• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Manchester Metrolink master thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,925
Location
Nottingham
Exchange Square serves the other end of Arndale from Market Street, and the 2CC trams will still call at Victoria and St Peters Square, with same or cross platform interchange at both places to trams via Piccadilly Gardens. So I don't think there will be much inconvenience - and the network should also run much more reliably once there is an alternative route to Mosley Street.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,407
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Exchange Square serves the other end of Arndale from Market Street, and the 2CC trams will still call at Victoria and St Peters Square, with same or cross platform interchange at both places to trams via Piccadilly Gardens. So I don't think there will be much inconvenience - and the network should also run much more reliably once there is an alternative route to Mosley Street.

Of course, I agree with all you say. It was just the matter of the location of the bus station in Piccadilly Gardens that has services serving many areas.

Just a pity that Cornbrook seems fated to accept more and more services as time goes by with nothing in sight to relieve the problem there.
 
Last edited:

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
Cornbrook is an interesting thing. There's scope to refurbish and strengthen the viaducts to take extra tracks. That wouldn't be so hard but then you arrive at the first issue, the birdcage bridge, there is another unused bridge however not entirely sure what kind of condition they're in. Again Deansgate-Castlefield gives us an issue in that the recently published remodelling plans only show 3 tracks. Ideally we'd have 4 tracks from Cornbrook Junction - St Peters Square Junction (1CC/2CC junction). To actually 4 track the entire route I'd imagine would need lots of ££££££! However what's being done now is supposed to provide enough capacity for 84 tph through Cornbrook and the new pocket siding gives some decent flexibility for failed trams to be dumped as does the bi-directional line at DGCF. In the words of british rail "we're getting there" ;)
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,851
Location
St Neots
The second birdcage seems to be in pretty good condition, indeed it was cleared of foliage not too long ago, so someone is definitely taking care of it.

Regardless, I would think that three-track stations on the busy section (Cornbrook, Gmex, St P's Sq.) will allow enough dwell-overlap, that the two-track running lines will be able to support more TPH than the minimum headway would ordinarily allow. Although with the Mediacity shuttle, Cornbrook might have to be four-track to maintain the 'juggling'.
 
Last edited:

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
The Castlefield viaduct is actually in pretty poor condition, the deck is full of holes and the viaduct itself has lost most of its strength. In 2009 it was cleared of foliage and rust to slow the deterioration and because clumps of rust were falling on the roads/cement works below a safety hazard, BRB(R) were supposed to then fund a follow program in 2012/13 to waterproof it and restore some of its structural strength but this has obviously not happened, even in 2009 there were doubts whether the funds would be available for such extensive work. Bringing it back to rail use would be extremely expensive.

Its partly due to design, all the structural embellishments cause water to pool and therefore accelerate corrosion and it was found during the 2009 works that it was only given a single coat of paint. Its therefore in much worse condition than its two older brick neighbours and was passed over when metrolink was originally built because the brick viaduct was in better condition.
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,925
Location
Nottingham
A double-track off-street tramway with no stops has a capacity in excess of 100 trams per hour. The capacity is limited by the stops and by any on-street junctions. Hence increasing the viaduct section to four tracks would be a waste of money unless the stops were increased to six or eight platforms each and the sections leading off at either end had both the demand and the capacity to take the extra trams. None of which is going to happen.
 

Boysteve

Member
Joined
25 Apr 2013
Messages
235
Location
Manchester
A double-track off-street tramway with no stops has a capacity in excess of 100 trams per hour. The capacity is limited by the stops and by any on-street junctions. Hence increasing the viaduct section to four tracks would be a waste of money unless the stops were increased to six or eight platforms each and the sections leading off at either end had both the demand and the capacity to take the extra trams. None of which is going to happen.

Yes I sort of agree. At St Peters Square only one tram per direction can cross the road per traffic light sequence. The same is true at other stations like Shudehill. Therefore a headway of around 60 seconds seems to be the lowest practical. Since TMS was introduced the section from Cornbrook to Deansgate can cope with this CC headway so there is no point increasing the number of tracks through Deansgate and Castlefield unless you allow two trams per direction to cross the road into St Peter's Square per traffic light cycle.
 

507 001

Established Member
Joined
3 Dec 2008
Messages
1,868
Location
Huyton
It had to happen sometime..... A bloke got on my tram at Ashton last night with a fully assembled ikea bookcase.

Wonders never cease.
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,266
Location
Greater Manchester
Regardless, I would think that three-track stations on the busy section (Cornbrook, Gmex, St P's Sq.) will allow enough dwell-overlap, that the two-track running lines will be able to support more TPH than the minimum headway would ordinarily allow. Although with the Mediacity shuttle, Cornbrook might have to be four-track to maintain the 'juggling'.
I do not think there is any prospect of more than two tracks through the Cornbrook stop - I understand the viaduct is not wide enough for a third platform. I think the headways achievable through the two platforms will be the ultimate limit on system capacity once 2CC opens, unless the Cornbrook stop is closed and Deansgate-Castlefield becomes the interchange stop.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,407
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
It's not a bay my understanding way a centre bi directional track with terminating facilities

Is that either a very technical or very posh way of describing a bay platform ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Anyway, back to more mundane matters, the BBC TV North-West News have just stated that a points failure is affecting a number of routes this morning. Any news on the location of the points ?
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,390
Location
Bolton
In all the years it was there that bay at Cornbrook must have been used oooh, maybe twice... :D
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Indeed, was used on occasion, however the platform was too narrow and short for regular use so its approach track has been replaced with a bi directional pocket siding and a driver rest facility was built on the platform.
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
Is that either a very technical or very posh way of describing a bay platform ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Anyway, back to more mundane matters, the BBC TV North-West News have just stated that a points failure is affecting a number of routes this morning. Any news on the location of the points ?

- Kind of, I think that the centre track will be like the siding at Cornbrook but with platforms if that helps? I'd imagine this will be used more for flexibility than the dead ended one at Cornbrook since it can be used as a through track too.
- Points went at Cornbrook however as freel has said before it's not the actual points it's an in built safety device that stops the points from being set.


EDIT: Paul this may give you more info on what is planned for Deansgate http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=107549628&postcount=28 :)
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,407
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
- Points went at Cornbrook however as freel has said before it's not the actual points it's an in built safety device that stops the points from being set

If the safety device activates to prevent the setting of the points, what then has caused the safety device to activate ?

I have already made my views known on how Cornbrook is a meeting of routes already with what appears to be viaduct problems to prevent a four platform station and a four-line track to Deansgate-Castlefield to allow for the extra capacity, but when the Airport line is running and if the Port Salford line ever decides to add its services, any point problems in this area will do nothing to enhance the image of the Manchester Metrolink system in the minds of commuters made late for work by such events.

When the Manchester to Altrincham electric line was running many years ago, there was a 4-track section from past Dane Road, passing through both Stretford and Warwick Road stations to aid capacity matters. Was there not a plan to widen the viaduct in Great Bridgwater Street between Oxford Road and Deansgate stations by modern methods of construction in a recent document ? Could this same method of viaduct widening be employed between Cornbrook and Deansgate-Castlefield on the Manchester Metrolink system ?
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
2CC and Port Salford - from SCC
2CC & Trafford details:

They are proposing to accelerate the development of 2CC at a cost of £3m (costs relate to accelerated testing and commisioning resources and construction of Exchange Square stop), though potential savings exist from reduced exposure to inflation and potentially extra revenue. The acceleration involves delivering it earlier by phasing it, first phase is track from Victoria to Market Street (I presume they mean the junction of Market Street on Corporation Street) and the Exchange Square stop. This would then operate as a spur from Victoria and from end of 2015 the Shaw and Crompton frequency would be increased to 6 minutes with the trams terminating at Exchange Square, this would accelerate the delivery of the 6 minute frequency on the Rochdale line by 18 months. It is anticipated the spur construction would be completed by June 2015 with the service arriving by the end of the year. All 2CC works have a total budget to £165m with a £45m contingency available through the GM Transport Fund.

The improvements at Deansgate Castlefield are subject to them winning a bid to the European Regional Development Fund for the 2CC works, if they fail in the bid they will take time to reconsider how to proceed with the DC works.

St Peters Square stop works and connection from St Peters Square to Market Street would commence in 2015 and be completed by winter 2016/17, the construction would be phased so as to keep the roads open to traffic in the city centre.

Trafford Centre line includes a turnback at Crumpsall station on the Bury Line, its also stated the Trafford Centre line would link to North Manchester to Trafford Park and generate additional frequency on the Bury line so I think we can take it that the service will operate Trafford Centre-Crumpsall (and so begins wild speculation on here where a service to Crumpsall could potentially be extended to in the future). Budget is £350m including ten more trams to operate it and a P&R at Parkway Circle, this includes £20m of developer contributions. It was considered to phase open the Trafford line from Pomona to Parkway Circle and the turnback at Crumpsall however as a standalone scheme this would only have a BCR of less than 0.5 so doesnt look likely to have a phased opening.

In addition proposals will still be considered for Port Salford and Eccles extension subject to business case and developer contributions. (Dont know whether Eccles is a misprint for Salford or if they would consider linking Trafford Centre to Eccles which if the case would be the first time this has been proposed by TfGM.)

Next step for Trafford Line getting TWAO approval as experience shows funding has a habit of being easier to obtain when a project is shovel ready. To secure TWAO traffic modelling in Trafford alongside pedestrian counts at the Trafford Centre entrances and pedestrian/driver interview surveys will take place in October alongside ensuring Trafford council properly allocates land to Metrolink use in its development planning. Statutory public consultation would occur in Spring 2014, TWAO application summer 2014. Subject to recieving TWAO permission construction would start Winter 2015/16 and be completed in 2019. The ten trams would be procured right away as defering delivery by a year costs £3.5m and £1.5m in each additional year defered, they would therefore be available to operate the Media City-Piccadilly service extension (from Cornbrook) and as operational spares until the Trafford line was completed. Slow development of Trafford Line due to the trickle of funds from the Earnback model rather than upfront financing, first 'earned back' funds would go to the extra trams and the planning/legal costs at an estimated cost of £36.9m, this includes £5m already okayed for tram long lead items.

http://www.agma.gov.uk/cms_media/files/gmca_agenda_25_10_13_web_v2.pdf
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And sorry Paul I'm not too sure, does seem to be an issue though but hopefully it'll pass just as it has at Irk Valley (touch wood;))

I've never seen anything official other than what people like you and I have hypothetically said. Would certainly help things along though!
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,925
Location
Nottingham
Was there not a plan to widen the viaduct in Great Bridgwater Street between Oxford Road and Deansgate stations by modern methods of construction in a recent document ? Could this same method of viaduct widening be employed between Cornbrook and Deansgate-Castlefield on the Manchester Metrolink system ?

Yes there is a plan to lengthen the 4-track section through Oxford Road as part of Northern Hub.

However to do something similar with the Metrolink viaduct would require both the existing spans and the unused metal spans next to them to be taken down, and probably the piers as well. The technique appears to be to put a wider deck on a masonry viaduct and I can't see how it would work on a steel one.

Also as I have posted previously, there is no capacity reason to reinstate four tracks on this part of Metrolink. On the face of it, it might improve reliability - however each point added is a potential source of failure whereas the likelihood of failure on plain line off-street track is pretty low, and some incidents would affect the adjacent tracks anyway. Hence the worsening of reliability from the extra points might outweigh the improvement from having parallel tracks.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
I thought the 6 minute service to Shaw was meant to start a lot earlier than the end of 2015? Basically whenever is the latest of

Victoria works finishing
all the trams being in service
TMS fully operational

?

Why is it considered safe to run on the bumpy track between Bury and Radcliffe at 50 mph, but only 5 mph is permitted east of Etihad Campus?
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
I thought the 6 minute service to Shaw was meant to start a lot earlier than the end of 2015? Basically whenever is the latest of

Victoria works finishing
all the trams being in service
TMS fully operational

It was however theres not enough capacity in the city, running Exchange Square - Shaw will provide both a 6 minute service through Oldham and secure EU funding for 2CC as work will start before the cut off date (which I've forgotten sorry.)
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
It was however theres not enough capacity in the city, running Exchange Square - Shaw will provide both a 6 minute service through Oldham and secure EU funding for 2CC as work will start before the cut off date (which I've forgotten sorry.)

But the new line across the city centre was never guaranteed, yet a 6 minute service to Shaw was always planned.
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
If MediaCity is cut back to Cornbrook there would be enough capacity so there would have been for the phase 3a lines
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
But it is being cut back to Cornbrook, isn't it?

Doesn't look like it now, in the plans I posted before they stated extra trams could be ordered to pertinently extend the service to Piccadilly which would no longer require the long ECS runs to Velopark on TMS is active at Sheffield Street.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,851
Location
St Neots
Doesn't look like it now, in the plans I posted before they stated extra trams could be ordered to permanently extend the service to Piccadilly which would no longer require the long ECS runs to Velopark once TMS is active at Sheffield Street.

It does make a lot of sense to connect Mediacity to Euston with only one change. Personally though, I'd prefer the capacity to be used for a 6 minute service on the SML!

On a more realistic note, the Sunday-Thursday 'last tram to East Didsbury' times are severely lacking, and really should be extended immediately.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top