Honestly real jealous of how nice the track is, we got something like this instead. Really over engineered tbh with the overhead cables, poles, and fences.
Still does the same job at the end of the day, but…
I think this comparison is not fair. AFAICT your picture shows a steep slope, which requires some more engineering for rail-bound vehicles:
you need some “climbing gear” for the heavy vehicles that run bare metal-on-metal. without this, you cannot climb such steep hills with tracked vehicles. they choose a common approach by using a cogwheel railway here, which does not really allow embedded tracks like in OP’s picture (notice the concrete layer between the tracks, which would cover the cog wheels here and looks “more clean”)
suspended ropes are difficult to force into a prescribed curve, and even more so if they must follow a slope. that’s why you see so much cables: all cables are needed to support the one or two power lines. note that they cannot simply add cables until the power lines fit good enough: they have to account for length changes due to temperature changes. the power lines have to be tightened enough so that they do not hang too low. on the other hand, they must not be too rigid because the Pantographs of each train must be pressed against the power lines without damaging them.
adding to the second point: spanning ropes needs a lot of force. even more so on such a slope, and this seems to be a curved slope as well? you either need supporting structures left and right (like adjacent houses, which are not available here. see, adding more poles left and right would be even more ugly) or really strong poles in the middle.
the last point is speculation from my side: the fences seem to be there not because of the railway itself, but to protect the cogwheel stuff from vehicles. regular tram tracks can be significantly damaged when driving heavier vehicles over them. if driving on them is expected, you embed the tracks in concrete. but as I mentioned above, this is not possible here. so you have to protect the expensive and not easily repairable cogwheel part from rouge drivers
What’s this inbetween the rails? You don’t just put gravel there?
Also, this seems to be two differen’t usecases. OP’s is in the street (we call that Tram here, often in cities) while yours is beside it (light train).
Edit: right, a gear train, yet another usecase. Answers the question about gravel.
OP’s is in the street (we call that Tram here, often in cities) while yours is beside it (light train).
Unless you’re New South Wales government, in which case you call your Sydney trams “light rail” because you don’t want to admit that Melbourne was right all along to keep its trams instead of ripping up all the tracks because “everyone has cars now”. Sydney used to have one of the biggest tram networks in the world until 1961. That was over two decades before I was born but I’m still mad about it.
Our city calls them LRTs (light rail trains), the public still calls them “streetcars”, but what ever they are called they are still fundamentally trams IMO.
The one I am showing is a new line in our city that goes both above ground and underground in certain locations. The above ground sections run in the center of the street with stations along the center as well.
This track does indeed have inclines in certain locations, but none of the areas along the route require gears. All of the sections above ground look exactly the same in design, only difference is in some locations we have grass between the tracks, and concrete in others.
Now that’s a nice tram!
Honestly real jealous of how nice the track is, we got something like this instead. Really over engineered tbh with the overhead cables, poles, and fences.
Still does the same job at the end of the day, but…
I think this comparison is not fair. AFAICT your picture shows a steep slope, which requires some more engineering for rail-bound vehicles:
edit: added missing not in last bullet point
No climbing gear along the whole route, and the whole route even the flat areas all look the same. Fences in many flatter areas as well.
Few more photos of the same over-engineered feeling in other sections of the same line.
I stand corrected, that looks really a lot more cluttered than I expected. WTF
God sake my eyes have a wider FOV than your camera
What’s this inbetween the rails? You don’t just put gravel there?Also, this seems to be two differen’t usecases. OP’s is in the street (we call that Tram here, often in cities) while yours is beside it (light train).
Edit: right, a gear train, yet another usecase. Answers the question about gravel.
Unless you’re New South Wales government, in which case you call your Sydney trams “light rail” because you don’t want to admit that Melbourne was right all along to keep its trams instead of ripping up all the tracks because “everyone has cars now”. Sydney used to have one of the biggest tram networks in the world until 1961. That was over two decades before I was born but I’m still mad about it.
Our city calls them LRTs (light rail trains), the public still calls them “streetcars”, but what ever they are called they are still fundamentally trams IMO.
The one I am showing is a new line in our city that goes both above ground and underground in certain locations. The above ground sections run in the center of the street with stations along the center as well.
This track does indeed have inclines in certain locations, but none of the areas along the route require gears. All of the sections above ground look exactly the same in design, only difference is in some locations we have grass between the tracks, and concrete in others.
Ah right, the screws looked like a gear rack to me.
No wait, it’s not?