Tram-trains, the future of our rail network?

[charlee]

Is the future of our railways in the form of tram-trains. I mean for example we have lost the oldham loop to trams. We will be shortly losing Sheffield to Rotherham to tram trains. Is this sort of rail format the future?

Do we envisage the future as heavy rail trunk routes with branch lines and suburban networks being turned into tram-trains?

I personally don't like trams, but I guess with moving times, the railways do need updating, but is it likely that this sort of rail transport will be our future. I'm not sure if I could personally welcome this sort of drastic change in what I see as railways.

 

[HSTEd]

As I understand it the line to Rotherham that is being converted for Tram operation is currently used only for freight....

The conversion of train lines into tram routes seems to be a thing specific to Manchester really... nowhere else has done it on anything approaching the same scale.

 

[RobShipway]

I think the issue is really down to the fact that when converting existing railway lines to Tram, you get more ridership on railways that either did not have a passenger service for years or a line that is very little used.

My problem with this though is that we should be encouraging more freight to the rails and have more passing loops as was available prior to the Beeching cuts

 

[Max]

Is the future of our railways in the form of tram-trains. I mean for example we have lost the oldham loop to trams. We will be shortly losing Sheffield to Rotherham to tram trains. Is this sort of rail format the future?

Firstly, we're not 'losing' Rotherham to trams, trains will continue to run to Rotherham Central via the normal route, trams will make use of the Tinsley line which is used mainly for freight at the moment.

On your other questions, I do think there is quite a distinction between traditional trams and tram-trains. The Oldham loop scheme has converted a heavy rail route for use by trams only, whereas the Rotherham scheme will utilise existing NR infrastructure. It is the trams that will be adapted. This provides far greater flexibility than on Metrolink.

I do think that you need quite a distinct set of characteristics for tram-train to be considered. In the Rotherham case, the NR metals run right alongside the tram route and Rotherham Central is only a short distance away from Meadowhall South along a rarely used line. So really it is ideal for the project. Are there many other cases where it would work effectively? I'm not too sure.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Is a dual-voltage (so it can use standard heavy rail OHLE electrified routes, and I don't think heavy-rail voltage electrification is allowed for street running), low-floor tram-train a possiblity?

The idea behind such a tram would be to work services which are mostly street running, so the low-floor is needed to allow cheaper low platforms instead of heavy rail style platforms as Metrolink in Manchester uses, but be able to run over heavy rail track too. Another idea is that smaller intermediate heavy rail stations on the edge of the town/village they are suppose to serve could be closed, with fast heavy rail services remaining alongside tram-trains which would deviate using street running into the towns/villages to provide a more central stop.

 

[Goatboy]

Trams work well elsewhere in the world because they are almost all street based. It does seem a shame that in this country they are more cheap trains than trams in terms of the service provision.

 

[HSTEd]

In Karlsruhe the trams are indeed dual voltage.... 750V and 15kV 16.7Hz.

 

[Philip Elliott]

So really it is ideal for the project. Are there many other cases where it would work effectively? I'm not too sure.

Robin Hood line. At the moment from Highbury Vale to Hucknall the tram and the train both have 1 track each. Tram-trains would allow the route to go back to a standard 2-track formation massively improving capacity. There are also a myriad of closed lines in Ashfield that could re-open for a tram and actually give Sutton a station. The lower costs would also allow for branches to Ollerton and Staveley/Bolsover/Chesterfield.

 

[Matt Taylor]

Trams seem to work very well in the Valencia region of Spain however the infrastructure improvements that have been required were presumably funded publicly. They are well priced, smooth, quick and serve places that previously had no service, but unlike trams in the UK there is very little street running.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/40172673@N03/8441120234/in/photostream

Alicante to Benidorm is around 1 hr 40 mins and features no street running at all.

 

[HSTEd]

That overhead equipment looks very heavy for a "Tram".

This makes it look more like a US style Interurban or the Belgian "Vicinal Tramways" of which only one really exists now.

It does make me wonder how much it costs to build a tramline through rural terrain....

 

[tbtc]

Other than the fact that we won't "be shortly losing Sheffield to Rotherham line to tram trains" (as others have pointed out), before going into this further can I ask what a "tram train" is?

Depending on the line/ argument/ poster, it can apparently be a term to describe a tram running wholly on tram routes (that may or may not have once had some NR trains running on them), a tram capable of running on NR lines too (like the Metro to Sunderland or the Supertram to Rotherham) or a low cost diesel Pacer replacement (like the plan to convert the Penistone line) or dual voltage tram capable of running under two types of electrification or even a bi-mode tram capable of running beyond the wires (e.g. Manchester - Altricham - Knutsford) or a low cost EMU replacement wholly running on NR lines (I've seen talk of a "tram train" on the Manchester - Glossop service...).

Tram Train appears to be a good phrase for suggesting investment but nobody seems to agree on what one actually is.

(the Rotherham service - the first extension of Sheffield's Supertram in twenty years - will be just like the Metro extension to Sunderland where trams will run off the current network onto newly electrified NR lines which it will share with Pacers/Sprinters - http://www.flickr.com/photos/thebustocrookes/7727491078/stats/)

 

[JohnCarlson]

Trams work well elsewhere in the world because they are almost all street based. It does seem a shame that in this country they are more cheap trains than trams in terms of the service provision.

If tram trains appear a lot in the UK I think it will be because they are cheaper than new EMUs.

John

 

[142094]

Tram-trains work well in Germany, so I'd be pleased to see more of them in the UK. However, I'd only want to see it where they complemented the heavy rail service, rather than replaced it completely.

 

[Haydn1971]

Firstly, we're not 'losing' Rotherham to trams, trains will continue to run to Rotherham Central via the normal route, trams will make use of the Tinsley line which is used mainly for freight at the moment.

That's not completely the case - the tram-train will call at Rotherham Central and will share the track between New York and Parkgate - the platforms at Rotherham central will be to the southern end of the heavy rail platforms (as they are lower to match the tram) and Parkgate will be a platform on a new siding near to the footpath that pops out next to Boots

 

[Max]

That's not completely the case - the tram-train will call at Rotherham Central and will share the track between New York and Parkgate - the platforms at Rotherham central will be to the southern end of the heavy rail platforms (as they are lower to match the tram) and Parkgate will be a platform on a new siding near to the footpath that pops out next to Boots

To be picky, what I've said is completely true, you are just adding additional (true) information, but not contradicting me! :P Based on who my employer is, I've had many briefings on this scheme.

 

[tom1649]

What happens if the line through Rotherham eventually needs to be electrified at 25kv? Will the trams be dual voltage?

 

[YorkshireBear]

What happens if the line through Rotherham eventually needs to be electrified at 25kv? Will the trams be dual voltage?

It is a question many of us are asking, especially with rotheram central soon to be a short infill project very likely to go ahead... I suppose dual voltage trams will be the only option.

 

[tom1649]

It is a question many of us are asking, especially with rotheram central soon to be a short infill project very likely to go ahead... I suppose dual voltage trams will be the only option.

Well let's hope they've taken this into account. It would be very short sighted not to.

 

[JohnCarlson]

Well let's hope they've taken this into account. It would be very short sighted not to.

The Tyne and Wear Metro extension to Sunderland Springs to mind here...

John

 

[tom1649]

It just seems odd and slightly worrying to me that we've heard nothing about this potential problem.

The Tyne and Wear Metro Sunderland extension was built at a time when there was a complete lack of interest in any electrification of the network. Indeed there was even talk of de-electrifying the ECML north of Newcastle, a completely barmy idea in my view. Fortunately it never went beyond being talked about.

I wonder if any future T&W Metro replacement fleet could be supplied as dual voltage, although the electrification infrastructure to Sunderland would need replacing I imagine before voltage could be increased.

 

[tbtc]

What happens if the line through Rotherham eventually needs to be electrified at 25kv? Will the trams be dual voltage?

Rotherham won't see electrification for at least another ten years (Sheffield isn't getting it's wires until 2021, with nothing further committed).

The Supertrams are twenty years old (they look pretty good for it), so would be at least thirty years old before Rotherham Central is "properly" electrified.

Of course, by then we may have given up on serving Rotherham Central with "heavy rail" (given the Holmes Chord) and replaced it with a station at Parkgate that connects with frequent trams along the Don Valley)...

Sunderland is a different story as there's no way of heavy rail *not* serving Sunderland station.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

there was even talk of de-electrifying the ECML north of Newcastle, a completely barmy idea in my view. Fortunately it never went beyond being talked about

The line from York to Edinburgh sees very few electric trains compared to the volume of traffic on it - not saying that it should have been unelectrified, just pointing out that the HSTs/ Voyagers/ freight really doesn't make the most of it.

 

[tom1649]

Rotherham won't see electrification for at least another ten years (Sheffield isn't getting it's wires until 2021, with nothing further committed).

The Supertrams are twenty years old (they look pretty good for it), so would be at least thirty years old before Rotherham Central is "properly" electrified.

Of course, by then we may have given up on serving Rotherham Central with "heavy rail" (given the Holmes Chord) and replaced it with a station at Parkgate that connects with frequent trams along the Don Valley)...

Sunderland is a different story as there's no way of heavy rail *not* serving Sunderland station.

Ok thanks for the explanation. It will be interesting to see if any other possible future 'tram train' schemes end up having to use parts of the 25kv network. I imagine that including dual voltage capability would push up the cost of any such project.

The line from York to Edinburgh sees very few electric trains compared to the volume of traffic on it - not saying that it should have been unelectrified, just pointing out that the HSTs/ Voyagers/ freight really doesn't make the most of it.

I agree that the electrification north of Newcastle isn't best utilised at present. However, there will likely (hopefully) come a day when it is better used. Fortunately there is the North Berwick/Dunbar service which does make good use of part the electrification on the route.

 

[GNER 91128]

Shame we couldn't have had a tram/train for St. Ives to Cambridge

 

[YorkshireBear]

The line from York to Edinburgh sees very few electric trains compared to the volume of traffic on it - not saying that it should have been unelectrified, just pointing out that the HSTs/ Voyagers/ freight really doesn't make the most of it.

Ive got hope that that will improve soon enough. (decade) with 2tph EMU TPE, electric spine possibly providing electric freight, IEP making more use of the wires (Ignoring the fact i hate bi mode IEP) :P. Plus further on cross country becoming electrified....

But as it stands, yes very underused 4 track electrification north of York!!!

 

[Haydn1971]

Of course, by then we may have given up on serving Rotherham Central with "heavy rail" (given the Holmes Chord) and replaced it with a station at Parkgate that connects with frequent trams along the Don Valley)...

That's a tad controversial

I'm not so sure RMBC would go with that given how much retail damage Parkgate and later Meadowhall did to the town centre.

 

[Rhydgaled]

(Sheffield isn't getting it's wires until 2021, with nothing further committed).

2021? I thought Sheffield was in the HLOS for CP5, meaning complete by end of 2019.

 

[tbtc]

That's a tad controversial

I'm not so sure RMBC would go with that given how much retail damage Parkgate and later Meadowhall did to the town centre.

Exactly - it's a ghost town. Ignore the charity shops and the superficial Mary Portas stuff and there's not a lot left. Rotherham Central is a bottleneck for trains to serve (given the long single track Holmes Chord, the flat junctions etc). Maybe by the end of the decade the council will have given up on trying to prop it up.

2021? I thought Sheffield was in the HLOS for CP5, meaning complete by end of 2019.

It was. But from what I saw, it was pushed into the middle of CP6 for completion - something that people suggesting that there's still plenty of scope for *additional* wiring in CP5 don't seem to have realised.

 

[northwichcat]

It is a question many of us are asking, especially with rotheram central soon to be a short infill project very likely to go ahead... I suppose dual voltage trams will be the only option.

Outside of the South Yorks area GMPTE (now TfGM) assessed the viability of dual-voltage trams and DC only trams which can run on both 3rd rail and OHE as ways of not putting DC OHEs on the National Rail network and dismissed both options as non-economically viable. Their preferred options are diesel only tram-trains and diesel-electric tram-trains.

 

[HSTEd]

It was. But from what I saw, it was pushed into the middle of CP6 for completion - something that people suggesting that there's still plenty of scope for *additional* wiring in CP5 don't seem to have realised.

There is still plenty of scope for additional overhead wiring if you agree to take on additional staff and equipment which can be found from the continent or by simply training additional staff in the time we have. (Its still 7 years till the end of CP5).

Network Rail doesn't want to do this as it would cost money and leave them with a larger electrification capability than they expect the beancounters at the treasury to let them utilise.
If we had a commitment to an expedited programme of electrification for the entire network, including freight only lines and even NIR, we could get it done rather more quickly than the work scheduled for CP5 would seem to imply.

 

[tbtc]

There is still plenty of scope for additional overhead wiring if you agree to take on additional staff and equipment which can be found from the continent or by simply training additional staff in the time we have. (Its still 7 years till the end of CP5).

Network Rail doesn't want to do this as it would cost money and leave them with a larger electrification capability than they expect the beancounters at the treasury to let them utilise.
If we had a commitment to an expedited programme of electrification for the entire network, including freight only lines and even NIR, we could get it done rather more quickly than the work scheduled for CP5 would seem to imply.

Well, yes, if you throw enough money and resources at anything then it becomes possible, but that's not going to happen.The fact that the ambitions of CP5 are unlikely to be realised within CP5 suggests to me that we should start thinking about the reality of the situation (e.g. the "wire everything up" alternative to bi-mode IEP is a non starter, there's even less chance of sufficient EMUs freeing up Pacers by 31 December 2019).

It's 2013, CP5 runs to 2019 so the clock is ticking.