'Metro' Style rail operations-UK potential?

[Waverley125]

So within the UK at the minute, London Overground is very succesful running services into & around London. Surely then, we should be adopting this model for other areas of the country? Aside from the SPT lines around Glasgow, there's nowhere else I can really think of that has such a system.

Most cities have lines at the start of what we might consider a system-running fast, frequent, clean EMUs e.g. the Airedale & Wharfedale lines in Leeds, the Cross-City line in Birmingham and the Glossop line in Manchester. Yet none of these projects has ever led onto greater development of an electric metro system. Firstly, dooes anybody know the specific machinations and reasons that have stopped it happening, but second, where should we be developing? Personally I can see a few areas:

Greater Manchester

Victoria-Preston via Bolton
Piccadilly-Chester & Crewe via Nortwich
Piccadilly-Liverpool SP via Warrington Central
Hazel Grove-Buxton

West Midlands

Snow Hill-Worcester via Kidderminster
Barnt Green-Worcester via Bromsgrove
Stratford on Avon-Snow Hill
Walsall-Rugeley Trent Valley
New Street-Tamworth/Nuneaton
Leamington Spa-Coventry-Nuneaton

West Yorkshre

Leeds-Harrogate-York
Leeds-Knottingley-Doncaster
Leeds-Wakefield Kirkgate-Sheffield
Wakefield-Rotherham-Sheffield
Leeds-Bradford-Halifax-Huddersfield
Stocksbridge-Sheffield Vic-Worksop-Retford High Level
Sheffield Vic-Rotherham-Doncaster
Sheffield-Staveley-Chesterfield

all of these would focus a transport system tightly & efficiently around one (or, in West Yorkshire's case) two main centres, providing excellent transport links and growth. Not to mention the potential of lines reopened (e.g. Bradford-Sheffield via Heckmondwike or Birmingham New Street-Kings Norton via Moseley.

 

[swtandgw]

I can also think of Bristol (although I'm not too sure if it will work well as a diesel metro, considering that wires are only going to be for linking the GWML from Paddington to Cardiff Central) and Cardiff (including the Valleys), the latter of which is definitely a strong possibility, depending if the WG plans gain enough traction for augmentation and electrification.

 

[142094]

It comes down to signalling and line capacity for most projects - in some areas there isn't the space on both lines and at stations for extra trains. In your example, Leeds - Harrogate - York, there would be platform issues at both Leeds and York for extra services, not to mention the fact that there is single track sections between Harrogate and York (which are to be doubled).

This is even before the extra rolling stock and staff is found, along with those associated costs.

 

[John55]

I am slightly puzzled by the original post as there are at least two systems predating the recent emergence of London Overground. These are the Tyne and Wear Metro and Merseyrail. Both are metro type operations and of course there is the grand daddy of them all in LUL.

One reason these systems were able to develop is that they are almost entirely separate from the rest of the network so can run frequent reliable services without having to worry about the problems of Inter City/regional trains getting in the way.

In the case of the T&W Metro the North Eastern Railway had built up an electric network which was expanded by the LNER. After BR had thrown it away in the 60s the locals had the imagination to create something better by improving the access to central Newcastle and expand the the old network. It was also reasonably easy to segregate the Metro from BR. Then you need a bit of luck in putting the ideas to central government at the right time and getting the money.

Merseyrail is similar. There were two autonomous electric networks surviving into the early 60s. The L&Y into Exchange and the Mersey/LMS routes to the Wirral. In the 60s plans were developed to integrate the networks and improve penetration of the city centre which were able to get money in the late 60s & early 70s.

In contrast the Picc-Vic proposal for Manchester was too late and fell into the gap. It missed the Merseyrail window and was too early for the T&W window. If the timing had been better there would be a very different transport system in and around Manchester. The locals then went hell for leather for something else which achieves similar results by being entirely separate from NR.

 

[thewolf]

Surely the Cross-City and Snow Hill lines through Birmingham can't be far off what you are getting at?

They have a 10-minute frequency through the 'core' of the route (plus an extra few from some stations), with various extensions?

If you mean that it would be a good idea to build on these 'starts' and make the whole West Midlands area run to a similar frequency then there are the obvious limitations (infrastructure, quantity of rolling stock, money, etc).

Although on all the 'local' routes through New Street there is a pretty good service, admittedly not all stations recieve such an intense service but their are 9 an hour to International (7 of those through to Coventry), 10 to Wolves and even 4 tph to Walsall isn't a bad effort.

You've also got to think about whether people would actually use the services if you put them there, of those West Midlands examples you've given, Stratford - Birmingham currently gets 1 train an hour (2 more from Whitlocks End) and the times I've caught this, while it has been reasonably busy it hasn't been rammed - don't think it would warrant a 'Metro' frequency. Similarly, Rugeley - Walsall was recently cut back from 2 tph to just one down to its lack of use, I use it quite regularly and it certainly doesn't justify much more than its current one train an hour - Another hurdle on that route would be the low line speed and very long signalling blocks.

 

[anthony263]

I agree about the Cardiff Valley Lines and Bristol. In fact I know some in the WG want services to/from Merthyr Tydfil, Treherbert etc every 20 minutes during the peaks and every 30 minutes off peak like they are now although there have been some for a 20 minutly service all day.

You also have the idea's for a full half hourly service all day on the Severn beach line with some running beyond Avonmouth to Bristol Parkway/Filton via Henbury and a 30 minutely service to Gloucester, Bath & Weston Super Mare. With talk of the wires going to Avonmouth and Portbury I think it would be a good idea to try and get the section of line to Portishead re-built asap.

 

[142094]

It also depends on what you call a Metro service - IMO a Metro service is one where you can just turn up and expect a train within a certain time (say 10 minutes) without having to look at a timetable.

 

[Class172]

Although the Snow Hill lines would be suited to such operations, I don't think it would be right to give destinations farther out the same style service. Journeys such as Birmingham-Worcester (1 hour) and even Great Malvern (1 hour 20 mins) would not be suited to 378-style trains. The route should stay as it is currently is with 172s.

Also you couldn't do anything on the Bromsgrove-Worcester section due to infrastructure restraints. It would require resignalling of Worcester and Droitwich Spa, as well as redualling of the Droitwich-Stoke Works line if you wanted a high frequency service. Again, this line' main traffic flows are Worcs-B'ham (which is 50mins); this line wouldn't suit a metro service. 170s are well suited to this route.

 

[Waverley125]

by 'Metro' style yes, basically without the need for a timetable-so a minimum of a train every 15 minutes, preferably every 10. Certainly Leeds & Manchester were more the sort of areas I was thinking, though I think Bristol, with the lines to Weston super Mare, Portishead, Chippenham, Severn Beach etc. would make a good candidate for such a system, potentially with another 'Cross City line' from Weston super Mare & Portishead through to Chippenham & Severn Beach/Bristol Parkway

 

[142094]

by 'Metro' style yes, basically without the need for a timetable-so a minimum of a train every 15 minutes, preferably every 10. Certainly Leeds & Manchester were more the sort of areas I was thinking, though I think Bristol, with the lines to Weston super Mare, Portishead, Chippenham, Severn Beach etc. would make a good candidate for such a system, potentially with another 'Cross City line' from Weston super Mare & Portishead through to Chippenham & Severn Beach/Bristol Parkway

It would be certainly do-able if there was the capacity and extra rolling stock for some of the lines in West Yorkshire and Manchester, although capacity/pathing is very hard to add to a railway without some form of capital expenditure on infrastructure and signalling.

Easiest way usually is to add more carriages which increases capacity but has no to little effect on pathing, but of course there will become a point where platforms have to be lengthened.

Certainly 'metro' style services is something to aim for, although the generalised cost saving for each additional service reduces so there might be a number (say 4 trains per hour/15 minute headway) where any additional increase in frequency doesn't actually bring that much in the way of benefits to passengers.

 

[whhistle]

Maybe they could use the refurbed ex-underground stock eh?

 

[142094]

Maybe they could use the refurbed ex-underground stock eh?

Stick them on the Harrogate line and see what the reaction is

 

[Waverley125]

the big problem areas in Leeds would the Huddersfield, Wakefield & York lines, where you're sharing with express services, so stations would have to rebuilt with loops are you'd need 4-track all the way through. This would, in turn, create specific bottlenecks like Morley Tunnel where 4-tracking would be prohibitivley expensive.

However, on almost all other lines-Harrogate, Caldervale etc, it'd not be a problem, given there are few 'fast' services that need to overtake.

 

[tbtc]

by 'Metro' style yes, basically without the need for a timetable-so a minimum of a train every 15 minutes

I'm not sure how serious these plans are (Sheffield Victoria etc), but the lines you mentioned in your OP (Airedale/ Wharfdale/ Glossop) only have a half hourly service to Leeds/Leeds/Manchester, nothing like the "metro" frequency you are talking about.

 

[GNERman]

Have you seen this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tees_Valley_Metro

Sort of fits what you're proposing...

 

[notadriver]

I am slightly puzzled by the original post as there are at least two systems predating the recent emergence of London Overground. These are the Tyne and Wear Metro and Merseyrail. Both are metro type operations and of course there is the grand daddy of them all in LUL.

I think London Overground is unique in that it's trains use main line tracks shared with other services but still provides a 5 minute metro style service on the core section. Also like Merseyrail, Overground uses NR signalling and NR stock so route extensions on existing lines are easy compared with the Tyne and wear metro.

 

[Class172]

t the lines you mentioned in your OP (Airedale/ Wharfdale/ Glossop) only have a half hourly service to Leeds/Leeds/Manchester, nothing like the "metro" frequency you are talking about.

Even less for Bromsgrove-Worcester, which is 1tph; it hardly warrants a metro service.