Comments on: Melbourne’s missed opportunities for low-floor trams

By: Photos from ten years ago: September 2014 - Waking up in Geelong

Photos from ten years ago: September 2014 - Waking up in Geelong — Mon, 23 Sep 2024 21:33:29 +0000

[…] prototype high floor light rail vehicles from 1985 were also still in […]

By: Photos from ten years ago: January 2013 - Waking up in Geelong

Photos from ten years ago: January 2013 - Waking up in Geelong — Mon, 30 Jan 2023 20:34:50 +0000

[…] that is a thing of the past, but on the tram network not so much – we have squandered multiple opportunities to acquire low floor trams, with the 2032 deadline for an accessible network unlikely to be […]

By: Marcus Wong

Marcus Wong — Sun, 27 Jun 2021 14:36:14 +0000

In reply to Andrew. I hope the government gets comprehensively owned by this lawsuit.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 27 Jun 2021 12:05:39 +0000

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/wheelchair-users-take-legal-action-over-frustrating-pace-of-melbourne-tram-upgrades-20210627-p584n8.html

By: Marcus Wong

Marcus Wong — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 14:36:51 +0000

In reply to Tramologist.

The Sydney Variotrams were an odd beast – based on the units running in Chemnitz, Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadler_Variobahn

The plans were sent over to Australia but the local branch of ABB, the successor of Comeng, found the design was unsuited, so had to rework it – a massive amount of work for just 7 trams.

By: Marcus Wong

Marcus Wong — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 14:33:18 +0000

In reply to Tramologist. It would've made a lot more sense to do back when they proposed doing it back in 2000 - the B2 class trams were only middle aged, with 20+ years of life left in them.

By: Marcus Wong

Marcus Wong — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 14:23:24 +0000

In reply to Freddy.

The Pittsburgh Light Rail system mixes high platform and street level stops, so each tram has two sets of doors!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Siemens_SD-400s_4236.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:August_2009_Pittsburgh_LRT_Interior.jpg

By: Marcus Wong

Marcus Wong — Wed, 23 Jun 2021 14:18:35 +0000

In reply to Andrew.

Only 27% of tram stops level access in 2020, and 100% need to be compliant by December 2020. That is 18 months to upgrade up to 1,215 stops – 68 stops per month, when the average delivery trend is only 21 stops per year, and dropping!

https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/accessibility-tram-services?section=

By: Tramologist

Tramologist — Tue, 22 Jun 2021 10:38:00 +0000

In reply to Michael Angelico. If they went ahead with that plan you would have a DDA compliant tram with about 90 seats for 2 million. Sounds reasonable to me.

By: Michael Angelico

Michael Angelico — Tue, 22 Jun 2021 06:49:17 +0000

The idea of the low floor section in the B2s was officially part of Yarra Trams’ fleet plan at one point. I’m told they wanted to do it for the St Kilda line, but then when they merged with M>Tram and got hold of the D2s they decided to use those instead.

Way later when Keolis Downer took over the franchise they gave a talk at the Metropolitan Transport Forum and I asked whether the idea was still on the cards – they said no, because the unit cost of converting a B2 was around $2m per tram, compared to a new E class tram at $6m (which they knew would come a long way down as production ramped up). They also said there’s a lot more technical risk involved in modifying a tram than building a new one, and there’s the disadvantage that the old tram has to go out of service before the new one can comes in so it affects fleet availability.

It didn’t stop me wondering what fleet numbers the extended B2s would have been given though… I was thinking of the 3200 series, with the 3 being for three sections and the 2 being a reference to their old number, plus keeping well clear of the C1s and D1s.