Manchester Metrolink to Middleton (proposed)

[Clarky]

We have the same problem at the Heaton Park roundabout, traffic coming from the M60 Motorway, 3 into 2 doesnt go.

Then from 2 to 1 a mile up the road just to make it grind to a halt even faster!

 

[Dentonian]

So it is possible to achieve a respectable modal share for public transport even where car ownership is high. However, in a large conurbation that won't happen unless rail or BRT plays a significant role as long journeys take too long if you have to use stopping buses.

Incomes in first-world countries are high enough so that most people who want a car can afford one. Given that car ownership is already high, there's no way of achieving high PT usage unless car owners use PT. There is certainly no point in trying to boost PT usage by hoping that people will get rid of their car they already have. It is even more crazy to try and maintain the current bus network by hoping that nobody else will buy a car.

Can you clarify then how your dream works, as regards the millions of adults who don't drive due to health (or sometimes wealth, or both) reasons. Is it a case of increasing car ownership from the current 75% to approx. 90% and somehow thinking that a larger proportion of that 90% will leave their car on the drive/road and use an expensive, unreliable and complicated rail dominated PT system. And more to the point, what about the remaining 10%?

 

[Dentonian]

Please look at 2011 Census data for "car or van availability" and "method of travel to work" then come back to us.

https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/query/select/getdatasetbytheme.asp?theme=75&subgrp=Quick+Statistics

How does it work? I tick my local authority; nothing happens; I select no cars or vans in household and press "next" (step) nothing happens.

 

[radamfi]

Can you clarify then how your dream works, as regards the millions of adults who don't drive due to health (or sometimes wealth, or both) reasons. Is it a case of increasing car ownership from the current 75% to approx. 90% and somehow thinking that a larger proportion of that 90% will leave their car on the drive/road and use an expensive, unreliable and complicated rail dominated PT system. And more to the point, what about the remaining 10%?

It's not a dream. Just because things aren't great in GM doesn't mean that everywhere is as bad. People really do leave their cars at home, today, in 2018, in many cities in western Europe. You've even admitted that it is possible. Copying best practice from across Europe is the most obvious way of achieving that dream in the UK.

 

[Dentonian]

It's not a dream. Just because things aren't optimal in GM doesn't mean that everywhere is as bad. People really do leave their cars at home, today, in 2018, in many cities in western Europe. You've even admitted that it is possible. Copying best practice from across Europe is the most obvious way of achieving that dream in the UK.

I asked about how your dream" works in terms of the people who can't drive, mainly through health reasons? Are we supposed to place ourselves under house arrest - and still pay our taxes of course?

 

[radamfi]

I asked about how your dream" works in terms of the people who can't drive, mainly through health reasons? Are we supposed to place ourselves under house arrest - and still pay our taxes of course?

Are you saying that you would rather have today's poorly used GM bus network than well used, big city transport networks in other parts of western Europe? I've never heard of carless people in Zurich or Frankfurt being disenfranchised because they have a lot of trams in their cities.

 

[Dentonian]

Are you saying that you would rather have today's poorly used GM bus network than well used, big city transport networks in other parts of western Europe? I've never heard of carless people in Zurich or Frankfurt being disenfranchised because they have a lot of trams in their cities.

What constitutes poorly used? How far do the carless people of Frankfurt and Zurich have to walk to reach those trams. Maybe they are disenfranchised. British bus users (outside London) are certainly disenfranchised. Not only do politicians (of all colours) not give two hoots about us but we are increasingly demonised by such as the BBC (twisting IPPR North reports, which themselves are flawed by grossly out of date figures) and now by the RHA (who apparently believe pedestrians don't exist, either).

 

[radamfi]

What constitutes poorly used? How far do the carless people of Frankfurt and Zurich have to walk to reach those trams. Maybe they are disenfranchised. British bus users (outside London) are certainly disenfranchised. Not only do politicians (of all colours) not give two hoots about us but we are increasingly demonised by such as the BBC (twisting IPPR North reports, which themselves are flawed by grossly out of date figures) and now by the RHA (who apparently believe pedestrians don't exist, either).

By "poorly used", I mean low modal share. It would be a simple matter to look at Google Maps in various cities and measure distances from residences to tram stops. There may, of course, be a closer bus service. Incidentally, it can be quite far to walk to a bus stop in densely populated parts of Greater London. For example, look how far parts of Grange Road near Thornton Heath are to a bus stop.

 

[Dentonian]

By "poorly used", I mean low modal share. It would be a simple matter to look at Google Maps in various cities and measure distances from residences to tram stops. There may, of course, be a closer bus service. Incidentally, it can be quite far to walk to a bus stop in densely populated parts of Greater London. For example, look how far parts of Grange Road near Thornton Heath are to a bus stop.

Right, so if a bus averages say 50 pax, but is reduced from 18 to 12 bph - giving a total of 600 pph, but cars carry 1.2 occupants but because there are say 500 an hour, that still gives 600 occupants so hat would mean buses have a poor modal share. Besides, as I've said before, I'm not interested in theoretical statistics on some planners desk, I'm interested in human beings.

 

[radamfi]

Right, so if a bus averages say 50 pax, but is reduced from 18 to 12 bph - giving a total of 600 pph, but cars carry 1.2 occupants but because there are say 500 an hour, that still gives 600 occupants so hat would mean buses have a poor modal share. Besides, as I've said before, I'm not interested in theoretical statistics on some planners desk, I'm interested in human beings.

We don't generally measure modal share on a route by route basis. We look at the overall proportion of trips in a city that are made by each mode. It is highly likely that a public transport system with high modal share will be attractive for both car owners and non-car owners.

I think you might find bus services in some US cities to be to your taste. A lot of quite big cities have no rail based service and bus stops can be incredibly close together, even as close as 100 metres apart because they often have bus stops at the end of each block.

 

[Dentonian]

We don't generally measure modal share on a route by route basis. We look at the overall proportion of trips in a city that are made by each mode. It is highly likely that a public transport system with high modal share will be attractive for both car owners and non-car owners.

I think you might find bus services in some US cities to be to your taste. A lot of quite big cities have no rail based service and bus stops can be incredibly close together, even as close as 100 metres apart because they often have bus stops at the end of each block.

100 metres is probably too close; 300-400 is the optimum (whether supplemented by other PT or not). A kilometre is totally unacceptable unless you have very good physical health. As we have been reminded this week; the British - and especially Mancunian climate is very humid and physically wareing in these high temperatures. Interestingly, I was in hospital last week and overheard a conversation between a doctor and patient who had been admitted with severe, previously undiagnosed asthma. The patient was of Middle Eastern origin and the doctor (from similar ancestory) said that asthma amongst people from sub-tropical climes settling in Manchester is very common - NOT due to filthy Euro6 buses (as the BBC would have you believe) but simply because of the climate and humidity trapped by the Pennines and Peaks to the east of the city.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

It's not a dream. Just because things aren't great in GM doesn't mean that everywhere is as bad. People really do leave their cars at home, today, in 2018, in many cities in western Europe. You've even admitted that it is possible. Copying best practice from across Europe is the most obvious way of achieving that dream in the UK.

The problem with that is that Dentonian's view of public transport is that rubber-tyred vehicles running on tarmac roads should form the greatest part of a decent PT system. Hence their negative reaction to suggestions of another Metrolink extension. Whereas most places in Europe have realised that where there is potentially bulk demand, as in urban areas, rail-based systems, whether on-street or segregated, form a much better core of a network and buses form the fiddly branches only. And yes that does mean many people will have to change at least once to complete many journeys. But with decent frequency of service and (especially) integrated ticketing, which need not be dirt cheap, such networks are well used and convince many people to avoid using their car more often. It would also help if VED was abolished and the tax transferred to fuel instead.

 

[Dentonian]

The problem with that is that Dentonian's view of public transport is that rubber-tyred vehicles running on tarmac roads should form the greatest part of a decent PT system. Hence their negative reaction to suggestions of another Metrolink extension. Whereas most places in Europe have realised that where there is potentially bulk demand, as in urban areas, rail-based systems, whether on-street or segregated, form a much better core of a network and buses form the fiddly branches only. And yes that does mean many people will have to change at least once to complete many journeys. But with decent frequency of service and (especially) integrated ticketing, which need not be dirt cheap, such networks are well used and convince many people to avoid using their car more often. It would also help if VED was abolished and the tax transferred to fuel instead.

No. The problem is that I believe public transport should be accessible to all and that I recognise that car ownership is still way below 100pc. The fact that the existence of non motorists seems to be denied by so many in a country that claim s to be diverse and egalitarian yet we should still pay towards our own exclusion only makes things worse. I do agree that cost of ownership should be transferred to cost of car use, though.

 

[edwin_m]

Most people don't want to travel long distances in a slow bus that stops every few hundred metres. So to get decent numbers of people onto public transport, including those who have a car available, something fast and reasonably convenient is needed. This does also mean that people will use what they see as a better alternative and transfer from bus to tram. If they didn't then there would be more and more cars, the buses would get stuck in traffic, become even slower, lose passengers, get less frequent, lose more passengers, put more cars on the road and so on. This isn't good for those who are unable to drive and reliant on the bus.

The ideal is to have a fast and frequent backbone to the transport network, which in most places is rail-based although bus rapid transit (with infrequent stops) does the job in a few. The buses would then provide the local links, feeding into this network at convenient interchanges but ensuring as far as possible that everyone is within a few hundred metres of a convenient stop. Most people travelling longer distances would get a faster journey with no cost penalty thanks to integrated ticketing. Any change is going to disadvantage some people, and someone who makes very long journeys on a bus, is happy with the amount of time this takes, and seems to have an aversion in principle to trams may turn out to be one of them.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Are you saying that you would rather have today's poorly used GM bus network than well used, big city transport networks in other parts of western Europe?

Does anyone have the actual annual bus passenger transportation figures in the area administered by TfGM for the last three full year periods.

 

[po8crg]

Can you clarify then how your dream works, as regards the millions of adults who don't drive due to health (or sometimes wealth, or both) reasons. Is it a case of increasing car ownership from the current 75% to approx. 90% and somehow thinking that a larger proportion of that 90% will leave their car on the drive/road and use an expensive, unreliable and complicated rail dominated PT system. And more to the point, what about the remaining 10%?

OK, here's an outline of how a lot of European city transport systems work - a bit idealised, but some of the best are much like this.

1. You get an integrated ticket, so a single ticket includes as many buses/trams/trains as you need to get to where you're going. It might be a zonal fare system or it might just be a single citywide fare. Or you can get a day/week/month/year pass.
2. Lots of people have both a pass for public transport and a car, so the marginal cost of a PT journey is zero; they still use the car (e.g. for shopping when they need to bring things back, and often for travel outside the city; also popular for suburb-to-suburb journeys like visiting friends, where PT means going into the city and back out again).
3. They tend to encourage passes rather than PAYG type systems because passes make the cost more like a car, where there's an annual fee but no cost for an individual journey - which makes it more competitive for people who already own cars.
   
4. The core network is on rails, train, tram or a combination of the two. These provide a relatively fast, traffic-avoiding, time-reliable service with substantial stop spacings (1 km is not untypical; fast trains can be even more).
5. There are still local stopping buses everywhere; they are arranged to stop at train stations and tram stops so you can get the local bus to the train/tram when you want to make a longer journey; buses are mostly used for connections within a suburb or town, like local shopping or visiting local services (doctor, hairdresser, etc).
6. Prices are subsidised from taxes to keep passes affordable; people with low incomes and/or disabilities usually get a free citywide pass.
7. The services are neither expensive nor unreliable because they spend tax money to make sure they aren't.

Instead of a bus into Manchester from Middleton, you'd get a bus to the tram stop and then a tram into Manchester. But there would still be local buses around Middleton, connecting people to get around Middleton, and also to the tram stops (and to Mills Hill train station) for longer journeys.

I'm sure some of these buses would be part of longer routes (tends to work better if they are), so you'd probably still have some buses running down Rochdale Road into Manchester - definitely the easiest way to get to Harpurhey, and probably to the NQ, though the tram would likely be better if you want to get to somewhere on the other side of the city centre like Castlefield or Piccadilly.

If you think that it's "complicated" because you have to change, then you should bear in mind the large numbers of poeple who only use buses in areas they know well because they don't know the bus routes, timetables and the locations of the bus stops. Modern mapping (e.g. CityMapper) on mobiles has made that much easier - but has also made using rail based public transport much less confusing and complicated.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Instead of a bus into Manchester from Middleton, you'd get a bus to the tram stop and then a tram into Manchester. But there would still be local buses around Middleton, connecting people to get around Middleton, and also to the tram stops (and to Mills Hill train station) for longer journeys.[/QUOTE]

Would the trams you describe as running from Middleton to Manchester have plenty of capacity to deal with the bus passengers from those connecting bus routes that normally would have themselves travelled into Manchester. Are you envisaging double tram units being used, rather than the example of the single tram units that have been a feature of the Manchester Airport/Wythenshawe service into Manchester?

 

[Bucephalus]

The problem I do see with changing from bus to tram mid-journey is the added time from the connection. 12 minutes inbound plus potentially longer outbound could be rendered unacceptable if the whole travelling part of the journey is say, 20 minutes.

This does make me think that a Middleton tram would partially replace some of the existing bus services' frequency, which might lengthen some people's current journeys

 

[158756]

The problem I do see with changing from bus to tram mid-journey is the added time from the connection. 12 minutes inbound plus potentially longer outbound could be rendered unacceptable if the whole travelling part of the journey is say, 20 minutes.

This does make me think that a Middleton tram would partially replace some of the existing bus services' frequency, which might lengthen some people's current journeys

Crumpsall to Victoria is 10 minutes, using the Ashton line as precedent Crumpsall to Middleton would be about the same. By bus Middleton to Shudehill is timetabled at 25 minutes off peak, but up to 40 minutes at peak.

So using the tram and changing for a frequent bus service (most people will not have to wait 12 minutes for a tram or 10 for a bus) will take around the same time as a direct bus at worst, and be much faster at peak times when most people want to travel. And even when it takes the same time car users will be tempted by the tram in a way they aren't by the equally fast bus.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There is the existing 163 high-frequency bus service from Bury to Manchester that serves both the Darn Hill estate in Heywood, Heywood town centre, the Langley estate in Middleton, Middleton town centre then the A664 route into Manchester. Would it therefore mean that service would only operate between Bury and Middleton, with Darn Hill residents encouraged to travel to Bury Interchange by bus then by Metrolink to Manchester from there and Langley residents encouraged to travel by bus to Middleton (Interchange) then by Metrolink to travel into Manchester?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

So using the tram and changing for a frequent bus service (most people will not have to wait 12 minutes for a tram or 10 for a bus) will take around the same time as a direct bus at worst, and be much faster at peak times when most people want to travel. And even when it takes the same time car users will be tempted by the tram in a way they aren't by the equally fast bus.

Can I ask if bus passengers alighting at the Wythenshawe town centre stop wish to then transfer to Metrolink at that interchange, what time frequency and tram unit formation would they currently be subjected to?

 

[TC60054]

Can I ask if bus passengers alighting at the Wythenshawe town centre stop wish to then transfer to Metrolink at that interchange, what time frequency and tram unit formation would they currently be subjected to?

I'm struggling to see where the length of the tram which shows up falls into this. Metrolink is lucky in the fact that they are one of the few tramways which is able to run double length vehicles anyway - in any other city in the UK for example, a tram of the same (or similar) length is going to show up regardless of which line you're on.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'm struggling to see where the length of the tram which shows up falls into this. Metrolink is lucky in the fact that they are one of the few tramways which is able to run double length vehicles anyway - in any other city in the UK for example, a tram of the same (or similar) length is going to show up regardless of which line you're on.

I notice that you chose to totally ignore my comment about the time service frequency of the Manchester Airport trams. Any reason why?

 

[edwin_m]

The problem I do see with changing from bus to tram mid-journey is the added time from the connection. 12 minutes inbound plus potentially longer outbound could be rendered unacceptable if the whole travelling part of the journey is say, 20 minutes.

This does make me think that a Middleton tram would partially replace some of the existing bus services' frequency, which might lengthen some people's current journeys

Another element of the Continental integrated transport systems is timed connections. Sometimes the train/tram services are less frequent than ours, but at the connecting stops there will be a row of buses, often just across the platform, waiting with doors open. They will all disappear off on routes that being outside the city centre are relatively unaffected by traffiic, and reappear about 18min later for the next train or tram 20min later (or whatever interval applies). This is particularly evident in small towns but also applies in some suburbs.

 

[edwin_m]

Can I ask if bus passengers alighting at the Wythenshawe town centre stop wish to then transfer to Metrolink at that interchange, what time frequency and tram unit formation would they currently be subjected to?

It's easy enough to double the trams if they aren't already and the buses bring more passengers. Some more city centre capacity might be needed to increase the frequency, but that becomes easier if the centre doesn't have to find space for so many buses.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It's easy enough to double the trams if they aren't already and the buses bring more passengers. Some more city centre capacity might be needed to increase the frequency, but that becomes easier if the centre doesn't have to find space for so many buses.

Is it not the case that there are far more towns and villages served by buses in the Manchester city core than are served by trams?

 

[edwin_m]

Is it not the case that there are far more towns and villages served by buses in the Manchester city core than are served by trams?

Not sure about towns and villages in the city core, but most cities in Germany have very few buses in the centre because most of the public transport in the inner area is rail-based. Buses act as feeders in the outer areas where the passenger flows aren't great enough to justify a dense rail network. Despite Manchester having the biggest tram network in Britiain it's still far less dense than some Continental cities of similar size.

 

[Bucephalus]

Can I ask if bus passengers alighting at the Wythenshawe town centre stop wish to then transfer to Metrolink at that interchange, what time frequency and tram unit formation would they currently be subjected to?

They run a single car every 12 minutes. There's no real point in transferring to metrolink at wythenshawe town centre because the 43, 103, 11 buses straddle the tram route. I once transferred for the sake of it but I doubt your average person would pay extra do this

 

[158756]

They run a single car every 12 minutes. There's no real point in transferring to metrolink at wythenshawe town centre because the 43, 103, 11 buses straddle the tram route. I once transferred for the sake of it but I doubt your average person would pay extra do this

There should be plenty of interchange - especially at peak hours the tram is much faster than the bus, so anyone from Wythenshawe would get the bus to the nearest tram stop - I would imagine the town centre to be the best place for this. However that needs integrated ticketing, and thus bus regulation, and the ability to change bus routes to connect with the tram.

 

[Dentonian]

There should be plenty of interchange - especially at peak hours the tram is much faster than the bus, so anyone from Wythenshawe would get the bus to the nearest tram stop - I would imagine the town centre to be the best place for this. However that needs integrated ticketing, and thus bus regulation, and the ability to change bus routes to connect with the tram.

What sort of integrated journeys are you envisaging? The tram route from Wythenshawe to Manchester is far from direct, so off-peak especially there is little if any time saving. Similar, for more local journeys, would the minor speed advantage really be greater than the sum of extra walking time and/or waiting time at such as Wythenshawe Interchange. The only advantage I can see with tram outside the city zones (as they are rumoured to be changing to) would be the cheaper fares.