Which heavy rail lines might be converted to light rail (including tram-train) to help meet the Treasury/DfT's financial targets post-Covid?

[geoffk]

Lines converted up to now are all in metropolitan areas. Future expansion will probably include tram-trains Manchester - Rose Hill and Sheffield - Doncaster, although the latter looks a long way off. Proposals to convert Watford - St. Albans and the Isle of Wight line were not pursued; one of the stumbling blocks in both cases seems to have been the likely loss of through-ticketing to and from the national network. Assuming this issue can be resolved, which other lines might be considered for conversion?

 

[JonathanH]

Assuming this issue can be resolved, which other lines might be considered for conversion?

Where is the money coming from for anything other than add-ons to existing systems? The problem with any new network would be finding servicing facilities for the trams.

What might get traction is a very light rail solution on short branch lines where only one or two vehicles are needed that can be kept in a suitable shed.

 

[furnessvale]

What might get traction is a very light rail solution on short branch lines where only one or two vehicles are needed that can be kept in a suitable shed.

Lines meeting that criterion are more likely to be closed and replaced by a bus.

 

[edwin_m]

Lines converted up to now are all in metropolitan areas. Future expansion will probably include tram-trains Manchester - Rose Hill and Sheffield - Doncaster, although the latter looks a long way off. Proposals to convert Watford - St. Albans and the Isle of Wight line were not pursued; one of the stumbling blocks in both cases seems to have been the likely loss of through-ticketing to and from the national network. Assuming this issue can be resolved, which other lines might be considered for conversion?

Retaining through ticketing (or not) shouldn't be a reason to decide (or not) on a conversion project . There would be no problem with retaining through ticketing on a tram, if people just got their heads together and made it happen.

However, any light rail conversion involves a major capital cost, and particularly on a lightly-used route the operating cost savings would only pay this back in many years, if ever. The benefit of light rail conversion is really about getting the service to somewhere a train can't, as happened in Manchester and Croydon and more recently in Birmingham/Wolverhampton. It's not really a viable option for cost cutting - as mentioned VLR may be, but only on a very limited number of route.

 

[adrock1976]

A line that would be suitable for conversion to trams is the Glasgow Central - Neilston/Newton/Cathcart lines.

These were electrified back in 1960 meaning that the overhead equipment is due for renewal in the near future. Also, the stops are very close to each other too.

If converted to trams, this would involve on street running beyond Central to Queen Street. Furthermore, a new tramline could also run from Queen Street to Paisley via Central Station, Broomielaw, Clyde Arc Bridge, Pacific Quay, Govan Cross, New Southern General Hospital, Braehead Centre, Renfrew Cross, Airport, Abbotsinch, and onwards to Paisley (Canal Station and/or Royal Alexandra Hospital).

Glasgow was once the Second City of the British Empire, and had the highest number of tram cars (around one thousand) outside of London at least. Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham/Wolverhampton, Croydon, and Nottingham all brought back trams. Blackpool and Llandudno were sensible by not getting rid of theirs in the first place.

 

[Peter0124]

A line that would be suitable for conversion to trams is the Glasgow Central - Neilston/Newton/Cathcart lines.

These were electrified back in 1960 meaning that the overhead equipment is due for renewal in the near future. Also, the stops are very close to each other too.

Don't forget its also a useful diversionary route for the west coast mainline

 

[daodao]

Squires Gate to Lytham (and possibly to Kirkham) might be a suitable conversion from heavy rail, as an extension of the Blackpool Tramway.

 

[Falcon1200]

A line that would be suitable for conversion to trams is the Glasgow Central - Neilston/Newton/Cathcart lines.

An interesting idea, especially as the Neilston line is my local railway ! I can see benefits, such as more frequent services and direct penetration right into the city centre. However Glasgow Central is well located already, and from Pollokshields West and East onwards would the complications of mixing tram-trains and conventional trains not require a separate route for the trams ? Plus, as @Peter0124 says, the Kirkhill line and Cathcart Circle are handy alternatives to the WCML.

 

[yorksrob]

Doncaster - Sheffield is far too useful as a through route to be converted.

 

[edwin_m]

An interesting idea, especially as the Neilston line is my local railway ! I can see benefits, such as more frequent services and direct penetration right into the city centre. However Glasgow Central is well located already, and from Pollokshields West and East onwards would the complications of mixing tram-trains and conventional trains not require a separate route for the trams ? Plus, as @Peter0124 says, the Kirkhill line and Cathcart Circle are handy alternatives to the WCML.

I think if this was done a connection would have to be made somewhere south of the Clyde, so that tram-trains could go on street across the river with a stop just outside Central. This would release capacity for other services within Central and its immediate approaches. However, it's not exactly a cost-saving exercise, and when I floated this very idea with the city council a few years back there was no interest whatsoever.

 

[Elecman]

Squires Gate to Lytham (and possibly to Kirkham) might be a suitable conversion from heavy rail, as an extension of the Blackpool Tramway.

Agreed to Kirkham with a 15 minute frequency to Lytham and 30 to Kirkham

 

[tbtc]

I think it'd only work with critical mass, so either an extension of an existing light rail network (e.g. Rose Hill, Hadfield, Wigan via Atherton) or a large scale conversion of a significant enough number of diagrams - I wouldn't want to set up a whole separate light rail operation for just a couple of units (e.g. another Stourbridge situation seems a waste of resources)

So, if you're doing Southside in Glasgow then that might require all of the short distance routes that terminate at Central High Level (plus maybe Anniesland too?) - but Watford to St Albans seems too small to warrant a non-standard set up, unless you are going to extend it further e.g. from St Albans City to Chesham via Rickmandsworth (n.b. I'm not seriously suggesting this, I'm not getting into a debate about hills/roads in central St Albans, just suggesting that a one unit St Albans Abbey - Watford Junction operation wouldn't be enough to justify having non-standard units etc, whereas a more frequent route from the Midland Mainline to replace the Watford and Chesham branches of the Metropolitan line would have sufficient units to warrant a separate depot etc

Future expansion will probably include tram-trains Manchester - Rose Hill and Sheffield - Doncaster, although the latter looks a long way off

I may be biased but it feels like a big shame that we didn't get the High Speed line from Leeds - Clayton - Sheffield, which would have meant replacing the current 150 operated Sheffield - Doncaster stoppers with an extension of the Tram Train (which currently runs from Sheffield to Parkgate in Rotherham) to free up a couple of paths on the Sheffield - Meadowhall heavy rail

(but obviously spending lots of money to convert a line would need to be accounted for over many years if the idea is to "save" money - it'll take a long time to recoup the savings!)

 

[EastisECML]

Darlington to Bishop Auckland and Newcastle to Carlisle.

 

[owidoe]

The Severn Beach line is a fairly obvious candidate. If converted to to trams, it could run through Temple Meads and into the city centre to provide a non-shameful link from TM to central Bristol. As it is, you have to walk a quarter of a mile and cross a busy road to get a bus to anywhere useful.

 

[Ex-controller]

An interesting idea, especially as the Neilston line is my local railway ! I can see benefits, such as more frequent services and direct penetration right into the city centre. However Glasgow Central is well located already, and from Pollokshields West and East onwards would the complications of mixing tram-trains and conventional trains not require a separate route for the trams ? Plus, as @Peter0124 says, the Kirkhill line and Cathcart Circle are handy alternatives to the WCML.

It’s for these reasons that I don’t think inclusion in a tram/train style network is workable for these routes. They are actually included in the Glasgow Metro proposals, with new branches from Kings Park to Castlemilk and from Whitecraigs to Newton Mearns.

However, the problem is being able to create a connection at the northern end of the route to on street running. It’s quite a built up area and as others have alluded to, could be costly, and loses what is a prime, direct link to the city centre at Central station. Even creating a connection for the suggested Castlemilk branch looks like a very tough ask. I think once these get to detailed planning stages there may be a rethink.

And there is the desire (possibly even need) to retain the route as a diversion from the WCML through Rutherglen and Cambuslang. If anything I would argue that keeping the heavy rail operation with improved frequencies would be optimal.

 

[adrock1976]

It’s for these reasons that I don’t think inclusion in a tram/train style network is workable for these routes. They are actually included in the Glasgow Metro proposals, with new branches from Kings Park to Castlemilk and from Whitecraigs to Newton Mearns.

However, the problem is being able to create a connection at the northern end of the route to on street running. It’s quite a built up area and as others have alluded to, could be costly, and loses what is a prime, direct link to the city centre at Central station. Even creating a connection for the suggested Castlemilk branch looks like a very tough ask. I think once these get to detailed planning stages there may be a rethink.

And there is the desire (possibly even need) to retain the route as a diversion from the WCML through Rutherglen and Cambuslang. If anything I would argue that keeping the heavy rail operation with improved frequencies would be optimal.

Now that the ex Rutherglen & Coatbridge line to Whifflet has been electrified, that could be used as a diversionary route as well.

 

[Peterthegreat]

I may be biased but it feels like a big shame that we didn't get the High Speed line from Leeds - Clayton - Sheffield, which would have meant replacing the current 150 operated Sheffield - Doncaster stoppers with an extension of the Tram Train (which currently runs from Sheffield to Parkgate in Rotherham) to free up a couple of paths on the Sheffield - Meadowhall heavy rail

Absolutely not. This would be a disaster for South Yorkshire. It seemed to be a knee jerk reaction to the dropping of the Meadowhall route from HS2 without any serious thought as to the desirability or practicalities of tram train operation.
For example:-
1) journeys from Stations beyond Rotherham to Sheffield would take at least 10 minutes longer
2) rail connections at Sheffield would be lost
3) to provide the same (pre Covid) capacity would require at least 3 if not 4 trams per hour - how would these fit in at Aldwarke Jn, Swinton and Doncaster?
4) trams do not have toilets

Heavy rail electrification would be far better.

 

[Bald Rick]

To help meet the financial targets - none whatsoever.

To help meet broader socio-economic policy - a small handful, perhaps.

 

[geoffk]

Interesting comments. Starr Gate/Squires Gate to Kirkham has come up on a number of occasions and has some local support but it seems that Lancashire County Council is lukewarm about the idea.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Interesting comments. Starr Gate/Squires Gate to Kirkham has come up on a number of occasions and has some local support but it seems that Lancashire County Council is lukewarm about the idea.

In my experience LCC have no interest in effective public transport and never did have, sadly.

 

[Neptune]

It seems most tram train proposals would require substantially more expenditure rather than cost savings. So many proposals appear to include building a tram track or even network in a town/city centre.

The Rotherham scheme required plenty of financial outlay for a scheme which many simply saw as an add on to the existing Sheffield network. So if a new new tramway is required on top of that it’s hardly saving money in the short term which is when the savings need to be.

I’ve always thought that Tram Train is the answer to a question. I’m just not sure that question has ever actually been asked.

 

[edwin_m]

It seems most tram train proposals would require substantially more expenditure rather than cost savings. So many proposals appear to include building a tram track or even network in a town/city centre.

The Rotherham scheme required plenty of financial outlay for a scheme which many simply saw as an add on to the existing Sheffield network. So if a new new tramway is required on top of that it’s hardly saving money in the short term which is when the savings need to be.

I’ve always thought that Tram Train is the answer to a question. I’m just not sure that question has ever actually been asked.

Indeed. I've presented entire conference papers on why, in many cases, tram-train is often a solution in need of a problem. There may be opportunities around growing the passenger market but it's highly unlikely that there are any around cutting costs.

 

[Ex-controller]

Now that the ex Rutherglen & Coatbridge line to Whifflet has been electrified, that could be used as a diversionary route as well.

Potentially, but as it currently stands class 390 units are banned from that route, so there are obstacles there. It also doesn’t allow a diversion if the line is blocked at Rutherglen, which is probably the more likely scenarios.

It’s hardly insurmountable for sure, but I’d think NR would prefer to keep the option open.

 

[Wynd]

Is the premise of this correct?

Would significant capital expenditure not be required to implements such changes? How much cheaper is it to run a tram and make all the required changes?

 

[ohgoditsjames]

Sheffield to Doncaster would be disastrous.

 

[A0]

Lines converted up to now are all in metropolitan areas. Future expansion will probably include tram-trains Manchester - Rose Hill and Sheffield - Doncaster, although the latter looks a long way off. Proposals to convert Watford - St. Albans and the Isle of Wight line were not pursued; one of the stumbling blocks in both cases seems to have been the likely loss of through-ticketing to and from the national network. Assuming this issue can be resolved, which other lines might be considered for conversion?

Unlikely to be any - if only because the cost of conversion will probably take many years to pay back, whereas cost savings are what is going to be sought.

In my experience LCC have no interest in delivering my definition of effective public transport and never did have, sadly.

There - fixed it for you.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Interesting comments. Starr Gate/Squires Gate to Kirkham has come up on a number of occasions and has some local support but it seems that Lancashire County Council is lukewarm about the idea.

It could paid for with property development on the Starr Gate to Blackpool South stretch, there is no reason to keep that length with the parallel tram and a path could be kept alongside buildings in the cuttings.
As with the entire country, Blackpool is in dire need of housing, the trackbed could be perfect for some mixed social/private apartment development with a mixed use path alongside.

 

[The exile]

Indeed. I've presented entire conference papers on why, in many cases, tram-train is often a solution in need of a problem. There may be opportunities around growing the passenger market but it's highly unlikely that there are any around cutting costs.

The tram- train comes into its own where 1) a town/ city has an existing tramway network and 2) the railway station is not convenient for the main destinations in that city. It obviously also helps if there are existing local services which are desperately in need of a pep-up. See Karlsruhe, Chemnitz and Zwickau… Unfortunately not many UK locations fulfil both 1 & 2, though several fulfil 2). Bristol certainly has an almost perfect alignment for most of the way already but I suspect that quite apart from £, there would be too many objections.

 

[REVUpminster]

Romford-Upminster with an extension to Cranham via the depot where the tram/s would be kept. Tracks are all there. Future could be street running into Romford Town centre via Victoria Road.

 

[Bald Rick]

It could paid for with property development on the Starr Gate to Blackpool South stretch, there is no reason to keep that length with the parallel tram and a path could be kept alongside buildings in the cuttings.
As with the entire country, Blackpool is in dire need of housing, the trackbed could be perfect for some mixed social/private apartment development with a mixed use path alongside.

I don’t know how well you know the area, but the housing development just south of Starr Gate on the Pontins site hardly produced big profits for the developers or landowners. Certainly nowhere near enough to fund a tram scheme.

Also you wouldn’t get many new properties in along the alignment between Squires Gate and Blackpool South - indeed none at all on much of it.