Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Well, as a long time Nottingham resident I wouldn't go that far. Derby has got a few things going for it - the Museum of Making, the Derwent right in the middle of town, the Five Lamps, The Victoria and The Brunswick, and also direct trains to the NE and SW...
They are however also really well connected already by train, buses including night buses, and road.
The settlements between the two cities are well-covered by these modes of transport so it's not just city-to-city.
I don't personally feel that a tram link between Nottingham and Derby would pass a cost-benefit analysis, and while there is a regional mayor, the logistics of it would be challenging.
Agreed. I really think the only way Derby trams are going to happen at all is if VLR in Coventry is a success, then some variation of Line 1 might happen, with that technology making it affordable (but definitely *not* going to Nottingham!).
As far as I know ilkeston is derbyshire but apart of the Nottingham Urban Area (or Greater Nottingham) same with longeaton however thats also got another oddity as it has Nottingham postcodes (NG10) in derbyshire but again slightly off topic
Derby is the size of place where, if it were in France, a tram would be built without question. But this is England where the DfT haven't approved a single new mass transit network since 2000.
I suppose you could make an argument that the gap between Nottingham and Derby is only a few kilometres. Operating at least a first tram line in Derby as an extension of NET Line 1 might bring some operational and cost benefits.
The section between Nottingham and Derby through empty fields is unlikely to represent a giant chunk of the budget!
I suppose you could make an argument that the gap between Nottingham and Derby is only a few kilometres. Operating at least a first tram line in Derby as an extension of NET Line 1 might bring some operational and cost benefits.
The section between Nottingham and Derby through empty fields is unlikely to represent a giant chunk of the budget!
Thing is, it needs to not just go through fields, because half the benefit isn't in transporting full route Nottingham-Derby passengers, it's the people who live in the settlements between the two cities.
To be most useful it would either need to go up to Ilkeston and back down, or extend the line from Toton Lane to hit settlements like Breaston, Draycott, Borrowash, Spondon, Alvaston.
If someone wants to go all the way from Nottingham to Derby they could just take the train (same location as the existing tram station), or the bus, both of which take about half an hour and have plenty of capacity.
Derby is the size of place where, if it were in France, a tram would be built without question. But this is England where the DfT haven't approved a single new mass transit network since 2000.
Derby is the size of place where, if it were in France, it would have a proper city centre population and be twice as dense in every direction. It also wouldn't have all the major employment dispersed around the ring road.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Thing is, it needs to not just go through fields, because half the benefit isn't in transporting full route Nottingham-Derby passengers, it's the people who live in the settlements between the two cities.
To be most useful it would either need to go up to Ilkeston and back down, or extend the line from Toton Lane to hit settlements like Breaston, Draycott, Borrowash, Spondon, Alvaston.
If someone wants to go all the way from Nottingham to Derby they could just take the train (same location as the existing tram station), or the bus, both of which take about half an hour and have plenty of capacity.
Derby is the size of place where, if it were in France, it would have a proper city centre population and be twice as dense in every direction. It also wouldn't have all the major employment dispersed around the ring road.
Not sure about that. The big French cities certainly have much denser city centres, but there are plenty of cities with ~200,000 population with trams whose population density seem not very different to Derby. And France is certainly not holding back when it comes to out of town employment centres.
To be most useful it would either need to go up to Ilkeston and back down, or extend the line from Toton Lane to hit settlements like Breaston, Draycott, Borrowash, Spondon, Alvaston.
This is my point though - the tram link shouldn't follow the A52.
If it does, it will just follow the express bus routes like the Red Arrow and won't serve any new settlements. I'm yet to try and board a Red Arrow and find it full, so the capacity appears to be fine, it's fast, runs every 10 minutes at rush hour, etc.
Anyone who instead wants an express direct service can get the train in the same amount of time also.
They are though it is quite slow. If they picked off a handful of those settlements and had a limited call tram service connecting with both Nottingham and Derby, that's really the only way I can see this idea having any merit.
Otherwise I think the idea of a tram between Nottingham and Derby is a bit dead in the water.
This smells more like political posturing, driven by jealousy that Nottingham has trams, and ignoring the fact that its urban area is 3 times the size of Derby's.
Every city in France with over 100,000 people has trams.
The principal issue is that the cost of building trams is multiples higher than on the continent. Some of that is due to the fact that in the UK every utility is moved when it’s built at the cost of the tram builder. Whereas on the continent it’s only stuff that’s close to the surface or particularly out of date that gets moved and off the infrastructure is updated the owner pays some of the cost.
Unfortunately the way we fund transport we tend to fund it based on the “best available techniques” which means that we bake the expense in. The combined authority won’t have a budget, capability or a plan to do a study into reducing the costs of building a tram before building a pilot line using these improved techniques followed by building the rest of the network at a French cost base.
Until we rebuild the parts of government that can do prototyping we are going to be stuck with whatever costs the risk averse fragmented private sector can give us.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
£405m for a 46.5km network or £14m per mile. For urban tram construction, I would call that optimistic, even if the author of these proposals rules out site clearance, planning and design.
The cheapest country to build trams in in Europe is Germany at £24m per mile, UK average is £87m per mile.
It’s not a totally unreasonable ball park number to target particular as you could use battery trams and save on a lot of the more costly electrification.
The problems are funding, research and industry.
1: There needs to be a way to pay for this without being on the hook from treasury. Funding needs to be more local and with locally elected people on the hook, that is how we avoid the funds being spent profligately. Some degree of land value capture is probably the best option if we honestly believe the BCRs.
2: We need to have standard ways of doing things and doing them cheaply, you will never get this if each tram project is a self contained unit without research and technology budget. Maybe as this is in Derby GBR Research can be the centre of excellence for tram construction.
3: The industry bit will take time but actually laying out a 5 line arrangement and a long term schedule is how you get them to invest.
I agree ilkeston shouldn't have a derby tram because there's even less settlements between spondon and ilkeston or even if you went via the old rail alignment via west hallam and breadsall dont think would work personally.
Ilkeston could get trams don't get me wrong but I think it would be either Toton lane through trowels to ilkeston (possibly extension to henor if funds allow) or the phenix park - near ikea giltbrook proposed extention extending that down through awsworth and into ilkeston
Alveston however I think could work but doubt it as you could come off in the draycott area go via elvaston into aleveston that way don't see it happening like that tho more likely will follow the A52 axis somewhat if was to be done
I have quickly plotted with where some stops could be although I know it wouldn't stop at them all as some are close together for a tram. I've not gone via derby road longeaton to Breaston as traffic can backlog and I'm not sure if it could go over the bridge near town hall without major reworking. (Couldn't attach video as file was too big) but this is how I image it to work with it going from Wyvern via the current derby proposal
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Before it goes anywhere towards derby I think they should extend it atleast to longeston probably that container site I labeled as asda on my route before even planning ahead to derby making it a whole different phase
There definitely would be enough traffic for an interurban tram between Nottingham and Derby, which can form the nucleus of a derby tram network.
As mentioned before both by traffic of the towns and suburbs between the 2 cities (which all are economically are interlinked)
There are 3 intercity direct bus routes (Red Arrow, Indigo and i4) as well as indirectly via the skylink bus network via the east Midlands airport.
And multiple trains per hour between the 2 cities also.
The buses are good but woefully slow or unreliable when there is any slight traffic or accident on the A52, Derby road or even Queens road (the Beeston bypass), trams are wizzing by multiple gridlocked buses to all over.
If there is even a slight modal shift from the roads/buses/trains to an interurban tram it would be benefiting the two cities transport networks immensely. (In my view Nottingham already has one of the best transport networks in the country)
There definitely would be enough traffic for an interurban tram between Nottingham and Derby, which can form the nucleus of a derby tram network.
As mentioned before both by traffic of the towns and suburbs between the 2 cities (which all are economically are interlinked)
Yes I doubt will happen but I do like the idea and think should happen however do think you could get private investment to pay for it like for example on my potential route I posted on post #42 the bit to longeaton could be paid for by a new development then some portions like Wyvern to derby I bet could be partly funded both by retail and the new industrial and mabey rolls royce then even nottingham university could scrap there 901 and use those funds to pay partly for nottingham - derby royal ( I know a bus route won't be cover anywhere near the amount for funding trams however little by little is alot) even NHS may help and like they do with the Royal Derby bus connecting the 2 hospitals
Not saying any of these would but my point makes me think it could be done if you thought about it right even if it don't pay for it all
Judging by the LRTA submission, I'd say somebody has spent £9.99 on a packet Crayola Supertips Washable Markers from Amazon, money they will never get back.
Judging by the LRTA submission, I'd say somebody has spent £9.99 on a packet Crayola Supertips Washable Markers from Amazon, money they will never get back.
If there is even a slight modal shift from the roads/buses/trains to an interurban tram it would be benefiting the two cities transport networks immensely. (In my view Nottingham already has one of the best transport networks in the country)
Why would you want to shift from buses or trains? The trains and the Red Arrow are much faster and nobody travelling between the city centres would get the tram.
Long Eaton - Derby only sustains a 3tph bus service (and similarly Stapleford - Derby). Passengers won't thank you for their bus frequency being downgraded. And where is there going to be a segregated alignment that doesn't ignore population centres?
Judging by the LRTA submission, I'd say somebody has spent £9.99 on a packet Crayola Supertips Washable Markers from Amazon, money they will never get back.
Ask yourself this, if a city the size of Leeds can't get their tram proposal off the ground, what chance does Derby have? The only people who will benefit from this are the various consultancy agencies that'll milk it for every penny before the idea is quietly shelved because there is no money...
The proposal has been submitted as part of one of those mayoral transport conversations where they are seeking suggestions to improve transport. My impression is that the proposal for Derby trams has gained much more coverage than the press release talking about 2,000 responses.
LRTA benefit from an elevated profile for both the national organisation and the local branch. There is probably a reasonable belief that they have done something to raise the profile of light rail.
Mayoral authority raises the profile of themselves and the consultation that they are running for free in various local and professional press outlets. All of these will feed into the report showing engagement. Even the Facebook posts with “Vote for this political party” will be counted and thanks to a little line on the Facebook page, they will be completely ignored in the consultation.
The press love these sorts of articles. They are easy to share and gain lots of engagement.
The question is who loses and, I think it is another knock back for the national conversation about what this country can achieve and deliver. Thoughtful contributions that improve or challenge this are drowned out for a quick bit of news bait and build up the view that this country isn’t moving forwards.
Ask yourself this, if a city the size of Leeds can't get their tram proposal off the ground, what chance does Derby have? The only people who will benefit from this are the various consultancy agencies that'll milk it for every penny before the idea is quietly shelved because there is no money...
The failure of the UK government and planning system to enable regional mass transit systems to be funded and built in the past should not be used as a crutch to beat any ideas away, particularly in the *speculative* section of a rail forum. Disagreement yes, but dismissal to shut down discussion isn't on.
The failure of the UK government and planning system to enable regional mass transit systems to be funded and built in the past should not be used as a crutch to beat any ideas away, particularly in the *speculative* section of a rail forum. Disagreement yes, but dismissal to shut down discussion isn't on.
At no point have I tried to shut down any discussion, but in reality the chances of this happening is minimal at best, that's obvious to everyone, it doesn't matter who is to blame or why and wasting any money on this is irresponsible.
As I said, if bigger, more densley populated cities such as Leeds can't get a tram system off the ground, what hope is there?
At no point have I tried to shut down any discussion, but in reality the chances of this happening is minimal at best, that's obvious to everyone, it doesn't matter who is to blame or why and wasting any money on this is irresponsible.
As I said, if bigger, more densely populated cities such as Leeds can't get a tram system off the ground, what hope is there?
Have you noticed a large surfeit of logic in any transport decision?
For example Newcastle has the closest thing to the London Underground (Metro runs about twice as fast as the Manchester Metrolink) it is far from the largest conurbation in the UK or the most economically successful.
There are reasons to be hopeful:
1: We have regional mayors who's influence and powers are likely to grow over time, eventually getting to the point where they can actually fund things themselves without needing treasury.
2: Derby is the second largest city in one of these regional mayoralties and the other city has a tram system
3: Derby is HQ of GBR so it has a much greater density of rail minded people locally, concentrated interest beats dispersed interest every time.
As I have said before justifying rapid transport at UK rates is incredibly difficult, we don't need to get better at justifying it or asking nicer we need to get cheaper at doing it. This is something that GBR (based in Derby) should help lead, unfortunately as it is originally put together by lawyers and economists I have seen no mention of GBR using any of its massive resources to do anything more than carry on network rails tiny £50m R&D budget.
Rail has an annual spend of £26bn, a sensible amount for GBR to spend would be a few percent of that (say £500 million a year) assuming that it would spur a decent amount of further spending in private industry and get the industry to the far more sensible 5-10% of revenue that a technological industry should be spending.
GBR won't be interested in trams, nor will it have the capability. Tram schemes are road schemes - it's all the utility diversion stuff that's complicated - heavy rail organisations don't deal with these things. Derby's land use is fundamentally wrong for supporting a tram network.
Have you noticed a large surfeit of logic in any transport decision?
For example Newcastle has the closest thing to the London Underground (Metro runs about twice as fast as the Manchester Metrolink) it is far from the largest conurbation in the UK or the most economically successful.
There are reasons to be hopeful:
1: We have regional mayors who's influence and powers are likely to grow over time, eventually getting to the point where they can actually fund things themselves without needing treasury.
2: Derby is the second largest city in one of these regional mayoralties and the other city has a tram system
3: Derby is HQ of GBR so it has a much greater density of rail minded people locally, concentrated interest beats dispersed interest every time.
As I have said before justifying rapid transport at UK rates is incredibly difficult, we don't need to get better at justifying it or asking nicer we need to get cheaper at doing it. This is something that GBR (based in Derby) should help lead, unfortunately as it is originally put together by lawyers and economists I have seen no mention of GBR using any of its massive resources to do anything more than carry on network rails tiny £50m R&D budget.
Rail has an annual spend of £26bn, a sensible amount for GBR to spend would be a few percent of that (say £500 million a year) assuming that it would spur a decent amount of further spending in private industry and get the industry to the far more sensible 5-10% of revenue that a technological industry should be spending.
I'm still not convinced, Derby may officially be a city, but compared to Nottingham, it's much smaller so will be much harder to justify, economically.
I doubt GBR HQ will have much of an impact either way, most of the senior team will probably be from outside of the local area so a local tram system will be of no benefit to them, so why push for it?
Lots if not all of the places that have reintroduced trams also had some heavy rail routes that could be repurposed to provide fast off street running for part of the journey. I don't think Derby has anything suitable but I could be wrong.
Lots if not all of the places that have reintroduced trams also had some heavy rail routes that could be repurposed to provide fast off street running for part of the journey. I don't think Derby has anything suitable but I could be wrong.
A lot of the course of one of those trams uses the former bed of the Great Northern Railway which has only partially been built over. In the rest of the city it's more difficult as the road network is radial with pretty poor interconnections and most of those radial roads lacking space to run a grade separated tram.
I'm still not convinced, Derby may officially be a city, but compared to Nottingham, it's much smaller so will be much harder to justify, economically.
I doubt GBR HQ will have much of an impact either way, most of the senior team will probably be from outside of the local area so a local tram system will be of no benefit to them, so why push for it?
The fact that this scheme has been in the press indicates that there is local interest in doing something, there are much bigger cities with no plans to do anything similar. I was more thinking about the fact that you have thousands of people who work in the rail industry living in the city and around it rather than the bosses at GBR spontaneously deciding to be involved. If only a small proportion of them are lobbying their MP, councillors and the regional mayor then its more likely that something will get done.
There is something called "luck surface area" which is the observation that "lucky" successful people tend to exhibit similar behaviours that increase the chances of fortunate things happening to them. The three examples I gave were reasons why something is more likely to happen in Derby than another similar sized (or larger) urban area that didn't have those factors. It's a probabilistic relationship rather than a deterministic one.
GBR won't be interested in trams, nor will it have the capability. Tram schemes are road schemes - it's all the utility diversion stuff that's complicated - heavy rail organisations don't deal with these things. Derby's land use is fundamentally wrong for supporting a tram network.
Where do we have any national capability on delivering tram schemes?
The lack of such a centre means that we have a bunch of uncoordinated, expensive schemes built for novice client organisations and any knowledge gained is scattered to the winds once those schemes are complete. I'd argue that building that centre of competence in Derby either in GBR or associated with it would be a better idea than trying to build such a body from scratch somewhere else or within the DfT. As we discuss on this forum regularly rail is due for disruption due to autonomous vehicles and AI adjacent technologies, it would make sense for GBR to actually have some capabilities in those areas too, the longest lived companies do something quite different to what they were founded to do.
It's about building momentum, Derby has GBR, now let's build a tram, now let's build the centre of competence for building trams (or other rapid transit) in the UK, that's the sort of thing that politicians can get behind. I'm actually going to get started on writing letters on this as I live in Derby.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
