Manchester Metrolink - Speculative ideas on how to improve it?

[signed]

A new gen, 55m, Citadis 502, like the one in Dublin may be able to work, but you do loose flexibility by not having a double

 

[Mcr Warrior]

One thing that would help is replacing the M5000s with something twice as long as they reach end of life, then you don't have the wasted space of 2 dead cabs + couplers in the middle.

Might there then be a problem with the various tight radius curves located across the Metrolink network?

 

[Chester1]

Well I was talking about a third city crossing line running from Salford (to serve any future lines in that direction), crossing the existing lines at St Peters Square and then running east to Piccadilly station, possibly via Oxford Road station.

This would support conversion of lines like New Mills Central, Atherton and an Oxford Road tramway.
I don't see there as any reason why we need some sort of city centre tunnel, we can support most practical growth requirements without one.

Ah I understand now. There is probably just enough space around St Peters Square to fit it an underpass. If platform 5 and the 60s buildings along side it where demolished there would be enough space below Oxford Road Station to build a stop at street level.

One thing that would help is replacing the M5000s with something twice as long as they reach end of life, then you don't have the wasted space of 2 dead cabs + couplers in the middle.

A new gen, 55m, Citadis 502, like the one in Dublin may be able to work, but you do loose flexibility by not having a double

Might there then be a problem with the various tight radius curves located across the Metrolink network?

The maximum length limit for junctions e.g. Piccadilly Gardens is 60 metres. 5 x 12 metre articulated sets should get around curves. With one door per car the layout could become more seat focused.

 

[Grimsby town]

Well I was talking about a third city crossing line running from Salford (to serve any future lines in that direction), crossing the existing lines at St Peters Square and then running east to Piccadilly station, possibly via Oxford Road station.

This would support conversion of lines like New Mills Central, Atherton and an Oxford Road tramway.
I don't see there as any reason why we need some sort of city centre tunnel, we can support most practical growth requirements without one.

But again such a line would take space that could be reallocated to cyclists or pedestrians. Oxford Street is already unsuitable for the pedestrian flows it experiences and there continues to be developments in the area.

It also doesn't do much to solve the issues that the current Metrolink lines either experience now or are expected to experience in the coming decades. In 2018, even with every tram as a double, TfGM forecast the peak usage on the Altrincham line to be at 140% of capacity by 2040. A 3rd city crossing does very little to solve that. The current line can't cater for this increase in demand and additional trams with new lines. That's why TfGM themselves have a metro tunnel in their 2040 strategy.

The other major issue with another cross city tram line is the speed. Any tram journey across the city centre is incredibly slow. It takes around 50 minutes to get from Old Trafford to the Etihad by public transport currently (with a 5 minute walk either side). Driving can be as little as 15 minutes. Cycling is only 30 minutes. The tram simply isn't competitive for cross city journeys which is particularly an issue when Etihad Campus and Old Trafford/Media City are major trip generators.

 

[HSTEd]

But again such a line would take space that could be reallocated to cyclists or pedestrians. Oxford Street is already unsuitable for the pedestrian flows it experiences and there continues to be developments in the area.

It also doesn't do much to solve the issues that the current Metrolink lines either experience now or are expected to experience in the coming decades. In 2018, even with every tram as a double, TfGM forecast the peak usage on the Altrincham line to be at 140% of capacity by 2040. A 3rd city crossing does very little to solve that. The current line can't cater for this increase in demand and additional trams with new lines. That's why TfGM themselves have a metro tunnel in their 2040 strategy.

An underground line is going to cost several times as much as a surface route though.
So it cannot be built without making sacrifices elsewhere.

There are alternatives that would allow the number of trams to be increased on existing core alignments, using a third city crossing that took the form I suggested.
For example, a third city crossing that ran out to Salford Crescent to pick up the Atherton line et al would potentially allow a short-ish section of tram route to provide an alternate connection to the Eccles Line near Anchorage.

If that happened then the Eccles line could be broken in half and be operated as three separate branches (Media City, Eccles and Pomona via Anchorage).
That would remove ~10tph from the core section in that direction, allowing a doubling of the Altrincham service.

TfGM put lots of things in their strategy documents that they are highly unlikely to get - like giant multi billion pound underground statement stations at Piccadilly.
And of course the figures are likely to be different in a post coronavirus world in any case.

The other major issue with another cross city tram line is the speed. Any tram journey across the city centre is incredibly slow. It takes around 50 minutes to get from Old Trafford to the Etihad by public transport currently (with a 5 minute walk either side). Driving can be as little as 15 minutes. Cycling is only 30 minutes. The tram simply isn't competitive for cross city journeys which is particularly an issue when Etihad Campus and Old Trafford/Media City are major trip generators.

How much faster is an underground central section actually likely to make that?
Unless you fundamentally alter the character of the system by slashing stops it is never going to be particularly fast for cross-city journeys.

 

[py_megapixel]

Could longer trams and extended platforms be a solution, as was done to the DLR?

Not suggesting a new fleet, but maybe more M5000s to allow for 3 tram sets to be used?

The current fleet do seem rather small, Wiki has the length of an M5000 as 29m, where as the Urbos 3's used on the Midland Metro is 4m longer at 33m, though both are dwarfed by Edinburgh's Urbos 3's at 42m...

3-tram sets wouldn't fit at most of the platforms

 

[Russel]

3-tram sets wouldn't fit at most of the platforms

That's why I also suggested extending platforms.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

That's why I also suggested extending platforms.

Sure that would be easy on the ex-rail lines, where almost ever platform has triple its length in empty space, but I can't imagine it being easy (or cheap) pretty much anywhere else, especially in the city centre.

 

[Russel]

Sure that would be easy on the ex-rail lines, where almost ever platform has triple its length in empty space, but I can't imagine it being easy (or cheap) pretty much anywhere else, especially in the city centre.

No, you're right, but it would be cheaper than some of the options being suggested here, such as tunnelling under Manchester!

 

[Grimsby town]

An underground line is going to cost several times as much as a surface route though.
So it cannot be built without making sacrifices elsewhere.

There are alternatives that would allow the number of trams to be increased on existing core alignments, using a third city crossing that took the form I suggested.
For example, a third city crossing that ran out to Salford Crescent to pick up the Atherton line et al would potentially allow a short-ish section of tram route to provide an alternate connection to the Eccles Line near Anchorage.

If that happened then the Eccles line could be broken in half and be operated as three separate branches (Media City, Eccles and Pomona via Anchorage).
That would remove ~10tph from the core section in that direction, allowing a doubling of the Altrincham service.

TfGM put lots of things in their strategy documents that they are highly unlikely to get - like giant multi billion pound underground statement stations at Piccadilly.
And of course the figures are likely to be different in a post coronavirus world

Covid has reduced passenger numbers but not massively. Its still difficult to get on Alty trams in the morning. The main difference seems to be Mondays are quieter and Fridays are a lot quieter.

I don't think a more direct Eccles services is a bad idea, but Pomana isn't a suitable place to terminate trams both operationally and in terms of onward connections. It'd have to be Cornbrook at the very least but that limits capacity gain unless Cornbrook is rebuilt.

I could be wrong, but I think the Piccadilly underground station is a political idea rather than something TfGM were suggesting too seriously. I don't see why a single metro tunnel isn't seen as feasible in the Manchester. How are regional cities ever supposed to level up if we only provide them with slow tram services. Metrolink has been a huge success so surely now is the time to progress to the next stage.

How much faster is an underground central section actually likely to make that?
Unless you fundamentally alter the character of the system by slashing stops it is never going to be particularly fast for cross-city journeys.

Probably 10-15 minutes. Jesmond to Gateshead stadium is around 4.2km and a 9 minute journey time. Cornbrook to Holt Town is 4.5km and 17 minute journey. Tyne and Wear Metro has pretty frequent stops. Metrolink is incredibly slow.

No, you're right, but it would be cheaper than some of the options being suggested here, such as tunnelling under Manchester!

And completely unworkable. Have a look at Google maps. How do you lengthen Market Street? Shudehill would involve the closure of roads. Piccadilly Gardens would sever a busy pedestrian route. Buildings at Deansgate make extension very difficult without reverting to only two platforms.

 

[DiscoSteve]

Survey of two now on the Route Map thing - this week I've been trying to explain to an Italian Gentleman how to get to Old Trafford (the one with the leaky roof) for a meeting coming out from London (where he is staying for a couple of days in two weeks time) - starts easy, take WCML from London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly, then take the tram to the Wharfside Stop on the Red Line!

So once again, we're left trying to explain to a total stranger which platform at Piccadilly to start from, which destination (why would he have to care about the line end points) to head for (one of Altrincham, Airport, East Didsbury, Eccles, Media City) and then change for a tram to the Trafford Centre at Deansgate Castlefield or Cornbrook - once again total nonsense when it could be as easy as take an Orange/Sky Blue/Purple line tram going into town and then change to the Red line at Deansgate Castlefield or Cornbrook.

I say no more.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Probably 10-15 minutes. Jesmond to Gateshead stadium is around 4.2km and a 9 minute journey time. Cornbrook to Holt Town is 4.5km and 17 minute journey. Tyne and Wear Metro has pretty frequent stops. Metrolink is incredibly slow.

By your example the time saving would be 8 minutes. But that's only for people going all the way across the city centre, and the percentage of people doing that is low. So you're down to about a 4-5 minute time saving for the majority of travellers.

Great, but how long does it take to get out of an underground station compared to just walking straight off a street-level platform? My experience is that it takes 2-3 minutes to get from platform to street level at Monument or Haymarket metro stations and that's using the escalator- it's more if you have to wait for the lifts if you have a buggy or heavy luggage. So almost all of the supposed savings from whooshing under the city centre are gone in the time it takes to get from the platform to the street.

Have a look at Google maps. How do you lengthen Market Street? Shudehill would involve the closure of roads. Piccadilly Gardens would sever a busy pedestrian route. Buildings at Deansgate make extension very difficult without reverting to only two platforms.

There's loads of room at Market Street at the SE end, there's the whole of the gardens to go at if you really need to. Loads of room at Deansgate westbound too, eastbound is a little bit tighter because of the access road to the car park but not unachievable. And in the longer term it won't matter if it does have to go to two platforms as the Trafford Centre trains are supposed to be going through to Crumpsall. Piccadilly Gardens has room to spread out at the NW end. The only one that would be tight is Shudehill, but who would care if they had to shut Dantzic Street?

Heck, when the M5000s are eventually replaced you could make the whole replacement fleet 4-car. You'd gain a lot of extra capacity through losing the two intermediate cabs and without having to lengthen anything. It's what the T&W Metro have done.

 

[Grimsby town]

By your example the time saving would be 8 minutes. But that's only for people going all the way across the city centre, and the percentage of people doing that is low. So you're down to about a 4-5 minute time saving for the majority of travellers.

But my point was about cross-city journeys and not journeys to the city centre. Journeys into the city centre are relatively competitive. Cross-city journeys struggle against a bike. It'd also likely have less stops than the Tyne and Wear Metro and be slightly longer so 10-15 minutes would be about right.

Great, but how long does it take to get out of an underground station compared to just walking straight off a street-level platform? My experience is that it takes 2-3 minutes to get from platform to street level at Monument or Haymarket metro stations and that's using the escalator- it's more if you have to wait for the lifts if you have a buggy or heavy luggage. So almost all of the supposed savings from whooshing under the city centre are gone in the time it takes to get from the platform to the street.

It's a valid point that it takes longer but you also don't teleport on and off a metrolink platform, particularly if they are busy and have been extended to 90 metres in length. You could also argue that people would prefer waiting underground to bring out in the elements. I'd question whether it makes a huge difference to the actual perceived journey time.

There's loads of room at Market Street at the SE end, there's the whole of the gardens to go at if you really need to. Loads of room at Deansgate westbound too, eastbound is a little bit tighter because of the access road to the car park but not unachievable. And in the longer term it won't matter if it does have to go to two platforms as the Trafford Centre trains are supposed to be going through to Crumpsall. Piccadilly Gardens has room to spread out at the NW end. The only one that would be tight is Shudehill, but who would care if they had to shut Dantzic Street?

Heck, when the M5000s are eventually replaced you could make the whole replacement fleet 4-car. You'd gain a lot of extra capacity through losing the two intermediate cabs and without having to lengthen anything. It's what the T&W Metro have done.

But again if you're extending platforms you start blocking streets and removing space for pedestrians. Market Street tram stop is already a massive pinch point for pedestrians. Making it longer increases the pinch point and creates new barriers to walking around. You're also making the line from St Peters Square very circuitous and perhaps slower.

As for Deansgate, it would definitely require going down to two platforms and that reduces the reliability and flexibility of the system. Yes you could extend a lot of the platforms, but by doing so you're making the system worse. The north needs better infrastructure to develop. Not worse. 4 car units aren't going to give you an extra 40% capacity over 2 car units which is what the Altrincham line may need.

 

[sprunt]

Can the trams do SDO? The DLR seems to manage with a few stops that aren't long enough for the triples that way.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Can the trams do SDO? The DLR seems to manage with a few stops that aren't long enough for the triples that way.

SDO wouldn't help, the problem is that you'd block every road and junction next to a station.

 

[cool110]

Can the trams do SDO? The DLR seems to manage with a few stops that aren't long enough for the triples that way.

Would need to bring the old T-68s with the retractable steps back for that

 

[DoubleLemon]

Isn't the bottleneck for the Altrincham line the single line NR section. That's were the 6 Min times all hang from (I think)

 

[507 001]

Survey of two now on the Route Map thing - this week I've been trying to explain to an Italian Gentleman how to get to Old Trafford (the one with the leaky roof) for a meeting coming out from London (where he is staying for a couple of days in two weeks time) - starts easy, take WCML from London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly, then take the tram to the Wharfside Stop on the Red Line!

So once again, we're left trying to explain to a total stranger which platform at Piccadilly to start from, which destination (why would he have to care about the line end points) to head for (one of Altrincham, Airport, East Didsbury, Eccles, Media City) and then change for a tram to the Trafford Centre at Deansgate Castlefield or Cornbrook - once again total nonsense when it could be as easy as take an Orange/Sky Blue/Purple line tram going into town and then change to the Red line at Deansgate Castlefield or Cornbrook.

I say no more.

I would simply advise him to get on an Altrincham or Eccles service at Piccadilly (there’s signage telling him which platform to go to), and change at Cornbrook for a Trafford centre service. I think you’re over complicating it.

By your example the time saving would be 8 minutes. But that's only for people going all the way across the city centre, and the percentage of people doing that is low. So you're down to about a 4-5 minute time saving for the majority of travellers.

Great, but how long does it take to get out of an underground station compared to just walking straight off a street-level platform? My experience is that it takes 2-3 minutes to get from platform to street level at Monument or Haymarket metro stations and that's using the escalator- it's more if you have to wait for the lifts if you have a buggy or heavy luggage. So almost all of the supposed savings from whooshing under the city centre are gone in the time it takes to get from the platform to the street.


There's loads of room at Market Street at the SE end, there's the whole of the gardens to go at if you really need to. Loads of room at Deansgate westbound too, eastbound is a little bit tighter because of the access road to the car park but not unachievable. And in the longer term it won't matter if it does have to go to two platforms as the Trafford Centre trains are supposed to be going through to Crumpsall. Piccadilly Gardens has room to spread out at the NW end. The only one that would be tight is Shudehill, but who would care if they had to shut Dantzic Street?

Heck, when the M5000s are eventually replaced you could make the whole replacement fleet 4-car. You'd gain a lot of extra capacity through losing the two intermediate cabs and without having to lengthen anything. It's what the T&W Metro have done.

Platoon extensions in the city centre are virtually impossible.

Piccadilly Gardens and Market street are both limited by the delta junction at one end, and curvature at the other (both ends in the case of Market Street). You have to remember that it’s not just the platform that needs to be accommodated, but a suitable access ramp for those with disabilities.
Shudehill could probably be extended by a few metres, but not enough to accommodate a third M5000.

This isn’t to say that longer units, aren’t possible. You could probably go up to 70 metres on the existing platforms by pushing the first and last set of doors to the very ends of the platforms, but it wouldn’t leave much room for error.

Isn't the bottleneck for the Altrincham line the single line NR section. That's were the 6 Min times all hang from (I think)

Correct.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

Does the Eccles Line have too many stops? It seems that most of the stops on it in the Salford Quays area are not necessary, especially the group of MediaCityUK, Harbour City, and Broadway. Couldn't these stops all be merged into a single stop a little further south of where Broadway is now? It seems the MediaCity spur causes long journey times to Eccles off-peak (27 min from Deansgate), whereas disusing Harbour City and the MediaCityUK spur and reconstructing Broadway would result in ~21 min from Eccles - Deansgate during all operational times.

 

[507 001]

Does the Eccles Line have too many stops? It seems that most of the stops on it in the Salford Quays area are not necessary, especially the group of MediaCityUK, Harbour City, and Broadway. Couldn't these stops all be merged into a single stop a little further south of where Broadway is now? It seems the MediaCity spur causes long journey times to Eccles off-peak (27 min from Deansgate), whereas disusing Harbour City and the MediaCityUK spur and reconstructing Broadway would result in ~21 min from Eccles - Deansgate during all operational times.

Personally I would close Harbour City and Anchorage, and build a replacement for both of them on the Harbour City side of The Quays.

As for Media, well it should never have been built frankly.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

Personally I would close Harbour City and Anchorage, and build a replacement for both of them on the Harbour City side of The Quays.

As for Media, well it should never have been built frankly.

Thanks for responding, I agree MediaCityUK is used quite a bit, but isn't necessary looking at a satellite view of the Eccles Line

-

The Eccles Line in general has quite a few speed restrictions that don't really make much sense to me, even with the line of sight signalling.

 

[Tetchytyke]

As for Media, well it should never have been built frankly.

It makes sense as what it is- a place to reverse half the trams. The Quays section does need 10tph but the bit through to Eccles does not.

 

[507 001]

It makes sense as what it is- a place to reverse half the trams. The Quays section does need 10tph but the bit through to Eccles does not.

To an extent.

What it absolutely doesn’t make sense to do is what we do early morning/evenings which is run everything via Media City.

The whole set up is an operational PITA.

 

[Russel]

Given Media City is a relatively recent addition and we're now talking about how it shouldn't have been built, why was it built?

 

[507 001]

Given Media City is a relatively recent addition and we're now talking about how it shouldn't have been built, why was it built?

Because Peel threw a fair chunk of money at it…

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Given Media City is a relatively recent addition and we're now talking about how it shouldn't have been built, why was it built?

Has to have been because in 2010 the nearby MediaCityUK complex was shortly about to open, and the developers considered that the fifth-of-a-mile walk to Harbour City tram stop to be just that little bit too far.

 

[Chester1]

Given Media City is a relatively recent addition and we're now talking about how it shouldn't have been built, why was it built?

Because Peel threw a fair chunk of money at it…

Has to have been because in 2010 the nearby MediaCityUK complex was shortly about to open, and the developers considered that the fifth-of-a-mile walk to Harbour City tram stop to be just that little bit too far.

It was a sweetener for the BBC and ITV to locate to Media City. It's a fairly convenient location to turn around the second service but I agree with @507 001 that it adds unnecessary journey time to off peak services. There is a strong argument that it should be closed when the terminating service doesn't run early mornings and late evening.

The line only extended as far as Eccles because of EU funding. It only supports a 5tph of single units and wouldn't have had a decent BCR without external funding. Similarly £160m of the £350m cost of the Trafford Park Line came from private sector (primarily Peel). The next extension of the network will probably be to Airport terminal 2 and that will be reliant on central government and the airport chipping in. The airport is 2/3rds owned by GM councils but money would need to be given on a commercial basis to be approved by the private sector minority shareholder. Greater Manchester has built the network in a pragmatic fashion.

Is the Weaste freight branch line still in use? Running services into new Metrolink platforms at Eccles railway station would cut journey times considerably and provide a better rail interchange, at the cost of a slightly worse bus interchange.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The airport is 2/3rds owned by GM councils...

Believe it's 35.5% by Manchester City Council, 29.0% (collectively) by the other nine Greater Manchester councils, with the remaining 35.5% now owned by IFM Investors (= Australian investment firm).

 

[Greybeard33]

Is the Weaste freight branch line still in use? Running services into new Metrolink platforms at Eccles railway station would cut journey times considerably and provide a better rail interchange, at the cost of a slightly worse bus interchange.

I believe the Weaste freight branch was last used three years ago. See this thread:

Eccles To Weaste Freight Traffic

This topic has been covered in the past and I know inbound Cement to the Terminal at Salford is covered every 10 days or so by boat from Limerick and Drogheda but I noticed today people working on the line and a lot of clearance work has taken recently place in the vicinity too with trees cut...

www.railforums.co.uk

The Sectional Appendix still shows the branch as part of the National Rail network.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I wonder if any benefit would come from extending this single track straight on, up through that pedestrian section (staying single track), and turning right into Piccadilly Metrolink so that a 5tph Piccadilly Rochdale service might be achieved. It wouldn't be able to call at Picc Gardens, and a crossover would be needed at Market Street if the stretch were to be bi-directional (unless Rochdale bound services went the original route via there, but I thought the problem was lack of capacity over the Delta junction)

Image shows curve at Market Street