Re: Sydney Light Rail

["B." <gunzel412@dingoblue.gunzel.net.au>]

Dave Proctor <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
V7_D5.12586$UP5.238138@news6.giganews.com">news:V7_D5.12586$UP5.238138@news6.giganews.com...
> "Samuel Eades" <seades@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
> wYZD5.11537$aD2.43519@news-server.bigpond.net.au">news:wYZD5.11537$aD2.43519@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> Peter Bollard <onk@magna.com.au> wrote in message
>> 39E04AE0.709D0F29@magna.com.au">news:39E04AE0.709D0F29@magna.com.au...

>>> Are there any definite plans to run it to Haberfield or
>>> Ashfield bearing in mind that this would  seem to require
>>> it to use  the line taking heavy freight to Glebe
>>> Island.Would it be feasible ,safe and technically possible
>>> for it to share the line with the freight trains?

>> If a tramway started using the same lines as a railway, then
>> that portion (IMHO) would have to become a railway as well
>> (the difference between a tramway and a railway being that a
>> tramway does not use any safeworking systems).

> What a lot of rot. The Metro Light Rail is signalled (not in a
> sense of what is generally accepted as railway signalling, but
> it is signalled all the same).

What a lot of rot.  The Metro Light Rail is extremely well
signaled, as far as 'tramways' go.  Indeed it uses basically good
railway signalling systems, the only difference is the aspects are
slightly different.  Do the trams actually have to stop if there
is a white/red aspect, or do they just reduce to running on sight?

>> So the tram would become a train and therefore require radio
>> equipment amongst other safety gear.

> Why would it need a radio and other safety gear?

The trams already have radios, and since they have ATP they are
already arguably safer than Cityrail, IMHO.

>> and the drivers would need to be trained in the safeworking
>> system used.

> They would need to be trained in any safeworking system used,
> including that currently used on the MLR. How is it so
> different to what is the current situation?

>> The trams would need to be capable of operating track circuits
>> reliably. It would probably be possible and safe, but perhaps
>> not viable.

> Mindless rubbish. It happens all the time in Europe, and the
> last time I looked at several systems, the safeworking was set
> up for the trams, with the goods trains having to operate to
> their safeworking system, i.e. being driven at a speed slow
> enough to be able to respond to street traffic and pedestrians
> crossing the line.

The MLR already operates TI21 jointless tracks, apparently
reliably.  On the European shared running systems (where the trams
run on railways) would the detection be based on axle counters?
The case under discussion here would involve trams sharing onto a
railway easement?  Simple - train the drivers to read Double Light
signals, construct a junction, and bingo.  The only issue is
whether you allow Freight to run during tramway operating hours,
i.e. do you run possibly wider freight vehicles through almost
rail level tram stops, and at what speed.

> It works over there, and there is no reason why the two modes
> cannot co-exist here, your mindless hyperventilating
> notwithstanding.

I don't think your allowed to use big words like that Dave.

--
B.

Email - gunzel412 at dingoblue dot net dot au
ICQ#  - 82329734
Phone - long, long, short, long.