Metrolink M5000 Trams: Final Verdict?
 

I've had a few months now to trial the new trams in everday life and I'm growing to notice they have some pretty major flaws.

• The ride quality is far worse than the T68 series. They're smoother at street running, but on the BR sections they're unbelieveably bouncy and can tilt rather alarmingly. They also judder quite suddely without much warning.
• The GPS system is knackered, so the trams have no idea where they are, so much so that the passenger announcements are now disabled on the M5000 series, because they're wrong 90% of the time. The onscreen PID displays still show that the tram is absaloutely clueless as to it's current location.
• They get dirty very very easily. A few of them are already starting to become quite dirty and unpleasent.
• The "smart lighting" creates a rather dark interior in certain situations. While the lights invariably always come on for a tunnel or underpass, there are times where the tram becomes a bit too dark for comfort, especially in the mornings and evenings, and passing tress for example, where the sensors see the light but you don't.
• The horns are too quiet, and are hard to hear for the general public. This has had the effect of making more sudden stops when in street running than the older trams have too. Plus it's outright dangerous. The horn can't be heard if you have headphones on. That's just not good news really.

All in all a good effort by Bombardier, but work needs to be done.

I would have thought the dirt issue was a function of the (hideous) livery, rather than that of the actual vehicle

Potentially, but the interiors are quite dirty as well. White does nothing to hide dirt though, so.

I spent six days in Manchester a fortnight ago, riding the Eccles extension every day. I found that the 5000 series trams didn't like the sharp curves around the old docks area. One lady driver slowed to 5mph for each sharp curve! I didn't notice any problems with the passenger announcements, in fact I was quite impressed. The older trams did seem to give a better, smoother ride and took the curves easier. I didn't realise that the 5000's had "thinking" lights, it wasn't apparent in normal running.

Tony, did you not notice that the tram announced the next stop was actually the stop after the next stop, especially around the Harbour City / Weaste areas?

The smart lights are not as much of an issue on the Eccles line during daylight as there aren't many trees or objects. You notice it in rush hour though when bodies block all the windows and there are no lights inside the tram.

The darkness sensors have been made less sensitive, on the old ones lights come on needlessly if it passes under a bridge and will take several seconds to go off, now theirs a timer that their has to be darkness for x seconds.

The GPS signalling system (TRAM OS) hasnt been turned on yet, at the moment its the driver who enters a code at the start of the journey which selects the correct preprogrammed destination display list. If the driver cocks and doesnt enter it at the start of the journey the display will be wrong.

Hi DBT (or Danny?),
Going back to your original comment about rough riding on the "railway" track sections; Have you ridden in a 142 lately? The 5000's are much smoother.

That's not a good thing. To be honest they're better left on, period.

If this is indeed the case, the M5000 suffers from it almost all the time. T68's do not. I also doubt this explination because the tram seems to get it right at first, then it skips ahead a stop or two without warning at random, then returns to the correct destination.

Either way I would suggest GPS is required for the system to work at all. Otherwise it would go out of sync too easily.

I ride 142's and M5000's daily. 142's are rough but not as rough as M5000's on BR sections. The pacers mostly have very smooth track to run on these days and don't tend to bounce around as much as they used too, especially towards the cab ends. The new trams are very very bouncy and in a way that's more noticeable to Pacers. Remember the trams are less substantially built.

Hi Danny,
In this part of the country we still have rough track, remember, it is only 108 years since they changed the gauge! 142's were called Skippers for a very good reason.
Since when were "Nodding Donkeys" substantial? Do you remember the Winsford crash a few years ago when a 142 body was detatched from it's undercarriage? Luckily it was an ECS service.

Hey Tony,

I know a Leyland National Bus bolted onto a cattle wagon is hardly substantial, but compared to a LRV, they are still "proper trains", which is why the tram seems to suffer a bit more!

That isn't to say on track that isn't continuously welded that Pacer's aren't bad news, but as most of the lines I ride on are, in general I find the M5000 trams to be a bit of a bumpier ride.

Apparently they are temporarirly banned from the Altrincham line as they suffer from a mechical fault which kicks in at 35mph and there's also a clearance issue at Altrincham station meaning the M500s have to stop much further up the platform than the T68s.

When was this ban implemented? I saw one on monday morning at Altrincham.

They seem to be running exclusively on Eccles services right now with the odd Bury or Victoria run, probably assosiated with a return to Queens Road. I can believe this may be down to certain issues with them, particularly that 35mph fault.

It's pretty much been a disaster of a tram to be honest, nice in theory but badly executed. More testing was clearly needed. The Flexiswift wasn't designed for National Rail style running as far as I know.

I agree they need work but unfortunately they're here now, so they need some modifications....