TRANSPORT | Metrolink

[Freel07]

Originally Posted by LNGCats

The delays from TMS sure have been crap but it does mean we are going to have a flood of openings this year as the issues are finally sorted out.

By the end of this year we will be waiting on Droylsden to Ashton, but that will surely be early 2014, Oldham and Rochdale town centres and the airport line.

East Didsbury also Cats. purely guessing but after next week's Droylsden opening I'd expect Rochdale Station followed late this year by East Didsbury and early next year Ashton. Then a bit of a gap again until ORL Town Centre lines. I wonder whether those 2 will open together or if Rochdale will open first as it seems to be somewhat ahead.

[VDB]

Assuming all line openings are 'sane' (i.e. no hiccups) from now until 2016, this is what Metrolink's steady increase looks like. Soon, we'll be bigger than any other city metro outside of London; and this is how it'll happen. Feel free to correct

Summer 1992 - 26 new stations open on Greater Manchester's brand new Metrolink tram network. They're city centre stations at Victoria, High St, Market St, Mosely St, Piccadilly Gardens, Piccadilly, St Peter's Square and Deansgate/GMEX.

1998 - High St station is merged into Market St to create a new two-way stop there.

Winter 1999 - 6 new stations open between Pomona and Broadway, through the Docklands area. A new interchange station is also opened at Cornbrook.

July 2000 - 4 new stations open between Broadway and Eccles, completing Phase 2 of Metrolink's expansion

2002 - A new city centre station constructed at Shudehill in anticipation for the new bus station.

Autumn 2010 - The beginning of Phase 3 saw one new stop built at the BBC's new headquarters in Salford Quays, at MediaCityUK.

Summer 2011 - 3 new stations built on the South Manchester Line at Firswood, Chorlton and St Werburgh's Road.

Spring 2012 - 8 new stations opened between Victoria and Oldham Mumps on the Oldham-Rochdale line

Winter 2012 - 2 new stations opened as an extension of the Oldham line, at Derker and Shaw & Crompton.


Above is in the past

Below is in the future



February 2013 - 8 new stations will open between Piccadilly and Droylsden

~2013~ - 5 new stations will open between Shaw and Rochdale

Autumn 2013 - 1 new station will open at Queens Road on the Bury line

~2013~ - 5 new stations will open when the remainder of the SML opens to East Didsbury

~2013~ - 2 stations will close, at Mosely St and Woodlands Road

~2014 - The remainder of the East Manchester Line between Droylsden and Ashton will open, with 4 new stations along the way

~2014~ - 1 new stop will open in Rochdale Town Centre at the very end of the Oldham-Rochdale line

~2014~ - 3 new stations will open in Oldham Town Centre, with a fourth station - Oldham Mumps - acting as a replacement to the current stop

~2016~ - 15 new stations will open when the Airport line opens between Chorlton and Manchester Airport. A new stop in the city centre will be built at Exchange Square, bringing the total number of Metrolink stations across Greater Manchester to 95.



The Airport line & Exchange Square will complete Metrolink Phase 3, however TfGM are currently looking at a new line to Port Salford & the Trafford Centre, as well as a new Wythenshawe Loopline; which will take the number of Metrolink stations to above 100.

[Nathan Dawz]

I thought the Oldham / Rochdale town centre links are 2014, not 2016?

Also you could add in when all of the T68s will be withdrawn since it's another important milestone (is that meant to be 2014 as well?)

[VDB]

Edited

[kriis101]

Originally Posted by Johnny de Rivative

Is ten the full complement to work Droylsden <> Bury?

Yep, was 6 trams Bury - Picc, then an extra 4 for Picc - Droylsden.

[Bradfordian2]

Originally Posted by Freel07

The reason for running the MediaCityUK trams to Velopark is to keep the number of Sheffield Street reversals to a manageable level. Whether they are to run in service or not seems to be a moot point.

No-one questions the reason for the Media City trams continuing to the loop at Velopark. If you were to read my post properly you would see that I am suggesting it is the prospect of running in service, rather than out of service, which has prompted the splitting (operationally) of the Eccles and Media City lines, although I have to say I'm far from convinced that I'm right. Do you have another explanation?
Incidentally, having now familiarised myself with the track layout at Velopark I appreciate that in referring to running in service to that point I should have referred to running in service to Etihad Stadium.

[madferret]

Originally Posted by Johnny de Rivative

I like it from the point of view of the EML . . . but I don't think the MCUK people will like being thrown off on to an already-full inbound Alti.

At the risk of being circular, aren't the flows opposed? i.e. the peak Altrincham to Manchester is morning, when people working at MediaCity will be travelling the other way. Same goes for evening flows in the opposite directions.

I know there are people that live in the MC area that need to go to Manchester but they do have Eccles trams as well as the MC ones if they need them.

[Freel07]

Originally Posted by madferret

At the risk of being circular, aren't the flows opposed? i.e. the peak Altrincham to Manchester is morning, when people working at MediaCity will be travelling the other way. Same goes for evening flows in the opposite directions.

I know there are people that live in the MC area that need to go to Manchester but they do have Eccles trams as well as the MC ones if they need them.

I have always thought that the plan for the Cornbrook MediaCityUK Shuttle was misguided. The lack of confidence in the extra capacity line of sight will give is disappointing and to believe that anyone travelling from Piccadilly to MCUK will want to change on that wind swept platform displays a lack of understanding of passengers wishes. This is now compounded by the levels of traffic that have built up since the MCUK service was extended to Piccadilly.

[Bradfordian2]

Originally Posted by Johnny de Rivative

The reason for running Medias to Velopark seems to be that the headshunt at Sheffield Street cannot cope with them (as they were not planned - and are still not advertised - to be at Piccadilly in any event), and Velo is the next nearest reversing siding up the line, albeit quite a long way (nearly 2 miles?).

See above.

But I fully agree that it will seem perverse to intending passengers to have an inaccessible service passing four stops each way every 12 minutes (quite apart from the wasted fuel/staff time/revenue considerations). But perhaps the extra loading times would sprag up the timetable? No sé nada.

Indeed - but that's still an argument as to whether or not the Picc-Velo should be operated in service, and not an explanation as to why the Eccles and Media City lines have been operationally separated.

What do you see as the future problems with Eccles <> Picc, Brad? It always struck me as having a fair bit of slack in the timetable, esp around the Quays - as well as a fair dollop of layover at Eccles . . . ? But no sé nada alrededor de estas cuestiones!

As has been said before (and not by myself) the leisurely progress through the Quays is a consequence of the topography of the track, rather than any slack in the timetable - from the latter perspective the Eccles line timings are quite tight. As for the layover at Eccles, that was only as great as it was while the Eccles journeys were being interworked with the Media City - the nominal layover at Eccles was ten minutes, whereas now the Eccles line is again going to be operated in isolation it is reduced to four minutes (which equates to an actual layover of, at most, nil).
When the Eccles line was previously operated independently (which was from its opening until widespread changes were made when the 'ghost' running commenced on the Oldham line in June 2012) the schedule latterly became very tight. The round trip time hadn't reduced, of course, but the addition of Media City and St Werburgh's trams had meant there were 25tph each way on the section between Cornbrook and Delta, and 20tph to reverse at Piccadilly rather than 15 - and, much as most contributors to this forum would prefer to deny, the more trams, the more delay. When Eccles and Media City were interworked, the round trip time on Eccles theoretically increased from 72 minutes to 78, while that on Media City reduced from 60 to 54. The latter then became the tight section, and late running was carried over to the next (Eccles) journey. Overall, punctuality didn't improve, but at least the amount of lost mileage was reduced.
So now we are going back to a round trip time of 72 minutes, Picc-Eccles-Picc. The schedule will be as tight as it was prior to June 2012, with all the attendant late running/missed journeys, plus the added complication of a further 2/3 minutes each trip to run from the undercroft up to Sheffield Street and back. I'll be happy to be proved wrong on this point, but I doubt I will be.

Is ten the full complement to work Droylsden <> Bury?

As kriis has said, the answer to that is yes. The only exception is on the 15-minute service when the requirement is 8 trams.

[WatcherZero]

Your not taking into account the Bury/Rochdale/Oldham/Altrincham/South Manchester passengers who all have to change at Cornbrook anyway. Your only thinking about the passengers going from Piccadilly and the City Centre.

The issue isnt capacity crunch on the Cornbrook viaduct its that all the extra paths through the city centre are needed by the new services until 2CC is built. When 2CC is built their may then be enough capacity through the city centre for the service to go to Piccadilly, however it was alway my understanding they wanted it when extended to terminate at Victoria, the building of the third platform at Victoria as part of 2CC/Victoria Roof is in part to allow that to happen.

[Bradfordian2]

Originally Posted by Freel07

I have always thought that the plan for the Cornbrook MediaCityUK Shuttle was misguided. The lack of confidence in the extra capacity line of sight will give is disappointing and to believe that anyone travelling from Piccadilly to MCUK will want to change on that wind swept platform displays a lack of understanding of passengers wishes. This is now compounded by the levels of traffic that have built up since the MCUK service was extended to Piccadilly.

I've always thought that the Media/Cornbrook shuttle was the second barmiest idea anyone has managed to come up with since Metrolink was inaugurated. Madferret has a point, of course, that Media City has what I call 'reverse flow' - i.e. the dominant flow is outwards from Manchester in the morning peak, and inwards in the afternoon - but that doesn't mean I fancy the idea of tipping a tram load of professional people onto the platform at Cornbrook every 12 minutes, and that's even if there were abundant capacity available on the alternative services, and I wouldn't say that there was. On this, I've always alluded to your viewpoint.
As to Watcher's point, people do, of course, transfer onto Alt/SML trams, but it's only a small proportion of the total - yes, I often change trams at Cornbrook myself, especially in the evening peak. Regarding those heading for the Bury or Oldham lines, and who would have to change trams sooner or later, I'm sure thay can only comprise a small number -there are so many other directions people can be going.

[Bradfordian2]

Originally Posted by Bradfordian2

When the service to Droylsden (or wherever) starts, is there not going to be a problem terminating trams at Piccadilly? If one tram every 12 minutes runs through, that will still leave three every twelve minutes which don't, and I can't easily see how they are going to be accommodated.

Posted the above as long ago as August - got shot down by my 'fan club'.

[sotonsi]

If you wait an age for HS2, you can rebuild it with a reversing platform as part of those works.

Or get 6 minute service to the Etihad or Velopark to make it only 2 trains every 12 terminating at Piccadilly.

[Futurelink]

Contrary to the Metrolink website, the Eccles line is severely disrupted this morning. 20 minutes between trams.

[Freel07]

Originally Posted by Futurelink

Contrary to the Metrolink website, the Eccles line is severely disrupted this morning. 20 minutes between trams.

Isn't that 'Normal Service' as the site says

[Freel07]

Originally Posted by WatcherZero

Your not taking into account the Bury/Rochdale/Oldham/Altrincham/South Manchester passengers who all have to change at Cornbrook anyway. Your only thinking about the passengers going from Piccadilly and the City Centre.

The issue isnt capacity crunch on the Cornbrook viaduct its that all the extra paths through the city centre are needed by the new services until 2CC is built. When 2CC is built their may then be enough capacity through the city centre for the service to go to Piccadilly, however it was alway my understanding they wanted it when extended to terminate at Victoria, the building of the third platform at Victoria as part of 2CC/Victoria Roof is in part to allow that to happen.

At the moment the capacity bottleneck is Old Trafford to Deansgate Castlefield and I am convinced that once Line of Sight is commissioned between these 2 points one more path could be found up Mosley Street. The path is there anyway until SML to ORL goes 10 tph. Accepted once the Airport Line opens things will be tight until 2CC opens. My understanding is the the additional centre platfrom at Victoria is for the Airport Line.

[M60lad]

Does anybody know what/who controls the St Peters Square/Princess Street traffic light junction only the other week when I was on a tram we waited abot 3 cycles before we were actually allowed to proceed through the junction, it wasn't until the driver of the tram radioed in that the lights actually changed for the tram.

Also as for East Didsbury opening according to a friend of mine who works in Control Room at Queens Road, East Didsbury can't open until the Control Room at Old Trafford Depot is fully operational as Queens Road Control Room can't handle the additonal trams for some reason

[Motortownman]

Originally Posted by Freel07

Isn't that 'Normal Service' as the site says

Seems to be. On friday I passed Weaste and it said "Eccles 1 min, 3 mins 27 mins". Got home checked the website out if interest and it said "Normal service"

Surely the first one should have waited at Weaste for the second one to pass the passengers onto. Then the drivers change running boards, with the second driver taking the front tram forward to Eccles and the first driver now on the back tram to reverse at Weaste after calling the passengers over from the other platform. That would have done a lot to try to get things back on time.

Or is that impossible? Or nobody thinks to do it?

[LNGCats]

I'm guessing with TMS being close to working the status website will be much more akin to the TfL one in the future rather than the wordy, manual updates at the moment.

[Bradfordian2]

Originally Posted by Motortownman

Seems to be. On friday I passed Weaste and it said "Eccles 1 min, 3 mins 27 mins". Got home checked the website out if interest and it said "Normal service"

Surely the first one should have waited at Weaste for the second one to pass the passengers onto. Then the drivers change running boards, with the second driver taking the front tram forward to Eccles and the first driver now on the back tram to reverse at Weaste after calling the passengers over from the other platform. That would have done a lot to try to get things back on time.

Or is that impossible? Or nobody thinks to do it?

I think you're assuming that the first of the three times was 10 minutes late, and that the second was on time - or, at least, if the second was late, then the first was ten minutes later still. You are also perhaps assuming that the previous tram (which you presumably didn't see) was running on time.
Last Friday there was still a scheduled 10-minute recovery time at Eccles (it was reduced as from Saturday - I presume to four minutes) so if the first tram was ten minutes late at Weaste it should have been or time, or almost on time, leaving Eccles. What sort of gap then existed between it and the previous tram would then depend on where the previous tram was. If there was an excessive gap for some reason, then, yes, there would have been something to be gained by terminating a tram at Weaste.
That leaves the matter of the 24-minute gap between the second and third trams, assuming that the PID was giving an accurate statement of the situation. Was the next tram running 12 minutes late (an almost everday occurrence on the Eccles line) or was a tram completely missing? I have known trams to miss completely (through shortage of a driver), but not very often. I remember one occasion when a tram was missing for a couple of trips (this was on the Eccles line, one evening) and the previous tram was dropped back by 6 minutes in order to give two 18-minute gaps in place of one of 24 minutes. On another occasion, however, a tram was missing from Werbys-Oldham for several hours, but no alteration was made to any other tram running.
In reality a tram usually needs to be seriously late (i.e. by much more than 10 minutes) before corrective action is taken. An Eccles tram wouldn't be terminated at Weaste, but it might be terminated at Media City, and Bury-Alt directs are often teminated at Piccadilly. The only examples I can think of on the spur of the moment of trams being terminated not far short of their scheduled destination involve Altrincham trams being terminated at Navigation Road or Timperley (since the reversing arrangement is fairly straightforward) - and that does happen regularly.

Edit (1255 hrs): I've just been reminded that the points at Weaste (both sets, presumably) have to be changed, and reset, by hand, and that makes an impromptu reversal pretty well impractical. This situation may or may not have always been the case.