Altfish
Member
What problems would it create?
-
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!
No Welsh Trains to Manchester Airport (Now approved until December 2017)
- Thread starter Envoy
- Start date
- Status
What problems would it create?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
The CLC route through Northwich is a low-grade, low-capacity route.
There would be a clamour for a major upgrade, probably encompassing electrification, the Middlewich line to Crewe, trains beyond Chester, and possibly to Liverpool.
And what do you do with the legacy indirect route through Altrincham/Stockport?
That's what makes the business case so hard to develop.
Western rail access to Heathrow, another "no-brainer", hasn't made it yet.
HS2 might prompt a different solution, however, if it ever gets past Crewe.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
In passenger train discussions such as this, I am always mindful of the existing and future freight train provision requirements of the lines in the area.
Yeah that is a good point. I was thinking more that if someone had mobility issues that hindered them changing trains they would find ultra long haul nigh on impossible. Some would not of course. I never really considered, for example, familes travelling with an army of kids who are fine once the luggage is dumped at check in.
It's a bit of a stretch to call Altrincham-Stockport a legacy route when it was freight-only until 1992!
The Mid-Cheshire line is lightly used and could easily take more traffic. An hourly DMU from the North Wales coast via Chester and Northwich, turning back at Manchester Airport would be very feasible. Would be made feasible by building just 3 miles of new railway mostly across green fields.
http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=53.35...m=b&gz=0;-23412895;533558793;652313;90151;0;0
craigybagel
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 5,081
I'm not sure which point Holly was agreeing. If its the latter, then the costs would be astronomical, and it comes with other issues summed up very well here.
If Holly is agreeing with the former, merging the MAN-MIA-CRE service with the CRE-CTR service, you have the platforming issues mentioned earlier. You also end up replacing a class 323 with a DMU of some kind which will leave you with timetabling issues.
The biggest constraints on the Mid-Cheshire line are:
1. Single line sections between Altrincham and Stockport - Not all that relevant to the discussion about linking the Mid-Cheshire line to the Airport spur.
2. The Leftwich viaduct - Banning Pacers and completing the relevant paperwork can get the speed limit up to 50mph for Sprinters and 175s, the same speed Pendolinos, Voyagers and 185s have to travel at on the Stockport viaduct.
3. The single line section in the Mouldsworth area - relevant to North Wales/Chester to Airport services but not Liverpool to Airport services.
4. The long journey time between west Cheshire and Manchester - linking the line to the Airport spur is a solution to that problem.
Surprisingly the Mid-Cheshire line is considered a candidate for electrification in CP6 or later even if the Airport link isn't built, due to needing faster journey times allowing provision for more passenger and freight services.
The overnight Chester-Stockport-Piccadilly-Airport service almost does Chester-Piccadilly as fast as the daytime Chester-Warrington-Manchester services, so it shows what can be done if you eliminate constraints like pathing conflicts, every train being all-stops etc.
For the idea of an Airport link to be very successful without causing cutbacks on for the existing Mid-Cheshire services everyone needs to come together:
* TfGM need to finalise plans for a Metrolink/Rail interchange at Baguley and a new Cheadle station.
* Tatton Estate need to come up with a proper plan for a second station in Knutsford as part of their development plan.
* The Middlewich line needs to be re-opened with stations at Middlewich and Gadbrook Park.
From December 2017 the plan is for an hourly Chester-Stockport-Manchester semi-fast and an hourly stopping Northwich-Stockport-Manchester service. The later could start back from Crewe and also include calls at all the new stations mentioned above.
New services from Liverpool/Chester/North Wales to the Airport and beyond could call at Northwich and/or Knutsford only. Knutsford could become an interchange station, allowing people from the smaller stations to get to the Airport without needing a further all-stops service between Chester and Knutsford.
A number of passengers from Northwich and Knutsford would move on to the new Airport services. However, the additional stations plus more attractive service should result in the services via Altrincham remaining popular.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Like I keep saying the line would only be built if there are wider benefits beyond the Mid-Cheshire line.
If an alternative to getting a additional Airport services is to quadruple the track through Deansgate and between Slade Lane Junction and the Airport, the extension of the chord looks like a sensible option.
If a solution to speeding services from Northwich to Manchester alone is sought then electrification and eliminating single line sections would be much more cost effective.
1. Single line sections between Altrincham and Stockport - Not all that relevant to the discussion about linking the Mid-Cheshire line to the Airport spur.
2. The Leftwich viaduct - Banning Pacers and completing the relevant paperwork can get the speed limit up to 50mph for Sprinters and 175s, the same speed Pendolinos, Voyagers and 185s have to travel at on the Stockport viaduct.
3. The single line section in the Mouldsworth area - relevant to North Wales/Chester to Airport services but not Liverpool to Airport services.
4. The long journey time between west Cheshire and Manchester - linking the line to the Airport spur is a solution to that problem.
Surprisingly the Mid-Cheshire line is considered a candidate for electrification in CP6 or later even if the Airport link isn't built, due to needing faster journey times allowing provision for more passenger and freight services.
The overnight Chester-Stockport-Piccadilly-Airport service almost does Chester-Piccadilly as fast as the daytime Chester-Warrington-Manchester services, so it shows what can be done if you eliminate constraints like pathing conflicts, every train being all-stops etc.
For the idea of an Airport link to be very successful without causing cutbacks on for the existing Mid-Cheshire services everyone needs to come together:
* TfGM need to finalise plans for a Metrolink/Rail interchange at Baguley and a new Cheadle station.
* Tatton Estate need to come up with a proper plan for a second station in Knutsford as part of their development plan.
* The Middlewich line needs to be re-opened with stations at Middlewich and Gadbrook Park.
From December 2017 the plan is for an hourly Chester-Stockport-Manchester semi-fast and an hourly stopping Northwich-Stockport-Manchester service. The later could start back from Crewe and also include calls at all the new stations mentioned above.
New services from Liverpool/Chester/North Wales to the Airport and beyond could call at Northwich and/or Knutsford only. Knutsford could become an interchange station, allowing people from the smaller stations to get to the Airport without needing a further all-stops service between Chester and Knutsford.
A number of passengers from Northwich and Knutsford would move on to the new Airport services. However, the additional stations plus more attractive service should result in the services via Altrincham remaining popular.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Like I keep saying the line would only be built if there are wider benefits beyond the Mid-Cheshire line.
If an alternative to getting a additional Airport services is to quadruple the track through Deansgate and between Slade Lane Junction and the Airport, the extension of the chord looks like a sensible option.
If a solution to speeding services from Northwich to Manchester alone is sought then electrification and eliminating single line sections would be much more cost effective.
Last edited by a moderator:
kieron
Established Member
They have to have 2tph from Manchester to York because every train from Manchester to York goes through Leeds?
In any case, none of this is going to make one train go an inch further.
It's not how simple? When I said that hardly anything uses the fast lines now, I didn't mean to suggest that the station is totally deserted.
I can see that you have to path a train crossing from platform 6 to the line towards Manchester between 5tph through platform 5 weekday off-peak, and 2tph each way into platform 1 to and from Manchester. I don't know anything about the signalling there, so I shan't try to guess how much opportunity there is for either move.
I do know that passenger trains only ever use this route from Chester in the dead of night, though.
Last edited:
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
What you have to realise when you make such a statement as this that some of "the green fields" in question have already been used some years ago for the extension to the second runway for Manchester Airport.
If you for one moment think that such another transport matter would be welcomed in the affected areas, then you most certainly need to take heed of the feelings of what once was a rural community that has preserved the countryside for eons. This of course, is totally separate from any future HS2 expansion into the proposed HS2 Manchester Airport railway station.
Do you remember the second verse from the song "Big Yellow Taxi" by Joni Mitchell?....
"They took all the trees and put them in a tree museum
And they charged the people a dollar and a half just to see them
Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you've got till it's gone
They paved paradise, put up a parking lot"
There are still green fields between the railway line at Mobberley and the Airport Runway. There is around 1.5 miles between the two.
However, this should be much less controversial than the building of Runway 2 which involved rehousing endangered newts and dismantling listed buildings to move them 1 mile down the road. While if the new line is electrified the noise pollution will be minute compared to the noise pollution caused by Runway 2.
It was covered by Counting Crows and Vanessa Carlton for people who don't remember the original.
Gareth Marston
Established Member
Has anyone mentioned the best chance of linking N Wales to an airport is via the Halton curve to Liverpool South Parkway for John Lennon?
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
That would be a very poor option.
Speke has a very limited set of destinations/frequencies compared to Ringway.
I use both airports, and Manchester normally wins hands down.
The final bus ride from LPY is also very off-putting.
berneyarms
Established Member
It's also been pointed out several times that Liverpool Airport is a very poor option compared to Manchester, offering a limited number of destinations using point to point low cost carriers.
Manchester offers far better connectivity through a much wider range of directly served destinations, and interline connections worldwide through all major European hubs.
But if we build a railway to Paradise, maybe the Paradise Parking Lot wont need to be so big.
Even more of the green fields in question were used when the Mid-Cheshire line was built in the first place. And a good thing too!
I doubt the citizens of Mobberley would dislike a faster rail service.
As someone below intimated, much of the new line could be cut and cover running parallel with the runways mostly on the existing airport right of way.
http://old.wikimapia.org/#lat=53.34...519;593090;424300;606823;433007;636005;439665
Last edited:
Liverpool does seem to have an ever changing list of destinations. I caught a direct flight from Liverpool to Berlin when Manchester to Berlin didn't exist as a direct route. I also did Liverpool to Cologne when Manchester to Cologne didn't exist as a direct route and now it's the other way around. I've also done Liverpool-Gibraltar, which wasn't kept as a route. However, new routes seem to be added each year to replace the withdrawn routes, so if you just want to go somewhere new on holiday each year Liverpool seems to be able to offer that. The destinations I can see Liverpool currently offers which Manchester doesn't appear to are Bacău, Bucharest, Mahón, Limoges, Poznań, Trop, Vilnius, Wrocław, Szczecin and Nîmes. While with some seasonal destinations like Pisa and Naples both Manchester and Liverpool offer flights only on certain days, so which airport is best to use may depend what you want to depart/come back or how long you want to go away for.
I get the point about not all Manchester flights being point to point. However, someone I know from Salford who has family in South America uses EasyJet to fly Liverpool-Madrid and then catches an onward flight. Currently the only Manchester-Madrid option is Ryanair, so it's still a point-to-point option.
From using the Trip Advisor Rome forum quite a bit last year I'm aware a number of people arrive at Ciampiano Airport on low-cost airlines and then catch an onward flight from Fiumicino Airport to their final destination and if you're travelling from Manchester, while you can get to Fiumicino Airport it's on Jet2 who operate as a point to point airline.
Liverpool will soon restart the connecting flights via Amsterdam option, which it used to have and which Manchester currently has. I'm also aware of via Lisbon, Munich, Paris, Dublin and Shannon options from Manchester. Although, through bookings aren't always available. For instance, Aer Lingus only offer flights to the USA via Dublin and Shannon. You can't make a through booking for Manchester to Santiago de Compostel via Dublin, for instance.
Gareth Marston
Established Member
I have a direct service to BHM INTL so the last two flights I've caught were from Liverpool and Heathrow and the flight I have booked in October is from......Heathrow.
jcollins made a very good point. Manchester does get a wider selection of destinations especialy when it comes to long haul carriers, however the vast majority of flights are short haul and with budget airlines. Do the number of people flying from Manchester on Etihad, Qatar, PIA, Singapore and Emirates etc. really justify a frequent direct train service from Wales for an infrequent air service.
berneyarms
Established Member
Liverpool is fine for short haul point to point travel.
The point is that Manchester offers that, and also a wider range of short haul destinations, some direct long haul flights and the benefit of interline connections via other European hubs (i.e. protected connections), such as:
- Heathrow (BA)
- Paris CDG (Air France)
- Dublin (Aer Lingus)
- Frankfurt & Munich (Lufthansa)
- Madrid (Iberia) (restarting in Autumn 2015)
- Lisbon (TAP)
- Copenhagen (SAS)
- Istanbul (Turkish)
- Zurich (Swiss)
- Amsterdam (KLM)
That's before you bring in the Middle East airlines.
The vast majority of people flying long haul will not take the risk of buying separate tickets with a point to point airline and then a long haul airline. If there is a problem with the first point-to-point flight, then you are up the swanny in terms of the second flight. I certainly would never take that risk. But each unto their own.
As for Aer Lingus - I'm not sure why they have been brought up as an example. The reality is that they are a hybrid airline, in that they are a low-cost short-haul operation, running point-to-point in Europe, but do offer connections into their long-haul network at Dublin or Shannon, which is entirely to/from North America and is a two-class service.
My fundamental point is that the two airports are different beasts, and trying to suggest otherwise is just daft. This whole Liverpool -v- Manchester discussion is somewhat pointless.
I'm merely arguing that given the nature of Manchester Airport's global reach, it makes sense to maximise the range of direct rail connections across the north to serve it.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
It's not just Wales, it's the corridor via Chester, currently completely dominated by the M56.
There's a lot of hubbing from Manchester via continental airports which Liverpool can't compete with.
Most of its flights are less than daily and to some very odd places (eg in eastern Europe) where you can not hub onwards.
Manchester offers daily routes on full-service airlines via mainline hubs like Zurich, Helsinki, Frankfurt, Munich etc, connecting on to worldwide destinations.
There are 6 AF daily flights to Paris and 7 on KLM to Amsterdam and then worldwide.
Liverpool offers only a fraction of that sort of connectivity.
I've flown out of Liverpool and back into Manchester before now.
I don't suppose that figures in the stats anywhere.
You have to be inventive about car parking and airport access in that situation - Hooton and Merseyrail/Northern won that one for me, saving a fortune on airport car parking.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Have you recently been to the area where Mobberley station is situated and the type of approach roads in the area? It is a railway station that is far from ideal for the residents on the village and a viewing on the passenger footfall figures over recent years show a low patronage at this particular railway station. The car is the prime method of transport in the village.
People in Mobberley have exceedingly long memories of past transport-based disruptions to their area and I would like to see the result of a poll in the area that would allow the residents to express a view on this matter that would be better reflective of local project reception, rather than the views of armchair cognoscenti from far afield. Before you say that I too fall into this category, a Prestbury to Mobberley journey is mainly on the A537 from Henbury to Mobberley, so I am well aware of local views having no less than nine friends of my wife who live in that village, four of which I have sought their personal views upon in the last three days during their visit to our residence when we celebrated our Ruby Wedding anniversary.
I'll try and put it simply. Heathrow is one of the worlds major hubs for air travel. It has next to no direct rail links to most of the UK. Why does Wales and the corridor through Chester need frequent direct trains to Manchester Airport?
merlodlliw
Established Member
Because the line is there,Manchester Airport is the busiest Airport outside of the South East,99.9% of passengers use the highly congested A55 and M56 from Chester and North West Wales, anything to take airport traffic off these roads must be an improvement.
I remember in the 60s when Heathrow could only be reached by tube and that station was a distance away,London is well served by termini linking the rest of the Country and then a very frequent rail service direct to the airport from Paddington,In my opinion ATW is been hard done by Network Rail, who on the other hand see Manchester/Liverpool/North East Wales Triangle as a key growth area, time Network Rail sorted themselves out.
All ATW trains terminate at Piccadilly a stones throw from the airport, then idle for almost an hour belching diesel fumes into the city,awaiting the return journey back to the West.
My opinion of course.
Last edited:
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I note the PID on platform 13 at Manchester Piccadilly station now appear give a quasi-official name to the "holding siding" that you make reference to just a short distance away from that station (I have forgotten its official title) as "the depot", as the last time that I was on platform 13, when the ATW service from Llandudno had decanted the last of its passengers, the PID stated "Do not board this train, as it is going to "the depot".
I was told that TransPennine Express managed to block ATW's application for track access to Network Rail for these services on the grounds of potential delays to their services.
The fourth platform at MIA was built early (it is a Northern Hub scheme) at the same time as the Metrolink platforms to save on costs/disruption. So will it not be used until the through service from the Calder Valley, promised for 2017, begins? In any case it must have been built to cater for more than one train per hour.
It's not just North Wales losing out of course, but also Chester and Warrington. NR seems to be saying that you can't have both the ATW and the Calder Valley service as there are not enough paths.
The fourth platform at MIA was built early (it is a Northern Hub scheme) at the same time as the Metrolink platforms to save on costs/disruption. So will it not be used until the through service from the Calder Valley, promised for 2017, begins? In any case it must have been built to cater for more than one train per hour.
It's not just North Wales losing out of course, but also Chester and Warrington. NR seems to be saying that you can't have both the ATW and the Calder Valley service as there are not enough paths.
The point I was trying to make is Aer Lingus offer some destinations from Dublin, which are not available from Manchester and if you want to go indirectly you have to take the risk with two point-to-point tickets.
Although, sometimes it easier to not fly to the Airport nearest where you are staying. If you want to go to Florence from the north of England it's far easier to catch a direct flight to Pisa and to get the train/coach to Florence, then to go via London or Amsterdam.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
It's called the Mayfield Loop. If they put that on the screen some basher might think it was an opportunity to do rare trackage into the adjacent derelict Mayfield station. Which for the avoidance of doubt now has no track!
TPE raised concerns about additional services causing delays to their Manchester Airport-York services which don't have great punctuality figures as it is. Network Rail agreed.
Although the main reason for Network Rail blocking the application is the service patterns for Airport services post-2017 is still in the planning stage. DfT have asked Northern franchise bidders to leave a path for the Wales & Borders franchise to run to Manchester Airport, if it's possible to do so. However, until the next Northern franchise is awarded it's unknown whether they'll be a path for Chester-Manchester Airport in December 2017.
The next Northern franchise is likely to include a Liverpool-Manchester Airport via Warrington Central semi-fast service.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
If a western rail connection to the Airport goes ahead (a pretty big if in my view) I think it would be well north of Mobberley. The obvious route would be to tunnel westwards from the existing airport station and follow the M57 or the HS2 route planned to run alongside it, before turning south to join the Mid-Cheshire line near Ashley. A new station interchanging with the HS2 station between junctions 5 and 6 might improve the business case, although it might not be possible to provide one because of the relative positions of the rail routes and the complex road layout surrounding them.
On the same basis both Altrincham and North Wales should have regular services to Liverpool - the second largest city in North West England. The lines are there but the signalling may need to be altered to allow new services.
- Status