Metrolink East Manchester line opening put back to February 2013

The opening of the East Manchester Line extension of Manchester Metrolink to Droylsden has been delayed until February next year. The news was first announced at a Tameside Council meeting and was then subsequently confirmed by Transport for Greater Manchester. It had been hoped that the first trams in passenger service would be operating before Christmas but TfGM have now admitted that this will not be possible and so have confirmed the big launch will be on 11th February 2013.

The East Manchester Line will be the first Metrolink line to head out of Piccadilly Station the other way and will feature eight new stops at New Islington, Holt Town, Etihad Campus, Velopark, Clayton Hall, Edge Lane, Cemetery Road and Droylsden. It is planned that eventually there will be a tram every six minutes at peak times reducing to every 12 minutes off peak and every 15 minutes on Sundays and Bank Holidays. After the line is up and running as far as Droylsden a further extension to the line is due to open in winter
2013/4 with stops at Audenshaw, Ashton Moss, Ashton West and Ashton-under-Lyne.

Tests and driver training have recently commenced on the line but these have now stopped for the time being, as per the plan for commissioning the line. The opening of the line was already running behind schedule before this latest setback with the integration of the new TOS equipment into the existing network the main cause.

The initial announcement of the opening date for the East Manchester Line was made during a Tameside Council meeting by the Council leader, Cllr Kieran Quinn, who also expressed his dismay at the delay and disruption the construction of the line had caused. He said: “know this has been a testing time for Droylsden residents, but we can now see the finishing line. As disappointing as it has been to see this project arrive behind schedule, there is no doubt that the arrival of Metrolink to Droylsden will be a massive boost for the people and businesses in the area.”

As part of a charm offensive to locals it has also been revealed that Transport for Greater Manchester will be offering local residents and school children in Droylsden special free three day passes for use before the line is officially opened. Households in the catchment area will be sent more details about this closer to the time and local schools will be contacted to arrange for classes to travel at specified times on supervised trips.

Cllr Andrew Fender, Chair of the TfGM Committee, said: “We’re now entering the final stages of the programme for the new line to Droylsden, which means we’re getting ever closer to that landmark moment when we open the doors to passengers for the first time. The progress we’ve made so far on testing and commissioning has been encouraging, but it’s now clear that we’ll not be able to open for service before the year is out as the tram management system being delivered by Thales has not been available within the prescribed timeframe. While it’s disappointing to be seven weeks beyond the revised target, we’re confident we’ll be opening the line in February thanks to the interim solution put in place by TfGM. This arrangement is similar to those developed by TfGM which enabled the opening of the South Manchester and Oldham lines.”

It is now looking likely that the next section of line to open on Metrolink will be a short section on the Oldham and Rochdale Line from Oldham Mumps to Shaw and Crompton early next year.

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

16 Responses to Metrolink East Manchester line opening put back to February 2013

  1. GLYN R HILL says:

    why dont they close the metrolink down for several weeks in the new year, and change the operating system over to TMS in one fell go, then it would all be on the TMS, they would no more trouble? GLYN

  2. Ralph Oakes-Garnett says:

    Very disappointing all round. Missing out on the Christmas shoppers etc. The extension onwards to Ashton appears on the surface (excuse the pun) to be ahead of schedule. I think many of us would be even more disappointed if this was not finished earlier than next winter!

  3. Ken Walker says:

    It’s beginning to look as though the software for the TMS was bought at a computer shop January sale. Some problems are bound to occur when trying to integrate the old with the new but surely they should have looked into compatability issues and purchased a system that would work without all this delay before starting all the disruptive work (and robbing the people of the Oldham area of a perfectly satisfactory train service). Or did they just short-sightedly go for the cheapest system available? Anybody taking bets on an announcement around 9th February that the opening is being delayed due to snow and ice?

  4. Steve Hyde says:

    It was never intended that the testing and initial training that took place a couple of weeks ago would continue. There is still infrastructure work to complete before the route can open. There will then be a period of full driver training. Part of the reason for the spell of running was to train those senior drivers who will be invloved in cascading the training to the rest of the team. It also allowed the gathering of data to set up the simulator they now use for part of the process.
    There are limited training resources and these are now concentrated on getting the short section between Oldham and Shaw up and running.

    As for Ashton being ready before next winter, why would that be expected as the planned date has always been Winter 2013/14?

    Ken, you sound like you should get a job with the Manchester Evening News! They did not buy the cheapest system. There is no such thing as an off the shelf system, each one is unique to the network it controls as each network has slightly different characteristics.

  5. Frank Gradwell says:

    Frankly the whole Metrolink system has been a shambles from day one and here we are twenty years later, apparently having learnt nothing! Manchester was a pioneer, but it could have learnt from those early mistakes.

    For the sake of a couple of skid steer loaders and a few skips the rail height platforms could have been cut down to european floor height so that Manchester could share continental technology and cascades – but No – we had to retain full height platforms, and mar the city centre forever with the awful monstrosities we have now, as well as lock Metrolink out of ever being able to tale advantage of windfall rolling stock opportunities.

    The final ramifications of this are yet to come with the M5000s which are nothing more than German streetcars on stilts, or rather extension frames over the bogies, to gain height, and increase body stress levels too in the long run.

    Even Metrolink now seem to have got the message that passengers want seats – but that means retro fitting.

    As for Thasles and TMS – what a shambles, what a reflection on the capabilities of TFGM and predecessors to write a contract, and what a reflection on the salesmen and technology gurus to only find out that you have to lose the T68s to make it work – Clever – NOT!

    I’m not even going to start on the lack of through ticketing that costs my daughter £500 for a one and a half mile journey every years, the lack of intermodal, the lack of park and ride – and as for the capacity to deliver on time and on budget – at least Charlie Caroli admitted he was a clown.

    Its long overdue for an apology from TFGM and Thales – or will we have to wait for that?

  6. Ken Walker says:

    I couldn’t agree more Frank. The decision to retain the full height platforms was totally unnecessary and as you say prevents Metrolink from taking advantage of European stock. Ironically Blackpool Transport could probably have found a peak time use for redundant T68s had they been built to European standards, as I believe the Flexities are. The Big Bang extension as you say is a farce, and if what I have read is correct – although it was in Steve Hyde’s “favourite(!!)” paper – when the line opens the signalling will be an “interim” system (make-do-and-mend?) which for one thing appears to involve the long-term and unannounced closure to road traffic of the Sheffield Street crossing outside Piccadilly undercroft, which is currently still closed although no tram running is currently taking place over the crossing. I think as I have said before the thing that bugs the people along the routes (who as taxpayers are funding this shambles), is the contempt with which they are being treated by TfGM, with no explanation for the repeated delays other than bland comments about “signalling problems”. Steve’s comments I’m afraid only serve to convince me that there may be more than a bit of truth in what was intended to be a frivolous comment about February 9th. The Metrolink site a few weeks ago stated that there are 200 drivers, most of whom will have to be trained on the route before it can open. If the training resources are being concentrated on the Shaw extension which it is “hoped” will open in January, that leaves less than a month to train getting on for 200 drivers before 11th February. I won’t hold my breath!

  7. Clifford Stead says:

    The high platforms are a real albatross for Metrolink, the M5000 is a poor design with awful ride quality and a distinct lack of seats. A real shame for Manchester.

  8. roger woodhead says:

    Although I am no longer a resident of Greater Manchester I was when Metrolink first started. A shambles from day one it most certainly was not it was very succesful. High platforms, they are here to stay let us hear no more about them except to say that should trams on rail tracks become a reality then potential operators may be forced to use vehicles that match Network Rail platform heights. M5000 an awful vehicle that is not fit for purpose in its present form but should TfGM find a way to increase its length to 30mtrs as the T68 then they may be able to fit the 86 seats that the T68/A are fitted with (not 84/82 as on the fleet lists on this site go count ’em while youcan!) TMS is a perfectly good system on its own the problem is where it interacts with the existing systems but that is a problem that should have been sorted out long ago, not have it resurface with each extension. Thales can only employ men within the contract price but how much is TfGM meddling the cause of delays? TfGM are answerable to the Greater Manchester CombinedAuthority and perhaps that body needs to pay more attention to what its PTE is doing, or not.

    • Ken walker says:

      While this far down the line we are stuck with the high platform setup on the Metrolink system, it does beg the question as to how much of the cost of lowering the platforms in the beginning could have been recovered from reduction in the cost of the trams by buying standard European design trams instead of having to have specially designed ones. With regard to the planned running of ‘tram trains’ on lines shared with conventional trains, does this not already happen on the Newcastleb/ Sunderland route on Tyne & Wear or do the Metro vehicles not count as trams?

  9. John Gilbert says:

    The original Metrolink line had to gain approval from the politicians and civil servants in London. I suspect that adding the cost of lowering the platforms on the first line might well have caused those ‘far-sighted people’ to cancel the whole project. Yes, we are saddled with high platforms everywhere now, but blame the politicians and civil servants for it. At some time in the future half the platform-lengths can be lowered to cater for a future build of ‘proper-sized’ trams. In Britain we never do anything simply when it can be made complicated. Must be the weather!

  10. Jamie Guest says:

    Having recently ridden several systems in the USA I can say that there asre several examples of how to transistion from high to low platform. Salt lake City was the best. Their first generation of trams were high floor Siemens vehicles similar to the ones in Sacremento. Their first lines all had a high platform at one end of the stops so that the driver could assist wheelchair bound passengers. Other parts of the tram had internal steps to attain floor height. The new trams are low floor and there is no problem loading wheelchairs from the other parts of the stops. The new extension to the airport is being built totally low floor. Also at weekends they only run low floor trams on some routes. Eventually the high floor trams will be withdrawn and presumably the high loading platforms will be demolished. Thius will happen over many years but demonstrates that there is a proven migration method. The only advantage of the high floor trams is that they ride a lot better due to the larger wheels.

    Jamie

  11. Ralph Oakes-Garnett says:

    My reason for commenting on the Ashton extension was because it is now nearly the end of 2012 and most of the trackwork and overhead looks complete. As a mere passenger and enthusiast I can not believe that it will take a further year to completion. Is there no such thing as early completion or is it not allowed?

    • Ken walker says:

      Early completion is allowed, just extremely unlikely Ralph , considering that everything else on the Ashton and Rochdale routes is roughly 12 months behind the original plan. The line as far as Droylsden has ‘looked’ complete since not long after Easter and the first testing with trams happened in July if I remember rightly, but we are where we are! I wouldn’t hold my breath over Ashton but I’ve heard that miracles can happen!

  12. roger woodhead says:

    I am wondering if a lack of vehicles is another reason for delays to both Droylsden and Rochdale lines? All of the first order for M5000’s are now in service (3001-40), of that 40, 32 were for the Phase 3a extensions. 13 are required for the Media City and StW Road to Mumps services, 12 have been hijacked to replace T68 (a somewhat questionable decision in my humble opinion) which leaves 7 for the new extensions.
    Those 7 will perhaps cope but that leaves no allowance for spare vehicles and my assumption is that the Mumps line will continue to operate at half its promised frequency as will the Droylsden line when it ever opens. Ralph mentions that the line to ashton appears to be almost complete, but so does the line to East Didsbury. Unless Metrolink start to equip 3041 upwards with the old signalling systems then delays are going to get worse. They could of course convert the rest of the system to TMS but how long will that take with inevitable teething problems that seem to take an eternity to sort out.

  13. GLYN R HILL says:

    i have been told a Metrolink Supervisior that Sevices will be starting to Shaw on Sunday 16th December 2012

Comments are closed.