Well certainly the Tram was mooted as a possibility not so long back.....Atherton line has a max line speed of 50mph, which oddly enough is the top speed of a tram. Or maybe just ripping out the track and converting to a busway stopping at the same places......I m sure a bus doing 50 mph would get from A to B just as quick.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Should the Atherton line be converted to become part of Metrolink?
- Thread starter Moonshot
- Start date
- Status
Well certainly the Tram was mooted as a possibility not so long back.....Atherton line has a max line speed of 50mph, which oddly enough is the top speed of a tram. Or maybe just ripping out the track and converting to a busway stopping at the same places......I m sure a bus doing 50 mph would get from A to B just as quick.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
who is going to pay to convert it to a tram or a busway ?
And what good is a busway or a tramway going to be come monday-saturday when the services are once again busy .
And how is that bus and tramway going to integrate in with connections to Wigan and Manchester ?
Last edited:
A less comfortable, and more poorly integrated (with the rest of the rail network) system is not the answer.
Perhaps someone could look into the real reasons why it supposedly costs so much more to run one railed vehicle on one set of tracks as opposed to another railed vehicle on another set of tracks. Certainly the recent myth busting paper by PTEG seems very enlightening.
http://www.pteg.net/resources/types/reports/economic-value-rail-north-england
On the other hand, one suspects that the establishment might not like what they find out.
Which is no different than what happens now......so then the question remains which it always comes back to is ....how do we cater for the public travel needs of those living on the Atherton line in a more cost effective way bearing in mind there are increasing pressures on the availabilty of state funds?
But its the answer that Manchester , Sheffield , Nottingam and Edinburgh are already using to meet the every day needs of local residents.
By the way , that link is great......whats suprising is that one of the graphs there shows Huddersfield as the top station for growth at an amazing 260% over 10 years............you have to wonder though if thats correct bearing in mind there are some issues with data quality.
Last edited:
In some countries most/all public transport is subsided. The idea behind it being that if it's dirt cheap to travel by public transport then it makes the car a much less attractive option and reduces both congestion and pollution.
In Britain ever since Harold Macmillan was Prime Minister the reliance for car travel has increased due to spending cuts affecting public transport. Yes OK we're having millions of pounds of investment in the railways now but we're carrying more passengers by rail than in the 1930s with less than half the infrastructure and it's coinciding with millions of pounds of cuts in provision for bus services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The answer is not TfGM who decided Metrolink on the Atherton line would cost £280m in set-up costs, which provides low value for money, so their conclusion is to review existing appraisal and consider alternatives: http://www.agma.gov.uk/cms_media/files/capital_projects_and_policy_agenda_papers_8_11_13.pdf I've told Moonshot this before, yet he persists in insisting it's a brilliant solution but unless he's going to invest £280m in it then it won't happen.
I never said it was a brilliant solution....I simply pointed out the option exists. Its an option thats been applied elsewhere in the region and also in other cities.
Its quite ironic when you were mentioning the lack of rail services connecting to hospitals yesterday, but isnt it true that the shortly to be opened extension of Metrolink to the airport does in fact have a brand new stop right outside Wythenshaw hospital ?
As usual you havent even answered the question and just gone off on a tangent ..........
The main two being
Where is the money coming from to convert the railway that is already there to a tram or worse a busway ?
How is that tram or busway going to integrate in with services to Wigan and Manchester?
In addition to that there are so many more questions
Is a Tram going to be that significantly cheaper to run over the same stretch of track that it is worth imposing months of inconvenience on the people that travel on the atherton line just to convert it to light rail all for the sake of one day per week of profit making ?
Where are the Southport and Kirkby services that currently run over that line where are they going to run now ?
What about the impact assesment of removing a diversionary route between Wigan and Salford Crescent ?
If the people along the atherton line wanted a bus they could probably quite easilly get a bus to their destination.
Well according to Mr Collins, Kirby services are planned to run as a shuttle between Wigan and Kirkby.......not seen that myself but maybe he can help you with the link to that particular piece.
Is it Moonshot? As Wythenshawe Hospital is served by a line which isn't a heavy rail conversion and you're proposing Metrolink on the existing Atherton rail line I don't see how the two are comparable.
I simply pointed out that Wythenshawe Hospital is getting a Metrolink stop right outside it......isnt that an example of improving public transport links ?
Right but again you are failing to answer the question .
Its much like that infamous interview between Jeremy Maxman and Michael Howard where Howard would do anything he could to avoid the very difficult questions being put to him . except here they aren't even difficult .
So where is the money going to come from is what you are asking......so isnt it true that currently , the taxpayer stumps up some £4 billion per year of investment capital for the rail industry?
It's in DfT's Illustrative options for CP5:
DfT said:
Other people like tbtc and LNW-GW Joint have logically suggested that following the announcement of Wigan-Bolton electrification the long term plan is now for a Manchester Airport to Wigan EMU service and a half-hourly Victoria-Atherton-Southport DMU service but I've not seen that officially documented anywhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So which specific hospitals would have been served by introducing Metrolink on the Atherton line had TfGM not dropped the plan? If you've got no specific examples then I don't see why you followed up a post on the Atherton Line Metrolink plans being dropped with "Its quite ironic" even Alanis Morissette could come up with a better example of irony
Something around that figure yes .
However as Jcollins has pointed out TFGM the owners of the metrolink system and the people who decide how the investment given to them by the government and the European development fund have already stated converting the atherton line is not something that they would do as it is not cost effective .
So do you want to try and secure the funding from the treasury to convert the line to metrolink or are you going to drop your silly idea ?
Like I've said before I wouldn't be surprised if Moonshot was being paid by RATP to post pro-Metrolink posts on web forums and if he posts anything negative about Metrolink he risks not getting paid, so he has to avoid giving answers which put Metrolink in negative light.
I don't even see why one comment by starmill about Metrolink has resulted in yet another thread being hijacked with Metrolink posts.
It's in DfT's Illustrative options for CP5:
Other people like tbtc and LNW-GW Joint have logically suggested that following the announcement of Wigan-Bolton electrification the long term plan is now for a Manchester Airport to Wigan EMU service and a half-hourly Victoria-Atherton-Southport DMU service but I've not seen that officially documented anywhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So which specific hospitals would have been served by introducing Metrolink on the Atherton line had TfGM not dropped the plan? If you've got no specific examples then I don't see why you followed up a post on the Atherton Line Metrolink plans being dropped with "Its quite ironic" even Alanis Morissette could come up with a better example of irony
Yet again you completely missed the point ............I simply pointed out Wythenshawe hospital as a beneficiary of the policy of extending Metrolink services. You yourself mentioned yesterday about hospitals having next to no rail links ......which is hardly suprising now is it when you consider the history.
So if you think improving public transport links to a NHS facility is a good idea ( i think it is !! ) then surely doing that in the most efficient and cost effective way has to be a win win situation all round yes?
Like I said what relevance does that have to the Atherton line?
Yesterday I was talking about one of the TfGM subsided Sunday rail services (which you strongly dislike) serves a hospital and how they are lucky to have that given many places have no public transport at all to the hospital on Sunday.
Do you need a lesson of how to quote in context? If not can you start doing it please?
And yet again you cant answer a simple question.......so I ll just ask it again.......
So if you think improving public transport links to a NHS facility is a good idea ( i think it is !! ) then surely doing that in the most efficient and cost effective way has to be a win win situation all round yes?
Simple yes or no just to the above point please.
I refused to answer your question because you started your post by quoting me out-of-context, something which you do all too often.
I think you should consider yourself lucky if any user answers any question you pose, when you so frequently refuse to answer any questions people ask you.
Maybe you should answer the question posed both by myself and muz379 much earlier about where you think funding for Metrolink on the Atherton line could come from, considering TfGM have said they don't want to waste Greater Manchester's taxpayers money on it?
Last edited by a moderator:
Can anybody else answer this one.....
If improving public transport links to a NHS facility is a good idea ( i think it is !! ) then surely doing that in the most efficient and cost effective way has to be a win win situation all round yes?
Muz...maybe you could.....then once answered maybe we can look at an example locally and see how it could be funded?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I m sorry did you say it was my silly idea? Are you saying nobody else has already considered this??
Network Rail are responsible for maintaining and using government funds for investing in the Atherton Line......do you think there is a possibility that Network Rail themselves might consider this line suitable to a tram or tram/train operation? They certainly mention trams and tram/trains in their own literature on future developments in other areas.
If improving public transport links to a NHS facility is a good idea ( i think it is !! ) then surely doing that in the most efficient and cost effective way has to be a win win situation all round yes?
Muz...maybe you could.....then once answered maybe we can look at an example locally and see how it could be funded?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I m sorry did you say it was my silly idea? Are you saying nobody else has already considered this??
Network Rail are responsible for maintaining and using government funds for investing in the Atherton Line......do you think there is a possibility that Network Rail themselves might consider this line suitable to a tram or tram/train operation? They certainly mention trams and tram/trains in their own literature on future developments in other areas.
Last edited:
Network Rail see the future of Southport services as 4 car class 156 operation and have platform lengthening plans in place to allow that in their final CP5 plans.
Last edited by a moderator:
In which case great .....an investment to improve public transport. Doesnt investing in Metrolink acheive the same results though? ie improvement in public transport?
No, because...
it's a poorer offering for people who are making part of their journey using advance tickets on trains.
You can't take bikes on it.
It's more expensive (e.g Altrincham - Piccadilly off peak return £3.90 by Rail, £4.60 by Tram).
Metrolink trams are less comfortable than Pacers.
it's a poorer offering for people who are making part of their journey using advance tickets on trains.
You can't take bikes on it.
It's more expensive (e.g Altrincham - Piccadilly off peak return £3.90 by Rail, £4.60 by Tram).
Metrolink trams are less comfortable than Pacers.
In which case, how do you square the corners of the fact that the tram network is being invested in at a rate of knots? Are you also saying that no one gets on board trams at Altrincham because the equivalent Northern Rail service is cheaper?
I keep seeing all the above points made regular......but I really cant connect those facts with what I see with my own eyes......which is a light rail system which is a very busy and popular way of getting around.
From my experience during the off-peak there's only usually a few passengers per tram who travel from Altrincham/Navigation Rd to Deansgate or beyond, so as an estimate maybe 70 per hour split across 12 services. Northern Rail get around 30 passengers per train who travel between Altrincham/Navigation Rd to Piccadilly. Considering the indirect route Northern are forced to take and the fact they have old trains running only an hourly service, I think they do quite well in comparison to Metrolink.
It doesn't achieve the same results.
To take only one of my list, just because there are a lot of people using it (without bikes) doesn't mean there isn't a significant number of customers who would rather bring a bike or people who could become customers if they could take bikes.
Converting a line from rail to Metrolink when there is no rail alternative afterwards represents an inferior service for a non-zero number of current Northern Rail customers.
Why doesnt it achieve the same results if the prime objective of ANY public transport is to get passengers from A to B? A passenger alighting a train at Bury in pre Metrolink days got off at Victoria......tram passengers can do exactly the same and more in the fact that they can drop passengers off right outside Debenhams or Primark for example.
isnt it true that trams are a bit smaller in length than the average 2 car train so as they can negotiate the tighter radius of street running? Do you think as a consequence of that , space would be a bit more limited anyway? But by introducing a 6 minute frequency at peak times, the slightly less numbers that can be accomadated in a single tram is more than mitigated by a huge upturn in frequency?
isnt it also true that we are increasingly seeing more cycle only lanes on our roads? Why would anyone want to hop on a tram ( for what are generally short journeys ) when they can avail themselves of the increasing road ( and dedicated ) space for cycling?
isnt it also true that if I was a very keen cyclist and fancied a trip to, say , Southport , I could go by train and simple hire one from a facility at or next to the station? I see these sorts of facilities popping up all the time now at stations. Of course Northern Rail impose a cycle limit of 2 in their own right on their trains, so if 20 cyclists suddenly turned up at a station ( which they are perfectly entitled to do as we have a walk on railway ) 18 of them are going to be disappointed.
As I understand it, most of those cities are using their light rail systems to serve areas that currently aren't particularly well served, rather than a cheapo way of replacing an existing railway passenger service. Certainly nothing as lengthy and integral to the regional passenger network as the Atherton line. (Not that cheap if you consider the conversion costs, but you seem to be implying it would be a better use of public money than subsidising a Sunday service).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I don't see the point. James Cook hospital in Middlesbrough has just had a new stop opened on a traditional railway line. Build the stop on whatever link is nearby seems a sensible option, but how is this an argument for conversion to Metrolink ?
Of course there are other areas of the current heavy rail network in manchester that are possible converts to light rail....Marple line being one such example. Metrolink per se does not have an operating subsidy, it stands on its own 2 feet with running costs covered by the farebox. Do you think its a better use of public money if an investment is made using scarce state funds which actually leads to no reduction in subsidy or indeed an increase? This was a point very well made by Paul Sidorczuk and his description of the Todmorden Curve situation.
- Status