Future Metrolink Expansion

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Was it not Cornbrook that was the stop that in 2015 saw a number of track problems which proved it to be the very pinch-point of the system?

Yet we still have to envisage matters when the Trafford line comes into being, as surely those extra services will be added to the existing situation.

Finally, despite being an outsider to the TfGM empire, I very recently found myself waiting for a connection at Cornbrook. I remember being told on SSC that passengers would not mind the wait on that elevated situation stop on account of the excellent service frequency there, but when I disembarked, it was said there was an eight minute wait for my connection in freezing cold windy weather, with nowhere to escape from the biting winds. They used to say that Sandhills on the Merseyrail network, being in a similar elevated position open to the prevailing winds, but there are waiting shelters on the platform there to enable passengers to get out of the wind.

 

[fandroid]

Pardon me asking but why has there never been a proposal to run a tram line down the Oxford Road/Wilmslow Road axis? In other countries, universities are seen as obvious targets for tram lines and tram extensions. Even the fairly modest-sized city of Ulm in Germany is planning a tram route to connect all of its university campuses. In Manchester, the University area generates massive numbers of bus passengers and buses dominate the local traffic. I know the route would be a tricky one especially through Rusholme, but it's an obvious missing link - Piccadilly Gardens to Didsbury via the universities and the hospitals.

 

[martin2345uk]

Pardon me asking but why has there never been a proposal to run a tram line down the Oxford Road/Wilmslow Road axis? In other countries, universities are seen as obvious targets for tram lines and tram extensions. Even the fairly modest-sized city of Ulm in Germany is planning a tram route to connect all of its university campuses. In Manchester, the University area generates massive numbers of bus passengers and buses dominate the local traffic. I know the route would be a tricky one especially through Rusholme, but it's an obvious missing link - Piccadilly Gardens to Didsbury via the universities and the hospitals.

There's a million dead cheap bus routes down that road that the students use heavily (slight exaggeration, but there's a LOT of buses with £1 fares etc). I am not sure students would spend the extra for a tram which would surely end up stuck in the traffic that exists on the route.

 

[Boysteve]

Was it not Cornbrook that was the stop that in 2015 saw a number of track problems which proved it to be the very pinch-point of the system?

Yet we still have to envisage matters when the Trafford line comes into being, as surely those extra services will be added to the existing situation.

Finally, despite being an outsider to the TfGM empire, I very recently found myself waiting for a connection at Cornbrook. I remember being told on SSC that passengers would not mind the wait on that elevated situation stop on account of the excellent service frequency there, but when I disembarked, it was said there was an eight minute wait for my connection in freezing cold windy weather, with nowhere to escape from the biting winds. They used to say that Sandhills on the Merseyrail network, being in a similar elevated position open to the prevailing winds, but there are waiting shelters on the platform there to enable passengers to get out of the wind.

The problems at Cornbrook, if not gone completely*, are very much reduced these days in my experience.
*By gone completely I mean Cornbrook is only as likely to fail as other key junctions (Picc Gdns delta jcn etc).

I agree with you on Cornbrook. I believe it to be the windiest place in the UK! I wonder if some sort of perspex paneling on the parapet that divides Network Rail for Metrolink would help break up the wind flow.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Pardon me asking but why has there never been a proposal to run a tram line down the Oxford Road/Wilmslow Road axis? In other countries, universities are seen as obvious targets for tram lines and tram extensions. Even the fairly modest-sized city of Ulm in Germany is planning a tram route to connect all of its university campuses. In Manchester, the University area generates massive numbers of bus passengers and buses dominate the local traffic. I know the route would be a tricky one especially through Rusholme, but it's an obvious missing link - Piccadilly Gardens to Didsbury via the universities and the hospitals.

You obviously have never accessed the SSC "Metrolink fantasy thread" where that particular Oxford Road "mission impossible" has often been the source of countless amusement to those with but a smidgeon of logic and a very large sense of the reality of that particular "aspiration from Hell" which always were discussed in depth....:roll:

 

[WatcherZero]

Its very heavily served by buses with a frequency under every five minutes, it could support tram investment but the feeling has been that it doesn't really need it as its receiving a very good service already and if your going to spend money spend it where it brings the biggest improvement rather than replacing like with like.

 

[Busaholic]

[QUOTE

I agree with you on Cornbrook. I believe it to be the windiest place in the UK! [/QUOTE]

Try Penzance Bus Station at 11 p.m. with a Southwesterly blowing straight from the Atlantic.

 

[miami]

Its very heavily served by buses with a frequency under every five minutes, it could support tram investment but the feeling has been that it doesn't really need it as its receiving a very good service already and if your going to spend money spend it where it brings the biggest improvement rather than replacing like with like.

By that logic why bother building trams at all when you could just put a ton of buses on. You could extend the logic to trains too.

 

[andyb2706]

I was well aware of how the 2CC line was a required Metrolink north/south lines connectional link, but with regards to the disruption of trade for businesses, the amount of construction time required for such a short distance of line construction that passes through the major commercial inner-city was a cross that those businesses have had to bear for far too long and the associated disruption to traffic flows has been most noticeable considering the situation that Deansgate endures, not at all helped by the singling at that thoroughfare outside Kendal Milne.

All that said, we are now talking of an aspirational 3CC line and if this were to have a same period of construction through the inner-city core as the 2CC line, noting my comments what that actually has so entailed so far and still to entail in the months to come, the city will be once again be disrupted in terms of businesses, visitors, shoppers and workers, solely so one mode of transport that is so beloved of TfGM can be boasted of how they are the leading light of tramway systems of Britain.

Sorry, if this has already been mentioned. But would the 2CC have taken so long if they had not come across the unknown graveyard and had to treat it with the respect it deserves? With finding this did they have to alter the completion date?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Sorry, if this has already been mentioned. But would the 2CC have taken so long if they had not come across the unknown graveyard and had to treat it with the respect it deserves? With finding this did they have to alter the completion date?

If that be the case, was the completion date for the St Peters Square new stop put back to coincide with the extended 2CC completion date.

Were there no official maps ever made that showed the position of the referred-to Cross Street Chapel graveyard?

 

[freetoview33]

If that be the case, was the completion date for the St Peters Square new stop put back to coincide with the extended 2CC completion date.

Were there no official maps ever made that showed the position of the referred-to Cross Street Chapel graveyard?

They always factor in time for archaeological assessments it might of added a few months max

 

[nerd]

If that be the case, was the completion date for the St Peters Square new stop put back to coincide with the extended 2CC completion date.

Were there no official maps ever made that showed the position of the referred-to Cross Street Chapel graveyard?

TGM were well aware of the location of the Cross Street Chapel graveyard; what has proved to be problematic is the number of burials found - which turned out to be more than double the prior estimate.

Exhuming human burials takes time; as they have to be removed and transferred individually. In strict principle, the chapel graveyard was not consecrated ground, and so individual exhumation one-by-one was not a statutory requirement; but the Home Office licence for the exhumation will have specified that 'consecrated ground' protocols would need to be applied so far as possible.

Fortunately, for the other church site under 2CC (St Peters), the burial crypt had been sealed at the time of redundancy and closure - so all was needed was to fit a reinforced concrete lid over the vault - with the tracks laid on top of that.

As far as I know, the extra time needed for exhumation has been accommodated within the same overall 2CC schedule; by juggling the other elements around a bit. Same with the discovery that the City Buildings were unsafe and needed extra shoring.

It may well be that there was a fair amount of slack in the original schedule; as effectively it had already been determined that the two blockade periods for St Peters Square would have to happen during the summers of 2015 and 2016; so there would have been no possibility of finishing the Cross Street Closures earlier than autumn 2016.

The huge tent covering the excavation of an old graveyard at Cross Street for Metrolink’s Second City Crossing has finally been taken down - and archaeologists have found the remains of at least 277 people.

The final figure is yet to be confirmed but it is already more than double the number expected.

Experts and archaeologists who consulted Cross Street Chapel graveyard and Manchester library records had expected to find fewer than 130 burials.

The bigger discovery has, in the eyes of businesses and the chapel congregation, led to an over-run of the project to eleven months - rather than the ‘three months’ they had been quoted.

Transport for Greater Manchester bosses have insisted that they have ‘mitigated’ the delay by advancing works elsewhere.

The Reverend Cody Coyne, Cross Street Chapel minister, has praised the way TfGM have handled the sensitive excavations.

He said: “We are overjoyed to have the front of our building back now the tent is down. We look forward to the Christmas season.

“Excavation work is completed but there will be plenty of work carrying on in front of the chapel and then the track work will continue into 2016.

“It took longer than we’d hoped - but they did find three times as many people as they expected and the extraction was done so sensitively.”

A service to reinter the bodies is expected to take place in late summer 2016, following completion of archaeological research.

 

[WatcherZero]

By that logic why bother building trams at all when you could just put a ton of buses on. You could extend the logic to trains too.

Because that requires investment (initial and ongoing) and you can make a like for like comparison to decide the better investment option. There isn't really much point in replacing a perfectly good setup that provides a good service, meets demand and requires no public subsidy.

 

[Busaholic]

Because that requires investment (initial and ongoing) and you can make a like for like comparison to decide the better investment option. There isn't really much point in replacing a perfectly good setup that provides a good service, meets demand and requires no public subsidy.

I agree with you on this. The plan to run a tram line down Oxford Street in London was also extremely ill-conceived imo. What happened when the tram got to Marble Arch/ Oxford Circus? Many got out and transferred to the mode of transport that had been replaced i.e. bus!

 

[fandroid]

As I see it the Oxford Road/Wilmslow Road corridor has a massive problem. That problem is called 'traffic' and a huge chunk of that traffic is buses. Replacing most of those buses with trams and adding in measures to reduce other traffic would massively enhance the environment. It's not just a transport issue. Getting all those Oxford Road buses away from Piccadilly gardens would enhance the environment there too.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As I see it the Oxford Road/Wilmslow Road corridor has a massive problem. That problem is called 'traffic' and a huge chunk of that traffic is buses. Replacing most of those buses with trams and adding in measures to reduce other traffic would massively enhance the environment. It's not just a transport issue. Getting all those Oxford Road buses away from Piccadilly gardens would enhance the environment there too.

And where, may I ask, is the money going to come from to purchase the large number of extra trams that will be required to provide the same passenger carrying ability shown by the existing buses and to allow for the installation of tramway tracks all down that road and the time period of disruption that will be caused along the route by that. The seating capacity of the M5000 trams is not what you would see in one of those fleets of the modern eco-friendly new double-decker bus fleets that Manchester now has many of.

You are aware, are you not, of the destinations that the existing bus services using that road corridor actually serve. What are you proposing here. That a bus tram interchange is to be built around the Withington area where passengers will be forced to change onto buses? What about the number of bus services that branch off Oxford Road to continue their journeys?

Written as one external to the TfGM empire but who well knows the Oxford Road route as well as most.

 

[radamfi]

And where, may I ask, is the money going to come from to purchase the large number of extra trams that will be required to provide the same passenger carrying ability shown by the existing buses and to allow for the installation of tramway tracks all down that road and the time period of disruption that will be caused along the route by that. The seating capacity of the M5000 trams is not what you would see in one of those fleets of the modern eco-friendly new double-decker bus fleets that Manchester now has many of.

Those "eco-friendly" double-deckers still emit harmful emissions, whereas an electric tram does not emit at the street level.

Trams have a superior capacity compared to buses even compared to buses running at a high frequency. Increasing capacity is one of the main reasons for conversion to trams. When I say "capacity", I of course include standing as well as seated.

A conventional bus service running in normal traffic can only really offer a capacity of a few thousand passengers per hour. An articulated bus running every couple of minutes would give you a capacity of about 7,000 per hour. A four car tram can carry in excess of 400 people, so a 4-car tram service at similar frequency would give a capacity of 12,000 per hour.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Those "eco-friendly" double-deckers still emit harmful emissions, whereas an electric tram does not emit at the street level.

Trams have a superior capacity compared to buses even compared to buses running at a high frequency. Increasing capacity is one of the main reasons for conversion to trams. When I say "capacity", I of course include standing as well as seated.

A conventional bus service running in normal traffic can only really offer a capacity of a few thousand passengers per hour. An articulated bus running every couple of minutes would give you a capacity of about 7,000 per hour. A four car tram can carry in excess of 400 people, so a 4-car tram service at similar frequency would give a capacity of 12,000 per hour.

I note the wording of "four-car" trams in your posting and the number of universal 4-car operation trams compared with existing rolling stock provision, but whilst you give a summation of the bus situation these days, you make no comment of the main gist of my posting which was a total and utter rebuttal of the aspirations expressed by fandroid in his posting, so I invite you give your views of his bus-free Oxford Road proposal and of the views so expressed in that.

 

[radamfi]

I note the wording of "four-car" trams in your posting and the number of universal 4-car operation trams compared with existing rolling stock provision, but whilst you give a summation of the bus situation these days, you make no comment of the main gist of my posting which was a total and utter rebuttal of the aspirations expressed by fandroid in his posting, so I invite you give your views of his bus-free Oxford Road proposal and of the views so expressed in that.

There's no reason why Oxford Road/Wilmslow Road or similar corridor can't be converted to tram only. Running a vast number of buses on a main road like what happens in Manchester and other UK cities is actually highly unusual in European terms. It is only because we are used to cities being clogged up with buses that we see it as normal.

 

[Busaholic]

There's no reason why Oxford Road/Wilmslow Road or similar corridor can't be converted to tram only. Running a vast number of buses on a main road like what happens in Manchester and other UK cities is actually highly unusual in European terms. It is only because we are used to cities being clogged up with buses that we see it as normal.

The cities that have fully committed to trams are usually much smaller, both physically and in terms of population, than Manchester or London (eg Vienna, Amsterdam) or, like Moscow, and St Petersburg, were built on a much grander scale, with wide boulevards, and thus tram, trolleybus, bus, cars and lorries can intermingle. Paris, which is so much smaller than London, is building the occasional tram line, but none go anywhere near the Paris that most tourists see, and are seen as solutions to specific problems, being isolated lines rather than a network.

 

[radamfi]

The cities that have fully committed to trams are usually much smaller, both physically and in terms of population, than Manchester or London (eg Vienna, Amsterdam) or, like Moscow, and St Petersburg, were built on a much grander scale, with wide boulevards, and thus tram, trolleybus, bus, cars and lorries can intermingle. Paris, which is so much smaller than London, is building the occasional tram line, but none go anywhere near the Paris that most tourists see, and are seen as solutions to specific problems, being isolated lines rather than a network.

There's usually excuses why things can't be done in the UK. The roads are either too narrow or too wide, population density too low or too high etc. Bigger cities should have even less dependency on the bus, as they can employ full blown metros. The Rhur area has a population of between 5 and 11 million, depending whether you include the Düsseldorf or Cologne areas. Trams, metros and S-Bahns are highly prevalent there. Vienna's metropolitan area is around 2 million, not unlike the bigger metropolitan areas in the UK outside London.

Paris "proper" is about 2 million, but you should really include the whole urban area around Paris, which is comparable to London's urban area. The metro system in Paris "proper" is very comprehensive and stops are close together meaning that you can pretty much get by without buses, although they have quite a few bus routes too, although not on the scale like in central London.

 

[daodao]

The Wilmslow Road/Oxford Road bus corridor has significant traffic potential which would justify its conversion to a tramway. Most journeys are on the segment Didsbury-City Centre and a Metrolink line could connect to the existing network at St Peter's Square and West Didsbury. Very few buses go south beyond Parr's Wood and the quickest way to Sale/Wythenshawe is not by the 41/43 bus services.

However, the current layouts at St Peter's Square and West Didsbury would need significant redesign and no provision has been for such a development. The section of Oxford Road north of High St (Hathersage Rd) now has restricted access (mainly for buses) and there would need to be similar restrictions through the Khyber Pass (Rusholme) and the very narrow Withington town centre.

While this route would undoubtedly be viable if built, I can't envisage it ever happening. The planned Trafford Centre line and a conversion of the rail line via Reddish to the ex-GCR/NSR station at Marple Rose Hill are likely to be the next 2 projects once the 2CC line is completed.

 

[Busaholic]

There's usually excuses why things can't be done in the UK. The roads are either too narrow or too wide, population density too low or too high etc. Bigger cities should have even less dependency on the bus, as they can employ full blown metros. The Rhur area has a population of between 5 and 11 million, depending whether you include the Düsseldorf or Cologne areas. Trams, metros and S-Bahns are highly prevalent there. Vienna's metropolitan area is around 2 million, not unlike the bigger metropolitan areas in the UK outside London.

Paris "proper" is about 2 million, but you should really include the whole urban area around Paris, which is comparable to London's urban area. The metro system in Paris "proper" is very comprehensive and stops are close together meaning that you can pretty much get by without buses, although they have quite a few bus routes too, although not on the scale like in central London.

I'm not excusing anything. I don't know Germany at all, but I am aware that most cities with trams never got rid of them, so the question of building new tramways in the centre of cities does not arise: also, you have subways for trams in many places, the distinction between modes may not be clear-cut (like in Berlin, I believe), and you have inter-urban tramways, as well as tram-trains (I may not go there, hut I have subscribed to Modern Tramways and its successor for years!). It is also a fact that construction of a tramway in the U.K. is approximately double the cost in France, Spain, etc.The reasons for this are multifarious, but the major two are the cost of diverting/protecting underground service ducts and pipes falling on the constructors in this country and the insistence of the powers-that-be that tramways are treated like railway infrastructure in many ways.

As to Paris, which I do know, the distinction in size between what may be called Greater Paris and Greater London is even greater than between the central areas. The London Borough of Bromley, only one of 32 boroughs, is equal to about one sixth of the size of the whole of Paris.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

One thing that all those in favour of tram operations on the Oxford Road corridor conveniently forget is the spacing of bus stops which are a benefit for passengers who need to both embark and to disembark on the route. One can draw a comparison with the East Manchester Metrolink line where the tram stops on the road-running section are spaced at much greater distances apart than the existing bus stops.

Such is the liking of an Oxford Road tram-conversion by certain forum members is that they would, given half a chance and if in a position of power, actually force those existing bus travellers to make much longer walks between tram stops, ignoring the actual realities of inclement weather which is not uncommon in Manchester and also the needs of those with bags of shopping, young children, old people, etc, and would seem to say that the longer walks required are "good for their health"...

If a referendum of existing bus passengers was taken which allowed them to vote on the enforced use of trams and the withdrawal of buses on Oxford Road, I do so wonder how the vote of the travelling public would be so reflected.

 

[radamfi]

One thing that all those in favour of tram operations on the Oxford Road corridor conveniently forget is the spacing of bus stops which are a benefit for passengers who need to both embark and to disembark on the route. One can draw a comparison with the East Manchester Metrolink line where the tram stops on the road-running section are spaced at much greater distances apart than the existing bus stops.

Such is the liking of an Oxford Road tram-conversion by certain forum members is that they would, given half a chance and if in a position of power, actually force those existing bus travellers to make much longer walks between tram stops, ignoring the actual realities of inclement weather which is not uncommon in Manchester and also the needs of those with bags of shopping, young children, old people, etc, and would seem to say that the longer walks required are "good for their health"...

If a referendum of existing bus passengers was taken which allowed them to vote on the enforced use of trams and the withdrawal of buses on Oxford Road, I do so wonder how the vote of the travelling public would be so reflected.

If you look at tram lines in other countries, stops are not as widely spaced as on Metrolink, or indeed other tram networks in the UK. However, bus stops in the UK are closer together than in mainland Europe. If you had come here from the USA you might complain that bus stops are too far apart, as they tend to have buses at every block, about every 100 metres compared to about every 300 metres here. Buses in America are unbelievably slow as a result. If you look at mainland Europe, bus and tram stops tend to be about 400 to 500 metres apart.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If you look at tram lines in other countries, stops are not as widely spaced as on Metrolink, or indeed other tram networks in the UK. However, bus stops in the UK are closer together than in mainland Europe. If you had come here from the USA you might complain that bus stops are too far apart, as they tend to have buses at every block, about every 100 metres compared to about every 300 metres here. Buses in America are unbelievably slow as a result. If you look at mainland Europe, bus and tram stops tend to be about 400 to 500 metres apart.

Shall we get back to the question that was actually asked on the thread, which for those who may have forgotten what it was, was a rhetorical proposal for removing buses in their entirety from Oxford Road and replacing them by trams. I have made all my subsequent postings based upon an answer to that premise.

Do not cloudy the issue by bringing tramways of Europe into the equation. We are discussing the Manchester Metrolink system which does in fact have an existing long street-running section on the East Manchester Line with widely-spaced tram stops, so let us all phrase our postings on the reality of what has actually occurred on the Manchester Metrolink system and not bring any European system into the debate as TfGM who will oversee any new extensions to that system will use their own pre-existing formulae to tram stop spacing and not be suddenly beholden to any European system of methodology in that particular respect.

 

[daodao]

Shall we get back to the question that was actually asked on the thread, which for those who may have forgotten what it was, was a rhetorical proposal for removing buses in their entirety from Oxford Road and replacing them by trams. I have made all my subsequent postings based upon an answer to that premise.

Do not cloudy the issue by bringing tramways of Europe into the equation. We are discussing the Manchester Metrolink system which does in fact have an existing long street-running section on the East Manchester Line with widely-spaced tram stops, so let us all phrase our postings on the reality of what has actually occurred on the Manchester Metrolink system and not bring any European system into the debate as TfGM who will oversee any new extensions to that system will use their own pre-existing formulae to tram stop spacing and not be suddenly beholden to any European system of methodology in that particular respect.

The wide separation of stops on Metrolink is in part an unfortunate consequence of using high platform trams and the use of ticket machines rather than on board fare collection. Stops are therefore much more substantial constructions than the slightly raised pavements/platforms on the Blackpool and Sheffield tramways and thus difficult to site and more costly to build.

A bus service could run in parallel along Wilmslow Road to carry residual traffic from individuals not willing to walk to a tram stop as bus 216 (originally MCT tram route 26) does on Ashton New Road.

The greater problems are:
1. Non-integration of bus and tram systems in Manchester - they are actually in competition, as on Ashton New Road (unlike in Blackpool and Sheffield where one of the major bus operators also runs the tramway); and
2. The difficulty in building/running a tramway through the Khyber pass (Rusholme) and the narrower sections of Wilmslow Road in Withington and Fallowfield.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Let us know ask how long the projected Oxford Road Tramway construction would be expected to take and also would the construction noise emanating therefrom in the areas of the University and the MRI be something that would raise comment of complaint from either of those two bodies.

I still await estimates of the construction costs of this aspirational project being stated upon this thread.

 

[radamfi]

Shall we get back to the question that was actually asked on the thread, which for those who may have forgotten what it was, was a rhetorical proposal for removing buses in their entirety from Oxford Road and replacing them by trams. I have made all my subsequent postings based upon an answer to that premise.

Do not cloudy the issue by bringing tramways of Europe into the equation. We are discussing the Manchester Metrolink system which does in fact have an existing long street-running section on the East Manchester Line with widely-spaced tram stops, so let us all phrase our postings on the reality of what has actually occurred on the Manchester Metrolink system and not bring any European system into the debate as TfGM who will oversee any new extensions to that system will use their own pre-existing formulae to tram stop spacing and not be suddenly beholden to any European system of methodology in that particular respect.

Where is the evidence that Manchester's transport needs are so substantially different to European cities that bus services need to be run in parallel with tram lines? Mainland Europe has great experience with modern and legacy tramways with very high modal share. That is the aim of the game here, to increase modal share for public transport. So we need to learn from that experience. Some stops on Metrolink *are* sited close together and there's no reason why stops could not be built closer together on Wilmslow Road if desired.

In my view, it was a big mistake building the Ashton line with such wide spacing that the bus service needs to be retained. That is a massive duplication of service. But there was probably no choice because of the deregulated bus network. In the future, that won't be an issue and if the Ashton line was built in 10 years time you would probably build the stops closer and cancel the bus service. In London, where buses are not deregulated, bus services were curtailed and cancelled as a result of tram building.

 

[daodao]

Some stops on Metrolink *are* sited close together and there's no reason why stops could not be built closer together on Wilmslow Road if desired.

In my view, it was a big mistake building the Ashton line with such wide spacing that the bus service needs to be retained. That is a massive duplication of service. But there was probably no choice because of the deregulated bus network. In the future, that won't be an issue and if the Ashton line was built in 10 years time you would probably build the stops closer and cancel the bus service. In London, where buses are not deregulated, bus services were curtailed and cancelled as a result of tram building.

Bus deregulation is here to stay outside London. Metrolink was never originally envisaged as a street tramway and was merely intended to have a short city centre street section as building an underground link was unaffordable and technically challenging. The street-running sections are very slow and it is likely that they are a drag on the performance of the system. Metrolink stops are difficult to site because of the size and requirements for a 4car high platform stop, and therefore they are further apart than might be desirable.

If a tramway was built, possible stops could be sited at points close to: St Peter's Square, Whitworth St (for Oxford Rd station), All Saints, Brunswick St (for University), Nelson St (for MRI), Moss Lane East (for St Mary's Hospital), Platt Lane, Old Hall Lane, Fallowfield (near old station), Withington Library, Oak Road (for Christie Hospital) and West Didsbury - i.e. limited stop, like the former MCT number 50 and 64 bus routes pre-1967, after which most limited stop services were abolished on this route outside peak hours.

However, the idea of (re-)building this tram line is probably pure fantasy.