• 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.

Andrew Nelson

Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
702
I knew that the Eccles line was converted.

No you didn't.
It was never a railway line.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I don't agree with driver changes en route on any form of transport, unless the timetable has been adapted to incorporate the driver change. On a route with heavy demand like Metrolink it is even more unacceptable. Driver changes should only happen at terminii. Of course, this costs money. Changing drivers en route is running a service on the cheap.
If the depot isn't at the end of each route, than what choice do they have?
Drivers sitting there from the depot to the terminus, getting paid for hours of un-constructive travel time per day?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Rail Bus

Member
Joined
10 Mar 2012
Messages
92
He could try the Northern Trains service - 28.5 minutes from Piccadilly to Altrincham via Stockport. Only 1tph, but dependable!
its a shame we lost heavy rail via Sale, 21 minutes stopper, 15 minutes express to Oxford Road

You do well to get as far as Cornbrook in 21 minutes on the metrolink

Regression?
 

ianhr

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2013
Messages
534
its a shame we lost heavy rail via Sale, 21 minutes stopper, 15 minutes express to Oxford Road

You do well to get as far as Cornbrook in 21 minutes on the metrolink

Regression?

Whatever the virtues of Metrolink in general I have always thought that the Altrincham and Bury lines deserve something better than trams. These were formerly efficiently operated and reliable heavy rail electrified suburban lines of long standing. The tram conversion was just a cheapskate idea to link them across the city centre avoiding the expense of a tunnel. Liverpool, Newcastle & Glasgow got their city centre tunnels at about the same time or earlier. How did Manchester miss out? Was it political ineptitude? What the Bury-Altrincham route really needs is a completely segregated high speed route on the style of Tyne & Wear Metro. trams are fine for developing other routes not previously served by a good rail service.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
If the depot isn't at the end of each route, than what choice do they have?
Drivers sitting there from the depot to the terminus, getting paid for hours of un-constructive travel time per day?

Other train companies manage to change drivers at locations other than the depot. Metrolink also sometimes change drivers at places other than Old Trafford and Queen's Road. London Underground even have drivers waiting for the train on the platform so that the previous driver doesn't have to walk to the other end of the train, to minimise turnaround times.

As I said, it does cost money to do it properly.
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
its a shame we lost heavy rail via Sale, 21 minutes stopper, 15 minutes express to Oxford Road

You do well to get as far as Cornbrook in 21 minutes on the metrolink

Regression?
The other side of the coin is that, thanks to the Metrolink takeover, we now have a direct heavy rail service from Altrincham to Stockport, taking less than 20 minutes, giving quicker onward connections to the Midlands, East Anglia, London, Birmingham, the South Coast, the South West and South Wales.

Progression?
 

Shrimper

Member
Joined
14 Apr 2012
Messages
347
Other train companies manage to change drivers at locations other than the depot. Metrolink also sometimes change drivers at places other than Old Trafford and Queen's Road. London Underground even have drivers waiting for the train on the platform so that the previous driver doesn't have to walk to the other end of the train, to minimise turnaround times.

As I said, it does cost money to do it properly.

Other TOCs probably have mess/rest facilities at the changeover location too.

At 20 minutes (ish) from the staff halt to Bury you'd be adding 40 minutes on a duty, and that's assuming the meal break is taken at Bury - what if the driver is operating a different service?

And what about Rochdale or East Didsbury - both about 40 minutes from Queens Road! And then if things go wrong you have drivers stranded with little chance of bringing in a standby driver.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,382
Location
0035
In August 1994 Metrolink patronage was 12.06 Million, compared to 7.6 Million on the British Rail services to Bury and Altrincham it replaced. In fact at the time the Metrolink 'system' was carrying more passengers than the rest of Greater Manchester's suburban rail network combined. At the time the system actually managed to turn a profit (albeit only £4 Million for the year), but good in comparison to the subsidy of £32 Million for the suburban rail network.

Metrolink obviously did/does something right.
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
its a shame we lost heavy rail via Sale, 21 minutes stopper, 15 minutes express to Oxford Road

You do well to get as far as Cornbrook in 21 minutes on the metrolink

Regression?

What do you think the Altrincham and bury lines would be like now if they hadn't been converted. Maybe a few extra 323s would have been ordered for the Altrincham line but I'd doubt if it would be as frequent as it is now. The bury lines DC stock was at the end of their life when metrolink came along. I very much doubt BR would have paid for new EMUs with the none standard electrification so the line would have probably been de-electrified ending up being operated by the typical 150s and 142s with maybe the odd 156 thrown in at the peaks.
 

Polo Mint

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2013
Messages
96
Hopefully if Train-tram services and proven as viable in the UK then the Met can operate on lines operated by trains assuming they don't slow them down, perhaps with trains operating at only a few stations with the Metrolink on the rest?

Being somewhat an amateur railway historian and the the one who set up the Closed Stations Journey quiz, I remember that the London and North Western Railway ran a service from Eccles to Wigan North Western which was part of a route taken from the Manchester area. The stations on that section were:-

Eccles
Monton Green
Worsley
Ellenbrook
Tyldesley
Howe Bridge
Hindley Green
Platt Bridge
Wigan North Western

I have a feeling that your posting makes reference to the Leigh Guided Busway project that has had recent works announcements made regarding the roads on the route. However, your posting makes reference to Wigan as being on this route, which is not the case as Leigh is the terminal point on that new system.

Still, the thought of the Manchester Metrolink system passing through the areas of Howe Bridge, Hindley Green, Platt Bridge and Wigan is something that will give the residents in those communities something to cheer about..:D
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Perhaps those forum members who are also devotees of SSC would like to add that last-mentioned route as a contender on the SSC Manchester Metrolink "fantasy lines" thread...:D

I was not particularly clear, but the busway reference was indeed to the guided busway that will use some of the line on the route. I thought the railway went via Leigh, do you happen to know what route Leigh was connected to?

There's a fantasy lines thread? It isn't quite as outrageous as an Altrincham to Ashton line, using existing rail infrastructure (if tram-train would work for the Metrolink system)

In August 1994 Metrolink patronage was 12.06 Million, compared to 7.6 Million on the British Rail services to Bury and Altrincham it replaced. In fact at the time the Metrolink 'system' was carrying more passengers than the rest of Greater Manchester's suburban rail network combined. At the time the system actually managed to turn a profit (albeit only £4 Million for the year), but good in comparison to the subsidy of £32 Million for the suburban rail network.

Metrolink obviously did/does something right.

The Metrolink seems to be popular with people who previously used other forms of transport, and attracted a large chunk of the population as opposed to the city office worker types. It could be because of the higher frequency service, newer rolling stock, more stations, or better access to Central Manchester

I keep thinking to myself, is it because Metrolink is a good idea, or that Northern Rail and its predecessors offer 30 year old carriages and not a particularly fabulous service.
 
Last edited:

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
There's a fantasy lines thread? It isn't quite as outrageous as an Altrincham to Ashton line, using existing rail infrastructure (if tram-train would work for the Metrolink system)
The Metrolink seems to be popular with people who previously used other forms of transport, and attracted a large chunk of the population as opposed to the city office worker types. It could be because of the higher frequency service, newer rolling stock, more stations, or better access to Central Manchester

- Yes on SCC; why would there be a need for a Altrincham - Ashton Line via heavy rail. Surely if you wanted to get from either of those you could do all metrolink changing at Piccadilly or northern ALT-PIC and then either another train to Ashton or met..?
- One of the reasons I can see why the mets more popular especially on the Altrincham line is because who wants to queue on Washway Road for hours every morning one a bus/in a car when you can take the tram!
 

Polo Mint

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2013
Messages
96
- Yes on SCC; why would there be a need for a Altrincham - Ashton Line via heavy rail. Surely if you wanted to get from either of those you could do all metrolink changing at Piccadilly or northern ALT-PIC and then either another train to Ashton or met..?
- One of the reasons I can see why the mets more popular especially on the Altrincham line is because who wants to queue on Washway Road for hours every morning one a bus/in a car when you can take the tram!

Can you please tell me what an SCC is?

I was thinking something more along the lines of it appealing to people going from Ashton to Stockport or from Altrincham to Cheadle for example as opposed to people using the entire rout. It may also add more communities to the Metrolink map who could connect onto the network.
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
- SkyScraperCity
- Yeah thats a good point but perhaps a little less drastic would be to integrate the Greater Manchester Suburban rail network showing people clearer connections and also improving interchanges as is being done at Altrincham.
 

Polo Mint

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2013
Messages
96
- SkyScraperCity
- Yeah thats a good point but perhaps a little less drastic would be to integrate the Greater Manchester Suburban rail network showing people clearer connections and also improving interchanges as is being done at Altrincham.

That is a good idea, I can see joint bus/tram/train ticketing scheme being popular.
 

Polo Mint

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2013
Messages
96
I didn't realise it got the full approval, I assumed it was just a 'proposal'. It looks pretty good.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,845
Location
St Neots
Hopefully if Train-tram services and proven as viable in the UK then the Met can operate on lines operated by trains assuming they don't slow them down, perhaps with trains operating at only a few stations with the Metrolink on the rest?

Metrolink vehicles don't meet crash-worthiness standards to work the same line as mainline trains.

You need special vehicles that are both strong enough to interwork with trains, and light enough with a small turn radius to operate on Metrolink lines (potentially not on street running sections).

Personally, I'm not convinced that the concept is sound or that the vehicles will be good value for money at all.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Metrolink vehicles don't meet crash-worthiness standards to work the same line as mainline trains.

You need special vehicles that are both strong enough to interwork with trains, and light enough with a small turn radius to operate on Metrolink lines (potentially not on street running sections).

Personally, I'm not convinced that the concept is sound or that the vehicles will be good value for money at all.

The crashworthiness issue can be mitigated by changes to the signalling, including more TPWS so that a SPAD-related collision goes from highly unlikely to virtually impossible.

Tram-train isn't a solution everywhere but it has potential on some routes in Manchester. TfGM is developing a strategy on whether and how to take it forward.
 

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
Something I don't get is why the pilot scheme isn't in manchester. Surely it'd be easier with metrolink as it's high floor so you wouldn't have to make the platforms low floor or..?
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,845
Location
St Neots
The crashworthiness issue can be mitigated by changes to the signalling, including more TPWS so that a SPAD-related collision goes from highly unlikely to virtually impossible.

You're assuming no wrong-side failures, which is a fallacy.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,269
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
I was not particularly clear, but the busway reference was indeed to the guided busway that will use some of the line on the route. I thought the railway went via Leigh, do you happen to know what route Leigh was connected to?

The London and North Western Railway were particularly strong in this area and quite a number of passenger routes were available, together with many goods trains from the collieries of the South-East Lancashire coalfield.

I will cite another of the routes (the Tyldesley loop line) used by that company that branched off the Liverpool and Manchester Railway at Eccles with stations as being:-

Eccles
Monton Green
Worsley
Ellenbrook
Tyldesley
Leigh
Pennington
Kenyon Junction

That particular one served the railway station of Leigh.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
You're assuming no wrong-side failures, which is a fallacy.

I did say virtually impossible.

For such a collision to happen due to failure to observe or react to the signal, it would require a wrong-side failure of the TPWS and a simultaneous wrong-side failure by the driver, ie failing to stop at the signal. Since both these have probabilities somewhere in the per millions, the chances of both happening simultaneously is somewere in the per trillions.

There remains the risk of a SPAD due to brake failure or loss of adhesion, but (like all safety issues in practice) this is a risk-based not an absolute approach, and experience shows that these account for only a small proportion of serious SPADs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
What about Karlsruhe and Mulhouse?

They rely on the train protection as I posted above, with minor differences due to the different systems used in those countries. This approach has been accepted by the German and French authorities, and has been accepted in principle in the UK for the Rotherham tram-train pilot.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Something I don't get is why the pilot scheme isn't in manchester. Surely it'd be easier with metrolink as it's high floor so you wouldn't have to make the platforms low floor or..?

Yes, but unfortunately there are no existing high-floor tram-train vehicle designs and buying a handful of a custom vehicle would have been extremely expensive as well as having a risk of teething troubles with a new design. The Rotherham vehicles are closely based on a design for Karlsruhe, with minor changes such as the AC system being 25kV not 15kV (this won't be used initially but might be if the MML electrification is extended). If the pilot is unsuccessful then there is the option to sell the vehicles somewhere on the Continent.
 

34D

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2011
Messages
6,042
Location
Yorkshire
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.

Presumably this viaduct has passed (as part of the burdensome estate) to the Highways Agency now?

Was it painted in 2009 also?
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
No it was just stripped of vegetation and rust, was previously planned to recieve a protective coating this year which has obviously failed to occur.
 
Last edited:

furryfeet

Member
Joined
17 Apr 2008
Messages
449
BRB(R) were supposed to then fund a follow program in 2012/13 to waterproof it (Castlefield Viaduct) and restore some of its structural strength but this has obviously not happened
Why has this been allowed to happen ?
And by Whom ? (Dept of Transport ?)
Also if something does fall off the viaduct and hit someone, who would be now held liable ?
Or have BRB(R) "got away with it" since the reponsibility has been moved to a different agency ?
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
They did the immediate intervention to tackle just such an issue, that a clump of rust would fall and injure someone and they would get sued. They did plan a followup longterm fix but even then they were dubious if it would go ahead because the money was tight (and this was pre-recession). BRB(R) was supposed for pay for maintenence of structures by disposing of assets which had value, however the sheer cost of looking after all these former viaducts, tunnels and other structures is huge so naturally they would have to prioritise. BRB(R) as of a couple of months ago of course is no more, they finished selling off everything of value apart from a few key potential development sites like Manchester Mayfield which were transferred to London and Continental Railways, the owner of the governments non-Network Rail rail infrastructure/investments. The remaining 'Burdensome Estate' was transferred to the Highways Agency Historical Railways Estate so presumably must be funded through the annual highways upkeep. A few bits of land which still potentially had rail use were transferred to Network Rail.
 

Muzer

Established Member
Joined
3 Feb 2012
Messages
2,773
Possibly a question that has been asked many times, but is there any form of timetable (maybe a WTT, maybe something public) available for the Metrolink? As in, something current, I'm not looking for a 5-year-old leaked WTT or anything like that. If not, is there anyone who is likely to have the timetable that is susceptible to FOI requests?
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
Possibly a question that has been asked many times, but is there any form of timetable (maybe a WTT, maybe something public) available for the Metrolink? As in, something current, I'm not looking for a 5-year-old leaked WTT or anything like that. If not, is there anyone who is likely to have the timetable that is susceptible to FOI requests?

If you go to

www.traveline-northwest.co.uk

and click on 'Timetables', and then enter MET1, MET2, MET3, MET4 or MET5 as the bus number you can see some kind of timetable for each line. Whether this is comparable to the WTT, it would be interesting to know. Regardless, I wouldn't rely on any timetable as the priority is to maintain the 12/15 minute headway.
 
Last edited:

Manchester77

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2012
Messages
2,628
Location
Manchester
I have the old WTT which was published after Shaw opened (Dec 12) but I've never got hold of any others. The new WTT came out when Ashton ghosting started but I've not seen a hard copy of it
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top