Normal service is resumed – collision and errant car on tracks trouble Metrolink

The past few days has seen more problems for Manchester Metrolink with cars once again causing problems. On Tuesday 10th February a car drove into a tram close to St Peter’s Square and this was followed just two days later by a car managing to make a wrong turn and finding itself on the tracks at Baguley.

The first incident happened shortly before 2000 on 10th February and involved M5000 3077 and a BMW car. No details of the incident are known but the car hit the front of the tram causing some damage. No injuries were reported. The scene was not cleared for an hour during which time services were unable to travel through St Peter’s Square.

Then on Thursday 12th February it was time for another car to get stuck on the tracks (after a few weeks of no major incidents). The car was discovered close to Baguley and during the disruption services only ran between Cornbrook to Barlow Moor Road and from Roudthorn to Manchester Airport.

This entry was posted in Manchester Metrolink. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Normal service is resumed – collision and errant car on tracks trouble Metrolink

  1. Dave Elison says:

    As a ‘local’ who is also a tram enthusiast, I have to admit, the road junction at Moor Road and Altrincham Road at Baguley could be very confusing for anyone not used to it. The ‘natural’ route over this junction is to want to take the path used by the trams on to Moor Road. Car drivers wanting to go up Moor Road have to keep well over to the left. The first time I used this layout when the trams where only ‘on test’ almost caught me out too.

    • Steve Hyde says:

      It wasn’t at that junction Dave, it was at Floatshall Road. I don’t know which way the car driver was coming from but the car ended up on the track towards Roundthorn according to the photo in the Evening News.

  2. Frank Gradwell says:

    Cushing was gushing in the MEN the other night about how Metrolink signage is compliant and that Metrolink have done all that they are obliged to do.

    The problem is that it keeps on happening despite this complacent attitude.

    Now don’t get me wrong – in 48 years of being a licence holder I have not succumbed to this mistake, but a careful study of car lane / tram lane design shows that the first fifty feet or so of track at many locations is indistinguishable from previous street running sections and that a deterrent answer such as ridges surfacing as found along hard shoulder margins on Motorways may be an answer.

    Going the extra mile may well be called for here – certainly the present set up is not delivering.

  3. Steve Hyde says:

    Up until recently there has been a problem with signage for tram only entrances to reserved track areas and street lanes. There is no approved No Entry Except Trams sign in the catalogue of approved road signs. The only approved sign is the blue Tram Only sign which whilst it gives a clear message is felt by some to be less than compulsory. No Entry Except Trams signs may be used if each and every one is applied for and approved by DfT and the relevant local highway authority. Ironically the Airport Line is the first to see universal application of these signs which have been erected in the last few weeks. It seems some still do not understand what a No Entry sign means.

    Agreed perhaps some further amplification of the change of status of the road surface could perhaps be applied. Whether ‘rumble strips’ would work when signage doesn’t is open to conjecture. Perhaps the use of hatched markings on the first few metres of the tramway alignment may be used combined with the ridged edge of carriageway markings. The problem may be that even the use of these is strictly regulated within the signage manual.

    • Ken Walker says:

      It could only be in this country that regulations prohibit signage that would help prevent people from putting themselves in danger!

  4. Colin Smith says:

    Too true Ken. However, I’m doubting that “rumble strips” will make a lot of difference. Many of these errant cars have ended up on completely segregated tracks, (the one near New Islington was miles from the nearest bit of what might be termed “level” roadway. If drivers riding over sleeper ends that protrude by an inch or thereabouts and don’t notice the bumpy ride, let alone the scraping of the steel rail on the underside of their vehicle, what chance is there that they will notice the relatively low-key bumps and noise of the “rumble Strips?”

  5. John Stewart says:

    Circular blue signs with white letters indication compulsion. Too many drivers don’t know that and the solution is to get it into their heads by prosecution and fining. Having ever-more exception plates beneath “No Entry” signs will, in the long run, simply devalue them.

    • Ken Walker says:

      Perhaps railway-style cattle grids would be a solution at the more vulnerable junctions. Incidents loke these seem to be very rare (but not completely unknown) on railway lines.

      • Steve Hyde says:

        Ken, they had those cattle grid deterrents on the Oldham Rochdale Line where the line up to Shaw crossed the A62 but they were totally ineffective. It’s hard to imagine a measure that would stop these intrusions.

        • Ken Walker says:

          Didn’t realise that Steve, in that case as you say it’s hard to imagine what will deter these negligent motorists. At least the culprits are always identifiable as they invariably carry on until the vehicle becomes stranded. If the fact of the road surface disappearing before their eyes doesn’t make them realise that they are about to leave the road I don’t know what will.

  6. Frank Gradwell says:

    Bloody Metrolink and road traffic – will they ever learn???

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-31609770

    But I have never seen this result with an M5000

Comments are closed.