Blackpool Trams

[seasidersfan]

It's been confirmed that utility/prep work for the North Station extension will start next month after the illuminations- the first extension in over 90 years if my facts are right.

I've no doubts that the continued success of the new system will lead to further links, namely the much mooted connect to St Anne's and Lytham via the South Fylde Line.

 

[Mikey C]

It's been confirmed that utility/prep work for the North Station extension will start next month after the illuminations- the first extension in over 90 years if my facts are right.

I've no doubts that the continued success of the new system will lead to further links, namely the much mooted connect to St Anne's and Lytham via the South Fylde Line.

It'll be interesting how much extra revenue the North Station link generates, and whether the NR line benefits as well, as the distance between North Station and the seafront and existing line isn't that great.

 

[Kite159]

If you have luggage it might make the difference between taking a tram to taking a taxi to your hotel (depending how far the hotel is from a tram stop)

 

[pdsalford]

If you have luggage it might make the difference between taking a tram to taking a taxi to your hotel (depending how far the hotel is from a tram stop)

It would certainly have made a difference during my stay last month, I didn't fancy heading down Talbot Road in the pouring rain to find a bus.

 

[seasidersfan]

Old tram tracks from the old route have been uncovered during utility works for the new one.

 

[snowball]

I haven't seen any notice saying the application for a Transport and Works Order for the extension has been approved.

Here is the notice in the London Gazette when it was applied for:

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/2574088

Here is the section of the DfT website that lists recent approvals:

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/twa-inspector-reports-and-decision-letters

And here's a piece in the Blackpool Gazette:

https://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/news/preparation-work-for-tram-line-at-own-risk-1-8868585

 

[seasidersfan]

I haven't seen any notice saying the application for a Transport and Works Order for the extension has been approved.

It's expected to come through 'imminently' according to the Council.

 

[snowball]

It's expected to come through 'imminently' according to the Council.

And indeed it has:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/extension-to-the-blackpool-tramway-decision

The Secretary of State agrees the construction, operation and maintenance of a 660 metre extension to the existing Blackpool Tramway. The extension will be from the North Pier stop along Talbot Road to terminate at Blackpool North railway station.

 

[seasidersfan]

Good news. First step in creating a first class light rail network for the whole Fylde subregion.

And indeed it has:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/extension-to-the-blackpool-tramway-decision

 

[uww11x]

New Flexity 017 delivered tonight.

 

[Wirewiper]

What will the new service pattern be once the line to Blackpool North comes on stream, or has that not been decided on yet?

(apologies if I missed it earlier in the thread)

 

[snowball]

Good news. First step in creating a first class light rail network for the whole Fylde subregion.

Are there any actual proposals or are you just being hopeful?

 

[Tramfan]

What will the new service pattern be once the line to Blackpool North comes on stream, or has that not been decided on yet?

(apologies if I missed it earlier in the thread)

This document from Blackpool Council's site suggests separate North Station to Pleasure Beach and North Station to Bispham services leaving the existing Starr Gate to Fleetwood service to run direct.

https://www.blackpool.gov.uk/Reside...mway-extension/A14.4-Transport-Assessment.pdf

The proposed tramway extension will provide a new connection between the existing tramway and Blackpool North Railway Station. To avoid any dis-benefits to passengers making north-south movements through the North Pier tram stop it is proposed to retain the existing north-south service frequency and introduce two additional services operating between Blackpool North and Bispham and Pleasure Beach respectively (the latter may occasionally be extended to Starr Gate).

 

[seasidersfan]

Are there any actual proposals or are you just being hopeful?

There are proposals for an extension south to Lytham St Annes as discussed on this thread. I expect those will be advanced further once the Blackpool North link is complete.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

This document from Blackpool Council's site suggests separate North Station to Pleasure Beach and North Station to Bispham services leaving the existing Starr Gate to Fleetwood service to run direct.

https://www.blackpool.gov.uk/Reside...mway-extension/A14.4-Transport-Assessment.pdf

Hmm. Are those proposals really sensible? I would imagine that the proportion of current journeys that go from beyond Bispham to beyond Pleasure Beach is quite low. In order not to disadvantage those journeys, the ends of the network - including all of Fleetwood - are going to be deprived of any direct connection to the station. And worse - I checked out the service frequencies in the document. The station-Bispham and station-Pleasure Beach services are planned to only run every 20 minutes on high season days and every half hour on other days. That doesn't seem sufficient to make tram/train interchange very attractive, and rather looks to me like setting up the extension for failure.

Wouldn't it be more sensible to divert the existing Fleetwood-Starr Gate service to run via the station, and run additional lower frequency services direct from Bispham to Pleasure Beach (avoiding the station)?

 

[PR1Berske]

There are proposals for an extension south to Lytham St Annes as discussed on this thread. I expect those will be advanced further once the Blackpool North link is complete.

There are no such proposals from official bodies, only suggestions from forum members.

 

[edwin_m]

From what I remember of Blackpool, the centre is fairly compact and roughly between North station and the site of Central station. So much of it is probably just as easy to get to from North as it is from a stop on the wrong side of the promenade somewhere around the Tower. I'd suggest the core service should be Fleetwood-North(reverse)-Starr Gate with extra short workings along the sea front when demand justifies them.

 

[seasidersfan]

There are no such proposals from official bodies, only suggestions from forum members.

Yes there are. Such proposals appear on the local plans of all involved authorities and preliminary feasibility took place a couple of years ago, with a tram option being one of the options taken forward.

 

[Sheepy1209]

This document from Blackpool Council's site suggests separate North Station to Pleasure Beach and North Station to Bispham services leaving the existing Starr Gate to Fleetwood service to run direct.

https://www.blackpool.gov.uk/Reside...mway-extension/A14.4-Transport-Assessment.pdf

As a resident of Cleveleys I'm really not happy about this service proposal, and I don't think there's much awareness of it. They make a big deal about not 'dis-benefiting' Fleetwood and Cleveleys, while conveniently forgetting to mention that all this investment and disruption does not BENEFIT our part of the Fylde. We already have to deal with trams turned short at Bispham or Little Bispham when it suits BTS, now we don't even get through trams to the station!

My observations - and obviously I don't have the stats - are that most passengers from north of Bispham are going to the town centre (including North station) - and alight at North Pier or Tower - while passengers heading for the resort part of town typically board at the hotels between Bispham and North Pier (plus the Norbreck Castle Hotel, which is north of Bispham). Demand for tourist travel to/from the station is very peaky - e.g. Friday & Monday, and those same tourists won't go anywhere near the station for the rest of the week.

Fleetwood - which has no realistic prospect of a main-line railway service and roads which are heavily congested - deserves a direct service to North station and I think when this service is introduced there will be an outcry (as there was with the reduction to hourly trams during the illuminations, especially when some of those were cancelled).

Re the service frequency to North station - it really is not high enough. I suspect the planners have been constrained by the capacity of the junction at Talbot Square, which is a bottleneck even without the trams. This junction had its traffic lights removed a couple of years ago in an attempt to improve the flow, now they're coming back!

 

[Chrism20]

It does seem a bit silly not to send the Cleveleys/Fleetwood services up to the station. I’d also imagine anyone going to town would prefer to board/alight on Talbot Rd rather than the promenade, particularly in winter.

I’d personally run the majority Starr Gate-Station-Fleetwood and run the extras as a promenade service Pleasure Beach to Cleveleys rather than Bispham.

The demand is there for a service as far as Cleveleys every ten minutes.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As a resident of Cleveleys I'm really not happy about this service proposal, and I don't think there's much awareness of it. They make a big deal about not 'dis-benefiting' Fleetwood and Cleveleys, while conveniently forgetting to mention that all this investment and disruption does not BENEFIT our part of the Fylde. We already have to deal with trams turned short at Bispham or Little Bispham when it suits BTS, now we don't even get through trams to the station!

Your observations seem very sensible to me. Perhaps, since you live in Cleveleys, you should consider contacting your local councillors or the local papers about this. I don't live in Blackpool so I don't have that option (and you could therefore argue it's not really any of my business anyway), but the proposed service pattern does look pretty silly to me. I'm pretty sure I'd be protesting loudly if I lived there.

The worst of it is that this pattern runs the risk that not only does Fleetwood etc. get deprived of the connection to the station, but that the low frequencies and lack of through services from Fleetwood on the station extension result in relatively few people using the station services, at which point the council decides the extension was a failure - when the real reason is they didn't run enough trams to make the service attractive.

I wonder if the issue is sufficient trams. They are ordering just two additional trams to provide the station services. Without doing a full timetable analysis, that seems to me rather low - and possibly insufficient to divert most trams to the station AND provide additional trams over the central section. Maybe to provide a decent timetable, they would have needed to order more than two?

 

[Tramfan]

I wonder if the issue is sufficient trams. They are ordering just two additional trams to provide the station services. Without doing a full timetable analysis, that seems to me rather low - and possibly insufficient to divert most trams to the station AND provide additional trams over the central section. Maybe to provide a decent timetable, they would have needed to order more than two?

That's my thinking as well. The peak season last year (10 minute Fleetwood - Starr Gate service) used 13 trams. Their proposed peak North Station service (3tph to Pleasure Beach and 3tph to Bispham) would require 4 at the very least. 17 out of 18 is quite tight; I overheard a conductor saying they had a shortage of trams during the summer.

If they diverted the main service in each direction, it would maybe add 2 vehicles at the most, so 15 out of 18 which is much more doable, but then the benefit of increasing the frequency on the main promenade that they've been talking about is removed.

 

[seasidersfan]

That's my thinking as well. The peak season last year (10 minute Fleetwood - Starr Gate service) used 13 trams. Their proposed peak North Station service (3tph to Pleasure Beach and 3tph to Bispham) would require 4 at the very least. 17 out of 18 is quite tight; I overheard a conductor saying they had a shortage of trams during the summer.

If they diverted the main service in each direction, it would maybe add 2 vehicles at the most, so 15 out of 18 which is much more doable, but then the benefit of increasing the frequency on the main promenade that they've been talking about is removed.

Yeah I think that's the issue. The tramway has been much more popular than the Council first anticipated, so in my opinion two trams is nowhere near enough.

They probably would have ordered more if it weren't for the existing depot. Technically it has a capacity of 20 Flexity 2 trams but logistically anything above 18 (which is what they'll end up with once the other new one arrives), is quite difficult.

In all likelihood a new shed will have to be constructed to facilitate natural growth and/or further extensions. I know that the original plan for the depot site was to house heritage trams inside the loop in an additional building at Starr Gate before it was decided for them to stay at Rigby Road. There even were points installed for that proposed building, so in theory a new Flexity 2 shed could be built there.

A short-term solution to provide direct services to Fleetwood would be to use the modified 'B Fleet' double deck trams.

 

[AngelicUpstart]

Flexity 018 has been seen heading west on the M62 this morning.

 

[BestWestern]

If there is indeed a shortage of cars, is there any actual reason that the modified Balloon fleet can't be put to use? The capacity might be very useful leaving North station in the tourist season.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If they diverted the main service in each direction, it would maybe add 2 vehicles at the most, so 15 out of 18 which is much more doable, but then the benefit of increasing the frequency on the main promenade that they've been talking about is removed.

The claim of an increased frequency seems dubious to me: It's still a tram every 10 minutes, just with an extra one to the station every 30 minutes (20 minutes in the summer). Yes, it's more trams per hour. But in practical terms it makes little difference to passengers - most of the time they still have just as long a wait for a tram.

So your idea of diverting the main service via Blackpool North in each direction, without adding new trams, seems to me a much more sensible approach.

 

[LOL The Irony]

If there is indeed a shortage of cars, is there any actual reason that the modified Balloon fleet can't be put to use? The capacity might be very useful leaving North station in the tourist season.

They have about 4 or 6 Balloons with the mods from memory. So why have they ordered 2 new Felixty's when they could use 2 Balloons (3 or 4 during peak season) on a Little Bispham - Pleasure Beach via Blackpool North shuttle. It'll help with the tourist crowds from Norbreck!

 

[bluegoblin7]

Because the Balloons lose serious amounts of time on the road, and are also not DDA compliant - there are limitations on how much each vehicle can be used per year, and collectively it isn't enough to run a regular service. There are also issues around crew training and familiarisation that would be difficult to overcome.

The widened cars are 700, 707*, 709*, 711, 713, 718*, 719, 720, 724*. Starred cars are flat fronters. 720 is long term out of use due to a door issue. 718 is an honourary member of the heritage fleet. First choice trams tend to be 700/11/9 as they're in corporate livery; 713 has also escaped in its expired all over advert.

 

[BestWestern]

Because the Balloons lose serious amounts of time on the road, and are also not DDA compliant - there are limitations on how much each vehicle can be used per year, and collectively it isn't enough to run a regular service. There are also issues around crew training and familiarisation that would be difficult to overcome.

The widened cars are 700, 707*, 709*, 711, 713, 718*, 719, 720, 724*. Starred cars are flat fronters. 720 is long term out of use due to a door issue. 718 is an honourary member of the heritage fleet. First choice trams tend to be 700/11/9 as they're in corporate livery; 713 has also escaped in its expired all over advert.

Interesting, thanks. In which aspects do they fail DDA?

 

[LOL The Irony]

I always thought they were DDA compliant. Turns out they were converted to RVAR regulations.