• 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!

Future Metrolink Expansion

Status
Not open for further replies.

freetoview33

Established Member
Joined
24 May 2009
Messages
3,721
Location
West of England
Just a new thread for future expansion such as Trafford Park line.

What is the current estimated date for construction to start on Trafford Park line.

and

What is next for metrolink after Trafford park?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Altfish

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
1,065
Location
Altrincham
Survey works are happening apace, I think everyone assumes the go-ahead will be given for the Trafford Centre route.
The new lift bridge being built next to Barton Bridge has allowance for continuing to Port Salford.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,269
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
What is next for Metrolink after Trafford Park?

I think that the recent tranche of line openings have led to somewhat unrealistic aspirations and expectations amongst certain members of the public at large about the future expansion of the Manchester Metrolink system, after the Trafford line is completed.

The TfGM information department should be approached for their considered view of future expansion matters of the Manchester Metrolink system, including the financing of these and the purchase of new trams to cater for that expansion. How long will be it be before a third depot is required, if the existing two depots cannot be suitably expanded to increase capacity?

I do so hope that this thread will not seek to emulate the SSC "fantasy" Metrolink thread and will continue to concern itself solely with reality. If such a fantasy thread does seem to have backing, then let a new and totally separate thread, suitably titled, be opened.
 
Last edited:

Altfish

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
1,065
Location
Altrincham
After the Trafford Centre line, Manchester is likely to wait the outcome of the Sheffield tram/train trial (mind you that could take forever!!).
Then the likes of the Marple line will be considered for such an operation.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
I think that the recent tranche of line openings have led to somewhat unrealistic aspirations and expectations amongst certain members of the public at large about the future expansion of the Manchester Metrolink system, after the Trafford line is completed.

The TfGM information department should be approached for their considered view of future expansion matters of the Manchester Metrolink system, including the financing of these and the purchase of new trams to cater for that expansion. How long will be it be before a third depot is required, if the existing two depots cannot be suitably expanded to increase capacity?

I do so hope that this thread will not seek to emulate the SSC "fantasy" Metrolink thread and will continue to concern itself solely with reality. If such a fantasy thread does seem to have backing, then let a new and totally separate thread, suitably titled, be opened.

TfGM has achieved a great deal with Metrolink and other British cities could learn lessons. Probably the most important are the need for cross-region and cross-party political support, and committing serious funding to deliver a big package rather than slicing into "affordable" pieces and losing economies of scale and certainty of planning. This has delivered a worthwhile network that appears to be well-used, and TfGM continues to look at a wide range of options for long-term expansion of Metrolink.

Having said that, although Manchester has three times more trams than any other city in the UK, the network is still pretty feeble compared with similar sized cities in Germany for example. They have had the benefit of consistent support and continuous investment in light rail since 1945 or before, whereas even Manchester can only claim this for less than a decade. Who's to say what Manchester might achieve by 2075?
 
Last edited:

freetoview33

Established Member
Joined
24 May 2009
Messages
3,721
Location
West of England
I don't want this to become a fantasy thread either! But looking at things in a more realistic way! Longer term aspirations have always been to Marple and Stockport. Surely the only way these could link into the network at East of Piccadilly. Due to space constraints and the fact that 2CC will be at capacity, only leaving spare capacity on the original route.

Does anyone actually know the capacities of the current 2 depots?
 

Altfish

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
1,065
Location
Altrincham
I don't want this to become a fantasy thread either! But looking at things in a more realistic way! Longer term aspirations have always been to Marple and Stockport. Surely the only way these could link into the network at East of Piccadilly. Due to space constraints and the fact that 2CC will be at capacity, only leaving spare capacity on the original route.

Does anyone actually know the capacities of the current 2 depots?

We will need 3CC !!

I think Old Trafford can hold just less than 100 (I remember this figure from a tour round the depot) but don't know what Queens Road can hold.
 

nerd

Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
524
I don't want this to become a fantasy thread either! But looking at things in a more realistic way! Longer term aspirations have always been to Marple and Stockport. Surely the only way these could link into the network at East of Piccadilly. Due to space constraints and the fact that 2CC will be at capacity, only leaving spare capacity on the original route.

Does anyone actually know the capacities of the current 2 depots?

Total capacity of the current two depots is 135 M5000 units - although the original site maximum capacities were to be 44 - Queens Road, and 95 - Trafford. The current programme will deliver 120 units by the end of this year; and there is an ongoing review of whether to order some more before the new franchise starts running in 2017. If a Marple tram-train happens, it will need 20 new tram-train units (likely 40m plus length); or maybe 40 28m units run doubled. Which means additional depot capacity.

Otherwise, current construction underway has been making passive provision for future Metrolink expansion - so a bit more than pure fantasy;

- the Trafford Park lift bridge has provision for extending the Trafford Park line to Port Salford;

- the Thorley Lane bridge has provision for the Airport Western Loop over the M56, also connecting the Davenport Green HS2 station with the airport;

- the Stockport interchange has provision for a Metolink stop on an alignment linking into Manchester Piccadilly through South Reddish and along the Marple tram train line. From Stockport interchange, the line would go via Stockport station and Edgeley, to the Airport. Again there is passive provision in ongoing project planning along the route.

In addition, assuming that HS2 Phase 2 goes ahead at Piccadilly, the vehicle entrance for Piccadilly Station will have to be shifted from the southside to the northside; and the space vacated used to extend the number of tram platform faces to four.
 
Last edited:

freetoview33

Established Member
Joined
24 May 2009
Messages
3,721
Location
West of England
We will need 3CC !!

I think Old Trafford can hold just less than 100 (I remember this figure from a tour round the depot) but don't know what Queens Road can hold.

Shouldn't need a 3CC I think the current two could just about cope with expansion if it was off the Ashton line. I guess a third depot could be located that way if ever needed.

But yeah HS2 will bring changes to the network too as mentioned.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,845
Location
St Neots
- the Stockport interchange has provision for a Metolink stop on a line linking into Manchester Piccadilly through South Reddish and along the Marple tram train line. From Stockport interchange, the line would go via Stockport station and Edgeley, to the Airport. Again there is passive provision in ongoing project planning along the route.

Is the East Didsbury extension to Stockport dead, then? It would seem much better to put rails on that east-west corridor rather than replicate the existing north-south alignments. Opens up Stockport for shopping across south Manchester, and enables access to WCML services without doubling-back in the city centre.
 

freetoview33

Established Member
Joined
24 May 2009
Messages
3,721
Location
West of England
Is the East Didsbury extension to Stockport dead, then? It would seem much better to put rails on that east-west corridor rather than replicate the existing north-south alignments. Opens up Stockport for shopping across south Manchester, and enables access to WCML services without doubling-back in the city centre.

I think the East Didbury extension is no longer top priority. ButStockport to Manchester Airport is.
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
I think the East Didbury extension is no longer top priority. But Stockport to Manchester Airport is.
The Atkins Stockport Rail Strategy report of Jan 2015 said:
Plans for a Metrolink route from Stockport to East Didsbury, and onwards to Manchester City Centre have
existed since the late 1990s. Following the same alignment from Stockport Town Centre as the proposed
Stockport – Airport service provides construction cost savings. This southern route from Stockport to East
Didsbury would join the Hazel Grove to Sharston freight line via a new junction at Cheadle Heath, and then
cross the River Mersey via a new alignment to East Didsbury. This has the potential to provide a new stop at
Gorsey Bank, providing sustainable transport access to the proposed new development site. This route would
provide Metrolink services to Manchester City Centre from the Edgeley and Adswood areas, and would provide
much-improved connections from Stockport to Didsbury, Chorlton and Salford Quays and Trafford Park.

An earlier Metrolink route between Stockport and East Didsbury followed an alignment close to the River
Mersey, terminating at Stockport Interchange. More recent work has indicated that the southern route offers
better value for money than the Mersey route, not least because of the cost-savings from sharing the alignment
of other Stockport West routes. The case for the southern route compared with the Mersey route has become
stronger as plans for development of the Airport area have evolved.
The report also proposed tram-train from E Didsbury continuing all the way to Hazel Grove along the freight line, but as a lower priority.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,845
Location
St Neots
The mid-Cheshire Line heavy rail services do that currently from Navigation Road, Altrincham and beyond.

Hourly Pacers aren't really 'access', and that doesn't serve the heavily-populated south Manchester corridor either.
 

Greybeard33

Established Member
Joined
18 Feb 2012
Messages
4,229
Location
Greater Manchester
Hourly Pacers aren't really 'access', and that doesn't serve the heavily-populated south Manchester corridor either.
Often Sprinters not Pacers these days, and some of the busier services are 4-car. Even with the hourly service, if you miss one it is nearly always quicker to wait at Stockport for the next rather than get a train from Stockport to Piccadilly and change to a tram from Picc to Altrincham.

In the morning peak there are 2tph from Chester to Stockport, and in the evening peak 2tph from Stockport to Chester. From Dec 2017 the service frequency is to be increased to 2tph each way between Picc and Greenbank all day.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Will the word "Metrolink" still be used by TfGM for any tram-train operation or has TfGM intimated that another term may be likely to be used for that specific mode of transit?

As far as I'm aware the intention is to get as close as possible to Metrolink quality of service, so it would be logical to adopt the Metrolink branding too.
 

nerd

Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
524
Will the word "Metrolink" still be used by TfGM for any tram-train operation or has TfGM intimated that another term may be likely to be used for that specific mode of transit?

Tram train services to Marple are envisaged as replacing the Bury-Picc and Atly-Picc direct services; providing a bit of extra capacity. So the lilkelihood is they will be very little different from the perspective of the user.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
I hardly know Manchester personally, but I'm aware of the general topography and how the existing branches interlink. I'm also aware of the new city crossing etc. Before more extensions after Trafford Park are planned should more attention not be focussed on the spine or spines, with consideration of a tunnel, or subway, to enable future users of Metrolink to access central Manchester without having to change on to already-overcrowded trams from other routes? This same problem bedevils the DLR in London, which can be compared imo to Metrolink as the only really successful light rail systems in Britain (I'm excluding Tyne and Wear as it's a hybrid, and nowhere else is extensive enough to count as a system.)
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Every single route passes through central Manchester with the exception of the Airport services currently running short until 2CC is finished.
 

nerd

Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
524
I hardly know Manchester personally, but I'm aware of the general topography and how the existing branches interlink. I'm also aware of the new city crossing etc. Before more extensions after Trafford Park are planned should more attention not be focussed on the spine or spines, with consideration of a tunnel, or subway, to enable future users of Metrolink to access central Manchester without having to change on to already-overcrowded trams from other routes? This same problem bedevils the DLR in London, which can be compared imo to Metrolink as the only really successful light rail systems in Britain (I'm excluding Tyne and Wear as it's a hybrid, and nowhere else is extensive enough to count as a system.)

Running the central spine of the system on the surface in Manchester results in a generally higher central area through-capacity than could be achieved if all the routes through the city centre were gathered into a 'common tunnel' ; as became the fashion in Germany a few decades ago. Trams in a tunnel have to be controlled through some variety of block signalling - and flat junctions generally have to be avoided. By contrast, the Metrolink 'spine' - specifically the Cornbrook viaduct through to St Peters Square - operates by Line-of-Sight control, and is being planned to carry 45 services in each direction per hour; and could be expanded further. And all the central area junctions can be flat.

Nonetheless, there is a clear logic in attaching new lines by running through existing services that currently terminate in the city centre - or only a bit beyond. Hence the Marple tram-train routes are envisaged as running through from the current Altrincham and Bury services that now terminate at Piccadilly; if it were proposed to run trams to Middleton, they could run through from the Trafford Park line services, that currently are envisaged as terminating at Crummpsall. And there will be 10 services per hour from the airport, now terminating at Victoria; which might well be run through to a destination in the north or east of the city.

The most problematic of the various tram-train routes in this respect, is probably the Glossop/Hadfield line into Piccadilly. In the GM Tram-train strategy document, this appeared to have been envisaged being linked across to counterpart services on the Atherton/Wigan line into Salford Central and Victoria. But such cross-city services would appear to require an additional city centre route - running SE to NW, rather than NE to SW as the current Metrolink central lines do. The TfGM 2040 Vision document floated the possibility that one (at least) of the cross city centre lines might need to run in a tunnel, were the full tram-train strategy to be implemented.
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Why can't a tram tunnel operate line of sight? A tram is just a road vehicle.

I'm not aware of a definitive answer to that question, but I think it has something to do with the greater consequences of a collision if it happens in a tunnel, making it more worthwhile to minimise the likelihood of the collision. Another issue may be the need to limit the number of trams in the tunnel simultaneously, because if there is then an incident and a queue of trams builds up behind it there will be that many more people to evacuate from the tunnel.
 

nerd

Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
524
Why can't a tram tunnel operate line of sight? A tram is just a road vehicle.

a road vehicle that's potentially 56m long. On a public highway, that length would likely require a police escort.

The problem is detecting accurately where another tram ends - e.g. so that you can switch points after it has passed; In the city centre, Metrolink does this by line of sight; but it doubt whether you could ever do it reliably by line of sight in a tunnelled system.

In practice, as I understand it, tunnelled systems have been tending to evolve towards a driverless, llight metro, model; as per Copenhagen, or DLR in its second reconfiguration. The Copenhagen system permits up to 30 services per hour throuigh its tunnels; I think DLR permits 24, and the Tyne & Wear Metro permits 20.

But these are absolute limits; they cannot increase frequency to (say) 35 per hour for a short period, if it is necessary to recover from a timetable disruption.

The two Metrolink city centre lines appear to be planned to have a capacity limit of 25 services per hour in normal timetabled service. But if needed (e.g. if one of the city centre lines were blocked temporarily) Metrolink might well be able to run 35 or 40 services per hour on the remaining functioning line; maybe by bunching services into convoys, as they are currently doing with great success maintaining nearly full operation while SPS is limited to a single line.
 
Last edited:

Altfish

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
1,065
Location
Altrincham
...... should more attention not be focussed on the spine or spines, with consideration of a tunnel, or subway, ...

Noooooo!!!!!!

Manchester does not want an underground system, keep them on the streets where you can see them and easily board them.
3CC may be needed and should probably go at right angles to 1CC and 2CC sort of University to Salford ish
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top