Manchester Recovery Taskforce (timetable) consultation

[Rhydgaled]

There is no need for HS2 phase 2b to stimulate development and regeneration around the proposed station for Manchester Airport (which is actually on the edge of Hale Barns) or around Piccadilly. There is plenty of development in these areas already.


There may be capacity on the line itself, but at present there would probably be issues with terminating more tram services at both Victoria and especially Piccadilly.

As it happens yes, certainly for a 10 tram per hour operation. If you look at the current network, it is set up to accommodate metro link extensions within the capacity capabilities of the city centre. That includes a 3rd city crossing from Salford Central to St. Peter’s Sq, extensions to Glossop & Hadfield and Rose Hill, extension of a branch from the Bury line to Middleton and increasing frequency from the Trafford Centre through the city centre (rather than terminate at Cornbrook).

Thanks both; a 3-minute interval service is out of the question then due to being unable to turn round the extra services but couldn't you extend something (either the additional service or one of the existing Victoria/Piccadilly terminators, depending on what gives the most even spacing of trams) beyond Picc/Vic to Droylsden/Ashton/Shaw/Bury/Rochdale to keep the number of services terminating at Picc/Vic at their current level? I don't like the sound of Metrolink to Rose Hill Marple, Glossop and Hadfield - those seem awfully far out for a tram.

Ultimately I think the important thing for the north Wales service (and probably others) is minimising the journey time to Piccadilly/Victoria with good interchange between the two whether that is heavy rail through a frequent Ordsall chord service (with capacity problems through Oxford Road and Piccadilly's through platforms) or Metrolink with through ticketing.

 

[Glenn1969]

Metrolink to the likes of Glossop and Marple is at best a 2040 project so won't solve the here and now. Is there that much time penalty for a via Northwich service from Llandudno if it only stops at Altrincham, Knutsford and Northwich between Stockport and Chester?

 

[Purple Orange]

I don't like the sound of Metrolink to Rose Hill Marple, Glossop and Hadfield - those seem awfully far out for a tram.

Not much different to Rochdale or Altrincham. If it’s within a 10-12 mile range of the city centre, it is game for metrolink in my opinion.

It’s also not just about the end destination, but all the various stops along the route too.

 

[Jozhua]

What is needed now is a solution to maximise the working effectiveness of Manchester's existing rail infrastructure. There is a need to choose one of the options in the recent consultation, tweak it to remove any particular issues that have come to light, and implement it asap.

In any case, increasing local rail/other traffic to central Manchester should not be encouraged when the existing infrastructure cannot cope.

"The existing infrastructure should be used more effectively." "We shouldn't increase service because the existing infrastructure cannot cope."

What do you suggest as a solution instead of running trains into central Manchester? It's a major interchange with other services and modes. Alternatives would require capex to create the more circumferential routes anyway.

I agree, but only once such extensions are built. Currently, there would be issues with terminating capacity at both Victoria and Piccadilly.

In addition, if/when a Metrolink extension to Rose Hill is built, more Standedge line trains could be diverted to the ex-GC platforms at Piccadilly, relieving pressure on Victoria and the Castlefield line. However, none of this solves the immediate issues with Manchester's rail services, which is the topic of this thread.

So there is a lack of capacity, it makes sense to improve that.

Considering that terminating platforms are significantly less efficient and useful than through-running ones, it makes sense to invest in those. I.e. 15/16, Oxford Road upgrades and/or a Crossrail/Metro Picc-Vic tunnel under the city.

 

[daodao]

What do you suggest as a solution instead of running trains into central Manchester?

Option C, with tweaking, including removal of the proposed TfW service over the Mid Cheshire line and diverting it to Crewe instead.

I.e. 15/16, Oxford Road upgrades and/or a Crossrail/Metro Picc-Vic tunnel under the city.

Building such infrastructure is unrealistic and even if agreed, would take a long time to construct and be very expensive. It will not solve the immediate problems with Manchester's rail services. Further discussion of suggested additional major infrastructure is outwith this consultation and thus the topic of this thread.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Is there that much time penalty for a via Northwich service from Llandudno if it only stops at Altrincham, Knutsford and Northwich between Stockport and Chester?

I believe it's half an hour longer but the main concern from Wales is the loss of services to the Airport, although the first train only got there at 10:30 so it was useless for morning flights. The main issue is the level crossings on the single track sections between Chester & Mouldsworth, both of which can be solved by giving the 2nd train to Northern and only going as far as Greenbank as originally intended by Arriva.

 

[Rail Ranger]

I believe it's half an hour longer but the main concern from Wales is the loss of services to the Airport, although the first train only got there at 10:30 so it was useless for morning flights. The main issue is the level crossings on the single track sections between Chester & Mouldsworth, both of which can be solved by giving the 2nd train to Northern and only going as far as Greenbank as originally intended by Arriva.

I've heard that running via Northwich would be 7 minutes longer than via Earlestown with stops at Northwich, Knutsford, Altrincham and Stockport. I wish we knew exactly what the issue was with those two user worked crossings between Mickle Trafford and Mouldsworth.

 

[Ianno87]

I've heard that running via Northwich would be 7 minutes longer than via Earlestown with stops at Northwich, Knutsford, Altrincham and Stockport. I wish we knew exactly what the issue was with those two user worked crossings between Mickle Trafford and Mouldsworth.

The current timings are roughly 60 mins for the current TfW service, and 90 minutes for the current Northern stopper (both to/from Piccadilly)

Crudely assuming 2 minutes saved per stop missed compared to the Northern stopper would give a TfW journey time via Northwich of around 70 mins (if all the pathing works out)

Too slow above this, and it becomes a TSINO (Through Service In Name Only), where the journey time is such that is no longer a meaningful through service, so almost might as well terminate at Chester for all the difference it would make to passengers' perceived journey time.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Crudely assuming 2 minutes saved per stop missed compared to the Northern stopper would give a TfW journey time via Northwich of around 70 mins (if all the pathing works out)

It'd probably be closer to 3 minutes taking braking and accelerating into account which would lop off a total of 27 minutes, being just approx. 3 minutes longer than the current route. You could also run an express bus between Altrincham and the Airport to offset it no longer calling there, but that's for another thread.

 

[Watershed]

The current timings are roughly 60 mins for the current TfW service, and 90 minutes for the current Northern stopper (both to/from Piccadilly)

Crudely assuming 2 minutes saved per stop missed compared to the Northern stopper would give a TfW journey time via Northwich of around 70 mins (if all the pathing works out)

There is (and long has been) an early morning TfW service from Chester to Manchester Airport that runs via Northwich. It's timed at 53 mins for a non-stop run as far as Edgeley No 2. Add on 12.5 mins for Edgeley No 2 to Piccadilly with a stop at Stockport and you get 64.5 mins.

So something just over 70 mins sounds right if you stopped at 3 additional stations - i.e. it would be about 10 mins slower than the current service via Warrington.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The current timings are roughly 60 mins for the current TfW service, and 90 minutes for the current Northern stopper (both to/from Piccadilly)

Crudely assuming 2 minutes saved per stop missed compared to the Northern stopper would give a TfW journey time via Northwich of around 70 mins (if all the pathing works out)

Too slow above this, and it becomes a TSINO (Through Service In Name Only), where the journey time is such that is no longer a meaningful through service, so almost might as well terminate at Chester for all the difference it would make to passengers' perceived journey time.

Journey time is not everything, as the number of people who use the xx13 from MKC north as a through service instead of the following xx40 and changing at Crewe will demonstrate. People value through services.

 

[Ianno87]

It'd probably be closer to 3 minutes taking braking and accelerating into account which would lop off a total of 27 minutes, being just approx. 3 minutes longer than the current route. You could also run an express bus between Altrincham and the Airport to offset it no longer calling there, but that's for another thread.

Probably better off running an express bus from Chester!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Probably better off running an express bus from Chester!

...and people prefer trains to buses, quite understandably.

 

[Ianno87]

Journey time is not everything, as the number of people who use the xx13 from MKC north as a through service instead of the following xx40 and changing at Crewe will demonstrate. People value through services.

In that example, those services are those that happen to exist anyway, and joining them across Birmingham is operationally convenient.

You may create the same scenario here. West of Chester passengers will be a mix of people who sit on the through train, and those who change for a faster Victoria service (especially if that is more convenient for where they are headed, remembering that a down side of the Mid-Cheshire route is no longer serving Oxford Road and ending up at the relatively peripheral Piccadilly.).

Or people who just won't travel at all, if the Mid Cheshire is too slow (more likely), even if it is direct on paper.

...and people prefer trains to buses, quite understandably.

For a comparable journey time and frequency yes. When one significantly outweighs the other, the rules of the game change.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In that example, those services are those that happen to exist anyway, and joining them across Birmingham is operationally convenient.

Yes, true. I would go as far to say that that was an utter masterstroke, creating new journey opportunities and solving a serious overcrowding problem at the expense of very little other than one fast TPH Wolves to New St that hardly anyone was using for that journey.

You may create the same scenario here. West of Chester passengers will be a mix of people who sit on the through train, and those who change for a faster Victoria service (especially if that is more convenient for where they are headed, remembering that a down side of the Mid-Cheshire route is no longer serving Oxford Road and ending up at the relatively peripheral Piccadilly.).

Yes, some will use the through service and some will change.

 

[Ianno87]

Yes, some will use the through service and some will change.

And there'll be a set of passengers to whom neither a slower direct journey or a change of train will attract them to the train compared to the present service offering.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And there'll be a set of passengers to whom neither a slower direct journey or a change of train will attract them to the train compared to the present service offering.

Indeed so, which takes us back to dropping a Chester-Leeds so it can still run fast on its present route. Which is what I think will happen.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Probably better off running an express bus from Chester!

And dealing with the M56 during rush hour? Altrincham - Airport is the best route possible for such a service.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes, true. I would go as far to say that that was an utter masterstroke, creating new journey opportunities and solving a serious overcrowding problem at the expense of very little other than one fast TPH Wolves to New St that hardly anyone was using for that journey.

It was a master stroke, and your response was to one of the artists!

 

[Bevan Price]

Indeed so, which takes us back to dropping a Chester-Leeds so it can still run fast on its present route. Which is what I think will happen.

Yes - in the proposals to send North Wales trains via Northwich, only the "Manchester viewpoint" has been taken into consideration. But will the authorities containing Warrington, Runcorn, Newton Le Willows & Earlestown react favourably to the loss of their longstanding through services to North Wales ? Will TfW be happy to lose its traffic to Warrington (and WCML connections to the North) That area contains a much greater population than Northwich + Knutsford. Having possibly poor or dodgy connections at Chester is no substitute for through services.

 

[Glenn1969]

But this is about the Manchester viewpoint and sorting out Castlefield. You do need to make sure the connections work - having said that I have always thought we will end up with Option A- the least change

 

[Purple Orange]

Is option A considered workable or has that been ruled out too?

 

[Killingworth]

Is option A considered workable or has that been ruled out too?

Option A includes South Pennine services continuing to reverse to the Airport. As 6 car units that's a nightmare and is currently suspended so that element is probably considered unworkable!

Continuation of that link is demanded by user groups from Grimsby to Sheffield.

No doubt there are other elements that mean A wouldn't solve the underlying problem of too many trains crossing over too many congested tracks to too few platforms where they're needed.

 

[Purple Orange]

Option A includes South Pennine services continuing to reverse to the Airport. As 6 car units that's a nightmare and is currently suspended so that element is probably considered unworkable!

Continuation of that link is demanded by user groups from Grimsby to Sheffield.

No doubt there are other elements that mean A wouldn't solve the underlying problem of too many trains crossing over too many congested tracks to too few platforms where they're needed.

I see all three options as something that won’t solve the problem, but will ease the problem rather than cure. If option A is the only workable solution, but does provide improvements id like to see it happen.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I see all three options as something that won’t solve the problem, but will ease the problem rather than cure. If option A is the only workable solution, but does provide improvements id like to see it happen.

Yes, I'd rather see something than nothing. Doing nothing is choosing unreliability for at least 10 to 20 years.

 

[Purple Orange]

Yes, I'd rather see something than nothing. Doing nothing is choosing unreliability for at least 10 to 20 years.

Exactly. Anything is better than nothing right now. For years my line was very reliable and couldn’t really fault it - everything went in to the main terminus platforms at Piccadilly.

As you rightly point out, we need to be thinking on a 10-20 year timescale, because it will require big infrastructure projects to ease this and Manchester can only only look towards HS2, trans pennine route upgrade and it’s own ability to expand metrolink as a means of improving public transport in the region.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Indeed so, which takes us back to dropping a Chester-Leeds so it can still run fast on its present route. Which is what I think will happen.

I would hardly describe the current Llandudno-Manchester service as 'running fast' given that it calls at all stations except between Newton-Le-Willows and Manchester. Personally I think the TfW service should have dropped some stops east of Chester (retaining just Warrington Bank Quay and either Newton-Le-Willows or Earlestown) when Northern introduced their Leeds-Chester service. It should also be diverted to Manchester Victoria to releive Castlefield a little.

Option A includes South Pennine services continuing to reverse to the Airport. As 6 car units that's a nightmare and is currently suspended so that element is probably considered unworkable!

Continuation of that link is demanded by user groups from Grimsby to Sheffield.

No doubt there are other elements that mean A wouldn't solve the underlying problem of too many trains crossing over too many congested tracks to too few platforms where they're needed.

I would just terminate the Cleethorpes service at Piccadilly just as the TPE Hull service does in option A - as noted above I think the TfW going into Victoria is the best option for the north Wales service given current infrustructure and only option A offers that (if you could upgrade the Altrincham route to allow a TfW fast service to Piccadilly that is quicker than via Warrington then I would support that but we are looking for something that can be implemented sooner than any infrustructure upgrades at this point).

 

[Dspatula]

I was having a look at the current Chester to Manchester times and have very roughly worked out the time for the Diverted North Wales train taking into consideration the issue with track crossing beyond Greenbank.

Times as follows;

88 minutes: Current Northern Stopper; Chester to Manchester Piccadilly via Northwich.

77.5 minutes: Diverted North Wales trains; Chester, Mouldsworth, Delamere, Cuddington, Greenbank, Northwich, Knutsford, Altrincham, Stockport and Manchester Piccadilly. Stopper cut back to Greenbank.

70 minutes: Diverted North Wales trains had crossings not been an issue; Chester, Northwich, Knutsford, Altrincham, Stockport and Manchester Piccadilly.

61 minutes: Current North Wales service; Chester, Helsby, Frodsham, Runcorn East, Warrington Bank Quay, Earlestown, Netwon-le-Willows, Manchester Oxford Road and Manchester Piccadilly.

56 minutes: Northern Chester to Leeds; Morning service with the same calling pattern as TfW service but to Manchester Victoria.

50 minutes: Northern Chester to Leeds; Warrington Bank Quay, Earlestown, Netwon-le-Willows and Manchester Victoria.

The full Chester to Manchester Airport route is 87 minutes and the Victoria to Stalybridge service is a single diagram, so all three routes should in theory require the same amount of crew and trains to operate.

 

[krus_aragon]

I was having a look at the current Chester to Manchester times and have very roughly worked out the time for the Diverted North Wales train taking into consideration the issue with track crossing beyond Greenbank.

Some useful number-crunching, thanks.

(It's fun working out timings and timetables for diagrams, isn't it?)

 

[Manutd1999]

So if the TfW goes to Victoria and has the same stopping pattern as the current Northern 'fast' service (50 mins), passengers from North Wales would actually gain a 10-minute reduction in journey time to Manchester. Surely this is the best all-round option?

The Northern service could then call at Helsby, Frodsham and Runcorn.