Marple - Manchester tram-train case study

[Dave]

Thanks rsh - that's interesting and very encouraging.  As you say, if this were implemented it would completely transform our connections with Manchester City Centre and indeed other places too.  Bring it on!

rsh writes:

One thing the report doesn't make clear is the division of services between Marple and Rose Hill, or the effect on Strines and New Mills.

I seem to recall in an earlier paper there was reference to the existing 'heavy rail' stopping service to Sheffield via Marple and New Mills continuing alongside a new tram-train service from Marple.  So presumably that's all that New Mills and Strines can expect. 

[rsh]

Finally an update on the prospect of "tram-trains" on the Marple line I thought I'd share, from the TfGM Committee papers.

To summarise: having studied the cost-benefit of six proposals for tram-train services, Marple has come out well in the lead with the only "High" value score and is being progressed as a possible Phase 1 of a wider tram-train strategy across the whole of Greater Manchester.

For us, that could mean 5 or even 10 services to Manchester per hour (tph) - that's a tram-train every 6 or 12 minutes! These would then leave the standard heavy rail line near Ashburys, travelling down onto a new tramway route that would lead into the Metrolink station underneath Piccadilly.

Since one benefit of a Metrolink-like operation is that the vehicles run right through the city, Altrincham is being touted as a possible terminus for trams from Marple (every other tram from Altrincham currently turns back at Piccadilly). If 10 trams per hour were chosen, they could even terminate at Altrincham and Bury alternately. That'd mean you could hop on Marple, having waited only about 6 minutes, and hop off again right at St Peter's Square, Market Street, Old Trafford or even Bury!

Estimated cost with 66% contingency allowance for 5tph to Marple is £170m or £200m for the full 10tph. As well as electrification of the line and the new link to Piccadilly, that includes 24 new electric vehicles, which would be a different design to the existing yellow trams, longer with more seats and built to a standard for heavy rail lines (crashworthiness etc).

It could happen as early as 2020 - just in time for the awful Pacer trains' last gasps!

One thing the report doesn't make clear is the division of services between Marple and Rose Hill, or the effect on Strines and New Mills. Curiously, the Rose Hill stub is marked on the map but everything simply refers to just "Marple". Which could mean they don't know, or it could mean Rose Hill is expected to remain a heavy rail route via Hyde, which I think would be a terrible situation for the station unable to compete. Oh well, six years still leaves plenty of time to work out the details (and enjoy our overcrowded diesels)...



Here are some snippets:

Introduction and Background

In the context of Greater Manchester, tram-train means extending  Metrolink onto the local heavy rail network, sharing track with remaining  heavy rail services. Track-sharing between heavy rail trains and LRT  with street-running capability is established in continental Europe, especially in Germany. Recently, a tram-train trial was approved in the UK, with services to run between Sheffield and Parkgate (near  Rotherham) which is planned to open in 2016.

At its meeting of 10 February 2012, TfGMC requested the development of a tram-train strategy for Greater Manchester and at a meeting of the GMCA on 29 June 2012 (report entitled “City Deal: Future Transport Prioritisation”), it was agreed that the following potential tram-train routes would be investigated:

• Manchester – Bredbury – Marple
• Manchester – Glossop
• Manchester – Atherton – Wigan
• Manchester – Sale - Altrincham – Hale/Knutsford
• Manchester – East Didsbury – Hazel Grove
• Stockport – Altrincham.

The work carried out since April 2012 to develop a Greater Manchester tram-train strategy has considered the feasibility, costs, and benefits of these routes [...]

A phased approach to implementation looks appropriate, with potential for the first phase to open around 2020.

Marple

In view of its strong performance, develop further as a potential first full tram-train line in Greater Manchester, subject to:

• confirming that an acceptable route between Piccadilly Station and Ashburys looks to be achievable (several options are currently under consideration); and
• confirming that the longer tram-train vehicles can be introduced into the city centre without creating substantial delays to existing Metrolink users.

It is recommended that Marple be developed as a potential Phase 1 of a Greater Manchester tram-train strategy, comprising the best-performing routes. For a six-minute headway service in which Marple services operated alternately to Altrincham and Bury, it is estimated that approximately 24 new tram-train vehicles would be needed, although many other service patterns would be possible, and so vehicle requirements at this stage are uncertain.

The early implementation of the tram-train route with the strongest business case is expected to improve the case for implementing the other routes in the proposed network, which will benefit from shared infrastructure.

Recommended way forward for the Marple proposal: Develop as a potential first full Tram-train line in Greater Manchester, possibly as part of a Phase 1 network comprising Marple and Altrincham.

Starts at page 41 of this PDF for those who wish to read: http://www.agma.gov.uk/cms_media/files/capital_projects_and_policy_agenda_papers_8_11_13.pdf

[Duke Fame]

Going back to the March 6 post about Manchester Piccadilly being overloaded and platforms not being available could Mayfield station be reopened?  The train shed is still there even if the booking halls etc are damaged.

I think the problem with Mayfield is there is still a shortage of capacity in the junctions ahead of the station. Rail & trams are not the best use of space as there has to be large gaps between moving trains.

[Dave]

could Mayfield station be reopened? 

I seem to recall that this possibility was considered quite recently, but then ruled out for cost and other reasons.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Mayfield_railway_station

But the solution now proposed is surely much better anyway - i.e building new lines linking the approach to Piccadilly down to the Metrolink lines. 

[Water Rat]

Going back to the March 6 post about Manchester Piccadilly being overloaded and platforms not being available could Mayfield station be reopened?  The train shed is still there even if the booking halls etc are damaged.

[Duke Fame]

I have no truck with Richard Leese but you have just publicly suggested he is corrupt.Hope his lawyers don't see your post.

Did I? I thought I just asked a question.

[wheels]

I have no truck with Richard Leese but you have just publicly suggested he is corrupt.Hope his lawyers don't see your post.

[marplerambler]

Post moderated. Howard

As for the comments about customer statements about improvements in the service on the line to Shaw, well surprise, surprise, they are on www.metrolink.
I know a number of people who live on the Bury tramline and commute and they are pretty unanimous that the tram was the worst thing that ever happened to the Bury line but even worse was to come with the new yellow rolling stock. Cattle trucks with few seats without any kind of suspension and an overhead power system which is so poor it is virtually guaranteed to 'crash' whenever carriages are coupled together. Everybody is whingeing about the old rolling stock on the Marple/Rose Hill line but to be fair you get a seat in Marple or Rose Hill, it does generally run on time and there have been additional carriages during the last few months. It is when you hit the tram platform at Piccadilly that you really feel the commuter rage sparked by an absence of trams and the removal of indicator signs telling you the time to the next tram (or even confirming that there are trams somewhere in Greater Manchester). Leave the trains on the line, Northern Rail found it worthwhile to start running the trains to Glossop and Clitheroe on Sundays: they may be pleasantly surprised if they introduce a more frequent Sunday and evening service. If a tram loop to Stockport can avoid the crawl along the road in the rush hours we just have to take what we can get.

[Duke Fame]

Post removed. Howard

[Stockport Classic Bus]

What's the latest on the Rotherham-Sheffield pilot analysis referred to in that much earlier posting?

[wheels]

Not my experience I have lots of family in Shaw and the town seems to be up in arms about how poor it is. Not a good word can be found to be said for it as you walk round the town.

[rsh]

The fact they have more trams than they did trains at the start doesn't mean it'll stay that way.

No, you're right - once patronage builds and the line extends to Shaw (and East Didsbury in the other direction), there will be a tram every 6 minutes at peak times!

That said, the Oldham line was just an example. Marple's service, especially if sharing the line with heavy rail, obviously wouldn't be so frequent. Probably every 15 minutes. The point is the huge step-change.

The people of Shaw to totally fed up almost before it begins of the poor quality substandard expensive service they are being provided with to replace what was a perfectly acceptable service.

Before the line opened to Oldham there was an incredible backlash against the tram, at least if you believed the comments section of the local online rag (always the best place to find informed opinion). Now it's open and literally from the moment the first tram departed, they can't say enough how much better it is.

http://www.metrolink.co.uk/oldham/

[Howard]

God keeping the trams out of marple is even more important than keeping ASDA out.

I fail to see why you consider divine intervention is required to keep trams out of Marple.

[wheels]

Whats not to like is that the trams don't take cycles and so would exclude many.

The tram offers nothing whatsoever that could not be provided by heavy rail and the reddish Loop into Stockport which is the real issue the lack of direct contact to Stockport.

The people of Shaw to totally fed up almost before it begins of the poor quality substandard expensive service they are being provided with to replace what was a perfectly acceptable service.

God keeping the trams out of marple is even more important than keeping ASDA out.

[Dave]

Marple of itself doesn't gain anything from Metrolink-style carriages.

It's not really about 'carriages'.  Marple stands to gain hugely from the tram-train, in the following ways:

1.  Increased frequency (every 12 minutes), and convenient through services to the city centre.  This will lead to:
2.  A big increase in the number of people using the service, which will lead to:
3.  Less traffic congestion on the roads

And on top of that, it will run without subsidy, unlike the third-world service which we currently put up with!  What's not to like!

For more detail, see rsh's informative posts near the beginning of this thread.