Those Canny Yorkshire Folk Seem To be Thinking About More Stations
Different parts of the country seem to have there own preferred ways of expanding their transport network.
Only London can probably afford large projects like Crossrail or Crossrail 2, but several cities like Manchester, Cardiff and Nottingham can make good cases for sensible projects that cost from say a hundred million pounds up to a billion. Projects in this category would include.
Croxley Rail Link to Watford – £230 million – Click for details
Midland Metro extension to New Street – £127 million – Click for details
North West Electrification – £422 million – Click for details
Nottingham Express Transit – Phase 2 – £570 million – Click for details
Valley Lines Electrification – £400 million – Click for details
The costs I have quoted are probably only indicative, as Network Rail have had their problems lately. But I just wanted to show that trains and trams don’t come cheap.
Underneath these large and medium sized projects, there are a large assortment that generally get chosen to suit the problems of an area. For example.
1. East Anglia got the Bacon Factory Curve at Ipswich to sort out delays to all traffic caused by the large number of freight trains going into and out of the Port of Felixstowe.
2. Lancashire got the Todmorden Curve to allow direct trains from Blackburn and Burnley to Manchester Victoria.
3.Warwickshire received funds to develop new stations at Coventry Arena, Bermuda Park and Kenilworth.
So as I said at the start of this post different areas of the country see their own priorities and attempt to get schemes funded.
Sheffield and Manchester for example might promote schemes based on their tram networks, and Leeds and Liverpool might want to expand their successful rail networks.
It is interesting to look at this page, which is a list of current projects on the West Yorkshire Metro.
Three new stations; Apperley Bridge, Kirkstall Forge and Low Moor are either under construction or could be so in the next year or so.
Improvements at major stations in the area are listed and there is even a project to identify places for new stations.
So as I said in the title of this post, it looks like West Yorkshire is hoping new and improved stations will be a successful, practical and affordable way of bringing more traffic to the network.
They do have a project on the possible introduction of tram-trains in the City. The web site just says this.
Development of a tram-train network for the Leeds city region would be through conversion of existing heavy rail routes and construction of some on-street alignments.
Further consideration will be given following the outcome of a trial in South Yorkshire.
How sensible!
Like many other cities and areas are probably doing, to wait for the trial between Sheffield and Rotherham to show if tram-trains are viable in the UK, is a very good idea.
If what I have seen in Germany is any indication of how the Vossloh tram-trains are introduced and perform, I suspect we’ll be seeing quite a few of their UK variant, the Class 399 tram-train.
Did You Know Sheffield Had A Strassenbahn?
I didn’t either, but if you read this first paragraph of this Wikipedia entry for NET 2012.
Der NET 2012 (Abkürzung für Niederflur Elektrotriebwagen 2012) ist ein Straßenbahntriebwagen, der bei Vossloh für die Verkehrsbetriebe Karlsruhe hergestellt wurde. Der Triebwagen wurde für den Einsatz bei der Straßenbahn Karlsruhe entwickelt und verkehrt dort seit 18. Oktober 2014. Ähnliche Fahrzeuge werden für die Straßenbahn Chemnitz und die Straßenbahn Sheffield hergestellt.
I know it’s in German, but look at the last sentence. It loosely says similar cars will be produced for the Strassenbahn in Chemnitz and Sheffield.
So as I suspected most of technology for the Class 399 tram-train for Sheffield is proven in extensive use on the Karlsruhe Strassenbahn. It would appear that there may even some vehicles that run on both 750 VDC and 16.7 kVAC in Karlsruhe, according to this Wikipedia entry for Karlsruhe Stadtbahn.
The big difference is that the Karlsruhe tram-trains come from Dusseldorf, whereas the Sheffield vehicles are coming from Valencia. But if you look at the Vossloh specifications of the two tram-trains, the German NET 2012 and the British Class 399, they seem to be very similar.
As the first Sheffield tram-train has been unveiled in Valencia, it shouldn’t be long before they are seen on the streets of Sheffield, even if it will be a couple of years before they run to Rotherham.
Vossloh’s Product Sheet For The Class 399 Tram-Train
I was reading this article on Global Rail News about the full certification of the Vossloh Citylink tram-trains that are being used in Karlsruhe and Chemnitz. I’ve seen both systems and these are some pictures that I took.
I apologise, if I’ve got some identification wrong.
On searching the Internet I found this product sheet on the Vossloh web site. It is actually titled Dual-Voltage Tram-Train Sheffield.
There are two bits of good news.
The product sheet says that the tram-train is air-conditioned.
But the best news is this from the article in Global Rail News.
Operator Verkehrsbetriebe Karlsruhe GmbH (VBK) has now exercised two options for a total of 50 additional Citylink LRVs to add to the 25 procured in 2011. All of the new low-floor vehicles should be delivered by summer 2017.
Would Karlsruhe have ordered seventy-five trams, if they weren’t up to the job?
So Sheffield isn’t getting some totally brand-new technology. They may be the first dual-voltage Vossloh Citylink tram-trains, but that is technology, that has ben wel-proven in many places.
Chemnitz Trams And The Chemnitz Model
Like most German cities Chemnitz has an extensive tram network, which even runs a few vintage trams.
One of the reasons, I went to Chemnitz was that they are extending the system, by using tram-train technology in reverse. Normally in the Karlsruhe model, the city’s trams venture out into the surrounding area, by joining the heavy rail lines. I took pictures of this system, working in Karlsruhe, Kassel and Mulhouse. In Chemnitz, the City-Bahn Chemnitz allows trains to turn into trams at the Hauptbahnhof. In the pictures the red-and-white trams are train-trams.
In some ways the only difference between a train-tram and a tram-train, is whether the original vehicle is based on tram or train technology. But in the end the objective is the same and that is to have a vehicle that is capable of running on both tram and train tracks, with the crash-worthiness of a train. The Germans have ascribed the Chemnitzer model to what they are doing in Chemnitz. This is part of the first psaragraph of the article on the Chemnitzer model.
A special feature of the pilot line of the Chemnitzer model for Stollberg is the low platform height of 20 centimeters above the top of rail , while according to the Railway Construction and Operating Regulations (EBO) in new buildings and conversions actually at least 38 centimeters high platform are required. The vehicles ordered for the 1st stage of the CityLink family have doors with different entry heights, which both the inner city and the railway lines a barrier-free allows passenger access to platforms that are 38 or 55 centimeters high.
It illustrates the tortuous thinking that applies to some tram systems and it would appear tram-train systems. In Sheffield the Class 399 tram-trains will be low-floor , which will be compatible with the Sheffield Supertram, which is worked by trams that are 40% low-floor. But then in Sheffield, they have chosen to run tram-trains on a route where only one station will be shared with heavy rail. So will the trams have different door heights like Chemnitz or some other solution. This article from Rail Engineer explains.
Network Rail will also be building a turn back siding with a tram stop at Parkgate and low level platform extensions to Rotherham Central station.
So it sounds like one section of the platform will be used for trains and a lower one will be used for the tram-trains. It is an arrangement similar to the Clapham Kiss, where passengers walk down the platform to change trains.
Could Tram-Trains Be Used To Advantage North Of Manchester?
In A Plea For Help From Lancashire, I said this about creating a better service to Rossendale.
Perhaps one way to do create a service would be use Class 399 tram-trains to extend the Metrolink from Bury, if they are proven to work successfully between Sheffield and Rotherham in the next few years. After all, the first phase of the Manchester Metrolink to Bury was built by converting the old East Lancashire Railway,
I also said that I feel that the Germans and the French would use tram-trains in the area.
So how feasible would it be to extend the trams from Bury? This is a Google Earth image of the centre of Bury around the end of the Metrolink line from Manchester.
Bury Interchange
Note how the East Lancashire Railway from Bolton Street station passes under the A58 and turns east to continue to its next station at Heywood. The Metrolink stop is marked by the blue symbol labelled Bury Interchange and the tram line goes south passing under the A58 and the rail line.
I clipped this route diagram from the Wikipedia entry for the East Lancashire Line.
Bury Rail Lines
My untrained eye says that it wouldn’t be that difficult to have some tram-trains go via Bury South Junction and then up the East Lancashire Railway. A Buckley Wells Metrolink stop and Park and Ride has been proposed and the site is already owned by Transport for Greater Manchester. Although, I would suspect that the lines would run differently to those shown.
If Class 399 tram-trains or similar going up the East Lancashire Railway were to be proposed, it would certainly result in at least two additional stops in Bury at Buckley Wells and Bolton Street. The biggest problem would be to decide how far the trams would go. Originally the electric trains on the Bury Line as it then was, went to Rawtenstall station. Wikipedia says this.
The Association of Train Operating Companies have identified that the community of Rawtenstall on the East Lancashire Railway Heritage Railway could benefit from services connecting the station to the National Network.
So perhaps this could be a possibility.
One of the advantages of using tram-trains to add a commuter service to the East Lancashire Railway, is that it would reduce the need to find heavy rail platforms at Manchester Victoria. There may be a problem though in the capacity of the current Bury Line, which has a double tram every six minutes. But then a second crossing of the city centre is being built and there are proposals to add all sorts of extensions to the Metrolink network.
Tram-trains are remarkably flexible vehicles in that provided the loading gauge, platform height and track is correct, there is a power supply and signalling system they can use, they can go a vast number of places on the rail and tram network. As an example, here’s one of Karlsruhe’s tram-trains in a platform in the main station alongside a TGV.
So the only thing that limits their use is the correct certification for a route and the training of the staff. Tram-trains also have the advantage that they can run at slowish tram speeds in city centres and at much faster speeds on rail lines designed for such.
In my view all this means that to expand the Metrolink outside of its current network, you need to get a tram-train that can run on the central network in the city centre and then gradually equip and certify all of the branches out of the city for the chosen tram-train.
It would be nice to think in my view, that we could come up with one specification for a tram-train, that could be used everywhere in the country.
To show how tram-trains could be used, I’ll use the example of the new service around the Todmorden Curve from Manchester Victoria to Burnley and Blackburn.
The Caldervale Line through Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley is going to be electrified in the next few years, so it would only be necessary to additionally electrify the line from Rochdale to the Todmorden Curve.
Rochdale where the train and tram lines are close together as this Google Earth image shows, gives two possibilities.
Rochdale Interchange
The tram-train could either go on the current route into Manchester Victoria, provided of course it was electrified or it could run to the city centre on the tram lines.
You pays your money and takes your choice depending on what optimises the network best for the passengers.
A Plea For Help From Lancashire
I have a Google Alert setup to look for stories about the Todmorden Curve. Normally, it picks up worthy stories about the Todmorden Curve and the new services from Blackburn and Burnley into Manchester.
However, today, I picked up this story from the Rissendale Express, which is entitled Rossendale Scribbler: Forget the bus station, we should look to rail to improve our transport links. This is the first couple of paragraphs.
Watching the TV news on Sunday night, I saw a report on the opening of the Todmorden Curve – a short stretch of railway which now makes it possible to travel directly from Burnley to Manchester by train.
As train fans know, this stretch of track is but a few hundred metres long, yet it’s taken an absolute age to get it opened.
So you’d think that if a rail link is good for Burnley and Blackburn, then one would be good for Rossendale, which lies to the north of Bury and south of Blackburn.
The Rossendale scribbler then goes on to explain how Lancashire County Council is giving £3.5million to create a bus station in Rawtenstall, whereas he and a lot of the locals would prefer a rail service. A couple of weeks ago I had to take a bus from Blackburn to Manchester and I know where my sympathies lie.
He then goes on to explain, that there is already a rail line, but it is a heritage railway called the East Lancashire Railway. He then says this.
After all, Rossendale has a head start over many areas wanting a rail link – the railway track is already down.
Of course, fans of the East Lancashire Railway speak of concerns that commuter services would damage the heritage railway which attracts so many visitors to the area.
That need not be so of course. The two could run side by side, and train services running on from the ELR to Manchester could bring more people to the heritage line.
Some suggestions put the cost of commuter services at £10.5m.
It strikes me that if it is best for all citizens of the area, then a solution must be found that allows commuters into Manchester to share the line with those that want to play with steam trains.
There is also this article on the Manchester Evening News, where rail enthusiast, Pete Waterman, talks a lot of sense about dual use of the line.
If the Todmorden Curve is a success, I think that there will be more pressure to bring a commuter service into Manchester via the East Lancashire Line.
And then you get a story like this in the Lancashire Telegraph, which is entitled TODMORDEN CURVE: £12m spin-off for Burnley’s economy
Enough said!
As someone, who lives in an area of London, that has been reinvigorated by the refurbishment of the North and East London Lines, I know the effect a good rail line can have on employment, leisure, business and housing opportunities. So if running services into Manchester, would give the area a significant uplift, the services should start.
Perhaps one way to do create a service would be use Class 399 tram-trains to extend the Metrolink from Bury, if they are proven to work successfully between Sheffield and Rotherham in the next few years. After all, the first phase of the Manchester Metrolink to Bury was built by converting the old East Lancashire Railway,
I’m certain, that if the Germans or the French were creating a system like the Manchester Metrolink now, they would look at tram-train technology based on the Karlsruhe model. But this type of tram-train operation only dates from 1992, so unfortunately Manchester didn’t have the option to look at it, when the Metrolink was first proposed in 1982.
Would A Tram-Tube Be Feasible?
I have seen tram-trains at work in Karlruhe, Kassel and Mulhouse and they work well as they travel on the tram-tracks in the city centre and the train tracks as they travel outside and to the next major town. We’re soon to introduce Class 399 tram-trains between Sheffield and Rotherham as an experiment and after what I’ve seen in Europe, I don’t believe that the trial will be a substantial failure because of the concept.
When I looked at Crossrail 2 at Wimbledon, I said I had a bonkers idea. If we can have tram-trains, then why can’t we have tram-tubes?
Dimensional restrictions would apply and I suspect it would only be possible with the larger size of tube train. But the cross-section of the modern S7/8 stock is not that different to your average tram, although they are longer. Although, I’ve seen some substantial tram-trains in Europe, with at least four coaches.
What gave me the thought was the problem of the Tramlink platforms at Wimbledon would be solved if they could run up the District Line to another terminus.
It is probably infeasible at Wimbledon for various reasons, but once the tram-train technology is proven in a UK environment, I can’t see why the concept might not work in the right way in the right place on the sub-surface lines of the London Underground. One possibility would be to create a branch line shuttle. Such a concept could have been used at Barking Riverside, but they have decided to extend the Gospel Oak to Barking Line instead.
I do think it will be wrong to underestimate the devious minds of those engineers trying to squeeze the last drop out of London’s transport infrastructure.
Quiet Flows The Don
The tram-trains between Sheffield and Rotherham will join up to the Sheffield Supertram in the area of the Meadowhall South/Tinsley tram stop.
This Google Earth image shows the area.
Tinsley Area
Note the tram line marked by the blue symbol which shows the Meadowhall South/Tinsley stop, running down the map, with the single-track Tinsley/Masborough South Junction-Rotherham freight railway, splitting off to the right. Note the footbridge that rises from the tram stop and crosses the freight line, which you can see in the pictures. You can also see Meadowhall at the left and the M1 at the right and the various roads leading to and from Sheffield.
I took these pictures of the area.
Believe it or not, in the midst of all this chaos is a quiet area by the River Don.
For the eagerly awaited tram-train, a connection will need to be made between the tram line and the single-track freight line. There is little detail at present about how the connection will be made, but the freight line will have to be provided with some form of overhead electrification at either 750 V DC or 25kV AC. However, the Class 399 tram-trains will be able to use any handy voltage.
I’ve just found this page on the Network Rail web site, which is their home page for the creation of the Tinsley Chord which will connect the tram line to the freight line. I was able to create this map of the chord from one of their published documents, from the impressive and comprehensive site.
The Tinsley Chord
The new chord is shown in red and curves between the tram line at the left and the freight line, which goes off to the right.
Note that the Meadowhall South/Tinsley tram stop is the Sheffield side of the chord, so passengers going between Rotherham and Meadowhall could enter the Meadowhall Centre via Debenhams, as I did after my walk by the River Don.
Incidentally, Network Rail and their contractors will like working on this one, as sixty percent of the work is virtually indoors, as it is underneath the massive Tinsley Viaduct that carries the M1 over the area.
If you want to know how this chord underneath the M1 will effect the local bats, hedgehogs and newts it’s all laid out in this document.
Perhaps the best news of the project is contained in this recent report from the Sheffield Star, which is entitled Construction work planned for long-awaited £60m Sheffield to Rotherham tram-train scheme.
The article hopes that tram-trains will be running in 2017.
The Creation Of The Tees Valley Metro
James Cook station is the first project that could be thought of as part of the proposal to create a Tees Valley Metro, which is described in Wikipedia like this.
The Tees Valley Metro is a project to upgrade the Tees Valley Line and sections of the Esk Valley Line and Durham Coast Line to provide a faster and more frequent service. In the initial phases the services will be heavy rail mostly along existing alignments. The later phase may introduce tram-trains to allow street running.
Tram-trains could be ideal for the line and perhaps if they ran past the Riverside stadium could be used to provide a stop there.
The proposed layout of the metro is powerful in that it links the East Coast Main Line at Darlington and the possibly soon-to-be-electrified Middlesbrough station to a number of both local heavy rail lines and a couple of heritage ones, opening up the area for all sorts of business, leisure and employment opportunities.
If Newton Aycliffe becomes a major train building centre as Hitachi hope, then surely that area could become an important destination on the Tees Valley Metro.
This Google Earth image shows the Tees Valley Line through Middlesbrough.
Middlesbrough
Note Middlesbrough station at the west (left) and South Bank station at the east, at the top of the image.
The current Tees Valley Line threads its way between the two stations, on the north side of the main A66 road, passing close to the Riverside stadium.
The Esk Valley Line to James Cook, Nunthorpe and Whitby branches off from this line between Middlesbrough station and the stadium and goes off in a generally south-easterly direction alongside the A172 road.
The Anonymous Widower 