Manchester Metrolink - Why are the tram sidings like this?

[MetrolinkInsYT]

Something I have noticed on the Metrolink with terminating tram services particularly at Etihad Campus is that they seem to travel further than they need to.
If a tram needs to turn around at Etihad Campus (outbound to inbound), then it has to pass the sidings and travel all the way to the next stop over at Velopark, then turn around and travel through the sidings to get back to Etihad Campus.
I saw this at the sidings on Warren Bruce Road on the Trafford Park Line as well, though they aren't used in regular service.

This is a problem for trams travelling in both directions.

I have two questions regarding this:

• Why couldn't the sidings have been arranged differently, like at Piccadilly or Timperley, so that trams can travel straight in and out, and
• why can't services to Etihad Campus terminate at Velopark instead if the trams already have to go that far?

Something related to my second question is that every time there is a problem on this line and trams, for example, cannot run between Etihad Campus and Ashton, the announcements and display boards have lately been saying instead "no services between Velopark and Ashton", as if they know services can terminate there instead.

Picture below is of the sidings near Velopark. The tracks are highlighted. Velopark stop is shown in the bottom right corner.

 

[edwin_m]

The extended crossover is long enough for two double trams. With a dead-end turnback the first one to arrive would be trapped until the second one had come in, driver changed ends and it had gone out again. With the extended crossover a following tram changing ends (at Velopark) doesn't prevent previous trams moving out to collect crowds at the end of an event.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

The extended crossover is long enough for two double trams. With a dead-end turnback the first one to arrive would be trapped until the second one had come in, driver changed ends and it had gone out again. With the extended crossover a following tram changing ends (at Velopark) doesn't prevent previous trams moving out to collect crowds at the end of an event.

I'm not sure I understand.
Trams terminate here one at a time every 12 minutes (by that I mean there should never two turning around at the same time), and even so, the same issue would be present at Velopark if another tram happened to also come in. The first tram to arrive would be trapped at Velopark.

 

[DanNCL]

I'm not sure I understand.
Trams terminate here one at a time every 12 minutes (by that I mean there should never two turning around at the same time), and even so, the same issue would be present at Velopark if another tram happened to also come in. The first tram to arrive would be trapped at Velopark.

On most days it’s one every 12 minutes so time isn’t so much of the essence as long as it’s clear of the running line before the next Ashton tram. But after a match at the Etihad with extra trams running to shift the crowd, the idea is that there can be a queue of trams in the siding ready to go as soon as they’re needed. Trams can continue to join the back of the queue with the reversal on the Ashton bound running line, if you have a driver at both ends that can be done very quickly. (whether Metrolink actually have a driver at both ends of a double for that manoeuvre or not, I’m not sure)
To do all of that with conventional sidings would take up more space as you’d need multiple sidings rather than just one.
This layout, being symmetrical, can be used to turnback from both directions too, meaning hypothetically if you wanted to use it to turn trams from Ashton back towards Velopark you could.

There’s another one of these turnback sidings on the Trafford Centre line between IWM and Village, when that actually sees use I’m not sure.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

On most days it’s one every 12 minutes so time isn’t so much of the essence as long as it’s clear of the running line before the next Ashton tram. But after a match at the Etihad with extra trams running to shift the crowd, the idea is that there can be a queue of trams in the siding ready to go as soon as they’re needed. Trams can continue to join the back of the queue with the reversal on the Ashton bound running line, if you have a driver at both ends that can be done very quickly. (whether Metrolink actually have a driver at both ends of a double for that manoeuvre or not, I’m not sure)
To do all of that with conventional sidings would take up more space as you’d need multiple sidings rather than just one.
This layout, being symmetrical, can be used to turnback from both directions too, meaning hypothetically if you wanted to use it to turn trams from Ashton back towards Velopark you could.

I think I understand now. They could definitely terminate trams at Velopark during a normal service (it wouldn't be much more hassle at all), yet for some reason it never happens. Maybe it's to do with passenger confusion and people going to matches or events. All they will see is the destination on the display, after all. When they see Velopark, some people who aren't used to the Metrolink might not know where it's going. Would still be helpful to have that kind of a service, though.

There’s another one of these turnback sidings on the Trafford Centre line between IWM and Village, when that actually sees use I’m not sure.

It's not in use during regular service.

So they could potentially install more points at the Etihad Campus sidings to allow trams to travel straight in and out when events aren't on, but I guess that would be problematic as it would cause disruptions and cost would outweigh the benefits.

 

[DanNCL]

I think I understand now. They could definitely terminate trams at Velopark during a normal service (it wouldn't be much more hassle at all), yet for some reason it never happens. Maybe it's to do with passenger confusion and people going to matches or events. All they will see is the destination on the display, after all. When they see Velopark, some people who aren't used to the Metrolink might not know where it's going. Would still be helpful to have that kind of a service, though.

Don’t they stop to reverse immediately after the points rather than continuing into the platform at Velopark? Driver doesn’t need a platform to change ends on a single and on a double just have two drivers, one at each end. Driver at the Velopark end then gets off at Etihad on the return, crosses over and then becomes the City end driver of the next one to turn back. As I said before no idea if they actually do that or not but theoretically that’d be the quickest way to do the turnbacks with doubles.

So they could potentially install more points at the Etihad Campus sidings to allow trams to travel straight in and out when events aren't on, but I guess that would be problematic as it would cause disruptions and cost would outweigh the benefits.

There aren’t any benefits, the existing setup does the job fine.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

Don’t they stop to reverse immediately after the points rather than continuing into the platform at Velopark?

No, I've seen it myself. They for some reason travel all the way to Velopark to turn around. This is possibly because there isn't enough room after the points for a double tram to turn around without being in the way of the public walkway and steps (doubles are approx. 57m long).

There is certainly enough room for a single to turn around there though, so I'm not sure why they also have to travel that far.
It makes it slightly more annoying that they could terminate trams there instead of Etihad Campus.

Driver doesn’t need a platform to change ends on a single and on a double just have two drivers, one at each end. Driver at the Velopark end then gets off at Etihad on the return, crosses over and then becomes the City end driver of the next one to turn back. As I said before no idea if they actually do that or not but theoretically that’d be the quickest way to do the turnbacks with doubles.

I don't know anything about drivers doing that with doubles, but I've seen a few glimpses of drivers getting on the back of doubles.

There aren’t any benefits, the existing setup does the job fine.

The only benefit I thought of was that the trams could have a shorter turnaround time of ~8 minutes, (it is currently 12 minutes exactly matching the service frequency, so not much leeway), and it might save a tram in service.

 

[edwin_m]

I think there's a signal for outbound trams just before they reach the crossover point which only lets them proceed when the line is clear as far as Velopark. This avoids a Mexican standoff if there is a tram hidden round the corner waiting to reverse over the crossover. Assuming that's correct, reversing immediately after the crossover may confuse the signalling, or maybe they just want to reverse in the same place whether it's a single or a double.

If they were in service to/from Velopark then the departing tram towards Manchester would be from the "wrong" platform, which might confuse passengers and perhaps lead to them running across the tracks in front of a tram.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

I think there's a signal for outbound trams just before they reach the crossover point which only lets them proceed when the line is clear as far as Velopark. This avoids a Mexican standoff if there is a tram hidden round the corner waiting to reverse over the crossover. Assuming that's correct, reversing immediately after the crossover may confuse the signalling, or maybe they just want to reverse in the same place whether it's a single or a double.

Yes, that would make a lot more sense.

If they were in service to/from Velopark then the departing tram towards Manchester would be from the "wrong" platform, which might confuse passengers and perhaps lead to them running across the tracks in front of a tram.

What led me to suggest the trams turning around at Velopark is that apparently the Metrolink doesn't care about that kind of thing with the wrong platforms, and what led me to believe that is this:

At stops like Central Park, in case of a vehicle problem or points fault or any other issues, there are measures like this in place so that trams can terminate and turn around to keep the service going as much as possible. The points are visible on the left, but they are arranged in such a way that the Rochdale-bound platform (closest platform to the top of the screen) would serve arrivals from and departures to the city centre if such a thing were to happen. That's another thing that has puzzled me for a long time.

There are other examples of this at stops like Freehold, Westwood, Crumpsall, West Didsbury etc.

 

[edwin_m]

Yes, that would make a lot more sense.

What led me to suggest the trams turning around at Velopark is that apparently the Metrolink doesn't care about that kind of thing with the wrong platforms, and what led me to believe that is this:
View attachment 157447
At stops like Central Park, in case of a vehicle problem or points fault or any other issues, there are measures like this in place so that trams can terminate and turn around to keep the service going as much as possible. The points are visible on the left, but they are arranged in such a way that the Rochdale-bound platform (closest platform to the top of the screen) would serve arrivals from and departures to the city centre if such a thing were to happen. That's another thing that has puzzled me for a long time.

There are other examples of this at stops like Freehold, Westwood, Crumpsall, West Didsbury etc.

It's normal for rarely-used tramway crossovers to be trailing, as they can* be spring-worked to turn all facing moves onto the correct track so don't need to be motorised. Trams would only use the wrong platform during unusual circumstances when they are being turned short due to some blockage further down the line, and importantly they would all use the same (wrong) platform.

*In normal use they may be set straight so they don't have to be pushed over by every passing tram wheel, which would create noise and wear. When trams are turning back they can be set to operate as spring points instead. As it's used regularly the crossover at Velopark may be motorised.

 

[Greybeard33]

Don’t they stop to reverse immediately after the points rather than continuing into the platform at Velopark? Driver doesn’t need a platform to change ends on a single and on a double just have two drivers, one at each end. Driver at the Velopark end then gets off at Etihad on the return, crosses over and then becomes the City end driver of the next one to turn back. As I said before no idea if they actually do that or not but theoretically that’d be the quickest way to do the turnbacks with doubles.

Metrolink does not have enough drivers to have them "step back" at Etihad, especially when running match day extras. The driver of a double has to change ends to reverse, which is much easier at the Velopark platform than climbing down into the cess.

If they were in service to/from Velopark then the departing tram towards Manchester would be from the "wrong" platform, which might confuse passengers and perhaps lead to them running across the tracks in front of a tram.

Indeed alternate inbound departures would be from opposite Velopark platforms in normal operation. And the reversing services have recovery time in the siding, so it would not be an even 6 minute service from Velopark. A late running ex-Ashton service might overtake a Velopark originator while the latter was in the siding, to the annoyance of passengers.who had assumed that the first to depart would get them to Manchester the soonest.

 

[edwin_m]

There may also be some reason why the crossover might not be able to be used when carrying passengers.

 

[Mothball]

Yes, that would make a lot more sense.

What led me to suggest the trams turning around at Velopark is that apparently the Metrolink doesn't care about that kind of thing with the wrong platforms, and what led me to believe that is this:
View attachment 157447
At stops like Central Park, in case of a vehicle problem or points fault or any other issues, there are measures like this in place so that trams can terminate and turn around to keep the service going as much as possible. The points are visible on the left, but they are arranged in such a way that the Rochdale-bound platform (closest platform to the top of the screen) would serve arrivals from and departures to the city centre if such a thing were to happen. That's another thing that has puzzled me for a long time.

There are other examples of this at stops like Freehold, Westwood, Crumpsall, West Didsbury etc.

As Edwin has mentioned, they are all trailing crossovers for a reason, many aren't fitted with detection so facing moves in passenger service cant be carried out. The only "emergency crossover" I can think of that is facing is Droylsden and that's down to road layout.

As an example, last time Central Park was used (Signal failure at Newton Heath) trams terminated at Monsall, travelled to Central Park out of service, cross over and re-entered service from Monsall.

The biggest exception to this is probably Whitefield, that is motorised/detected and does see some semi-regular ad-hoc use from the "wrong" platform, I imagine a British Rail legacy.

 

[507 001]

They could definitely terminate trams at Velopark during a normal service (it wouldn't be much more hassle at all), yet for some reason it never happens.

No, we couldn’t. You can’t have passengers sitting around in the siding for up to 10 minutes and you can’t have a service that starts and finishes in a different place.

Also, immediately post match/event Holt town and Velopark stations close, and so you couldn’t terminate a service there even if you wanted to.

Don’t they stop to reverse immediately after the points rather than continuing into the platform at Velopark? Driver doesn’t need a platform to change ends on a single and on a double just have two drivers, one at each end.

No. We are supposed to carry on round to the station, although it is technically possible to change ends once you’re clear of the points doing so is frowned upon as it makes rescue difficult in the event of a failure. Going round onto the platform ensures there’s enough straight track available to couple up a rescue set. It also makes changing ends in a double much easier and safer.

We’ve also tried stepping back before (at Bury) and it didn’t work. The system is too vulnerable to outside influences (unlike say the victoria line where it works quite well) and it caused chaos.

There may also be some reason why the crossover might not be able to be used when carrying passengers

Yes, they’re not detected. Passenger moves are therefore forbidden.

 

[chiltern trev]

Maybe I suggest that if you detrain at the Etihad, there may be 'platform' staff (on event days) to assist with detraining whereas if the tram(s) detrained at Velopark it might only be the driver to ensure the tram is detrained and thus is there are 'awkward' passengers the detraining time would take longer.
Secondly, detraining at Etihad means a shorter time before the tram arrives in the siding and thus clearing the outbound line quicker.

 

[bluegoblin7]

We’ve also tried stepping back before (at Bury) and it didn’t work. The system is too vulnerable to outside influences (unlike say the victoria line where it works quite well) and it caused chaos.

Genuinely intrigued as to why stepping back didn’t work, if you can share more?

There should always be at least one more driver than vehicles during the period of operation, so no more or less risk (ultimately) than by not implementing stepping back. A much as the Vic line is segregated it still has issues, as do other lines that implement stepping back such as the Circle, Met and Northern lines.

 

[edwin_m]

Genuinely intrigued as to why stepping back didn’t work, if you can share more?

There should always be at least one more driver than vehicles during the period of operation, so no more or less risk (ultimately) than by not implementing stepping back. A much as the Vic line is segregated it still has issues, as do other lines that implement stepping back such as the Circle, Met and Northern lines.

Stepping back has much less benefit compared with somewhere like Brixton where a driver changing ends would have to walk much further on a crowded platform.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

No, we couldn’t. You can’t have passengers sitting around in the siding for up to 10 minutes and you can’t have a service that starts and finishes in a different place.

Oh, I did think that was the case for a short time, but for some reason later I assumed that the drivers just stayed at Velopark for the 10 or so minutes before travelling through the sidings to get back, even though outbound trams to Ashton would then be blocked. So, all the drivers do at Velopark is switch ends, right?

Also, immediately post match/event Holt town and Velopark stations close, and so you couldn’t terminate a service there even if you wanted to.

Wasn't this change only implemented recently, though? Of course it doesn't change the fact that its not possible, but the match on 4 May was the first time I ever noticed. How long has it been going on for? Just curious

 

[507 001]

Genuinely intrigued as to why stepping back didn’t work, if you can share more?

Probably because we tried to do it without an extra driver. There was issues with sets turning up out of sequence, so two directs and then a Bury-Picc or vice versa, instead of direct, Picc, direct. A lot of our driving jobs also interwork with other lines, so if things got out of sequence it knocked onto other lines and that would have been problematic if there was an extra driver or not.

There was also the problem that the stepping back also involved interworking, so a driver arriving on a set from Altrincham would then take a service to Piccadilly, instead of another Alti.

I had a window put through one afternoon on my way up to Bury. On an M5000 a shattered window is an immediate out of service fault (the windows have a nasty habit of falling out when shattered, and so they’re not allowed to run across the city centre unless there’s no other option). I had to take that set all the way up to Bury from Bowker Vale, just so that the driver that was supposed to step back onto it could take it to the depot as I also had to step back onto an Altrincham set.

Oh, I did think that was the case for a short time, but for some reason later I assumed that the drivers just stayed at Velopark for the 10 or so minutes before travelling through the sidings to get back, even though outbound trams to Ashton would then be blocked. So, all the drivers do at Velopark is switch ends, right?

The aim when doing the Velopark TB is to get off the mainline and into the siding as quickly as possible. There’s usually an Ashton right up your chuff, and even if there isn’t it takes that long to get into the siding that the Ashton won’t be far behind as you clear the mainline.

Any turnaround time is taken in the siding, out of the way.

Wasn't this change only implemented recently, though? Of course it doesn't change the fact that its not possible, but the match on 4 May was the first time I ever noticed. How long has it been going on for? Just curious

No, it’s been going on since the line opened, so 11 years or so.

 

[MetrolinkInsYT]

No, we couldn’t. You can’t have passengers sitting around in the siding for up to 10 minutes...

Yes, they’re not detected. Passenger moves are therefore forbidden.

I'm not sure what you mean by "they're not detected". The passengers?
Of course, people intending to get to a destination can't just be in the siding for that long, but are passengers actually allowed to stay on a tram? If not, why exactly?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I'm not sure what you mean by "they're not detected". The passengers?
Of course, people intending to get to a destination can't just be in the siding for that long, but are passengers actually allowed to stay on a tram? If not, why exactly?

I think "not detected" in this context means the signalling system doesn't reliably pick up things in the sidings - thus passenger moves are prohibited.

 

[507 001]

I'm not sure what you mean by "they're not detected". The passengers?
Of course, people intending to get to a destination can't just be in the siding for that long, but are passengers actually allowed to stay on a tram? If not, why exactly?

For the first question, see below.

For the second, passengers are technically allowed in the siding, and it has happened in the past either accidentally or deliberately, but it is something to be avoided if possible. Drivers should ensure that the tram has been completely detrained before entering any siding.

I think "not detected" in this context means the signalling system doesn't reliably pick up things in the sidings - thus passenger moves are prohibited.

No, it means that there is no way of proving that the points are set and locked (I.e. in detection/detected). Any points that are cleared for passengers have a Points Position Indicator (PPI) on them.