http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3792.jpg
http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3794.jpg

Stunning piccies JdR - makes you realise what was going on during the re-design meetings! Looking very professional and modern (even if the reality is about as reliable as the London Underground Central Line!:ohno:)!
:cheers:

I loved Gmex stop in the Snow, at its deepest point was about 1.5ft of snow on the platform :)

With regards to the 'Piccadilly Link' proposal to Ashburys, to link to the Hadfield/Glossop and Marple/Rose Hill tram-train proposals, they are looking for implementation before 2018, here is the map:

http://i654.photobucket.com/albums/uu267/smartcma1/Map_124.png

Take note of the proposed stop on Chancellor Lane, as part of the Chancellor Place development, if that ever happens (either!). Given the route continues down Fairfield St, rather than the ex-railway alignment along Pin Mill Brow, the bridges/cuttings/viaducts of which were removed in the 1970s for the aborted Inner Ring Road, I reckon it will reach the Undercroft via the Square One servicing yard/former North Western Street.

With regards to the 'Piccadilly Link' proposal to Ashburys, to link to the Hadfield/Glossop and Marple/Rose Hill tram-train proposals, they are looking for implementation before 2018, here is the map:

http://i654.photobucket.com/albums/uu267/smartcma1/Map_124.png

Take note of the proposed stop on Chancellor Lane, as part of the Chancellor Place development, if that ever happens (either!). Given the route continues down Fairfield St, rather than the ex-railway alignment along Pin Mill Brow, the bridges/cuttings/viaducts of which were removed in the 1970s for the aborted Inner Ring Road, I reckon it will reach the Undercroft via the Square One servicing yard/former North Western Street.

Interesting, I seen on an earlier (I think) map that it would have gone down Alan Turing Way and join between the Sportcity stops; I personally think that would be better.

IIRC, that was the GMSRS map, which dates from 2001.

Passengers from the outer suburbs don't want a leisurely stroll round the inner suburbs, hence why calls to divert services to Victoria haven't progressed.

'Piccadilly Link' opens up the area for better access, which should attact investment. IMO, detouring via Sportcity makes no sense, unless as part of a future inner ring '53' route, connecting Central Park - Sportcity - ????

IIRC, that was the GMSRS map, which dates from 2001.

Passengers from the outer suburbs don't want a leisurely stroll round the inner suburbs, hence why calls to divert services to Victoria haven't progressed.

'Piccadilly Link' opens up the area for better access, which should attact investment. IMO, detouring via Sportcity makes no sense, unless as part of a future inner ring '53' route, connecting Central Park - Sportcity - ????

Having read the GMSRS in detail it states that the new routes on its map are merely indicative of the general role they play in the network, rather than detailed plans. So the Kingsway line is marked as going down Princess Street, Upper Brook Street and Anson Road as it is easier to draw. Similarly the sport city link is just to show that it links to the Ashton line east of Piccadilly, and isn't meant to imply that is the preferred alignment.

Where did the Piccadilly link map come from? I've never seen it anywhere before.

IIRC, that was the GMSRS map, which dates from 2001.

Passengers from the outer suburbs don't want a leisurely stroll round the inner suburbs, hence why calls to divert services to Victoria haven't progressed.

'Piccadilly Link' opens up the area for better access, which should attact investment. IMO, detouring via Sportcity makes no sense, unless as part of a future inner ring '53' route, connecting Central Park - Sportcity - ????

I suppose so, I just thought it may be a bit cheaper considering the distances involved.

and if anyone needs a bigger map of the network rail area, try:

http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/system/galleries/download/print_maps/liverpool.pdf

The map is from the 'East Manchester Strategic Regeneration Framework 2008-2018', from New East Manchester URC.

It is a shorter alignment via Sportcity, but the costs would be higher (on-street vs. railway).

The 23/10/08 planning application (086042/OO/2008/C2) for Chancellor Place also states:

GMPTE have identified a potential light rail transport link along Ashton Old Road. Whilst this has no formal or statutory approval the applicant has agreed that they would ensure that when plots are being designed a reservation will be included. This aspect will require further discussion at a later date.

May I ask; If the Glossop route was to be 'tram-trained', would the section after Guide Bridge be still a tram train service or just a full metrolink service, since it has no other train lines/jucntions after that point.

I have read points raised about this. There is constant talk of re-opening the woodhead route. If that happens then the trams couldn't use the same tracks as express trains as they would slow them down too much.

I have read points raised about this. There is constant talk of re-opening the woodhead route. If that happens then the trams couldn't use the same tracks as express trains as they would slow them down too much.

I may be totally wrong but isn't this the route that was originally 4 track and that there are plans to re-track it to separate fast and slow trains, especially if Woodhead is reopened?

I may be totally wrong but isn't this the route that was originally 4 track and that there are plans to re-track it to separate fast and slow trains, especially if Woodhead is reopened?

It is up to Guide Bridge at least. I'm not so sure about the line further on though. However,

Between Guide Bridge and Fairfield they built the M60 bridge (2000) with what seems to be space for another 2 tracks, I don't know what the plans are for these but I think it's just to leave the door open.

It is up to Guide Bridge at least. I'm not so sure about the line further on though. However,

Between Guide Bridge and Fairfield they built the M60 bridge (2000) with what seems to be space for another 2 tracks, I don't know what the plans are for these but I think it's just to leave the door open.

Yes, sorry I wasn't specific. That's what I thought.

I loved Gmex stop in the Snow, at its deepest point was about 1.5ft of snow on the platform :)

Yes, I did but it was a but nippy up there 'waiting for my nana'! :banana:- The freezing wind blows a gale across that plateau, and there are no sides to the shelters, no escape. However, I do like the new yellow lamps, and is it my imagination, or are the headlamps of the bananas yellow as well? (á la continent?)

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3730.jpg

The construction industry normally takes a break over the xmas period, but this year it ws very much extended by the snow cover. However, good news, this morning travelling on the 216 between Tameside and Manchester, I saw easily 100 men in orange jackets, digging and doing allsorts all the way along the line. Bring it on!

Theres this in the Greater Manchester Strategic Rail study 2001, pg 62.

It rapidly became apparent during the evaluation that the option of routing North Trans-Pennine services to Piccadilly via the Midland Curve would be no cheaper than upgrading the route via Guide Bridge and its feasibility is more questionable.

Accordingly this alternative was dropped. It was recognised that North Trans-Pennine routing and tram-train conversions on the Eastern Lines were independent of each other and the two issues could be considered separately. It was also recognised that it would not be essential to convert all three of the Eastern Lines services, although there would be synergy benefits from doing so. A more significant issue is the routing of South Trans-Pennine services. Several options are available:

• The existing route via Stockport, with no impact on this sector;
• Via Marple and Bredbury, precluding tram-train on the Marple Line;
• Via the Hyde Lop, preventing its conversion to tram-train; and
• Via a re-opened Woodhead Route, through Hadfield, removing the tram-train option from this line.

If one or both of the Trans-Pennine services operate via Guide Bridge it would have the potential to be developed as a major network interchange node. Ashton could play a similar role, with interchange between heavy and light rail, if North Trans-Pennine services were routed to Victoria.

I don't think it would be a good idea to route North Transpennine services to Victoria. Piccadilly offers far better connections than Victoria, but more importantly, it would surely mean North Transpennine services could no longer serve Manchester Airport (or at least not easily)?

I don't think it would be a good idea to route North Transpennine services to Victoria. Piccadilly offers far better connections than Victoria, but more importantly, it would surely mean North Transpennine services could no longer serve Manchester Airport (or at least not easily)?

If the Castlefield Curve is built - then it would be possible to route this service via Victoria, and then around the city centre to Piccadilly platform 13: and then on to the airport. This has the big advantage that the trains would not have to reverse across the throat of Piccadilly, as at present.

Sorry is this not the metrolink current expansion forum? or are we not diverting slightly here???
btw a nice set of pictures of the new tram at gmex.

Sorry is this not the metrolink current expansion forum? or are we not diverting slightly here???
btw a nice set of pictures of the new tram at gmex.

Get a grip...:bash:

Get a grip...:bash:

No, they are right. This thread is specifically for the construction of Metrolink extensions building projects. The Woodhead tunnels and re-routing of Transpennine Express services have naff all to do that.

There are other threads about Metrolink and other forms of transport in the Manchester section.

No, they are right. This thread is specifically for the construction of Metrolink extensions building projects. The Woodhead tunnels and re-routing of Transpennine Express services have naff all to do that.

There are other threads about Metrolink and other forms of transport in the Manchester section.


In a way, this topic is linked to Metrolink. Due to capacity problems with the MSJA viaduct, a new Castlefield Curve was ruled out. The alternative proposal involved diverting some Transpennine trains via the Ancoats Goods Loop and (a restored) Blind Lane Curve to access Piccadilly Station and then the Airport. A proposed interchange with the Metrolink Ashton line would be placed at the point of crossing near Eastlands Stadium Station.

Train Guard

In a way, this topic is linked to Metrolink. Due to capacity problems with the MSJA viaduct, a new Castlefield Curve was ruled out. The alternative proposal involved diverting some Transpennine trains via the Ancoats Goods Loop and (a restored) Blind Lane Curve to access Piccadilly Station and then the Airport. A proposed interchange with the Metrolink Ashton line would be placed at the point of crossing near Eastlands Stadium Station.

Train Guard

Proposed proposed proposed.... that is for the other Metrolink thread. This is about actual construction.

It's all relative.

It's not like they were talking about football.

No but while we have a construction thread and a general thread we should probably try to keep them that way. Obviously discussion does drift though.

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3794.jpg




I was initally (and pathetically) impressed with those spherical luminaires, thinking they represented a rare bit of subtlety and finesse in an otherwise disappointing re-brand.... unfortunately I now realise they've not changed.

I was initally (and pathetically) impressed with those spherical luminaires, thinking they represented a rare bit of subtlety and finesse in an otherwise disappointing re-brand.... unfortunately I now realise they've not changed.




Yes they are the same ones and they haven't even had the globes cleaned up. I wonder when they are actually going to finish the city centre section as there are still large parts of track without rubber round the edges, the stations are not finished off .Cornbrook and G-mex with all the cheapo signage and both the old and the new at Cornbrook and maps which are all waterlogged.

Whilst driving down the Princess Parkway today I noticed a ton of activity on the Chorlton to Didsbury stretch of the new Metrolink line (just next to Princess Parkway). Lots of men in high-vis jackets chopping down the trees/shrubs etc .. Looks like it's all systems go.

Might be good if anyone is passing to get a few shots.

Whilst driving down the Princess Parkway today I noticed a ton of activity on the Chorlton to Didsbury stretch of the new Metrolink line (just next to Princess Parkway). Lots of men in high-vis jackets chopping down the trees/shrubs etc .. Looks like it's all systems go.

Might be good if anyone is passing to get a few shots.

I don't think it's part of the current construction phase. However, they were to start clearance work to enable proper prepatory surveys to be undertaken on this stretch of the next phase.

Train Guard

Anyone know why the Mount Street stop of 2CC was chosen over routing the line from Cross Street - Princess Street - Mosley Street - St. Peter's square?

The latter would make St. Peter's square the major central interchange rather than having to move and rebuild Deansgate. The Mount Street stop will itself be pretty pointless, with it being only a Library Walk away from St. Peter's Square. Plus it halves frequency between the two.

I think it's capacity issues - it seems that even the most up to date traffic management could only get 30 tph down the street running sections (well Mosley street, but it's fair to assume it applies to all sections). With 3b there'll be something like 45tph, so 2CC needs to diverge immediately at the bottom of the ramp.

Correct, Mosely st cant take the increased number of trams, even if they are planning to reduce the number of buses along it in future. But it will also add services for St Anns square, the Royal Exchange and other parts in that area depending on where they place the stops. I think they want 2 or 3 but the only certain location is the Townhall, Royal Exchange I think they needed to look at where they could fit them in.

Correct, Mosely st cant take the increased number of trams, even if they are planning to reduce the number of buses along it in future. But it will also add services for St Anns square, the Royal Exchange and other parts in that area depending on where they place the stops. I think they want 2 or 3 but the only certain location is the Townhall, Royal Exchange I think they needed to look at where they could fit them in.

Having walked along the route, my prediction is for 2 stops, at Albert Square and Royal Exchange. Space is very tight, however, between the R Ex and the shopping centre near Market St. There is probably just about room without demolition, but I think it would have to be an island platform, perhaps similar to Oldham Central.

GMITA held a seminar in the Town Hall on Monday, 18.1.10, at which they said the funding was pretty definite ("as definite as it can be") for the 3b extensions, and in the MEN this week was an article about demolition of a youth club near Wythenshawe Park going ahead, to make way for Metrolink. Together with clearance work on E Didsbury, it seems like things are perhaps starting to happen?

Anyone know why the Mount Street stop of 2CC was chosen over routing the line from Cross Street - Princess Street - Mosley Street - St. Peter's square?

The latter would make St. Peter's square the major central interchange rather than having to move and rebuild Deansgate. The Mount Street stop will itself be pretty pointless, with it being only a Library Walk away from St. Peter's Square. Plus it halves frequency between the two.

I think it's capacity issues - it seems that even the most up to date traffic management could only get 30 tph down the street running sections (well Mosley street, but it's fair to assume it applies to all sections). With 3b there'll be something like 45tph, so 2CC needs to diverge immediately at the bottom of the ramp.


Aye. Plus a full on interchange like the one that appears to be planned for the area around the current G-MEX stop would never get the go-ahead in SPQ. I also don't think introducing street running to even a small section of a major one-way thoroughfare such as Princess street would be very wise - the implications for traficflow would be difficult to manage.

Aye. Plus a full on interchange like the one that appears to be planned for the area around the current G-MEX stop would never get the go-ahead in SPQ. I also don't think introducing street running to even a small section of a major one-way thoroughfare such as Princess street would be very wise - the implications for traficflow would be difficult to manage.

ah the GMEX stop, that's the interchange I meant. Not Deansgate.

Would these changes to cross-city car travel make Princess Street less of an issue? Princess street itself is going to see some major changes.

If buses are to be ditched from Mosley street altogether, the current road that runs between the Metro stop and the Library will be redundant. What if this road could be used to make the Platform on the library double sided, so you'd have 3 platforms?

The current plaforms are then used for trams leaving the city. One for 1 CC and the other for 2CC. The lines will then converge before GMEX.

The new platform is for incomming trams. As they are coming in from the viaducts they could do better at holding the higher capacity. Some will turn off down Princess Street, others with continue down Mosley street, though the latter would need to cross the track of the outbound 2CC line so would need signalling.

Like this:
http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=3426769

Is the road wide enough for 3 lines next to the Peace gardens? I'm not sure but the area's getting redeveloped and they're shit anyway.

So is 30/45 TPH each way or all together?

There may be a bit of congestion at times but my point is it may be better to put up with a little rush hour tram congestion (how bad can it really be?) for the benefits of retaining the full capacity through SPQ. Plus it's cheaper.

Hello forummers

have just kicked off a new thread on this issue on the main Manchester page
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1051297:banana:

Leave us clear on this one to talk 3a construction.

Hope you approve and see y'all there soon!:)

Don't know if this has been posted on this section of the forum before?

After a little bit of digging...

Lots of original plans, including the 2nd depot site

http://www.gmpte.com/upload/library/metnews4.pdf

....and the following years update

http://www.gmpte.com/upload/library/met_winter0203.pdf

Interesting to look at the earlier plans... and compare them where we are today!

http://i48.tinypic.com/2dtdx1x.jpg

http://i48.tinypic.com/iznty1.jpg

When is the media city line due to open? The overhead lines are in, station almost complete, paving being added between the lines in front of the pie factory. The BBC have the main building and staff are moving in from March/April so will the line open then?

When is the media city line due to open? The overhead lines are in, station almost complete, paving being added between the lines in front of the pie factory. The BBC have the main building and staff are moving in from March/April so will the line open then?


Should be sometime in Summer

Should be sometime in Summer

I wish it was sooner. Capacity on the trams between Salford Quays and Cornbrook at peak time is shocking.

I wish it was sooner. Capacity on the trams between Salford Quays and Cornbrook at peak time is shocking.

I'm sure other passengers will say the same about the other routes

I'm sure other passengers will say the same about the other routes

I say it about Sale to Trafford Bar too....

Another minor milestone to-day 25.1.10:-
For the first time in over 50 years on Ashton New Road, road vehicles are having to mix it with tramlines . . .

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3854.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3920.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3921.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3922.jpg

Johnny de Rivative, Another minor milestone to-day 25.1.10:-)
For the first time in over 50 years on Ashton New Road, road vehicles are having to mix it with tramlines .

god! I'll be driving a Banana along those tracks in 2 years lol :banana: :)

god! I'll be driving a Banana along those tracks in 2 years lol :banana: :)

on a rather different point Metman.

I get the impression from the outside, that the driver's cab on the M5000 is rather shorter front-to-back than on the old T68.

If so, that would imply that - although the M5000 is shorter overall by about 0.5m, that the passenger compartment might be closer to the same length as that in the old trams?

.. or am I mistakent?

on a rather different point Metman.

I get the impression from the outside, that the driver's cab on the M5000 is rather shorter front-to-back than on the old T68.

If so, that would imply that - although the M5000 is shorter overall by about 0.5m, that the passenger compartment might be closer to the same length as that in the old trams?

.. or am I mistakent?

you are correct Nerd!

Railway Herald has a great front cover this week:

http://www.railwayherald.org/magazine/pdf/RHUK/Issue209.pdf

Johnny de Rivative, Another minor milestone to-day 25.1.10:-)
For the first time in over 50 years on Ashton New Road, road vehicles are having to mix it with tramlines .

god! I'll be driving a Banana along those tracks in 2 years lol :banana: :)

I don't think anyone has mentioned it, but the first rail has been laid in Merrill Street on the up side concrete foundations.

Train Guard

I don't think anyone has mentioned it, but the first rail has been laid in Merrill Street on the up side concrete foundations.

Train Guard

I'm sure it did either just before or after christmas and I could be wrong I think someone up loaded a picture

More street running at the bottom of Every Street:
http://i319.photobucket.com/albums/mm469/carlf18/Metrolink/IMG_1502.jpg

This is where I remember it from. The posting and Picture credit is by High-Fi from December on a trip he made on the Droylsden route.
As you can see from High-Fi's pic there appears to be some track laid down then. From this picture it is looking directly up Merrill Street

More street running at the bottom of Every Street:
http://i319.photobucket.com/albums/mm469/carlf18/Metrolink/IMG_1502.jpg

This is where I remember it from. The posting and Picture credit is by High-Fi from December on a trip he made on the Droylsden route.
As you can see from High-Fi's pic there appears to be some track laid down then. From this picture it is looking directly up Merrill Street

I made some observations on the weekend before Christmas. The concrete raft and the rail foundations were complete, but no sign of the rail!

Train Guard

Johnny de Rivative, Another minor milestone to-day 25.1.10:-)
For the first time in over 50 years on Ashton New Road, road vehicles are having to mix it with tramlines .

god! I'll be driving a Banana along those tracks in 2 years lol :banana: :)

Any more jobs like that going, Metman?

And yes,Mode, one track is now there in Merrill Street and also one of the three-track layout on Sheffield Street car park, but they are still fenced off in private compounds at the moment. It looks as though Merrill Street might not be far off re-opening with the tracks in place, so that the buses can start going back that way again and along Pollard Street. Then we might be able to look over from the top deck to see what's going on at New Islington station! :nuts:

Any more jobs like that going, Metman?

And yes,Mode, one track is now there in Merrill Street and also one of the three-track layout on Sheffield Street car park, but they are still fenced off in private compounds at the moment. It looks as though Merrill Street might not be far off re-opening with the tracks in place, so that the buses can start going back that way again and along Pollard Street. Then we might be able to look over from the top deck to see what's going on at New Islington station! :nuts:

I walked the routes today and down,well around Merrill Street.
There only seems to be the Piccadilly direction track in place on the concrete bed. They appear to be working like they did in town. By laying one direction first.
Is that road going to reopen to buses then?
Had a look at Holt town stop and the retaining wall is nearly finished. Just appears to be one section of wall to finish there.
I took some pictures including down round Sheffield Street but I never can manage to load them up on here without major dramas.:nuts:

Any more jobs like that going, Metman?

And yes,Mode, one track is now there in Merrill Street and also one of the three-track layout on Sheffield Street car park, but they are still fenced off in private compounds at the moment. It looks as though Merrill Street might not be far off re-opening with the tracks in place, so that the buses can start going back that way again and along Pollard Street. Then we might be able to look over from the top deck to see what's going on at New Islington station! :nuts:

there is a long waiting list, you can phone metrolink and ask for an application form to be sent to you. the number is 01612058665 they will start recruiting soon though. :banana2:

Just been looking at the 2CC options and have thought of another possible route that would give more of the city-centre/Salford border area access to Metrolink and reduce the problems associated with a network failure between gmex and piccadilly/victoria.
This is the suggested route (sorry I can't map this one)

Victoria to Exchange Square (stop 1) - viable if the wheel goes and would support footfall at the struggling Triangle.

Exchange Sq to St Mary's Parsonage via Parsonage Gardens. This would be incorporated into the West Properties redevelopment of the Ramada complex, reducing disruption. Stop 2: Bridge Street/King Street West

West onto Bridge Street and then South onto Gartside Street via Civil Justice Centre. South-west onto Young Street towards Quay Street. Possible Stop 3

Continue onto Atherton Street and East towards Lower Byrom Street. Southward past MOSI with possible stop 4 just before Liverpool Road.

Southward along Duke Street with ramp up to join existing line at Cornbrook.

The city centre is settling down now after the snow and looking good. I think there is a slight design fault in the platform lighting, however - the unshaded flourescent lights are so close to the station name boards, that they make them very difficult if not impossible to read:-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3869.jpg

The digital camera can penetrate these, but my naked eyes can't! :nuts: Luckily, I know where the stations are.

Anyway, end of mini-gripe. On the subject of lights, I ABSOLUTELY LOVE the ones at the foot of the ramps:-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3864.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3862.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3866.jpg

Something else I am a big fan of is the 'water feature' at Piccadilly Place outside GMPTE. It's even better this week now it's got water in! I think its meant to give the impression that the water runs underneath the tram tracks, but whether it actually does or not I couldn't say . . .

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3871.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3873.jpg

Everything gets better and better, and will continue to do so for the next few years . . . can't wait :cheers:

Cheers for those pics :)

The lighting at the end of the ramp is really good. Same for the water feature at PP... shame about the overall public space though.

Just been looking at the 2CC options and have thought of another possible route that would give more of the city-centre/Salford border area access to Metrolink and reduce the problems associated with a network failure between gmex and piccadilly/victoria.
This is the suggested route (sorry I can't map this one)

Victoria to Exchange Square (stop 1) - viable if the wheel goes and would support footfall at the struggling Triangle.

Exchange Sq to St Mary's Parsonage via Parsonage Gardens. This would be incorporated into the West Properties redevelopment of the Ramada complex, reducing disruption. Stop 2: Bridge Street/King Street West

West onto Bridge Street and then South onto Gartside Street via Civil Justice Centre. South-west onto Young Street towards Quay Street. Possible Stop 3

Continue onto Atherton Street and East towards Lower Byrom Street. Southward past MOSI with possible stop 4 just before Liverpool Road.

Southward along Duke Street with ramp up to join existing line at Cornbrook.

Can I suggest you repost this in the Metrolink Phase 3b, further extensions etc. thread in the main section, as it might get more attention there?

shame about the overall public space

I think it's a bit early to judge that just yet personally. The space is quite permeable for the pedestrian, though only really leads to each side of the old London Road Fire Station and the associated issues surrounding its lack of use. If this area and London Road become more active then this should really help foot-traffic.

Equally when the offices and apartments are fully occupied and most importantly when the retail units are let. Generally speaking though it's nice to have a bit of open space in what is increasingly a very built up part of the city.

Just been looking at the 2CC options and have thought of another possible route that would give more of the city-centre/Salford border area access to Metrolink and reduce the problems associated with a network failure between gmex and piccadilly/victoria.
This is the suggested route (sorry I can't map this one)

Victoria to Exchange Square (stop 1) - viable if the wheel goes and would support footfall at the struggling Triangle.

Exchange Sq to St Mary's Parsonage via Parsonage Gardens. This would be incorporated into the West Properties redevelopment of the Ramada complex, reducing disruption. Stop 2: Bridge Street/King Street West

West onto Bridge Street and then South onto Gartside Street via Civil Justice Centre. South-west onto Young Street towards Quay Street. Possible Stop 3

Continue onto Atherton Street and East towards Lower Byrom Street. Southward past MOSI with possible stop 4 just before Liverpool Road.

Southward along Duke Street with ramp up to join existing line at Cornbrook.

Hey I've posted Vision 2020s post above: into the other thread on future projects as it does not concern stuff currently under construction
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1051297
:-)

Regarding Johnnys architectural feature photos of the stations above: they are very impressive indeed, from my knowledge of all the other LightRail systems in the UK these are the most robust and smartest tram stops in Britain.

More kudos to GMPTE.

(yeah it does look like the neons are fighting with the station names in that photo but lets hope they design in a solution to this as they progress up the new lines).

:-)

Just been looking at the 2CC options and have thought of another possible route that would give more of the city-centre/Salford border area access to Metrolink and reduce the problems associated with a network failure between gmex and piccadilly/victoria.
This is the suggested route (sorry I can't map this one)

Victoria to Exchange Square (stop 1) - viable if the wheel goes and would support footfall at the struggling Triangle.

Exchange Sq to St Mary's Parsonage via Parsonage Gardens. This would be incorporated into the West Properties redevelopment of the Ramada complex, reducing disruption. Stop 2: Bridge Street/King Street West

West onto Bridge Street and then South onto Gartside Street via Civil Justice Centre. South-west onto Young Street towards Quay Street. Possible Stop 3

Continue onto Atherton Street and East towards Lower Byrom Street. Southward past MOSI with possible stop 4 just before Liverpool Road.

Southward along Duke Street with ramp up to join existing line at Cornbrook.


Is this how you mean:
http://web2.twitpic.com/img/60984999-d917635a9cc35719197f6f521024c8f6.4b62e37c-full.jpg

Had to do a bit of interpretation about getting from Exchange Square to St Mary's Parsonage - how about up the pedestrian ramp past beside the wheel, along New Cathedral Street (cos I hate that space), then right, down St Mary's Gate and quickly across Deansgate - minimum disruption to the traffic there.

(yeah it does look like the neons are fighting with the station names in that photo but lets hope they design in a solution to this as they progress up the new lines).

They are actually LED type lights rather than neon, which is probably why they're so bright. I'd noticed when the first few stops started to get these shlters (Old Trafford) that at night it is very difficult to read the station named due to the brightness.

The ones on the new shelter at Timperley aren't working and was wondering if the residents of the houses opposite had compained and they'd been switched off as there's not much between them to block it out.

Hey I've posted Vision 2020s post above: into the other thread on future projects as it does not concern stuff currently under construction
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1051297
:-)
Thanks for this MarkO :-)

Regarding Johnnys architectural feature photos of the stations above: they are very impressive indeed, from my knowledge of all the other LightRail systems in the UK these are the most robust and smartest tram stops in Britain.

More kudos to GMPTE.

(yeah it does look like the neons are fighting with the station names in that photo but lets hope they design in a solution to this as they progress up the new lines).

:-)

Yes, I agree and have also wondered why the staion names are in such a small script?

A second track is now joining the first of three, on Sheffield St car park at the back of Piccadilly station towards Droylsden, looking East:-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3914.jpg

I like the water landscape feature but it appears the trams don´t want to get their wheels wet.
In comparison, a photo from Oslo

http://i46.tinypic.com/11j43s4.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3871.jpg

Water does apparently run under the tracks. It runs down the wall from outside GMPTE, into the pool below the steps, and then under the track into the Piccadilly Pond.

CHORLTON TO EAST DIDSBURY & STOCKPORT January - June 2010 (76 images)

When they announced the accelerated part of Phase 3b (Ashton and E Didsbury) in May 2009, they said work could start as early as September, using the same contractors etc who are currently building Phase 3a. The route as far as East Didsbury (as well as Ashton-under-Lyne, covered elsewhere) was finally confirmed as 'go-ahead' by the new Coalition government on 17.6.10. The further extension to Stockport, however, remains firmly aspirational, if not a pipe-dream, but is included as these things sometimes come true against the odds (such as the existence of Metrolink at all, courtesy of Michael Portillo, who signed the original Warrant as minister for Transport on 24.10.1988!).

Subsequent to this 2003 diagram, Withington stop has been moved to the North-West side of Princess Road (even further away from Withington!) :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/IMG_0004-6.jpg

After parting company with the future Airport line at Hough End, Chorlton, the Didsbury route continues towards Withington, here looking South East along the old Midland Railway line from Mauldeth Road West :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4676.jpg

This will be the site of Withington tram stop, looking back towards Chorlton:-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3938.jpg

Six months on, you can now see some activity back towards Mauldeth Road West :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5851.jpg

Above the tram stop will be Princess Road, not exactly the centre of Withington, but there is some housing :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5849-1.jpg

The line runs under the road between the semis and St Bernadette's Church :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5853.jpg

This is taken from that point, as the line continues South East towards Burton Road and Didsbury. The tram stop was originally going to be in this location and entitled 'Princess Road' :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3935.jpg

The new tram stops will be more numerous, and all except Chorlton in different places than the old railway stations :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/IMG-8.jpg

Burton Road tram stop was originally going to be called 'Withington Hospital'. It will have to fit in to a fairly constricted space, this shot looking back North West :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5844.jpg

There has been some controversy about narrowing a footpath to improve access to the stop :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5846.jpg

Which is very close to residential properties :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5847.jpg

The route continuing from Burton Road towards West Didsbury is still very overgrown, but the old platforms of Didsbury West station are becoming visible again :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5843.jpg

From the other direction, looking North from the bridge at the junction of Lapwing Lane and Palatine Road :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_9470.jpg

Didsbury West BR station was opposite the old Town Hall, but the location is now inaccessible due to development :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5840.jpg

On the South side of the road junction underpass, dozens of trees have posters saying "Save our Trees". Hard to disagree with this, but Metrolink have promised to plant five times more than they remove:-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3928.jpg

West Didsbury tram stop will be a few hundred metres further South than the old BR station, beside the Lawn Tennis club :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_9467.jpg

15 months on (April 2011) it looks very different :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/101_1372.jpg

First there is a subway then there is no subway then there is (May 11 c/- martin2345):-

http://i853.photobucket.com/albums/ab93/martin2345uk/Didsbury%20line%2008052011/IMG_1170.jpg

Looking back from further down Lapwing Lane towards Wilmslow Road :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/101_1381.jpg

More clearance has been done at Didsbury Village, but the earth fill remains at the other end of the the long sealed tunnel under Wilmslow Road :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_9460.jpg

This is the earth fill from the opposite end :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_9451.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_9445.jpg

Wilmslow Road runs through the very busy village centre, the Northern abutment of the long underpass visible in the background, left of the clock tower :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3888.jpg

From the same point, turning around 180 degrees, this is what you would have seen in 1976 :-

http://i1183.photobucket.com/albums/x461/nferguso_wyvern/Manchester%20Railways%20in%20the%201970s/2007-04-17-2205-38_edited.jpg
picture c/- Fallowfield Fergy

Nowadays it looks like this. The wide kerb, bottom right, is in the same location as the former bridge abutment, and I think the old platforms remain entombed and silent underneath this jolly scene. In the background are the piledrivers working between the car park and School Lane :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/101_1394-1.jpg

School Lane bridge: the location of Didsbury Village tram stop can be seen through the underbridge :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3889.jpg

This shot looks West along School Lane from the bridge. The blue bus is travelling South on Wilmslow road, and the gentleman is crossing Olive Shapley Avenue, towards where the new tram stop will be, to the South of School Lane bridge :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3882.jpg

Looking South from the bridge, this is the site of the tram stop with Olive Shapley Avenue on the right :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3879.jpg

And viewed from the West Pennine Trail on the other side, the tram stop will be very handy for these apartments :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_9450.jpg

The West Pennine Trail long distance footpath has had to be diverted :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3887.jpg

Looking across the tram stop towards Olive Shapley Avenue :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3886.jpg

Approaching East Didsbury, the route passes under the Railway line. It's a pity there can't be a proper interchange between the two East Didsbury stations here. They will be fully 500 metres walk from each other, involving very long ramps and crossing two major arterial roads :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3898.jpg

This shot shows the distance between the two stations. Looking from the platform of East Didsbury Railway Station, Metrolink will be in the distant bushes, beyond the bus stop centre left :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3909.jpg

Looking back from East Didsbury Metrolink terminus :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_9606.jpg

The location of the terminus itself, with Burnage Lane beyond the far fencing - the end of the line forever . . . ?

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3903.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_9610.jpg




Or is it . . .


http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/IMG_NEW.jpg

Photo tour of the once-proposed extension to Stockport continues on page 118 #2360

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=866944&page=118#2360

Thanks for the photos. Nice to see some work finally progressing on 3B. Was disappointed when I went down at Christmas and nothing seemed to have been done.

Although I did get to see the platforms at the old Didsbury west station - look like they are still there from your photos, but I should imagine not for much longer:

http://i594.photobucket.com/albums/tt26/The_Gerbil_of_SSC/img_0675.jpg

Great photos!

Here is a link to some interesting ones. Last night long lengths of continuous welded rails were placed between Radcliffe and Whitefield (which should mean the end of speed reductions for 3000 series trams) for upcoming track replacement.

Engines were supplied by the East lancs railway and wagons from DB railways

http://if.fotopic.net/c1810135.html

Enjoy!

Great photos!

Here is a link to some interesting ones. Last night long lengths of continuous welded rails were placed between Radcliffe and Whitefield (which should mean the end of speed reductions for 3000 series trams) for upcoming track replacement.

Engines were supplied by the East lancs railway and wagons from DB railways

http://if.fotopic.net/c1810135.html

Enjoy!

Excellent photos & good work Local Lad.
Have you got any idea why this track replacement work was not done during the Bury / Altrincham line closures during 2007?

Zapaman, I think it was purely a matter of time. The full line closures were huge projects. I think that was why the lines in Victoria were also left. I cant remember how long the line was closed, a month I think. Not long!!

Great photos!

Here is a link to some interesting ones. Last night long lengths of continuous welded rails were placed between Radcliffe and Whitefield (which should mean the end of speed reductions for 3000 series trams) for upcoming track replacement.

Engines were supplied by the East lancs railway and wagons from DB railways

http://if.fotopic.net/c1810135.html

Enjoy!

Engineering work is taking place between 22.00 on Friday 5th February until the close of service on Sunday 7th February 2010 between Bury and Whitefield stations.

A replacement bus service will operate between Bury, Radcliffe and Whitefield for the duration of the engineering work.

----

Ahhh that'll be it!

Just seen 3009 go past my window.... 9?? yup 9

Why are the tram numbers in a different typeface on the later m3000s?

[QUOTE=nistromo;51121393]Just seen 3009 go past my window.... 9?? yup 9

Yes, it was out doing its 1000 :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: I guess this means we now have all the eight for the Bury-Alti augmentation, and now starting to take delivery of the four for MediaCity . . .

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3942.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3947.jpg

Sorry I re-touched this a bit as the yellow disappeared in the bright sun :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3983.jpg

More brilliant photos Johnny, I just wanted to say thank you and that all your hard work is really appreciated.

Great photos!

Here is a link to some interesting ones. Last night long lengths of continuous welded rails were placed between Radcliffe and Whitefield (which should mean the end of speed reductions for 3000 series trams) for upcoming track replacement.

Engines were supplied by the East lancs railway and wagons from DB railways

http://if.fotopic.net/c1810135.html

Enjoy!

Presevered locos going to good use! Would be nice to see them working on the oldham loop line!

I agree Wydna. They will need to run the trains TGV construction style (two engines on each end) to deal with the extreme gradients that will soon be found on the Oldham line though, what with the embankments being removed on several sections, so the stations can be at ground level.

Awesome photos Johnny. I see you went up on the grassy viewing platform behind the depot :D. Cracking view up there eh?

http://if.fotopic.net/c1810135.html

Enjoy!

Excellent photos. Very interesting. Thanks for posting them.

I guess this means we now have all the eight for the Bury-Alti augmentation, and now starting to take delivery of the four for MediaCity . . .
[/IMG]


Thanks for the pics Johnny.

They won't be able to use the doubles on the Bury line until they have built the 2 new sub stations and sorted the track out though will they?

I hope they use them on Altrincham to Piccadilly at peak times in the mean time.

It's very frustrating seeing all these new trams but not seeing an improvement in peak time overcrowding issues.

Excellent photos. Very interesting. Thanks for posting them.




Thanks for the pics Johnny.

They won't be able to use the doubles on the Bury line until they have built the 2 new sub stations and sorted the track out though will they?

I hope they use them on Altrincham to Piccadilly at peak times in the mean time.

It's very frustrating seeing all these new trams but not seeing an improvement in peak time overcrowding issues.

It sounds like it could be some time then before the extra doubles start running. I can't see them running on the Altrincham Line as all Altrincham sets end up on the Bury Line after Manchester so a complete timetable recast would be needed.

Just a quick photo from today...

The depot has gained a second building since I last went, also has a nice fan of sidings too!

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a260/Geeves8612/DSC00798.jpg

I think perhaps this might be the new control room? It doesnt appear to have any doors or rails leading inside it anyway. The flying junction at Trafford bar is also coming along well. The tunnel is now dug out. Out today I noticed 3001, 3002, 3003, 3004 and 3007.

I think perhaps this might the new control room?

That remains at QRD for the time being where work has actualy started in preparation.

Thankyou cap'njack. Do you what has been done so far?

So let me get this right! We've bought 8 new trams to create double trams on the direct Alty/Bury route, but we are unable to use them due to the lack of the 2 new sub stations.

That sounds like some 3rd world planning!

So let me get this right! We've bought 8 new trams to create double trams on the direct Alty/Bury route, but we are unable to use them due to the lack of the 2 new sub stations.

That sounds like some 3rd world planning!

That's how I understand the situation at present.

If anyone else 'in the know' could shed further light on the matter it would be appreciated.

Theyve known that the substations were needed since last May, I think they call it the 'Metrolink Power Supply Project' Ive never seen a date attached to it though, the lead times on electrical equipment procurement for the rail industry is quite long.

2009 arriving without spots again, mmm, are units being delivered from both the German and Austrian production plants (accounting for minor differences)?

interesting to see some of that track clearance work. they had already done as far as st werburgh's road as earlier as last spring. i walked the track bed with a friend and you could get as far as the parkway (through heavy vegetation) before there was a big fence.

its where it dips into a cutting further on that it has flooded really badly. i went down to the old west didsbury platforms in 2002 and the track bed was bone dry then. its like a bog now.

Water does apparently run under the tracks. It runs down the wall from outside GMPTE, into the pool below the steps, and then under the track into the Piccadilly Pond.[/QUOTE]

Ah yes Seasonedbest, I see that now from the other side, quite pretty. The water is actually flowing down the whole length and breadth of the black wall, behind the blue buttons :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3998.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3999.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4000.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4001.jpg

Banana 10 (3010) is due to arrive this Saturday! 3007 was out on test today clocking up it's 1000 miles!

Theyve known that the substations were needed since last May, I think they call it the 'Metrolink Power Supply Project' Ive never seen a date attached to it though, the lead times on electrical equipment procurement for the rail industry is quite long.

2009 arriving without spots again, mmm, are units being delivered from both the German and Austrian production plants (accounting for minor differences)?

I could be wrong, but I didn't think any of them had arrived with spots since the first 3001, and that that was just a special case..... :dunno:

Banana 10 (3010) is due to arrive this Saturday! 3007 was out on test today clocking up it's 1000 miles!

I realised t'other day that almost a quarter of the total fleet is now made up of 3000 series trams.

One thing it did make me think of, is how many extra vehicles can Queens road accommodate? Is it possible that it will reach capacity before the Old Trafford depot is complete, perhaps meaning that new tram deliveries may need to pause for a while?

I know we are going waaaaay off topic here but to put that water feature at Piccadilly Place story to bed it is two seperate features. No water is flowing under the track they are being fed by seperate units. The water feature was running that is the pool at ground level that is along side the glass engraved panels but across the other side at night the water that runs over the cobble type pool was turned off.

So let me get this right! We've bought 8 new trams to create double trams on the direct Alty/Bury route, but we are unable to use them due to the lack of the 2 new sub stations.

That sounds like some 3rd world planning!

While ordered to increase capacity, the new trams were always going to allow a 'catch-up' first. The existing fleet has been worked so hard over recent years. The new vehicles coming in to service will allow modifications and a better maintenance regime to be applied to the existing fleet.

Once the power supply upgrade is complete then we'll see more doubles on the Bury - Alti direct services, but by my reckoning doubling all direct services will only need 6-7 of the 8 ordered so availability/deliverability should increase no-end. Same goes for Mediacity, on a 12-min service that will surely only need 3 max. Will be nice to have a fleet size that is suitable for a change!

While ordered to increase capacity, the new trams were always going to allow a 'catch-up' first. The existing fleet has been worked so hard over recent years. The new vehicles coming in to service will allow modifications and a better maintenance regime to be applied to the existing fleet.

Once the power supply upgrade is complete then we'll see more doubles on the Bury - Alti direct services, but by my reckoning doubling all direct services will only need 6-7 of the 8 ordered so availability/deliverability should increase no-end. Same goes for Mediacity, on a 12-min service that will surely only need 3 max. Will be nice to have a fleet size that is suitable for a change!

Do you think that 28 trams for Chorlton, Droylsden and Oldham/Rochdale is enough?

I have my doubts.

Do you think that 28 trams for Chorlton, Droylsden and Oldham/Rochdale is enough?

I have my doubts.

by my calculation:

Rochdale to Chorlton (every 12 mins, 31.4 km) will require 11 trams
Shaw to Chorlton (every 12 mins, 24.4 km) will need 8 trams
Piccadilly to Droylesden (every 6 mins, 6.3 km) will need 6 trams

which makes 25, plus three extras for relief/repair.

just about enough

by my calculation:

Rochdale to Chorlton (every 12 mins, 31.4 km) will require 11 trams
Shaw to Chorlton (every 12 mins, 24.4 km) will need 8 trams
Piccadilly to Droylesden (every 6 mins, 6.3 km) will need 6 trams

which makes 25, plus three extras for relief/repair.

just about enough

Surely they will need to run some doubles from Rochdale at peak time?

Surely they will need to run some doubles from Rochdale at peak time?


maybe so; but not, I suspect in phase 3a.


The extra capacioty for doubles in phase 3a will consist of the 2 extra T68 trams notionally available, plus the 8 3000 series trams just delivered; making 10 peak-hour services in all, e.e. just 5 Alty-Bury, plus 5 Bury-Alty direct services.

that said, I reckon that the Mediacity - Cornbrook service will only need 2 trams (not all 4) initially for a 12 minute frequency over 3.2km ; while Eccles - Piccadilly ought eventually to be servable with 5 trams rather than the current 6 over 9.8km. Which might free up an extra 3 units in phase 3a for doubling - so long as none are out of service long-term.

Thankyou cap'njack. Do you what has been done so far?

mainly underfloor work at the moment such as cable runs LL

Cornbrook service will only need 2 trams (not all 4) initially for a 12 minute frequency over 3.2km

Is this frequency due to increase? I assumed that as they were allocating 4 trams it'd be a 6 minute frequency. 12 minutes as a peak time service isn't that great.

There'll be the 12 minute Eccles service too, so Cornbrook would have a peak time tram between Cornbrook and the Quays every 6 minutes, assuming smooth running. Is this correct?

As Cornbrook serves an interchange point from and the city centre (i.e. anyone heading to the quays should get the first tram heading West and change at cornbrook if required) it needs to be higher frequency to save significant waits at the changeover.

Is this frequency due to increase? I assumed that as they were allocating 4 trams it'd be a 6 minute frequency. 12 minutes as a peak time service isn't that great.

There'll be the 12 minute Eccles service too, so Cornbrook would have a peak time tram between Cornbrook and the Quays every 6 minutes, assuming smooth running. Is this correct?

As Cornbrook serves an interchange point from and the city centre (i.e. anyone heading to the quays should get the first tram heading West and change at cornbrook if required) it needs to be higher frequency to save significant waits at the changeover.

They will need all 4 trams once they are able to extend the service on to Piccadilly. So I cannot see any possiblility of the interim service being more frequent. Added to which, it is going to be tricky enough at Cornbrook merging the trams from Salford into those from the rest of South Manchester, without having higher frequency services to be bothered about.

They will need all 4 trams once they are able to extend the service on to Piccadilly. So I cannot see any possiblility of the interim service being more frequent. Added to which, it is going to be tricky enough at Cornbrook merging the trams from Salford into those from the rest of South Manchester, without having higher frequency services to be bothered about.

Ah right, I had no idea the long term plans were to run them from Piccadilly. That's good news. I was just thinking the other day if Media City trams would be extended from Cornbrook to the new GMEX/Deansgate interchange after 2CC.

So at what point are the media city trams due to start from Piccadilly?

I always thought the Cornbrook-Media City route was a cunning way to add higher capacity to the quays with fewer trams; with a primary reason for the Media city stop's existence (rather than moving Harbour City further along the line) being to utilise it as a turnaround point.

So at what point are the media city trams due to start from Piccadilly?



When the 2CC is completed.

Ah right, I had no idea the long term plans were to run them from Piccadilly. That's good news. I was just thinking the other day if Media City trams would be extended from Cornbrook to the new GMEX/Deansgate interchange after 2CC.

So at what point are the media city trams due to start from Piccadilly?

I always thought the Cornbrook-Media City route was a cunning way to add higher capacity to the quays with fewer trams; with a primary reason for the Media city stop's existence (rather than moving Harbour City further along the line) being to utilise it as a turnaround point.


And thats what it will be, either by direct service from Cornbrook, or the Eccles service but having to get off at Harbour City,also gives the opportunity now to catch an Altricham service and change at Cornbrook as trams in the direction of MC and Eccles will have between them a frequency of six mins.:banana::banana::banana:

Drove past the wasteland directly opposite Tesco's on Kingsway today. Noticed loads of chopped ups tress stacked on top of each other. Looks like work has started to turn the site in to one of the park and ride area's. Could be wrong though. I'll have a closer look either tomorrow or Friday.

Drove past the wasteland directly opposite Tesco's on Kingsway today. Noticed loads of chopped ups tress stacked on top of each other. Looks like work has started to turn the site in to one of the park and ride area's. Could be wrong though. I'll have a closer look either tomorrow or Friday.

The trees could be from the trans pennine line between that and Didsbury village. They started work about 3 weeks ago to clear it - and have temporarily shut the trans-pennine trail through Didsbury.

Not the most exciting photo but progress nonetheless! The sport city station site is appearing more clearly, as is the track bed. The massive mound of earth in the background still needs to be moved. Work has also started at the side of ASDA.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a260/Geeves8612/DSC00806.jpg

Hard to tell from the photo, how far below ground level is the platform and track bed? Looks to be about cable height.

Yeah I took the photo from the bridge and im guessing that the gravel area is the final level. I would say about 5 or 6 meters down.

Photo tour of the future East Didsbury Line
Part Two - Stockport

part 1 begins page 116 #2319
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=866944&page=116#2319

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/IMG_NEW.jpg

(Manchester Evening News 21.7.2000, above)

To me it will be a crying shame if it doesn't go through to Stockport. The day before the above article, MEN's front page 20.7.00 had said:-

"Plans to add Stockport to the Metrolink map of Manchester have already won a big thumbs-up from people in the town.
"When a public consultation was staged earlier this year, the move was backed by more people than any other extension to the service.
"Eight out of ten people asked said they would use the line, and 83 per cent of people were in favour of it being built. One third of passengers would switch to the supertram from using a car for the journey.
"Stockport Council Leader Coun Fred Ridley said, getting Metrolink would be 'great news' for the town".

Ten years later, cllr.craig.wright@stockport.gov.uk (Liberal Democrat councillor for Marple North) is still pushing for the extensions to Stockport, followed by the much needed link to Marple via Brinnington, as well as the tram-train proposals via Ashburys to Piccadilly undercroft. (The South East Manchester Multi Modal Study also identified a link between Stockport and the Airport, via Gorsey Bank and Northenden.)

So all strength to his elbow! :cheers:

The extension of Metrolink beyond East Didsbury to Stockport is currently unfunded, and there is some suggestion that it might be supplanted by tram-trains on the more direct route to Piccadilly. For my part, I would say there is a lot to be gained from the provision of the additional alternative via the Western parts of South Manchester, which would also link a number of otherwise disjointed areas on both sides of the Mersey. The situation at Stockport is perhaps analogous to the one at the Airport, both centres having fast and frequent rail services for mass express transit, but also serious deficiencies in local rail links with their immediate hinterlands, especially to the East and West.

However, in terms of terrain, the final third of the Stockport Metrolink line as planned, would be much more difficult and expensive to build than the previous section to East Didsbury, requiring no less than 3 bridges over the Mersey, one of them having to fly over the river and the M60 motorway at the same time, and a new 'cut and cover' tunnel of about 700 metres at Heaton Mersey.

Construction of the first 8 km will have been relatively easy, all of it being in the extant railway cutting from Trafford Bar. Here is the site of the current terminus of Phase 3b, East Didsbury tram stop, looking back West from near the junction of Parrs Wood Lane and Burnage Lane. Kingsway overbridge is in the centre, with the white railway overbridge further back :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4206-1.jpg

Turning around the other way towards the East, the new pedestrian access to Burnage Lane goes up to the left, while the tram route if ever built, will continue straight ahead past the signposts and the walkers :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4210-1.jpg

Here the first obstacle is encountered, and the old Midland Railway cutting was filled in beyond this point in the 1980's :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4212.jpg

A linear parkland walk was then placed on top of the infill up ahead :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4214.jpg

The parkland has nowadays become well-established :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4217.jpg

Meanwhile, the route has crossed the Stockport boundary :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4227.jpg

The plan as devised about 10 years ago, is to build the line in a shallow, sub-surface tunnel, and then replace the parkland on top :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4223.jpg

However, now some twenty years on from its previous life as a railway, one imagines it would take a while for the planting to regain its current level of maturity :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4221-1.jpg

The linear park ends at Station Road, which was previously an overbridge to the Railway, the site of the station itself now having been built over on the right :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4225.jpg

Metrolink's tunnel, however, will continue under Station Road near its junction with Green Pastures, emerging, now that Spring has sprung, on to the green pastures of Heaton Mersey Park Sports Ground, :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5434.jpg

Looking back West from Heaton Mersey Park Sports Ground, the main Didsbury Road can just be seen behind the trees on the right, and the maisonettes are on Station Road, descending from right to left. Metrolink is planned to emerge on the left in this shot, from its new tunnel in the underbank below Station Road, and continue towards the camera in the shady area :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5438.jpg

Now looking East again from the maisonettes, the alignment proceeds away from the camera on the right. There would need to be a slight embankment here to keep it level with Station Road, which has now turned to run parallel out of shot on the right. The route will then swing right to cross Station Road at grade, through the trees just beyond the walker, right of centre :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5436.jpg

This is the site of the level crossing, near the junction with Craig Road and Vale Road. The butt end of the old railway viaduct, centre, is to be lowered to accommodate the first tram stop on the Stockport extension, Craig Road, which is adjacent to a lot of modern residential property :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5440.jpg

The alignment will then rise to continue along the narrow viaduct itself, currently a walkway with drops on both sides :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5449.jpg

In Summer, the foliage conceals the increasing height of the narrow path, except for occasional glimpses below :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5445.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5447.jpg

Then it starts to open out more as it approaches the Mersey Valley :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5451.jpg

The viaduct now bifurcates and comes to a sudden end, as in this photo I took a few years ago. The white houses in the distance are at Cheadle Heath (probably on Swythamley Road), an area currently lacking a Northward transport link avoiding Stockport, which Metrolink would intend to serve via its stop at Gorsey Bank :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/IMG-7.jpg

There is a wide view of the plains at this point, and the viaducts must have been substantial structures, reaching out towards the distant abutment. How one grieves for all the Victorian effort which has been wasted! :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5453.jpg

http://i935.photobucket.com/albums/ad200/Vernon151/HeatonMerseyHLBridge3.jpg
picture c/-ex-manc

Nowadays, Stockport Council have put safety railings on the precipitous Northern abutment :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5459.jpg

Metrolink, however, is planned to take a slightly more Easterly route towards the M60 motorway :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5460.jpg

At the first of its three new bridges over the Mersey on this section, the line will have to climb high above the river and the motorway, both at the same time :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5464.jpg

Crossing from right to left in this shot :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5473.jpg

It will land on the Southern side at Gorsey Bank, here looking East :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5564.jpg

Gorsey Bank used to be an isolated council estate, which had some of the characteristics of an enclosed colony, until it was demolished probably more than 10 years ago. Nowadays, there is nothing in the immediate vicinity of where the tram stop would be, except a small estate of modern residential property, on the other side of the tracks (both metaphorically and literally the single track of the Hazel Grove goods line) at Swythamley Road :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5986.jpg

As discussed in above posts and shown on the old maps, Heaton Mersey Bowl used to contain a fairly complicated series of railway intersections and viaducts. All that now remains is the single goods line from Hazel Grove towards Northenden, away from the camera. There has been a suggestion that this track could form part of a Metrolink line from Stockport to the Airport, joining it here as far as Northenden, then turning out Southwards down Brownley Road, to pick up the Wythenshawe Eastern loop :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5567.jpg

However, being within reach of Cheadle Heath, and Edgeley at a pinch, the area is also ripe for brownfield re-investment, and a tram stop would be a terrific catalyst for this. On Gorsey Bank itself, nature has reclaimed the area big style, and you would never know it was once a densely-populated council estate (would you?) :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5979.jpg

I remember a time after the houses had gone, but the road layout was still there (as it still is just about), and all that remained were the lamp posts, standing in formation and facing different directions like sentinels. Now, even they have been purloined for scrap metal, leaving just the bases. But there are still places where you might think you are entering Narnia . . . :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5981.jpg

Extraordinarily close by this dereliction, however, are some idyllic views along the Mersey, now in a gorge rather than a bowl :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5546.jpg

High beneath the horizon you also get the first iconic glimpse of our final destination on this tour - the Stockport railway viaduct. For geographical reasons, the Metrolink line from here will have to cross back to the North side of the river, emerging from right to left, above the base of demolished industrial buildings, just visible within the right-hand bank:-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5977.jpg

This is the same point, the location of the second bridge over the Mersey, looking back towards Gorsey Bank from the North side in a better light :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5545.jpg

The geographical reason is that Brinksway, on the South side, is very high, narrow, steeply graded and bendy :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5542.jpg

You can tell why it was rejected as a tram route :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5958.jpg

Even without the road works :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5957.jpg

However, the return to the North bank gives the opportunity to serve other developments on that side, such as the Pyramid HQ of the Co-operative Bank, viewed here from across the river :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5960.jpg

In fact the tram stop here on the North side was going to be called 'Pyramid', but now it is just a possible one called 'Giant's Field', also serving the Yew Street trading estate :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5543.jpg

If it continued along here, however, the route would encounter the M60 Motorway Junction 1 at Hollywood Way, so it has to cross again to the South side, right to left and away from the camera, The plans seem to imply some demolition here, for the line to pass through the footprint of these industrial units above the weir :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5534.jpg

It will rejoin Brinksway behind the trees on the left in this shot, looking back West from the bridge adjoining the Woolpack public house :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5533-1.jpg

From here on the alignment will be in the roadway with other traffic, in this view also looking West. Descending from its third bridge over the river Mersey on this section, the line will come in towards the camera centre left, now that Brinksway has straightened and flattened out. The sign (welcoming traffic turning off the motorway) is misleading viewed in isolation, as it is not a boundary, and Stockport centre is behind the camera :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5531.jpg

The Woolpack, with its own footbridge across the river on the corner of Hollywood way, is unfortunately boarded up at present :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5529.jpg

I am sure that a tramstop near the Pyramid would help it to thrive, however, in such a delightful setting :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5478.jpg

Brinksway then becomes Chestergate, the tramlines still in the tarmac, here looking back West :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5523.jpg

Onwards into the city. . . (if its not a city, it certainly looks like one!) :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5518.jpg

Nearly at the terminus, the route passes with the traffic under the famous viaduct :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5525.jpg

The end of the line will be in the bus station, approaching the camera from Chestergate, centre :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5623.jpg

Three forms of transport, water, road and railway. Will there ever be a fourth here . . .?

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_5620.jpg

And if there is, will it ever go further East ? :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_8355.jpg

Well, we can but dream . . .

end

Nice shot Johnny. It would have been funny if you had of caught me taking photos from your bus. :lol:. I only had my crappy phone camera with me, so I didn't take too many. I walked up as far as the Greggs in Clayton. Once the line has crossed the canal and then Ashton Road I'm guessing they still have a few more industrial places to knock down? Couldn't really see where it was going!

I see you went up on the grassy viewing platform behind the depot :D. Cracking view up there eh?

Cheers Lad :cheers: yes, its ideal for views of the depot and of this wonderful, fabulous city in general :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3974.jpg
http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3975.jpg

Anyway, before we get done for veering of thread, here is a conundrum to bring us back on line: When up on the same grassy bank a few months ago, I noticed for the first time, that Queen's Road depot will have a direct link towards Oldham, using that particular chord of the Collyhurst loop that passes directly under the Bury line.

The conundrum is, how long would an intrepid snapper have to wait, before managing to get a pic of one tram flying over another??? I know there are other grade-separated junctions (Cornbrook, Trafford Bar) where this happens in part, but I think this will be the only place on the whole network, where two discrete lines will cross over each other in this way?

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_2862.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_3987.jpg

I don't think you would have to wait too long. I'm guessing that a tram would be held on one of those two reception roads either leaving or entering from the Oldham line. Then just pray for another over the top :cheers::lol:

I walked up as far as the Greggs in Clayton. Once the line has crossed the canal and then Ashton Road I'm guessing they still have a few more industrial places to knock down? Couldn't really see where it was going!

Yes, the line is quite curvaceous at that point. It winds round the back of the West Indian snack bar, across Croft Street, through what is now a pallet yard, then behind the Grove Inn and across Clayton Lane to the station. At the local presentations, they said there was no more demolition to be done, but it looks like a garage is still in the way. It is difficult to walk to that bit as the 'dead ends' lead to fenced off private property from either direction. :nuts:

Great pics Johnny, as always! :applause:

Which no. trams are in the bottom pic?

Great angle JdR, cheers. The skyline will look even more bulky from there when the new Co-op HQ has been built.

3010:banana: will turn up to night just hope they have fitted the extra dampers:bash:

Taken today from COMS looking towards the city centre. Left them at full size so you can see some detail. Some of the pics aren't that good as I used my camera phone. Especially the first one.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/DSC00074.jpg?t=1265390388

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/DSC00071.jpg?t=1265389942

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/DSC00072.jpg?t=1265390050

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/DSC00073.jpg?t=1265390731

Looking away from the city centre towards the Velodrome.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/DSC00075.jpg?t=1265390291

Great pics Johnny, as always! :applause:

Which no. trams are in the bottom pic?

Sorry, forgot to take a note.

Will all those turquoise bridges now have to be painted yellow?

Thats been pondered before. I think they will wait until its a necessity for financial reasons, but personally the Yellow might be a bit too bright, maybe a darker shade.

Originally Posted by Local Lad
I walked up as far as the Greggs in Clayton. Once the line has crossed the canal and then Ashton Road I'm guessing they still have a few more industrial places to knock down? Couldn't really see where it was going!Yes, the line is quite curvaceous at that point. It winds round the back of the West Indian snack bar, across Croft Street, through what is now a pallet yard, then behind the Grove Inn and across Clayton Lane to the station. At the local presentations, they said there was no more demolition to be done, but it looks like a garage is still in the way. It is difficult to walk to that bit as the 'dead ends' lead to fenced off private property from either direction. :nuts:

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/IMG_0001.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/IMG_0002.jpg

Thats a lot of pedestrian deterrent paving!

Minutes of Authority meeting 18th December 2009, They asked the government for two extra trams to be funded for the Didsbury and Chorlton accelerated extensions (Peak doubling or spares?), but the government said no.

http://www.gmita.gov.uk/download/2919/item_04_minutes-18_december_2009

Also says their selling the land around Old Trafford Metrolink stop.

Thats a lot of pedestrian deterrent paving!

Minutes of Authority meeting 18th December 2009, They asked the government for two extra trams to be funded for the Didsbury and Chorlton accelerated extensions (Peak doubling or spares?), but the government said no.
http://www.gmita.gov.uk/download/2919/item_04_minutes-18_december_2009

Also says their selling the land around Old Trafford Metrolink stop.

FFS! What would 2 trams cost? £4million?

I hate this country.

http://neilsrailwayphotos.fotopic.net/c1513569.html

hope this is classed as relevant. this is what went before the chorlton extension.

Piccadilly dog posted the link to the new plans for Mumps station, so here she is...

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/AcolnetDocs/DCDocsOnlineFiles/128454_9.pdf (http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/AcolnetDocs/DCDocsOnlineFiles/128454_9.pdf)

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a260/Geeves8612/Oldhammumps1.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a260/Geeves8612/Oldhammumps2.jpg

The old station site will be levelled, with the new station being about 100 meters away in the Shaw direction. The station will be raised up at viaduct level. Unfortunately the new station site is even further away from the centre of Oldham than the old station.

Some updates on MC extension...the spur from MC in direction of Eccles is now linked up

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010005.jpg

Concrete is being layed on either side of tracks as we speak, its then given a pattern which I believe is applied using a rubber mat

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010006.jpg

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010007.jpg

and a dried off section that was being cleaned up as I was there, the finished section actually looks very good too

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010013.jpg

oh and just to finish off with Banana 2 is on the Eccles service again to day

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010001.jpg

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010002.jpg

at last fame and fortune on Broadway!:ohno: well ok its only Broadway stop but hey a trammy has to start somewhere

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010003.jpg

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010004.jpg

Hello folks,

First timer on here but been reading all the post with great interest. It good to see all the new development finally taking shape, had a drive round today near Piccadilly and ancoats all very interesting stuff.

Anyhow what I was wondering as they start to progress up Ashton new road many moons ago the trams did run down this route, has anybody got any pics of the original tracks in the road where they are digging up to lay new ones, would be very grateful.

Again very good and informative forum.

Rgds
Andy

The MC stop is now having glass panels installed..perhaps one of our Metrolink friends could tell us if the remaining glass panels will have the new Metrolink attached/etched on to them

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/MC06022010008.jpg

Hello folks,

First timer on here but been reading all the post with great interest. It good to see all the new development finally taking shape, had a drive round today near Piccadilly and ancoats all very interesting stuff.

Anyhow what I was wondering as they start to progress up Ashton new road many moons ago the trams did run down this route, has anybody got any pics of the original tracks in the road where they are digging up to lay new ones, would be very grateful.

Again very good and informative forum.

Rgds
Andy

Welcome dreamweaver...hope you enjoy the postings, look forward to your contributions WT

Cheers Wingtips - MC looking good, impressed with the finished surface. It looks like the single line will be completely open next to the footpath and road, rather than on private land..
And welcome dreamweaver! :hi:

Cheers Wingtips - MC looking good, impressed with the finished surface. It looks like the single line will be completely open next to the footpath and road, rather than on private land..
And welcome dreamweaver! :hi:

Yes it will..I spoke to contractor and thats the intentsion

FFS! What would 2 trams cost? £4million?

I hate this country.

I don't hate the country it's the system of incompetant government which fails to recognise anything outside London. Even Scotland and Wales manage to fund railway schemes when the English major centres outside London are denied funds to bolster resources in London. I guess we in Manchester should be grateful for being allowed to spend our own money on the Metrolink expansion!

I've saved a load of mages of the extension to Didsbury onto photobucket & yet I can't seem to get them on here using the image link (I'm copying & pasting the web address). Anyone have any ideas?

You need the [img]url[ /img] tags from Photobucket

Just figured how to upload..!

Went on an unauthorised walk of the extension from to St Werburgh's Road to Old Trafford in the snow, a few weeks back & took a few photos on the way...

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/Line3bChorltonHightowardsDidsbury.jpg
From St Werburghs Road Looking towards future line to Didsbury (Maybe even Stockport?)

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/StWerburghsRdStoptowardsDidsbury.jpg
Future location of St Werburgh's Road stop

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/StWerburghsRdStoptowardsMcr.jpg
Looking towards Chorlton & Mcr from St Werburghs Rd Stop

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/ChorltontowardsDidsbury.jpg
Looking towards St Werburghs Rd & Didsbury from future Chorlton location

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/ChorltonStoptowardsMcr.jpg
Approaching future Chorlton Stop & Wilbraham Rd, looking towards Mcr

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/CholrtonStopMcrBound.jpg
Future Chorlton Stop, Mcr Bound

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/DidsburyBoundRHSChorltonstoplooking.jpg
Future Chorlton Stop, Didsbury bound. Looking back towards Mcr

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/FirswoodStopMcrBoundSide.jpg
Future Chorlton Stop, Didsbury bound platform

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/McrRdBridgeTowardsDidsbury.jpg
Underneath Mcr Rd Bridge, looking towards Chorlton

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/FirswoodStoptowardsMcr.jpg
Future Firswood Stop, towards Trafford Bar & Mcr

Then some from last weekend

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/IMG_0255.jpg
The line coming from Chorlton & Didsbury will pass under the current Alty line & join the Mcr bound line just before Old Trafford stop

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/IMG_0254.jpg
The Chorlton & Didsbury spur joing the Mcr line

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l72/scouseinmanc/IMG_0253.jpg
New Metrolink Depot & Sidings are taking shape

Hope you enjoyed :)

http://i50.tinypic.com/awsvfl.jpg

http://i48.tinypic.com/no7wr7.jpg

Certainly did enjoy those Winter photos Scouse - Awesome!, (and then some!)

Here are a couple of Autumn ones to go with them. In about November 2008, there was a very brief window of opportunity to walk the old Midland Railway from St Werburgh's Road to Chorlton. Prior to that, most of the line was so overgrown with bushes and brambles as to be inaccessible, and shortly after these were cleared, it was fenced off for the construction work.

A friend of mine has lived all his life in one of the cul-de-sacs which abut the line near Chorlton, and grew up to the sound of trains. He well remembers the night of the last goods movement in 1988, after which a very, very long silence . . .

Anyway, I was delighted to discover this old railway signal just South of Wilbraham Road, which had survived all those years, apparently buried in the brambles. I see from your recent photo it has now gone.

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/m22_Chorlton-16Nov08.jpg
http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/m23_Chorlton-16Nov08.jpg
http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/m24_Chorlton-16Nov08_1028.jpg

That bottom photo has a very strange feel to it. They should have kept an item like that for historic purposes. I bet you could put that in an art gallery or a museum as it symbolises what has been, come and gone.

3010:banana: will turn up to night just hope they have fitted the extra dampers:bash:

Hi manc, what dampers please?

Hi manc, what dampers please?

Anybody who has had a ride on a M5000 on the Altrincham and Bury line will notice how rough the ride is, there are quiet a few speed restrictions in place for the M5000 but it is still very rough in places, they are supposed to be improving the suspension on them by fitting dampers which should improve the ride quality! they will retro fit them to the M5000 already here but the ones being delivered from now on are supposed to have had them fitted before they are delivered.

Anybody who has had a ride on a M5000 on the Altrincham and Bury line will notice how rough the ride is, there are quiet a few speed restrictions in place for the M5000 but it is still very rough in places, they are supposed to be improving the suspension on them by fitting dampers which should improve the ride quality! they will retro fit them to the M5000 already here but the ones being delivered from now on are supposed to have had them fitted before they are delivered.

Thanks for that.

Do you know why trams leaving Dane Road towards Manchester crawl out of the station for the first 100 metres or so before accelerating.

I've noticed it since the line opened again in September after the overhead wires were changed.

Would anybody agree that the new trams feel 'tinny' in terms of the ride quality? Does anybody know if this condition will improve over time?

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/m24_Chorlton-16Nov08_1028.jpg

Absolutely fantastic picture. Its incredible how many things like that were not cleared up. Here is one that is still active on a disused line through Preston city centre:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2379/1497667990_4ce33aebaf_b.jpg

That bottom photo has a very strange feel to it. They should have kept an item like that for historic purposes. I bet you could put that in an art gallery or a museum as it symbolises what has been, come and gone.

. . .and what is yet to come? Yes Andy, it gave me a funny feeling when I first saw it, wierd vibes. :shifty:

[QUOTE=Accura4Matalan;51535519]. Its incredible how many things like that were not cleared up. Here is one that is still active on a disused line through Preston city centre:
Amazing Matalan - Is that on the Longridge line near the University?

Spot on!

Anybody who has had a ride on a M5000 on the Altrincham and Bury line will notice how rough the ride is, there are quiet a few speed restrictions in place for the M5000 but it is still very rough in places, they are supposed to be improving the suspension on them by fitting dampers which should improve the ride quality! they will retro fit them to the M5000 already here but the ones being delivered from now on are supposed to have had them fitted before they are delivered.

thanks matey

Update from East Manchester - the 'cut and cover' operation for the Great Ancoats Street Underpass has now started in earnest:-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4011.jpg

And Merrill Street is coming along slowly. The sign on the bus stops here says they will be closed for about 18 months from 5th January 2009. Presumably by then the rails will be laid and the buses will be able go back over them.

[QUOTE=Johnny de Rivative;51549881]Update from East Manchester - the 'cut and cover' operation for the Great Ancoats Street Underpass has now started in earnest:-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4010.jpg

Do you know how far the underpass is submerged?

You can see the length of the underpass from where the piling's laid out on the new Google Earth images. Don't know how deep it is though if that's what you meant.

any advance on twenty feet??? It took the utilities long enough to finish beggering about diverting.

Thanks for that.

Do you know why trams leaving Dane Road towards Manchester crawl out of the station for the first 100 metres or so before accelerating.

I've noticed it since the line opened again in September after the overhead wires were changed.

there is a fault with the overhead line section isolator so that is another perminent speed restriction. no wonder we are running late all the bloody time!:bash:

[QUOTE=Johnny de Rivative;51549881]Update from East Manchester - the 'cut and cover' operation for the Great Ancoats Street Underpass has now started in earnest:-

Great pics Johnny!

Now that the days are starting to get that much lighter, we should start seeing things happen at a much quicker pace. :)

there is a fault with the overhead line section isolator so that is another perminent speed restriction. no wonder we are running late all the bloody time!:bash:

Any news of when it will be fixed?

I noticed some Cherry pickers parked on the bit of land next to the track yesterday.

East Lancs Railway want to save Oldham Mumps station canopy before it gets knocked down.

http://www.east-lancs-rly.co.uk/?p=MumpsCanopy

Worth a tenner....

East Lancs Railway want to save Oldham Mumps station canopy before it gets knocked down.

http://www.east-lancs-rly.co.uk/?p=MumpsCanopy

Worth a tenner....

Why don't they keep it and renovate it?

It'd look great if it was spruced up a bit.

Why don't they keep it and renovate it?

It'd look great if it was spruced up a bit.

It "new mumps" station will be about 300 yards over the viaduct, on an elevated platform. The current site is to be flattened, for the site of a new bridge linking the loop to Union Street. I think

It "new mumps" station will be about 300 yards over the viaduct, on an elevated platform. The current site is to be flattened, for the site of a new bridge linking the loop to Union Street. I think

Ahh right. Nice one.

Heres the link to the plans for Mumps station

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/AcolnetDocs/DCDocsOnlineFiles/128454_9.pdf

The line that will pass through the centre of town will branch off at Werneth station

heres the spiel from LRTA.org

Phase 3b, Greater Manchester Transport Fund

This begins at Featherstall Road where it turns north towards Middleton Road, turning east for the 2 side platforms Westwood stop. This is parallel with Middleton Road and west of Winterbottom Street.

After crossing the latter, the line will turn to run alongside the Oldham Way slip road in a cutting, before passing beneath Manchester Street and continuing in a short tunnel then surfacing at the 2 side platform King Street stop.

Trams will then run along Union Street, sharing with road traffic till the Peter Street / Hobson Street juction. Then to Clegg Street it is tram only with an island platform Oldham Central stop. East of Clegg Street there is sharing with road traffic till the possible Mumps stop.


The site of the new station should allow the town centre line to join on just before the new Mumps station.

Heres the link to the plans for Mumps station

http://planning.oldham.gov.uk/AcolnetDocs/DCDocsOnlineFiles/128454_9.pdf

The line that will pass through the centre of town will branch off at Werneth station

heres the spiel from LRTA.org




The site of the new station should allow the town centre line to join on just before the new Mumps station.

I suspect the line will divert south at the juntion of Yorkshire st and Union st, accross the old B n Q car park, to a bridge over Oldham way to join the existing viaduct. Then again I might be totally and uttery wrong!!: ol:

Why on earth is it costing so much to take down & transport over to Bury exactly???

If it's getting torn down anyway, then surely ELR can get it for a lot less?

Big structure needs transporting, lot harder to take something apart without damaging it then compared to say a wrecking ball.

And pray tell where will it go?

Buckley Wells?

I had posted this a while back, not sure which forum:

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/uploads/f2/news/img/2009617_123452.jpg

from the Oldham Chronicle.

The fact that they pulling down the existing Mumps station increases the chance that only the 3b will be left after completion IMO.

At the recent drop in meetings before Xmas the offical line was the existing Mumps could have stayed.

The Chron article didn't specify where ELR are going to put it.

BTW great pics Johnny (et al) across the forums.

Hiya Folks

New to this.Very interesting to read through . The East Manchester line passes my back garden -am looking forward to having the trams passing me . I was wondering if anyone knew whether phase 1 and 2 vehicles are to be painted into the new Metrolink Colours. If so when is this likely to be done, has i have noticed recently that some of the trams are in a very poor state both externally and internally. Also are there any plans to name the new trams- i quite fancy trams with proper nameplates like on locomotives. what do other people think

Thanks

A mate contacted metrolink about the rebranding of the existing fleet and they did come back with the answer of up to five years to complete. They will have to get a few more new ones before lifting off the original trams in phases for the new look.
Think the concensus of opinion on here is a big no to naming the new fleet.

Edit. What Mode says lol...


Anyways this image was posted a while back. How the trams will all look (eventually) Enjoy!

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a260/Geeves8612/metrolinkyellow2ui7.jpg

Five years! Does that strike anyone else as quite absurd?

Plan for Mumps is that 3A will close once 3b is up and running.

http://if.fotopic.net/c1812578.html

Some more pics of last weekends Track Renewal works up on the Bury line.

Incidently, has anyone used that bit of track and noticed a smoother ride?

They are closing Between Whitefield and Bury again, this Saturday and Sunday.

I guess that means they are replacing the other set of rails this weekend then? Excellent!

I guess that means they are replacing the other set of rails this weekend then? Excellent!
dont think so, its more about welding and stressing the rails put down last week LL

And pray tell where will it go?

Buckley Wells?

There are a number of locations earmarked for canopies. One is needed for Platform Two at Bolton Street, where the Trackside etc. is situated. Another is needed for Rawtenstall, a very exposed and windy location (with a weatherboard screen at the Southern end). There is also Heywood (when a permanent station building is erected) and the proposed terminus at Castleton.

Train Guard

Plan for Mumps is that 3A will close once 3b is up and running.

That was the original idea but perhaps not:


Trams at the double?

Reporter: Richard Hooton
Date online: 17/06/2009

OLDHAM could get two tram lines running through the town centre — making it the big winner from Greater Manchester’s £1.5billion transport investment package.

Work to replace Oldham’s rail tracks with tram lines is continuing as planned to bring Metrolink to the borough by autumn, 2011 and into Rochdale by spring, 2012.

But it has emerged that the go-ahead for tracks to run along Union Street, revealed by the Chronicle last month, could result in trams running parallel through Oldham.


from:
http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/25506/trams-at-the-double


Things were very much in the air at the drop in events, the only thing that is clear at the mo is that the existing Mumps is getting knocked down, unless someone in the know has some further info.

Whatever happens they will keep it as a bypass route allowimg quick replacement service if something were to occur in the Oldham town centre stretch. Its also been suggested that an express service from Rochdale could bypass Oldham TC.

Whatever happens they will keep it as a bypass route allowimg quick replacement service if something were to occur in the Oldham town centre stretch. Its also been suggested that an express service from Rochdale could bypass Oldham TC.

I imagine that's what would happen given the cost of electrifying the existing stretch, still leaving a 12 minute service in Oldham TC

http://if.fotopic.net/c1812578.html

Some more pics of last weekends Track Renewal works up on the Bury line.

Incidently, has anyone used that bit of track and noticed a smoother ride?

They are closing Between Whitefield and Bury again, this Saturday and Sunday.

Cracking set of pics!

Oh yeah train guard I'd forgot to consider Rawtenstall.

As this You tube video demonstrates

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOBrdvKzWj4

Erm some of my locals were erm less than enamoured about certain uniforms on display that weekend.

Even though it was a load of Paddy McGuinness Lankey types gripping about "me helmut being twoo tieht"

I have donated.

Whatever happens they will keep it as a bypass route allowimg quick replacement service if something were to occur in the Oldham town centre stretch. Its also been suggested that an express service from Rochdale could bypass Oldham TC.

It will shut, leaving just the town centre route. Keeping that rout open will cost a fortune and go against the grain of rapid transport. Miss out 3 stops? Why? The whole idea is to provide transport for as many people as possible, Not providing an express service for those from Shaw and Rochdale. If the TC line shuts then it will be bus replacement.

first rtc involving a m5000:bash: hgv has hit 30001 and pushed it of the track not heard how the tram driver is but just show's what we have to put up with on a daily basis:bash::ohno:

From GMPTE (http://www.metrolink.co.uk/servicedisruptions/index.asp?id=253):

11/02/2010 - Service Update at 12.19 - Altrincham, Picadilly, Bury and Eccles
Metrolink is currently operating a 6 minute service between Bury and Altrincham.

Due to a road traffic accident near Langworthy Metrolink stop involving at HGV and a tram, Metrolink services on the Eccles line will operate between Broadway Metrolink stop and Piccadilly Station until further notice.

Please be aware that Metrolink tickets will be accepted on the First bus 33 service that operates on Eccles new Road.



If you require further assistance or advice on your Metrolink journey, please contact a member of the Customer Services team on 0161 205 2000.

Travelled on 3002 this morning between Navi Road and Alty (lazy I know, but had a 2 year old in tow that didnt want to walk.) The stand out thing for me was the fact it wasn't level boarding at either stop. There was about a 20mm "step" from the platform to tram. Its perfectly level with 1/2xxx series trams!!

first rtc involving a m5000:bash: hgv has hit 30001 and pushed it of the track not heard how the tram driver is but just show's what we have to put up with on a daily basis:bash::ohno:

Tram out of service??

Travelled on 3002 this morning between Navi Road and Alty (lazy I know, but had a 2 year old in tow that didnt want to walk.) The stand out thing for me was the fact it wasn't level boarding at either stop. There was about a 20mm "step" from the platform to tram. Its perfectly level with 1/2xxx series trams!!

The 'step' will depend on the loading of the tram as the suspension settles under load. The 1/2xxx series trams have self levelling air suspension, the M5000 doesn't.

Was gonna say similar, but wasn't sure I had my facts straight.

I'm pretty sure that 3001 will be out of service. If the impact was forceful enough to remove the tram from the tracks altogether, it must have done substantial damage I'd have thought... :ohno:

Even if there appeared to be only cosmetic damage they would still have to do a thorough check and testing of all systems.

Was on 3001 this morning it was rocking all over the place and had a massive scrape down one side. They also haven't cleaned the outside of the tram since the trails with the polystyrene blocks so parts of these are still stuck on and loads of sticky tape is still on thram. Poor cleaning and shows they don't give a shit about keeping even the new trams in good shape.

first rtc involving a m5000:bash: hgv has hit 30001 and pushed it of the track not heard how the tram driver is but just show's what we have to put up with on a daily basis:bash::ohno:

The bright "visible" yellow ends don't work then..........

thanks mode1

Like the look of the old trams in the new colours.

But 5 years to rebrand the trams is way to excessive. Bet if GMPTE said to rebrand them in Stagecoach Identity they would be done with in 12/18 months. While having coffee in Costa this morning (Hoping to see 3005 upwards :)) i noticed the skirt over the coupling on 3004 looked faulty/damaged (think it was the b end) , so i waited and waited and eventually 3002 came round onto Market Street and the skirt was firmly shut.

Has for my nameplate question - i think vinyl nameplates are a big No cos they are untidy. But why NO to naming then ?

I say Come on Metrolink get ALL the trams deep cleaned and then rebranded .

Its going to take so long for two reasons, firstly everyone you send away means you can offer less services and have less spares (and until the M5000's they were desperatley short of trams) so they will only send one or two at a time. Secondly its not just a paint job they are having the old internal furnishings replaced to match the new trams, so new seats, new panels, installing those hoop things. But also its a thorough overhaul bringing them all up to t68A street running spec, installing digital destination displays inside and out, external cameras and cab displays so they can remove the retractable wing mirrors (about half of the fleet has had these upgrades done in a previous mid life refurbishment program thats still ongoing) and beyond that upgrading many mechanical and electrical components with more reliable ones that have been trialled on individual trams and removing the problematic and expensive to maintain retractable steps.

The 'step' will depend on the loading of the tram as the suspension settles under load. The 1/2xxx series trams have self levelling air suspension, the M5000 doesn't.

How does this affect wheelchair users? I know on the London Underground there's only allowed to be a very small step between platform and tube if it's to be classed on disabled-friendly.

Surely if there's even a small step up from tram to platform then it's going to cause problems getting off.

Sounds like yet another thing the PTE cut back on. Did they go out of their way to find the cheapest trams they could find or something. :dunno:

thanks mode1

Like the look of the old trams in the new colours.

But 5 years to rebrand the trams is way to excessive. Bet if GMPTE said to rebrand them in Stagecoach Identity they would be done with in 12/18 months.

In terms of the livery, the trams in Koln have all-over sponsors on some of their trams. I reckon if Sony came along and said they wanted five trams in full branded livery, it would be done in 3 weeks max. The problem with GMPTE is that there is absolutely no rush now. Leather, Purdy, Whitmore and co have now had their photo ops with the new trams on the new tracks with the new rebranding (in select locations). As long as everything is finished by the end of the final phase, the 2nd city crossing, they'll have their complete showpiece. That's if in five years, its considered a showpiece.

How does this affect wheelchair users? I know on the London Underground there's only allowed to be a very small step between platform and tube if it's to be classed on disabled-friendly.

Surely if there's even a small step up from tram to platform then it's going to cause problems getting off.

Sounds like yet another thing the PTE cut back on. Did they go out of their way to find the cheapest trams they could find or something. :dunno:

The difference in height allowed by the regulations is up to 50mm and the M5000s comply under all loading conditions. It may be that at the 2 extremes there is a step up or down depending on whether the tram is empty or crush laden. The T68 can actually be low if it suffers a suspension fault such as air loss. The M5000 is a virtually standard European vehicle and not particularly cheap either. The air suspension on the T68s is very unusual for a tram its more normally found on trains. Most London Underground trains have fairly simple suspension and manage to cope with the accessibility regs as you say. I doubt the step will cause problems even if it ever reaches the maximum allowed.

Oh yeah train guard I'd forgot to consider Rawtenstall.

As this You tube video demonstrates

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOBrdvKzWj4

Erm some of my locals were erm less than enamoured about certain uniforms on display that weekend.

Even though it was a load of Paddy McGuinness Lankey types gripping about "me helmut being twoo tieht"

I have donated.

That's an old story. We now (in common with some other preserved railways) draw the line at swastika armbands and overt displays of Nazi regalia.

But this is getting way off the subject....

Train Guard

The difference in height allowed by the regulations is up to 50mm and the M5000s comply under all loading conditions. It may be that at the 2 extremes there is a step up or down depending on whether the tram is empty or crush laden. The T68 can actually be low if it suffers a suspension fault such as air loss. The M5000 is a virtually standard European vehicle and not particularly cheap either. The air suspension on the T68s is very unusual for a tram its more normally found on trains. Most London Underground trains have fairly simple suspension and manage to cope with the accessibility regs as you say. I doubt the step will cause problems even if it ever reaches the maximum allowed.

Yeh I thought the limit was 50mm, cheers for that. Even so, I would have thought a 5cm step up would be difficult for any wheelchair user to get up if they have no help.

You all seem to be forgetting that our trams are not just going to be having a simple 'rebranding'.... They're gonna be getting a total overhaul -refitting inside and out; kind of a mid-life refurbishment. This is not just a case of giving the outside a new lick of paint. THAT is why it is going to take longer than some corporate sponsor tackily covering their exteriors in ugly advertisments.

On the topic of advertising have you seen how cheap it is to advertise on the trams? Last time I checked one of the roof boards cost only £17 for a week.

3001 looks like it is off to derby to be fixed got alot of body and window damage:ohno:

I remember posting a comment a couple of months ago asking how long would it be before one of the new trams is shunted. Hell does this happen in other cities with trams or is it mindless nutters around here that are not watching where they're going?
Ah on checking it appears it does as you can see from this link below.
I can't understand how drivers can't see something as big as tram, they're not to be messed with.
Also thought the new colour scheme was in part done to make the trams more visual.
So here below is a story from Nottingham

http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/news/Tram-lorry-collide-Phoenix-Park/article-544183-detail/article.html

I remember posting a comment a couple of months ago asking how long would it be before one of the new trams is shunted. Hell does this happen in other cities with trams or is it mindless nutters around here that are not watching where they're going?
Ah on checking it appears it does as you can see from this link below.
I can't understand how drivers can't see something as big as tram, they're not to be messed with.
Also thought the new colour scheme was in part done to make the trams more visual.
So here below is a story from Nottingham

http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/news/Tram-lorry-collide-Phoenix-Park/article-544183-detail/article.html

Did hear a rumour that 3001 might have actually hit a stationary lorry. Thats sounds like driver error. I stress it's a rumour and might not be true so best wait and see what the official line is.

I remember posting a comment a couple of months ago asking how long would it be before one of the new trams is shunted. Hell does this happen in other cities with trams or is it mindless nutters around here that are not watching where they're going?
Ah on checking it appears it does as you can see from this link below.
I can't understand how drivers can't see something as big as tram, they're not to be messed with.
Also thought the new colour scheme was in part done to make the trams more visual.
So here below is a story from Nottingham

http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/news/Tram-lorry-collide-Phoenix-Park/article-544183-detail/article.html

It has happened in Nottingham as indicated also in Dublin http://http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1213965/At-16-injured-bus-tram-collide.htmland Croydon http://http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23552200-man-is-killed-after-bus-hits-tram-in-town-centre.doin the last 18 months or so

Very bad news about 3001. I've always said trams and traffic don't mix. I watched some tram drivers do two stupid things in the last days. Tram not in service/training? was stopped at St Peters and went over Oxford Road when it was still clearly on green on Oxford Road with traffic still crossing. Bit daft.

I've always said trams and traffic don't mix

:lol:

Says it all....


But it's true, the fact is it's not the turn of the last century where trams MK1 only had to worry about horse-drawn carriages. Shared sections will always be the weak-point of the system and seriously hamper reliability.

I'll repeat what I said on another thread, the met should be underground in the city centre. I know people will say it's unrealistic, but it simply shouldn't be for a city of Manchester's size. If Liverpool and Newcastle can have underground transport tunnels then so can we.

I'll repeat what I said on another thread, the met should be underground in the city centre. I know people will say it's unrealistic, but it simply shouldn't be for a city of Manchester's size. If Liverpool and Newcastle can have underground transport tunnels then so can we.

Will you be happy for massive fare increases to cover the costs of this? That is why it is unrealistic.

No, it should be the government who pays for it out of general taxation. That's how it works in other European countries. It should be done here.

It's only London in this country which seems to get anything.

It could be much worse and Manchester having no tram system at all. Although the Metrolink bashers in the M.E.N would love that.

No, it should be the government who pays for it out of general taxation. That's how it works in other European countries. It should be done here.

It's only London in this country which seems to get anything.

Yes, all these extensions and new trams must be our imaginations ;)

Yes, you're probably right! :) But I still think the system could and should be better when you look at what other European cities get.

And as I say, it's pretty standard for a metro to have an underground element in the city centre, simply to avoid clogging up the roads for cars/buses/people. This country just seems to go for the cheapest option it can get away with. Think, poor Leeds doesn't even have any metro/light-rail system at all!

Yes, you're probably right! :) But I still think the system could and should be better when you look at what other European cities get.

And as I say, it's pretty standard for a metro to have an underground element in the city centre, simply to avoid clogging up the roads for cars/buses/people. This country just seems to go for the cheapest option it can get away with. Think, poor Leeds doesn't even have any metro/light-rail system at all!

I do agree it would be great to have - but it is just not realistic now. Remember the whole system was built on a shoestring - if money was available back then I'm sure they would have spent more effort on attempts to go underground.

Making St.Peter's square underground does not cost much at all.
All over Europe, squares are dug up for car parking. Most of these places have barely 5pence to spend, so it is just a total lack of imagination.

Having said that, the trams do add to the vibrancy of the street scene, so stuffing them underground is a bit sad. Let the people see our fine city.

Making St.Peter's square underground does not cost much at all.
All over Europe, squares are dug up for car parking. Most of these places have barely 5pence to spend, so it is just a total lack of imagination.

Having said that, the trams do add to the vibrancy of the street scene, so stuffing them underground is a bit sad. Let the people see our fine city.

Can you back that up with anything?

Have you factored in fire regs, smoke extraction and permanent manning? What happens to the roads where there are ramps up and down? etc etc.

Just because some places abroad do something doesn't mean it is the best option for the UK.

I can see the obvious ascetic reasons.

But it wouldn't happen because there is a serious issue of where to goes down and comes up. How much this costs, especially in light of the EU legislation for 2020 on transport accessibility which will increase the costs, how much dead space the two entrances/exists it would create, which would be essentially eyesores.

Simply why spend money on a few 100 metres, when that same money could be used on extending the service further than envisaged?

Costs would be akin to what TfL achieved for the DLR tunnel to Woolwich Arsenal.

"The £180 million, 2.5km extension will link Woolwich south of the river with DLR station, King George V, in North Woolwich. "

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/archive/5536.aspx

That would be an extra mile of track in Stockport or Ashton than a tunnel under a short space in the Square.

But having said that, MCC did think of its own underground car park here.

Clearly even the powers that be realised that underground transport was sensible in the city centre, or the PicVic tunnel idea would never have come up. But as ever, cheaper, short-term thinking won the day.

Clearly even the powers that be realised that underground transport was sensible in the city centre, or the PicVic tunnel idea would never have come up. But as ever, cheaper, short-term thinking won the day.

I think it's more a case of realising that it's better the cheaper option then nothing at all.

Well yes, that's obvious. But by now the thinking should have evolved to 'the long-term solution is better than cheaper short-term gains'.

Well yes, that's obvious. But by now the thinking should have evolved to 'the long-term solution is better than cheaper short-term gains'.

I agree Nathan, but as we go through probably a decade of public spending cuts/restrictions, I fear we are going to see more of the "comprimise and make do" approach to getting a new project of the ground.

Unfortunately, you're probably right about that.

Making St.Peter's square underground does not cost much at all.
All over Europe, squares are dug up for car parking. Most of these places have barely 5pence to spend, so it is just a total lack of imagination.

Having said that, the trams do add to the vibrancy of the street scene, so stuffing them underground is a bit sad. Let the people see our fine city.

St. Peter's Square contains the site of St.Peter's Church, where the Cenotaph is. The whole garden area is on top of a sealed crypt crammed with mouldering coffins.

Apart from that, I can't really see the case for tramway subways in Manchester, given that Metrolink is largely on reserve track and is integrated with traffic control measures.

Train Guard

I can understand why there is a big shout for underground mass transit in Manchester. Those who argue it for the ascetic reasons in that the trams create unattractive street furniture and ambience. Those who define big cities by having an underground and those who just prefer them.

But

Thank you train guard, I will take your professional opinion on this.

There is a strong case to consider the HST be run underground if it is coming westward along the Eccles line to Piccadilly station.

(as opposed to the inevitably unsightly extra or elevated line between Deansgate and Platform 13 at Piccadilly)

Perhaps you might want to drive a hypothetical train tram through this "City Tunnel" (a loose term about the suits I have heard being thrown around).

But as far as the Metrolink - and this has been done to death elsewhere on here - it will remain upstairs. De composing Mancunians or not.

On that cheery note I noticed while going past on Great Ancoats Street the work on the tunnel is getting on with one side of the road now all dug up. Won't be long before we see the pile driver back.

Here you go Mode. Little more info

East Manchester Metrolink line - Work at Great Ancoats Street

As you may know, we are currently building the new Metrolink line from Manchester Piccadilly to Droylsden (the East Manchester line).
We are continuing with construction on the underpass that will carry the tram under Great Ancoats Street.

The second stage of the piling works is due to start in February and is expected to take approximately 3 to 4 weeks. This will involve piling across Great Ancoats Street to continue constructing the retaining walls for the underpass.
During this work, traffic management measures will remain in place on Great Ancoats Street. Wherever possible, Great Ancoats Street will remain open to two way traffic.

For this work, we will be using the same piling techniques and equipment as the phase 1 piling carried out during spring 2009. Some noise during this work will be inevitable, although this method will create significantly less noise, dust and vibration than the alternatives methods.

For this phase of the construction, we will need to work outside our usual hours of construction on the following dates. These dates have been agreed in advance with Manchester City Council:

Sunday 14th February – 8am to 4pm (construction of piling platform)

Wednesday / Thursday, 17th / 18th February – 5am onwards (early morning delivery of piling rigs and machinery to site, timed to avoid traffic congestion due to large, slow moving vehicles)

Sunday 28th February – 9am to 4pm (altering debris netting scaffold around Great Ancoats Street) Managing construction work

and the Oldham line...

Monsall Metrolink stop – start of sheet piling works to widen cutting, 15th February 2010

As you may be aware, we are converting the Oldham Loop Line and the disused railway cutting at Monsall into a new Metrolink line which will be open to Central Park in spring 2011, Oldham Mumps in autumn 2011 and Rochdale Railway Station in spring 2012.

I am writing to inform you that as part of the construction program for this new line, we will begin sheet piling work to widen the cutting for the new Monsall Metrolink stop on February 15th 2010.

You will see sheet piling rigs being used as part of our work. This work will cause some noise and vibration particularly for residents close to the construction site.
However, we will be using noise and vibration monitoring equipment to make sure we stay within acceptable levels for this type of work.

This part of construction at the stop is due to take approximately 1 week. We do not anticipate that we will need to work outside our usual hours of construction. yadda!

thanks for that

On that cheery note I noticed while going past on Great Ancoats Street the work on the tunnel is getting on with one side of the road now all dug up. Won't be long before we see the pile driver back.

Hi Mode - Yowser -

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4011.jpg

ALSO TODAY 16.2.10, the first concrete girders have been laid across the Ashton Canal, for the new bridge just East of ASDA. I will put a better picture on than this, later this week :-

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4162.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4169.jpg

http://i742.photobucket.com/albums/xx61/Johnny_de_Rivative/100_4163.jpg

Cheers Matey, I can just about see it now.

Being a newbie to this forum I was wondering if I could ask you guys some questions if possible. Apologies if they have already been asked in this thread already

- Are the planned extensions to Ashton – Under – Lyne, East Didsbury, Rochdale Town Centre and the Airport going to happen? If so what are the planned opening dates.
- I know with the Rochdale extension the line when it was heavy rail was single track from Shaw up until it connected with the Manchester – Leeds line. I am assuming that Metrolink are going to double the track up as far to Rochdale as they can?
- Does anyone have any pictures of the progress of the Rochdale extension to date?

Many thanks.

Being a newbie to this forum I was wondering if I could ask you guys some questions if possible. Apologies if they have already been asked in this thread already

- Are the planned extensions to Ashton – Under – Lyne, East Didsbury, Rochdale Town Centre and the Airport going to happen? If so what are the planned opening dates.
- I know with the Rochdale extension the line when it was heavy rail was single track from Shaw up until it connected with the Manchester – Leeds line. I am assuming that Metrolink are going to double the track up as far to Rochdale as they can?
- Does anyone have any pictures of the progress of the Rochdale extension to date?

Many thanks.

Welcome to Skyscraper Kurt.

Here is a link to the latest excellent news letter from Metrolink themselves.

http://www.metrolink.co.uk/pdf/10-0004_Link3Reprintlowres.pdf

Being a newbie to this forum I was wondering if I could ask you guys some questions if possible. Apologies if they have already been asked in this thread already

- Are the planned extensions to Ashton – Under – Lyne, East Didsbury, Rochdale Town Centre and the Airport going to happen? If so what are the planned opening dates.
- I know with the Rochdale extension the line when it was heavy rail was single track from Shaw up until it connected with the Manchester – Leeds line. I am assuming that Metrolink are going to double the track up as far to Rochdale as they can?
- Does anyone have any pictures of the progress of the Rochdale extension to date?

Many thanks.

Hmmmmm, are you sure you're new? :sly:

Hmmmmm, are you sure you're new? :sly:

Hmmm, I thought exactly the same thing!!

Hmmmmm, are you sure you're new? :sly:

Surely oldKurt wouldn't need to ask?

makes me piss the driver training is a joke :bash: and do door faults traction faults and rough riding meen it's all going well for the M5000 hmm some how i don't think oh and the megga wheel flats that we was told "they never get wheel flats" when is mr oz man going to accept these are tram's and are not designed for light rail.yesterday was great NOT only one M5000 managed to get off the depot due to the ice the rest would not move:bash: well done to the pte for paying peanuts for off the shelf waste's of space :ohno:

Surely oldKurt wouldn't need to ask?

Ha ha - I am newKurt for sure!!

makes me piss the driver training is a joke :bash: and do door faults traction faults and rough riding meen it's all going well for the M5000 hmm some how i don't think oh and the megga wheel flats that we was told "they never get wheel flats" when is mr oz man going to accept these are tram's and are not designed for light rail.yesterday was great NOT only one M5000 managed to get off the depot due to the ice the rest would not move:bash: well done to the pte for paying peanuts for off the shelf waste's of space :ohno:

Just looked at your posting history - little bundle of joy aren't you. I personally don't think that people with such negativity and miserable attitudes should work with the public. The trams are not the only thing wrong with the system.

:applause::applause::applause:
Just looked at your posting history - little bundle of joy aren't you. I personally don't think that people with such negativity and miserable attitudes should work with the public. The trams are not the only thing wrong with the system.

Just looked at your posting history - little bundle of joy aren't you. I personally don't think that people with such negativity and miserable attitudes should work with the public. The trams are not the only thing wrong with the system.

Couldn't agree with you more ML. Sounds like someone with an axe to grind to me.

makes me piss the driver training is a joke :bash: and do door faults traction faults and rough riding meen it's all going well for the M5000 hmm some how i don't think oh and the megga wheel flats that we was told "they never get wheel flats" when is mr oz man going to accept these are tram's and are not designed for light rail.yesterday was great NOT only one M5000 managed to get off the depot due to the ice the rest would not move:bash: well done to the pte for paying peanuts for off the shelf waste's of space :ohno:

I think you are all wrong and looking at the tram drivers as an excuse to have a go. It sounds to me like he/she is disappointed at being promised good quality trams to drive only to be given cheep rubbish with a sparkly silver outside to tart them up and make them look good. GMPTE as I keep saying have NEVER bought anything of quality. If a good quality tram at £50 grand came along they would ask what they could have for £20 grand. These trams are not good quality by any means, I said this over 2 years ago after having been on them in Cologne only although the ride on theirs may be marginally better, the noise and interiors are bad. Perhaps working for a cheapskate company for years on end driving crap about must get to you and maybe it's the management or GMPTE who need to not be working with the public, remember it starts at the top and works downwards.

And if anyone does in fact think these trams are good quality, look at the back of the boards where the wheelchair users sit and see how it is finished off, can't imagine what that's going to look like in a few years time

The criticism is justified. There's no point putting a USA-style faux-optimistic gloss on a service which is currently crap.

Yes, some investment is coming in, but it's nowhere near enough. And still even now, lessons aren't being learnt and things are being done on the cheap for short-term gain, long-term pain.

Still it's not the PTE's fault. Blame Our Friends in Whitehall for not coughing up a creditable amount of our own taxpayer cash.

No axe to grind at all! Been with metrolink 8years and like to take pride in what I do as a driver and it just seems that pte are hell bent on making metrolink look a laughing stock.for god sake put the money in and stop buying the cheaper option! And it's not just trams the new uniform looks the part but is already falling to bits:bash:its hard to be up beat about things when all we seem to be doing is going backwards.

No axe to grind at all! Been with metrolink 8years and like to take pride in what I do as a driver and it just seems that pte are hell bent on making metrolink look a laughing stock.for god sake put the money in and stop buying the cheaper option! And it's not just trams the new uniform looks the part but is already falling to bits:bash:its hard to be up beat about things when all we seem to be doing is going backwards.

The problem with the ride isn't about the tram. The M5000 is a tram not a train. I agree the ride is appalling but some track maintenance would help. As an engineer I know only too well that new infrastructure is not built or costed with maintenance in mind but the operator is paid to maintain it. I do not believe the tram is a cheap and nasty alternative in fact there were very few options open when they were ordered. No one wants to build small quantities, there's no profit in it. An order for 100 or more may have drawn more interest but that's not the way our London based politicians work. Short termism rules in UK and we pay dearly for it. My message really I suppose is we should be thankful for what we have, many cities such as Leeds and Liverpool on our doorsteps would give their right arms for Metrolink.

The problem with the ride isn't about the tram. The M5000 is a tram not a train. I agree the ride is appalling but some track maintenance would help. As an engineer I know only too well that new infrastructure is not built or costed with maintenance in mind but the operator is paid to maintain it. I do not believe the tram is a cheap and nasty alternative in fact there were very few options open when they were ordered. No one wants to build small quantities, there's no profit in it. An order for 100 or more may have drawn more interest but that's not the way our London based politicians work. Short termism rules in UK and we pay dearly for it. My message really I suppose is we should be thankful for what we have, many cities such as Leeds and Liverpool on our doorsteps would give their right arms for Metrolink.


track maintenance is the problem, OR should that be lack off! nothing has been done since the new trackes were laid on the Alt and Bury Lines, but the main problem are the parts that wern't done, they are the parts where the M5000 are rough riding badly!

it's not just lack of track maintenance on the Alt and Bury lines, there are a number of emergency speed restrictions of 5mph on the Eccles line, some have been in place for months, ARE THEY WAITING FOR A TRAM TO DE-RAIL before they repair them??

the vehicle reliability really needs to be tackled!! but if the pte will not put there hand in there pocket, then it's just a case of make do and mend, get the sticky tape and blue tack out!!! and you think i'm joking!!!

and as a fellow metrolink driver with pride in the job we do, it does get you down when nothing seems to be done to improve things, simple things would make all the diffrence, like regular informative stations announcments from the control room, sometimes all we recieve is a text message 'STOP NXT STATION' on the vehicle radio and nothing else! we could be sat there for 20 minutes with no more information given for us to inform our passengers, the Metrolink Control Room need to be more informative to staff so we can inform passengers!

This is probably better on the main forum but it would thus seem metman that communications even Within the system is ambiguous to say the least..

track maintenance is the problem, OR should that be lack off! nothing has been done since the new trackes were laid on the Alt and Bury Lines, but the main problem are the parts that wern't done, they are the parts where the M5000 are rough riding badly!

it's not just lack of track maintenance on the Alt and Bury lines, there are a number of emergency speed restrictions of 5mph on the Eccles line, some have been in place for months, ARE THEY WAITING FOR A TRAM TO DE-RAIL before they repair them??

the vehicle reliability really needs to be tackled!! but if the pte will not put there hand in there pocket, then it's just a case of make do and mend, get the sticky tape and blue tack out!!! and you think i'm joking!!!

and as a fellow metrolink driver with pride in the job we do, it does get you down when nothing seems to be done to improve things, simple things would make all the diffrence, like regular informative stations announcments from the control room, sometimes all we recieve is a text message 'STOP NXT STATION' on the vehicle radio and nothing else! we could be sat there for 20 minutes with no more information given for us to inform our passengers, the Metrolink Control Room need to be more informative to staff so we can inform passengers!

Communications from within the Control Room has always been poor. I have mentioned before that its no use expecting staff out on the system to help passengers if they are not kept informed. They seem to be scared to tackle the Control Room to sort it out.
Tram reliability was I thought the subject of a joint Stagecoach/PTE Project at least for the T68s. Obviously reliability issues with the M5000s are fairly and squarely Bombardiers problem. Its not always money, sometimes simple things can make a big difference.
I do realise that a lot of the staff do still have a pride in the system but unfortunately the small minority who don't give a damn are the loudest.

Do the tram operating companies have to contribute anything to the cost of the trams they operate (and make profit from)?

and as a fellow metrolink driver with pride in the job we do, it does get you down when nothing seems to be done to improve things, simple things would make all the diffrence, like regular informative stations announcments from the control room!

Yes they would help I very much agree! So lets explain just how the PA system works shall we?
In fact let me do that for you as I know you have no knowledge of the systems limitations………….
The PA system works via the Metrolink telephone exchange. To make a PA you either dial the appropriate number for the required station and the exchange rings the number and hopefully connects, which will allow you to make a PA to 1 station. If you need to make an announcement to more than 1 station it can be done via a touchscreen.
The touchscreen allows a PA to be made to multiple stations ie groups of stations or even a whole line can be selected. A PA can be recorded, by speaking into a handset at a touchscreen and set to repeat however many times you like, for as long as you like. In theory you can make the same PA & set it to repeat every minute until doomsday.
So as an example lets say we have a tram missing on the Eccles line causing a delay. Does everyone across the system need to know this fact? Ideally yes as its informative to passengers travelling from anywhere on the system towards Eccles as well as passengers using the Eccles line itself. So the person responsible for making PA’s in Control makes the PA, via a touchscreen due to the number of stations involved, and sets it running.
Now the exchange does its job and starts ‘polling’ through the stations a couple at a time until it gets back to the start and begins again depending on the frequency set.
Sounds a pretty impressive system eh? Ok I saved the bad news until last! with every station selected the ‘window’ available to actually make the PA gets shorter and shorter as another station is added. That’s why PA’s cut off in mid stream for no reason other than the amount of stations selected by the operator. Now I know from experience that if say a whole line is selected then you are lucky to have about 10 seconds available to get what you need to say across. Not a great deal of time to go into great details about anything is it really? While the exchange is sending PA’s out across the system you cannot dial that stations PA as the line will be engaged. The alternative is that the operator individually dials each station and makes individual PA’s which as you can imagine takes quite some time to go across the whole system. So now on top of a missing Eccles tram we have a signalling fault at say Timperley. Who wants what information now? What would usually happen is one fault would be on auto PA and the other would be manually done to the affected area, but again the more staions receiving PA’s the lesser the time allowed to make it.
The Eccles line has quirks of its own where PA’s can be set in ‘Day’ or ‘Night’ mode. Day mode operates from 7am -7pm. In Day mode the PA’s are so loud that the residents along the line constantly complain and ask for them to be turned down (how would you like to hear the same loud message coming through your front window every few minutes?) So we went through the routine of having to turn them into ‘Night’ mode during the day, the drawback there being that the roads are so busy around Eccles line stations that road traffic noise totally drowns out the PA as its that quiet. Oh and before its suggested that the volumes should be adjusted, that avenue was investigated not long after installation.
I apologise for the long post but I hope its helped you understand the difficulties that arise, and yes PA’s ARE DONE CONSTANTLY! For the proud Metrolink drivers among you that still don’t know, it’s the Revenue & Security Supervisor that does the PA’s and has been so for about 18 months, and a very good job they do of them too despite the kit provided. (see Freel07 nothings scary about the control room!)
Im told that no provision has been made in the upgrades to replace the current PA system so it looks like we are stuck with what we have for the foreseeable future. :cheers:

Yes they would help I very much agree! So lets explain just how the PA system works shall we?
In fact let me do that for you as I know you have no knowledge of the systems limitations………….
The PA system works via the Metrolink telephone exchange. To make a PA you either dial the appropriate number for the required station and the exchange rings the number and hopefully connects, which will allow you to make a PA to 1 station. If you need to make an announcement to more than 1 station it can be done via a touchscreen.
The touchscreen allows a PA to be made to multiple stations ie groups of stations or even a whole line can be selected. A PA can be recorded, by speaking into a handset at a touchscreen and set to repeat however many times you like, for as long as you like. In theory you can make the same PA & set it to repeat every minute until doomsday.
So as an example lets say we have a tram missing on the Eccles line causing a delay. Does everyone across the system need to know this fact? Ideally yes as its informative to passengers travelling from anywhere on the system towards Eccles as well as passengers using the Eccles line itself. So the person responsible for making PA’s in Control makes the PA, via a touchscreen due to the number of stations involved, and sets it running.
Now the exchange does its job and starts ‘polling’ through the stations a couple at a time until it gets back to the start and begins again depending on the frequency set.
Sounds a pretty impressive system eh? Ok I saved the bad news until last! with every station selected the ‘window’ available to actually make the PA gets shorter and shorter as another station is added. That’s why PA’s cut off in mid stream for no reason other than the amount of stations selected by the operator. Now I know from experience that if say a whole line is selected then you are lucky to have about 10 seconds available to get what you need to say across. Not a great deal of time to go into great details about anything is it really? While the exchange is sending PA’s out across the system you cannot dial that stations PA as the line will be engaged. The alternative is that the operator individually dials each station and makes individual PA’s which as you can imagine takes quite some time to go across the whole system. So now on top of a missing Eccles tram we have a signalling fault at say Timperley. Who wants what information now? What would usually happen is one fault would be on auto PA and the other would be manually done to the affected area, but again the more staions receiving PA’s the lesser the time allowed to make it.
The Eccles line has quirks of its own where PA’s can be set in ‘Day’ or ‘Night’ mode. Day mode operates from 7am -7pm. In Day mode the PA’s are so loud that the residents along the line constantly complain and ask for them to be turned down (how would you like to hear the same loud message coming through your front window every few minutes?) So we went through the routine of having to turn them into ‘Night’ mode during the day, the drawback there being that the roads are so busy around Eccles line stations that road traffic noise totally drowns out the PA as its that quiet. Oh and before its suggested that the volumes should be adjusted, that avenue was investigated not long after installation.
I apologise for the long post but I hope its helped you understand the difficulties that arise, and yes PA’s ARE DONE CONSTANTLY! For the proud Metrolink drivers among you that still don’t know, it’s the Revenue & Security Supervisor that does the PA’s and has been so for about 18 months, and a very good job they do of them too despite the kit provided. (see Freel07 nothings scary about the control room!)
Im told that no provision has been made in the upgrades to replace the current PA system so it looks like we are stuck with what we have for the foreseeable future. :cheers:


cap`njack

Many thanks for taking the time to expalin this to all, by pure coincidence I was delayed on the Ecc line at Lunch time..got chatting to some Metrolink Engineers asked them if there was a delay to which the answer came back yes..a short one..we then had a chat about the lack of info from Metrolink in these situations (but not aportioning blame to them obviously) and well done to the chap he contacted your control room (I now see as above) and low and behold a minute later the appropriate announcement was made telling us where the next tram was at the moment, and the expected time until arrival in Eccles..and yes it arrived exactly when they said it would...so it can be done ...and we all got on "happy little bunnies"!

Took these with my cam phone in Eccles today..nothing we`ve not seen before though

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/P190210_1424.jpg

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/P190210_142401.jpg

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/ss255/trakkie/P190210_1426.jpg

Holy shit, that is quite incredible. In the worst possible sense. Thanks for the info.

With the new PIDs, won't tannoy announcements be less important? But then surely DDA (in relation to those with poor sight) mean the tannoy must work properly?

I noticed that Yellow (was white) MPV digger thing that Metrolink own passing through Victoria at silly O clock last night. No idea where it was going. Perhaps testing the new Media City extension?

http://i45.tinypic.com/2jf7yv.jpg