Tbus

[Wirlie G]

Just re-read above.

I am NOT saying Supertram was not viable compared to Metrolink.

I am saying the scheme is not comparable to Metrolink.

If Metrolink had been built over just a small area as Supertram was to be, all from scratch and no heavy rail conversion who is to say whether it would have been funded?

We don't know.

Both systems are vastly different and serve different functions.

[MattN]

Rather more cautious than your recent claim that 'I doubt' Metrolink would have been viable if it didn't extend beyond the M60!

As a result I thought I thought I should point out that a scheme serving a smaller urban area than either this hypothetical truncated Metrolink or the Leeds supertram proposals clearly is considered to be viable.

[Wirlie G]

Phase 1 - the really successful part of Metrolink has very few stops within the M60.

6 stops on the Alty line and 5 (I think) on the Bury line are not within the M60.

The % of journeys that start or end at one of those stations is absolutely huge.

It may have worked.
I don't know. But a Metrolink entirely within the M60 would be nothing like what we have today.

The station spacing would almost certainly be closer together and the type of journeys taken vastly different.

NET was a new build and was a success.

Metrolink was a heavy rail conversion and a success.

Metrolink would have had to be much more like NET than it is today to have been a success.

Maybe the comparison between NET and Supertram is more valuable?

Both new builds, both serving similar populations?

[cmj]

NET wasn't a totally new build. Part of it (the line to Beeston?) was a heavy rail conversion.

[MattN]

None of it is a heavy rail conversion. Part of the Hucknall line runs alongside a railway but did not involve any conversion. The Phoenix Park branch runs along a pit branch that had been shut for 20-30 years before it opened but this hardly counts. Similarly the Clifton line is proposed to run alongside part of the former Great Central line but this has been shut for over 40 years. The line to Beeston is another proposed extension that hasn't yet been built and will not involve any conversion (or even derelict former trackbed AFAIK).

[cmj]

Originally Posted by MattN

None of it is a heavy rail conversion. Part of the Hucknall line runs alongside a railway but did not involve any conversion. The Phoenix Park branch runs along a pit branch that had been shut for 20-30 years before it opened but this hardly counts. Similarly the Clifton line is proposed to run alongside part of the former Great Central line but this has been shut for over 40 years. The line to Beeston is another proposed extension that hasn't yet been built and will not involve any conversion (or even derelict former trackbed AFAIK).

I was under the impression that the Hucknall line was a conversion of one of the rail tracks to tram, with the other being left as heavy rail, however loooking at google maps that doesn't look like the case.

[MattN]

Yes part of the railway around Bulwell was converted from double to single track (not sure how much off the top of my head since the bit north of Hucknall was single anyway). However what you were saying in the context of this thread suggested that they had converted a heavy rail route to NET like Metrolink, which hasn't happened, this was all completely new infrastructure and no heavy rail routes were closed.

[Wirlie G]

Exactly which is what was proposed for Supertram unlike Manchester Metrolink.

The comparisons between Metrolink and the failed bid for Supertram are weak.

The expansion that was funded which gets Gregg so excited is also a heavy rail conversion and not the same as what was proposed in Leeds.

[grego66]

Originally Posted by Wirlie G

I've heard Leeds might be getting a Crossrail equivilent.

London is getting one therefore it's only fair Leeds gets one.

Dam right.

Originally Posted by Cherguevara

I think it's stupid for Gregg to make the argument that Leeds deserves what Manchester has as an automatic right, but also think it shortsighted to suggest that it could never have similar investment because it's a smaller city. I've said upthread that don't I think the Leeds scheme wasn't as good as it could be (I think I described it as Metrolink with only Eccles, Ashton and Didsbury) but I do think in certain specific contexts a comparison of why a scheme happened in one city and didn't in the other is fair.

To be fair I never said that.

Originally Posted by Wirlie G

Exactly which is what was proposed for Supertram unlike Manchester Metrolink.

The comparisons between Metrolink and the failed bid for Supertram are weak.

The expansion that was funded which gets Gregg so excited is also a heavy rail conversion and not the same as what was proposed in Leeds.

That was pointed out pages ago! The bottom line was money not the work carried out.


And now we're scrapping for the Tbus?? Last I read the NGT was one of 22 transport schemes around the country battling it out from a pot of £600m. Leeds is asking for under £200m. It's hard to find any updates since Hamilton accused Cameron of dodging questions about its future in the House of Common's early this month. It's not looking good, back in March Carter said the Dft should become known as the Department for Timewasting.

[traffordboy]

Originally Posted by grego66

And now we're scrapping for the Tbus?? Last I read the NGT was one of 22 transport schemes around the country battling it out from a pot of £600m. Leeds is asking for under £200m. It's hard to find any updates since Hamilton accused Cameron of dodging questions about its future in the House of Common's early this month. It's not looking good, back in March Carter said the Dft should become known as the Department for Timewasting.

And there is one of the reasons Leeds has alienated itself to the back of the queue!! The men at the top can't keep their mouths shut. Rather than getting on with it behind closed doors, coming up with alternatives, it's just whinge moan gripe. Get a grip.

The bitching on here by gregg that Leeds was more deserving than Manchester is just ludicrous. Greater Manchester is a larger metropolitan area. A good friend of my used to be a manager for network rail before retirement and befor that with BR for many years. He recently to told me if the money hadn't been found for the conversion of the Oldham line, in all probability it would have been closed. This would have made Oldham the largest town in England without a rail link, I believe.

My question to Leeds is this. Why after being unable to convince successive Governments over the last two decades that trams and now trolley busses are the answer, do you still persist in claiming hardship?? Look at Sheffield. Thatcher/Tories hated south yorkshire , yet they developed a tram system. Presumably because that met requirements. Something that Leeds plans never seem to have.

[MattN]

Originally Posted by traffordboy

This would have made Oldham the largest town in England without a rail link, I believe.

Like Leeds is allegedly the largest city in Europe without rapid transit?

Dudley is a lot bigger than Oldham and has no railway in the town centre, though still has a couple of stations in the suburbs.

Keep your mouth shut hey? Not that all that 'get our Metrolink back on track' malarkey did any harm! I'm sure the other things that you lot did over there were what really clinched it but to blame decisions on soundbites from councillors regarding previous rejections (when frankly they would probably be pilloried for not speaking out even if they didn't want to, even though they are bound to want to speak out against decisions they feel harm their area) is just absurd to be honest.

[traffordboy]

To accuse the prime minister of dodging, in parliament, with regards to a project that has been effectively been binned is Political suicide!!! The fact that the Leeds scheme requires 1\3 of the pot of money would have been reason enough to just plug away and keep the mouth shut.

With regards to metrolinks "back on track"campaign, that was for money that had been agreed with the govt, only for it to be withdrawn. A world away from Leeds predicament.

Birmingham is the largest city in Europe without an underground railway. Does that mean we should just say " here you are brum, have 6bn to keep up with minsk" !!!!

[MattN]

Does it mean we should say 'here you are Oldham, here's £500 million so you can keep up with Rochdale'????!?!?!:@:"U&*)"Y"????????

He asked the Prime Minister a perfectly reasonable question in Parliament about a project affecting his constituency or at least very nearby, wasn't satisfied with the answer and said so. He didn't say so in the chamber. It hasn't effectively been binned but it is uncertain. A backbench MP in an opposition party standing up for his constituents interests?!?! You're right, absolute political suicide!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

With regards to Leeds Supertram, that was given funding based on all sorts of conditions in 2001 only to be cancelled due to increasing costs. Funnily enough, exactly like Metrolink phase three rather than 'a world away'.

Oh and do you not find it odd that the only one of these schemes never to have been cancelled or watered down (Nottingham) serves the smallest urban area of the lot?!?!?!?! A mere 430,000 or so.

You have no point of any substance to make.

[traffordboy]

You're right I'm rambling, im sat at home writting these on my phone with a 10 month old baby fast asleep on my chest whilst watching the telly. I should have been taking my 2 year old swimming but had to miss out as ive had noro virus. Ramblings much like about 80% of the posts on this thread!!! The bottom line is Leeds has much less sucessful at scoring in the moving goalposts than other cities. These other cities are not to blame. The folk behind the various plans are - metro, Leeds cc etc.

[Wirlie G]

The back on track campaign (which I was heavily involved in) never ever suggested that Manc had been poorly treated compared to anywhere else.

It never claimed that any other city is not deserving of any investment.

Vastly different from many postings on here who think Metrolink should not have been expanded.

[traffordboy]

Exactly wirlie. No body can say that one shouldn't be built so the other can. Leeds twice missed the financial boat then finally went for a gimmick system which offers nothing more than a standard high quality bus route does. The govt saw through it hence it ends up in the "to be reviewed pile" alongside much cheaper high quality bus corridor plans. Will be interesting to see which get through!!

[MattN]

And the postings on here are being conducted by the local politicians whom you were accusing of derailing the projects by making them?

Hmm, thought not. Still, I see you had to let Wirlie move your goalposts for you, before it was that local politicians shouldn't complain about what they see as bad decisions for their area at all! Funny how he ignored some of the other untruths you peddled though. Obviously sticking up for the truth against the uneducated, uncouth masses takes a back seat if it makes the hood look better!

Oh, and the government 'saw through' what exactly? The exact sort of project they told Leeds to produce when Darling said that it should look at a 'high quality bus option'?

Seriously, leave it out.

[traffordboy]

I'm sure as far as the money men are concerned, trolleybuses are just high quality buses with expensive wires. They will probably be advised that diesel hybrids will do the job just as well. The whole tbus thing was a folly to con the people of Leeds that they were getting something "like" a tram but not!!

Seeing how this has got very petty boys, why dont you take a look at the Manchester expansion board. JDR has tonight posted some excellent pictures of the Ashton lines progress. All done in just over 2 years. Just look at what you could have won gregg.

P.s dont try to imply I'm uneducated and uncouth just because I've upset you!! It is an Internet forum - get over yourself!!

[Electric_City]

Originally Posted by traffordboy

I'm sure as far as the money men are concerned, trolleybuses are just high quality buses with expensive wires. They will probably be advised that diesel hybrids will do the job just as well.

Except that that would be the wrong advice.

Funny how we rarely hear anyone advocating hybrid trams, rather than ones with 'expensive wires'. Also funny how people keep advocating electrification of train lines as an improvement over diesels. I wonder why that is?

Could it be (as one news reporter said the other day) that electrification means greater reliability, longer lasting vehicles and better acceleration?

If you'd read what I posted recently, you'd realise that it's the route segregation, the Park and Ride sites and the new bus depot that would make up most of the cost of the NGT - *not* the wires.

[MattN]

Originally Posted by traffordboy

I'm sure as far as the money men are concerned, trolleybuses are just high quality buses with expensive wires. They will probably be advised that diesel hybrids will do the job just as well. The whole tbus thing was a folly to con the people of Leeds that they were getting something "like" a tram but not!!

Seeing how this has got very petty boys, why dont you take a look at the Manchester expansion board. JDR has tonight posted some excellent pictures of the Ashton lines progress. All done in just over 2 years. Just look at what you could have won gregg.

P.s dont try to imply I'm uneducated and uncouth just because I've upset you!! It is an Internet forum - get over yourself!!

It was actually aimed at Wirlie G who has often implied or even stated that he nudges us to think about things the right way or talk about the real issues, or see things from real people's perspectives while most people on this forum are hopelessly out of touch. I thought it was obvious who I was addressing but clearly not.

We shall see what we shall see, with or without premature smugness from you (though I'm not sure what you're smug about). All I can say is that Leeds was advised to develop a quality bus bid and positive noises have been made until recently. Yes just like the early days of Supertram and Metrolink phase three but there you go. Not to mention what Electric City said (I appreciate it wasn't a serious suggestion but I may as well mention that obviously nobody would be advocating hybrid trams, just look at what happened with that Penistone line nonsense before they realised that nowhere else had been daft enough to try such a thing and therefore there was no such thing as a diesel tram and they would have to be developed bespoke for the line).