Those are the services that would need to if platform 15 and 16 are built. They are the only Northern services through Stockport that use the main shed and therefore are the only ones that could be diverted and linked with services from the other end of the corridor. The alternative would be building a flyover to get services from Ardwick to platforms 13-16 without crossing the station throat.
-
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!
Petition for Manchester Piccadilly platforms 15 & 16
- Thread starter Rhydgaled
- Start date
- Status
Those are the services that would need to if platform 15 and 16 are built. They are the only Northern services through Stockport that use the main shed and therefore are the only ones that could be diverted and linked with services from the other end of the corridor. The alternative would be building a flyover to get services from Ardwick to platforms 13-16 without crossing the station throat.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bantamzen
Established Member
The more I think about this, the more I think they could do with some west-facing terminal platforms at Picc instead of 15/16!
Just pretending for a moment you were being serious, where would you locate them and why would you not simply build 15/16 as through platforms? There is precious little space in that area, and the cost for bays would be pretty much the same as through platforms, being I assume on the same footprint, soooo....
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
You could probably get a couple in between 13/14 and the main station on an elevated section, though they might be a bit short. Otherwise, yes it would be in a similar place to 15/16, the advantage of bays would be the ability to walk between them on the level.
Bantamzen
Established Member
Not a lot of use if you still have to cross the lines to get to P1-14, the main concourse, the exits.....
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Not a lot of use if you still have to cross the lines to get to P1-14, the main concourse, the exits.....
But quite useful if you want to interchange between the routes more easily than at Oxford Road. OK, technically a doubleback, but not one that anyone is ever likely to bother enforcing.
Bantamzen
Established Member
That's a thin case, very thin. An expensive build to save a fraction of commuters having to cross a footbridge on some limited flows.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Have you had sight of the most recent proposals for the land use in the area where Mayfield station stood?
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 16,710
If there were no platform constraints at all at Oxford Road and Picadilly, ie. both had been fully rebuilt to four (or even more!) full platforms each, what would the absolute maximum number of trains that could pass through be?
If we got an all in THameslink esque solution with ATO, ETCS and multiple fallbacks including on site driving?
I doubt we could get the 24tph they get from fully homogenous trains, but could we get to 20 or so?
If we got an all in THameslink esque solution with ATO, ETCS and multiple fallbacks including on site driving?
I doubt we could get the 24tph they get from fully homogenous trains, but could we get to 20 or so?
Greybeard33
Established Member
Before May 2018, the Sunday Mid Cheshire services ran through the corridor from Chester to Southport and vice versa.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Unless you did go to fully homogeneous commuter-style trains (which could be done with CAF units and anything not using those diverted elsewhere - while they don't quite have the Class 700 seating arrangement the standbacks and large overhead racks for luggage do help make them veritable people eaters) I think realistically you will need to time in at least 5 minutes' dwell for each train to keep things reliable, which means a theoretical maximum of about 12tph, I reckon.
I suppose at a push Class 150s run in pairs could be refurbished to also meet the requirements there, by adding standbacks in the windowless section with a table bay aligned with each window. Couldn't mark the door positions on the floor then though.
It seems to me that any scheme for the Castlefield corridor will take a very long time to deliver. Given this, and the increasing pressure to take drastic measures to combat climate change, should the airport be given any importance in this debate? By the time any improvements are made to the rail infrastructure the airport might be a fraction of the size it is today.
Bantamzen
Established Member
Right now the airport is undergoing a billion plus pound expansion project, with an expected increase of up to 40% traffic in the next few years. So whilst this flies in the face of what campaigners want to happen with air travel, it is unlikely that the airport's significance will reduce to a fraction, quite the opposite in fact especially given Greater Manchester's ownership of it.
In terms of what will happen with air travel, expect the major changes to be to aircraft efficiency, as well as less use of hubs and more point to point travel.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 16,710
but dwell time is unlikely to be the important factor, since 5 minutes of platform reoccupation time would give you something like 24 trains per hour, since you have two platforms at your disposal in each direction.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Sorry, 12tph per platform per direction was what I meant. If you build 15/16 that would get you 24, yes, though you might not want to go quite that far to build in some resilience. Lines that are operated to capacity with no spare paths tend to have punctuality issues.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 16,710
Well with ATO we should be able to have a techincal headway much tighter than that necessary for 24tph, so it might not cause too much of an issue.
Worth noting that 24tph is probably enough to take every current train into or out of Manchester Piccadilly, if the junction conflicts can be dealt with.
The Corridor you actually want to benchmark performance against is SE's Charing Cross tracks around London Bridge, a 2 track railway either side of London Bridge with 4track /platforms at London Bridge* (P6-9) and also Waterloo East* - it handles 28tph per direction with 10-12car trains and no ATO. It also has flat junctions at Metropolitan C Jn, Tanners Hill Jn and Parks Bridge Jn on the 2 track section all handling above 24tph/direction. It used to operate at 29tph from Kent Coast electrification in the 1950s till the current London Bridge rebuild when it dropped to 28tph +2tph white space recover path gaps.
*Each platform face handles 14tph with considerable ease. The old P6 at London Bridge handled 18tph and was the busiest platform face in Europe by passenger numbers with enforced sub 60s dwell times.
Last edited:
I've seen the plans for the new terminal Curzon St station in Birmingham. What are the plans for Manchester if HS2 gets the go-ahead ? Could Mayfield become the HS2 terminus ? And be linked to an expanded Piccadilly with P15/16 for through services.
Mayfield looks semi derelict so it would be nice to bring it back to life. Look what was achieved with St Pancras.
Mayfield looks semi derelict so it would be nice to bring it back to life. Look what was achieved with St Pancras.
Last edited:
Jozhua
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 1,856
Yes, agreed, Manchester Airport already has the most destinations of any UK airport and the move to less use of hubs (e.g Heathrow) will definitely work in it's favour.
Direct, point to point on more efficient 787's, A350's and even narrow bodies like the 737 Max is going to make Manchester an even bigger airport for not only short haul but long haul flying. Airlines are big polluters, but also have a reasonable excuse for doing so and are one of the few industries with big financial gain for lowering emissions.
Isn't Mayfield a concert venue now? Manchester Pride Live was hosted there a couple months ago.
I think it's important to see the Castlefield corridor issues as two separate problems: platform use for Piccadilly, Oxford Road and Deansgate, and junction conflicts either side of the corridor. The Northern Hub project to extend Oxford Road platforms and add another two platforms to Piccadilly is designed to solve the former, but does nothing about the latter. And any solutions with the aim of increasing capacity through the corridor such as ATO will not achieve anything until the latter problem is dealt with.
There are many historical reasons for how Manchester's network was formed going back to the first-ever passenger railway but we now have a network that is supposed to be the hub for the North West and one of the major hubs for the nationwide network, but is not much more than a massive mess of flat junctions. Recent projects such as the Ordsall Chord may have helped increase connectivity for passengers coming in and out of the city and made better use of rolling stock, but has had a negative impact on the network's reliability and resiliency. Neighbouring areas like Liverpool, Sheffield and Wales have also been negatively affected as they rely on Manchester to provide connections to other areas.
NPR seems to be the closest to providing a long-term solution, with a new corridor connecting Leeds with Liverpool through Manchester that should free up capacity for local services but the more severe bottlenecks will still remain.
There are many historical reasons for how Manchester's network was formed going back to the first-ever passenger railway but we now have a network that is supposed to be the hub for the North West and one of the major hubs for the nationwide network, but is not much more than a massive mess of flat junctions. Recent projects such as the Ordsall Chord may have helped increase connectivity for passengers coming in and out of the city and made better use of rolling stock, but has had a negative impact on the network's reliability and resiliency. Neighbouring areas like Liverpool, Sheffield and Wales have also been negatively affected as they rely on Manchester to provide connections to other areas.
NPR seems to be the closest to providing a long-term solution, with a new corridor connecting Leeds with Liverpool through Manchester that should free up capacity for local services but the more severe bottlenecks will still remain.
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 8,155
I always find it baffling why Oxford Rd has 4 through platforms and another terminal platform, whereas Piccadilly only has two on that line? Logic would say that Piccadilly should have had two further platforms built before the Windsor Link completion, let alone the curve. Seems we're doing this back-to-front.
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 8,155
The lower level (I think) and I've no idea what state it's in - but passing the upper level appears derelict. Could be used for local trains to terminate (maybe Airport shuttle?) with walkways to the main station, but I doubt long enough to host HS2.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The Windsor Link wasn't a great problem - the platforms, with permissive working in place and almost everything a 2 or at most 4-car DMU so the possibility of stacking three units up, were well able to handle the much thinner pre-1998 but post-Metrolink service (e.g. the line via Chorley had just 1tph fast and 1tph slow and nothing to Vic). The rot first set in with the mid-platform signals (early 2000s) meaning that a platform alteration to 13b wasted a good 5 minutes while people walked far further along rather than to just beyond the stairs, but the Ordsall Chord really screwed it up, and they should definitely have been built before that.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 16,710
Untangling the mass of flat junctions is going to be somewhat difficult however, you need at least one flying junction at each end of corridor, even if you get fancy with non standard track arrangements.
You might be able to work something out using one of the out of use viaducts at the Castlefield end, if you can get Metrolink to play ball by slewing the lines around.
EDIT:
Now if only there was room for a third track between Deansgate and the Ordsall Chord junction, then you could get some right-hand running shenanigans going, but there isn't.
EDIT #2:
Well there might be room for a third track without demolishing any buildings, but it would mean enclosing the street adjacent to (and parallel with) the railway, which is not going to be very popular with the people living near that street.
You might be able to work something out using one of the out of use viaducts at the Castlefield end, if you can get Metrolink to play ball by slewing the lines around.
EDIT:
Now if only there was room for a third track between Deansgate and the Ordsall Chord junction, then you could get some right-hand running shenanigans going, but there isn't.
EDIT #2:
Well there might be room for a third track without demolishing any buildings, but it would mean enclosing the street adjacent to (and parallel with) the railway, which is not going to be very popular with the people living near that street.
Last edited:
The Oxford Road upgrade and new Piccadilly platforms will add resilience by reducing dwell times - not capacity. But they need to review some services that use OR & 13/14, for instance the Northern Connect service between Blackpool North & Manchester Airport is a joke. It's usually held up by a slower train and by the time it gets to Manchester it's 10 minutes late. By that point is usually delayed further as it's missed it's slot with conflicting movements across Castlefield junction etc. NR have recently started some sort of permissive working on platforms 13/14 at Piccadilly to reduce dwell times. It helps to some degree but still not ideal.
On the Styal Line issue, TPE should make additional calls at select stations similar to how Northern Connect services operate on a skip-stop basis. We're literally talking about no more than 5 minutes if that for a stop or two. These stops can be "padding" as platform capacity at Manchester Airport is starting to become an issue. Northern and TPE should come to a quid pro quo arrangement rather than the current arrangement of the stopping Northern service delaying TPE services and TPE services being prioritised over stopping services which results in lost revenue for Northern. Just yet another example of the fragmented nature of Britain's railways and the lack of vertical integration/thinking that ultimately affects passengers.
On the Styal Line issue, TPE should make additional calls at select stations similar to how Northern Connect services operate on a skip-stop basis. We're literally talking about no more than 5 minutes if that for a stop or two. These stops can be "padding" as platform capacity at Manchester Airport is starting to become an issue. Northern and TPE should come to a quid pro quo arrangement rather than the current arrangement of the stopping Northern service delaying TPE services and TPE services being prioritised over stopping services which results in lost revenue for Northern. Just yet another example of the fragmented nature of Britain's railways and the lack of vertical integration/thinking that ultimately affects passengers.
Bantamzen
Established Member
Indeed, anyone hoping for a drastic reduction in traffic through Manchester is in for a long wait. Once the Max finally gets certification, I expect more growth with their use, along with Airbus' Neos and longer haul A350s.
There is already padding, certainly from the airport towards Piccadilly. I suppose at a push one or two stations could be served, but it won't stop the problem of fasts getting stuck behind late running stoppers. This is where P15/16 could come into their own, allowing fasts to potentially overtake late running stoppers to avoid the need for as much padding. Sort out Oxford Road with 4 longer, accessible platforms and there is more potential still, although frankly I do tend to lean towards letting some long distance services to pass through without stopping.
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 8,155
Is there any website where we can watch movements between and around Piccadilly/Oxford Road (I don't mean webcams - I mean the sort the controllers have)?
It’s just a shell. Keeps people dry that’s about it.
https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/man1#T_MNCRPIC shows one end of the line...
VT 390
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 1,366
I don't know how accurate this one is as it does not seam to show all services sometimes but it is something:
http://raildar.co.uk/map/MCO
- Status