TRANSPORT | Metrolink - Future Phases & Fantasy Extensions

[nerd]

Originally Posted by DiscoSteve

But in London, its the Circle Line that is the hub of the Underground system and more importantly it gives some resilience against line failure rather than the whole lot grind to a halt. Granted each Underground line is mostly independent from each other BUT there is line/track sharing on District/Circle and H&C/Metropolitan which is similar to Metrolink

So I also think some kind of loop/bypass line (wider than 2CC which for me is of very limited value) is necessary for the ongoing health and patronage of Metrolink into the medium/long term

It would be more accurate to say that the London Underground grew out of the Circle Line; in origin an orbital line linking the various main line terminus stations. But it never really worked well, and as lines began to be built across central London, the Circle Line became more trouble than it was worth. Which is why, although still designated on paper, there are now no Circle Line services (i.e. trains running round and round in a circle).

When Moscow first planned their Metro, they came to London Transport for advice. They were told; "Don't, whatever you do, build a circle line". There is in fact an orbital line (Koltsevaya) on the Moscow Metro, but it has flying junctions and does not intersect with the distinct radial llines

[iheartthenew]

Originally Posted by Joseph_Locke

Tram-trains will never run on NR metals through Crescent. Any TT scheme on the Athertons would see the tram-trains coming off north of Frederick Road bridge to join the Metrolink system.

The new ticket office for Crescent will be on the north side of the road but on the Manchester side of the railway, so a little closer to your tram stop but not adjacent. Given the Chapel St calming, is there any reason why the stop couldn't move westwards and closer?

While I know I'm on dodgy ground disagreeing with a contributor of your calibre Joseph, but the closer you get to Salford Crescent NR Station, the road starts to rise up to go over the bridge (over the heavy rail line) potentially putting the stop on a bit of an incline. Also, as before, you also get closer to the junction with Albion way and there is a little bit less space for the stop. Of course, I'm not expert and my stop locations are only indicative

By placing the stop close to the University I do expect it to be used by a lot of students. I know I've argued that students don't make the best passengers when putting arguements against the Oxford/Wilmslow Rd line, but Salford attracts a lot more local (NW) students who live at home and commute in and there is no 50p-a-ride competition from Megabus/Finglands, Only wWrst bus which is more expensive than Metrolink. By putting the stop outside the Uni, it can be integrated with the existing pedestrian crossings too.

[Gerbil]

My suggestion for a kind of loop would be a route from Albert Square - Salford Central - Middlewood Locks - Salford Quays. This would do the following:

(a) Provide most of the route to Salford Crescent for Wigan tram-trains.
(b) Help regenerate Middlewood locks
(c) Speed up Eccles - City journeys
(d) Provide a bypass in case of problems at Cornbrook, while still allowing interchange with St. Peter's via a stop near Albert Square

A route serving purpose (a) may actually happen, I suspect that the link to SQ will not.

[scientist12]

Originally Posted by Joseph_Locke

Tram-trains will never run on NR metals through Crescent.

What is the reason for that I wonder?

[Vince Noir]

Originally Posted by scientist12

What is the reason for that I wonder?

Because if you are going to spend millions on tram-train you'll want/need to get some capacity relief benefits on the rail network. No point converting the Atherton line to tram-train if you carry on routing services through what will be one of the biggest remaining bottlenecks post-Hub.

[DiscoSteve]

Originally Posted by nerd

It would be more accurate to say that the London Underground grew out of the Circle Line; in origin an orbital line linking the various main line terminus stations. But it never really worked well, and as lines began to be built across central London, the Circle Line became more trouble than it was worth. Which is why, although still designated on paper, there are now no Circle Line services (i.e. trains running round and round in a circle).

When Moscow first planned their Metro, they came to London Transport for advice. They were told; "Don't, whatever you do, build a circle line". There is in fact an orbital line (Koltsevaya) on the Moscow Metro, but it has flying junctions and does not intersect with the distinct radial llines

Going round and round in a circle is not the point - its the fact that because it exists you get:-

a) The ability to get from anywhere to anywhere without going into the centre if you don't want to (clog up the centre)
b) Some resilience/alternative route around a blockage

Suppose the Fallowfield Loop was Metrolinkised to meet the Ashton Line somewhere between Gorton/Fairfield (or Tram/Trained Marple Line) - you could get between Ashton / Alty-Airport-Didsbury-Eccles without touching the potentially congested (or broken) City Centre Section - continuing north (on some to-be-defined-alignment-wherever) around to link up with OLR and Bury Line would complete that opportunity for the northern lines too

[mackenziesoley]

Originally Posted by nerd

It would be more accurate to say that the London Underground grew out of the Circle Line; in origin an orbital line linking the various main line terminus stations. But it never really worked well, and as lines began to be built across central London, the Circle Line became more trouble than it was worth. Which is why, although still designated on paper, there are now no Circle Line services (i.e. trains running round and round in a circle).

When Moscow first planned their Metro, they came to London Transport for advice. They were told; "Don't, whatever you do, build a circle line". There is in fact an orbital line (Koltsevaya) on the Moscow Metro, but it has flying junctions and does not intersect with the distinct radial llines

Not quite true. The Circle lines (there was six at one point, with some great names like greater outer circle) were never actually circles but spirals with end points like today's Circle line. Technically although today the line is more a spiral, it does a complete lap of the 'circle'.

But the Underground never grew out of the Circle, in fact the original linear (it was never a orbital line until a while after) line is how the Hammersmith & City and the once tiny Baker Street & St Johns railway now the main Metropolitan route.

[Joseph_Locke]

Originally Posted by iheartthenew

While I know I'm on dodgy ground disagreeing with a contributor of your calibre Joseph, but the closer you get to Salford Crescent NR Station, the road starts to rise up to go over the bridge (over the heavy rail line) potentially putting the stop on a bit of an incline. Also, as before, you also get closer to the junction with Albion way and there is a little bit less space for the stop. Of course, I'm not expert and my stop locations are only indicative

You do me an ill-deserved justice there, IHTN. I'm just a lowly Engineer, honest.

IIRC the Chapel street calming makes Crescent two lanes each way and the slope isn't that steep, but I can see the logic of not having a stop on a hill ...

Because if you are going to spend millions on tram-train you'll want/need to get some capacity relief benefits on the rail network. No point converting the Atherton line to tram-train if you carry on routing services through what will be one of the biggest remaining bottlenecks post-Hub.

Spot on.

[scientist12]

Here's my Wigan / Atherton to Manchester airport line via 3rd city crossing. I thought that there's a nice balance going on here as Wigan to Manchester would be very busy as would Fallowfield to Manchester requiring trams every 6 minutes and doubles at peak. Should calamity strike at Cornbrook Chorltonites and Didsbury East can still get home via St Werburgh's as can airport. (At a pinch Altrincham could via Trafford Bar/ long walk from Baguley?).
I've taken the tram train line off Network Rail to relieve congestion at Salford Crescent as instructed:image hosted on flickr

Picture 21 by scientist12, on Flickr

Looks tight on the map through spinning fields up to Albert square but I've walked it before and it seemed spacious on foot. Would require removal of existing foot bridge to be replaced by tram bridge:
image hosted on flickr

Picture 20 by scientist12, on Flickr

No idea if this works:
image hosted on flickr

Picture 19 by scientist12, on Flickr
On the cheap through existing platforms across the existing bridge at bridge st:

image hosted on flickr

Picture 18 by scientist12, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Picture 12 by scientist12, on Flickr

[VDB]

I actually really like that idea! Can't see it happening for a while, but I'd never thought of that route.

Looking at that last map though, compared with the frequency of stations on other Metrolink lines; the Atherton line doesn't appear to have that many.. maybe a station between Pendlebury and Swinton?

EDIT: you appear to have put Pendlebury where Irlams o'th' Heights is. Perhaps replace this station with IothH and move Pendlebury further up the line into ... Pendlebury? that'd sort out the frequency..

[Chorlton Bloke]

The route in picture 20 wouldn't work, I doubt if you'd get two lines down Lloyd Street, let alone a stop!

On second thoughts, you might!

[MarkO]

Nice one Scientist - definitely along the right lines: combining two inner area "must have's" with a crucial 3CC.

IMHO a route very much in this trajectory will be studied for "phase 4" (or 5)

[DiscoSteve]

you'll not get past the town hall like that - they'll have to move the memorial AGAIN

[kriis101]

Originally Posted by DiscoSteve

you'll not get past the town hall like that - they'll have to move the memorial AGAIN

Yeah if you want to put in a new platform, then go straight down Princess Rd, across Mosley St and have a stop next to the Art Gallery. Then turn right down George St (not the prettiest of roads as I think it is the back alleys of some bars and hotels) to get onto Oxford Road. - Well either that or turn right at Portland St, but that may get messy because of the number of buses plus that junction is constantly congested!

[scientist12]

Originally Posted by flange

Looks like the majority of the 2CC line will be poleless and the wires hung from the buildings.

All images from the many many differnet planning applications for each building along the route.








And the St Peter's Square stop.

Flanges pictures show that the line is possible maybe not the platforms. Also war memorial unaffected as my route runs along Cooper St, however art gallery does look a better bet. I could just imagine a tram crossroads here with trams backed up at the lights waiting to go. I do wonder what will happen to Princess St and Portland St traffic after the second city crossing as the BRT from Leigh is due also to run down this way and Princess St is no longer going to be a one way street due to the Oxford Road BRT. It may be that like Moseley St there will be tram creep / tram succession i.e. first cars, trams and buses share the road, next only buses and trams allowed, finally only trams allowed.

[scientist12]

Originally Posted by VDB

I actually really like that idea! Can't see it happening for a while, but I'd never thought of that route.

Looking at that last map though, compared with the frequency of stations on other Metrolink lines; the Atherton line doesn't appear to have that many.. maybe a station between Pendlebury and Swinton?

EDIT: you appear to have put Pendlebury where Irlams o'th' Heights is. Perhaps replace this station with IothH and move Pendlebury further up the line into ... Pendlebury? that'd sort out the frequency..

So is Irlam of the heights not particularly near Irlam then? Not many stations is because the line here appears to go through quite a lot of waste land and factories and not much population perhaps analogous to Central Park, I don't know if it is a very busy stop despite its grandeur. People take a lot of photos of it and the photos don't have many people on it. It seems to be surrounded by unused land or is that just google maps out of date again?

[scientist12]

Originally Posted by MarkO

Nice one Scientist - definitely along the right lines: combining two inner area "must have's" with a crucial 3CC.

IMHO a route very much in this trajectory will be studied for "phase 4" (or 5)

Cheers Marco, although of course just tinkering with ideas that came from tfgm plans from ages ago:
image hosted on flickr


Their's of course going down upper brook st to E Didders also good.

[iheartthenew]

Originally Posted by scientist12

So is Irlam of the heights not particularly near Irlam then? Not many stations is because the line here appears to go through quite a lot of waste land and factories and not much population perhaps analogous to Central Park, I don't know if it is a very busy stop despite its grandeur. People take a lot of photos of it and the photos don't have many people on it. It seems to be surrounded by unused land or is that just google maps out of date again?

Irlams o' th' Height is in Salford M6, nothing to do with the Irlam on the way to Warrington. Io'th'H had its own heavy rail stop on the line, probably not too far from where you are proposing. I say used to as it closed due to low patronage long before Dr Beeching. It was pretty much for the reasons you outlined above, it was at the end of Bank Lane a fair walk from the main centre or Io'th'H. I think the station site is still surrounded by unused land.

[John07]

Originally Posted by iheartthenew

Irlams o' th' Height is in Salford M6, nothing to do with the Irlam on the way to Warrington. Io'th'H had its own heavy rail stop on the line, probably not too far from where you are proposing. I say used to as it closed due to low patronage long before Dr Beeching. It was pretty much for the reasons you outlined above, it was at the end of Bank Lane a fair walk from the main centre or Io'th'H. I think the station site is still surrounded by unused land.

It was badly placed for a station.

I used to go to the Salford Tech Annex at Daisy Bank. That was a pain to get to from Cheadle Hulme using train and buses. A station in that location would have been no help.

[MarkO]

My money was on Quay Street/Peter Street/Oxford Road trajectory as it's certainly wide and straight enough but I do think that moving the St. Peter's Square station may have snookered them a bit (if as seems obvious an interchange station is necessary)

One solution might be to enter from Salford via Peter St, turn left to pass the SPS platforms then right down Princess St then either right down Whitworth/left down Oxo to retake the route or go the whole hog on that side and stay on Upper Brook St...well as long as you want maybe even as far as Hathersage Road.

This has been suggested as a good way to keep it near Oxo/Wilmslow but not on it, but once you get to the end of Upper Brook St you still face the difficulty of weaving the lines thru Rusholme.

I still think if this route ever gets done a short tunnel under the tightest part of curry alley (with a station either end of the portal if you must in order to avoid a physical underground tram stop if that is too costly) is almost unavoidable but as we all know thats why this route has never been Metrolinked so back to the drawing board really!

Upper Brook St has the advantage of at least being walking distance from the Uni campus though I has to admit it seems preferable to actually pass in front of the main uni buildings.

Any compromise/hybrid ideas people??