Manchester Metrolink - Speculative ideas on how to improve it?

[GCH100]

The former bus depot at Weaste was originally a Salford Corporation tram depot, and there is (or at least was) a short section of tram line still extant outside the depot.

There is no longer any tram track in the former Weaste Depot, as most of Weaste depot appart from the frontage, the clock and the side facing Eccles, was demolished and turned into flats around 20 years ago or so.

 

[daodao]

There is no longer any tram track in the former Weaste Depot, as most of Weaste depot appart from the frontage, the clock and the side facing Eccles, was demolished and turned into flats around 20 years ago or so.

I referred to tram track still extant outside the depot, as described in this article from 2020 on the British Trams on Line website at:

Still standing! Weaste Depot track, Eccles | British Trams Online News

Still standing! Weaste Depot track, Eccles​

Posted on Tuesday 4 February 2020 by Gareth Prior
Although there is still plenty of tram track buried under road surfaces across the country to see old track still on the surface is rarer but look carefully enough and will still find some. A location included in this is very close to the new generation Metrolink system in Metrolink at Weaste on the Eccles line.
The second Weaste tram depot is also still standing and is in use as an industrial unit but in the below photos we concentrate on remaining sections of track which have been kept for posterity including points and a curve. This would have likely last been used in March 1947 when the depot closed.

 

[DiscoSteve]

The lines are effectively already named - Google Maps labels them by their colours (Blue, Red, Green, Yellow etc) - IMHO anyone unfamilar with Metrolink (and I believe their are lots of tourists in this position) would greatly appreciate some simple line naming/numbering rather than the odd 'terminus naming' used today.

I started a whole thread on SkyscraperCity on this very topic many years ago "Metrolink Lines and Signage" complete with some mockups of station and train signage/destinator boards - starts here in 2012... https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/metrolink-lines-and-signage.1559406/#replies

 

[507 001]

The lines are effectively already named - Google Maps labels them by their colours (Blue, Red, Green, Yellow etc) - IMHO anyone unfamilar with Metrolink (and I believe their are lots of tourists in this position) would greatly appreciate some simple line naming/numbering rather than the odd 'terminus naming' used today.

I started a whole thread on SkyscraperCity on this very topic many years ago "Metrolink Lines and Signage" complete with some mockups of station and train signage/destinator boards - starts here in 2012... https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/metrolink-lines-and-signage.1559406/#replies

Yes they’re named;

Altrincham Line
Bury Line
Oldham Rochdale Line
East Didsbury line/South Manchester line
Ashton line/East Manchester line
Airport line
Trafford park line.

Nobody refers to them by their line colours unless they’re using Google maps. The line colours just aren’t a thing, so it’s not Metrolink that needs to change, it’s Google.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I wonder if anyone from TfGM reads this thread.

 

[TheSmiths82]

I think tram numbers are good idea, they could be T1, T2 etc so they don't clash with bus numbers. Relying on coloured lines on the map is not really suitable as it is not accessible and causes problems with people who are colour blind etc. I never really thought it was a problem though because I use the Metrolink all the time. On the other hand the lack of tube numbers don't cause me any issues in London. I still always end up on the right tube train.

Numbered trams would be useful when different trams go to the same stops before splitting into a completely different route.

 

[Starmill]

Nobody refers to them by their line colours unless they’re using Google maps. The line colours just aren’t a thing, so it’s not Metrolink that needs to change, it’s Google.

The issue with this is that Google didn't make the colours up themselves, and Metrolink aren't paying for Google staff to go around messing with the data, so you'd effectively be asking Google to work for free to clear up the issue. I'd suggest that will never happen so needs a rethink.

I think tram numbers are good idea, they could be T1, T2 etc so they don't clash with bus numbers. Relying on coloured lines on the map is not really suitable as it is not accessible and causes problems with people who are colour blind etc. I never really thought it was a problem though because I use the Metrolink all the time. On the other hand the lack of tube numbers don't cause me any issues in London. I still always end up on the right tube train.

Numbered trams would be useful when different trams go to the same stops before splitting into a completely different route.

When I was new I found the uncommon Central line destinations very counter-intuative, especially Hainult via Woodford and Loughton. I sometimes thought I was on a train going the opposite direction to the one I wanted, even when I wasn't, so the confusion is real. I also found the circle line announcements confusing.

 

[507 001]

The issue with this is that Google didn't make the colours up themselves, and Metrolink aren't paying for Google staff to go around messing with the data, so you'd effectively be asking Google to work for free to clear up the issue. I'd suggest that will never happen so needs a rethink.

No but they did ignore the fact that they’re not mentioned anywhere else, not in the disruption alerts, not in the journey planner, not in the disruption alerts… nowhere.

They got it wrong. Not us.

 

[cool110]

No but they did ignore the fact that they’re not mentioned anywhere else, not in the disruption alerts, not in the journey planner, not in the disruption alerts… nowhere.

The journey planner in the app doesn't, but the one on the web does use them. So they are just using the data they've been given.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Who decided upon the colours used on the Metrolink zonal map (extract below)?


(Extract of zonal map - source: www.tfgm.com )

 

[507 001]

Who decided upon the colours used on the Metrolink zonal map (extract below)?

View attachment 159001
(Extract of zonal map - source: www.tfgm.com )

Presumably the graphic designer.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Presumably the graphic designer.

Quite possibly. Or some planning committee. BTW, do the colours used correspond faithfully with those used by non-TfGM journey planners?

 

[Starmill]

No but they did ignore the fact that they’re not mentioned anywhere else, not in the disruption alerts, not in the journey planner, not in the disruption alerts… nowhere.

Why would they know anything about that? They look at data. They don't look at the journey planner they're competing with, or the website. Why would they? Do you think they have a team of staff who phone up every transit agency in the world and ask what they want on the Google Maps app?

They got it wrong. Not us.

This is an opinion you're obviously entitled to, but I think there's a need for perspective here. They're re a global mega-corporation.

Quite possibly. Or some planning committee. BTW, do the colours used correspond faithfully with those used by non-TfGM journey planners?

The colours are provided in the General Transit Feed Specification file from TfGM: https://ckan.publishing.service.gov.uk/dataset/gm-public-transport-schedules-gtfs Google Maps, Citymapper and all the rest just pick them up and put them out. How are they to know the trams don't show the colours on them?

 

[Greybeard33]

Yes they’re named;

Altrincham Line
Bury Line
Oldham Rochdale Line
East Didsbury line/South Manchester line
Ashton line/East Manchester line
Airport line
Trafford park line.

Nobody refers to them by their line colours unless they’re using Google maps. The line colours just aren’t a thing, so it’s not Metrolink that needs to change, it’s Google.

It is important to distinguish between physical lines (the branches of the infrastructure) and lines of route (the paths services follow over the network). The colours on the Metrolink map represent routes, not physical lines. For example, Altrincham - Bury (green), Altrincham - Piccadilly/Etihad (purple) and Bury - Piccadilly (yellow) are different lines of route that run on the Altrincham and Bury physical lines.

In using colours to help distinguish between routes on the map, TfGM has followed common practice on maps of rapid transit systems worldwide. But those other system maps usually have a key that translates the colours to route numbers, letters or names, or have "bubbles" with the route identifier at each end of the route. Journey planners, scraping the data off the map, can then describe the line of route as "S2" or "Metropolitan" or whatever. The Metrolink map, however, just has the colours as the only means of identifying the routes. Therefore it is logical for Google Maps and other planners to describe the line of route as "Green line" or "Purple line" etc. The algorithms are not to know that TfGM has chosen not to refer to the colours on the tram destination displays and PIDs.

If the colours "just aren't a thing", TfGM should take them off its map. When you publish data, you must expect it to be used.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

At any time, recent or past, has TfGM ever issued a statement of intent that some of these aspiration thread changes have ever reached any discussion stages?

 

[DiscoSteve]

It is important to distinguish between physical lines (the branches of the infrastructure) and lines of route (the paths services follow over the network). The colours on the Metrolink map represent routes, not physical lines. For example, Altrincham - Bury (green), Altrincham - Piccadilly/Etihad (purple) and Bury - Piccadilly (yellow) are different lines of route that run on the Altrincham and Bury physical lines.

In using colours to help distinguish between routes on the map, TfGM has followed common practice on maps of rapid transit systems worldwide. But those other system maps usually have a key that translates the colours to route numbers, letters or names, or have "bubbles" with the route identifier at each end of the route. Journey planners, scraping the data off the map, can then describe the line of route as "S2" or "Metropolitan" or whatever. The Metrolink map, however, just has the colours as the only means of identifying the routes. Therefore it is logical for Google Maps and other planners to describe the line of route as "Green line" or "Purple line" etc. The algorithms are not to know that TfGM has chosen not to refer to the colours on the tram destination displays and PIDs.

If the colours "just aren't a thing", TfGM should take them off its map. When you publish data, you must expect it to be used.

Spot on. It is not the lines/tracks that matter, its the routes. Consider Munich MVV with its singular S-Bahn tunnel through the middle - there's about 6 or 7 routes/lines running through that single tunnel, and its the 6 or 7 options that matter NOT the piece of track. We have our own little segment from (Pomona/Trafford Bar) to Cornbrook to St Peter's Square to (Market Street/Piccadilly Gardens)

 

[barbette165]

The colours help route planning. You just need to look at the colour(s) of your originating as destination stops. If both have the same colour, then a single tram is possible, if they are different, look for a stop where both colours are present and change there. Colours make this easy to do, but don't require the line/route to be named after the colour.

 

[WibbleWobble]

The problem with colours is that there's no reference to them on destination displays or real time screens. Given that trams share routes, then that could cause confusion to passengers not familiar with the system or who have disabilities.

With line numbers, it is one thing renumbering the small number of bus routes that would clash, but this would need to keep happening every time the Metrolink system expands. Perhaps the most logical approach would be to use lettered identifiers rather than number, or use the Parisian T-prefix format (there is only one service with a T-prefix in Greater Manchester, and that ceases in July; the other two services starting with a T are "TA01" and "TA02" in the far north of the county).

 

[DiscoSteve]

The problem with colours is that there's no reference to them on destination displays or real time screens. Given that trams share routes, then that could cause confusion to passengers not familiar with the system or who have disabilities.

With line numbers, it is one thing renumbering the small number of bus routes that would clash, but this would need to keep happening every time the Metrolink system expands. Perhaps the most logical approach would be to use lettered identifiers rather than number, or use the Parisian T-prefix format (there is only one service with a T-prefix in Greater Manchester, and that ceases in July; the other two services starting with a T are "TA01" and "TA02" in the far north of the county).

Agreed - in my original SkyscraperCity discussion on this 12 years ago I mocked up some colour/number squares on station signage and also proposed a way the line number could be placed at the left hand end of the front destination board - I see they've sadly now gone from SSC but I found them and here they are again - I thought they were quite neat (notice there were only 8 routes back then)

 

[py_megapixel]

In using colours to help distinguish between routes on the map, TfGM has followed common practice on maps of rapid transit systems worldwide. But those other system maps usually have a key that translates the colours to route numbers, letters or names, or have "bubbles" with the route identifier at each end of the route. Journey planners, scraping the data off the map, can then describe the line of route as "S2" or "Metropolitan" or whatever. The Metrolink map, however, just has the colours as the only means of identifying the routes. Therefore it is logical for Google Maps and other planners to describe the line of route as "Green line" or "Purple line" etc. The algorithms are not to know that TfGM has chosen not to refer to the colours on the tram destination displays and PIDs.

Agreed - in my original SkyscraperCity discussion on this 12 years ago I mocked up some colour/number squares on station signage and also proposed a way the line number could be placed at the left hand end of the front destination board - I see they've sadly now gone from SSC but I found them and here they are again - I thought they were quite neat (notice there were only 8 routes back then)

View attachment 159076

View attachment 159077

It's interesting to see people mention this sort of thing, as a previous version of the map did in fact give each route a letter, with coloured boxes at each terminus. This was removed a few years ago though, which I'm sure was a particularly good decision.

I wouldn't like to see them start actually naming the lines after the colours, since that raises accessibility issues for people with colour-blindess.

(Nitpicking, but for the sake of consistency, the route numbers/letters should probably go at the right of the destination board not the left - since that's the standard for buses in this country)

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

During a conversation that I had with TfGM on a different matter, I did raise some of the points that had been raised on this thread, such as line numbering aspects. The response from the person to whom I spoke suggested that none of these ideas form part of any official TfGM policy that concerns the Metrolink system.

 

[Mothball]

During a conversation that I had with TfGM on a different matter, I did raise some of the points that had been raised on this thread, such as line numbering aspects. The response from the person to whom I spoke suggested that none of these ideas form part of any official TfGM policy that concerns the Metrolink system.

I think you missed the "Speculative" part of the title.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

Spot on. It is not the lines/tracks that matter, its the routes.

I wouldn't like to see them start actually naming the lines after the colours, since that raises accessibility issues for people with colour-blindess.

It is important to distinguish between physical lines (the branches of the infrastructure) and lines of route (the paths services follow over the network). The colours on the Metrolink map represent routes, not physical lines. For example, Altrincham - Bury (green), Altrincham - Piccadilly/Etihad (purple) and Bury - Piccadilly (yellow) are different lines of route that run on the Altrincham and Bury physical lines.

View attachment 159076

This is what I meant when I started this conversation (back in the main thread). The lines and routes are confused too much by passengers, and they were even being confused in the original thread. The difference between the two needs to be clear.

I raised points about colour-blindness and people that just see colours differently, and so the Google Maps names for the lines wouldn't be much help for most people. The attachment above seems to express what I've been envisioning exactly.

I also mentioned that the Metrolink used to have letters instead of numbers for routes around 2016, so the idea must have been approved at some point.

Yes they’re named;

Altrincham Line
Bury Line
Oldham Rochdale Line
East Didsbury line/South Manchester line
Ashton line/East Manchester line
Airport line
Trafford park line.

Nobody refers to them by their line colours unless they’re using Google maps. The line colours just aren’t a thing, so it’s not Metrolink that needs to change, it’s Google.

What would Google change it to? They're naming the routes, not the lines, after all.

 

[HSTEd]

The Metrolink appears to be stuck in an awkward space where it has been moving more and more towards being a de-facto metro, but is apparently unwilling to take that final step.

In my view the system should acquire metro-style line names or numbers and be done with it.
This halfway house is not helpful to anyone.

Should probably just adopt New York subway style train numbers.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

In my view the system should acquire metro-style line names or numbers and be done with it.

I'm not sure if I'm entirely persuaded by your argument.

 

[HSTEd]

I'm not sure if I'm entirely persuaded by your argument.

The status quo of having colour named lines, but not really, and having geographically named lines, but not really, whilst trying to use destinations to define tram routes is not really sensible in the long run.

We now have several routes a tram can take through the city centre, so it is far from intuitive what trams go where. Further expansions to the system are likely to make this worse - a third city crossing is likely to be needed before too long.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is it not the case that the vast number of Manchester Metrolink passengers just accept the current tram destination system shown on the tram unit destination PID screens and the destination shown on the tram units themselves? The only place that I hear differently is on websites such as this and SkyScraper City Manchester,

 

[Russel]

I find looking at the destination display to see where the tram is going is sufficient.

 

[The exile]

The problem is

This is all a solution looking for a problem.

there alright once you have a network that has more than a couple of variable routes. Not so much for regular users - but for non-regular ones (who are, after all, a market looking to be tapped). Much easier for a venue to say “we’re on tram routes 1,5 and 26” than using destinations. As mentioned above, it also solves the “part route” problem, where the destination shown is not the one an unfamiliar traveller has been told, but is the correct tram. Suspect only Manchester has a complex enough network (as yet) though Sheffield might as well add numbers to its colours.
If an entire recast of numbering is being contemplated, then you just dedicate a block to trams.

I wouldn't like to see them start actually naming the lines after the colours, since that raises accessibility issues for people with colour-blindess.

Even for non colour-blind people, once you get beyond primary colours plus a few more it can get very difficult: “No - you want the cerise line; this is magenta”
In general, I can’t understand what British systems have against route / train numbers - unless it’s the good old “not invented here”.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There have been a certain number of postings made that make reference to non-regular users and users from other area regions exterior to the Manchester Metrolink system. That is all well and good and looks kindly upon those individuals, but surely the actual regular users of the system who should be those who are catered for and for these travellers, the existing system that has platform PID and tram destination display is quite adequate.