By the time you got to DH, walked to the train platform, waited for the next train, I doubt you would save much time compared to direct tram travel, even only a couple of stops out. Guess it depends on what part of the CBD you wanted to go to. If I was in that situation I would only use the train to go in the other direction.
From:TramsDownUnder@... [mailto:TramsDownUnder@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ted Gay
Sent: Tuesday, 15 May 2012 11:18 AM
To:TramsDownUnder@...
Subject: Re: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Light rail at Dulwich Hill/Wardell Road in Sydney NSW.
What about those who could catch a tram a few stops to DH then train to the city?
Agree that you wouldn't get off a train and catch tram to city.
Ted
Ding ding
From: Brian Blunt <bblunt@...>
To:TramsDownUnder@...
Sent: Monday, 14 May 2012 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Light rail at Dulwich Hill/Wardell Road in Sydney NSW.
I wonder how much call there would be for transfer between tram and train at Dulwich Hill??
Certainly not people going into the city, or even to the Darling harbour/Pyrmont area.
The train would also be a better choice for people living in the vicinity of the tram terminus.
From:TramsDownUnder@... [mailto:TramsDownUnder@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dudley Horscroft
Sent: Monday, 14 May 2012 4:35 PM
To:TramsDownUnder@...
Subject: Re: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Light rail at Dulwich Hill/Wardell Road in Sydney NSW.
I suspect that the west leg of the triangle is being kept as the LR line is City Rail property and City Rail must have rail access - even though the likelihood of doing so is approximately zero.
Note that the Google Maps view is so far out of date it does not show the new track on the east leg, laid between 16 September and 30 December 2010.
While Bedford St is a dead end, and the south side is used for car parking, I would suggest that it would be virtually impossibly to use it as a tram terminus owing to the probability of a centre of the road terminus blocking "very easy access" to and from the parking bays. There could conceivably be a kerbside terminus on the north side immediately adjacent to Wardell St, as the adjoining site is occupied by Emergency Services, who could possibly be 'persuaded', provided access to their junk yard at the rear is maintained.
Incidentally, the 30 Dec photo shows a single car on the up line following an 8 car train a bit east of Dulwich Hill Station. Unusual for a single double deck car to operate on its own? Or has the Parcels Van service been restored? No signs of a join in the photos to create a single car on its own.
But I would suggest that the best option is to route the track into the shrubbery between Bedford St and the Goods Lines. There is ample room there for a single track terminus and platform, and the end could be immediately adjacent to the Wardell St footpath, thus making it very easy to walk from the tram stop to the station.
The option I would like, if people really pulled their fingers out, would be for the tram track to cross the goods lines and the up line, having gone round to the west of the large white hut, then up a ramp and on to the Dulwich Hill platform. Run far enough so that there can be reasonable clearances between tram and platform edge one side and the tram platform (remember level boarding) and the platform edge on the other. Even better than cross platform boarding. Don't say crossing the tracks can't be done, Melbourne trams cross very frequent heavy rail passenger services every day on the level, and the only difference in the overhead arrangements is that the trams in Sydney are 750V and in Melbourne they are 600V. Even better, just sink the tram track at the tram stop by 350 mm to give level boarding on both sides!
Regards
Dudley Horscroft
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry mailto:terry.boa@bigpond.com
To:TramsDownUnder@...
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2012 2:54 PM
Subject: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Light rail at Dulwich Hill/Wardell Road in Sydney NSW.
I agree that logic would say to keep the west fork as acess for track
machines and ballast trains in view of the length of ballasted track on
the light rail line
On visiting the site it seemed logical and feasible to me, as a layman
and not an engineer, to slew the disconnected east fork and extend it up
to street level and into Bedford Street and terminate the light rail
line just short of the intersection with Wardell Road thus enabling easy
and level access to the bridge over the Goods and Bankstown lines, the
stairs to Dulwich Hill station and the street bus stops and shops nearby
Bedford Street is dead end and virtually a car park and would have
adequate room for a light rail terminus similar to the current
Lillyfield facility and although the approach gradient would be steep I
judged it to be achievable
Incidentally I have been confused by the various names used in TDU
postings for the three legs of the triangular connection under
discussion. This is adjacent to the site of the former Wardell Road
signal box and was in some ways a focal point of Sydney's Goods Lines
giving acess as it did to the freight only lines to Darling Harbour via
Rozelle, the Botany Line, the Up and Down Illawarra lines via Meeks Road
and Sydenham and the Western, Southern and Northern lines variously via
Canterbury, Sefton Park and Flemington and Lidcombe as well as the
Abattoirs branch. To me the legs were variously the East and West forks
and the Goods Road
Terry Boardman - who wonders why it is taking so long to resume the
discontinued work on the light rail extension
--- InTramsDownUnder@..., "Noel Reed" <noelreed10@...>
wrote:
>
> I would expect that all points connecting the freight lines with the
light
> rail line at Dulwich Hill would be removed to avoid maintenance as
they
> would be rarely used. The comparatively light weight of the light rail
> vehicles would not cause excessive track deterioration. Track machines
can
> be brought in by other means than a rail connection.
>
>
>
> A case in point would be the siding at Petersham which is disconnected
from
> the Down Local lines. The double deck carriages used for training were
> brought in by a temporary slew of the line. I believe that old NSWR
> sleeping carriages used by the Zig Zag Railway were transferred from
the
> Main West line to the site by similar means.
>
>
>
> Another case would have been the recent track rehabilitation on the St
Kilda
> and South Melbourne light rail lines in Melbourne where, as I
understand,
> railway ballast hopper wagons were brought in to the tramway tracks by
road
> haulage.
>
>
>
> Yarra Trams in Melbourne are using temporary track turnouts. I would
think
> that these could also be used at Dulwich Hill or other places if
required.
>
>
>
> Noel Reed.
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From:TramsDownUnder@...
[mailto:TramsDownUnder@yahoogroups.com]
> On Behalf Of Tony Prescott
> Sent: Sunday, 13 May 2012 9:16 PM
> To:TramsDownUnder@...
> Subject: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Light rail at Dulwich Hill NSW.
>
>
>
>
>
> --- InTramsDownUnder@...
> mailto:TramsDownUnder%40yahoogroups.com , kda4203@ wrote:
> >
> >
> > The West fork is still intact with the points spiked over.
> >
>
> I would have thought the west fork would be retained to get track
> maintenance vehicles onto the line. But I guess there's no provision
for
> this on the existing line either. How do they maintain the tracks
then,
> Irish navvies?
>
> cheers
> Tony P
>
>
>
> <hr size=1 width="100%" noshade color="#aca899" align=center>
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com/
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2425/4995 - Release Date:
05/12/12
>