Surely that can't be right? The Rochdale and Oldham route was converted to tram because it was no longer viable as a train route. The Metrolink in Manchester pays for its operation itself through fares but many of the rail services are subsidised by TfGM.
It is right if you consider the costs of the vehicles in isolation. A tram costs about the same as a 2-car EMU but has less passenger space, and a tram-train is more expensive than a tram. Replacing trains by trams while changing nothing else will almost certainly increase costs especially if the capital cost of converting the infrastructure is taken into account.
Cost savings from trams compared to trains arise from (in no particular order):
- Driver only operation
- Lower driver wages
- Line of sight operation replacing a high-integrity signalling system
- Less wear on the track (probably)
- Probably lower energy costs (smaller and lighter vehicle, but higher performance)
Also the more frequent service going direct to important places not on the rail network will attract more passengers, fares may be a bit higher, so the revenue is more as well as the costs being less.
Hence tram-train schemes need to be in places where these savings and benefits make them worthwhile, rather than assuming that tram-train conversion is the solution to all problems!
