AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

OVERHEAD EQUIPMENT ON THE MANCHESTER-ALTRINCHAM ROUTE

14th April 1931, Page 64
14th April 1931
Page 64
Page 65
Page 64, 14th April 1931 — OVERHEAD EQUIPMENT ON THE MANCHESTER-ALTRINCHAM ROUTE
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

The Possibilities of Railless Traction Discussed in Connection With an Abandoned Tram Service AT a recent transport-committee meeting of Manchester Corporation, the general manager, Mr. It. Stuart Filcher, reported upon the overhead electrical equipment on the Altrincbam route. On the circular and Bradford Road routes the overhead equipment was removed and materials sold so soon as the change-over was made. Before dismantling on the Altrincham route he wished to obtain the instructions of the committee. The tramways on this route have now been abandoned, and it is being successfully operated by motorbuses. The question arises as to whether the tramway standards and wires should be removed, or whether they should be left up in case

c42 railless traction should be introduced if and when Parliamentary powers are obtained.

If Parliamentary powers are obtained to operate railless electric vehicles outside the city to such districts as Altrincham, Sale and Stretford, these powers cannot be obtained until August, 1932.

If railless traction were adopted for this route, it would require to operate with the tramway system from War

wick Road into and through the city. The route runs through streets which are congested. Four extra trolley wires would require to be erected in order to permit the trolley-buses to pass the tramway cars. Further, on examining the poles on this route, it is found that a considerable number would have to be renewed. Apart from these considerations, trolley vehicles would be less mobile than motorbuses ; for instance, they could not pass tramcars except on the near side; one railless bus cannot pass another railless vehicle without de-wiring; a trolley-bus cannot turn around except at• a terminus or where special provision for a siding is made. He believes that in considering alternative modes of trarisport, preference should be given to the most mobile form of vehicle, especially where traffic con

gestion is of consideration. Motorbuses have the advantage of being easily diverted into side streets in case of blockage, and of being diverted to other routes in other parts of the city.

The overhead equipment in City Road (Manchester), Altrincharn and Bucklow for a distance of 2 miles 1,110

yards is owned by Manchester Corporation, and can be left in position if it is desirable. On the other hand, the overhead equipment in Sale and Stretford over a. distance• of 5 miles 722 yards is not the property of the corporation, mid may be removed by these local authorities.

The decision as regards policy is, therefore, not entirely in the hands of the corporation; motorbuses must always be operated on the Altrinchaaa route, as they connect with other districts. It is desirable, if possible, that poles should be removed from the pavement as in some eases they constitute a danger to other forms of road traffic situated as they are on the edge of the pavement. In the whole of the circumstances, he recommends that the poles and wires which are the property of the corporation should be removed. The report and recommendation were approved.

Tags

People: Stuart Filcher
Locations: MANCHESTER

comments powered by Disqus