Light Rail v Heavy Rail

[squizzler]

I love modern LRV. I don't think there are any Western cities still in need of a metro railway system that would be better served by conventional heavy rail metro than LRV (using segregated or tunnelled right of way where applicable. I have just used the Porto metro based on trams in tunnels, and think this is the way to go.

Those of us whose experience of light rail in the UK is a ride across the city centre in a Manchester Metrolink have not witnessed anything like what Light rail can deliver in big cities. The Cardiff Metro should show what modern light rail can do over a large area.

THat said, I also think that in light of the High Speed Rail programme, it is also not unreasonable to consider an uplift in heavy rail frequencies on our legacy lines and stations to 5tph S-Bahn style services once the intercity traffic is abstracted into HSR.

This latter might be the case for many routes in the Midlands and North, since there is no point in converting the already high quality electrified LMS (New Street Ststion lines) system around Birmingham, Wolverhampton and Coventry, say, to light rail. It is quite possible that these areas may benefit from S-Bahn and LRT metro as a complimentary whole.

On balance, I feel the original question creates a false dichotomy. There will be some cases where creation of a metropolitan transport system is best achieved by conversion to LRT, and others where the HSR programme allows the legacy routes to become high frequency S-Bahn with heavy rail.

 

[EllieAquitrain]

A new line in to the city centre from Salford Crescent to accommodate Wigan via Atherton, Eccles and Media City services.

A fun instance of the ambiguous comma! I don't think Atherton line passengers would be happy with a diversion through Eccles and Media City

 

[HSTEd]

As much as I'm sure Manchester would love a tram tunnel, I am not hopeful it will get one, and I'm not sure one is strictly necessary at the present time.

If it's a choice between a tramtunnel and one or two new lines and a surface crossing and three, I will take the surface crossing every time.

 

[BayPaul]

Very nicely put!

 

[Purple Orange]

A fun instance of the ambiguous comma! I don't think Atherton line passengers would be happy with a diversion through Eccles and Media City

Ha ha, no I can’t imagine that would go down very well!

As much as I'm sure Manchester would love a tram tunnel, I am not hopeful it will get one, and I'm not sure one is strictly necessary at the present time.

If it's a choice between a tramtunnel and one or two new lines and a surface crossing and three, I will take the surface crossing every time.

I too think it won’t happen. I suspect the metrolink network as we know it today will be ‘complete’ to it’s fullest potential once the Atherton, Glossop & Hadfield and Rose Hill lines are converted to tram-train.

After that it would be building a completely different type of network (it might be light rail metro still), but that is unlikely.

More likely is using heavy rail infrastructure projects like HS2, NPR, Oxford Rd remodelling, Piccadilly P14 & P15, Salford Central P3-P5, to enable metro service levels on selected heavy rail routes.

 

[Ianno87]

Ha ha, no I can’t imagine that would go down very well!



I too think it won’t happen. I suspect the metrolink network as we know it today will be ‘complete’ to it’s fullest potential once the Atherton, Glossop & Hadfield and Rose Hill lines are converted to tram-train.

After that it would be building a completely different type of network (it might be light rail metro still), but that is unlikely.

The key thing for Metrolink will be making best use of the existing city centre capacity. The "obvious" solution is extending Piccadilly/Victoria/Crumpsall terminating services out of the city, and filling up the capacity that's left on 2CC (if any).

Then comes the "what next?" question.

 

[HSTEd]

If you built a Salford Crescent to Victoria line with a seperate set of platforms at Victoria you could probably push another service pattern through to Picadilly via Shudehill.

That gets you enough to Atherton, Glossop/Hadfield, Rose Hill and possibly a Levenshulme Line.

But for Warrington, Bolton or anything fancy like that you likely need a third city crossing of some type, be it on the surface or underground.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Building a tunnel trough Manchester has been proven to be an expensive task, so if you're spending that much on the supposedly cheaper option, you may as well spend a bit more and have a relief for Castlefield. It'll be a massive waste of money otherwise.

 

[HSTEd]

Building a tunnel trough Manchester has been proven to be an expensive task, so if you're spending that much on the supposedly cheaper option, you may as well spend a bit more and have a relief for Castlefield. It'll be a massive waste of money otherwise.

Well once you have a "Tram"-tunnel, Metrolink becomes almost indistinguishable from a true metro system.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Well once you have a "Tram"-tunnel, Metrolink becomes almost indistinguishable from a true metro system.

But then it's no longer this cheaper alternative to heavy rail if you have to build a tunnel through a notoriously difficult area and the money would be better spent on a relief for Castlefield, either above or below ground.

 

[Purple Orange]

But then it's no longer this cheaper alternative to heavy rail if you have to build a tunnel through a notoriously difficult area and the money would be better spent on a relief for Castlefield, either above or below ground.

Can you explain why Central Manchester is a nortoriously difficult area to tunnel?

 

[LOL The Irony]

Can you explain why Central Manchester is a nortoriously difficult area to tunnel?

Because it is built on rock, whereas London is built on clay, making it harder and more expensive to drill through. This being one of the reasons that killed Picc-Vic, causing Greater Manchester Council to go with a ground level metro system. Which is what Metrolink should stay as, but I digress.

 

[Purple Orange]

Because it is built on rock, whereas London is built on clay, making it harder and more expensive to drill through. This being one of the reasons that killed Picc-Vic, causing Greater Manchester Council to go with a ground level metro system. Which is what Metrolink should stay as, but I digress.

Yet a tunnel is to be built for HS2 and for all the discussions on an NPR tunnel, nobody has cited the issue of the geology as a problem.

The Picc-Vic tunnel was cancelled because the government announced a £500m reduction in public spending due to the poor economic conditions. It wasn’t cancelled because of the cost specifically associated with the scheme.

 

[snookertam]

Was going to be facetious and say what if my local line is the West Highland….

In all seriousness, it’s a difficult one. My local line currently has a half hourly service which is reduced from 4tph due to covid service reductions. It has been proposed that the route be converted as part of a proposed Glasgow metro, but doing so would imply increased journey times to divert via city centre street running. So the previous 4tph heavy rail service was ideal in that it provided a direct service into the city. 5tph heavy rail would be even better!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Was going to be facetious and say what if my local line is the West Highland….

Clearly not sensible for a long rural line like that, but I have wondered about short-distance rural light rail as being a way of improving and electrifying branch line service and continuing into town centres when the station is on the outskirts. The Cornish branches are examples where this sort of thing might fit, sort of on the model of the Swiss narrow gauge lines. Might also suit the Thames Valley branches now they no longer run through to Paddington. Were it not for East West Rail the Marston Vale might also suit.

 

[daodao]

I have wondered about short-distance rural light rail as being a way of improving and electrifying branch line service and continuing into town centres when the station is on the outskirts.

There is an excellent example in Austria where the Gmunden tramway and the Traunseebahn were linked a few years ago.

 

[cle]

Clearly not sensible for a long rural line like that, but I have wondered about short-distance rural light rail as being a way of improving and electrifying branch line service and continuing into town centres when the station is on the outskirts. The Cornish branches are examples where this sort of thing might fit, sort of on the model of the Swiss narrow gauge lines. Might also suit the Thames Valley branches now they no longer run through to Paddington. Were it not for East West Rail the Marston Vale might also suit.

The problem with the Cornish lines is that they mostly spur off the same way (St Ives being the exception but also at the end of the earth) - and so there isn't the chance for mini-Crossrsail (I know!) through services which might add even a little to the mainline and link places. Like the Llandudno/Conwy line for a split second, for instance. I guess Falmouth to Looe would be theoretically possible, but not much point.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The problem with the Cornish lines is that they mostly spur off the same way (St Ives being the exception but also at the end of the earth) - and so there isn't the chance for mini-Crossrsail (I know!) through services which might add even a little to the mainline and link places. Like the Llandudno/Conwy line for a split second, for instance. I guess Falmouth to Looe would be theoretically possible, but not much point.

I wasn't so much thinking of linking them but more to allow electrification and continuation into town, e.g. isn't Looe station a long way from the centre?

 

[BayPaul]

I wasn't so much thinking of linking them but more to allow electrification and continuation into town, e.g. isn't Looe station a long way from the centre?

I don't think that's a major issue on any of the Cornish Branches.
Looe Station is just the other side of the bridge into town, and even a tram would be a nightmare to get any closer Edit - 400m from the town, but not along a road that is really suitable for trams - too narrow and busy.
Falmouth town station is only 300m from the National Maritime Museum - bringing the line closer to the centre of town would mean closing the last mile or so of track, including both stations, and then street running for a similar distance on narrow and hilly roads (i.e. basically impossible)
Newquay station is central
St Ives station is about 600m from the town centre, and other than running into its own car park (which I think it used to do), none of the roads are remotely practical to take it any closer into town.
Gunnislake station is 1km from the village, but is up a very steep hill, that I really doubt a tram could manage, and the population of the village isn't really sufficient to make a scheme like this make sense.
All of the branches seem to me to be ideal for battery trains, rather than stringing up wires.

 

[cle]

I wasn't so much thinking of linking them but more to allow electrification and continuation into town, e.g. isn't Looe station a long way from the centre?

Ahh ok. Yeah it is bit, but the streets are super narrow and it would never be remotely viable. It's pretty dire and tiny.

The likes of Truro might be more interesting for what you describe - the station is up on a hill and pretty inconvenient. Punches above its weight as a regional centre too, like a mini-Norwich, and could get locals out of cars if it reached the shops, healthcare and jobs. Sort of thing that once upon a time might have gotten EU money

 

[Irascible]

St Ives station is about 600m from the town centre, and other than running into its own car park (which I think it used to do), none of the roads are remotely practical to take it any closer into town.

Yes, it was a pretty long platform & the station building was at the end nearest the current station anyway, so it's not really a longer walk.

All of the branches seem to me to be ideal for battery trains, rather than stringing up wires.

That they do - pretty sure some of the Cornish branch services run through to Penzance too. Other than running down a street is there really any difference between these services & light rail anyway? the branches are pretty basic.

 

[HSTEd]

It's worth noting that tram-trains mean that a metro tunnel does not have to be for trams or for heavy rail exclusively, it can be both.

Especially in the Metrolink scneario where the platform heights are the same.

 

[LOL The Irony]

It's worth noting that tram-trains mean that a metro tunnel does not have to be for trams or for heavy rail exclusively, it can be both.

Especially in the Metrolink scneario where the platform heights are the same.

If such a tunnel were to exist, it would be better for express trains to use so they don't take up space on Castlefield. A 3rd City Crossing going up Deansgate would be better for Metrolink.

 

[Purple Orange]

It's worth noting that tram-trains mean that a metro tunnel does not have to be for trams or for heavy rail exclusively, it can be both.

Especially in the Metrolink scneario where the platform heights are the same.

Some people really lose their **** upon seeing the word ‘tram’. Usually from people who live nowhere near the network for it to bother them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Oct 2021 ==

If such a tunnel were to exist, it would be better for express trains to use so they don't take up space on Castlefield. A 3rd City Crossing going up Deansgate would be better for Metrolink.

There won’t be a 3rd city crossing up Deansgate. It will most likely come in from Salford Central, crossing Deansgate and up John Dalton Street to join the 2nd city crossing line to St. Peter’s Square.

 

[LOL The Irony]

There won’t be a 3rd city crossing up Deansgate. It will most likely come in from Salford Central, crossing Deansgate and up John Dalton Street to join the 2nd city crossing line to St. Peter’s Square.

Yes! Let's have zero forward planning, fill up the existing network, send it through an already existing bottleneck, then have to build an avoiding line anyways that probably goes up Deansgate, having spent tens of millions more than if we just sent it up Deansgate in the first place.

 

[Purple Orange]

Yes! Let's have zero forward planning, fill up the existing network, send it through an already existing bottleneck, then have to build an avoiding line anyways that probably goes up Deansgate, having spent tens of millions more than if we just sent it up Deansgate in the first place.

It’s not full up. St. Peter’s Sq can handle 45 tph. Converting the Glossop/Hadfield and the Rose Hill lines does not affect city centre capacity, as 10 tph terminate at Piccadilly at present. The Middleton extension doesn’t affect city centre capacity, as they would be an extension of the services that terminate at Victoria. Then having a line that accommodates 5 tph to Wigan via Atherton and 10 back to Eccles & Media City also has no impact on city centre frequency.

Essentially the line through Cornbrook & St Peters Square will have 45 tph, of which 15 head to Piccadilly, 15 head to Victoria and 15 can head to Salford Central. 10 can travel between Victoria & Piccadilly.

 

[Ken H]

What is the plan to get trams from Picc to Glossop/Rose Hill. OK you can use the unused track once it goes down from 4 to 2 tracks just West of Gorton. But before that its a busy railway. TPE depot, Aggregate Depot etc. Street tram down Ashton Old Road perhaps?
I think you would want the tram on the south of the formation so there is no conflict at Guide bridge for trains going to Stalybridge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What is the plan to get trams from Picc to Glossop/Rose Hill. OK you can use the unused track once it goes down from 4 to 2 tracks just West of Gorton. But before that its a busy railway. TPE depot, Aggregate Depot etc. Street tram down Ashton Old Road perhaps?
I think you would want the tram on the south of the formation so there is no conflict at Guide bridge for trains going to Stalybridge.

Street running as far as Ashburys is I believe the likely plan. There's then, I believe, room for 4-tracking as far as Guide Bridge where the mainline stuff turns left, though you would need to re-slew the mainline track and rebuild local stations (if you kept them on the mainline bit) in a few places, like Fairfield's platforms appear to be on what was a running line.

Arguably for Rose Hill running via Bredbury would be better as that is I believe busier than the local stations towards Guide Bridge, but if you're doing Glossop the other way makes more sense.

 

[cle]

Street running as far as Ashburys is I believe the likely plan. There's then, I believe, room for 4-tracking as far as Guide Bridge where the mainline stuff turns left, though you would need to re-slew the mainline track and rebuild local stations (if you kept them on the mainline bit) in a few places, like Fairfield's platforms appear to be on what was a running line.

Arguably for Rose Hill running via Bredbury would be better as that is I believe busier than the local stations towards Guide Bridge, but if you're doing Glossop the other way makes more sense.

I think you do both, if you have 10tph to play with. You need one route to Romiley and Sheffield, and the route to Guide Bridge will remain due to Stalybridge bound services - so Bredbury seems to be one which could absorbed into the Met. Romiley would be a bit of a hub (and integrated/mode agnostic ticketing would help here!)

The platforms and paths would allow a much more intensive metro (HR) service to New Mills and beyond, where feasible to terminate. Hopefully wired (already out to Guide Bridge) all the way to Sheffield.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think you do both, if you have 10tph to play with. You need one route to Romiley and Sheffield, and the route to Guide Bridge will remain due to Stalybridge bound services - so Bredbury seems to be one which could absorbed into the Met. Romiley would be a bit of a hub (and integrated/mode agnostic ticketing would help here!)

The platforms and paths would allow a much more intensive metro (HR) service to New Mills and beyond, where feasible to terminate. Hopefully wired (already out to Guide Bridge) all the way to Sheffield.

So I guess you'd be looking at 25kV tram-train?