Petition for Manchester Piccadilly platforms 15 & 16

[Bletchleyite]

As a Calder Valley user I disagree. We have no link to Manchester Inter City services or the Airport at present and Victoria is a dead end. I think we deserve a through service to at least Piccadilly and indeed were promised one in the TSR in 2015

Ringway again! Not everyone can have a direct service for their week in the sun. And from Vic to Picc you've got the tram and the half hourly Ordsall service.

 

[Glenn1969]

Tram takes too long and people don't want to change trains especially with heavy luggage

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tram takes too long and people don't want to change trains especially with heavy luggage

People pull the luggage further through the elevated tunnels at the Airport than they'd need to for the change.

If you want a door to door direct service, take a taxi.

 

[Glenn1969]

You'd be surprised how many people do, including us sometimes- my sister lives in Rochdale so we have been known to go in a taxi from there. I'm disabled so always arrange assistance to get me through the airport

 

[Howardh]

People pull the luggage further through the elevated tunnels at the Airport than they'd need to for the change.
If you want a door to door direct service, take a taxi.

Struggling with that these days, a number of taxi firms round here won't touch the airport (unless you want dropping off at the car-park bus shelter a mile from the terminal); they say there's a £3 charge + if they can't get in or out due to congestion that charge increases. One firm (forget which one, there are so many) suggests being dropped off at the penultimate tram stop (Shadowmoss?) and get the tram from there - more reliable than the airport shuttle buses!!
I wouldn't dream of going anywhere near the place with my car or as a pax in one.

 

[Greybeard33]

As a Calder Valley user I disagree. We have no link to Manchester Inter City services or the Airport at present and Victoria is a dead end. I think we deserve a through service to at least Piccadilly and indeed were promised one in the TSR in 2015

I am a Mid Cheshire user and we do not have the second hourly service we were promised in the TSR. Likewise Macclesfield, Atherton and Hazel Grove line users do not have all the additional services promised. The franchise ITT specified more service enhancements than the current infrastructure can reliably support and so Network Rail is now in "once bitten, twice shy" mode. As the saying goes "The best is the enemy of the good".

I believe TfGM has plans to strengthen the Picc - Vic tram service once the extra vehicles are delivered next year; also to double the frequency to 10tph in the longer term.

There are TPE trains direct from Victoria to the Airport via Piccadilly every 30 minutes; if you just miss one of these it can be quicker to take the direct tram to the Airport (every 12 minutes) despite the 60 minute journey time. The Airport tram starts from Victoria so luggage transfer may be less of a hassle than boarding a through train.

 

[railfan100]

There is no pressing need for more trains into or through Manchester. What is needed is for the existing services to run reliably and punctually, with long enough trains to provide adequate capacity. That is what the Piccadilly/Oxford Road scheme can deliver.

Growth in patronage can be accommodated by train lengthening for the foreseeable future.

There is a very good point in there train length and I totally concur the current lengths lack coherence but we have a Rail industry collectively that seems quite happy that two car DMU's can be ordered on the cheap without front gangways. Without going off on a wild rant all new Northern stock should be 4 car minimum both the 195 and 331 with front gangways, although the horse has bolted (lack of planning and strategy again at work).

Whilst we need current services to run in a reliable fashion not thinking of the future got Manchester in this mess, and not thinking of the future again long-term will dig the city further in a transport mess. It is about time that the transport planners or those that expect a salary from such titles start planning, as it really is embarrassing that the current situation was self made and knowing that some additional capacity was available and lost as recent as 1991.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is a very good point in there train length and I totally concur the current lengths lack coherence but we have a Rail industry collectively that seems quite happy that two car DMU's can be ordered on the cheap without front gangways. Without going off on a wild rant all new Northern stock should be 4 car minimum both the 195 and 331 with front gangways, although the horse has bolted (lack of planning and strategy again at work).

The 2-cars were allegedly for cascade onto branches, but not specifying gangways (as WMT have) was mind-numbingly incompetent as until then they should mostly be working in multiple.

 

[Andyh82]

Ringway again! Not everyone can have a direct service for their week in the sun. And from Vic to Picc you've got the tram and the half hourly Ordsall service.

There is no through ticketing onto the tram, if you are coming from outside Greater Manchester.

If you had say a Halifax to Manchester Stations ticket would you be able to travel on a separate train from Vic to Picc? Would the barriers at Vic allow you to pass ‘landside’ if the connection was lengthy?

 

[Greybeard33]

There is no through ticketing onto the tram, if you are coming from outside Greater Manchester.

If you had say a Halifax to Manchester Stations ticket would you be able to travel on a separate train from Vic to Picc? Would the barriers at Vic allow you to pass ‘landside’ if the connection was lengthy?

It is a lot easier and cheaper to integrate ticketing systems than to build new infrastructure through the centre of Manchester.

Regarding the second point, you might need to ask at the Victoria gateline if you could visit the toilet while waiting for your connection to Piccadilly.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Ringway again!

I know that you use the term "Ringway" as something of a disparagement, but I really wish you would not do so. Manchester Airport has grown to become one of the major airports of Britain.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I know that you use the term "Ringway" as something of a disparagement, but I really wish you would not do so. Manchester Airport has grown to become one of the major airports of Britain.

It has indeed. My using it in a disparaging manner relates to the demand for a direct service from everywhere to it, which is both unrealistic and a significant cause of the problems we have at the moment.

There should certainly be no more direct services to it without removing one for each new one.

To be fair I could be tempted to say that they should remove two of the TPEs to replace one with a Picc-Airport all stations Northern EMU and the other with a Calder Valley local operated using a Class 195 better suited to the high loadings from Vic to Picc.

 

[Killingworth]

I know that you use the term "Ringway" as something of a disparagement, but I really wish you would not do so. Manchester Airport has grown to become one of the major airports of Britain.

Britain's 3rd busiest by passenger numbers, well behind Heathrow and Gatwick and ahead of Stanstead. Some would argue that Heathrow expansion wouldn't be needed if more use was made of regional airports. Manchester draws users from the North-East and Scotland so it could draw more from the Midlands and South. Just needs more trains into MIA South!

 

[Jozhua]

Investment that makes a real and obvious difference to the service provided is needed. If that includes 15/16 seems debatable based on the NR report linked a few pages back. The advantage is that it is probably close to 'shovel ready' vs other schemes. The disadvantage may be the proof to the likes of Calder valley, Bolton line or other residents outside the major cities that it makes an obvious difference to them and their town and is not just more money invested in a major city that already gets 'lots' (in relative terms) of investment vs their town.

As someone who lives on the Bolton corridor, I have to disagree, I and many others make use of 13/14 to get across to the other side of Manchester. Increasing reliability of these services would help me and many others acess other parts of the country with considerably more ease. 13/14 are many people from around the North's acess to a considerable amount of Southbound services.

The only major city that gets an appropriate level of investment is London, the rest get peanuts.

As a Calder Valley user I disagree. We have no link to Manchester Inter City services or the Airport at present and Victoria is a dead end. I think we deserve a through service to at least Piccadilly and indeed were promised one in the TSR in 2015

I echo the sentiment of other areas that are poorly connected to other cities due to capacity restrictions in those cities!

 

[Greybeard33]

I know that you use the term "Ringway" as something of a disparagement, but I really wish you would not do so. Manchester Airport has grown to become one of the major airports of Britain.

Arguably the use of an invented name for a station, e.g. "Ringway", is contrary to forum accessibility rules, in the same way that a station code, e.g. MIA, should not be used without first defining it.

Many forum users may be unaware that Manchester Airport was originally constructed on the site of the former Ringway Farm.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Arguably the use of an invented name for a station, e.g. "Ringway", is contrary to forum accessibility rules, in the same way that a station code, e.g. MIA, should not be used without first defining it.

The term "Ringway" is very common in North West parlance to describe the Airport itself (less so the station). I think it's reasonably clear what it means here in this thread.

But anyway, I'll quite happily be disparaging towards excessive direct services to Manchester Airport (rather than Ringway) if people prefer - the point stands - the principle of an hourly service from everywhere to everywhere else squashed through Castlefield and Victoria, plus unrealistic crew diagrams, is what is killing punctuality and reliability in the North West.

Oh for some west-facing terminal capacity at Picc or Vic. Maybe something like that should be built instead of 15/16?

 

[Ianno87]

[Ringway is still fairly common collquially in the older generation in Manchester (there's even a line in the sitcom The Royle Family referring to 'watching the planes land at Ringway') but not really outside of Manchester. It's usage is really dying out now though compared to 10-20 years ago]

I'm still convinced that, looking at providing a reasonable number of trains per hour on each corridor into Manchester, and seeking to minimise crossing movements around Piccadilly and Victoria as much as possible, the logical conclusion is the sending a decent proportion of through services from a range of routes to Manchester Airport is the least-worst option overall.

@Bletchleyite You always mention shuttling the Airport line as a stopping service...what happens to everything else in that case? Say you have 8tph approaching from Bolton (2 Blackburn, 2 Preston fast, 2 Preston slow, 2 Westhoughton)...where do they all go?

 

[Bletchleyite]

[Ringway is still fairly common collquially in the older generation in Manchester (there's even a line in the sitcom The Royle Family referring to 'watching the planes land at Ringway') but not really outside of Manchester]

FWIW it's also common to refer to Liverpool John Lennon Airport as "Speke" - people who don't live in the rather scruffy Council estate of the same name generally exclusively use that term to describe the airport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm still convinced that, looking at providing a reasonable number of trains per hour on each corridor into Manchester, and seeking to minimise crossing movements around Piccadilly and Victoria as much as possible, the logical conclusion is the sending a decent proportion of through services from a range of routes to Manchester Airport is the least-worst option overall.

@Bletchleyite You always mention shuttling the Airport line as a stopping service...what happens to everything else in that case? Say you have 8tph approaching from Bolton (2 Blackburn, 2 Preston fast, 2 Preston slow, 2 Westhoughton)...where do they all go?

This is a problem (and one that would be solved by west facing bays at Picc) so pragmatically they probably do need to go there if they don't go to Vic or beyond (Stalybridge/Rochdale) as some do. However, what there is no need for is the TPE that reverses in Platform 1 and crosses the entire formation to head there (it's a waste of scarce 185s), nor is there any need for the Calder Valley to go there, as that is best off terminating as it does at the bay at Vic and not having its punctuality and reliability whacked into the floor by sending it through Castlefield.

It's maybe 100m walk from a terminating Calder Valley service to Metrolink. Just take the tram. If you can afford a flight you can afford a tram ticket, though I'd be supportive of a London style change to including Picc <-> Vic Metrolink travel in all tickets that are valid via Manchester and could be used that way rather than just those wholly within GM as at present.

 

[Glenn1969]

There is a demand from our line for better connections to Manchester Inter City services than is available at present. Our User group has also noted that you can't commute very well from the Calder Valley to Huddersfield by train at the moment either but that is OT for this thread

I made a practical suggestion earlier that the Bradford- Huddersfield shuttle be linked in some way to the TPE stopper which would give us access to Piccadilly without going via Castlefield and fulfil the TSR requirement for a 3rd train Bradford- Manchester. Would be willing to wait until Transpennine Upgrade completion for that to happen

 

[Ianno87]

This is a problem (and one that would be solved by west facing bays at Picc) so pragmatically they probably do need to go there if they don't go to Vic or beyond (Stalybridge/Rochdale) as some do. However, what there is no need for is the TPE that reverses in Platform 1 and crosses the entire formation to head there (it's a waste of scarce 185s), nor is there any need for the Calder Valley to go there, as that is best off terminating as it does at the bay at Vic and not having its punctuality and reliability whacked into the floor by sending it through Castlefield.

It's maybe 100m walk from a terminating Calder Valley service to Metrolink. Just take the tram. If you can afford a flight you can afford a tram ticket, though I'd be supportive of a London style change to including Picc <-> Vic Metrolink travel in all tickets that are valid via Manchester and could be used that way rather than just those wholly within GM as at present.

I agree that Calder Valley is a promise too far, and whilst the Cleethorpes-Airport once upon a time made sense, the operational wisdom if that service needs to be questioned. Heck - route the 199 / X30 buses via Stockport station and offer a through ticket! It'd be faster!

But you still end up with services from the Airport to some mix of Liverpool, Bolton/Preston and via Victoria to beyond Stalybridge (which might as well be Yoekshire) as the inevitable consequence.

And terminating that lot at Piccadilly instead (say 4tph CLC, 2tph Chat Moss/Chester, 4tph Bolton at least) is going to need at least 5-6 platforms to be robust - materially more robust than the existing 4 platforms at Airport (with 13/14 kept for through freight capability). A huge amount of city centre land for he 'benefit' of losing existing direct links - not just to Man Airport.

 

[Greybeard33]

However, what there is no need for is the TPE that reverses in Platform 1 and crosses the entire formation to head there (it's a waste of scarce 185s)

I presume you are referring to the TPE Cleethorpes service. In fact this reverses in Platform 9 or 10, not 1, and does not cross the throat to get there. If it were curtailed to Piccadilly it would save zero scarce 185s - it would just mean that both units of a 6-car train would have to wait in one of those platforms for an hour, rather than the outer unit splitting off and going to the Airport and back as now. Then Northern would have to find a unit and crew to provide a replacement Airport service. Daft idea.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I presume you are referring to the TPE Cleethorpes service. In fact this reverses in Platform 9 or 10, not 1, and does not cross the throat to get there. If it were curtailed to Piccadilly it would save zero scarce 185s - it would just mean that both units of a 6-car train would have to wait in one of those platforms for an hour, rather than the outer unit splitting off and going to the Airport and back as now. Then Northern would have to find a unit and crew to provide a replacement Airport service. Daft idea.

Why would it have to wait there for an hour? If you removed the Airport run you could reduce the layover accordingly.

Does it even need replacing?

 

[Ianno87]

Why would it have to wait there for an hour? If you removed the Airport run you could reduce the layover accordingly.

Does it even need replacing?

Chopping the existing path would mean Piccadilly arrive xx02, depart back to Cleethorpes xx18. Pretty neat, actually.

There'd be no need to replace it with something else (other than having remaining services pick up its odd intermediate stops)

 

[randyrippley]

Why does everything have to go to the airport? Its like saying everything arriving at Euston or Kings Cross has to go to Heathrow........just plain stupid. The airport is a distraction to serving the real need - commuter traffic and trans-Pennine traffic
Best way to get passengers to Manchester Airport is with a dedicated non-stop shuttle from a rebuilt Mayfield station. Turn it into a remote passenger terminal with luggage handling and booking in desks, and security screening so passengers are cleared for flight before they get to the airport. Make everyone change at Piccadilly and move to Mayfield and book in. Mayfield itself would be a secure dedicated outstation from the airport. The two would be linked with a travellator - still shorter than many airport ones.

 

[Ianno87]

Why does everything have to go to the airport? Its like saying everything arriving at Euston or Kings Cross has to go to Heathrow........just plain stupid. The airport is a distraction to serving the real need - commuter traffic and trans-Pennine traffic
Best way to get passengers to Manchester Airport is with a dedicated non-stop shuttle from a rebuilt Mayfield station. Turn it into a remote passenger terminal with luggage handling and booking in desks, and security screening so passengers are cleared for flight before they get to the airport. Make everyone change at Piccadilly and move to Mayfield and book in. Mayfield itself would be a secure dedicated outstation from the airport. The two would be linked with a travellator - still shorter than many airport ones.

...again, where do you put all the trains from the North and West bound for Central Manchester. Plus plenty of people travel to Manchester Airport for many reasons without going anywhere near a flight (it's a bus interchange for starters, plus landside jobs and offices).

 

[Jozhua]

15/16 Plans include an extra terminating bay at Oxford Road, and making Platform 1 accessable so more trains can make use of it. Not a huge amount more paths are to be added, this is very much a reliability move.

Unfortunately, the ship has sailed on everything to the airport with the construction of the Ordsall Chord!

What 15/16 will do, is allow current services to run more reliably, have an extra 1-2 trains per hour stop at Oxford Road, which is close as you can get to some westward terminating bays at Piccadilly!

The incredible amount of crowds you see on those platforms are a massive sign they are overcapacity, plus the shouty people and red lines. Similar situation with Oxford Road.

Wether the platforms are the bottleneck to train movements or not, they are undeniably close to capacity passenger wise. Less frequent 6-8 car trains will still face issues of not having enough space for people to embark/disembark. Passenger numbers can only be expected to grow, as Manchester and the surrounding North-West become increasingly popular places to live, more move into city centres and people ditch their cars.

The stairs, lifts and escalators at 13/14 are rammed for almost the whole day, with rush hour being pretty agregious.

Dwell times are also high, as the trains empty a lot of passengers passengers and then completely fill to standing room only.

Flyovers and grade seperate junctions may help trains move about more, sure, but when it comes to dealing with the actual passenger volumes, two more platforms seems very reasonable.

 

[Greybeard33]

Chopping the existing path would mean Piccadilly arrive xx02, depart back to Cleethorpes xx18. Pretty neat, actually.

16 minutes layover would be inadequate for the Cleethorpes service, which is frequently delayed at some point on its long route. It currently gets 28 minutes at the Airport, but even so it is often turned short at Piccadilly to recover longer delays. For robustness it would be necessary to have a 76 minute layover at Piccadilly, with the same number of diagrams as now. Cluttering up a bay platform and making Airport passengers change, just to save a bit of fuel.

 

[randyrippley]

...again, where do you put all the trains from the North and West bound for Central Manchester. Plus plenty of people travel to Manchester Airport for many reasons without going anywhere near a flight (it's a bus interchange for starters, plus landside jobs and offices).

Non-airline users can use the tram, thats why its there.
As for traffic from the north and west, anything you don't want to send transpennine can go via Victoria, then go on a circular route to the east of the city back into Piccadilly and terminate. You'd have to reinstate a curve around Ardwick to access Piccadilly from the Etihad direction, but it looks like the old trackbed is still there, but if its not there's plenty of semi-derelict land there to work with. It was intended to be done for the Commonwealth games but got culled from the budget as it couldn't be completed in time. That way your north / west commuters have the option of which side of the city to use.

 

[Andyh82]

I wonder what would happen if TPE suggested the curtailment of any long established airport service to no longer go there.

I’m thinking the reaction from passengers, the media both TV and papers, user groups, every politician within a 50 mile radius of the route, metro mayors, opposition politicians...