• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Todmorden Curve

Status
Not open for further replies.

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,885
Location
Reston City Centre
But being my usual pedantic self, if "no growth" means what it purports to state, why should "additional carriages" be provided to meet a "no growth scenario", as additional carriages are surely only required when growth has occurred and then to provide cover for this growth

As has been explained once or twice, Northern currently provide around 30% more seats than at the start of the franchise (no, not a universal increase, before someone starts arguing, obviously some routes have done better than others), so I don't know why we keep coming back to this "no growth" argument.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,069
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
As has been explained once or twice, Northern currently provide around 30% more seats than at the start of the franchise (no, not a universal increase, before someone starts arguing, obviously some routes have done better than others), so I don't know why we keep coming back to this "no growth" argument.

With regard to the "no growth" argument, I did make a point in an earlier posting today to ask if there had ever been any legal moves to change that particular proviso in the 2004 Northern Rail franchise documentation. However, in the similarity to the British prime minister, Neville Chamberlain, in his broadcast to the nation in 1939 about the ultimatum given to Germany...."I have to tell you now that no such undertaking has been received"..:roll:

If matters had been dealt with in a way that the rolling stock problem would have been addressed by Northern Rail in a PR manner at a much earlier stage than the sudden last-minute admission of the problem, they could have put the problem squarely upon the shoulders of the DfT by explaining the matter of the problems in the current matter of a franchise extension, who then would have been seen to be the culprits.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,885
Location
Reston City Centre
With regard to the "no growth" argument, I did make a point in an earlier posting today to ask if there had ever been any legal moves to change that particular proviso in the 2004 Northern Rail franchise documentation. However, in the similarity to the British prime minister, Neville Chamberlain, in his broadcast to the nation in 1939 about the ultimatum given to Germany...."I have to tell you now that no such undertaking has been received"..:roll:

If matters had been dealt with in a way that the rolling stock problem would have been addressed by Northern Rail in a PR manner at a much earlier stage than the sudden last-minute admission of the problem, they could have put the problem squarely upon the shoulders of the DfT by explaining the matter of the problems in the current matter of a franchise extension, who then would have been seen to be the culprits.

Sorry, I don't see why this is being argued about.

Why would there be legal moves to change the 2004 franchise documentation?

Whilst the franchise was written on a "no growth" basis, there's obviously been a large growth in trains/ seats/ services over the past decade, and there'll be further growth in the "Northern" franchise over the next couple of years as EMUs are introduced (with the "spared" DMUs seemingly being kept, partly for use on things like the Todmorden Curve).

Maybe your reference to Neville Chamberlain is an attempt to drag this thread into "Godwins Law" territory, I don't know (?)
 

Darren R

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2013
Messages
1,252
Location
Lancashire
I'm looking forward to driving the replacement bus service between Hebden Bridge and Burnley Manchester Road. I'm expecting it to be pretty busy at times.

It's a good job you're keen on the bustitutions. It's gonna be buses running between (at least) Halifax and Blackpool North every Sunday until December 22nd - presumably due to other works elsewhere. And yes, I would think they will be very busy in the run up to Christmas, especially on Saturdays. I haven't bothered checking the fixture lists: better hope that Blackpool, Preston NE, The Rovers, Accy Stanley or Burnley aren't playing any of the Yorkshire clubs in the meantime!
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
25,128
Location
Bolton
Maybe your reference to Neville Chamberlain is an attempt to drag this thread into "Godwins Law" territory, I don't know (?)

Hahah no I suspect that's not the case, tbtc, I think that's just Paul :D
 

Welshman

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2010
Messages
3,052
I'm looking forward to driving the replacement bus service between Hebden Bridge and Burnley Manchester Road. It wouldn't surprise me that passengers for Rochdale/Manchester Victoria will want to jump off in Todmorden. It would certainly make sense that as the buses will have to go through Todmorden to get to/from Burnley. ;)


You're not planning on trying to take one up through Heptonstall and Blackshaw Head, then? :D
 

lancastrian

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2010
Messages
536
Location
Bolton, Lancashire
And one last comment before the thread goes too far off topic, the problem with the Colne branch is not the infrastructure per se: it's the fact that it's used by the same trains that use the Blackpool South siding. Gannow Junction to Colne takes 20 minutes. The problems are caused because incoming and outgoing trains have to pass each other at Rose Grove because of timings at Kirkham & Wesham. Timings there are fixed, and the rest of the timetable revolves around this. If the Colne trains started instead from Preston, a much more robust timetable could be drafted. But that really is for another thread in another section!]

Ok, do we know where the people who actually use the Colne branch want to travel TO? Manchester? Preston? Blackpool South?...I suspect quite a few just go to other E.Lancs towns. I doubt many want to go to Blackpool South apart from on Summer days out.

Perhaps the Blackpool South line should be run as a shuttle from Preston if this would improve reliability. My suggestion for a through working was that this is often promoted as a way of reducing terminal costs and obtaining better rolling stock utilisation. I gather that few trains will turn at Man Vic once all the improvements are implemented, with electric trains turning at Stalybridge and DMUs at Rochdale.

If the Rose Grove-Colne timing is 20min then a half hourly service could be provided as a shuttle from Rose Grove, with one unit if some way of turning it there could be found without conflicting with trains to/from the Copy Pit line. I really do think SELRAP is a daft proposal, a fantasy with ZERO prospect of implementation whereas increased frequency on the existing Colne branch could be achieved cheaply and quickly and benefit more people.

There are two ways that this service could be better.

1. Separate the Preston to Blackpool South service from the Preston to Colne service, not only would that mean you weren't reliant upon train completing their running to time on what are basically TWO long sidings.

2. Just run the services on an hourly basis from Preston to Bradford, and possibly further and run the Rose Grove to Colne service as a shuttle.

This could be done very easily. The former Colne bay at Rose Grove still exists, howbeit over grown and on the part of the platform that is fenced out of use.

If this was reopened and the trains ran wrong line from Gannow Junction into that platform then the trains could be kept in the bay while the main services called and people could get straight onto the trains, which would be much better than having to wait on what is basically just a plain platform.

Obviously the service could be left as a Blackpool South to Colne service IF a dynamic loop was installed from Lytham to St Annes, including double track through both those stations and another one perhaps from Burnley Central to Brierfield.

Although you may be right concerning SELRAP, personally I believe the day will come when what they are proposing will be built, simply because the Oil will run out.
 

Deerfold

Veteran Member
Joined
26 Nov 2009
Messages
13,151
Location
Yorkshire
2. Just run the services on an hourly basis from Preston to Bradford, and possibly further and run the Rose Grove to Colne service as a shuttle.

I'd suggest further - the majority of people on the train at Bradford are travelling to Leeds.
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,776
Location
Nottingham
The Manchester service is already doubling the trains through Manchester Road and probably providing extra opportunities to travel towards Halifax by changing at Todmorden. What's the benefit of making Colne line passengers change somewhere as unpleasant as Rose Grove, simply to improve further the service to Manchester Road and points east?
 

ianhr

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2013
Messages
534
I would have thought that if a good connection can be provided at Rose Grove then Colne branch passengers would get a faster journey to Man Vic via Todmorden than at present by changing at Blackburn. They would only have to cross the platform. I think that for some years there was a peak hour through train from Colne to Man Vic via Bolton but this seems to have disappeared.
 

Darren R

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2013
Messages
1,252
Location
Lancashire
I would have thought that if a good connection can be provided at Rose Grove then Colne branch passengers would get a faster journey to Man Vic via Todmorden than at present by changing at Blackburn. They would only have to cross the platform. I think that for some years there was a peak hour through train from Colne to Man Vic via Bolton but this seems to have disappeared.

It disappeared because it wasn't being utilised. BR tried a Man Vic - Bbn - Colne train in the late 80s and dropped it, and Northern did the same a few years back, and also dropped it after just a year.

There just isn't a market for rail passengers between Colne and Manchester at the moment. It's quicker by bus. The main market for Colne trains is to Accrington, Blackburn and Preston: Colne to Burnley is better served by bus for local journeys. This is reflected at Blackburn, where there is no connection between trains from Manchester onward to Colne. (Off peak it's a 57 minute wait! ;))

The question is - if good connections at Rose Grove from Colne (and vice versa) can be timetabled, will this be a journey time (and fare) that is competitive enough with the buses? Is it even possible to be able to provide good connections in this way (from a timetabling point of view, with the infrastructure in its present form.)
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,776
Location
Nottingham
It disappeared because it wasn't being utilised. BR tried a Man Vic - Bbn - Colne train in the late 80s and dropped it, and Northern did the same a few years back, and also dropped it after just a year.

There just isn't a market for rail passengers between Colne and Manchester at the moment. It's quicker by bus. The main market for Colne trains is to Accrington, Blackburn and Preston: Colne to Burnley is better served by bus for local journeys. This is reflected at Blackburn, where there is no connection between trains from Manchester onward to Colne. (Off peak it's a 57 minute wait! ;))

The question is - if good connections at Rose Grove from Colne (and vice versa) can be timetabled, will this be a journey time (and fare) that is competitive enough with the buses? Is it even possible to be able to provide good connections in this way (from a timetabling point of view, with the infrastructure in its present form.)

The situation at Colne is presumably because Clitheroe to Preston is a more important flow than Colne to Manchester.

The relative timings of services at Colne make it impossible to provide connections to Manchester with the existing service pattern and infrastructure in the Rose Grove area. And I don't see that providing a connection to Manchester would justify breaking the link with Preston.
 

ianhr

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2013
Messages
534
Returning to the rolling stock problem, I think there is an assertion in the current issue of "Rail" that Northern do not have any routes where DMUs are diagrammed for routes which are electrified throughout, and therefore cannot be released by the 317s in store and/or the 6 319s they are to receive in May.

Giving this some thought:

1. Most Hazel Grove workings are DMU. I believe they run through to Preston? How many people actually make cross-Manchester journeys on these trains? If they were split into Preston-Man and Man Picc-Hazel Grove with the latter an EMU, could this not release one DMU and make better use of the Hazel Grove electrification which at present only sees one or two EMUs per day?

2. I believe all the local services north of Newcastle are DMU on the ECML. Using EMUs here would surely release at least one DMU?
 

ianhr

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2013
Messages
534
No, I think they all work through to (at least) Metrocentre or Sunderland at some point in their diagrams.

Ok, no doubt there is quite a bit of demand for the Metrocentre workings in view of the national obsession with shopping!
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
18,607
Location
Yorkshire
No, I think they all work through to (at least) Metrocentre or Sunderland at some point in their diagrams.

Perhaps this is something that needs to be looked at, though. Newcastle I imagine has space for services to turn back rather than continue through, and EMUs would also be quicker on the Morpeth/Chathill services than the 75mph DMUs, possibly allowing extension to Berwick and/or an increase in frequency.

As for the Hazel Grove conundrum, one problem with splitting the service at Piccadilly would be terminating services in the through platforms which I imagine is not the most efficient use of paths along that stretch.
 

Spaceflower

Established Member
Joined
13 Jul 2007
Messages
1,504
Perhaps this is something that needs to be looked at, though. Newcastle I imagine has space for services to turn back rather than continue through, and EMUs would also be quicker on the Morpeth/Chathill services than the 75mph DMUs, possibly allowing extension to Berwick and/or an increase in frequency.

As for the Hazel Grove conundrum, one problem with splitting the service at Piccadilly would be terminating services in the through platforms which I imagine is not the most efficient use of paths along that stretch.

Good idea but that would mean having one EMU unit at Heaton. Hardly cost effective. Besides it's ONE DMU I think. Hardly going to make much impact in Lancs.

A better idea would be to take off the Newcastle-Middlesbrough trains and run hourly TPE/XC trains down that route instead;)

Even better remove NE local services from the Northern franchise altogether and incorporate into to the other franchises. I think NR are currently considering the possibility of something similar? There's certainly going to be a few spare 185's come electrification of the TP route for example
 
Last edited by a moderator:

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
18,607
Location
Yorkshire
Good idea but that would mean having one EMU unit at Heaton. Hardly cost effective. Besides it's ONE DMU I think. Hardly going to make much impact in Lancs.

A better idea would be to take off the Newcastle-Middlesbrough trains and run hourly TPE/XC trains down that route instead;)

Even better remove NE local services from the Northern franchise altogether and incorporate into to the other franchises. I think NR are currently considering the possibility of something similar? There's certainly going to be a few spare 185's come electrification of the TP route for example

True, with the current service pattern there's not much point in going electric- though with the cascades of EMUs due in the future there might be a case for improvements to NE local services. Of course, all this will come too late to release DMUs for Todmorden though!
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,776
Location
Nottingham
1. Most Hazel Grove workings are DMU. I believe they run through to Preston? How many people actually make cross-Manchester journeys on these trains? If they were split into Preston-Man and Man Picc-Hazel Grove with the latter an EMU, could this not release one DMU and make better use of the Hazel Grove electrification which at present only sees one or two EMUs per day?

2. I believe all the local services north of Newcastle are DMU on the ECML. Using EMUs here would surely release at least one DMU?

1. To do this you'd have to terminate a DMU service from the west at Piccadilly. This is theoretically possible, the ATW service from Llandudno etc does it every hour, but it sits in Mayfield loop for most of the hour so any other service would have to run further out to turn back. Not a good idea in performance terms either considiering how busy Piccadilly P13/14 are.

2. There is an hourly DMU from Newcastle to Morpeth but most workings are extended to the Metrocentre which isn't electrified.
 

Darren R

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2013
Messages
1,252
Location
Lancashire
Northern don't have any EMUs spare though. DMUs operating under the wires because of a lack of EMUs is not unusual on the lines out of Piccadilly. And besides, the Hazel Grove to Preston services are well-patronised throughout (although what proportion of them would be inconvenienced by having to change at Picc or Oxford Rd I don't know.)


Originally Posted by Paul Sidorczuk
Exactly how many DMU are required to fulfil the service provision requirements of the proposed Blackburn-Copy Pit line-Manchester Victoria service.

With journey times of around 70 - 75 minutes (ish!) it will need three for an hourly service. Three measley little Sprinters - that's all we need! :lol:
 

ianhr

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2013
Messages
534
Send the Preston trains to Man Vic. Terminal capacity there may be tight but it would free up the South Junction Line and platforms 13 & 14 at Piccadilly a bit, which would be no bad thing. Most people from the Preston line stations want to go to MANCHESTER, not Hazel Grove. There will still be Preston-Chorley-Bolton-Man Picc trains provided by TPE (the Blackpool and Barrow to Man Airport trains).

Turn the Morpeth & Chathill trains at Newcastle Central and make people change for Metrocentre. Running DMUs for long distances under the wires is plain bonkers! I doubt any other railway in the world does this!

For comparison, in Mallorca the SFM electrification, with its excellent frequent EMUs, runs out at Enllac, in the middle of nowhere, and everyone quite happily transfers to DMUs for onward journeys to Sa Pobla and Manacor. An efficient railway which manages its limited resources sensibly.
 

Spaceflower

Established Member
Joined
13 Jul 2007
Messages
1,504
Send the Preston trains to Man Vic. Terminal capacity there may be tight but it would free up the South Junction Line and platforms 13 & 14 at Piccadilly a bit, which would be no bad thing. Most people from the Preston line stations want to go to MANCHESTER, not Hazel Grove. There will still be Preston-Chorley-Bolton-Man Picc trains provided by TPE (the Blackpool and Barrow to Man Airport trains).

Turn the Morpeth & Chathill trains at Newcastle Central and make people change for Metrocentre. Running DMUs for long distances under the wires is plain bonkers! I doubt any other railway in the world does this!

For comparison, in Mallorca the SFM electrification, with its excellent frequent EMUs, runs out at Enllac, in the middle of nowhere, and everyone quite happily transfers to DMUs for onward journeys to Sa Pobla and Manacor. An efficient railway which manages its limited resources sensibly.

Long distance?
Morpeth-Newcastle is about 15 minutes.
Like I said, running an EMU would require EMU provision at Heaton for one train. That would be bonkers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

RAPC

Member
Joined
30 May 2010
Messages
339
Most people from the Preston line stations want to go to MANCHESTER, not Hazel Grove. There will still be Preston-Chorley-Bolton-Man Picc trains provided by TPE (the Blackpool and Barrow to Man Airport trains).

As a commuter on this line, most people do indeed want to go to Manchester. However it is normally a pretty even split between Salford Central / Victoria and the alternative of Deansgate / Oxford Road / Piccadilly. Removal of the service to Piccadilly would add at least a 12 minute walk each way across Manchester to my commute.

The TPE services would be a solution, except they don't stop at all stations served by the Northern services, so some will miss out.

The Hazel Grove services may not be the optimal service to be running through P13/14 at Piccadilly, but removal of them is not without knock-on effects to passengers.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
1. Most Hazel Grove workings are DMU. I believe they run through to Preston? How many people actually make cross-Manchester journeys on these trains? If they were split into Preston-Man and Man Picc-Hazel Grove with the latter an EMU, could this not release one DMU and make better use of the Hazel Grove electrification which at present only sees one or two EMUs per day?

Northern have to provide an hourly service between Stockport , Manchester Oxford Road, Bolton and Preston as part of the franchise agreement. Due to pathing constraints the service must originate from somewhere south of Stockport which means the options are:
1. Buxton - Northern didn't want to send Preston trains there because of poor punctuality when they ran Buxton to Blackpool services.
2. Chester - Given Chester is further from Stockport than Buxton I imagine they'd see punctuality as a potential problem.
3. An alternative electrified destination - Alderley Edge, Crewe or Stoke. That would mean even more diesel under the wires and likely the need for 90mph DMU stock.

The Summer timetable is when more people use the Northern Hazel Grove-Preston service for cross Manchester transfers due to people going to places like Blackpool, Southport and the Lake District. The first off-peak train from Stockport to Preston in the Summer can get very busy.
 

ianhr

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2013
Messages
534
I wonder if we should start another thread on cross-Manchester services as this is obviously a complex subject in its own right. The present pattern has both advantages and shortcomings as is nearly always the case, and it is likely to change fairly radically in the near and medium future with electrification and the Castlefield curve.

There seems to be a mismatch between terminal capacity, of which there is plenty at Piccadilly platforms 1-12 and the through lines which are very constricted. Most of the terminal capacity at Man Vic has now been removed and so there are problems there now too!
 

L&Y Robert

Member
Joined
22 Apr 2012
Messages
585
Location
Banbury 3m South
Northern have to provide an hourly service between Stockport , Manchester Oxford Road, Bolton and Preston as part of the franchise agreement. Due to pathing constraints the service must originate from somewhere south of Stockport which means the options are:
1. Buxton - Northern didn't want to send Preston trains there because of poor punctuality when they ran Buxton to Blackpool services.
2. Chester - Given Chester is further from Stockport than Buxton I imagine they'd see punctuality as a potential problem.
3. An alternative electrified destination - Alderley Edge, Crewe or Stoke. That would mean even more diesel under the wires and likely the need for 90mph DMU stock.

The Summer timetable is when more people use the Northern Hazel Grove-Preston service for cross Manchester transfers due to people going to places like Blackpool, Southport and the Lake District. The first off-peak train from Stockport to Preston in the Summer can get very busy.

Chester, Buxton, Crewe? And this thread is titled "TODMORDEN CURVE".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top