West Midlands Metro Tracklaying in Brum

[wombatofludham]

I was present at a meeting with the then HMRI back in the late 90s when there was talk of coming out of Platform 4 onto the new Snow Hill development to free up capacity in the station and we were told then that two train operation at Snow Hill would not be permitted, although that was before the widespread installation of TPWS. Unfortunately I can't recall the exact reason but I seem to recall there were concerns about the layout of the station. I would have thought though the two central through tracks which are nice and straight with good visibility could with TPWS be cleared for two train operation. Perhaps the issue is filed under too difficult for now requiring signalling and regulatory work when NR have a lot of schemes on the go.

 

As for Platform 4, when we were looking at it back in 1998-9 the idea was it would be a bay platform for the Shirley terminators and any Chiltern trains still terminating in Snow Hill, so the odd track layout at the St Pauls end of the platform shouldn't be an issue if that is still the case.

[phil-b259]

I was present at a meeting with the then HMRI back in the late 90s when there was talk of coming out of Platform 4 onto the new Snow Hill development to free up capacity in the station and we were told then that two train operation at Snow Hill would not be permitted, although that was before the widespread installation of TPWS. Unfortunately I can't recall the exact reason but I seem to recall there were concerns about the layout of the station. I would have thought though the two central through tracks which are nice and straight with good visibility could with TPWS be cleared for two train operation. Perhaps the issue is filed under too difficult for now requiring signalling and regulatory work when NR have a lot of schemes on the go.

 

As for Platform 4, when we were looking at it back in 1998-9 the idea was it would be a bay platform for the Shirley terminators and any Chiltern trains still terminating in Snow Hill, so the odd track layout at the St Pauls end of the platform shouldn't be an issue if that is still the case.

 

Ahh I see - the significant thing is (i) it was before the nationwide installation of TPWS made the risks attached to such a operation minuscule and (ii) It was also in an era before ROGS, where the HMRI had much more direct involvement in the specifics of infrastructure modifications where as now its less about them saying an absolute yes / no to a proposal and more about the infrastructure provider proving the propose solution addresses all risks and can be operate safely.

 

Were platform sharing to be proposed today then assuming suitable signalling (inc TPWS, etc) was installed then I see no reason why it wouldn't happen. However given the pressure on signalling resources I wouldn't expect that to happen any time soon.

Edited October 18, 2015 by phil-b259

[wombatofludham]

The adoption of TPWS has changed things quite dramatically, it in theory makes trams and trains on the same track more feasible - when I was involved in the early days of Midland Metro on plans for the still stalled Merry Hill route the HMRI were absolutely adamant that lightweight trams and heavy rail should never operate on the same lines, for obvious reasons, which meant that either separation by time (trams in the day, freight at night) or separate lines, or ATP had to be in place, the latter adding dramatically to costs as effectively the Metro project would have to fund ATP installation on any loco likely to run along the same route. Now, with TPWS and TPWS+ providing effective protection against SPADS and the change to a more risk-based assessment, there shouldn't be any obstacles on safety grounds to shared running although the technical issues about flange and wheel profiles are still to be tested. I suspect that if the Rotherham tram-train operation works as planned it may bring forward plans for the Wednesbury-Brierley Hill route that have remained on the back burner now for more than 20 years.

 

An arthritic slug surfing a glacier down a mountain moves quicker than light rail development in the Midlands.

Edited October 18, 2015 by wombatofludham

[The Stationmaster]

TPWS doesn't necessarily protect against SPADs but what it will do is mitigate the effect of a SPAD as it is very unlikely that a train which SPADs will run beyond the overlap  (unless there is of course a very short overlap).  Snow Hill sounds to me to be more of a design issue rather than anything else now and thus, as Phil says, it would have to take its places in a long queue behind likely more important projects.

[Edwin_m]

The adoption of TPWS has changed things quite dramatically, it in theory makes trams and trains on the same track more feasible - when I was involved in the early days of Midland Metro on plans for the still stalled Merry Hill route the HMRI were absolutely adamant that lightweight trams and heavy rail should never operate on the same lines, for obvious reasons, which meant that either separation by time (trams in the day, freight at night) or separate lines, or ATP had to be in place, the latter adding dramatically to costs as effectively the Metro project would have to fund ATP installation on any loco likely to run along the same route. Now, with TPWS and TPWS+ providing effective protection against SPADS and the change to a more risk-based assessment, there shouldn't be any obstacles on safety grounds to shared running although the technical issues about flange and wheel profiles are still to be tested. I suspect that if the Rotherham tram-train operation works as planned it may bring forward plans for the Wednesbury-Brierley Hill route that have remained on the back burner now for more than 20 years.

 

An arthritic slug surfing a glacier down a mountain moves quicker than light rail development in the Midlands.

I think you may have been on one of our technical visits to Kalsruhe in, I think, 1997 or 1998!   I had another look at the route in 2008, must be nearly must to get me back again! 

 

However Dudley to Dudley Port appears to have been earmarked for a "Very Light Rail Test Track", which won't allow for passenger service and unless it's based on the (very expensive) three-track parallel running idea won't leave any scope for Metro service. 

[Alan J Kirkman]

I am told that it's as much that now no ICP would be prepared to sign off two trains in one platform just in case he was sued if somebody got it wrong, as much as any technical issues. ROGS has much to answer for and will not allow innovation and new working or even old but not here before anything like as much as convincing an HMRI that it was in fact safe to do it allowed for. Such is life.

[The Stationmaster]

I am told that it's as much that now no ICP would be prepared to sign off two trains in one platform just in case he was sued if somebody got it wrong, as much as any technical issues. ROGS has much to answer for and will not allow innovation and new working or even old but not here before anything like as much as convincing an HMRI that it was in fact safe to do it allowed for. Such is life.

Interesting when compared with the new Reading - where, on the WTT. trains run into opposite ends of a platform within a couple of minutes of each other and the only visible indication of where they should stop is a noticeboard  (lots of TPWs grids about though).  And of course the design post-dates ROGS.  The sign you see below suspended from the station roof is literally all that marks the point to which a train may run having received the appropriate aspect at the signal in rear of it although as I mentioned previously in seemingly every case in the current TT trains then reverse in 'their' half of the platform.  The sign is the inverted black triangle on a circular background.

 

In reality I suspect it is all down to SPAD risk assessment and mitigation measures and having the space to design in something which will keep trains apart from each other - and (design capacity apart) maybe that is a problem in respect of Snow Hill?  

 

[wombatofludham]

I think you may have been on one of our technical visits to Kalsruhe in, I think, 1997 or 1998!   I had another look at the route in 2008, must be nearly must to get me back again! 

 

However Dudley to Dudley Port appears to have been earmarked for a "Very Light Rail Test Track", which won't allow for passenger service and unless it's based on the (very expensive) three-track parallel running idea won't leave any scope for Metro service.

Sorry, no it wasn't me, I was more involved in the implementation of Line 1 at the time with a number of trips to Italy for "interesting" meetings with Ansaldo. The one good thing about the Italian meetings is I did get some serious BAC1-11 "haulage" before they were replaced by Boeing 737s on the BHX-Milan service! I always liked the 1-11, it first flew four months after I made my debut appearance in the world so I feel we were of the same generation, and shared similar character traits - temperamental, noisy, robust and quirky!

[Fay Singpoint]

 

Also what about platform sharing without mid platform signals which is used extensively across the network using call on signals to allow a second train into the occupied platform. This is due to go in on the 100% new build platform at Redhill.

 

There's no platform sharing being designed for Redhill "so no mid-platform signals or marker boards".  Permissive working is provided for joining/splitting trains only

[Edwin_m]

Sorry, no it wasn't me, I was more involved in the implementation of Line 1 at the time with a number of trips to Italy for "interesting" meetings with Ansaldo. The one good thing about the Italian meetings is I did get some serious BAC1-11 "haulage" before they were replaced by Boeing 737s on the BHX-Milan service! I always liked the 1-11, it first flew four months after I made my debut appearance in the world so I feel we were of the same generation, and shared similar character traits - temperamental, noisy, robust and quirky!

I will refrain from comment on which of these characteristics were shared by the Ansaldo trams...

[wombatofludham]

I will refrain from comment on which of these characteristics were shared by the Ansaldo trams...

I have no such qualms - noisy, temperamental, each one wired up differently to the others, although robust isn't a word I'd associate with them.

 

Still it was sad to see them go as I had a bit of involvement with them.

[jamie92208]

I have no such qualms - noisy, temperamental, each one wired up differently to the others, although robust isn't a word I'd associate with them.

 

Still it was sad to see them go as I had a bit of involvement with them.

 

It sounds as if the T69's share that characteristic with the T68's.Allegdly built in 5 different factories.  Apparently the first task after deliver was a thorough inspection to work out where everything was and write a manual for the individual vehicle.

 

Jamie.

[Robert Shrives]

Snow Hill platform 3 never got its permissive working sorted as it was all wheels tested by just one class 31. so it was not possible to test a permissive arrival. All the TCs are there and I have noted another version of an intermediate stop advice board between the Livery Street entrance  and the carpark overall roof - must take a pic and ask more about it. 

 

The works in BHM  now have two cross spans in Corperation St and about 6 other poles errected. Yesterday the glass support brackets in Upper bull st at the tram stop were again being lowered to the ground? ! but platform surface 85% complete. The next tram stop has metal work up and the Arco back drain in place. Little obvious progress on the further rebuild of the out of town face opp BHM New st stop. There was more concrete being pumped up to the cross over site near the junction at Snow hill- Livery st end.

Getting there!

Robert      

[melmerby]

Some Pictures from Yesterday

 

Plenty of OHLE going up now

 

Stephenson Street outside Ian Allan:

(This is above the crossover there)

 

Outside House of Fraser:

 

Colmore Gate above the crossover:

 

This is a close up of one of the eyebolts taken last week, screwed onto the threaded shaft but before wires went up in Stephenson Street:

 

The Tram stops are taking shape

 

Tram stop in Corporation Street:

 

Tram stop in Bull Street:

 

One of the equipment cabinets alongside Superdrug in Corporation Street:

 

State of play alongside Snow Hill with concrete pouring:

 

Cheers

 

Keith

Edited October 21, 2015 by melmerby

[wombatofludham]

Looks like they have really picked up the pace.

[melmerby]

Looks like they have really picked up the pace.

Starting this weekend there is a six week window to get everything finished.

Trams will terminate at St Pauls (seen in the distance when looking over the Snow Hill work)

 

You can see a tram at the St Pauls stop in this earlier picture:

 

The old terminus will be taken out of use and the tracks, old and new will be joined.

The aim is for trams to run (testing only to start with, I presume) along the new route after that six week period.

 

The claim is still for the new route to be opened to the public before the end of the year!

 

Keith

Edited October 21, 2015 by melmerby

[melmerby]

Just a few shots from a rather damp, murky day today.

 

2 days into the blockade the site of the joining of the old track to the new is a hive of activity.

 

The wiring and poles at the site of the work have been removed and the old track ripped up:

 

A close of the work with a tram visible at the temporary terminus at St Pauls:

 

Meanwhile the now abandoned Snow Hill stop is already looking forlorn, closed to the public and the OH wires removed:

 

Although the street works elsewhere looked more or less complete apart from some utility and paving work for some reason the track has been dug out at the site of a point motor at the end of Stephenson Street:

 

Progress since last week elsewhere could be seen in that there were more cross span cables up and the tramstops are being worked on towards completion.

 

Cheers

 

Keith

Edited October 27, 2015 by melmerby

[melmerby]

Latest photos from Yesterday 3rd November.

Another damp murky day!

 

Poles seemed to be the order of the day!

 

Looking from New St to Grand Central with a new pole and wiring visible:

 

Corner of New Street/Stephenson Street:

 

Base for new pole (Outside Waterstones)

Pavement has just been re-paved as part of the tram works but has to be dug up again to plant the pole - madness!

 

Outside Ian Allan at the end of the current route:

 

A load of poles beside Snow Hill waiting to be erected:

 

The tram stop in Bull street is almost complete waiting for it's first passengers:

 

A couple of ro-railer platforms about to be unloaded in Bull Street:

 

Over by Great Charles Street the two sets of tracks are getting closer:

 

A close up:

 

Cheers

 

Keith

Edited November 4, 2015 by melmerby

[uax6]

The traction poles are interesting, I see they are bolted to flanges, and not just dropped into holes and buried like the good old days. I wonder why the change, as shurly the flange method must be more expensive, as I'm guessing that the foundation flange must still be buried to a fair old depth.

 

Is there still a British Standard for Traction poles?

 

Andy G

[melmerby]

The traction poles are interesting, I see they are bolted to flanges, and not just dropped into holes and buried like the good old days. I wonder why the change, as shurly the flange method must be more expensive, as I'm guessing that the foundation flange must still be buried to a fair old depth.

 

Is there still a British Standard for Traction poles?

 

Andy G

The thing I noticed whilst photographing them is that there are at least two versions; namely 4 bolt and 6 bolt being used in different places.

 

I assume it must be to do with the loading on the poles.

 

Keith

[dcroz]

Pavement has just been re-paved as part of the tram works but has to be dug up again to plant the pole - madness!

 

Hi Keith, thanks for another update.

 

Absolutely agree with you on the "madness"!

 

Good to see work progressing though.

 

Best wishes,

 

David

Edited November 4, 2015 by dcroz

[wombatofludham]

It is rather cack-handed that the pole foundation went in after the paving works but that is probably down to different agencies doing different contracts. I have to say I do think the finishes, whilst high quality, seem a bit sterile although that will be down to the City's urban design team. Progress does seem to be really visible now and I must say the approach through Snow Hill does look rather nice and futuristic.

[Siberian Snooper]

At least with flanged and bolted poles it should be easier to replace a damaged pole if it gets struck by an errant road vehicle.

[phil-b259]

I am told that it's as much that now no ICP would be prepared to sign off two trains in one platform just in case he was sued if somebody got it wrong, as much as any technical issues. ROGS has much to answer for and will not allow innovation and new working or even old but not here before anything like as much as convincing an HMRI that it was in fact safe to do it allowed for. Such is life.

 

That sounds like someone making excuses to me (and possibly is cover for the fact that there are insufficient signalling design / installers / testers to do anything in the short term). Platform sharing was perfectly acceptable at Reading when the NEW platforms were built there and it will be installed with NEW Platform 0 at Redhill.

Edited November 4, 2015 by phil-b259

[dcroz]

Midland Metro services to return to Birmingham city centre - Centro Press Release, 09.11.2015

 

Trams will return to the streets of Birmingham for the first time in more than 60 years when Midland Metro services start running into the city centre on December 6th.

 

The announcement by Centro will see passengers taken directly to a new stop in Bull Street as the first step in the opening of the £128 million city centre tram extension.

 

Traders gearing up for the busy festive shopping period also issued a resounding 'Open for Business' message today after Centro announced a scaling back of tram works in the run up to Christmas.

 

Services will run to the new Bull Street stop from Snow Hill from December 6 while works further down the line will be scaled back over Christmas following talks with city centre traders.

 

The decision has been taken in order to minimise disruption in the crucial festive trading period and provide the best Christmas shopping experience possible for the millions of visitors expected to pour into the city over the coming weeks.

 

However, those visitors will see trams running along Corporation Street to New Street Station as Centro aims to carry out testing and commissioning of the entire 0.7 mile (1.2km) extension during December.

 

Passenger services to New Street Station will start once all infrastructure work and test running has been successfully completed.

 

Centro chief executive Geoff Inskip said: "We recognise this is a vital time of year for retailers and they need to provide the most attractive shopping environment possible, which is why we have scaled back our works.

 

"Doing so shows Birmingham is very much open for business and can lay on a truly magical festive atmosphere for everyone coming to the city.

 

"There has been a tremendous effort from everyone involved in this project with people working around the clock in recent weeks. I would particularly like to thank Retail Birmingham for all its support and co-operation.

 

"It is because of that hard work that we will be able to start running trams into the city centre at Bull Street before Christmas.

 

"However, as with all tram extensions through city centres at the moment there are always unforeseen challenges and that makes it difficult to give an exact date for when we will run trams to New Street Station."

 

Trams last ran on the streets of Birmingham city centre in 1953.

 

Centro's decision to reduce construction work has been warmly welcomed by Retail Birmingham, which is hoping for bumper Christmas crowds again this year.

 

The organisation, which represents city centre businesses, said the Frankfurt Christmas Market alone attracted more than 5.5 million visitors last year, helping to generate a major shot in the arm for the local economy.

 

Jonathan Cheetham, the chair of Retail Birmingham, said: "We are delighted that Centro have considered the needs of businesses in Birmingham in this vital trading period.

 

"We are looking forward to the New Year and the delivery of the tram through to New Street in yet another phase in the aspirations to achieve world class connectivity in transport throughout the city."

 

The £128 million tram extension, which includes a £40 million fleet of new trams, is expected to create more than 1,300 sustainable new jobs and boost the regional economy by more than £50 million a year.

 

Work has already begun on extending the route from New Street Station to Centenary Square with services expected to start running in 2019.

 

Outline funding approval is also earmarked to extend the route still further along Broad Street, past Five Ways and on to Edgbaston by 2021.

 

The route of a further extension through Digbeth has also been chosen, running between the Bull Street/Corporation Street, via Albert Street and on to the forthcoming HS2 high speed rail station at Curzon Street.

 

From there it would go along New Canal Street and Meriden Street into High Street Deritend, stopping at Digbeth Coach Station and the Custard Factory. It is anticipated the line could be open by 2023.