Sheffield Tram-Train

[eastwestdivide]

Point 2 is interesting - "there may be no spur". Which implies the new platform will be on the running lines, needing a quick turnround time so as not to block the line for any extended period.
I can see land acquisition being a problem, as the geography (roughly from E-W) at the Eastwood footbridge goes canal-towpath-rail lines-access road for Parkgate. The width required for an additional rail/tram track plus platform would mean eating into the access road by the look of it. While you could divert the access road further over, that would eat into the deliveries space at the backs of the Parkgate shops. All a bit of a squeeze, unless the new platform was located further N, where the railway curves away from the canal.

 

[bladesman123]

That's brilliant, thanks for that! Will the line be electrified through to Parkgate or are we talking bi-mode tram-trains?

As far as i understand the whole route will be electrified and the tram-trains will not be bi-mode.

 

[MK Tom]

That's grand, thanks everyone. I agree with jimmyowl1992 that bi-mode wouldn't be sensible and would cause unnecessary extra wear on the on-street sections. The only slight issue with electrifying the whole route is if at a later stage there is a desire to electrify long-distance services through Rotherham at 25kV overhead (the same issue comes into play between Pelaw and Sunderland). But that does seem quite a remote possibility.

 

[tbtc]

That's grand, thanks everyone. I agree with jimmyowl1992 that bi-mode wouldn't be sensible and would cause unnecessary extra wear on the on-street sections. The only slight issue with electrifying the whole route is if at a later stage there is a desire to electrify long-distance services through Rotherham at 25kV overhead (the same issue comes into play between Pelaw and Sunderland). But that does seem quite a remote possibility.

I think that if the MML is electrified (and to Doncaster/Leeds) then there's a chance that Rotherham Central (and the rest of the "loop") would be handed over to the trams, with a rail/tram interchange at Meadowhall and Parkgate.

Trains could go back to stopping at Masborough, if required.

 

[talltim]

The trouble with that is that the line Woodbourn-Rotherham is failry oftne used as a diversionary route when there problems at Meadowhall, which seems to be more frequently than it should be.

 

[HSTEd]

The only slight issue with electrifying the whole route is if at a later stage there is a desire to electrify long-distance services through Rotherham at 25kV overhead (the same issue comes into play between Pelaw and Sunderland).

Well that might always get fixed (in the Newcastle case) during the replacement of the current T&W stock which will be coming up relatively soon (despite the heavy rebuild the fleet is undergoing at the moment).

Ordering bi-voltage units would not be that much more expensive (if at all really since all the Karlsruhe derived stock available these days is dual voltage anyway) and would allow that line to be converted as and when.

We have converted 1500V to 25kV before, we can do it again. (You might even be able to make an argument for converting the entire T&W network at that time, but yeah).

 

[Nonsense]

I think that if the MML is electrified (and to Doncaster/Leeds) then there's a chance that Rotherham Central (and the rest of the "loop") would be handed over to the trams, with a rail/tram interchange at Meadowhall and Parkgate.

Trains could go back to stopping at Masborough, if required.

The way I'd imagine dual voltage operation would be a retractable DLR style contact rail system while on Network Rail under 25kv wires.

 

[WestRiding]

lets just face it, this project will never happen. we have had 3 years of talk, and not so much as a minor piece of work done. it is proven technology in europe, and despite all the positive talk within this thread, we on the railway signalling side, controlling rotherham and tinsley branch, have heared absolutely nothing. well done for been positive though people.

 

[WestRiding]

and still we wait for the announcement for weather or not this scheme has got the go-ahead. thought we were supposed to hear mid march???????????

 

[bladesman123]

Apparently the final decision has been delayed until june now, don't know it that's a good sign or not.

 

[WestRiding]

according to someone in the know, meetings have been cancelled until further notice, ant the scheme might not go ahead to Rotherham, but instead, go to Woodhouse, joining the main line at Nunnery Depot. Bad luck Rotherham.

 

[daniel3982]

Where did you hear that?

Suppose it would make sense serving Darnell and Woodhouse more than Rotherham which already has better train links with Sheffield & the new BRT too. You could also have a new station at Waverley new-town which would be very attractive for developers, and perhaps extend the line further down towards Beighton and Killamarsh too. Plus for a tram-train trial it would be useful to actually use a line that has regular services rather than (mostly) a little used freight chord.

Hopefully the tram reaches Rotherham eventually though, but in a way that allows more stops.

 

[WestRiding]

a signalman involved with one of the meetings that got cancelled. lets face it, as i have said before, it will not happen. If it was to happen, it would not be so hard to find stuff out about it. the whole thing is too hush hush.

 

[daniel3982]

I think you're probably right in that regard.

 

[HowMuch?]

Thanks for the link about the BRT, I live in Sheffield and I'd never heard of it.

Don't you just love marketing speak? Presumably "opportunity to buy tickets before you board" means "you can't buy tickets from the driver". If so, describing something mandatory as an "opportunity" is pure cynical spin.

Apart from that niggle, I'd be in favour. Rush hour bus journeys in Sheffield take 100% ( (c) MadeUpStatsForEmphasis Inc.) longer than they need to, because of people queuing up to buy tickets. ("Now where's me purse?")

And, No, I don't favour 'smart'cards. My monthly paper card works just fine, with no risk of a prosecution for fraud because my Shyster didn't register a tap in).

 

[eastwestdivide]

"Final approval" given today by Transport Minister
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-press-20120517a
and
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/statements/baker-20120517a

introduction in 2015 it says.

 

[YorkshireBear]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-18100674

I'd say it was going to happen.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

DfT announcement:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-press-20120517a
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/statements/baker-20120517a

I wish I could be persuaded this is a good idea.
It feels like a "Pacer Mk2" to me.
Just look at the kit required to make it work on NR (TPWS etc).
And 5 years before we make up our minds on rollout.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It does seem to have been very slow in reaching this stage, considering a number of other areas are waiting to see the results of these trials.

What has been the reason for the tardyness ?

 

[Masboroughlad]

DfT announcement:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/press-releases/dft-press-20120517a
http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/statements/baker-20120517a

I wish I could be persuaded this is a good idea.
It feels like a "Pacer Mk2" to me.
Just look at the kit required to make it work on NR (TPWS etc).
And 5 years before we make up our minds on rollout.

I am still a bit dubious. I would have thought the tracks between Meadowhall and Rotherham were probably very full already. Are they going main line then via Holmes chord into Rotherham Central?

And it seems a lot of money to have only three tram trains per hour? Thought a system like this would have to be more intense to be justifiable!

And if it is going to use train tracks, it won't go into the middle of Rotherham on the streets anyway. So why not just give it new trains?!

 

[brompton rail]

I am still a bit dubious. I would have thought the tracks between Meadowhall and Rotherham were probably very full already. Are they going main line then via Holmes chord into Rotherham Central?

And it seems a lot of money to have only three tram trains per hour? Thought a system like this would have to be more intense to be justifiable!

And if it is going to use train tracks, it won't go into the middle of Rotherham on the streets anyway. So why not just give it new trains?!

The line to be used is the freight only line between Tinsley Viaduct (nr Meadowhall SOUTH tram stop) and Rotherham Central. It doesn't go anywhere near the Meadowhall - Holmes - Masborough line.

Three trains per hour Rotherham Central - Meadowhall Interchange - Sheffield Midland plus 3 trams per hour (Parkgate) - Rotherham Central - Meadowhall South - Sheffield City Centre (Cathedral ?) is a doubling of service.

 

[tsr]

I am still a bit dubious. I would have thought the tracks between Meadowhall and Rotherham were probably very full already. Are they going main line then via Holmes chord into Rotherham Central?

And it seems a lot of money to have only three tram trains per hour? Thought a system like this would have to be more intense to be justifiable!

And if it is going to use train tracks, it won't go into the middle of Rotherham on the streets anyway. So why not just give it new trains?!

This is something of a trial system, so whilst I would have thought prospective users would be more receptive to a higher trial service frequency, it may be increased later if the planned trial itself is successful - it's either a vicious circle or an entirely understandable bit of planning, depending on how you look at it.

 

[ex-railwayman]

“Providing better connections between Sheffield and Rotherham’s city centres and residential areas will help to reinvigorate the local economy.''

Typical Government Minister clap trap. Firstly, Rotherham is not a city it's a town, they also had a tramway which closed in 1949 and that served Sheffield whilst the industrial boom was in full swing. They have had buses running between these South Yorkshire locations for decades, but, that hasn't re-invigorated the area, so, how are posh trams going to do any better, at such a huge cost to the taxpayers.
I can't understand why they would spend £58 million on a trial, to only create 35 jobs locally and all for an 8 minute journey, which could be done by bus if they altered a few things. More waste of public funds, and for what reason, to appease our friends in Brussels Euroland??

Cheerz. ex-railwayman.

 

[ALEMASTER]

“Providing better connections between Sheffield and Rotherham’s city centres and residential areas will help to reinvigorate the local economy.''

Typical Government Minister clap trap. Firstly, Rotherham is not a city it's a town, they also had a tramway which closed in 1949 and that served Sheffield whilst the industrial boom was in full swing. They have had buses running between these South Yorkshire locations for decades, but, that hasn't re-invigorated the area, so, how are posh trams going to do any better, at such a huge cost to the taxpayers.
I can't understand why they would spend £58 million on a trial, to only create 35 jobs locally and all for an 8 minute journey, which could be done by bus if they altered a few things. More waste of public funds, and for what reason, to appease our friends in Brussels Euroland??

Cheerz. ex-railwayman.

Because buses are rubbish and don't attract people out of cars. It is also hoped there will be development along the route that will create jobs etc.

The scheme is basically a simple way of extending the tram network - services use the existing tramway from Sheffield City Centre (Cathedral) to Meadowhall South/Tinsley, cross over onto the Network Rail track which will get electrified and then run fast into Rotherham Central station and onto the terminus at Parkgate retail world.

Additional benefits include providing a traffic free route Parkgate into Rotherham town centre (which suffers awful traffic congestions at peak times and will also allow withdrawal of the freebee bus) and providing more rail services between Rotherham and Sheffield (a busy flow where the Northern Rail service cannot be improved due to infrastructure capacity being reached).

The bus servicesthat competes with the train service and the new tram-train service are:

X78 Doncaster-Rotherham-Meadowhall-Sheffield (every 10 mins and well used)
69 Rotherham-Magna-Tinsley-Carbrook-Don Valley-Attercliffe-Sheffield (every 30 mins, lightly used with evening and Sunday services funded by SYPTE).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
http://www.google.co.uk/maps?q=Mead...r=Meadowhall+South+-+Tinsley+Station&t=h&z=17

above is a link to Meadowhall South/Tinsley tram stop on google maps. The new bit of track linking Supertram and Network Rail lines will be just before the tram stop near the road bridge. An additional platform will be built at this tram stop for the tram trains.

 

[HSTEd]

I can't understand why they would spend £58 million on a trial, to only create 35 jobs locally and all for an 8 minute journey, which could be done by bus if they altered a few things. More waste of public funds, and for what reason, to appease our friends in Brussels Euroland??
Cheerz. ex-railwayman.

So would you think it wiser to build a fifty kilometre tram-train network without doing a test first?

Its a trial, these things always are more expensive and done on a smaller scale than full blown implementation.

 

[WatcherZero]

Half the trams were already going to be ordered by Sheffield anyway to boost capacity, making them one order of tram-trains saves money.

 

[Ploughman]

I assume that there will be no problems if ever the MML gets electrified?
I realise that they are using the freight line but would the mainline divert route from Chesterfield be considered for wiring as well?

Also is the proposed idea of using these Tram Trains on the Penistone line dead in the water? or just in abeyance?

 

[eastwestdivide]

...Three trains per hour Rotherham Central - Meadowhall Interchange - Sheffield Midland plus 3 trams per hour (Parkgate) - Rotherham Central - Meadowhall South - Sheffield City Centre (Cathedral ?) is a doubling of service.

Anyone any info on ticketing intentions? Would be good to see any rail ticket destination/origin Rotherham inter-available on the new trams, otherwise it's not such a useful "doubling" of the service.
e.g. you're coming back to Rotherham, just miss the train (despite being 3 an hour, they're not regularly spaced at 20 minutes), and have the option of getting the next tram instead.

 

[Mattmatt]

They should have trialled it in Manchester; some would say we've already got tram/trains running already?

 

[YorkshireBear]

They should have trialled it in Manchester; some would say we've already got tram/trains running already?

No suitable lines in manchester to test it on. The reason it is tested here as it is converting a lightly used freight line.