if I want to go out that night. If I want to cross the city at peak hour, it's well worth getting off at central and catching the train to Wynyard or Circular Quay - train tracks don't get congested like our roads do.
Try buying a MyMulti for a few weeks. You'll feel the increased freedom. Changes are no longer a hassle, you'll jump from bus to train to ferry to tram without a second thought.
The government discriminates most of the Eastern Suburbs residents. Most people need to use only bus. The last change in the ticket scheme cost us arm and leg. All “bus only” weekly tickets were cancelled and there was no option which would replace them. I can buy the very expensive all transport “MyThing“ or 10 trips on various sections which if I have to change busses became a very expensive exercise.
If "most people need to use only bus" then why does CityRail convey a million passengers a day? Why is Metro, despite all its failings, still profitable? Why does Sydney Ferries exist? I'll admit that the bus network is by its very nature the most extensive, but the rail and ferry services are indispensable.
There are not many train or ferry connections in Eastern Suburbs. The fact is: we had lost the bus only weekly tickets and there was no replacement for it. Therefore who doesn’t need to use train or ferry is much worse off after the previous costly and unnecessary government ticket change. They made it easier for long distance commuters at the expense of people like me! That’s what I don’t like!
Integrated ticketing is the way to go, many cities the world over have been using it for decades, why are we so slow on this one?
I've used the light rail from Central to Lilyfield on numerous occasions.
I've found that for most of the journey the trams are very lightly loaded, even recently since Myzone ticketing has been extended to the light rail.
One problem they have is that the line is nowhere near where they need it to be, which is a problem when you use an old goods line alignment. The population is not going to locate itself near a goods line as there is no benefit unless you like noise. They would have been better off running the light rail where the buses go. This would have cost a lot more and would not have been so easy to do, but it would have been more useful.
Soulbirds, as you mentioned the Lightrail is using an old ie no longer used heavy goods line, so your point about people not locating near a goods line is defunct. It is no longer used therefore it doesn't make lots of noise. So I disagree about your point that people wont locate to good transport connections. The issue here is the cost of the service.
What I was saying was that as the goods line was where it was in the inner west, the suburbs and shops grew up in locations away from it (already). Take a look at Leichhardt. The new tram stop is going to be a 15 to 20 minute walk from the Forum and the other popular areas on and around Norton Street. It the goods line had been built as a passenger line from the start, either Leichhardt or another suburb would have been centred around that line. Now that trams are going in, they can build high-rise near the line, but they aren't going to move the existing Leichhardt shops.
Light Rail to Leichardt but it's pretty slow. Trams in Melbourne are very good. Trams in San Francisco are excellent
Yes, I've used light rail 50 years ago in Perth, WA, similar I understand to the tramways that used to service Randwick along Anzac Parade. Also in Melbourne recently where the trams cope quite well with high usage.
My husband used the tram to get to school - he got on near Maroubra Beach, went to the Junction and along Anzac Parade to Sydney High at Moore Park, without changing trams. He always talks about it and hated it when they got rid of the trams. However, very few people had cars in those days, and the traffic congestion and the population density was low. If we use the old tram area in the middle of Anzac Parade to build a light rail, that is good, as it will not add to the congestion on the roads, but the proposed light rail MUST be built all the way to La Perouse, and to the beaches as well, as it was before.
I used the tram line prior to it being included in the My Multi transport scheme, it was an enjoyable experience.
I then used it when it was included in My Multi, 6 minutes to board from Central! It was chaos, too many people trying to move in and out!
"Chaos"?, that's interesting because I've never had any problems boarding or disembarking from the trams here. I purposely avoid the buses & take the tram instead, much better for those with children or for people with disabilites. Given the choice between waiting at the truly chaotic bus stop at Railway Square, or getting the tram nearby, it's a no-brainer.
Try last Saturday afternoon, when we were sardines from the Casino till Market Square. The two conductors had no chance checking tickets. I suppose they can move a lot of people when everyone is crammed together, but how safe is that?
Sorry to hear about the cramming, but that doesn't sound too dissimilar to my experiences daily on overloaded heavy rail trains or buses, or dare I say, a few experiences I've had riding a number of metro systems overseas, but I think that it would be unfair to infer that this is somehow representative of every trip made on these modes of transport, wouldn't it?
I think the ticketing problems can be ironed out when tram tickets are integrated into the overall transport ticketing system.
Poor old light rail, if the system is used, critics complain, if the trams are empty critics complain. Trams can move more people, more comfortably than buses, vehicle for vehicle, not a bad thing & not the same crush that you find in buses, at least you can breathe.
On the buses I travel on, the driver will usually stop letting passengers on when there is no space left. Even when it is full, if you squeeze past the crowd, you can usually find space towards the rear. The tram I was on the other day was crammed from front to back as passengers boarded from every door. There was nobody able to stop them getting on.
At least with the buses when the service gets too full, they can add a second bus. The 333 sometimes runs as two buses. We only have 7 trams (6 operating). There aren't more…
I certainly don't want to launch a diatribe against bus drivers [they put up with enough already] or buses in general, but it is difficult to agree that somehow being in a crowded bus is preferable to being in a crowded modern light rail vehicle. I understand that any form of public transport has limits with respect to passenger loadings (trams included), but truthfully a number of bus journeys I've taken in peak hour, several buses appear to be exceeding passenger limits, with passengers standing in restricted areas, people arguing with bus drivers to cram on, sometimes ignoring the driver's more…
Soulbirds wrote: "Look at how many buses pick up students from the uni and take them to the railway. I'd love to see the one tram every few minutes handle that." -- You do know that a tram can fit much more people than a bus, don't you? I do not see why the shortage of trams could be an argument against extending the route/rails. Extending the fleet certainly makes much more sense after the extension of the network.
In Japan, they employ people with gloves on to push more people into the commuter trains. As an added bonus, if you are a female, you can enjoy being groped by one of these people (you can't tell which one of the ten people in close bodily contact with you has groped you, as they all stare glassily into space).
Interesting that you say the tram (light rail) is better for those with children or disabilities - so is it easy to get on the light rail if you have a wheelchair?
Hmmm never noticed any chaotic times getting on the Sydney tram.
The Manila ones I have, but then look at the population difference.
Hate to point it out, but the population of Sydney is growing, and all the forced urban consolidation in large centres such as Kensington, Maroubra Junction and others is making the density greater, while we all struggle to get on the same amount of buses.
Not sure I understand the point you are making.
Of course the population is rising, it always is rising. Not sure how I gave the impression otherwise in my comment above, which is supposed to be pro-light rail due to this population growth.
It was in response to some strange idea that getting on to a light rail vehicle would be chaotic.
So much smoother than a oil burner (diesel bus)
Yes, agree. My husband refers to the bus as the "Blue Chauffeur driven Mercedes", but he does have a keen ironical sense of Aussie humour.
Some years ago, the bus fleet needed replacing, and an order was placed for 500 natural gas buses, the cleaner burning fuel. They had been trialling them and were impressed. The order was cancelled at the very last minute as the diesel buses were marginally cheaper.
My neighbour is a bus driver: what a horrible job it seems to be: split shifts, breathing in fumes all day, physical exertion and concentration for hour upon hour every day; getting very tired and catching all the colds from the passengers; copping abuse from teenage girls with no respect for anyone; you name it.
Before he became a bus driver he was a nice person who liked people; now he's a grumpy old man who hates everyone.
Modern day humanity does that to the best of us who serve the public :-(
I don't envy your nieghbour for being a bus driver now, but thank him for putting up with todays human vermin for the better good of the rest of the community.
I have been on the Light Rail in Sydney, as well as on trams in Melbourne and in Greece. The vehicles are much larger than buses and have a much smoother ride. Unfortunately the current Sydney Light Rail line services an area that isn't densely populated. However if Light Rail is used as a replacement to buses in heavily congested areas I believe it would be successful. When the trams run in their own right of way, they don't have to compete with cars, and therefore provide a faster journey.
The current "slow" problem with the Lilyfield line is that it just stops at every tram stop, what would make it move quicker is IF the tram only STOPPED when needed, not because of protocol. But that mite be fixed when it starts running on the roads
You mean it stops even if no-one gets on or off - how annoying!!!
I used to live near the Rozelle Bay stop in Annandale. It was a FANTASTIC way to commute to the city. No traffic. Clean tram. And very efficient. Tram use is great, and it should be rapidly expanded in areas that heavy rail cannot go.
Yes, Melbourne, Adelaide, Sydney and Manila.
Would use any one of these systems over buses any day. A far more pleasant way to travel, with loadings that make them far more useful than their bus equivilents.
Been a while since I was on the Sydney one. Loading was light, as mentioned elsewhere, but the Dulwich Hill extension, along with the fact people 'do' seem to be moving to these former industrial areas, will meen that it will pick up greatly in the future.
Yes. Sydney, Melbourne, and Adelaide. I am fully supportive of Light Rail (read trams/Tramways), however I still see Sydney's Light Rail as some kind if gimmick. The fact that it dawdles along Hay St and for the most part Darling Harbour as well. It defintaly needs to be sped up, and as Alcogoodwin said, not stop at all stops regardless.
A tramway to Randwick and the other Eastern Suburbs should not be seen as some kind of guinea pig, but as a serious step towards bringing trams back to Sydney streets. Whilst there will be disruption during construction works, like more…
DC4916, interestingly I was talking to a friend last night about the project and the possibility of a weekend tourist service with heritage cars. Be a nice family day out.
The ones rotting away at Rozelle come immediately to mind.
I would really like to know where, on these nominated roads, the tracks will be placed for light rail. I commuted to school and work using toast rack trams and later corridor trams. I remember, that when the tram stopped, eg in the middle of Oxford Street, passengers would alight into a safety zone in the middle of the road. Traffic was supposed to stop to allow passengers to safely walk to the kerb. It didn't however always work that way and passengers were stranded in the middle of traffic. Could you imagine that in todays traffic? The Coogee tram had a very scenic track, through Moore Park and then the Centennial parklands. After King street it cut through a track which no longer exists as it has gone to units. I loved the trams but I just wonder how they will fit into today's impatient, chaotic traffic!
JanCee, they would be situated in the middle as before. I tend to think an ideal solution would be to situate stops with the island platforms just prior to a traffic light, so the regular crossing could be utilized for passengers.
Alternatively, cars having to stop for light rail passengers, to me, seems like a great traffic calming move. Also a great revenue raising one for the government when cars fail to stop and get booked :-)
Seriously though, they seem to make it work in Melbourne and elsewhere. I have no doubt we can make it work here, and make it a huge assett for the city.
I have a feeling the section that you mention going to units was one that we fought against years ago, knowing that one day it may be used by light rail. There was talk of designing it for them to still pass underneath, but I havent been to look and resume this part of the design did not happen.
They will have to resume some land, knock down some of the units if built on tram areas.
Can't be a huge amount of it on the proposed one to Randwick. In which locations?
IIRC when we originally were pushing for a light rail system out here there was a developer planning to put a block of units on the right of way for the line to Coogee Beach. There were suggestions that they should design it with light rail in mind, but not sure what the ultimate outcome was (likely not good).
But from the city down Anzac Parade to the uni, racecourse, Entertainment Quarter, Kingsford and on to Maroubra and even La Perouse (or dare I dream Maroubra Beach), I can't think of any resumption of land or structure demolition thats required.
I am sure there is one block, will have to research it more.
But there are all the carparks which have to be ripped up, the roads that will have to be taken over again: eg Mons Avenue at Maroubra: one half was tram lines, the other half was road, it is all road now....
Not insurmountable, of course.
The unit block I remember being discussed all them years ago was near Randwick shops I think.
It was thought that, while it could be possible to kink the line around it, it would be a bit inconvenient compared to the straight through path.
Funnily enough, despite being local, I have never stopped to consider how the tram got down to Maroubra Beach until now you mention Mons Ave :-) Looking at it on Google, it does make sense.
Sounds a bit like Perry Street in Matraville that was once half and half. Not tat I would ever expect to see tramway there again.
I must go take a better look on the way down to the Seals.
One of the biggest complaints will be all those carparks down the middle of Anzac Parade, especially the ones at the Junction that I admit to using a lot. Still, I will happily perserve with that inconvenience in the name of light rail to the area - as long as they don't need to remove Noodle Junction :-)
I’ve travelled on the Sydney light rail, and am unimpressed with its slow speed and seating capacity. It's nearly as quick to walk from Central to the entertainment centre. I’ve also travelled on Melbourne trams, and also got caught behind one in a car. The maximum speed the Melbourne tram was doing was 30km/h. In the Melbourne CBD, the trams are no quicker than walking, and they were overcrowded. I have also travelled by tram in Adelaide, again another slow public transport experience, walking pace in the CBD, slower than private transport, and again standing room only for a good more…
Sounds awful. Forget it if you are in a hurry.
Also sounds like an attempt at using the worst examples in an effort to promote the prefered heavy rail idea.
Having spent huge amounts of time on the Melbourne network I have experienced far better speeds than 30km/h.
Of course, in the CBD things may move much slower, but can't say I have been in a bus along Castlereagh at any more between all those stops and traffic.
Oh, I just remembered.
I once rode the railway from Waratah to Sandgate Cemetery. On the line into the cemetery we were doing around 10-15km/h. I could have crawled to te station faster.
The same statement I can use for my Adelaide experiences.
However, I agree with Sydney. It seemed set up more as an amusement thing that has become a commuter service, but has never managed to act as one. It could easily be sped up and, as said above, why stop needlessly at all stops?
I am a UNSW student and I live very close to the Lilyfield lightrail stop. However, I prefer to take the bus simply because of the cost, as there is no student concession ticket on the lightrail. A lightrail to Randwick would be a great option for UNSW students but unless the costs can rival those of bus and train tickets then it will largely go unused by that market.
If you get a MyMulti 1 Weekly concession ticket, you should be able to use this on the light rail now.
We need student concessions; we need integrated ticketing; we need to stop the nonsense about paying more to use certain stations such as the Airport stations and Mascot (and Green Square???). You can't run public transport in this way and expect people to use it and be happy.
It's a half-arsed approach: they present us with a sort of hotch-potch of public transport cobbled together, but don't make it easy to use. Result: half of use go back to the car, the other half are unhappy but forced to use it and muddle through.
More thought please from transport planners and decision makers.
Hasn't this changed since the government buy out?
Or at least, isn't it planned?
Yes, you are right, I googled Green Sqare in Wikipedia (assuming that is correct):
"Like other stations on this line, Green Square was built and is operated by a private company as part of a Public Private Partnership. Before March 2011, station users were required to pay a small access fee ("Gatepass") to use the station. The NSW Government reached an agreement with the station operator to pay the access fees at Green Square and Mascot on behalf of passengers. Patronage increased by around 70% at the two stations in the months following the removal of the fee."
How amazing is more…
Yes, I think the airport is closer to the $11.
Since the change to the fares many can be seen getting off at Mascot and doing the 10 minute walk to domestic.
2UE ran a thing to find the cheapest option for going to the airport. The Mascot station plus walk was it.
I used to work for a shuttle bus company that did airport to door of city hotel and return for $10.
I live in Rozelle, not far from the Lilyfield tram stop. Our family uses this light rail on a regular basis and we all find it an efficient way of getting to Haymarket and Central. Looking forward to the extension to Dulwich Hill, as well as light rail to the UNSW.
I have when I used to live in Glebe. I would catch the light rail from Glebe to work in Pyrmont.
I found it a little expensive compared to bus and train, but it's far cleaner, more comfortable and more reliable. You know one will arrive every 10-15 min or so. I'd rather rely on a regular 15 min service than rush to a bus stop for the 7:44am, only to have it either be full, arrive 10 minutes late with 5 other buses or not turn up at all (I assume in those circumstances it was early).
I live in Annandale not far from the light rail but have hardly ever used it. The 470 bus is far more convenient as it takes you into the CBD, albeit that its not as clean or as comfortable as the light rail. I see the light rail more as a tourist attraction.
No light rail does not go to any of the places that I want to go to. Unless this project goes ahead, then I might consider going on one.
Having lived and worked in Melbourne, and traveled to Uni of Melbourne frequently, the light rail was wonderful, easy and convenient. It also enable commuting around the city during breaks and was a much safer alternative than buses and cars.
Although a Sydney person, I found Sydney very difficult to navigate once I had spent time living in Melbourne and would very much like to see this kind of travel option for UNSW and it's environs.
I've used the Sydney light rail from Central to the Fishmarket occasionally. it's relatively expensive.
I've also used the trams in Melbourne, and the electric buses in wellington. The trams that go through the city in Melbourne are pretty slow; the suburban ones are much better. One thing that Melbourne and Brisbane have that'd need to be implemented here is a better more unified public transport ticketing system --- it should be possible to hop on and off trams buses trains etc., and pay a single fare from end to end, rather than a separate fare for each leg of a multi-mode journey.
I was around when the trams ran from the city and all around the beaches etc. It was a great way to travel ad very efficient.
Because there are shocking bus routes, mostly no routes, throughout or linking the Eastern Suburbs suburbs it has been necessary for 2 working people in the one family to both have cars, if you live in Rose Bay and have a student in the family then that student will also need a car because there is no easy public transport system from Rose Bay to Randwick or most other areas of Sydney except for those en route to Circular Quay/the city.
This I am sure is great for the local councils because they can raise a tremendous amount of revenue in parking fees, parking stickers and parking fines.
The idea of light rails is very nice, but they should travel faster and have less stops than the lillyfield one.
I think that a light rail to UNSW is necessary, but with just few stops. Every morning I see many people taking the express bus to UNSW, and they are very fast, in just 10-15 minutes you travel from central to UNSW. If they build a tram, it should be the same fast. Trams would be cheaper, cause one tram can carry much more people!
I have used light rail/trams in a number of European cities and have always found them convenient, quiet and well integrated into the pedestrian and vehicle traffic flows. The integration with cars and buses was what impressed me most. This meant that multiple forms of transport could use the same routes, with trams and buses being given priority.
The ease of hoping on and off a tram is much better than the process of using an underground rail system, it is also more scenically pleasing. Of course the ability to transfer between different forms of transport is an esential element for making light rail work well.
Loved the right rail in Netherlands.
Certainly! I loved the extensive light-rail network of Dresden, Germany. There is no better transport system than on rails! "As if you were flying" -- that is, how some Berliners were quoted after first using the (horse) tram. Well, they did not yet know how loud a modern airplane is... ;-) In any case, I prefer it much over the often very rough-driven busses. My experience of light and mono rail in Sydney, however, is, well, somewhat limited -- mainly because they are rather short and only run in a circle.
I expect that they PLANNED the light rail in Dresden after it was flattened in WWII. The problem with Sydney is that they always try to put the transport systems in AFTER everything else. Retrofitting for light rail/trams is not easy: you have to take space which is already being used for roads or other things. One good thing is that most of the former tramway land from the city all the way to La Perouse is still available.
Dresden has trams since 1872. Surely, I cannot tell whether the public transport back then was any good. And though Dresden got largely distroyed in the war, many sights are meanwhile rebuilt the way they were before the war. My suspicion is that the overall town planning (where are streets, where are buildings) did not dramatically change. Nevertheless, I have to admit that it is easier to adjust the previous town plan after such a tragedy.
Regarding space: In Paris, where the city centre is quite packed, the city council just decided a few years ago that the inner city needs more…
Completely agree with comments re Paris and Sydney.
You should put all your thoughts in a letter to the Planning Department - they won't know about good ideas unless we tell them. This forum is NOT enough; it's just a place to blow off steam while nothing happens - proof is that your post was in August 2011, and here we all are still posting here about it.
It needs a letter-writing campaign.
I will do my bit, you should do yours.
The light rail/trams in Budapest (Hungary) is the best public transport I have ever used. However it is also very cheap which is an important factor if you want people to use it.
It should be the same price or cheaper than the bus.
The existing light rail is slow and expensive. It is a good way of getting from Central to the fishmarkets or casino, but unnecessary for Randwick which is well serviced by buses.
It is pretty obvious that people LOVE using light rail when it is CHEAP and QUICK! If we get these two variables correct, then light rail in the eastern suburbs will work!
I've used light rail in Melbourne and throughout Europe. It is fantastic and can turn the 'dead zone' areas of a city into vibrant areas, that people want to visit. Bring back the trams to Sydney!
Light rail in Europe is fantastic. It would work here - a smoother ride than a bus and not stuck in traffic. Another advantage is that it would take some of the buses off the roads, and there is no doubt that the buses contribute to the bad state of the roads. With the increasing urbanisation and revitalisation further south - Kensington, Alexandria, Rosebery etc, we will need additional infrastructure anyway. I do agree also with another comment that it would be great to extend from Randwick to the beaches, but I guess one step at a time!
I have used light rail and many other forms of public transport around Australia and around the world.
The key issues are
Speed of journey. The Central - Lilyfield light rail has an average speed of around 17 km / hour. Not only is this route very slow it also is not direct. To travel from Central Station to Glebe in a direct route along roadways is 2.8km. The light rail route is 4.4km approx. Any transport system implemented should have average speeds of greater than 30km and hopefully higher and have direct routes. The average espeed of the Liverpool Parramatta Tway more…
I've used trams all over the world as well as the light rail in Sydney. Trams are far better than buses, but not as good as heavy rail, especially for longer distances. Trams can run into problems with heavy traffic where cars don't leave access clear. Trains don't have that problem.
I lived in Europe for a while in a city that had trams, a metro, buses and heavy rail. It was so easy to get anywhere. Trams were brilliant for moving large groups of people efficiently. Hopefully one day Sydney's light rail network gets extendended extensivly and maybe one day we'll even have a metro system.
I use the Lilyfield line about three times a year (as my car service centre is right opposite the Lilyfield terminus, and they throw in a free tram ticket as part of the car servicing deal!!).
I really like it a lot.......it is clean (spotless actually), the staff are VERY friendly and the overall ambience is terrific. I do not feel like a second class citizen by travelling on this system. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the mob running it are well removed from the whole STA/RailCorp system, and so have a different mindset (from the management downwards).
Hopefully some fare reform will come with light rail extension and a new integrated ticketing system.
In Melbourne I always use their trams/light rail. It makes the city VERY easy to get around, with trips to places like St Kilda or Chapel Street being a breeze.
I really pity tourists trying to get to so many of Sydney's popular destinations (of which the Eastern Suburbs has more than its fair share) having to rely on a convoluted and SLOW bus system (complete with an odd fare system and lack of integrated ticketing).
I am a resident of Maroubra. I've used Light rail in numerous locations around the world (France, Belgium, Spain, US) and here in Australia (Melbourne). I have also been involved in Light rail projects in my career.
The (re) development of the Light rail network in Sydney needs to fit within a greater Public Transport network vision for Sydney. A Light rail network merely 'complements' a Transport network by providing services to support patronage demand to relieve congestion of a bus network for instance.
The key to a light rail to Randwick will be to integrate a Light rail network with a bus network (i.e perhaps covering stops that are not covered by light rail vehicles or providing more express services) without negatively impacting on existing road users capacity. To obtain a 'balanced' outcome also local communities, councils and city of Sydney all need to be involved in the greater Transport plan developped by Transport NSW.
Please bring in international-proven transport planning firms - whose experience would be vital to Sydney - as this type of planning exercise has been undertaken successfully in so many cities throughout the world (please don't limit yourself to Australian transport planning agencies).
i spent my first 21 years in greater london, and used the underground railway system extesively.
i have also travelled on the light rail systems in melbourne,santiago chile, paris, madrid, barcelona, rome and amsterdam
the main reason for their general efficiency is that the are mostly underground
to construct a surface light rail system in the sydney inner city and eastern suburbs may not be effective as it would only add to the already existing congestion
however i support the construction of an underground system 100%. the best examples of those mentioned above are the modern ones in santiago and barcelona
also the completion of the abandoned section of the eastern suburbs railway from bondi junction to kingsford with an extension to the airport via mascot would take considerable traffic off the roads
Yes I used light rail from Central. It was pathetic! Slow, expensive, going from nowhere to nowhere and nearly nobody was using it… That’s maybe good for tourists, not for everyday commuting!
Compare to this touristy light rail, I used trams in many places (Melbourne, Hiroshima, Prague, Boston…) they are fast, efficient, inexpensive.
The only way it would work in Sydney is to build separate track for the tram, there need to be barriers so cars are not driving on tracks. Any other way the tram gets caught in traffic and most people choose to sit in their own car stuck in more…
Yes. Not much in Sydney because it has a limited range and therefore limited utility and appeal. But I have been to plenty of cities in Europe that do have extensive light rail networks. Zurich, Vienna, Berlin, actually most cities in northern Europe I've been to have good systems. They all interlink with other transport options particularly a good underground train network so you can travel longer distances by heavy rail and shorter distances by light rail, which is usually concentrated in the dense urban core. Reclaiming the streets from cars. And replacing them with reliable, safe, environmentally clean and cheap transport is a dream come true. ..And Melbourne
We recently used the light rail between Darling Harbour and Central Station, and I was impressed. The best thing about it was there is a conductor! Not only is an extra job being provided for someone, but the presence of a conductor is clearly a very effective deterrent for graffiti and vandalism. The light rail train is the cleanest and best condition public transport that I've seen.
State Rail claims that vandalism costs millions of dollars each year. Now surely if they employed conductors, that would be a much, much cheaper way of keeping the trains looking nice so that people enjoy using them??
State Rail or State Transit?
I would have to imagine a large amount of the State Rail vandalism is undertaken when standing around in yards overnight.
Of course there is the stuff done during the day, but are we suggesting a conductor in each of the 8 carriages to watch it? Gawd, they are already whinging about staff levels at Railcorp.
Besides watching for the vandalism, what else are these thousands of extra staff going to do? Tickets are already sold at stations and newsagencies, revenue protection officers check for ticket purchases, the guard and driver have the operational side of things handled.
However, if you mean State Transit buses, then I fully agree with you. May make the rapidly growing violent behaviour towards bus drivers a lot less in occurance also.
That is a good point that many of the millions of dollars would account for external vandalism of carriages done overnight in train yards. The train carriages and buses are in a terrible state internally though, and perhaps that could be managed with staff on board the trains and buses. They could go back to the system of simply purchasing a ticket once on board the vehicle.
I also agree with your concern about excessive staff levels at Railcorp. The thing is, that it's most likely top heavy with bureaucracy as with most government departments such as the health system who's wages bill for doctors and nurses is less than the management. It's a middle class welfare system. The state government recently sacked 750 Railcorp middle managers! That makes me wonder how many managers were there in total. Probably one for every axle on the railway! They perhaps could do with pulling people out from sleeping at their desk and employ them at the coal face to maintain tax payers assets and provide a quality service.
I'm old enough to have travelled on the original trams in Sydney. I've also travelled on trams all over the world - where there are trams, I use them. They are a great way of moving large numbers of people safely and efficiently. The State Government should never have got rid of them in the first place.
I find the Melbourne tram system both good and bad. The main positive for me is the reduction in pollution and noise on the city streets. Also, it is speedy on long stretches of road with no traffic lights and no stops. However, in the cbd and areas near the cbd it can be excruciatingly slow. E.g. there is a green light at a traffic light but the tram has to stop to let people on or off, then just as it's finished picking people up the lights change and the tram slowly pulls up to the red light to wait the full traffic light cycle - and that happens at EVERY traffic light. Or it doesn't need to stop but cannot go because the tram in front has stopped. This sort of stuff really gets to people who commute every day.
I have memories of trams in Sydney as well as travelling on trams in Melbourne, France, Germany and the States. They are quicker, cleaner and more reliable than busses and are essential if Sydney is not to come to a complete halt due to traffic congestion. The best trams are those that run on a dedicated lane separated from cars so they do not get caught in traffic and do not hold cars up as in parts of Melbourne. This means dedicated lanes beside or down the centre of roads (but separated from cars by low barriers). Where trams do more…
I've used light rail in Lilyfield, Dublin and Berlin and its a fine mode of transport. Its clean and quiet to travel on and one of my favourite things is it is quiet and clean from the perspective of pedestrians, local residents and other city street users which makes city spaces better for all. I love Sydney but traffic noise pollution in the city is terrible when compared to other cities. I've experienced St Stephen's Green in Dublin both before and after the introduction of light rail and the improvement in amenity in terms of noise pollution is phenomenal. Any improvement in Sydney is welcome.
From a speed point of view its at its best on sections separated from the street or street traffic.
Yes to Leichhardt. Slow and expensive.