4K cab view - Adelaide O-Bahn City to TTP interchange via O-Bahn Tunnel

Route No.540 City to TTP Interchange
Scania K230UB / Custom Coaches CB60 'EvoII'
The O-Bahn Busway is a guided busway that is part of the bus rapid transit system servicing the northeastern suburbs of Adelaide, South Australia.
Adelaide's O-Bahn was introduced in 1986 to service the city's rapidly expanding north-eastern suburbs, replacing an earlier plan for a tramway extension. The O-Bahn provides specially built track, combining elements of both bus and rail systems. Adelaide's track is 12 kilometres (7.5 mi) long and includes three interchanges at Klemzig, Paradise and Tea Tree Plaza. Interchanges allow buses to enter and exit the busway and to continue on suburban routes, avoiding the need for passengers to transfer to another bus to continue their journey.
An additional section including a 670-metre (2,200 ft) tunnel opened in 2017 at the city end to reduce the number of congested intersections buses must traverse to enter the Adelaide city centre.
MY O-Bahn Gallery
www.aunzrailfan.com/o-bahnphot...
www.aunzrailfan.com/o-bahn.html
O-Bahn buses
www.aunzrailfan.com/adelaidebu...
MY Website
www.aunzrailfan.com

[@navelxxx03]

BRT名乗りつつ専用レーンが無かったり、あってもチンタラチンタラ走ってる日本のなんちゃってBRTとは大違いですな。

[@hnwsn]

2:40-専用トンネル的なやつ 〜バス専用レーン走行 5:00-専用道路

[@phoozle]

Love the O-Bahn. This video right at the front of the bus makes me appreciate how beautiful the trip is along the River Torrens through all the beautiful gumtrees! Thanks for sharing

[@michaeleverett1479]

An O'bahn/ guided bus is a railway done on the cheap; It's a piece of embarrassing transport infrastructure with a hideous waste of concrete that must be ashamed by Adelaideans. The bus industry spreads nonsense propaganda of the "O'bahn/ guided bus or BRT is like heavy/ metro rail or light rail, but cheaper and more flexible." All kinds of buses even biarticulated buses in Bogota and Curitiba are can never replace a high capacity steel wheels on steel rail railway in suburban or metro trains with high capacity signaling. There's no way a busway can move 18,000 passengers/hr per direction as claimed by the O'bahn video link below: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b3KYc3aYpNuFb9U Since the O'bahn buses in Adelaide usually run at street level without or little grade separation, the actual capacity of the O'bahn guideway is only 5000 passengers/hr per direction (1 track per direction) in peak hours and 2000 passengers/hr per direction (1 track per direction) or less in non peak hours. A suburban or metro (usually third rail) train can easily output an actual capacity of 20,000 - 50,000 passengers/hr per direction (1 track per direction). The truth is that these wacky grade separated transport solutions of O'bahn/ guided bus or BRT are so stupid while replicating heavy rail, meaning its so much better to get railway vehicles with grade separation instead of just grade separating a bus (not a train). This is why so few O'bahn/ guided busways are built as there're hidden costs just to grade separate a bus (ground level, elevated and tunnel/ underground) or giving buses signal priority (BRT) at intersections on ground level with high capacity signaling borrowed from conventional rail. For buses: they have lower capacity than trains, higher rolling resistance (significant at speeds >70 km/h), slow acceleration (diesel engine and even hybrid or electric), unstable ride quality, jerky fell due to terrible suspension and a much lower vehicle life of 15 - 25 years when compared to trains and other railway vehicles. For trains: Much higher capacity than buses, lower rolling resistance (significant at speeds >70 km/h), reasonable to fast acceleration (usually electric multiple unit, EMU), stable ride quality due to high quality railway bogies/ hydraulics and a much higher vehicle life of 30 - 50 years These ugly winding busways with indirect curves destroy the beautiful urban fabric of Adelaide's grid road network (main roads and streets). In short, the O'bahn/ guided bus or BRT systems are bus industry rubbish from bus companies who are looking to eat and rob your hard earned taxpayer money.

[@AmbientWalking]

Love this. Great channel of rides. Just subscribed! : )

[@chea.5416]

those trees are beautiful

[@user-wh6yy7le8q]

鉄道のような道と景色の中走ると思ったらバス停は普通の道路に面した感じ　なんだか不思議な気分

[@lennyrosantysimanjuntak2224]

たしかに

[@everydayday]

名古屋の基幹バスレーンとゆとりーとラインを合体したような形ですね

[@almondsquid2011]

連接バスまでおるわ

[@mvg2x34]

My grandfather visited Adelaide in the late 1980’s and he talked about the O-Bahn. I think it is an amazing concept and am not sure why the US has not implemented this in tier 2 population cities and suburban areas. Also- why didn’t the designers continue the O-Bahn tracks on the short stint after the first tunnel? Seems like a few cuts for the regular car right and left turns could have been integrated.

[@lucky360pride]

Just wondering if Indonesia has such a system.. I bet it’ll be full of motorcycles and cars 😂

[@MahuyuniMitubati]

凄い！ 外国に住んでいるんですか？ どうぶつの森キャラのアデレードが推しキャラになってから名前の由来のアデレードに興味を持ちました。すごい企画のバスですね。出来たらですが、こんな交通機関を日本でもやってみたいですが、日本でやると色々と大変なことになりそうですね笑

[@user-bb5oq7ox2w]

電車をつくる費用はあまりにも高いし、1両編成、2両編成でも何十人も乗せないと黒字にならないが、バスなら、20人乗ったら黒字なんですね。駅いらない、車掌もいらない、駅員もいらない。バスで支払いができるところもメリットです。 バス専用道路をつくって、90km/h出せれば、「安価な速達公共交通」が実現できます。 バスは普通のバスを購入、道路は線路より安価、どこにバス停をつくってもよい(赤字ならすぐ撤去できる)、もしものときでも迂回できる。 それにつけてもあの白い道路は必要なのでしょうか。黒いアスファルトの道路をつくって、バス専用にすればいいのでは？(でも私が間違っているのでしょう) 人口密度1500人or2000人くらいの田舎ならBRTで黒字になるのではないでしょうか。

[@nql29250]

懐かしいなぁ 20年も前に留学して時に通学で乗ってました。もっとよく仕組や景色見ておけば良かった。 映像途中のパラダイスインターチェンジで降りて、歩いて友人宅にもよく行ったなあ。 確かニュートンとか言う住所だった。 結構遠かったけど、バスの乗継がわからず歩いて行ったな

[@SnappingTurtle801]

I started watching the video before reading the description and my first thought was this bus sounds like its having struggles.....lol. Interesting system.

[@SyedDanielProductions_YT]

Scania ZF Ecomat 😍

[@kapi5652]

なんかロマンがありますね笑 タイヤと接触面の摩擦を極力小さくしているということでしょうか？

[@tomservo5007]

I've never seen a bus only road. Interesting.

[@bored1ca]

They're becoming more prevalent in large urban centers now

[@roy_hks]

Tom Servo every european city has those, along with bus lanes everywhere

[@Thomas1980]

wow.... i like 5:00 .... Fantastic Video👍👍👍

[@annabelholland]

Exactly 10,000 views

[@samuelfellows6923]

How fast was the bus going on what I assume were the 90mph sections? It looked slower in the video. 🤨

[@IHYVMC]

90 km/h not mph

[@neko7684]

That would be 50 MPH roughly, 90 KPH was the limit

[@samuelfellows6923]

Neko - ✅ 🌟, 🇦🇺= kmph - 🇬🇧= mph, I am British - am used to our speed measurement, even though the Australian speed limit signs look similar to ours - that’s what confused me 😉

[@user-hf2dy5bd4m]

かさゆたはた

[@yvindascanius6061]

Germany has a similar system. I can't remember which city.

[@alexjenkins1079]

I think it's possibly Essen in NRW

[@yvindascanius6061]

@@alexjenkins1079 Yes, you're right. I found the video and here's the link if you would like to watch it again; kzbin.info/www/bejne/oaG7lKN4a7Cbb80. They are building something like it in Peshawar, but nowhere near as sophisticated. Link here to that: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g5fKmZSIiNeYj7M.

[@kiroposuto938]

ゆとりーとラインに結構似てますね あれは鉄道扱いみたいですが。

[@ff6rokku6]

ここまでバス専用だと日本なら鉄道敷いた方が？ってなりそう。 日本のバスは鉄道未満な公共交通って感じかな。

[@ya-10b66]

確かにそう感じる。鉄道運転士の教育は最低1年かかるらしいが、バスなら半年くらいで済むんだとか。鉄道は免許講習の期間の長さがネック。

[@yoka2627]

ガイドレール区間は1路線だけでなく、いろんな路線が乗り入れてまた離れていくのではないのでしょうか。そうすると鉄道と比べたら融通が効きますね。広州のBRTもガイドレールではなく道路の真ん中に引かれた専用道ですが、そんな感じです。

[@ff6rokku6]

バスオンリーの路線ではないなら日本にもバスレーンとしてありますね。ただそれだと動画の趣旨から離れるかなと。それに一般道なので速度制限もありますし。事故のリスクも高い。 こんなレーン付きでバス運用するとなるとやっぱりコストかな？人口密集地帯なら土地確保が大変、逆に過疎地帯ならそれに対する収益が大変。 鉄道は元国鉄が敷いた投資がありますからね。 運転手の教育期間はまあ自動車運転免許の枠内とその外だけでも仕方ないかと。通常の運転速度が高速だとそれにも注意が必要だし。

[@adadajajadad]

自動運転化した方が早そう

[@user-mt1ku8es3x]

音がMT54

[@obkb1]

"Cars entering the O-Bahn are deterred by a large number of signs at entrance points and a "sump buster" device that rips out a car's sump (oil pan) if it gets onto the track. An average of four cars per year enter the O-Bahn and must be removed by crane." Nothing like having your oil pan ripped out to call attention to your mistake!

[@user-hf2dy5bd4m]

ねりめ「て、「なやまめら。めなら「めなやめあなめ「め

[@user-hf2dy5bd4m]

74(〒〒88かやまみtりめみめ

[@samuelfellows6923]

😳 - a very effective way to stop you [a car] by having your engine seize-up ☹️, hmmm... I wonder what it would do to battery/electric cars?

[@PreNeanderthal]

Doesn't seem much point in building tunnels to avoid delays at a number of congested intersections when you keep the bus waiting for an eternity at a red traffic light with little or no traffic coming from the other directions. Might as well have saved the cost. Hardly a 'Rapid' transit system. You'd think they'd build in traffic light control with computerized bus priority like they do in many Netherlands' towns and cities.

[@lars7935]

The whole idea is in the strange limbo between bus (very flexible) and tram (high capacity, fast, often grade seperated and cheap) system and doesn't realy do either well. Turns out most of the time a properly built tramway (with proper grade separation) is both cheaper and higher capacity.

[@Twittler1]

PreNeanderthal Well, that could be done, and maybe will be (it should). But once through the lights, it gets to its destination much faster than it would on normal roads. A tramway would in some ways be better, but are only cost effective when there are a lot of passengers. And busways can be more flexible; the buses can have multiple destinations as they can use ordinary roads. That wouldn’t be economically feasible with tramways.

[@michaeleverett1479]

Metro systems (third rail with high signaling) are even better than tram/ light rail for high capacity applications. Metros or suburban trains can easily carry 20,000 - 50,000 passengers/hr per direction in practice but require well designed stations to handle those high volumes of passengers (escalators, lifts, fare gates and walkways). Theoretically, light rail is claimed to have a capacity of 2,000 - 18,000 passengers/hr per direction but trams only manage to carry 1,000 - 5,000 passengers/hr per direction in practice. For steel wheels on steel rail comparison: It's better to go for a fully blown metro system over a tram/ light rail as the metro trains are usually 2.8 m - 3.0 m wide while trams/ light rail vehicles are only 2.3 m - 2.4 m wide. Grade separated metro rail always beats grade separated tram/ light rail in capacity, frequency and speed. Trains with steel wheels on steel rail must be chosen, not trains with rubber tyres and steel wheels as there're more moving parts.

[@user-nm2sw9ez9v]

東京や川崎BRTには無い光景ですな😅

[@rafvis]

What city is this?

[@annabelholland]

Adelaide

[@rafvis]

@@annabelholland thank you

[@ch-cx4rd]

ハンドル操作はない感じですか？

[@nql29250]

ない。 コーヒー☕️とか呑んでる

[@ch-cx4rd]

@@nql29250 ありがとうございます。

[@user-wp4ol3yw2j]

日本にこんなに土地ないから無理だね

[@user-xm5cj5js2d]

これタイヤ乗り上げないの？？？？？

[@tori8661]

バスの端にローラー(案内輪)が付いていて専用道路のガイドウェイ(側壁)に沿ってミニ四駆のように走る

[@Welgeldiguniekalias]

Imagine how much public funds would have been saved if they'd just built a regular road and written "bus lane" on it.

[@nfwolf20]

Welgeldiguniekalias what a moron

[@Twittler1]

Welgeldiguniekalias This system allows the bus to get from a to b at higher speeds, guided by rails instead of the driver, without dealing with junctions, obstructions, traffic signals, urban speed limits, etc, etc. And idiots who park and otherwise clog up bus lanes. They’re used for limited stop/express services, stopping only at interchanges and main centres. Like a train but cheaper, with vehicles that can use ordinary roads as well as the expressway.

[@Welgeldiguniekalias]

@@Twittler1 Granted, an ordinary bus lane would not guide vehicles automatically, but since there is already a driver there to deal with stops and stretches of regular public road, this does not seem like much of an advantage. A regular bus lane would not have to follow the public road, it could run around busy areas, over bridges and through tunnels just the same, but without the added cost of the guidance system on the infrastructure as well as on every vehicle. Keeping bus lanes clear of parked cars is just a matter of enforcement, and a bus on a regular bus lane can drive around obstacles. Idiot drivers could still get their vehicle stuck in O-bahn tracks, and the bus would need to take a detour, as it wouldn't be able to just swerve around it through the other lane. I still think the extra expense is not worth it when you need to have a driver on every bus.

[@Twittler1]

Welgeldiguniekalias It’s about speed as well. On automatic guidance, on a dedicated busway, the vehicles can reach much higher speeds for longer distances than on a regular road. And at high speeds, being guided removes the possibility of driver error. No traffic jams to hold them up either. The cost isn’t great - guide wheels at the front of each bus, and concrete guide rails; that’s more or less it. Cheaper than a tramway, and the vehicles can leave it for normal roads as necessary. I can’t remember where, but in a couple of places, the buses were diesel-electric. On the guided busway, they picked up electricity direct from the guide rails, allowing the engines to be turned off. And, at the beginning of the busway, the drivers get off and the buses are computer controlled. The driver then waits for the next bus coming the other way, and takes that bus onto the normal roads. Modern fully electric buses, would make that system even better. The buses could take traction power from the guide rails, and charge their batteries at the same time. And on the busways, the buses would be computer controlled. Bus lanes clearance is a matter of enforcement, true. But the lane has to be blocked before enforcement happens. And on very busy roads, manoeuvring a bus around a lane blockage is easier said than done, and holds up non-bus traffic. The fools who drive their cars onto busways can be easily blocked. A strong, raised barrier, that only drops down for properly equipped buses approaching it, and rises quickly the second the bus clears it.

[@roy_hks]

Kevin Twining wait these buses ain’t electric?

[@l6960016]

stupid systems