Proposed new Liverpool & Manchester Railway

[Western Lord]

This is similar to HS2 in that they're perhaps promoting it for the wrong reasons. It won't be substantially quicker than the present fast services. However what it will do is allow fast services to be removed from Chat Moss and the CLC lines, allowing these to finally have the Merseyrail style 4tph service they deserve. That is the real benefit, and what should be being sold - it's about giving places around Manchester and Liverpool the commuter service they deserve but have never had because of fast trains needing to take up paths on these routes.

Between Eccles/Patricroft and Newton -le-Willows the Chat Moss line goes through nowhere except, well, Chat Moss. Only the Liverpool and Manchester ends might justify such lavish train provision.

 

[SynthD]

Like the Birmingham and Manchester mayors reuse of the Birmingham to Manchester part of HS2, this looks much like the NPR. That Cheshire Connector from Crewe to Millington is almost identical to the HS2 plan to go from Crewe to High Legh (to access Manchester by the NPR), the next village to the west of Millington.

It’s a (silly) shame there may be nothing in rail for the Brum and Liverpudlian mayors to collaborate on.

 

[Brubulus]

What exactly is the point of Liverpool Gateway. South Parkway already exists. I would assume this involves using the Fiddlers Ferry line to somewhere around Lymm, with the HS2 approach to Manchester via the Airport. Not sure if this would use a terminus or through station at Piccadilly, though you could have a through station with a reversing siding.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What exactly is the point of Liverpool Gateway. South Parkway already exists. I would assume this involves using the Fiddlers Ferry line to somewhere around Lymm, with the HS2 approach to Manchester via the Airport. Not sure if this would use a terminus or through station at Piccadilly, though you could have a through station with a reversing siding.

Remember most journeys are not city centre to city centre, rather they are suburb to city centre. This provides accessibility for Liverpool-origin journeys without going into Liverpool. It's something HS2 misses at the London end but is why Manchester Airport station is crucial to HS2 2B - Stockport is presently a hugely busy Parkway station which is kind of equivalent. Indeed on some London services more board at Stockport than Piccadilly.

If it actually gets built near enough to the airport to be considered an airport station, bonus.

Between Eccles/Patricroft and Newton -le-Willows the Chat Moss line goes through nowhere except, well, Chat Moss. Only the Liverpool and Manchester ends might justify such lavish train provision.

And justify it they do - particularly the Liverpool end which is like a Merseyrail line in character but presently suffers with an hourly service which isn't even close to adequate. The Manchester end maybe less so because Patricroft is the only station that doesn't have a decent alternative, but because of how many stations there are on the Liverpool end that's enough for it to be an issue adding more local services (you could get to 2tph but not further).

There's also I guess the possibility of ecovillage type development on parts of the line.

 

[WAO]

If there were packed 12 car trains shuttling between the two Lancashire cities four times an hour, if there were a reasonably direct route (I am informed that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line) and if the cost of this scheme were to be borne entirely by the Region's tax paying electorate, then there might be a case.

There is plenty of demand to improve existing services in both cities which would benefit more (ordinary) people but at a fraction of the cost, although if the Mayor can spend £100M just reopening one station....

The L&M could have Merseyrail services by reinstating 4-track at least to Huyton and using the Wapping Tunnel instead of Lime Street.

WAO

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is plenty of demand to improve existing services in both cities which would benefit more (ordinary) people but at a fraction of the cost, although if the Mayor can spend £100M just reopening one station....

If I read it right that is a full rebuild of Liverpool Central, both the upstairs bit for these trains and the downstairs bit which is in dire need of very expensive capacity upgrades.

The L&M could have Merseyrail services by reinstating 4-track at least to Huyton and using the Wapping Tunnel instead of Lime Street.

Given that a fair chunk of this new line is actually refurbishing the extant Fiddlers Ferry route (so all a bit of an East West Rail clone) is that going to be cheaper? And you can't get to 4tph without slowing existing trains down. The fast TPE services on both Chat Moss and the CLC are the thing preventing frequency increases - moving these onto a new line solves it.

 

[WAO]

Central low level suffers from having only one through service. The pilot heading for a further Southerly route to Wapping Tunnel exists. Four track from Edge Hill would remove the conflict with other trains. Yes there are some (limited) encroachments but there's quite a budget.

The L&M needs a Merseyrail type service because of the existing (fixed) population. Fiddlers Ferry is effectively a new route, with a poor catchment area.

We need those Loop and Link planners back!

WAO

 

[Bletchleyite]

The L&M needs a Merseyrail type service because of the existing (fixed) population.

Yes, which you can achieve by removing the fast services from the CLC and Chat Moss.

Fiddlers Ferry is effectively a new route, with a poor catchment area.

Exactly. It's through an area where there'll be no demand for local stations so perfect for a fast intercity route with a stop only at Warrington.

 

[Brubulus]

When I was saying Gateway was a poor idea, I was meaning it in that trains should stop at the existing South Parkway station, given the improved connections from there, even if the road access isn't quite as good as from Gateway a couple of miles further out. Most of the money will need to be spent on a new approach to Manchester and Piccadilly.

 

[Spekejunction]

The headline is Manchester to Liverpool in 20 minutes..
TPE does Manchester to Liverpool with one stop in 34 minutes..Non stop 30 minutes..
So the idea is to spend X billions to save 10 minutes ?
j

 

[Bletchleyite]

The headline is Manchester to Liverpool in 20 minutes..
TPE does Manchester to Liverpool with one stop in 34 minutes..Non stop 30 minutes..
So the idea is to spend X billions to save 10 minutes ?

Like HS2 the main point is freeing up capacity for a higher frequency local service and for freight on the existing lines. Again it's being sold with glitz rather than practicality.

 

[Farnborough]

Looking at the article, this seems to be three things:

1. The new line between Liverpool Lime Street/Central and Manchester Airport/Piccadilly via Gateway and Warrington
2. Upgrading the Chat Moss line
3. Upgrading the Warrington line

From these, it's unclear whether this is:

1. HS2 and a bit
2. NPR/TPE
3. Merseyrail upgrading

My guess it's a bit of all three?

 

[HSTEd]

The route via Fiddlers Ferry is too slow to deliver the sorts of transformative benefits that would justify the cost of this project.

If you want a new alignment, it needs to be a new alignment or the project will just create another subsidy sink to little overall effect.

EDIT:
Is the actual report text available yet? I've not seen it anywhere.

 

[The Planner]

The route via Fiddlers Ferry is too slow to deliver the sorts of transformative benefits that would justify the cost of this project.

If you want a new alignment, it needs to be a new alignment or the project will just create another subsidy sink to little overall effect.

EDIT:
Is the actual report text available yet? I've not seen it anywhere.

That assumes the Fiddlers Ferry route is left as it is. They arent going to keep the level crossings through Warrington.

 

[Senex]

The 3-post thread on this topic in "Infrastructure & Stations" starts with a reference to 20 minutes between Liverpool and Manchester. Given three intermediate stops and the poor alignment of the old LNW Low Level line at Widnes and especially through Warrington is this even a remote possibility? Wouldn't the expensive new route actually be no quicker than non-stop via Chat Moss (especially if the latter saw some improvement)?

And the public statement referenced above talks about bringing many more people within 30 minutes of the centres of Liverpool and Manchester. Doesn't this raise once again the question of what this new line is really for? Is it to be a cpntribution to the inter-city main line across the north of England, or is it to be a glorified suburban line to get more people faster into the centres of those two cities?

 

[Brubulus]

That assumes the Fiddlers Ferry route is left as it is. They arent going to keep the level crossings through Warrington.

Yes, but the alignment will be the same, which limits speed, however, it's about capacity more than speed. Secondly, with the route being a passenger only railway, much more can't can be applied to the curves to keep them at a decent speed, though the speed needed through Warrington doesn't need to be that high, given it's likely all trains will stop there. I can't see the Sankey Bridges curves adding more than 30 seconds to journeys. With the distance and stopping pattern, substantial journey time reductions are difficult on Liverpool-Manchester.

 

[Oxfordblues]

East of Arpley Junction will this entail reinstating the high-level bridge over the ship canal at Latchford? If so, are there any "tall ships" still traversing the canal that require such generous headroom?

 

[HSTEd]

The 3-post thread on this topic in "Infrastructure & Stations" starts with a reference to 20 minutes between Liverpool and Manchester. Given three intermediate stops and the poor alignment of the old LNW Low Level line at Widnes and especially through Warrington is this even a remote possibility? Wouldn't the expensive new route actually be no quicker than non-stop via Chat Moss (especially if the latter saw some improvement)?

The fundamental problem of the Chat Moss is that a train running non stop will just run into the back of the stopper in front, because of the density of stations.

I think you could probably do Liverpool to Manchester with at least two intermediate stops in 20 minutes, but it would require a high performance trainset on a new alignment with a top speed of 260km/h or better. ie. a Shinkansen.

With three stops, even short periods of non stop running will likely make the objective functionally impossible.

EDIT:

Even drawing straight lines through Liverpool, somewhere near Liverpool South Parkway (where actually is Gateway?), Warrington and Manchester Airport gets a distance of 63km. That would require an average speed of nearly 190km/h to do it in 20 minutes. That's pushing it, even with one stop.

If you abandon the idea of serving the airport it is much more tenable.

 

[Brubulus]

The fundamental problem of the Chat Moss is that a train running non stop will just run into the back of the stopper in front, because of the density of stations.

I think you could probably do Liverpool to Manchester with at least two intermediate stops in 20 minutes, but it would require a high performance trainset on a new alignment with a top speed of 260km/h or better. ie. a Shinkansen.

With three stops, even short periods of non stop running will likely make the objective functionally impossible.

EDIT:

Even drawing straight lines through Liverpool, somewhere near Liverpool South Parkway (where actually is Gateway?), Warrington and Manchester Airport gets a distance of 63km. That would require an average speed of nearly 190km/h to do it in 20 minutes. That's pushing it, even with one stop.

If you abandon the idea of serving the airport it is much more tenable.

This isn't really about a new line from Liverpool to Manchester, it's something for the Midlands/NW rail link to connect to and offload most of the costs to. Plus it would enable CLC and Chat Moss to be used as stopping routes. I'd guess it will be 225kmh top speed, any more is ridiculous.
You're limited to 70 through South Parkway, further increasing the justification to stop there instead of some gateway station. Plus there's the Edge Hill tunnel but that will need to be sorted to increase speeds above 30. I think 30 mins Liverpool-Mancheter is just about possible but even that would be difficult.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Electrifying the CLC would hep a bit I think.

 

[gc4946]

Looking at the possible location of Liverpool Gateway on this map https://www.liverpoolcityregion-ca....railway-plan-could-unlock-90bn-economic-boost it'll be sited either in Widnes or Ditton.
The map shows two possible routes between Liverpool Lime Street and Liverpool Gateway:
the current line through Mossley Hill and Liverpool South Parkway;
a new line via Tarbock, Childwall and joining the existing alignment at or near Wavertree Technology Park

 

[Farnborough]

Looking at the possible location of Liverpool Gateway on this map https://www.liverpoolcityregion-ca....railway-plan-could-unlock-90bn-economic-boost it'll be sited either in Widnes or Ditton.

That "Liverpool Gateway" may be located in Cheshire will be well received by the residents of those Cheshire towns... Not!

 

[Red Rover]

Does anyone know about this new “Northern arc”? I heard a long time ago overheads are going in on the CLC (2030 ish) but this new lines branches at bank quay and runs south through Millington and up to the airport?
It’ll be amazing if it comes to fruition.
Cheers.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

CLC is getting electrified!? I've never heard of that!

 

[Red Rover]

CLC is getting electrified!? I've never heard of that!

Yes apparently so, well I’ve been told that, that certainly doesn’t make it gospel though ha ha! Not too sure when network rails spending plan is (2026?), it would be in that as they run (spending plans) for 5 years.

 

[Class 170101]

Well it kind of makes sense to wire the CLC route via Warrington Central if there is sufficient OLE power in feeder stations on surrounding routes including the WCML at Warrington to feed the line.

 

[GraphitProjekt]

Yes apparently so, well I’ve been told that, that certainly doesn’t make it gospel though ha ha! Not too sure when network rails spending plan is (2026?), it would be in that as they run (spending plans) for 5 years.

Just about every inch of GB lines has been suggested for electrification in a report somewhere - but are you saying somewhere there's official intentions to develop an actual plan and field it to government for funding? Is there any source for this (not saying I don't believe you) - I'm not finding anything immediately obvious online.

 

[Red Rover]

Just about every inch of GB lines has been suggested for electrification in a report somewhere - but are you saying somewhere there's official intentions to develop an actual plan and field it to government for funding? Is there any source for this (not saying I don't believe you) - I'm not finding anything immediately obvious online.

There probably won’t be, this come from people inside the industry, it would make sense to do both lines.
Network rail have certainly been out on the line over the last few years to survey, other than that there’s little I’m afraid.
That said I personally think it’ll happen, but when? Couldn’t say, if I find anything more out I’ll put it on here if I can.
Big spending review in June so maybe more news then.

 

[The Planner]

There probably won’t be, this come from people inside the industry, it would make sense to do both lines.
Network rail have certainly been out on the line over the last few years to survey, other than that there’s little I’m afraid.
That said I personally think it’ll happen, but when? Couldn’t say, if I find anything more out I’ll put it on here if I can.
Big spending review in June so maybe more news then.

NRs next funding period is 2029 to 34. If anything the spending reviiew will require more money to be saved/not spent.

 

[Red Rover]

NRs next funding period is 2029 to 34. If anything the spending reviiew will require more money to be saved/not spent.

Ok, they’re lobbying though there’s something in it, what I’m seeing on the proposed route also is it’ll be on the garston docks line? Where’s there room east of the junctions so they can run to lime st? Would seem crazy to build a new station when parkway is up the road.