G’day, as you can probably see, I am new to this site. After reading the magazine at my local library, (at the end of a long waiting list) i have finally lashed out and subscribed. I have really enjoyed reading Trains over the last couple of years, finding the wealth of knowledge incredible. Not only does this magazine look at current and historic railways, it has an international perspective.
Anyhow, although originally from Broken Hill, (ah, the Silverton Tramway) I am now in Adelaide, the capital of South Australia. Up until the 50s, as with many comparable cities around the world, Adelaide had an extensive tram (I think you call them street-cars) system, however that was eventualy reduced to one specific line, from Adelaide to the beach-side suburb of Glenelg. Most of this was on a separate reserve.
A couple of years ago, the State Government decided to extend this line though the CBD, and there is talk of taking it down to Pt Adelaide. Now, unlike Glenelg, the 'Port is serviced by a heavy rail suburban system, each train-set being able to carry many more passengers than the tram and faster. However trams, or rather Light Rail has become "fashionable.
Years ago I visited Europe, and saw the excellent rail systems there, and a couple of months ago, went to New Orleans and San Francisco. Great trams, awesome cable cars!!! In San Francisco though, as in Europe, trams / street cars are part of an integrated rail system which also includes underground services, and heavy rail passengers services that seem to go further out, to outer suburbs or near by towns.
Sorry for the long preamble.
Anyhow, to me it seems that trams / street cars are best providing intra-urban, rather than inter-urban passenger services. Is this a fair and accurate observation, if so is there any rule of thumb as to distances most appropriate for each type of railway passenger services?
Thanks
Adrian (the Au