• 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!

What happened to tram route numbers?

Status
Not open for further replies.

U-Bahnfreund

Member
Joined
6 Feb 2015
Messages
366
Location
Germany
Hello!

I am wondering, why Britain's tram systems seem to be so reluctant to use line numbers (1, 2, 3 or A, B, C).

From what I understand, only Sheffield differentiates its tram services, by using colours. Birmingham, Edinburgh and Blackpool of course don't really need them; but why don't the other systems have any numbers?

London used to have its lines 1 to 4 and Manchester even had both letters and numbers, but I don't understand why these were dropped. Buses use route numbers without anyone questioning that, so I don't really see why trams should be different.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

johnnychips

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2011
Messages
3,675
Location
Sheffield
Hi
Sheffield has four routes:
Y, Yellow, from Middlewood to Meadowhall
B, Blue, from Malin Bridge to Halfway
P, Purple from Cathedral to Herdings Park
TT, no colour, Tram-Train from Cathedral to Parkgate

The trams display the letters on the relevant colour background next to the destination. The whole trams are not branded to a particular route, though the tram-trains are confined to certain sections.
Hope that is of interest.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
Hello!

I am wondering, why Britain's tram systems seem to be so reluctant to use line numbers (1, 2, 3 or A, B, C).

From what I understand, only Sheffield differentiates its tram services, by using colours. Birmingham, Edinburgh and Blackpool of course don't really need them; but why don't the other systems have any numbers?

London used to have its lines 1 to 4 and Manchester even had both letters and numbers, but I don't understand why these were dropped. Buses use route numbers without anyone questioning that, so I don't really see why trams should be different.
In respect to London (Croydon Tramlink in popular parlance) I believe there were two main reasons why route numbers were dropped:-
a) The public hardly ever used them in conversation, referring instead to the destinations
b) For operational convenience: e.g. some early morning Addington line trams work through to Wimbledon, rather than round the West Croydon loop.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
All of the UK's tram networks are simple enough that it's possible to work out the route and all the intermediate stops by reading the destination and consulting the route map. Only Metrolink has more than one possible route between the same pair of stops, but that is dealt with by having "via" on the destination screens. The same is true of all the "new" tramways that have sprung up since the 1980s, and offhand the only one I can think of with route numbering is Paris, where it's probably more for consistency with the Metro. Most of the more complex historic tram networks had route numbers to help comprehensibility, as buses still need to, and the survivors of those networks mostly still do even where only a handful of tram routes remain.
 

AutoKratz

Member
Joined
26 Jan 2010
Messages
110
Location
Washington
The Tyne and Wear Metro originally had line numbers, Metrolines 1-4, but much like Croydon’s trams they were ditched after a few years as no-one ever referred to the line number.

TheNEWMetroLeaflet.jpg

OldMetroMaps1.jpg
 
Joined
4 Apr 2019
Messages
130
When Midland Metro started out, they called their route 'Line 1' as the orginal intention was that other lines would soon follow. The trams even displayed the '1' on the blinds. 20 years later, and only now has construction started on '2'.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
Maybe one reason (and I'm speculating) is that the Sheffield system is pretty much an upgrade to the buses that used to run on those roads (with the exception of the Meadowhall branch and a short section that passes through Derbyshire between Gleadless and Halfway, the majority of the network runs on roads or segregated alongside roads)…

...whereas the Greater Manchester/ West Midlands/ South London systems were predominantly replacing old train services along old railway alignments...

...so the Sheffield one is more like a "bus" (hence has "routes") whilst the others are more like trains (which generally don't have route numbers)?

As I say, just speculation. Could just be because Sheffield likes to do things differently because we are Sheffield!

The Tyne and Wear Metro originally had line numbers, Metrolines 1-4, but much like Croydon’s trams they were ditched after a few years as no-one ever referred to the line number

Excellent - I was meaning to search for a copy of that image (there was a recent question about how the Metro coped with the Sunderland extension, given that there had been no new stock introduced at the time to allow for this significant addition to the network - and I had intended to look for what you've posted to explain that the original Metro frequencies were much better through central Newcastle (albeit not much has changed if you are at Whitley Bay)
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,845
Location
St Neots
Perhaps when the modern tram systems were seeking acceptance, the various PTEs wanted to deliberately distance them from buses and from their predecessors.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
Perhaps when the modern tram systems were seeking acceptance, the various PTEs wanted to deliberately distance them from buses and from their predecessors.
Not so distant from their predecessors that the Croydon tram numbering system followed on from the last L.T. tram number! Didn't Metrolink previously adopt this policy too?
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,459
Location
Sheffield
The same is true of all the "new" tramways that have sprung up since the 1980s, and offhand the only one I can think of with route numbering is Paris, where it's probably more for consistency with the Metro.

As well as Montpelier (mentioned above) Nice (opened 2007) uses route number & Bordeaux (2003) uses letters.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Not so distant from their predecessors that the Croydon tram numbering system followed on from the last L.T. tram number! Didn't Metrolink previously adopt this policy too?
Metrolink didn't - the classes were numbered from 1001, 2001 and 3001 - but I believe Nottingham did.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,845
Location
St Neots
Perhaps when the modern tram systems were seeking acceptance, the various PTEs wanted to deliberately distance them from buses and from their predecessors.

Not so distant from their predecessors that the Croydon tram numbering system followed on from the last L.T. tram number! Didn't Metrolink previously adopt this policy too?

Metrolink didn't - the classes were numbered from 1001, 2001 and 3001 - but I believe Nottingham did.

That's effecively invisible to the average user.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,029
Yes, we've hopped from route numbers to fleet numbers which are something else entirely.
But it does go to show that some people at a level to make the decision were both aware of the history of tram travel in their respective areas and felt sufficiently strongly to initiate a numbering system that showed respect to their predecessors. Personally, I have zilch interest in fleet numbers of any public transport mode with the sole exception of London buses, and, even then, only up to some time in the 1960s.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,712
Location
Glasgow
Given the simplicity of most UK tram networks compared to say Amsterdam or Prague, I'm not sure route numbers are really necessary as such.

Of course were networks sufficiently expanded then route identifiers would likely be necessary if the potential routings were numerous/complex enough.
 

Andyh82

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2014
Messages
3,489
Metrolink in Manchester is quite an extensive system now, so I think route numbers would be a good idea.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
Given the simplicity of most UK tram networks compared to say Amsterdam or Prague, I'm not sure route numbers are really necessary as such.
Except in the case of Croydon, where numbers are far easier communicated than destinations with visitors and people who either speak little English or don't speak English well, of which there are plenty in the locality.

So much for an inclusive London.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,712
Location
Glasgow
Except in the case of Croydon, where numbers are far easier communicated than destinations with visitors and people who either speak little English or don't speak English well, of which there are plenty in the locality.

So much for an inclusive London.

But people would need to know which number applied to which route and presumably the destination would be up as well, so I don't see what having a route number is going to accomplish tbh
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Perhaps the distinction is that if the network is simple enough that each service is a different colour, on the map, numbers aren't necessary (it makes life a bit more difficult for the colour-blind, but they can still follow the lines without knowing the colours). The other criterion for route numbers would be if there were several routes between the same places, and this was too complicated to be handled by a simple "via" as on Metrolink. In my view something like the TrentBarton Indigo could do with route numbers because of the multiple branches and destinations at the outer end.

There's also the possible confusion, most evident on the Paris Metro, of people in the centre not being familiar with the suburban destinations so having to work out which direction they need - but route numbers wouldn't help with that unless they were different for the two directions.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,304
Location
Isle of Man
So much for an inclusive London.

Tourists- of which there are many more in central London- cope on the tube and trains without route numbers.

If your English is so poor you can't recognise "Beckenham Junction" (even if you can't say it), route numbers are not going to help, unless each direction has a different number. And even then, you'd still need to be able to understand you need a 3 tram to Arena.

The only tram system in the UK complicated enough to really merit route numbers would be Metrolink, and even then only to distinguish between trams using 1CC and 2CC.
 

sheff1

Established Member
Joined
24 Dec 2009
Messages
5,459
Location
Sheffield
But people would need to know which number applied to which route and presumably the destination would be up as well, so I don't see what having a route number is going to accomplish tbh
If your English is so poor you can't recognise "Beckenham Junction" (even if you can't say it), route numbers are not going to help, unless each direction has a different number.

When travelling on trams in, say, Sofia it is far easier for someone used to Latin script to read a route number quickly than a destination in Cyrillic. The same will apply, in reverse, for a Bulgarian (or anyone else whose native language does not use Latin script) in the UK.

Are there any places worldwide where tram route numbers are different in each direction ?
 

vlad

Member
Joined
13 May 2018
Messages
749
Are there any places worldwide where tram route numbers are different in each direction ?

There are several places in Russia where an otherwise circular route has a small spur to/from the terminus. As such, clockwise and anticlockwise routes have different numbers so that if you start at the terminus you know which way round it'll go.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
Tourists- of which there are many more in central London- cope on the tube and trains without route numbers.

If your English is so poor you can't recognise "Beckenham Junction" (even if you can't say it), route numbers are not going to help, unless each direction has a different number. And even then, you'd still need to be able to understand you need a 3 tram to Arena.

The only tram system in the UK complicated enough to really merit route numbers would be Metrolink, and even then only to distinguish between trams using 1CC and 2CC.
Being inclusive is all about making things easy for people where possible. Getting people with poor English to understand, differentiate between, and communicate "Route 1" and "Route 2" is far easier than getting them to do the same with "Elmers End" and "Beckenham Junction". Of course the ability to recognise the direction is also important, but that does not eliminate the usefulness of route numbers, especially when it does not need to be implemented at the expense of other features. Taking a Route 2 tram from, say, hotel en route to an interchange station for an attraction means coming back I only need a Route 2 tram, not one which only shows a terminus which I have no need to research. (Why should I?) Without a route number, do I also have to research the other destination possibilities which are short-workings, such as those on Supertram which turn back at places like Shalesmoor?

Of course tourists understand London Underground services, by route colours, not destinations and mostly not by line names. Why would tube lines need to have colours otherwise? We may as well do the same and just show the destinations at the front.

Heavy rail services tend to work differently to bus/tram/metro services in most countries running less frequently and not always to a uniform calling pattern. As for coping, I must have been seeing things with many tourists who actively avoid them and preferring to stick to Underground services, and those totally bewildered even at places with fairly simple offerings such as Windsor and Eton Riverside or Bath.

A common practice across most countries on earth does not exist for cosmetic reasons alone.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
But people would need to know which number applied to which route and presumably the destination would be up as well, so I don't see what having a route number is going to accomplish tbh
Using your argument, why have bus route numbers? Why not just have a destination + via points?
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,712
Location
Glasgow
Using your argument, why have bus route numbers? Why not just have a destination + via points?

I only meant for a simple network, for more complex networks I didn't say it would get rid of numbers, if a destination is reachable by more than one route which go different paths then for intermediate stops it would obviously help to have some form of clear differentiation be it a colour, number or letter.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
Without a route number, do I also have to research the other destination possibilities which are short-workings, such as those on Supertram which turn back at places like Shalesmoor?

Hmm, there's a thought... for years, the convention on Supertram was that only services going the full distance would show the appropriate "colour" (and part journeys wouldn't). Although the "purple" journeys from Herdings to Meadowhall would show often (but not always) "yellow" from Cathedral to Meadowhall.

So, the morning peak extra from Halfway that ran through the city centre and University (and terminated at Shalesmoor, which is the next crossover after the Cathedral) had no "colour", despite it running the vast majority of the "blue" route.

However, the relatively recent changes that saw off peak frequencies dropped* to every twelve minutes sees a Malin Bridge - Cricket Inn Road service just after the morning peak (i.e. a tram that is only used in the morning peak)... but this journey shows "blue" (even though Fitzalan Square to Cricket Inn Road isn't on the blue route - I don't know why Stagecoach have the journey branded like this - there must be a danger of passengers seeing "blue" and assuming it'll go past the train station

* - seven new trams delivered and then the existing routes saw a reduction in frequency (only three trams required each day to do the TramTrain service) - I appreciate the reasons about traffic congestion but we'd been waiting for years for an increase in fleet size, only to see the services cut slightly
 

TC60054

Member
Joined
3 Mar 2016
Messages
586
Location
South Sheffield
Hmm, there's a thought... for years, the convention on Supertram was that only services going the full distance would show the appropriate "colour" (and part journeys wouldn't). Although the "purple" journeys from Herdings to Meadowhall would show often (but not always) "yellow" from Cathedral to Meadowhall.

So, the morning peak extra from Halfway that ran through the city centre and University (and terminated at Shalesmoor, which is the next crossover after the Cathedral) had no "colour", despite it running the vast majority of the "blue" route.

However, the relatively recent changes that saw off peak frequencies dropped* to every twelve minutes sees a Malin Bridge - Cricket Inn Road service just after the morning peak (i.e. a tram that is only used in the morning peak)... but this journey shows "blue" (even though Fitzalan Square to Cricket Inn Road isn't on the blue route - I don't know why Stagecoach have the journey branded like this - there must be a danger of passengers seeing "blue" and assuming it'll go past the train station

* - seven new trams delivered and then the existing routes saw a reduction in frequency (only three trams required each day to do the TramTrain service) - I appreciate the reasons about traffic congestion but we'd been waiting for years for an increase in fleet size, only to see the services cut slightly

Other than services that turn back at Cathedral and Cricket Inn Road now there's no actual part route timetabled services anyway. There's an argument behind both methods with the destinations though -
Blue Cathedral or Blue Cricket Inn Road, lets people that don't recognise the destination, know that it's a blue route tram, and it's heading the same way that any other tram would, but at the same time could lull people into a false sense of security that it's going further than it actually is.
Showing no colour on the other hand could very easily confuse someone who's just looking for a blue route tram, and a tram with no colour turns up because it's timetabled to terminate at Cathedral to run back to the depot for instance.

With regards to the timetable change - the overall fleet requirement during the peaks (not including the tram-train service) has increased anyway, to twenty four vehicles - we wouldn't have been able to do that without the addition of the problematic Citylinks - don't forget that still only leaves three spares in the peaks, and that's assuming that the Citylinks haven't been stopped by Stadler again.
 

ALEMASTER

Member
Joined
18 Aug 2011
Messages
316
Metrolink-Map-2019.jpg
Manchester Metrolink is of course more a Metro rail service with a few bits of tramway rather than a traditional tram service, the network map colour codes the different routes but only the destination is displayed on the vehicle
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top