What time-period plans do Merseyrail have for Dual Voltage trains as stated above and what will be the fleet size and financial cost of them?
That is exactly what I was getting at. Only local trains on the CLC, use the empty viaduct to access a new station next to the tram stop at Deansgate. Change there for the Castlefield line and local trams.
Agree about not getting Merseyrail caught up in the Manchester mess.
Living in Leigh for a year until I moved last month, it’s fine, but replacing the every 15 minute bus service (every 4 in peaks) with a double tram every 12 minutes would elevate the service enormously.
If there was to be any existing heavy rail service I'd consider converting in the near term, it absolutely would be this one. It's relatively self contained and isnt a particularly fast line. Absolutely would be improved with more modern trams, especially if next generation trams were 100km/h units.
Would it? Would terminating services in Wigan not be possible? If wallgate isn't possible due the the lack of east facing bays and possible lack of space to build some, how well used is p1 at northwestern and the 2 bays there?
How would that work? Doesn't that line totally bypass the town? The only way I could see it working is coming in via the north towards central park way which would bypass most population centres.
Feel free to correct me but I thought Rotherham was built to 25kV and the trams are dual voltage. Any other GM tram-trains are likely to need to be dual voltage anyway as electrification is expanding quite rapidly at the moment across the region with very few lines now avoiding any significant running under wires (maybe just the Calder valley services starting in Victoria which avoid enough existing electrification for possibly put up DC tram wires. Though Rochdale is also proposed for electrification at 25kv so not even that may last long. All other diesel routes have large portions under wires still.
It may well be the fantasy land that you speak of, but this thread concerns itself in its thread title with improvements to the Manchester Metrolink system. Talk of turning the heavy rail CLC services to Merseyrail seems to have strayed somewhat from the raison d'etre of this thread as I wonder how many Metrolink tram stops are currently situated on the line of the CLC.
The conversation though has been on whether the CLC would be a good candidate for metrolink conversion and suggesting alternatives is a way of saying why it isn't a suitable metrolink expansion. The CLC however seems to be the most controversial proposal for any such conversion
Maybe, being an old-stager of 81, I find myself unable to comprehend why heavy-rail train services with proper train seating are viewed as lesser to what trams or tram-trains have to offer to the travelling public.
Like for like, certainly. The comparison being offered is 1 or 2 tph of "proper" trains, or 4+ per hour of trams/ tram trains. On most suburban branches around Manchester, 2tph is about all you could hope for because of the constraints around the central area. Doubling (or more) that frequency could result in a much better overall offering, even if the vehicles themselves haven't improved.
Take Oldham. At one time, they could never have imagined having 10tph (now 8tph) into victoria and certainly not deansgate or south west Manchester
What must not be forgotten is Mayor Burnham and his pet "Bee Network" project where buses and new bus interchanges were his number one priority with bus service introductions in three tranches under a system similar to what London has. It was only much later when other modes of public transport entered into his official discussions, such as the eight heavy rail lines that are to be part of the Bee Network, in the "Burnham Yellow" livery, in years to come. One may well think that if TfGM feel that 4tph are a feasible prospect on those eight lines, it will enter into the public domain to inform the travelling public.
With the exception of the quays
I have travelled recently on trams from Victoria where up to St Weberghs Road, both the East Didsbury line and the Airport line trams run, which admittedly offer passengers to Firswoof and Chorlton the service you intimate above, but passengers travelling after that from there to the stops in the Didsbury and Wythenshawe areas do not gain such benefit.
Didsbury does still have 2 services, on Rochdale and one shaw service giving disbury 8tph still
An interesting supposition. Where on the A34 will this tram service start and end and will it cause any road traffic difficulties on what must be a very heavily used road in the south of Manchester. The current road junctions in the Parrs Wood area of East Didsbury are notorious.
I'd say rather than use the A34 all the way, use Oxford Road / Wilmslow Road down as far as Fallowfield. From there dogleg it onto the A34 on to wherever would be best. This would then hook up Oxford Road to the network, as well as the University. Yes there's a narrow section going to through the curry mile, but from what I can tell this route is already speed limited so it's not going to be as massive an impact as one of the bigger routes going south. Plus it gets in into an area that could open up another option to reach Stockport. It might even be possible to get a second, slightly faster route into the airport. But most of all it would plug a major hole in the network that would surely benefit lots of people in the Manchester sprawl.
It would only be Able to run as far as parrs wood anyway. Any further than that would be difficult as density decreases and the road wasn't ever designed for trams either. Parr's wood obwoildnt say is a particularly large source of congestion. The only badly congested junction along there imo would be gately and that's well beyond the scope of a tram running down that road.
Oxford road could work, however I feel youd have to move over to birchfields road. The road is a lot wider, has less cycle traffic (which doesn't mix well with tram tracks) and is poorer served by existing transport. As well it has a lot more space to incorporate stops as metrolink doesn't allow road traffic to drive through stops.
To be honest if cycle users don't mix well with tram services, then that's as much about the the cyclists than it is about the trams. Wherever you have tram street running, it's going to interact with cycle traffic. So cycle traffic cannot be a blocker, especially given that those trams can likely take a lot more traffic off the roads which only benefits cycle users.
A cursory glance using Google Street suggests there are a series of parking spots that could easily be used. It might be tight in sections, and I'm sure some would complain but this is about making a modal shift, and a few parking spots should again not be blockers. Plus again this scheme would be aimed a taking traffic off the roads, especially through traffic leaving the route primarily for for trams / buses / local traffic / cyclists.
There's plenty of scope for debate for how best to serve South Manchester, and plenty of route options. But getting Metrolink into this area ought to be the big priority in my opinion. It would likely need a rolling programme so as not to cause too much chaos, say starting out by heading out to University, then in the next phase to Fallowfield, then out towards Stockport.
Not enough to have 2 lanes of traffic, 2 cycle lanes at least one tram lane, a high level platform to metrolink standards as well as street level access to premises. At a push you might by the job centre fit a single platform, whether it's long enough of a space however I don't know.