Anyone for Trams?

[Vierwielen]

Light in this context is used in the sense of "intended for light loads and fast movement", rather than referring to physical weight.
That's from Wikipedia so must be right.

It's all relative. Light rail is (a) lighter in construction standard than main line rail, and (b) intended for smaller trains or trams, typically of 2-4 small cars rather than a full set of 10-12 full size carriages. I'm not so sure about the "fast movement" bit, light rail is usually rather slower than main line services, and stops more frequently. But it's faster than the bus.

According to the Croydon Tramlink Accident Report, tram safety is controlled by the driver's line of sight rather than by rail-side signals or, as is the case for trains travelling at 220 km/h or more, in-cab devices. The "in-sight" requirement limits the trams speed and also its weight as the driver might need to brake more sharply than a main-line train.

[FleetlinePhil]

According to the Croydon Tramlink Accident Report, tram safety is controlled by the driver's line of sight rather than by rail-side signals or, as is the case for trains travelling at 220 km/h or more, in-cab devices. The "in-sight" requirement limits the trams speed and also its weight as the driver might need to brake more sharply than a main-line train.

Metrolink's Altrincham and Bury lines originally had two aspect signalling, but this has been replaced by line of sight operation to enable greater flexibility: https://www.railengineer.uk/2014/12/02/ ... metrolink/

It may just be me, but I always feel Metrolink trams are slightly slow, even on the reserved track sections.

[mikehindsonevans]

According to the Croydon Tramlink Accident Report, tram safety is controlled by the driver's line of sight rather than by rail-side signals or, as is the case for trains travelling at 220 km/h or more, in-cab devices. The "in-sight" requirement limits the trams speed and also its weight as the driver might need to brake more sharply than a main-line train.

Metrolink's Altrincham and Bury lines originally had two aspect signalling, but this has been replaced by line of sight operation to enable greater flexibility: https://www.railengineer.uk/2014/12/02/ ... metrolink/

It may just be me, but I always feel Metrolink trams are slightly slow, even on the reserved track sections.

Hmm, when the trams speed up for the run on the long stretch which passes under the M60 between Dane Road and Stretford, the wobbling of the tram indicates that those little wheels are rotating at close to their maximum safe speed. Bit like an ATR-42 plane (narrow undercarriage) waddling down a windy runway after landing.

[Chris5156]

Hmm, when the trams speed up for the run on the long stretch which passes under the M60 between Dane Road and Stretford, the wobbling of the tram indicates that those little wheels are rotating at close to their maximum safe speed. Bit like andATR-42 plane (narrow undercarriage) waddling down a windy runway after landing.

I've only done the run up to Bury and back once, some years ago now on the old trams, and possibly even when the original railway rails were still in use. The side-to-side swaying and rolling of the body of the tram when it was up to speed on even a straight length of track was remarkable.

[FleetlinePhil]

It may just be me, but I always feel Metrolink trams are slightly slow, even on the reserved track sections.

I travelled from Victoria up to Heaton Park yesterday, and there was more of an urgency than I'd remebered: we certainly accelerated pretty fast once clear of Victoria. The original comment was largely based on the seemingly-leisurely progress along the Oldham loop through the open country betwen Shaw and Milnrow the first time I used it. The street running sections also seem quite stately, perhaps due to the smoothness of the acceleration, or perhaps because I'd got used to the antics of the trams in Prague !

[Bryn666]

There are still two-aspect signals north of Crumpsall on the Bury line, or there were a few months ago at least. I'm fairly sure on the ex-railway sections speeds hit up towards 50 mph which is fast enough when packed like sardines and standing.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... estriction has the exact restrictions in place.

[wrinkly]

Line-of-sight working is to be extended to Whitefield in about 6 weeks according to posts on SSC. Eventually it will reach Bury and Timperley. The last bit to Altrincham, where Metrolink runs alongside Network Rail, and where NR controls the level crossings and the signalling, is doubtful at present.

The hunting of the vehicles at high speeds (for trams) is apparently because it's difficult to find a way of tuning the suspension that works both at speed and on the tight curves encountered on tram routes.

[RichardA626]

I heard the Altrincham & Bury lines originally had an early computerised system which couldn't be easily integrated into the rest of the network's signalling.

Eventually it was completely resignalled using newer technology, which allows for more trams per hour.

[fras]

It seems Tram-Trains will shortly start operation in the UK after decades of operation in Europe. Quite why we cannot accept experience of operation elsewhere, I really do wonder. Anyway, it's good to see that Rotherham-Sheffield will be operating soon, (one hopes !). And only 10 years after it was first mooted !! Maybe this sets some sort of record.

http://www.metro-report.com/news/projec ... cture.html

[roadtester]

Interesting article in the Guardian about the reintroduction of trams in the UK. The peg is the addition of tram lines to Rail Map Online:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018 ... ?CMP=fb_gu

[Big L]

Interesting article in the Guardian about the reintroduction of trams in the UK. The peg is the addition of tram lines to Rail Map Online:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018 ... ?CMP=fb_gu

Interesting how they highlight some cities that had trams and now don't (Glasgow, Bristol), but miss out places that do currently have trams (Birmingham/Wolverhampton, Blackpool).

[FleetlinePhil]

Interesting article in the Guardian about the reintroduction of trams in the UK. The peg is the addition of tram lines to Rail Map Online:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018 ... ?CMP=fb_gu

Interesting how they highlight some cities that had trams and now don't (Glasgow, Bristol), but miss out places that do currently have trams (Birmingham/Wolverhampton, Blackpool).

Yes, that is odd, I think it's a particular pity the old network in the West Midlands wasn't highlighted.

I am always impressed by the size of the former Glasgow network, especially as a single-operator entity.

[Chris Bertram]

What they didn't mention is that the new systems are all built to railway standard gauge, 4' 8.5", whereas older systems were to a variety of gauges. Birmingham's were 3' 6", for instance.

[Octaviadriver]

What they didn't mention is that the new systems are all built to railway standard gauge, 4' 8.5", whereas older systems were to a variety of gauges. Birmingham's were 3' 6", for instance.

You can see the difference in the gauges from looking at photos of old trams or seeing them in museums as the old ones are often tall and thin. I would think that the narrower gauges make it easier to lay double tracks in narrow streets and manoeuvre around tight corners. I recently went to Lisbon and went around the city in a tourist tram down some very narrow streets. It has a gauge of only 2' 11 7⁄16" and the standard railway gauge would never fit.

[FleetlinePhil]

What they didn't mention is that the new systems are all built to railway standard gauge, 4' 8.5", whereas older systems were to a variety of gauges. Birmingham's were 3' 6", for instance.

You can see the difference in the gauges from looking at photos of old trams or seeing them in museums as the old ones are often tall and thin. I would think that the narrower gauges make it easier to lay double tracks in narrow streets and manoeuvre around tight corners. I recently went to Lisbon and went around the city in a tourist tram down some very narrow streets. It has a gauge of only 2' 11 7⁄16" and the standard railway gauge would never fit.

I'm not sure there were many places in the UK where physical constraints were the reason - I think it was more down to reducing costs. I recall reading that the tramway company was responsible for maintaining the roadway between the tracks and a certain distance either side, so this area would be reduced slightly with a narrower gauge. Some areas had company-operated trams throughout their lifetime, others were operated by the local council but even many of these had originally been built privately.

Whilst the 3'6" tramcars were narrower, it is generally not by much. Standard gauge trams were not wide by any means, certainly not as wide as buses had become. Blackpool had to relay several bits of line to introduce 8'0" wide cars in the 1950's, and I have a feeling these were the widest on the "historic" networks.

There were also various restrictions placed on double-deck narrow-gauge trams, where enclosed upper-deck balconies were not allowed for many years, presumably to lower the centre of gravity. I posted back upthread my alarm at being in a near miss on the Seaton Tramway, which is 2'9" gauge and really did feel top-heavy, even on an open-top car.

[Octaviadriver]

The last towns and cities in the UK to run the old style trams probably didn't have many physical restraints on the track gauge. Many of the last systems to survive had reserved sections of track that helped them survive for longer. Being born at the start of the 1950s, I can remember some of the old trams, especially Glasgow where my father had to go once a year for a conference for a few days and we all went as a family and I recall going with my mother to Glasgow Zoo at the end of the tram line.

Many of the early casualties were where problems arose when motor vehicles became more widely used after WWI. I was born in Exeter and I know their trams went 20 years before I was around as they caused problems when they clashed with motor vehicles in the narrow streets.

[fras]

Went to Trafford Centre last week, and had a quick look from the pedestrian bridge at the tramway works. Track laying is progressing and it can't be long to opening, I would think. The crossing of Barton Dock road is installed and some track on the reservation as well. Interesting to note that there was a tram route into Trafford Park, which was, apparently, quite daunting for the driver due to the number of railway crossings. Trafford Park in its heyday was a large and busy industrial site with much railway goods traffic in and out and engines shunting wagons into and out of sidings.

[fras]

Went to Trafford Centre last week, and had a quick look from the pedestrian bridge at the tramway works. Track laying is progressing and it can't be long to opening, I would think. The crossing of Barton Dock road is installed and some track on the reservation as well. Interesting to note that there was once a tram route into Trafford Park, which was, apparently, quite daunting for the driver due to the number of railway crossings. Trafford Park in its heyday was a large and busy industrial site with much railway goods traffic in and out and engines shunting wagons into and out of sidings.

[fras]

Went to Trafford Centre last week, and had a quick look from the pedestrian bridge at the tramway works. Track laying is progressing and it can't be long to opening, I would think. The crossing of Barton Dock road is installed and some track on the reservation as well. Interesting to note that there was once a tram route into Trafford Park, which was, apparently, quite daunting for the driver due to the number of railway crossings. Trafford Park in its heyday was a large and busy industrial site with much railway goods traffic in and out and engines shunting wagons into and out of sidings.

[FleetlinePhil]

Went to Trafford Centre last week, and had a quick look from the pedestrian bridge at the tramway works. Track laying is progressing and it can't be long to opening, I would think. The crossing of Barton Dock road is installed and some track on the reservation as well. Interesting to note that there was once a tram route into Trafford Park, which was, apparently, quite daunting for the driver due to the number of railway crossings. Trafford Park in its heyday was a large and busy industrial site with much railway goods traffic in and out and engines shunting wagons into and out of sidings.

"Services are expected to launch in 2020" according to TfGM's website: https://tfgm.com/trafford-park-line

I can recall seeing freight trains on the Trafford Park Estates network as a child, but by the time I was using the area as a learner driver with my father (1980), they had become much rarer. The variety of heavy industry located in the place was hard to imagine from what you see now - both my grandfathers and my father worked in Trafford Park, as did the majority of fathers of my school friends. The GEC works on Westinghouse Road still required many works buses into the mid 1980's, running mainly to Trafford and South Manchester, but also into Salford. At that time I did the occasional bit of evening conducting after my office job, occasionally working the 268 route from Trafford Park into Manchester that replaced the original tram route, or the 270/2 to Wythenshawe, which still had an evening service for shift workers.