One failed Metrolink tram delays all services again

[snail]

Really, so this conference and exhibition centre couldn't move 70 yards up the road into the Derelict Buildings just behind St Peters' Square to make way for a regionally important station that will prevent the stifling of growth on two major commuter lines, a long regional line, and several diversionary railway routes, not to mention removing or reducing the need for the Metrolink 2CC plans that I don't know many locals who are in favour of?

For one, have you noticed the security cordons during party conferences? This was a major driver in revising the 2CC route away from Mount Street/Albert Square as it would have isolated the Midland Hotel. The 'Ring of Steel' would be totally impractical if St Peter's Square had to be included as well.

I know this is a railway forum but there is more involved here than supporting trainspotter pipe dreams! It's just possible that your sample of 'locals' may not be as well informed as TfGM and the City Council.

 

[Nym]

Oh please.
If you can't handle criticism you should not post.



Where are these derelict buildings you speak of? This is one of the densest and least derelict parts of Manchester city centre. The only derelict building I can think of in the vicinity is the Odeon and thats hardly big enough is it?

Not just buildings, but theres plenty of uncompleted development and spare land to have a Conference Centre in Manchester.

http://g.co/maps/5chny

And if you can come up with a better critisism, I'd gladly entertain it, but how would YOU have further growth on the CLC route and Alty lines handled? If you've got a better idea I'd gladly hear it...

 

[Samtron2000]

Not just buildings, but theres plenty of uncompleted development and spare land to have a Conference Centre in Manchester.

http://g.co/maps/5chny

Are you having a laugh!! There is ONE site youve marked that would fit the present day Manchester Central!! Do you have any idea how much it would cost! We're talking private land here!!!

 

[futureA]

Can somebody tell TfGM that Mr Purdy is no longer the best candidate for the job. Mr Collins has clearly demonstrated in his posts he has considerably greater knowledge and experience than Mr Purdy, despite Mr Purdy previously running Melbournes tram system, one of the largest in the world!!

See my previous post.

 

[Nym]

Are you having a laugh!! There is ONE site youve marked that would fit the present day Manchester Central!! Do you have any idea how much it would cost! We're talking private land here!!!

I'll bring it back to my other question then, what other alternatives are there for additional services on the CLC route without going for Network Rail's stupid service frequency possibilities?

 

[Samtron2000]

I'll bring it back to my other question then, what other alternatives are there for additional services on the CLC route without going for Network Rail's stupid service frequency possibilities?

I couldn't give a monkey's foreskin about additional services on the CLC route!! You are just obsessed about reopening Central Station and are just trying to justify a solution to a problem that doesn't exist! It has been closed 45 years! It's gone, reused, never to reopen!

 

[futureA]

I'll bring it back to my other question then, what other alternatives are there for additional services on the CLC route without going for Network Rail's stupid service frequency possibilities?

Does the route need extra capacity is what you should be asking. It probably does need some but re opening central is not the most cost effective way of delivering this.

 

[Nym]

Considering what the Northern Hub wants to do (more CLC route passing loops) and the loadings on them services, and lack of choice about where to send these, something needs doing.

Unlike the Chat Moss and Windsor Bridge lines, the CLC doesn't have any choice but to use Oxford Road. Sounding like a broken record again, but the terminating capacity from these routes is a total of 1 platform at Oxford Road.

If for example, some joined up thinking came and the Chat Moss gained some platforms at Victoria with a smidge of grade separation and each route is cut back to 3tph maximum through Oxford Road + CLC stoppers, it's do-able.

I'm working on a maximum capacity at Oxford Road of 15tph w/o Freight (a bridge over the M62 and some electrification can solve that). With the spare paths required then 3tph Windsor Bridge, 2tph Chat Moss, 3tph + 3tph CLC and 4tph Cord is possible.

Services would likely be: 1tph Southport via Atherton, 1tph Blackpool North, 1tph Preston / Blackpool North / Barrow / Windermere, 1tph Scotland, 1tph Llandudno.

But no-one wants to admit that the Ordsall Cord will mean a cut in services through Oxford Road to other destinations, since it's currently running at 12tph and already suffers capacity problems, and no-one wants to be kicked off to Exchange / Victoria.

Since platforms on Exchange wouldn't mean demolishing anything would they be more viable in your eyes? Or would the required grade separation at Ordsall Lane be 'silly'? Grade separation at this junction will likely be necessary soon anyway, given to the increases in complexity and the flat junction at Castlefield. Grade separation would provide a series of diverging routes with a roughly 40/60 split between the CLC and Ordsall at Castlefield, followed by a 44/56 split at 'Cord Jcn' then a 40/60 split at Ordsall Ln Jcn, with an additional ?6tph joining the Chat Moss by means of grade seperation from Exchange / Victoria, improvments in layout may enable the Windsor Link to be used to prevent crossing movments (but avoiding Salford Central) to have Windsor services use the Exchange platforms, if not, reversing sidings will be required.

 

[pemma]

despite Mr Purdy previously running Melbournes tram system, one of the largest in the world!!

Yes he's run a real tram system, not one that's really a converted rail network joined up with a relatively small section of street running.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Unlike the Chat Moss and Windsor Bridge lines, the CLC doesn't have any choice but to use Oxford Road. Sounding like a broken record again, but the terminating capacity from these routes is a total of 1 platform at Oxford Road.

What would be involved in reopening the former Platform 6 at Manchester Oxford Road, which would then reinstate the original two terminal bay platforms. It is not as if the land available for that platform has been reduced.

 

[Nym]

What would be involved in reopening the former Platform 6 at Manchester Oxford Road, which would then reinstate the original two terminal bay platforms. It is not as if the land available for that platform has been reduced.

The problem then would be 2 or 3tph crossing the 12tph that will be running through Oxford Road, the problem wouldn't be platform space, it would be pathing them in and out. Hence why the plans I drew up to re-build Oxford Road cut off 5/6 and hand them over for Metrolink or Tram Train use, using 2/3 with conflict free terminating.

If that could be solved than re-opening it would involve moving the OHLE support masts and a full rebuild of Platform 6, not an easy job.

 

[pemma]

And there is significant street running on the Eccles, Ashton and airport line.

The Eccles-Piccadilly services is the one Metrolink service that's slower than the equivalent bus route and it also gets the lowest passenger numbers. If anything that proves street running was the wrong idea for the Manchester area

The Ashton and the Airport lines are under construction. How successful they will be is unknown.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I couldn't give a monkey's foreskin about additional services on the CLC route..just trying to justify a solution to a problem that doesn't exist

While I don't agree with Nym's suggestion of re-opening Central station there is a problem with capacity on the Warrington Central to Manchester line and you're constant praising of Metrolink for opening random lines that no-one wanted but ignoring the real problems that people from the likes of Irlam and Urmston face is nothing but pure ignorance. Oh joy Metrolink will give the people from Wythenshawe who can't afford to go holiday a direct Airport link so let's forget about Urmston.

 

[Nym]

Oh I do have a much more radical solution for the CLC stopping services that would also assist in taking freight away from Piccadilly, but I don't think it would be a popular one, and a full rebuild of Oxford Road would be cheaper

Basically, link the CLC into 'Exchange' and build masses of platforms there, also of course meaning that freight can access Trafford Park via Victoria rather than Piccadilly...

Would be about half a mile of new viaduct...

Simple grade seperation of Ordsall Lane Jcn and some additional platforms at Victoria on the 'Exchange Site' or possibly two stations closely linked like they used to be, with a clearly defined set of services using "Exchange" and foot access up Cathedral Approach and via Victoria may be sufficent for now.

Destinations you would go to Exchange for would be slows on the Chat Moss, basically: Wigan NW, St Helens, Warrington BQ and any services torn away from Piccadilly such as Llandudno via Warrington BQ.

And before you cynics start on "Exchange is too far away from Victoria" it's no further than platforms 13 & 14 at Piccadilly.

I can't see anything to do for Windsor Bridge services other than Abstract pax away onto the Chat Moss (Wigan via Eccles is faster and uses bigger trains etc) to reduce demand, there is possibly space with some inventive bridging over Victoria St to get some 4 or 5 car bays in with an over bridge.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Oh joy Metrolink will give the people from Wythenshawe who can't afford to go holiday a direct Airport link so let's forget about Urmston.

I am sure that you said this in jest. Wythenshawe to the airport is extremely well served by buses that will be used by Wythenshawe people as they do so at present.

Off-hand, I can think of services 18, 19, 43, 105 and 369 that provide this type of service from Wythenshawe bus station.

 

[martin2345uk]

Comes down to how much (if at all) faster the tram is when it opens and, more importantly, if it's cheaper.

For me living in Chorlton, when the Metrolink line opened last year I was pleasantly surprised to find it was 70p cheaper than the bus to town, as well as being about twice as fast.

The Eccles line on the other hand is dog slow - but I think that's because there are just too many stops around the quays, and it crawls around some twists and turns barely faster than walking pace.

The Airport Line is mostly segregated running, with not too many stops, so if they manage the road crossings well and, crucially, get the prices right, it could be very successful.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The Eccles line on the other hand is dog slow - but I think that's because there are just too many stops around the quays, and it crawls around some twists and turns barely faster than walking pace.

I think that the raison d'etre for the Eccles line was the very large amount of new employment that was created in the Salford Quays complex as a whole. as an aid to staff mobility. Just see how many of these stations on that line are in that commercial area, compared with the few on the final stage from there onwards to Eccles. I should imagine that Salford Council, in whose area the Salford Quays development lies, were instrumental in lobbying for such a system that is currently in operation....and this is discounting all the new arrivals at Media City UK, the Lowry Centre (and the shopping mall) and the Imperial War Museum North.

I am well aware of the bus service from Salford Crescent station to the area, but this should only be viewed as an extra arm of public transport for the workers in the area who come from the Bolton direction by rail.

 

[futureA]

The Eccles-Piccadilly services is the one Metrolink service that's slower than the equivalent bus route and it also gets the lowest passenger numbers. If anything that proves street running was the wrong idea for the Manchester area

From my experience Broadway to Eccles is certainly used more than enough to justify its existence. The main problem with the Eccles line is that it goes via Salford Quays. As others have mentioned this was the reson d'être of the line, it was decided quite late on in it's development to extend it to Eccles.
Lots of the development in the quays in the last decade would simply not have happend without Metrolink.

Broadway to Piccadilly (inc Media City) is very busy these days.

Oh joy Metrolink will give the people from Wythenshawe who can't afford to go holiday a direct Airport link so let's forget about Urmston.

Consider how many people work at the airport. Consider how many of them live in Wythenshawe. Consider how isolated Wythenshawe is from many other places in South Manchester.

Bingo, that is why the Metrolink line is being built.

Am I right in thinking that once the Chat Moss line is electrified most fast Liverpool services will run on it making space for extra trains for people in Irlam and Urmston?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not just buildings, but theres plenty of uncompleted development and spare land to have a Conference Centre in Manchester.

http://g.co/maps/5chny

Only about 1 or 2 of your suggestions are big enough to contain an exhibition centre the size of central.

Also, you can't just move something like that. The area in the vicinity of central has many other facilites such as hotels that are just not present in other areas. Being next to two tram stations probably helps as well.

I don't think any of your suggestions are as good as Central's current location.

And if you can come up with a better critisism, I'd gladly entertain it

lol

but how would YOU have further growth on the CLC route and Alty lines handled? If you've got a better idea I'd gladly hear it...

I really don't care about the CLC route. I am just trying to balance the criticism of the Metrolink system and trying to get you to understand that re activating central as a rail terminal is a really really bad idea.

 

[pemma]

Lots of the development in the quays in the last decade would simply not have happend without Metrolink.

It would have needed some transport link but it could have just as easily happened had passenger services and stations been introduced on the freight line to Trafford Park.

Broadway to Piccadilly (inc Media City) is very busy these days.

Well yes. It serves a theatre seating hundreds and MediaCity has thousands of employees and regular studio audiences of a few hundred. If it wasn't well used there would be something seriously wrong.

Consider how many people work at the airport. Consider how many of them live in Wythenshawe. Consider how isolated Wythenshawe is from many other places in South Manchester.

Bingo, that is why the Metrolink line is being built.

So you of course realise that many of the jobs are at the cargo centre and the Airport is 24 hour operations. Yet the Metrolink will not be 24 hours and will not serve the cargo centre.

Am I right in thinking that once the Chat Moss line is electrified most fast Liverpool services will run on it making space for extra trains for people in Irlam and Urmston?

No. There will still be 4 trains per hour on the line but the final destinations and calling patterns may be different.

The proposed May 2014 TPE timetable includes a Liverpool-Newcastle service via Chat Moss replacing the Liverpool-Airport service and the existing Liverpool-Scarborough still operating via Warrington.

It is expected that the Northern 2014 TPE timetable will include one of the Liverpool-Oxford Rd stoppers being speeded up and extended to the Airport but there's been no proposed timetable yet.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am sure that you said this in jest. Wythenshawe to the airport is extremely well served by buses that will be used by Wythenshawe people as they do so at present.

Off-hand, I can think of services 18, 19, 43, 105 and 369 that provide this type of service from Wythenshawe bus station.

You may be aware that one of the reasons for Wythenshawe having so many Airport buses relates to historical bus depots and operations.

Star Line Travel had one of their two depots at Wythenshawe which they referred to as their 'Airport Division' so for their buses to get between the depot and the Airport they were running Wythenshawe-Airport. Star Line Travel were taken over by British Bus (now Arriva) which is why the routes between Wythenshawe and the Airport come under the Arriva routes and not the former GM Buses South routes that Stagecoach acquired.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You may be aware that one of the reasons for Wythenshawe having so many Airport buses relates to historical bus depots and operations.

Star Line Travel had one of their two depots at Wythenshawe which they referred to as their 'Airport Division' so for their buses to get between the depot and the Airport they were running Wythenshawe-Airport. Star Line Travel were taken over by British Bus (now Arriva) which is why the routes between Wythenshawe and the Airport come under the Arriva routes and not the former GM Buses South routes that Stagecoach acquired.

I am most certainly aware of the situation of the bus provision history in the south part of Manchester, even though I live outside the area in Cheshire East.

Of the routes that I made reference to, the 18 and 19 services come under Arriva and the 43, 105 and 369 routes come under both the existing Stagecoach Manchester depots in South Manchester (new Sharston replacement for Princess Road depot) and at Stockport.

Arriva are currently deciding the fate of their depot in Manchester city centre and it will be interesting to see what size of facility they finally decide upon to be their main depot for the area covering their existing South Manchester operations.

 

[snail]

I should imagine that Salford Council, in whose area the Salford Quays development lies, were instrumental in lobbying for such a system that is currently in operation....and this is discounting all the new arrivals at Media City UK, the Lowry Centre (and the shopping mall) and the Imperial War Museum North.

I am well aware of the bus service from Salford Crescent station to the area, but this should only be viewed as an extra arm of public transport for the workers in the area who come from the Bolton direction by rail.

MediaCity (and possibly the NWMN) wasn't at the planning stage when the Eccles line was conceived in the 1990s. A spur to the Lowry was included but no one would pay for it so it didn't happen - similar to the proposed Trafford Centre extension that Peel refused to support. As for the bus service, that is subsidised by Salford University to link their main campus with the new media building at the Quays.

 

[futureA]

It would have needed some transport link but it could have just as easily happened had passenger services and stations been introduced on the freight line to Trafford Park
.

What, you mean the freight line that connects to the CLC? Many on this thread seem to be under the impression that it is so busy it can barely cope with current services never mind a couple of trains per hour to Salford Quays.

You are suggesting we run passenger trains on street level track. Sounds a bit like a tram.

The airport line will run 22 hours a day and although it doesn't go to all areas of the airport it will still be a great deal more usefull than nothing.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

MediaCity (and possibly the NWMN) wasn't at the planning stage when the Eccles line was conceived in the 1990s. A spur to the Lowry was included but no one would pay for it so it didn't happen - similar to the proposed Trafford Centre extension that Peel refused to support. As for the bus service, that is subsidised by Salford University to link their main campus with the new media building at the Quays.

That is specifically why my posting said "discounting those areas" as it was only the new commercial developments that I was referring to when I said that Salford Council would have been lobbying for a service that would offer immediate access to the main commercial sections of the Salford Quays development.

Thank you, all the same, for clarifying the matter of the bus route, which I had seen in some associated TfGM literature for an aid for rail users of Salford Crescent. This would appear to be a case of "jumping on the bandwaggon" of the use that you state to be the case. Would this service not be for the use of rail passengers travelling from Salford Crescent station to Salford Quays commercial areas, but only for the use of the student body travelling direct to the University campus in that area, with a University pass being required to be shown to the driver, as proof of entitlement to travel ?

 

[Mattmatt]

Isnt this thread about one failed Metrolink tram the other week? - it seems to have moved away completely? - Just a comment, as the comments still make an interesting read.

 

[snail]

Thank you, all the same, for clarifying the matter of the bus route, which I had seen in some associated TfGM literature for an aid for rail users of Salford Crescent. This would appear to be a case of "jumping on the bandwaggon" of the use that you state to be the case. Would this service not be for the use of rail passengers travelling from Salford Crescent station to Salford Quays commercial areas, but only for the use of the student body travelling direct to the University campus in that area, with a University pass being required to be shown to the driver, as proof of entitlement to travel ?

No, it is a public service but at subsidised fares (£1.60 for a day ticket), with free travel to anyone showing a University ID. I have used it myself several times because - as you say - it's a good way to get to the Quays via Salford Crescent without the hassle of going through Manchester.

From what I have read, it took some persuading for TfGM to organise the service (provided by Maytree of Bolton) though it appears to be quite popular as it not only connects the campuses but connects Salford Crescent station to the local shopping centre and that area to the Quays/MediaCity thanks to using a sensible route instead of the most direct route.

 

[pemma]

What, you mean the freight line that connects to the CLC? Many on this thread seem to be under the impression that it is so busy it can barely cope with current services never mind a couple of trains per hour to Salford Quays.

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.

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

The 17:09 Deansgate-Stoke service starts from the sidings at Trafford Park and match day extra services run between Manchester and Man United's ground. That to me suggests that capacity would be available for most of the day for a heavy rail service between Manchester and Salford Quays, just not between Manchester and Warrington Central or Liverpool by the time they have to fit in between other trains.

 

[snail]

That to me suggests that capacity would be available for most of the day for a heavy rail service between Manchester and Salford Quays, just not between Manchester and Warrington Central or Liverpool by the time they have to fit in between other trains.

Isn't there a canal in the way? How is this an improvement over the current provision?

 

[Nym]

Isn't there a canal in the way? How is this an improvement over the current provision?

They got across it before... They did know about bridges in the late 80s...

 

[pemma]

Arriva are currently deciding the fate of their depot in Manchester city centre and it will be interesting to see what size of facility they finally decide upon to be their main depot for the area covering their existing South Manchester operations.

They have already removed the overlap with the Winsford depot by losing routes.

289 Altrincham-Knutsford-Northwich went first to Swans Travel and has recently gone to GHA. Northwich of course having many routes operated from the Winsford depot.

300 Knutsford Town Circular (which was transferred between depots many times and was run from the Winsford depot in the end) was lost in two stages - firstly the evening services and then the daytime services.

That then left Knutsford only served by the Manchester operations with the 288 Knutsford-Wilmslow-Altrincham service being run from there, but that route went to GHA a couple of years ago and was rebranded as 'Connect 88.'
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Isn't there a canal in the way?

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

I believe Metrolink uses these as well.

How is this an improvement over the current provision?

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.

Although, if a Salford Quays heavy rail shuttle was every 20 minutes it would probably be twice as fast as Metrolink to Deansgate, so the less frequent service wouldn't have been a disadvantage prior to the MediaCity shuttle starting and then if the rail service had been a success it too could have been improved.

 

[adamp]

Random rant but I can't agree enough with people who are fed up with the Metrolink. It's a pain in the arse, and one of the slowest tram systems ever!!!! (Certainly feels like it, no doubt someone will go well out of their way to find a slower one)

If anyone tries to justify that it's ok to have 5 Altrincham, 2 St. Werburghs Rd, and one Eccles tram (thats too full to board anyway) turn up at Mosley Street before one Media City tram then just don't bother.

I'd be more than happy to settle if something like this happened once in a blue moon, but it happens way too often. Paying £3.50 standard fare in a morning to get the utter p*ss taken out of you it just isn't on! Journey times are too long, almost hindered by the slow signalling systems (if you want to call it such 'system'). I'll accept due to tight curves etc.. it's just not possible to increase speeds, but when inconsistent and almost lazy/slap dash signalling adds time... I cannot justify paying for such service.

I can't wait to see how journey times on the Oldham Loop line have increased. Give me a 142 any day at least it bloody moves when told to. Progression? Modernisation? Just Metrolinks pathetic plan for world domination!

PM me if you would like to tell me how wrong I am.

 

[martin2345uk]

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...