One failed Metrolink tram delays all services again

[snail]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge

I believe Metrolink uses these as well.

Yes, and it's east of the Trafford Road bridges with a gradient and curves that heavy rail would find impossible. I'll rephrase my question: Where would you get the rail line across the Ship Canal, given that it has to be navigable for large vessels as far as the Trafford basin? There are a couple of old rail lines under Trafford Road that used to go to the Colgate Palmolive factory and other industry but no obvious route to get them over the canal and Pomona basins to the main line.

Where did I say it was an improvement? futureA claimed that Salford Quays regeneration only happened because of the Metrolink service so I was pointing out that alternative options were available.

Yes, people tend to forget that the Salford Quays development started in the 1980s but initially as a residential project mirroring St Katharine's Dock in London. Metrolink certainly didn't do any harm though in attracting (or retaining) commercial business, hence the small distances between stops. It's debatable that heavy rail would have had the same impact.

 

[Class377/5]

Just noticed this on Metrolink's website, relating to after a football match:

"Due to heavy patronage at Old Trafford stop, passengers are advised to allow extra time to make their onward journey. The queuing time from the back of the queue to the platform can be approximately 1 hour. Please allow extra time for your journey. "

Of course that's the usual expectation but it shows one of the big disadvantages of Metrolink over heavy rail. 3 strengthened commuter train services can carry well over 2000 passengers (based on 6 car EMUs) while a crush loading on a tram carries 200.

Are you talking about 3x 6 car trains here?

A few snags with that:

1. T68s and M5000s can't operate in multiple.
2. M5000s won't operate in multiple while Mossley Street remains open.
3. Extra trams can't operate between Old Trafford and Manchester only, it will require a southbound ECS run as far as Timperley and then back north and running to Timperley will put the unit(s) in to the section under Network Rail signalling.

Or like the services that used to serve Warwick Road station before Metrolink on both Football and Cricket match days, in addition to the services to the football ground station, which also carried large numbers back to Sale and Altrincham.

Actually your wrong. M5000 can operate in multiples now as long as they avoid Mosley Street. Nothing to stop a double M5000 with its the extra standing room running empty after turning back at Timperley and starting at Old Trafford to Piccadilly as a crowd buster. Going to the match you can sprad the load better and use double T68's on the Bury - Piccadilly - Altrincham rather than the directs. Tram available permitting.

AFAIK only some of the T68s have been earmarked for being scrapped and these don't include any of the 1999 build of T68As.

We don't actually know the 12 that have been picked for withdrawal currently. So you can't be sure there's no T68-A's going. However TfGM is looking at replacing them all and is just finding the cash from its back up budget. Using its spare funds in account of saving lost money due to making system more realiable.

(Note I've just seen I've replied to three of your replies, please don't see this as picking on you but discussing things I disagree with you on).

** EDIT **

For some reason when I posted this 2.5 pages if this thread popped up and you'd all moved on (sort of).

 

[futureA]

I was saying what could have happened instead of Metrolink over ten years ago as you claimed Salford Quays wouldn't have been redeveloped without Metrolink.

I said it wouldn't have developed as much. Media City would certainly not exist without some kind of high capacity solution.

The money that went in to Metrolink could easily have been used to provide extra capacity and stations on existing heavy rail track instead.

I'm not saying it would have been impossible to build something that linked into the heavy rail line but surely this is one such example where a tram is the perfect solution? Trams can get to places where heavy rail can't. Might be slightly quicker to get to the city centre but not the places in-between.

No idea why you are so anti trams but it is clouding your judgement.

 

[adamp]

Also another question, can the new trams couple up like the old ones? I've never seen a 4-car one to date.

-Adam

 

[futureA]

Also another question, can the new trams couple up like the old ones? I've never seen a 4-car one to date.

-Adam

They can. But since they do not have retractable steps they cannot could not call at Mosley Street.

TfGM have authorisation to close Mosely Street, but a firm date for closure has not been set.

 

[pemma]

No idea why you are so anti trams but it is clouding your judgement.

I'm probably not as anti-tram as my posts are sounding, it's just a few of the posters on here seem to be writing sales pitches about how good they are and don't seem to realise the disadvantages.

Trams are a good solution to replace city centre buses but less good for replacing well utilised heavy rail services. I have mentioned before how trams work better in the Greater Berlin area - there isn't a tram system connecting Berlin to Potsdam - that's the job of S-Bahn and Regio train services, Berlin and Potsdam both have trams but have two separate systems.

 

[Class377/5]

I'm probably not as anti-tram as my posts are sounding, it's just a few of the posters on here seem to be writing sales pitches about how good they are and don't seem to realise the disadvantages.

Trams are a good solution to replace city centre buses but less good for replacing well utilised heavy rail services. I have mentioned before how trams work better in the Greater Berlin area - there isn't a tram system connecting Berlin to Potsdam - that's the job of S-Bahn and Regio train services, Berlin and Potsdam both have trams but have two separate systems.

I have to say the point I picked you up on, the 3x 6 car EMU vs a 1 tram seems rather false arguement to make.

A 12 car crush loaded train can hold upto 1200 in the highest of peaks in London. (400 per 4 car or 300 per 3 car, so not much more than a tram with 100 per car) So in your example we're talking about 2400 people to move.

Well a crush loaded tram carries 200. But even if you get use the 2400 as a base line you need 12 trams to shift the masses.

Now Old Trafford gets a 12min direct Bury-Altrincham service which is formed of double units in the day (so it can at weekends) so you get 20 trams here.

Add in the 12 Piccadilly service that's singles and 12mins you get 5 more teams.

Now add say 3 more trams, even singles and you get a total of 28 trams an hour giving a moving capacity of 5600 in crush loading conditions.

To achieve that in rail terms you need 19 units or 10x 6 car trains. Not to mention you then have to find somewhere to put these additional 10 trains as well.

So basically an EMU vs tram actually shows a more level passenger carrying capacity than you state plus the trams added bonus of being able to connect easier with people's onwards connections, be it bus, train or tram.

 

[pemma]

A 12 car crush loaded train can hold upto 1200 in the highest of peaks in London. (400 per 4 car or 300 per 3 car, so not much more than a tram with 100 per car)

In the North our commuter EMUs don't have First Class so the capacity is higher. We can get 280 seated on a 3 car 323, so including maximum standing capacity using a train that's 69m long it will take considerably more than 300 passengers.

200 on a tram is the absolute maximum with passengers falling out every time the tram doors open.

Now Old Trafford gets a 12min direct Bury-Altrincham service which is formed of double units in the day (so it can at weekends) so you get 20 trams here.

No Metrolink claimed they would be doubled up once the M5000s were introduced, in reality during the day there's usually 4 single formed trams per hour and one double formed tram.

Now add say 3 more trams, even singles and you get a total of 28 trams an hour giving a moving capacity of 5600 in crush loading conditions.

To achieve that in rail terms you need 19 units or 10x 6 car trains. Not to mention you then have to find somewhere to put these additional 10 trains as well.

See above point. 7 x 6 car trains can provide the same capacity as 28 trams but we're talking about around 16 trams per hour absolute maximum currently, which 4 pairs of 323s can provide.

Also note 200 on a M5000 means around 75% of passengers standing, 400 on a 323 means 30% of passengers standing, so a 323 provides a more comfortable riding experience for the majority of passengers.

I'll also refer you to the link posted in post 16 of this thread, which shows that EMUs did once used to run on the Altrincham line during peak times at a higher frequency than trams now run.

So basically an EMU vs tram actually shows a more level passenger carrying capacity than you state plus the trams added bonus of being able to connect easier with people's onwards connections, be it bus, train or tram.

Really? If you arrive at Old Trafford and want to make an onward journey to Northwich you have no idea what's the last departure you can use to make a connection at Altrincham as Metrolink doesn't run to a public timetable, trams turn up approximately every 6/12 minutes but in reality it could be double that time gap and if it is double that time gap there's a high chance of two trams running very close together meaning one will terminate short.

If, on the other hand you catch the 323 from Old Trafford heavy rail station and want to travel onwards to Bolton from Deansgate/Oxford Rd you know whether you're going to make the connection or not.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

2. M5000s won't operate in multiple while Mossley Street remains open.

Actually your wrong. M5000 can operate in multiples now as long as they avoid Mosley Street.

No I'm right. You read it wrongly.

 

[Class377/5]

In the North our commuter EMUs don't have First Class so the capacity is higher. We can get 280 seated on a 3 car 323, so including maximum standing capacity using a train that's 69m long it will take considerably more than 300 passengers.

Note my comments on crush load means no first class. I grew up in the north so I'm rather familiar with the norths rolling stock thank you. So your point null and void. I'm talking about high capacity stock that copes with London crush loading, not the north so I'm using higher figures.

200 on a tram is the absolute maximum with passengers falling out every time the tram doors open.

No Metrolink claimed they would be doubled up once the M5000s were introduced, in reality during the day there's usually 4 single formed trams per hour and one double formed tram.

Funny how you claim there's only one double. That actually doesn't play out in reality when you use the system. The other week I was there in peak and there was five doubles I saw. So your point is invalid.

See above point. 7 x 6 car trains can provide the same capacity as 28 trams but we're talking about around 16 trams per hour absolute maximum currently, which 4 pairs of 323s can provide.

Are there 14 spare 323's ready to be used and staffed for this or are you doing fantasy thinking vs real world running? Very unfair to compare.

Also note 200 on a M5000 means around 75% of passengers standing, 400 on a 323 means 30% of passengers standing, so a 323 provides a more comfortable riding experience for the majority of passengers.

Agreed but seeing how short the jounery lengths are, it's not as important.

I'll also refer you to the link posted in post 16 of this thread, which shows that EMUs did once used to run on the Altrincham line during peak times at a higher frequency than trams now run.

And trams can run more often so your point?

Really? If you arrive at Old Trafford and want to make an onward journey to Northwich you have no idea what's the last departure you can use to make a connection at Altrincham as Metrolink doesn't run to a public timetable, trams turn up approximately every 6/12 minutes but in reality it could be double that time gap and if it is double that time gap there's a high chance of two trams running very close together meaning one will terminate short.

Fair point. Joined up thinking required here.

If, on the other hand you catch the 323 from Old Trafford heavy rail station and want to travel onwards to Bolton from Deansgate/Oxford Rd you know whether you're going to make the connection or not.

Why won't you know if you'll make your connection on a tram?

No I'm right. You read it wrongly.

No your not, nothing to stop a double M5000 running now. unless you can prove other wise.

 

[pemma]

377/5 please read what you've written yourself and my responses before arguing that my responses are invalid. I've not got time to teach you how to read.

1. You quoted South East EMU capacities not higher capacity standard class only North West 323 capacities so my point is certainly not void but your response certainly is.

2. You said Altrincham-Bury is double units in the day not at peak times. You've now changed your argument so again your response is void. I've seen single trams departing Altrincham for Bury between 16:30 and 17:30 so the peak services certainly aren't all doubled up.

3. Why does it matter if 323s are spare? They can't exactly run on the line through Old Trafford now. Had the Altrincham line not been converted it would almost certainly see 323 operation now, so it is a very fair comparison.

4. Altrincham to Bury is over 50 minutes, even if you assume you won't have to stand for more than half the journey time as the trams will empty out and fill up again, it's still longer than TOCs are supposed to aim for.

5. Trains have higher capacity and could run to a higher frequency than the current Metrolink frequency, so frequent train is a better crowd mover than the current Metrolink frequency.

6. I never said M5000s can't run in double, I said "M5000s won't operate in multiple while Mossley Street remains open." I even quoted that and you're still arguing the point, you do know the difference between won't and can't don't you? Hence my point about you not reading.

 

[Class377/5]

377/5 please read what you've written yourself and my responses before arguing that my responses are invalid. I've not got time to teach you how to read.

Are typos trying to be insulting or do you just like to troll?

1. You quoted South East EMU capacities not higher capacity standard class only North West 323 capacities so my point is certainly not void but your response certainly is.

So what capacity is the 323 then if it's o much higher than London units!

2. You said Altrincham-Bury is double units in the day not at peak times. You've now changed your argument so again your response is void. I've seen single trams departing Altrincham for Bury between 16:30 and 17:30 so the peak services certainly aren't all doubled up.

I've never changed my argurement. I've stated trams run in doubles in the day and in peak.

3. Why does it matter if 323s are spare? They can't exactly run on the line through Old Trafford now. Had the Altrincham line not been converted it would almost certainly see 323 operation now, so it is a very fair comparison.

Why would it have been 323? Now your your your opition to justify a fantasy point.

4. Altrincham to Bury is over 50 minutes, even if you assume you won't have to stand for more than half the journey time as the trams will empty out and fill up again, it's still longer than TOCs are supposed to aim for.

I thought we were discussing people queeing from Old Trafford after an event not travelling from one end of the network to the other.

5. Trains have higher capacity and could run to a higher frequency than the current Metrolink frequency, so frequent train is a better crowd mover than the current Metrolink frequency.

So your saying trains could do this vs trams can do this. Guess what, trams can run to higher frequencies.

6. I never said M5000s can't run in double, I said "M5000s won't operate in multiple while Mossley Street remains open." I even quoted that and you're still arguing the point, you do know the difference between won't and can't don't you? Hence my point about you not reading.

Why won't they? Your arguing a point but not stating the reason. That's not a discussion, which is what a forum is about.

Well maybe if you calm down and try and discuss you'll actually produce a sensible answer rather than getting insulting. Then again you seem all knowing on every subject, maybe we should just let you rant.

 

[pemma]

377/5 I've told you TWICE already the seating capacity of the 323s and yet you still ask me the same question again. DfT's standard formula for maximum train capacity is 1.35 x number of seats. You yourself said a 3 car EMU carries 300 passengers in the South East and compared that to a crush loading of 200 on a tram. AS I'VE SAID READ WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN WRITTEN. You are going around in circles because you can't be bothered reading my posts properly or re-reading your own posts.

AFAIK Metrolink haven't run any M5000s in multiple in passenger service and have no plans to until Mossley Street station closes, therefore if you're saying I'm wrong then specify an exact service that has been operated by a double M5000 or provide a link to a photograph of one. If you can't then you can't argue I'm wrong.

You're wrong about most/all Altrincham-Bury services operating in multiple during the day. That happened between when the M5000s were introduced but stopped when the Chorlton line opened and why I said you can't use the same sentence replacing daytime services with peak services.

Maybe you're right about 323s not being the only possibly for Altrincham line had the line not been converted. They had 4 car EMUs prior to conversion so perhaps they would have got a larger EMU than the 323s but the number of units required would not have justified a whole new unit designed. If it had been a larger unit than a 323 you would have an even higher mountain to climb in your unsuccessful attempt to sell Metrolink.

Yes trams could run to higher frequencies - you keep saying that! The fact is the heavy service once operated by 4 car EMUs and DMUs provided stoppers and express services, more services than at present and a higher capacity per unit, so if that is a benefit of Metrolink it's not yet been achieved.

Please don't bother replying asking the same questions yet again as next time I won't bother to reply.

 

[Class377/5]

377/5 I've told you TWICE already the seating capacity of the 323s and yet you still ask me the same question again. DfT's standard formula for maximum train capacity is 1.35 x number of seats. You yourself said a 3 car EMU carries 300 passengers in the South East and compared that to a crush loading of 200 on a tram. AS I'VE SAID READ WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN WRITTEN. You are going around in circles because you can't be bothered reading my posts properly or re-reading your own posts.

Considering you sated more than 300 and also mentioned up to 300, you've not given any answer that doesn't contradict some else you've wrote.

AFAIK Metrolink haven't run any M5000s in multiple in passenger service and have no plans to until Mossley Street station closes, therefore if you're saying I'm wrong then specify an exact service that has been operated by a double M5000 or provide a link to a photograph of one. If you can't then you can't argue I'm wrong.

Never said they had run in service. All I said is there is no reason why they can't as long as they avoid Modley Street. Ie Altrincham - Piccadilly.

You're wrong about most/all Altrincham-Bury services operating in multiple during the day. That happened between when the M5000s were introduced but stopped when the Chorlton line opened and why I said you can't use the same sentence replacing daytime services with peak services.

I'm talking about what I saw in April 2012. The reason there are more doubles is 3001-2023/2025 are now in service giving many more trams to be double. Chorlton opened with 3013-3016 given dual signalling equipment. Currently there is an extra 8 M5000's in service but one less T68 giving a total of 7 extra trams over what the system had when Chorlton open.

Maybe you're right about 323s not being the only possibly for Altrincham line had the line not been converted. They had 4 car EMUs prior to conversion so perhaps they would have got a larger EMU than the 323s but the number of units required would not have justified a whole new unit designed. If it had been a larger unit than a 323 you would have an even higher mountain to climb in your unsuccessful attempt to sell Metrolink.

Yes trams could run to higher frequencies - you keep saying that! The fact is the heavy service once operated by 4 car EMUs and DMUs provided stoppers and express services, more services than at present and a higher capacity per unit, so if that is a benefit of Metrolink it's not yet been achieved.

Currently yes it's not better. But talking about anything else is discussing fantasies that I doubt we'd agree on.

Please don't bother replying asking the same questions yet again as next time I won't bother to reply.

May we should call it quits and let the thread continue on without us arguing?

 

[snail]

Considering you sated more than 300 and also mentioned up to 300, you've not given any answer that doesn't contradict some else you've wrote.

I wouldn't worry about that. I'm still waiting for an answer to my question about where trains can cross the Ship Canal on one of those clever bridge thingies.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I wouldn't worry about that. I'm still waiting for an answer to my question about where trains can cross the Ship Canal on one of those clever bridge thingies.

Yes, it does seem some time now that your question has remained unanswered. Still, they do say that everything comes to those who wait...:roll:

 

[Rail Bus]

377/5 I've told you TWICE already the seating capacity of the 323s and yet you still ask me the same question again. DfT's standard formula for maximum train capacity is 1.35 x number of seats. You yourself said a 3 car EMU carries 300 passengers in the South East and compared that to a crush loading of 200 on a tram. AS I'VE SAID READ WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN WRITTEN. You are going around in circles because you can't be bothered reading my posts properly or re-reading your own posts.

AFAIK Metrolink haven't run any M5000s in multiple in passenger service and have no plans to until Mossley Street station closes, therefore if you're saying I'm wrong then specify an exact service that has been operated by a double M5000 or provide a link to a photograph of one. If you can't then you can't argue I'm wrong.

You're wrong about most/all Altrincham-Bury services operating in multiple during the day. That happened between when the M5000s were introduced but stopped when the Chorlton line opened and why I said you can't use the same sentence replacing daytime services with peak services.

Maybe you're right about 323s not being the only possibly for Altrincham line had the line not been converted. They had 4 car EMUs prior to conversion so perhaps they would have got a larger EMU than the 323s but the number of units required would not have justified a whole new unit designed. If it had been a larger unit than a 323 you would have an even higher mountain to climb in your unsuccessful attempt to sell Metrolink.

Yes trams could run to higher frequencies - you keep saying that! The fact is the heavy service once operated by 4 car EMUs and DMUs provided stoppers and express services, more services than at present and a higher capacity per unit, so if that is a benefit of Metrolink it's not yet been achieved.

Please don't bother replying asking the same questions yet again as next time I won't bother to reply.

jcollins your so right with what you say, clearly someone who knows the system very well

incidentally it took me nearly 2 hours to get into work this morning due to yet another infrastructure failure!

This happens as a common occurance

Then had to wait more than 30 min at St Peters in the pouring rain on the way home (in which time 2 Eccles, 2 St Werbs, 2 MediaCity and a sorry not in service went past)

As a matter of interest which is the busiest Metrolink route, Altrincham or Bury?

 

[snail]

incidentally it took me nearly 2 hours to get into work this morning due to yet another infrastructure failure!

Cable theft near Cornbrook.

Suspected metal thief falls 50ft from railway viaduct

That never happens on heavy rail... :roll:

 

[Andrew Nelson]

No one can tell you you're wrong, if that's how you feel then that's how you feel! And sadly if you're an Eccles line user then I don't think things are going to get much better as the signalling on the Eccles line isn't being changed from what it currently is.

I believe they should run doubles on the Eccles line in peak times, not really sure why they don't...

Do the Eccles line trams have couplings?

 

[snail]

The fact is the heavy service once operated by 4 car EMUs and DMUs provided stoppers and express services, more services than at present and a higher capacity per unit, so if that is a benefit of Metrolink it's not yet been achieved.

How many of these EMUs and DMUs would take people to Bury via Market Street and Victoria?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Suspected metal thief falls 50ft from railway viaduct

That never happens on heavy rail... :roll:

This matter should be given the maximum national coverage and the matter of what happened the the 40 year old thief be also done so as a warning to others.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

This matter should be given the maximum national coverage and the matter of what hapened the the 40 year old thief be also done so as a warning to others.

When I was at Salford Uni' during the early days of the Metrolink, there was a story of a "traveling scrap dealer" who tried to use a chain and a grappling hook to pull the overhead down at night, when they thought the juice was off.
Obvously he didn't do it twice!!!!

 

[martin2345uk]

Do the Eccles line trams have couplings?

The Eccles line uses the same trams as the other lines so no reason why they couldn't use doubles...

 

[snail]

This matter should be given the maximum national coverage and the matter of what hapened the the 40 year old thief be also done so as a warning to others.

Absolutely. @Rail Bus was placing the blame on Metrolink but it could just as easily have happened on the Network Rail tracks on the adjoining viaduct.

 

[Class377/5]

Absolutely. @Rail Bus was placing the blame on Metrolink but it could just as easily have happened on the Network Rail tracks on the adjoining viaduct.

Has happened. Cable theft in London Bridge area in peak killed everything out of London Bridge High Level, Cannon Street, Charing Cross and heavily affected Thameslink.

 

[Tramfan]

Cable theft was an almost daily occurrence on the Tyne & Wear Metro last year as well, often in the same areas, to the point where I believe they ran empty trains through the night and drafted in patrols in the worst affected areas. Not really much more that can be done by the operators of tram systems or Network Rail to prevent this.

 

[starrymarkb]

Do the Eccles line trams have couplings?

Under the fairing I believe. When I was in Leipzig the native Leoliner trams ran in multiple, the front panel and lights hinged up to reveal a coupler

 

[Andrew Nelson]

Under the fairing I believe. When I was in Leipzig the native Leoliner trams ran in multiple, the front panel and lights hinged up to reveal a coupler

I see.
I wasn't aware of that.
The blue-prints I saw when the second generation were introduced didn't show this. I seem to remember this being comented on at the time.