Re: Re: Adelaide 381

IS Edit
Thursday, March 21, 2002 11:15 AM

I see. So the weight was not critical as there were fairly widely spaced stops and mostly private right-of-way. I thought they might have been used on the wider tram system as well.

I went to that museum in my old M&MTB AEC half-cab bus with my kids and then wife about 10 years ago and was impressed by the operation then, but can't really remember the details. Funny thing about women is that they just don't understand about trams. :)

Bob Murphy

----- Original Message -----

From: pvawser

To: [email protected]

Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 6:05 PM

Subject: [TramsDownUnder] Re: Adelaide 381

--- In TramsDownUnder@y..., "IS Edit" <bobmurphy2@c...> wrote: > I've never understood public transport undertakings buying > needlessly heavy vehicles. There's no way the H class needed to > weigh more than 20 short tons and it probably could have weighed > significantly less and achieved good performance with smaller > motors. Remember that these trams were built in the 1920s, a very different era from today. The H type were built in 1929 for a converted rail line with good patronage. They needed the capacity at the time, hence their size (64 seated, 170 crush load, capable of running in multiple sets). And steel was becoming more available and more popular than wood, hence the weight (23.1 tons). Most of the line was on reserved track, meaning faster travel was safe, hence 4x60hp motors. They were quite suitable when they were designed. The H1 was just an all steel version of somewhere between an F and an H, and still reasonably well suited to it's design era (1939). The extra weight warranted the slightly more powerful motors (4x65hp). The dropcentres were 20 tons running on 4x40hp or 4x50hp motors, and they performed very well as streetcars. > How long is your running track, Peter? Is it all single track? Any > passing loops? Is there room for expansion? I don't have an exact figure for the length of the track, but it is in the order of 2km. I'll scan the layout map and put it on the web site in the near future. We have a 5 track depot fan merging to a single track run with an automatic (sprung points) passing loop about 60% of the way along. I'll have to check on the length of the passing loop. It know can handle two trams provided one is a four wheeler. There is one stop along the route, at the St Kilda Adventure Playground, at about 90%. The terminus is at "St Kilda Beach", which is nothing like the Melbourne version :-). Expansion. There is an enourmous amount of room, but little point. The only place of interest within 5km is St Kilda (the Museum is inland, literally in the middle of nowhere). The next nearest worthwhile point is Salisbury, about 11km by the most direct route. I think someone put a figure of more than $10 million on that possibility, without considering crossing both Port Wakefield Road (the main northern exit from all of Adelaide) and the Main North rail line. Of that 11km, only 4km would really be suitable for a public transport route. -- Peter Vawser [email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.