It was a lot simpler before the Citadis trams borrowed from the L2 and L3 were brought in after the CAFs started falling apart. In a typical display of incompetence, TfNSW failed to specify the wheel shape be the same as the L1 trams, so Alstom apparently supplied their normal shape. Consequently especially pointwork was not really suitable for the Citadis trams. Points were modified to an adequate degree, but whether imposed speed limits are still required or not, I don’t know. So it’s about time the L1 track and trams were altered to the George St standards. As the L1 has a lot less trams, it would be the easier of the 2 to change.
@@tressteleg1L1 was constructed on such a cheap budget. You can see that as platforms aren’t level boarding as compared to L2 and L3 and future parramatta light rail. I think it would have been very difficult prior because the first gen trams (from Germany) were still operating. Personally I think the cracking was due to the generous speed limits on the line as well as the track profile being use for freight instead of light rail. Compare that to parramatta light rail, the whole carlingford line had new tracks installed but they just used the same freight tracks on the L1.
Yes the line was built on the cheap as I suspect the government was sceptical that it would be popular. While the first generation trams were a German design, they were built in Dandenong Victoria. As for the CAF trams cracking up due to “rough track”, I have never before in my life heard of any trams anywhere falling to pieces for any reason. They were simply designed and built on the cheap. Hopefully the CAF 100 are a lot more robust.
With a smooth driver, and on this line most of them are, you would barely notice the speed changes unless looking for the speed boards as you go along.
Apparently the CAF Urbos have a hybrid tram-train wheel profile like the Variotrams did. They can run over normal tramway points just fine but the railway step back becomes useless. It should not be a problem for them to run over properly converted point work to accomodate the Citadis tramway wheels, if it hasn't been done already.
Yes they do. The design was so that both trams and trains could go through the same pointwork, (something that never was done) and the check rails at points were set for railway standards, and raised higher than normal so they matched the fatter tram wheel width a bit above rail head level. To allow Citadis trams to run through pointwork, the check rails were lowered and moved closer the running rail, to the normal tramway flangeway width. However there is still some basic difference between L1 and L2/3 wheels which has resulted in many TSRs. It’s about time the L1 wheel and rail standards were made identical to George St standards.
i would be interested to know since this line has both citadis and the urbos which do drivers prefer - they would have been trained on both. i think it is a good skill set to have if they want to further their career somewhere else.
Several have told me that the Citadis gives them a smoother ride. This was before the Urbos 100 arrived. However in Adelaide the Bombardier are preferred over the Citadis there as the Citadis wiggle as they go along at speed.
@@tressteleg1 any idea on the ergonomics of the master controller - joystick on the citadis or t bar on the urbos? is one dominant over the other in the industry do you know?
@Roadrunnerz45 I’m reasonably certain that on the Citadis, the driver has to constantly press a little button on the right hand end of the joystick. Having to do that with the thumb would drive you crazy, and likely end up with RSI problems. Unfortunately I have no way of knowing what the Urbos does, but suspect it is something less onerous and harmful. Once you have the feel of one type of tram, it does not take real long to get used to different controls from a different manufacturer.
@@tressteleg1 yes i have a feeling as well. seems to be very sensitive as well which is another factor. that may have been designed on purpose because of the large pedestrian zone? i don't know but definitely not the best for drivers along with the stresses of the job. they have my support everytime i hop on board.
@@Roadrunnerz45 Presumably you are referring to the vigilance button, unless a purchaser requested it not be fitted, I expect it would be standard on all models. But it is most unlikely a driver could fall asleep and the tram keep going, as happened with me one night on a B on the 96 to East Brunswick.
Well not too long ago Hay Street was a bit of a backyard with the Sydney market being the brick building on the right. It’s still a marketplace. Not visible on the left two streets before George Street is Sydney’s Chinatown, a comparatively wide pedestrian only treelined Street. It never was the fastest of lines with all the twists and turns, and many speeds have been lowered due to the Citadis trams from George Street having a less than ideal wheel shape for this track.
Probably just using the cheapest signs available. And of course some operators of modern tramways fool themselves into thinking they are running something superior to trams. ‘Light Rail’ is just a Sales pitch so that when re-introducing trams into a city which had them before, old people won’t think they are getting back the noisy old trams they remember from the past.
@@daveg2104 In this situation, yes. Unfortunately the planners and others have deluded themselves into believing that they have something superior to trams and thus have nothing to learn from Melbourne. While not everything is perfect there, they get a lot of things right such as simple track which does the job well at a fraction of the costs paid for the George St lines.
@@tressteleg1 If you can't gold plate it, it probably isn't worth doing. Sure, it may be fools gold on an ugly duckling, but it looks nice, and there's taxpayers money to spend, and profits to be made. I don't think there is anyone in my family that can remember the old trams, or they were young if they can. And I don't think I have heard anyone say Sydney is superior to Melbourne when it comes to trams/light rail - apart from trolls (or maybe the people involved justifying the cost). There are people that just hate public transport though, as a matter of principle.
@@daveg2104 Unfortunately the time can come when the cost of a project is ridiculously expensive and even somebody in favour of it is liable to say no thanks. Recently it was announced that the 13 km extension of the Gold Coast line to the airport could cost as much as $7 billion which is absolutely unacceptable. Similar length stage 1+ depot and two bridges across a river cost under 1 billion. Gold plating must be eliminated. Or the project will be eliminated. Anyone in Sydney born before 1950 is likely to remember the trams, some of which were particularly old, primitive, noisy and uncomfortable. As you say, many people are opposed to public transport but it has been shown that a good Tramway can attract motorists out of their cars while buses do the opposite. This happens worldwide.
Well the line was built very many years ago for slow moving freight trains and long before bulldozers and other earthmoving equipment was invented so it tends to follow the lay of the land. It was enough of a struggle to get the government to convert to light rail, let alone straighten the twists and turns.
Just incredibly stupid constructing the terminus as a single stub track for the sake of not having to move some electrical equipment or take 2-3m of poorly-used space from the park there.
For 10 years, the Gold Coast line has operated perfectly well with a similar terminus at Broadbeach South. It is particularly rare to see two trams at the terminus together, one at the platform the other waiting to get in. The L1 by comparison has a negligible amount of street running so timekeeping should be much easier. There must be some reason why trams bunch up. Certainly poor timetabling is keeping the incoming tram waiting for the outgoing to depart.
@@tressteleg1 Sure but the Gold Coast line: -trams can hold 100 more passengers than L1 trams (45m vs 33m) -trams have 6 double doors (rather than 2 double doors and 2 single doors on L1) -runs a lower peak frequency (every 7.5 minutes where L1 runs every 6 minutes for four hours during both morning and evening peaks so a more intense service) -has a ridership demand profile is less peaky than Sydney L1 You are right the timekeeping should be easier than Gold Coast, but the key point is actually that the L1 needs a higher frequency going forward especially as extending trams will be too expensive (all those underground platforms can't be extended without huge cost and disruption). It is possible to fit a turnback track at Lilyfield which would appear to be about right in terms of demand right now as the inner section gets 2-3x as much patronage as the outer section; but this might change when the Bankstown Metro conversion and then Metro West line opens and the interchange becomes more attractive. The other option is to split the lines at Rozelle, and build a new section of track to the new Metro West station at The Bays so they are two lines that both terminate at White Bay (The Bays Metro).
Apparently some account decided it would be better value for money to replace the Variotram with new trams. As it turns out, CAF was the worst possible choice.
Bombardier weren’t playing nice with giving CAF variotram replacement parts (higher cost per component). CAF capitalised on the opportunity saying it would be cheaper to replace those german trams with shiny new Spanish ones. They essentially gave them away at $4mil per unit (new U100’s were north of $6mil). The cost of breaking into a new market. I bet some TfNSW execs regret going down the “cheap” path.
@@joshporter5422 I don’t know how CAF had anything to do with Sydney light rail before their first tram arrived, and by then the decision to replace had already been made. CAF are no angels in the spare parts department. One of the four Newcastle trams has been laid up for many months I gather something to do with CAF not letting the people with the maintenance contract have the necessary parts. It seems they are all like this.
With Bombardier it was a matter of price and CAF then not willing to pay full price. With CAF now it’s a general refusal to supply their components to a third party maintainer or a rival manufacturer. Apparently for L1’s fleet according to discussions on various forums, transdev is having to source CAF spares from its various European operations to replace components that have prematurely failed on the Urbos 3 fleet. Not a good look for either party. Thankfully they can continue to roster Citadis’ until the matter resolves.
No wonder CAF was the biggest poor choice to Pick that's why I would rather go with bombardier Like here in Melbourne We had the best modern E1/E2 Class tram, Yarra tram network it was very modern and very unique for route 96 and 86
There's a dazzling array of speed limits. I don't know if it's normal tram practice, but it must keep drivers on their toes.
It was a lot simpler before the Citadis trams borrowed from the L2 and L3 were brought in after the CAFs started falling apart. In a typical display of incompetence, TfNSW failed to specify the wheel shape be the same as the L1 trams, so Alstom apparently supplied their normal shape. Consequently especially pointwork was not really suitable for the Citadis trams. Points were modified to an adequate degree, but whether imposed speed limits are still required or not, I don’t know. So it’s about time the L1 track and trams were altered to the George St standards. As the L1 has a lot less trams, it would be the easier of the 2 to change.
@@tressteleg1L1 was constructed on such a cheap budget. You can see that as platforms aren’t level boarding as compared to L2 and L3 and future parramatta light rail. I think it would have been very difficult prior because the first gen trams (from Germany) were still operating. Personally I think the cracking was due to the generous speed limits on the line as well as the track profile being use for freight instead of light rail. Compare that to parramatta light rail, the whole carlingford line had new tracks installed but they just used the same freight tracks on the L1.
@@tressteleg1 I would find those constantly changing speed limits to be really frustrating as a passenger.
Yes the line was built on the cheap as I suspect the government was sceptical that it would be popular. While the first generation trams were a German design, they were built in Dandenong Victoria. As for the CAF trams cracking up due to “rough track”, I have never before in my life heard of any trams anywhere falling to pieces for any reason. They were simply designed and built on the cheap. Hopefully the CAF 100 are a lot more robust.
With a smooth driver, and on this line most of them are, you would barely notice the speed changes unless looking for the speed boards as you go along.
Apparently the CAF Urbos have a hybrid tram-train wheel profile like the Variotrams did. They can run over normal tramway points just fine but the railway step back becomes useless. It should not be a problem for them to run over properly converted point work to accomodate the Citadis tramway wheels, if it hasn't been done already.
Yes they do. The design was so that both trams and trains could go through the same pointwork, (something that never was done) and the check rails at points were set for railway standards, and raised higher than normal so they matched the fatter tram wheel width a bit above rail head level. To allow Citadis trams to run through pointwork, the check rails were lowered and moved closer the running rail, to the normal tramway flangeway width. However there is still some basic difference between L1 and L2/3 wheels which has resulted in many TSRs. It’s about time the L1 wheel and rail standards were made identical to George St standards.
With the 100s too that’s great
??
Guessing he means captured one of the four new Urbos 100’s. The CAF’s with the white LED desto’s and different car body design.
@@joshporter5422 yep
@@joshporter5422 Perhaps, but actually I captured two, 28 and later 25. The white destinations certainly stand out!
6:48 my most replayed
I guess you like the high speed limit, and the tram aiming for it ☺️
i would be interested to know since this line has both citadis and the urbos which do drivers prefer - they would have been trained on both. i think it is a good skill set to have if they want to further their career somewhere else.
Several have told me that the Citadis gives them a smoother ride. This was before the Urbos 100 arrived. However in Adelaide the Bombardier are preferred over the Citadis there as the Citadis wiggle as they go along at speed.
@@tressteleg1 any idea on the ergonomics of the master controller - joystick on the citadis or t bar on the urbos? is one dominant over the other in the industry do you know?
@Roadrunnerz45 I’m reasonably certain that on the Citadis, the driver has to constantly press a little button on the right hand end of the joystick. Having to do that with the thumb would drive you crazy, and likely end up with RSI problems. Unfortunately I have no way of knowing what the Urbos does, but suspect it is something less onerous and harmful.
Once you have the feel of one type of tram, it does not take real long to get used to different controls from a different manufacturer.
@@tressteleg1 yes i have a feeling as well. seems to be very sensitive as well which is another factor. that may have been designed on purpose because of the large pedestrian zone? i don't know but definitely not the best for drivers along with the stresses of the job. they have my support everytime i hop on board.
@@Roadrunnerz45 Presumably you are referring to the vigilance button, unless a purchaser requested it not be fitted, I expect it would be standard on all models. But it is most unlikely a driver could fall asleep and the tram keep going, as happened with me one night on a B on the 96 to East Brunswick.
Interesting ride. Thanks tressteleg1💚👌
👍👍
A very slow line and the of street section looks like they are driving along the backyards in Sydney
Well not too long ago Hay Street was a bit of a backyard with the Sydney market being the brick building on the right. It’s still a marketplace.
Not visible on the left two streets before George Street is Sydney’s Chinatown, a comparatively wide pedestrian only treelined Street.
It never was the fastest of lines with all the twists and turns, and many speeds have been lowered due to the Citadis trams from George Street having a less than ideal wheel shape for this track.
5:09 lewisham west (near to lewisham train station i guess???)
A 5-10 minute walk mostly uphill, crossing a couple of roads along the way. Not an ideal “transfer” between the two modes.
@@joshporter5422 👍😊
Probably just under 500 metres.
@@daveg2104 👍
So why do the signs say “Beware of trains” when they’re trams? Laziness and cheap?
Probably just using the cheapest signs available. And of course some operators of modern tramways fool themselves into thinking they are running something superior to trams. ‘Light Rail’ is just a Sales pitch so that when re-introducing trams into a city which had them before, old people won’t think they are getting back the noisy old trams they remember from the past.
@@tressteleg1 Calling it light rail allows them to use "L" on their lollipop signs. That is the only practical thing I can think of.
@@daveg2104 In this situation, yes. Unfortunately the planners and others have deluded themselves into believing that they have something superior to trams and thus have nothing to learn from Melbourne. While not everything is perfect there, they get a lot of things right such as simple track which does the job well at a fraction of the costs paid for the George St lines.
@@tressteleg1 If you can't gold plate it, it probably isn't worth doing. Sure, it may be fools gold on an ugly duckling, but it looks nice, and there's taxpayers money to spend, and profits to be made. I don't think there is anyone in my family that can remember the old trams, or they were young if they can. And I don't think I have heard anyone say Sydney is superior to Melbourne when it comes to trams/light rail - apart from trolls (or maybe the people involved justifying the cost). There are people that just hate public transport though, as a matter of principle.
@@daveg2104 Unfortunately the time can come when the cost of a project is ridiculously expensive and even somebody in favour of it is liable to say no thanks. Recently it was announced that the 13 km extension of the Gold Coast line to the airport could cost as much as $7 billion which is absolutely unacceptable. Similar length stage 1+ depot and two bridges across a river cost under 1 billion. Gold plating must be eliminated. Or the project will be eliminated. Anyone in Sydney born before 1950 is likely to remember the trams, some of which were particularly old, primitive, noisy and uncomfortable. As you say, many people are opposed to public transport but it has been shown that a good Tramway can attract motorists out of their cars while buses do the opposite. This happens worldwide.
More speed restrictions then normal speeds
Yes, quite a few because the Citadis wheel shape is not ideal for the L1 track design so precautions have been taken, for better or for worse.
Seriously, I think the Mad Mouse at Luna Park has fewer curves!
Well the line was built very many years ago for slow moving freight trains and long before bulldozers and other earthmoving equipment was invented so it tends to follow the lay of the land. It was enough of a struggle to get the government to convert to light rail, let alone straighten the twists and turns.
@@tressteleg1 Thanks for this information. That would explain it. It would be fun to ride!
@@kentandmerran1032 👍😊
Just incredibly stupid constructing the terminus as a single stub track for the sake of not having to move some electrical equipment or take 2-3m of poorly-used space from the park there.
For 10 years, the Gold Coast line has operated perfectly well with a similar terminus at Broadbeach South. It is particularly rare to see two trams at the terminus together, one at the platform the other waiting to get in. The L1 by comparison has a negligible amount of street running so timekeeping should be much easier. There must be some reason why trams bunch up. Certainly poor timetabling is keeping the incoming tram waiting for the outgoing to depart.
@@tressteleg1 Sure but the Gold Coast line:
-trams can hold 100 more passengers than L1 trams (45m vs 33m)
-trams have 6 double doors (rather than 2 double doors and 2 single doors on L1)
-runs a lower peak frequency (every 7.5 minutes where L1 runs every 6 minutes for four hours during both morning and evening peaks so a more intense service)
-has a ridership demand profile is less peaky than Sydney L1
You are right the timekeeping should be easier than Gold Coast, but the key point is actually that the L1 needs a higher frequency going forward especially as extending trams will be too expensive (all those underground platforms can't be extended without huge cost and disruption). It is possible to fit a turnback track at Lilyfield which would appear to be about right in terms of demand right now as the inner section gets 2-3x as much patronage as the outer section; but this might change when the Bankstown Metro conversion and then Metro West line opens and the interchange becomes more attractive. The other option is to split the lines at Rozelle, and build a new section of track to the new Metro West station at The Bays so they are two lines that both terminate at White Bay (The Bays Metro).
If only Variotram are Back in service Instead of retiring early 2015 This would've been happened When the CAF urbos 3 had Cracks
Apparently some account decided it would be better value for money to replace the Variotram with new trams. As it turns out, CAF was the worst possible choice.
Bombardier weren’t playing nice with giving CAF variotram replacement parts (higher cost per component). CAF capitalised on the opportunity saying it would be cheaper to replace those german trams with shiny new Spanish ones. They essentially gave them away at $4mil per unit (new U100’s were north of $6mil). The cost of breaking into a new market. I bet some TfNSW execs regret going down the “cheap” path.
@@joshporter5422 I don’t know how CAF had anything to do with Sydney light rail before their first tram arrived, and by then the decision to replace had already been made. CAF are no angels in the spare parts department. One of the four Newcastle trams has been laid up for many months I gather something to do with CAF not letting the people with the maintenance contract have the necessary parts. It seems they are all like this.
With Bombardier it was a matter of price and CAF then not willing to pay full price. With CAF now it’s a general refusal to supply their components to a third party maintainer or a rival manufacturer.
Apparently for L1’s fleet according to discussions on various forums, transdev is having to source CAF spares from its various European operations to replace components that have prematurely failed on the Urbos 3 fleet. Not a good look for either party. Thankfully they can continue to roster Citadis’ until the matter resolves.
No wonder CAF was the biggest poor choice to Pick that's why I would rather go with bombardier Like here in Melbourne We had the best modern E1/E2 Class tram, Yarra tram network it was very modern and very unique for route 96 and 86