• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

MEN article-"Northern Rail is crumbling from the inside out and things are only going to get worse"

Status
Not open for further replies.

gazzaa2

Member
Joined
2 May 2018
Messages
829
Agreed. The Liverpool-Crewe stopping service since the May 2018 through Manchester simply hasn't worked. As I understand the only reason it exists is Newton-Le-Willows required a direct service to Manchester Airport as part of the Train Service Requirements. It was a theoretical route devised by the DfT simply to tick a box rather than it being a service which could work in a sense.

Thirty three services from Manchester Airport to Manchester shall also call at Liverpool Lime
Street. Of these, eighteen shall also call at Deansgate and Newton-le-Willows and fifteen
shall also call at Warrington Central.


Dividing the west side via Victoria (potentially onto Stalybridge as it was pre-May 2018 I believe) and terminating south side into Piccadilly (as it was pre-May 2018) would increase its reliability and lessen impact on other 'fast' services to the Airport. Additionally, this would have the added benefit of releasing a much-needed path through Castlefield which should result in improved punctuality.

Liverpool-Crewe Northern service is expendable. It's new, not worked and not really needed.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

js1000

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2014
Messages
1,011
Sone of these comments confirm my suspicion that those in Manchester think the North's rail system should be built around their needs.
A rather bemusing comment given Network Rail have declared the corridor through Manchester officially 'congested' - the only corridor in the UK to be called as such. A lot of the delays in Liverpool, Blackpool, Preston, Leeds, Nottingham et al are arise because of delays through Manchester. Generally these delays exacerbate as the journey continues due to them being out of position. Not so much a 'need' but a solution that is clearly required.
 

Glenn1969

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2019
Messages
1,983
Location
Halifax, Yorks
Maybe they should be forced to do something about it then? After all, the Castlefield Corridor has been on the DfT in tray for pushing 5 years now. Instead of moaning at the franchisees why don't Burnham and Rotheram try and sort out a solution to this creaking infrastructure. You never know it might help them get reelected
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
7,447
Location
UK
A rather bemusing comment given Network Rail have declared the corridor through Manchester officially 'congested' - the only corridor in the UK to be called as such. A lot of the delays in Liverpool, Blackpool, Preston, Leeds, Nottingham et al are arise because of delays through Manchester. Generally these delays exacerbate as the journey continues due to them being out of position. Not so much a 'need' but a solution that is clearly required.

Sure it's the only place? What about around East Croydon? Clapham junction? Euston? Paddington?
 

js1000

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2014
Messages
1,011
Liverpool-Crewe Northern service is expendable. It's new, not worked and not really needed.
If a management contract is agreed between the DfT and Arriva in January to revise the timetable to establish greater resilience then hopefully this experiment will be given the chop. The only reason the 'through' service exists is because Newton-Le-Willows needs direct link to Manchester Airport which seems a heavy price to pay for the disproportionate impact that service has on other 'fast' TPE and Northern 'semi-fast' services. Don't see why Newton-Le-Willows can be just served by the pre-May 2018 service to Victoria as I thought one of the supposed benefits of the Ordsall Chord was that it provided a direct connection for routes only served by Victoria to Manchester Airport.
 

js1000

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2014
Messages
1,011
Sure it's the only place? What about around East Croydon? Clapham junction? Euston? Paddington?
They're congested but not officially considered so by Network Rail. The difference is those junctions/stations have ongoing, active improvement schemes with money set aside and are being pursued. The concern from Network Rail, Arriva and First regarding the Castlefield corridor is that the government reneged on a pledge to put money aside to upgrade the corridor as part of the 2016 franchise agreements. Yet the DfT still persist with running much of the new timetable which could only work reliably alongside corridor upgrades through Manchester. Such is the frustration - Arriva consider the Northern franchise agreement to be 'legally void'.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,812
Location
Sheffield
They're congested but not officially considered so by Network Rail. The difference is those junctions/stations have ongoing, active improvement schemes with money set aside and are being pursued. The concern from Network Rail, Arriva and First regarding the Castlefield corridor is that the government reneged on a pledge to put money aside to upgrade the corridor as part of the 2016 franchise agreements. Yet the DfT still persist with running much of the new timetable which could only work reliably alongside corridor upgrades through Manchester. Such is the frustration - Arriva consider the Northern franchise agreement to be 'legally void'.

And that's not all by a long way. The North-West electrification did happen, eventually, but has caused immense knock-on damage.

The Hope Valley scheme was supposed to have been complete by December 2018 but we'll be lucky if it's operational by December 2023. That's necessary for improved reliability of current trains, let alone a third fast service down the Hope Valley. (The original intention to make it 4 has long gone!)
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
7,447
Location
UK
And that's not all by a long way. The North-West electrification did happen, eventually, but has caused immense knock-on damage.

The Hope Valley scheme was supposed to have been complete by December 2018 but we'll be lucky if it's operational by December 2023. That's necessary for improved reliability of current trains, let alone a third fast service down the Hope Valley. (The original intention to make it 4 has long gone!)

So is the GWML electrification to Bristol and Oxford, Cardiff has just been completed.
These are arguably more important than Manchester to Sheffield
 

Whisky Papa

Member
Joined
8 Aug 2019
Messages
385
If a management contract is agreed between the DfT and Arriva in January to revise the timetable to establish greater resilience then hopefully this experiment will be given the chop. The only reason the 'through' service exists is because Newton-Le-Willows needs direct link to Manchester Airport which seems a heavy price to pay for the disproportionate impact that service has on other 'fast' TPE and Northern 'semi-fast' services. Don't see why Newton-Le-Willows can be just served by the pre-May 2018 service to Victoria as I thought one of the supposed benefits of the Ordsall Chord was that it provided a direct connection for routes only served by Victoria to Manchester Airport.

My bold above. Newton-le-Willows was also served pre-May 2018 by Northern's hourly Liverpool Lime Street to Airport semi-fast service, I thought?
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
We kept getting told that there are lightly loaded, yet whenever I've been on one or seen one they seem to have plenty of punters seemingly heading for the airport. And then let us not forget that the airport is planning somewhere around a 40% expansion in traffic, so add the potential to the 25%+ growth seen on the TPE airport services and that makes a lot more people. As I have said, the TOC is not going to give up this lucrative route. And Greater Manchester also benefits from growth there, so its there to stay

Do you honestly believe Manchester airport only serves Greater Manchester? People travel from all over the north of England and even Scotland to take flights from there. In the next few years they are expecting to handle up to 50 million passengers, even now they handle 30 million. Why does this airport's passenger base surprise so many members?

re the above two points - nobody is saying that there's *no* market to the Airport - it's just that some of us are trying to explain that the passenger numbers don't justify all of the services currently thrown at it (at a time when plenty of other lines have insufficient stock.

Thirty million passengers is a big number but there are under five million train passengers per annum - divide those by the number of trains serving the airport and you have thirtysomethibng passengers on each train - now, maybe we should all believe Manchester Airport Group's PR and assume their forecast of fifty million passengers, but even if the trains see a corresponding increase in passengers (i.e. not spreading the passengers amongst additional services like the proposed Bradford one), that forty percent increase still means there'd be spare seats if all nine trains per hour were single 153s - which means there are currently quite a lot of seats on a 5x26m 802.

Whichever way you want to use the numbers, there are going to be a lot of empty seats on Airport trains - maybe ninety percent of seats on an 802 are going to be spare - maybe if you buy into the spin, it'll only be eighty five percent of seats that are empty, but that feels a waste of resources when people are struggling to find a seat on other services (and can't even physically board some services).

Again, to avoid doubt, I'm not saying that's no demand, I'm not saying that there are no passengers, just that the passenger numbers don't justify the current service level (and therefore, it we are looking to thin out some services to deal with all of the congestion).

What is needed is a review of all services through Manchester. For example the Liverpool - Crewe is only there really because Northern can use EMUs throughout, is there really a need for it otherwise? That could easily be split again, making the Chat Moss section terminate at Victoria until the wires go further east, and the Styal Line section go back to being started at Piccadilly, and probably easier to make closer to a clock face service. One path through Castlefield released. And then there is the obsession with Southport being connected to the rest of the universe, this is one that could immediately be rerouted and / or combined with shorter east facing services through Manchester. Quite honestly Leeds doesn't need a Southport service (or to be honest a Chester one), so some rationalisation is possible there too. Now we have freed up two paths

That would be a step in the right direction (but would keep up the number of services on the Airport branch)

Well I've said it before someone needs to tell Manchester Airport Group (owned by the councils of Greater Manchester), because a lot of their expansion plains involve shipping punters in from afar, and in growing numbers on those airport trains. Tipping punters off at Victoria to make their own way across Manchester will kill this growing market stone dead

It's amazing that southerners manage to get to Airport, given the way that Stansted and Heathrow don't have long distance services from every village in a fifty mile radius (Gatwick and Luton are obviously on main lines but even so Luton Airport won't be getting any services from Leicester/ Derby/ Nottingham)

Even if it were quadrupled (plats 15/16) you still run into issues at the junctions at either end which are not grade separated

Good point - I'm really unconvinced that 15/16 are the priority that a lot of people think they are.

And if there are large numbers of people travelling long distance between Liverpool/Preston to Leeds/York/Newcastle etc., is there not scope to provide trains using the Bentham<>Leeds line instead to relieve congestion around Manchester?

Maybe we should be looking to double the service from West Yorkshire to Burnley/ Blackburn and the WCML at Preston (if the SELRAP suggestions of amazingly untapped demand from the Burnley area to Leeds etc

Agreed. The Liverpool-Crewe stopping service since the May 2018 through Manchester simply hasn't worked. As I understand the only reason it exists is Newton-Le-Willows required a direct service to Manchester Airport as part of the Train Service Requirements. It was a theoretical route devised by the DfT simply to tick a box rather than it being a service which could work in a sense.

Thirty three services from Manchester Airport to Manchester shall also call at Liverpool Lime
Street. Of these, eighteen shall also call at Deansgate and Newton-le-Willows and fifteen
shall also call at Warrington Central.


Dividing the west side via Victoria (potentially onto Stalybridge as it was pre-May 2018 I believe) and terminating south side into Piccadilly (as it was pre-May 2018) would increase its reliability and lessen impact on other 'fast' services to the Airport. Additionally, this would have the added benefit of releasing a much-needed path through Castlefield which should result in improved punctuality.

I agree with the suggestion - but you do highlight one of the big problems with the Northern franchise - the messy combination of hourly services that clog up Greater Manchester are mainly due to the franchise specification (as demanded by the various "stakeholders") rather than decisions directly made by Northern - get rid of Arriva if you want but you'll struggle to find someone else capable of getting a decent tune out of a franchise hamstrung by all of these requirements/ demands. But Northern can't make the changes unilaterally.

A rather bemusing comment given Network Rail have declared the corridor through Manchester officially 'congested' - the only corridor in the UK to be called as such. A lot of the delays in Liverpool, Blackpool, Preston, Leeds, Nottingham et al are arise because of delays through Manchester. Generally these delays exacerbate as the journey continues due to them being out of position. Not so much a 'need' but a solution that is clearly required.

I agree that something needs to be done - at the moment every corridor will get affected by a minor delay on the Airport branch - all of these hourly services will fall over and stock will be out of place, staff due their breaks, no resilience, it's very hard to bounce back when something goes wrong.

Look at what works, copy it, don't be afraid to inconvenience a small number of people in Middlesbrough who want direct trains to the Airport for their annual holiday if it means you can provide a more reliable service to the significantly larger number of people in northern England who rely on the train for their daily commute.
 

ohgoditsjames

Member
Joined
16 Jun 2019
Messages
379
Location
Sheffield & Shipley
So is the GWML electrification to Bristol and Oxford, Cardiff has just been completed.
These are arguably more important than Manchester to Sheffield

Don’t think he meant Hope Valley electrification, he was referring to the scheme associated with creating an extra passing loop. It’s a relatively minor development that absolutely needs to happen.

The Hope Valley is woefully inadequate for providing connections between 2 of the countries largest cities. Sheffield and Manchester are the worst connected neighbouring cities by both rail and road.

As for electrification, the MML should absolutely be a priority, it was originally meant to be done before the GWML!
 

gazzaa2

Member
Joined
2 May 2018
Messages
829
Maybe they should be forced to do something about it then? After all, the Castlefield Corridor has been on the DfT in tray for pushing 5 years now. Instead of moaning at the franchisees why don't Burnham and Rotheram try and sort out a solution to this creaking infrastructure. You never know it might help them get reelected

They're trying but they are Labour politicians, so don't exactly have the ear of the ministers like Andy Street for example.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,669
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
re the above two points - nobody is saying that there's *no* market to the Airport - it's just that some of us are trying to explain that the passenger numbers don't justify all of the services currently thrown at it (at a time when plenty of other lines have insufficient stock.

Thirty million passengers is a big number but there are under five million train passengers per annum - divide those by the number of trains serving the airport and you have thirtysomethibng passengers on each train - now, maybe we should all believe Manchester Airport Group's PR and assume their forecast of fifty million passengers, but even if the trains see a corresponding increase in passengers (i.e. not spreading the passengers amongst additional services like the proposed Bradford one), that forty percent increase still means there'd be spare seats if all nine trains per hour were single 153s - which means there are currently quite a lot of seats on a 5x26m 802.

Whichever way you want to use the numbers, there are going to be a lot of empty seats on Airport trains - maybe ninety percent of seats on an 802 are going to be spare - maybe if you buy into the spin, it'll only be eighty five percent of seats that are empty, but that feels a waste of resources when people are struggling to find a seat on other services (and can't even physically board some services).

Again, to avoid doubt, I'm not saying that's no demand, I'm not saying that there are no passengers, just that the passenger numbers don't justify the current service level (and therefore, it we are looking to thin out some services to deal with all of the congestion).

There's just one problem with your figures, they relate to all airport services, and assume that loads are spread equally. However the TPE services serve large population centres, which will mean they are far more likely to be used than a stopping service running through smaller areas. These are not needed as much as the TPEs, so these should be reviewed first. And again, the TPE airport services are now part of the franchise's core, they are not going to give them up. So like it or lump it, Northern are going to have to work around them so paths like Liverpool to Crewe need to go, especially as demand rises for transit to the airport as it expands by up to 40% (you can't ignore that forever I'm afraid).

That would be a step in the right direction (but would keep up the number of services on the Airport branch)

Not if the airport stoppers through Castlefield were removed. Stick to TPE and fast Northern services that operate from major population centres around the North.

It's amazing that southerners manage to get to Airport, given the way that Stansted and Heathrow don't have long distance services from every village in a fifty mile radius (Gatwick and Luton are obviously on main lines but even so Luton Airport won't be getting any services from Leicester/ Derby/ Nottingham)

One problem with that, Heathrow has been wanting connectivity from outwith central London for a very long time. Why, because it is a royal pain in the behind fighting through London's network to get to the airport. Just because there isn't that better connectivity doesn't mean it isn't needed

Good point - I'm really unconvinced that 15/16 are the priority that a lot of people think they are.

But combined with better signalling would naturally increase capacity.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,812
Location
Sheffield
So is the GWML electrification to Bristol and Oxford, Cardiff has just been completed.
These are arguably more important than Manchester to Sheffield

But ihat's the point. Its typical of many other schemes around the country. Together every scheme that's delayed adds up to avoidable delays to trains that knock-on around the network. The example I used was one that has a minor bearing on all the services running into Manchester, but the Hope Valley line has the worst performing stations in the country for punctuality. If anyone has cause to grouse about Northern just look at the performance at Grindleford. It's trains are later than any on the line.

It has 2 platform that must have been capable of taking at least 6 coaches but most of that length is out of service. It's supposedly to be lengthened to take 4 by December. They've been working on it for about 3 months and it won't be finished this month. Same goes for the platforms at Hathersage. Hope is also supposed to be lengthened but it's not clear if it's considered to have been done or not.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20191224_161430.jpg
    IMG_20191224_161430.jpg
    2.2 MB · Views: 63

aye2beeviasea

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2017
Messages
119
This may be a stupid question, but could you route airport services to/from Yorkshire through Denton, reversing at Wilmslow, and skip Piccadilly and central Manchester entirely?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
This may be a stupid question, but could you route airport services to/from Yorkshire through Denton, reversing at Wilmslow, and skip Piccadilly and central Manchester entirely?

But that is the whole issue - the major destination is Piccadilly, not the Airport. There is no point whatsoever in doing that as it removes the main destination and would be an even worse case of the tail wagging the dog.
 

ohgoditsjames

Member
Joined
16 Jun 2019
Messages
379
Location
Sheffield & Shipley
But that is the whole issue - the major destination is Piccadilly, not the Airport. There is no point whatsoever in doing that as it removes the main destination and would be an even worse case of the tail wagging the dog.

Don’t think that’s true, Manchester Airport is the main airport for Sheffield.
 

Mogster

Member
Joined
25 Sep 2018
Messages
902
That may be so but 30m people will most likely pass through Manchester airport for the first time next year. That’s a massive number of people and it’s increasing by 3-4% per year.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
That may be so but 30m people will most likely pass through Manchester airport for the first time next year. That’s a massive number of people and it’s increasing by 3-4% per year.

But it is nowhere near the demand to Manchester city centre and will not be, so needs to be secondary in accordance with that.
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,189
Location
Wittersham Kent
The two track section of the Brighton Main Line between Wivlesfield and Barcombe Tunnel Junction deals with 15 tph in the peaks with various destinations along the south coast 60 miles apart and feeding a further critical section in Central London (the Thameslink Core) which then serves 3 different radiating lines plus its own London Terminal (Victoria). Services include different stopping patterns, portion working with train lengths in excess of whats operated in Manchester. All on standard 4 aspect BR era signalling.
There needs to be careful studies as to why a short section of double track through Manchester is failing so badly before further investment is authorised.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,812
Location
Sheffield
That it might be but more people want to go to central Manchester or other places reached from it than do the Airport.

I'd estimate at least 5 times as many are going to Manchester City centre, or changing for other destinations at Piccadilly, than are going to the airport from Sheffield. That's one reason why TPE's 6 coach trains are going to be split at Piccadilly.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,812
Location
Sheffield
Therein is the crux of the problem. Willingness to invest in a new road but railways miss out! imho

Having used the A555 for a variety of journeys across South Manchester I'm very glad it's there. Only the airport would have been practical by rail. (Pity it floods!)

The crux of the problem is we've all got used to going to too many destinations, too far away, too often, too easily and too fast. How that is resolved only time will tell but maybe our descendants will be staying nearer home and walking more! Dream on.
 

Mogster

Member
Joined
25 Sep 2018
Messages
902
The two track section of the Brighton Main Line between Wivlesfield and Barcombe Tunnel Junction deals with 15 tph in the peaks with various destinations along the south coast 60 miles apart and feeding a further critical section in Central London (the Thameslink Core) which then serves 3 different radiating lines plus its own London Terminal (Victoria). Services include different stopping patterns, portion working with train lengths in excess of whats operated in Manchester. All on standard 4 aspect BR era signalling.
There needs to be careful studies as to why a short section of double track through Manchester is failing so badly before further investment is authorised.

https://cdn.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...-Corridor-congested-infrastructure-report.pdf
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top