Metrolink: Where should it go next?

[Flying Claret]

Have to admit, I do sometimes think it's a shame the ELR is there - the density of population in the valley wouldn't be badly suited to Metrolink....

That...plus the not insignificant amount of commuter traffic from east lancs and the ribble valley. The m66 is a car park at rush hour...

 

[Bletchleyite]

That...plus the not insignificant amount of commuter traffic from east lancs and the ribble valley. The m66 is a car park at rush hour...

Well, if they can run steam locomotives on Metrolink[1], then they could run trams on the ELR, maybe?

If a commuter service was viable, I'd imagine something could be done - a Parry People Mover or Class 230?

[1] https://www.burytimes.co.uk/news/13791027.VIDEO__Steam_returns_to_Radcliffe_station/

 

[185]

1) Project big tram. 30 Larger 56m trams, based at a new purpose built depot. No excuses about Queens Road not being able to cope, I'd flatten it and start again.

2) Atherton line to Wigan. Spur at Salford Crescent, Middlewood Stop, to a new segregated tram line emerging near Deansgate. (95% Segregated)

3) Leigh busway ripped up and joined to 2 (above) west of Walkden, linked 1km across Ellesmere Golf Club (All Segregated)

4) Hadfield line segregated running Manchester-Guide Bridge then converted beyond. (Segregated)

5) East Didsbury extended to Stockport. Demolition of the three houses blocking it's way east of East Didsbury. (90% Segregated)

6) Man Airport loop completed - Roundthorne-Hospital-P&R Stop-Cargo-T2-Man Airport Station. (Segregated)

7) Review of viability of (Manchester-) Radcliffe to Bolton (Segregated)

8) Middleton from Bowker Vale (90% Segregated)

9) Extension of (3) 2km south beyond Leigh to new parkway rail station on Chat Moss line.

10) 3CC - a tunnel under Manchester City Centre. All Bury-Altrinchams routed via it.

11) MediaCity served by all services - install catch points thus a tram from MCR is sent mechanically to Media then after changing ends sprung points send it to Eccles and vice versa. Use gauntlet (interlaced) track to avoid taking up any extra land. No TMS would mean no waiting at Media City.

12) Bin yard closed at Newton Heath - double track the Rochdale line to improve reliability (ie no failed freights or point failed)

13) Metrolink extended to Northwich - investigate bi-modal tram. Run some semi-fast along Altrincham line. Passing loops at M60/Water Park.

*Segregated - not shared with general traffic - effectively an ordinary railway line.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Metrolink extended to Northwich - investigate bi-modal tram.

Yet again, that's not happening unless TfGM remember what NEC stood for in SELNEC (and Northwich is a massive push to be anywhere near North East Cheshire). So if TfGM doesn't get a head who thinks it's a brilliant idea, then the idea is going nowhere without a push from central government.

 

[185]

Yet again, that's not happening unless TfGM remember what NEC stood for in SELNEC (and Northwich is a massive push to be anywhere near North East Cheshire).

If they realise it's a massive cash cow, I'm sure TfGM will be out with the stool and bucket pronto.

 

[LOL The Irony]

If they realise it's a massive cash cow, I'm sure TfGM will be out with the stool and bucket pronto.

Aha! You think that but look at my posting about it on the previous page. They don't want to spend a single penny on anything outside of Greater Manchester. Also I can see the government using it as an excuse to stop trains north of Northwich, cutting off a direct link to Stockport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

@185 - Agree with all of those except Northwich - it's too far out to be sensible. Might be worth going single-track to Hale with every other tram though.

Add Rose Hill Marple (tram-train) via your Guide Bridge line and Hyde Central/Woodley. Possibly even via Brinnington to Marple turnbacks, and just have the "fasts" (Picc, Romiley, Marple, then all stations via the Hope Valley) running as DMUs.

If doing via Brinnington, have those join the formation at Ashburys and close Ardwick (replaced by the tram).

 

[tbtc]

One benefit of trams out to Glossop (other than the fact that they surely couldn't be slower than the 323s that average about twenty miles per hour) is that it'd stop the weekly suggestions on here to re-open Woodhead!

I always value and enjoy your contributions, and try not to be a nitpicker, but think you mean five trams per hour, to make sense?

Apologies - you are (of course) right!

Is there any evidence that the Oldham loop itself required an operating subsidy as part of the railway network, or are we just assuming that it did because the artificially created Northern Rail franchise did at the time ?

The Oldham loop may have been cross-subsidising other parts of the franchise.

I'm not sure what you mean by "artificially created Northern Rail franchise"... surely all franchises are artificially created?

Fair enough if you want to believe that a thirty metre train that required two members of staff on board (on railway salaries) plus all of the signalling and higher maintenance costs etc would be profitable on a diet of PTE-subsidised fares though.

Pretty sure Oldham has ten trams per hour - at least the journey planner indicates so although the map implies five!

Sorry, I should have been clearer - I was referring to the first year of operation, when it started with just five/hour (and before it extended into central Oldham), and the significant passenger jump (despite the frequency increase being only marginal, from four trains per hour to five trams).

People seem to prefer a reliable service into the heart of Manchester than a train to Victoria (despite the train having a toilet, offering through tickets to other National Rail destinations and all of the other current benefits of heavy rail)

Have to admit, I do sometimes think it's a shame the ELR is there - the density of population in the valley wouldn't be badly suited to Metrolink....

Something needs to be done - the morning traffic reports always mention Simister Island - a through tram-train would take some traffic off that roundabout

Half hourly is a perfectly acceptable frequency for the route IMO.

I just don't want to spend stupid amounts of time on a crappy tram with no bog pootling around the streets of Manchester. I want a swift connection to get back to Yorkshire

Sadly, I think that the group of people who'd prefer "five services per hour into the heart of Manchester" would outweigh the group of people who'd prefer "just a half hourly service to the edge of the city centre, but more convenient for connections to Normanton". Can't please everybody though.

If there is that much demand for a metrolink style service to the North West of Manchester, they should dig up the guided busway and replace it with a tram

Metrolink works best on routes where it's relatively segregated - whilst the bus lanes work well on the A6, it'd be harder for trams to be accommodated here - hence them being better on routes where they follow historic (or even current) rail alignments.

 

[yorksrob]

People seem to prefer a reliable service into the heart of Manchester than a train to Victoria (despite the train having a toilet, offering through tickets to other National Rail destinations and all of the other current benefits of heavy rail)

Sadly, I think that the group of people who'd prefer "five services per hour into the heart of Manchester" would outweigh the group of people who'd prefer "just a half hourly service to the edge of the city centre, but more convenient for connections to Normanton". Can't please everybody though.

Well, has anyone ever actually canvassed local residents if they want to replace their fast service to Victoria, that currently takes less than half an hour, with a very slow tram ? I've not seen anything to suggest this is the case. Then there's the fact that the Atherton line isn't some branch line, but is an integral part of the railway network to Southport and Kirkby, so isn't really suited to being hived off.

Metrolink works best on routes where it's relatively segregated - whilst the bus lanes work well on the A6, it'd be harder for trams to be accommodated here - hence them being better on routes where they follow historic (or even current) rail alignments.

The Leigh loop is a historic railway alignment, so it's ideal. Anyhow, there aren't any others that are spare, so it'll have to do.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well, has anyone ever actually canvassed local residents if they want to replace their fast service to Victoria, that currently takes less than half an hour, with a very slow tram ? I've not seen anything to suggest this is the case. Then there's the fact that the Atherton line isn't some branch line, but is an integral part of the railway network to Southport and Kirkby, so isn't really suited to being hived off.

Southport trains can run via Bolton (as they indeed used to for many years), and the sensible thing for Kirkby-Wigan is to extend Merseyrail through to Wallgate bay (either via Skem or not); people on that line (to the extent that there are people on that line) are more interested in going to Liverpool than Manchester, and even so it'd be an easy same-island-platform change in both directions onto something nicer than a knackered Pacer if they did want to go to Manchester.

 

[daodao]

If they realise it's a massive cash cow, I'm sure TfGM will be out with the stool and bucket pronto.

The population density south of the River Bollin barely justifies more than 1-2 passenger trains per hour. Anyone who proposes a Metrolink extension to Ashley and beyond is living in cloud cuckoo land. In theory, a non-electric tram train could be extended into rural Cheshire, but in practice the stringent safety requirements needed as the Mid Cheshire line (as far as the WCML) is extensively used by heavy freight trains means that this is unrealistic.

 

[yorksrob]

Southport trains can run via Bolton (as they indeed used to for many years), and the sensible thing for Kirkby-Wigan is to extend Merseyrail through to Wallgate bay (either via Skem or not); people on that line (to the extent that there are people on that line) are more interested in going to Liverpool than Manchester, and even so it'd be an easy same-island-platform change in both directions onto something nicer than a knackered Pacer if they did want to go to Manchester.

I'm not buying it. It's a dreadful idea. It will leave a very large area of North West Manchester without a fast service into the city. The other "metro" link in the area, the busway already takes around an hour just to get from Atherton to Oxford Road. Why do we want to destroy a fast link just to replicate that ?

This proposal is Metro empire building with no intrinsic merit. I hope it's buried in the dust bin of history where it belongs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This proposal is Metro empire building with no intrinsic merit. I hope it's buried in the dust bin of history where it belongs.

The "intrinsic merit" is a higher frequency, more modern service requiring reduced or no operating subsidy. And no dirty diesel.

The Oldham Loop, which is similar in concept, seems to be doing well.

 

[PR1Berske]

Please God, not Wigan via Atherton. I want a quick journey to Vic

Maybe to Leigh from Eccles or Cornbrook. Going all the way to Wigan without a toilet? Not sure that's a good idea.

 

[tbtc]

Well, has anyone ever actually canvassed local residents if they want to replace their fast service to Victoria, that currently takes less than half an hour, with a very slow tram ? I've not seen anything to suggest this is the case. Then there's the fact that the Atherton line isn't some branch line, but is an integral part of the railway network to Southport and Kirkby, so isn't really suited to being hived off

I'm not aware of any canvassing, but the Oldham Loop seems to be a fairly similar case.

That went from four trains per hour into Victoria to five trams per hour into the heart of Manchester (later increased to ten trams per hour), so seems a fair test of whether the people of Atherton would swap a couple of trains per hour into Victoria with five trams per hour into the heart of Manchester?

Maybe the trade off is worthwhile and people would prefer a frequent service that avoids the need for a long walk through Manchester City Centre to a faster (but less frequent) service that dumps them at Victoria? There's merit in both options, but the Great Mancunian Public seem to prefer frequent trams.

I'd say "faster", but the Atherton train takes around half an hour to cover around ten miles - it's not great, is it?

Okay, you could throw money at the Atherton line to improve it but it's never going to get much of a more frequent service, given the well documented problems squeezing trains through central Manchester and the imbalance (since lots of services from the "east" terminate in the shed at Piccadilly, and the horseshoe shape of the Ordsall Chord) that means we have too many services from the "west" (compared to services from the "east" able to run through to the other side of Manchester).

Any path (through Salford) for the Atherton line would have to be fought against bigger destinations (Liverpool, Preston etc), so even if additional paths were found there's no guarantee of Atherton ever getting a more frequent service.

Whereas, a tram could be a lot more flexible, there's scope to run trams that properly serve central Salford en-route, actually extend into Atherton (rather than the current station that's half a mile from the centre of the place). Look at how the flexibility of light rail has allowed trams to serve central Oldham/ Rochdale properly? Trains could never have realistically done that.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I would look at new extensions from:

• East Didsbury to Stockport (& Possibly Marple)
• Oldham to Middleton
• East Didsbury to Hazel Grove (Possibly a tram-train via a reopened Cheadle Heath)
• Radcliffe to Bolton
• Bolton to Bury via Radcliffe
• Manchester Airport Loop
• Stockport to Manchester Airport via Baguley
• Eccles to Wigan via Tyldesley

Your Thoughts?

 

[185]

.....anyone who proposes a Metrolink extension to Ashley and beyond is living in cloud cuckoo land....

Tis nice here in cloud cuckoo land.

Besides, Ashley... population 11, 3 cats and a half a goat also has the M56 passing through and thus the market for growth for dragging Mr Chelsea Tractor off the motorway to a park and ride could be a lucrative one. Tis the nay sayers who for decades have left Manchester's transport years behind other cities, and our roads chocablock.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tis nice here in cloud cuckoo land.

Besides, Ashley... population 11, 3 cats and a half a goat also has the M56 passing through and thus the market for growth for dragging Mr Chelsea Tractor off the motorway to a park and ride could be a lucrative one. Tis the nay sayers who for decades have left Manchester's transport years behind other cities, and our roads chocablock.

I doubt the posh villagers of Cheshire will want a dirty great car park in their village. It'd be a bit like Islip - "we don't want more trains as it'll get too busy, we like our infrequent country branch line as it is, if we ever bother to use it" (I actually jest not).

 

[LOL The Irony]

Tis nice here in cloud cuckoo land.

Besides, Ashley... population 11, 3 cats and a half a goat also has the M56 passing through and thus the market for growth for dragging Mr Chelsea Tractor off the motorway to a park and ride could be a lucrative one. Tis the nay sayers who for decades have left Manchester's transport years behind other cities, and our roads chocablock.

A few years ago on another forum, I came up with the idea of an "M56 Parkway" and I still have the doodles somewhere on this computer.

 

[LOL The Irony]

I doubt the posh villagers of Cheshire will want a dirty great car park in their village. It'd be a bit like Islip - "we don't want more trains as it'll get too busy, we like our infrequent country branch line as it is, if we ever bother to use it" (I actually jest not).

They won't. No matter how much of a benefit it is to the Town or Village, they'll protest it to the bitter end.

 

[yorksrob]

The Oldham Loop, which is similar in concept, seems to be doing well.

The 189 bus from Wakefield to Leeds via Castleford is doing very well. I still wouldn't want it to replace the train which takes half as long.

 

[Greybeard33]

Metrolink would be the only practical way of ever getting better than half-hourly service on the route.

As a matter of fact, the Atherton line already has 3tph. The franchise agreement requirement was for 4tph from December 2017. Following the timetable chaos and delays, this improvement is now planned for the May 2019 timetable change.

Network Rail resignalled the line a few years ago to enable the frequency increase.

I'd say "faster", but the Atherton train takes around half an hour to cover around ten miles - it's not great, is it?

Okay, you could throw money at the Atherton line to improve it but it's never going to get much of a more frequent service....

Whereas, a tram could be a lot more flexible, there's scope to run trams that properly serve central Salford en-route, actually extend into Atherton (rather than the current station that's half a mile from the centre of the place).

The semi-fasts take only 21 minutes from Victoria to Atherton, and it is more than ten miles. The 50mph linespeed could be improved at much lower cost than tram-train conversion.

Tram-trains would have to share track with 2tph heavy rail between Crow Nest Junction and Wigan, which would restrict their frequency to 4tph - no improvement.

The existing trains all call at Salford Central, which is in central Salford! The TfGM tram-train proposal does not envisage relocation of Atherton station.

 

[td97]

7) Review of viability of (Manchester-) Radcliffe to Bolton (Segregated)

• Radcliffe to Bolton

• Bolton to Bury via Radcliffe

Some ignorant house builders have recently built a housing estate on part of the former railway line
https://goo.gl/maps/wRNpqeh61EE2

 

[yorksrob]

I'm not aware of any canvassing, but the Oldham Loop seems to be a fairly similar case.

That went from four trains per hour into Victoria to five trams per hour into the heart of Manchester (later increased to ten trams per hour), so seems a fair test of whether the people of Atherton would swap a couple of trains per hour into Victoria with five trams per hour into the heart of Manchester?

Maybe the trade off is worthwhile and people would prefer a frequent service that avoids the need for a long walk through Manchester City Centre to a faster (but less frequent) service that dumps them at Victoria? There's merit in both options, but the Great Mancunian Public seem to prefer frequent trams.

Victoria is in the heart of Manchester.

As I have said previously, the area already has the option of slow and frequent in the form of the Leigh guided busway, and many residents at the time expressed a preference for rail for that. Let those of us who travel in the area regularly, have at least one fast link to Manchester.

I'd say "faster", but the Atherton train takes around half an hour to cover around ten miles - it's not great, is it?

Have you ever travelled on the Oldham loop since it became a tram ? Atherton is fast compared to that.

Okay, you could throw money at the Atherton line to improve it but it's never going to get much of a more frequent service, given the well documented problems squeezing trains through central Manchester and the imbalance (since lots of services from the "east" terminate in the shed at Piccadilly, and the horseshoe shape of the Ordsall Chord) that means we have too many services from the "west" (compared to services from the "east" able to run through to the other side of Manchester).

Any path (through Salford) for the Atherton line would have to be fought against bigger destinations (Liverpool, Preston etc), so even if additional paths were found there's no guarantee of Atherton ever getting a more frequent service.

Whereas, a tram could be a lot more flexible, there's scope to run trams that properly serve central Salford en-route, actually extend into Atherton (rather than the current station that's half a mile from the centre of the place). Look at how the flexibility of light rail has allowed trams to serve central Oldham/ Rochdale properly? Trains could never have realistically done that.

Light rail does get very far into the heart of Rochdale and Oldham. That is also why it is very slow. As you say, there is a trade-off. The Atherton line already has the correct one.

In terms of frequency, the line is already well served as half hourly. A twenty minute interval would be superb. True, there is congestion in the Salford area, but if trains were turned around at Rochdale or Stalybridge, this could be overcome. I'd be interested to see what sort of a convoluted route a tram would take through central Manchester.

 

[peri]

Guide Bridge looks fairly close to the Ashton-under-Lyne line, is there a chance of connecting there?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Some ignorant house builders have recently built a housing estate on part of the former railway line
https://goo.gl/maps/wRNpqeh61EE2

Could it be diverted via different alignment (or on-street) hence why I suggested it as part of the MetroLink rather than Heavy Rail.

 

[Ianno87]

In terms of frequency, the line is already well served as half hourly. A twenty minute interval would be superb. True, there is congestion in the Salford area, but if trains were turned around at Rochdale or Stalybridge, this could be overcome. I'd be interested to see what sort of a convoluted route a tram would take through central Manchester.

In business case terms, if you had a spare path through Salford Crescent and onwards into/through Victoria (or Piccadilly), the case for an extra path via Bolton I'd wager would almost certainly always outweigh the case for it being used for a via Atherton service. It is always going to be the poor heavy rail relation to the Bolton corridor.

 

[B&I]

Off heavy rail alignments and onto streets, where trams are meant to go in conurbations of nearly 3 million people.

What I shouldn't find amazing (given the degree of groupthink on this forum), but still do, is that most of the suggestions made involve not some new alignment, extending the area of Greater Manchester covered by light rail, but replacing an existing heavy rail alignment with Metrolink. The chief advantage of light rail - flexibility - is therby completely squandered.

But why should this surprise me ? Metrolink came into being because successive governments were unwilling to spend proper amounts on public transport in Manchester, and it was cheaper than the heavy suburban rail system the conurbation needs. Not, of course, that anyone will admit this, because it doesn't fir with the modern Manchester philosophy of relentless civic boosterism. It's a bit difficult pretending you're Britain's Second City when you have a fourth rate transport system.

And so the Metrolink philosophy continues, regardless of the damage inflicted on any wider rail network across the north.

 

[yorksrob]

In business case terms, if you had a spare path through Salford Crescent and onwards into/through Victoria (or Piccadilly), the case for an extra path via Bolton I'd wager would almost certainly always outweigh the case for it being used for a via Atherton service. It is always going to be the poor heavy rail relation to the Bolton corridor.

Even then, with trains going through Victoria, rather than blocking it, we're hardly talking Borough Market Junction.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

https://i.imgur.com/gzuJFQQ.png

Some suggestions here, I know not all (if any) happen but it has a few options.