The whole thing is just a complete mess. Everyone in the North wanted a direct rail link to Manchester and Manchester Airport. The only good to have come from this debacle is that this experiment has now been tried and proven it cannot work and a reasonable tph rate through Manchester can now be agreed. It has failed to offer a reliable timetable so much that it has actually led to some previously profitable commuter routes and stations losing far too many passengers.
Good points - I think that we need to have a tough conversation about just how many services can be accommodated by finite number of paths
I expect another storm of protests when this is put out to public consultation.
I think that the authorities need to accept that any tweaks will generate petitions and negative tweets etc, given how well organised people are these days - need to bite the bullet though
Speaking from Sheffield, I agree.
I can't say I'm thrilled by all Hope Valley fast services going through 13/14 and Castlefield to/from Liverpool. Firstly I'm yet to be convinced that that will greatly improve the reliability of two long distance services. Secondly the time to get from the entrance of the station to crowded and unattractive platforms 13/14 adds a couple of minutes to overall journey time.
But we have to give this a try. At least both fasts will depart from the same place. However, Northern's 195 stopping services may get extra through business, not least because their fares can undercut the other two by 50% or more! Loadings are already back to pre-Covid on many of their trains.
I think that the idea of a half hourly Sheffield - Liverpool service is something more desired on Merseyside than in South Yorkshire - there seems to be a lot more focus on "how many long distance links does Liverpool have compared to the number that Manchester has" - I'd be okay with everything from Sheffield terminating in the main Piccadilly shed (any through service to Castlefield/ Airport/ Liverpool/ Blackpool/ Windermere etc would have some benefits but also some costs)
The current Southport to Manchester set-up needs improvement, not least because missing a train from Piccadilly entails either making it to Victoria or hoping you can catch a connection at Salford. One destination for all Southport services makes sense on this basis, on paper.
Agreed - whilst I appreciate that a lot of enthusiasts like complicated/ messy combinations of random patterns of services, I'd suggest that everyday commuters would prefer something simple and reliable (instead of worrying about which direction they should have to head in for their train home)
I'm all for the S-Bahn idea
That does not appear to be the overriding desire of the Sandgrounders and other users of the line (as represented by OPSTA). The preference appears to be "one of each" as has been the established pattern since the late 1990s, and before that it was still split in a sense with an all-day hourly-ish service running to Picc and beyond and peak extras to/from Vic. Only pre Windsor Link (early 90s?) was it all to Vic as Picc could not be reached.
You can, as you say, always take a connection if you miss it and can't be bothered walking over to the other station.
Nominally the "both to Vic" thing does make sense, but it seems a fair whack of the Southport line users have built up their journeys based on direct services to Castlefield (e.g. working at or attending the university) and the additional journey time on a commute would never be appreciated. And most people don't regularly miss trains on infrequent services, they check the timetable and act accordingly. It's not like a "walk up" type service like Merseyrail.
Tell me again about your suggestions that
other people around the UK lose their long established bus services into city centres (and should be forced to change onto a tram/train), and
other people should have their train services "simplified" to match some Germanic definition, but the precious people of your childhood line must have
their timetable preserved because
they can't be expected to change trains...
What would be far more beneficial would be a high frequency corridor service and people use it like using a metro. For example all Stockport services terminate in the main train shed (including the Sheffield fasts), but then we have no more than two dedicated services passing through Castlefield - one towards Bolton (and onwards) and one towards Victoria (and onwards). That would help far more people, knowing that once arriving at Piccadilly, you’ll have no more than a 5-10 minute wait until you connecting train.
Agreed - keep it simple
If all the Airport services ran through 13/14 and all the 13/14 services ran to the Airport then you'd remove a lot of conflicts and allow a much more balanced service (rather than nine trains per hour on the Airport branch but with gaps of up to seventeen minutes because of all the different long distance links, which means that the local stations on the line can't have a regular service into Manchester)
It's a shame a city growing at the scale Manchester is, doesn't get the transport infrastructure spending it deserves.
Adding more lines through castlefield through to Piccadilly and adding platforms 15&16 would be ideal but won't happen.
What does Manchester "deserve" though?
London manages dozens of services per hour on the two track Thameslink infrastructure
London will manage dozens of services per hour on the two track Crossrail infrastructure
Manchester
could manage dozens of services per hour on the two tack infrastructure through Castlefield - but not if they want to have a messy combination of routes like Newcastle/ Middlesbrough/ Glasgow/ Edinburgh/ Barrow/ Llandudno - Manchester Airport, Liverpool - Norwich, Liverpool - Crewe, Blackpool - Hazel Grove... (as well as proposals for routes like Bradford - Manchester Airport in the Northern franchise that Arriva committed to delivering)
How much longer can people argue. #1313 1314 now on this thread alone. It's never been possible to please everyone. How much more so-called consultation? I recognise it takes time to build and implement a new timetable. A/ B/ B+/C ... C++ ... ? Consistency, reliability, those are the objectives. Let's get on now.
We'll keep arguing, because everyone thinks that their line is special and deserving of regular services to Castlefield/ Manchester Airport etc - someone has to try to trim things down and simplify things - I don't envy them that task, since they are going to annoy a lot of people one way or the other
