Manchester Metrolink - Altrincham Line.

[507 001]

However, unlike other recent schemes, the tram-train proposals require TfGM to deal with Network Rail, who are no pushover. If the tram-train proposals were sensible, the case would be easier to make, but the proposed tram-train service to Hale adds little benefit at the expense of a lot of complication. Given the current issues with Metrolink and Network Rail operating side-by-side between Deansgate Junction and Altrincham, greater integration is likely to exacerbate problems.

We’ll see. I suspect for it to have appeared in the plan some form of preliminary discussions will have already taken place.

 

[Glenn1969]

Can TfGM fund any of these plans? Or is it a pipe dream like NPR via Bradford and most of the other schemes on TfN's wish list ?

 

[sjm77]

This would be a good idea, however, Tram-Trains to Hale will be a pipe dream unless the freight trains magically disappear.

Why do the freight trains need to disappear? Northern Rail and Freight trains all mix with Tram-Trains at Rotherham Central and the Tyne & Wear metro between Heworth & Sunderland.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Why do the freight trains need to disappear? Northern Rail and Freight trains all mix with Tram-Trains at Rotherham Central and the Tyne & Wear metro between Heworth & Sunderland.

Through a single track section though?

 

[507 001]

Through a single track section though?

There wouldn’t be a single line section though…

The idea would be to reinstate Deansgate Junction as a proper junction, do away with the two independent single lines through Navigation Rd and remodel Altrincham itself to allow services to use all 4 platforms.

All Alti services would have to be operated by tram-trains which is either a problem or an upgrade depending on your opinion of M5000s.

 

[apk55]

The present arrangement through Navigation road is probably the best arrangement that can done short of putting in 4 tracks. If you had a common pair of tracks you would end up with lots of delays as trains and trams kept crossing each others paths. There is a considerable amount of freight traffic which if diverted would probably have to go through already very congested central Manchester tracks so this is not an option. Building another pair of tracks would not be easy as there is a lot pf property very close to the railways as it is and acquiring a 8M wide strip of land would involve a lot of acquisition and demolition of property. Then there is the problem of Navigation road Level crossing which is busy road and no very easy way round.

 

[Ianno87]

I do think the current pair of single lines is actually the highest capacity arrangement, as it keeps both routes segregated and independent from each other.

 

[LOL The Irony]

There wouldn’t be a single line section though…

The idea would be to reinstate Deansgate Junction as a proper junction, do away with the two independent single lines through Navigation Rd and remodel Altrincham itself to allow services to use all 4 platforms.

All Alti services would have to be operated by tram-trains which is either a problem or an upgrade depending on your opinion of M5000s.

And they want to do this with simple TPWS whilst also serving Hale? Yeah, it's a little ambitious, especially at Hale. Also, why does TfGM want Metrolink to serve Hale so bad, isn't it served well enough by the train? It's all that effort just to serve 1 stop. If it was continuing to Knutsford or Northwich (which we know it won't, thanks to the costs not being recoverable), I'd understand and support the effort. The only thing I support is the mixed use at Navigation Road.

 

[Ianno87]

And they want to do this with simple TPWS whilst also serving Hale? Yeah, it's a little ambitious, especially at Hale. Also, why does TfGM want Metrolink to serve Hale so bad, isn't it served well enough by the train? It's all that effort just to serve 1 stop. If it was continuing to Knutsford or Northwich (which we know it won't, thanks to the costs not being recoverable), I'd understand and support the effort. The only thing I support is the mixed use at Navigation Road.

I get the impression that a lot of folks in Hale "railhead" to Altrincham for the improved tram frequency compared to the rail service.

 

[LOL The Irony]

I get the impression that a lot of folks in Hale "railhead" to Altrincham for the improved tram frequency compared to the rail service.

Then instead of running a tram down there, put a Metrolink ticket machine there that allows use on the train up to Navigation Road.

 

[Ianno87]

Then instead of running a tram down there, put a Metrolink ticket machine there that allows use on the train up to Navigation Road.

That doesn't solve Hale having a relatively poor service frequency; folks will still head to Alty.

 

[LOL The Irony]

That doesn't solve Hale having a relatively poor service frequency; folks will still head to Alty.

Well then I hope TfGM liked being bossed around by Network Rail and their service being inconsistent.

 

[miami]

Trams can run on roads. Is Hale station the best place for a tram to run? Be busy every morning for kids going to the school, but there are other places in Hale/Bowdon that don't even have an hourly tram

Was it a cost decision to not run it on the road from Navigation Road back in the early 90s?

 

[507 001]

And they want to do this with simple TPWS whilst also serving Hale? Yeah, it's a little ambitious, especially at Hale. Also, why does TfGM want Metrolink to serve Hale so bad, isn't it served well enough by the train? It's all that effort just to serve 1 stop. If it was continuing to Knutsford or Northwich (which we know it won't, thanks to the costs not being recoverable), I'd understand and support the effort. The only thing I support is the mixed use at Navigation Road.

I don’t quite understand what the issue with using TPWS would be? It works perfectly fine in Sheffield. All you’re doing is reinstating what was there pre-Metrolink (with a couple of exceptions). The Metrolink side is well overdue a major renewal between Navigation Road and Altrincham anyway. Obviously new tram-train stock would be required but that goes without saying.

The idea is that Hale would be used as a ‘pathfinder’ project for other future tram-train projects. It’s all in the 5/10 year plan on TfGM’s website.

Trams can run on roads. Is Hale station the best place for a tram to run? Be busy every morning for kids going to the school, but there are other places in Hale/Bowdon that don't even have an hourly tram

Was it a cost decision to not run it on the road from Navigation Road back in the early 90s?

When Metrolink was first built it was never intended to run on the street anywhere other than the City Centre.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

When Metrolink was first built it was never intended to run on the street anywhere other than the City Centre.

Is that the reason why it was decided to have a "high door" tram design that would utilise existing railway station platforms?

 

[tspaul26]

Is that the reason why it was decided to have a "high door" tram design that would utilise existing railway station platforms?

I think it was mostly about reducing the cost of the conversion by not having to rebuild said platforms.

 

[Ianno87]

Was it a cost decision to not run it on the road from Navigation Road back in the early 90s?

Yes. There was no need for street running to Altrincham as the heavy rail route could be reconfigured, making use of the 4 track formation south of Navvy Road., and Alty Station is pretty convenient for the Town Centre already.

Metrolink Phase 1 really was done on a shoestring.

 

[WatcherZero]

I think it was mostly about reducing the cost of the conversion by not having to rebuild said platforms.

Yes it was primarily not having to rebuild the BR platforms. On later lines they would demolish and rebuild all existing stations to ensure level boarding as cheap modular pre-cast concrete platform sections had been developed.

Also 100% low floor trams (axel-less) hadnt been invented at the time, the best that was available was 50% or 70% low floor designs which were generally low level platform height (200-300mm, a high kerb) but the vehicle was only low floor immediately around the doors with space for wheelchairs/prams, to reach the seats you had to step up to a higher floor level like the rear of buses.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Also 100% low floor trams (axel-less) (axle-less) hadnt been invented at the time, the best that was available was 50% or 70% low floor designs which were generally low level platform height (200-300mm, a high kerb) but the vehicle was only low floor immediately around the doors with space for wheelchairs/prams, to reach the seats you had to step up to a higher floor level like the rear of buses.

Are you talking about the original Metrolink T68 trams, which were operating on the line in 1992?

Don't remember them ever having split level floors.

I do remember them having retractable steps especially for use at Metrolink stations with (partial) low level platforms, such as at the now closed Mosley Street, in central Manchester.

 

[TC60054]

Are you talking about the original Metrolink T68 trams, which were operating on the line in 1992?

Don't remember them ever having split level floors.

I do remember them having retractable steps especially for use at Metrolink stations with (partial) low level platforms, such as at the now closed Mosley Street, in central Manchester.

The T68s were officially designated as high floor trams though, even though they were level throughout, because of the use of railway height platforms. The first low floor trams in the UK were the Sheffield ones, with, as WatcherZero says, have about 40% low floor around the door area for the less able / wheelchairs / pushchairs etc with the majority of seating space up a small flight of stairs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The T68s were officially designated as high floor trams though, even though they were level throughout, because of the use of railway height platforms. The first low floor trams in the UK were the Sheffield ones, with, as WatcherZero says, have about 40% low floor around the door area for the less able / wheelchairs / pushchairs etc with the majority of seating space up a small flight of stairs.

I personally think those are better than the modern ones, to be honest - the layout of the modern ones tends to result in very poor seating arrangements. The Sheffield arrangement is very practical like a double decker bus - a long flat floor for lots of seats, and accessible areas for those needing those.

The Edinburgh ones have an awful seating arrangement - I very much understand why many locals prefer the buses.