£85m train link between Manchester Piccadilly and Victoria stations approved

[Multiple Unit]

But wouldn't that 85million be better spent on Rolling Stock as its fine having more services to a place but when the rolling stock isnt there or able to cope with current demand then how is it to cope with more population.

 

[pemma]

The aim eventually is to have trains running from Stockport through Victoria using the Denton line and then through Ashburys, this would then connect the two markets back up.

I don't understand. If you were suggesting Stockport-Stalybridge services connecting with TPE services then I can see advantages for people travelling from/through Stockport. However, a Stockport-Victoria service would be slower than the train to Piccadilly and walking to Victoria, as well as probably a lot less frequent. The benefits of a Stockport-Victoria service are:
1. Rail service between Denton and Manchester.
2. Rail service between Denton, Reddish and Stockport.

I am afraid I had no idea what the current service on the line was. Of course if it is possible then stoppers are good.

I actually envisaged the semi fast serving most of the Manchster end but then running fast (ish) from Earlestown to Lime Street with a merseyrail service running as far as Newton-Le-Willows from Lime Street. This would use the paths created when all of the Preston bound services have branched off to go North.

It would reduce the number of trains from some Merseyside stations to MCV but the connection at Newton should be good enough to make up for this.

You really need to look at current timetables and existing planned changes for this line.

The off-peak pattern for 2014 is scheduled to be:
* Victoria to Newton-le-Willows to Lime Street (all stations) 2tph
* Airport to Newton-le-Willows to Lime Street (limited stop) 1tph
* Airport/Piccadilly to Newton-le-Willows to Chester/Llandudno (non-stop between Oxford Road and Newton-le-Willows) 1tph
* Airport to Edinburgh/Glasgow via Newton-le-Willows (limited stop) every 1-2 hours depending on demand.

A lot do use the train from the airport. It is a quietish train but there always seem to be Scottish sounding people on it when I have used it (not to say they are going to Scotland mind)

If you're travelling on an off-peak 6 car working then it may be quietest but if it's a 3 car working or a peak working it's usually a very busy service between Oxford Road and Scotland.

 

[swt_passenger]

But wouldn't that 85million be better spent on Rolling Stock as its fine having more services to a place but when the rolling stock isnt there or able to cope with current demand then how is it to cope with more population.

Money is being spent on rolling stock - it's just that it's for Thameslink and TPE. The displaced 319s that are to be transferred to the newly electrified lines in the NW then allow some existing DMU routes to be strengthened.

Don't assume electrification will result in any DMUs being scrapped.

Also, replacement of the 185s on TPE Scottish services with EMUs allows the other TPE routes to be strengthened - this has been already announced by DfT.

 

[tbtc]

Don't assume electrification will result in any DMUs being scrapped

Agreed. The only way we'll see Sprinters/ Pacers scrapped will be when they are mechanically unsound and physically unable to continue in duty. Until then we don't have the luxury of being able to retire them (too much demand on existing routes)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

tbtc, I hope you mean until Blackpool-Preston-Manchester is electrified?

Yes, in the short term. The Hazel Grove line is busy, with four passenger trains an hour in each direction, yet only one of those a *day* is currently an EMU. Such a waste when there are other lines that could have been done.

 

[pemma]

Yes, in the short term. The Hazel Grove line is busy, with four passenger trains an hour in each direction, yet only one of those a *day* is currently an EMU. Such a waste when there are other lines that could have been done.

It's always seemed a bit pointless to me to have the wires ending at Hazel Grove even when there was an EMU running under them every hour in both directions. I'd guess the wires ending there is due to GMPTE funding up to Hazel Grove and no one funding Hazel Grove-Buxton or Hazel Grove-Sheffield.

Some of the peak time Hazel Grove-Manchester workings are booked as 2x142s, while some not-very-busy 323s work Alderley Edge turnbacks. This is down to the 142s having poorer acceleration and top speed meaning they are less suitable for services doing longer stretches on the WCML where paths are at a premium.

If we still had 158s on the West Side we could be using 2 car 158s on the Alderley Edge turnbacks, putting the 323s on the Hazel Groves and having a pair of 142s on a slow West Yorkshire shuttle instead of a 158.

 

[Invincibles]

I don't understand. If you were suggesting Stockport-Stalybridge services connecting with TPE services then I can see advantages for people travelling from/through Stockport. However, a Stockport-Victoria service would be slower than the train to Piccadilly and walking to Victoria, as well as probably a lot less frequent. The benefits of a Stockport-Victoria service are:
1. Rail service between Denton and Manchester.
2. Rail service between Denton, Reddish and Stockport.

It does have those benefits as well as the moving of trains out of the Piccadilly approaches.

I think my aim really is to restore the through journeys that are lost in making 13/14 solely airport line.

I expect most from Stockport would simply take one of the many trains to Piccadilly.

You really need to look at current timetables and existing planned changes for this line.

The off-peak pattern for 2014 is scheduled to be:
* Victoria to Newton-le-Willows to Lime Street (all stations) 2tph
* Airport to Newton-le-Willows to Lime Street (limited stop) 1tph
* Airport/Piccadilly to Newton-le-Willows to Chester/Llandudno (non-stop between Oxford Road and Newton-le-Willows) 1tph
* Airport to Edinburgh/Glasgow via Newton-le-Willows (limited stop) every 1-2 hours depending on demand.

That might have been a good idea

Still only really the Blackpool train that I put on Chat Moss but actually is staying via Bolton (and that was to use the wires)

And of course the fact I am routing the TPE and Liverpool - Norwich that way to stop crossing Piccadilly approach and make Victoria the primary station for Liverpool.

Liverppol to the Airport then comes out of the above list because it provides the fast trains between Piccadilly and Lime Street via Warrington Central.

I appreciate this is different from the plan, but it does deliver the airport focus, makes 13/14 easier to timetable and prevents any moves across the throat of Piccadilly from the Ashburys line.

If you're travelling on an off-peak 6 car working then it may be quietest but if it's a 3 car working or a peak working it's usually a very busy service between Oxford Road and Scotland.

As I have done the Oxford Road to Preston many times a week I know how bad that section is. It would be eased by not having Bolton passengers, but I usually stand to Chorley/Preston when I take it.

I think the question was about the Airport to Piccadilly leg where it can be a quiet train and it is not easy to know where people on it travel to. I just think a lot do use it to get to Cumbria and Scotland from the airport.

 

[tbtc]

If we still had 158s on the West Side we could be using 2 car 158s on the Alderley Edge turnbacks, putting the 323s on the Hazel Groves and having a pair of 142s on a slow West Yorkshire shuttle instead of a 158.

The 158s on the Selby - Wakefield "Grand Tour" work fast Calder Valley services to Manchester as part of their duties - the interworking means that Pacers/ Sprinters do a mixture of duties.

For example the "fast" service from Victoria runs to Selby, sits in Selby for fifty minutes, does the Grand Tour to Wakefield, comes back from Wakefield to Leeds, becomes a "slow" service to Victoria... so there's some journeys with a direct eastbound service but no corresponding westbound service and vice versa (e.g. you can do Selby to Brighouse but not Brighouse to Selby).

There seems no easy way to split the 158s from the Pacers, and if there was then the 158s would be more suited to running more/all of the fast services through Rochdale than similar "slow shuttles" in Lancashire/ Cheshire.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As I have done the Oxford Road to Preston many times a week I know how bad that section is. It would be eased by not having Bolton passengers, but I usually stand to Chorley/Preston when I take it.

I think the question was about the Airport to Piccadilly leg where it can be a quiet train and it is not easy to know where people on it travel to. I just think a lot do use it to get to Cumbria and Scotland from the airport.

On some services a three coach train would be fine from Scotland to Manchester Airport *if* it wasn't for the Preston - Bolton - Manchester passengers. Can't blame them for opting for the TPE services, of course, but it does put them under a lot of pressure (IIRC when Virgin ran the route some journeys had picking up/ setting down restrictions at Bolton)

 

[Whistler40145]

ukrob, the re-routing of Virgin Services wasn't a permanent thing, but what could be when engineering works close parts of the WCML following electrification of the Northwest project is completed, but to enable this to happen, at least one train a week should be pathed via a diversionary route, for route refreshing.

So e.g. If Liverpool-Weaver Jn is closed, then services would run non-stop to Manchester Piccadilly, then run via Macclesfield & Stoke on Trent, but if only Liverpool-Runcorn was shut, then services would run non-stop to Warrington Bank Quay & then via Crewe.

Likewise, Glasgow/Preston-Euston services would call @ Wigan & Manchester Piccadilly via Chat Moss if Wigan-Crewe was shut, but would call @ Bolton & Manchester Piccadilly if Preston-Crewe was shut.

Do you now see where I am coming from?

 

[pemma]

There seems no easy way to split the 158s from the Pacers, and if there was then the 158s would be more suited to running more/all of the fast services through Rochdale than similar "slow shuttles" in Lancashire/ Cheshire.

The Manchester to Airport/Alderley Edge/Crewe/Macclesfield/Stoke have to be operated by 90mph (or faster) stock except for a couple of services in total per day which can have 75mph stock.

If you want more than one EMU using the Hazel Grove electrics per day the only options than can be implemented until the Thameslink cascade are:
1. Use 158s on Northern's WCML Piccadilly services, releasing 323s.
2. Use any DMUs on Glossop/Hadfield services - then those overhead electrics will get limited use instead.

I suggested using 158s on peak time Alderley Edge services, but off-peak the 158s could be used on one of Airport-Liverpool, Piccadilly-Buxton or Piccadilly-Chester services and then switched for 156s in the peak periods.

On some services a three coach train would be fine from Scotland to Manchester Airport *if* it wasn't for the Preston - Bolton - Manchester passengers. Can't blame them for opting for the TPE services, of course, but it does put them under a lot of pressure (IIRC when Virgin ran the route some journeys had picking up/ setting down restrictions at Bolton)

Maybe you need to remind yourself of the May 2007 timetable where the standard hourly pattern between Piccadilly-Bolton-Preston was:
1tph Manchester Airport to Barrow/Windermere
1tph Manchester Airport to Blackpool
1tph Buxton to Blackpool

On top of that off-pattern was the Virgin Manchester-Scotland service.

Now the standard hourly pattern between Piccadilly-Bolton-Preston is:
1tph Manchester Airport to Barrow/Scotland
1tph Manchester Airport to Blackpool
1tph Hazel Grove to Preston

There's no off-pattern additional services as there's extra Victoria services instead. It would be difficult for TPE to have Bolton restrictions on the Scottish services when that service between Manchester and Lancaster is now in lieu of a Windermere service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I expect most from Stockport would simply take one of the many trains to Piccadilly.

Have you seen on CrossCountry timetables where it recommends where possible you change at Wolverhampton to avoid changing at Birmingham New Street? That is what people do at Stockport, change there instead of at Piccadilly as it's quicker to make a connection. Adding extra changes or removing convenient connections between services will put people off travelling by rail - you only have to see what happened when XC removed the Stockport stop from some of their services, only to later add it back in.

 

[Whistler40145]

I am thinking in the future that Hazel Grove-Buxton could be wired, then this would make more use of the OHLE from Stockport & would enable through electric services from Liverpool, Blackpool, Manchester & Crewe (via Warrington). Not only that, but if the power supply was strong enough, electric locos could haul charter trains through from London or Birmingham.

 

[tbtc]

Maybe you need to remind yourself of the May 2007 timetable where the standard hourly pattern between Piccadilly-Bolton-Preston was:
1tph Manchester Airport to Barrow/Windermere
1tph Manchester Airport to Blackpool
1tph Buxton to Blackpool

On top of that off-pattern was the Virgin Manchester-Scotland service.

Now the standard hourly pattern between Piccadilly-Bolton-Preston is:
1tph Manchester Airport to Barrow/Scotland
1tph Manchester Airport to Blackpool
1tph Hazel Grove to Preston

There's no off-pattern additional services as there's extra Victoria services instead. It would be difficult for TPE to have Bolton restrictions on the Scottish services when that service between Manchester and Lancaster is now in lieu of a Windermere service

I'm well aware of what the service pattern was. And I'm aware that stopping restrictions at Bolton aren't practical. But I thought it worth contrasting the capacity problems at the southern end of the TPE Scottish service with the capacity north of Preston (when three coaches is fairly sufficient for a lot of journeys)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am thinking in the future that Hazel Grove-Buxton could be wired, then this would make more use of the OHLE from Stockport & would enable through electric services from Liverpool, Blackpool, Manchester & Crewe (via Warrington). Not only that, but if the power supply was strong enough, electric locos could haul charter trains through from London or Birmingham.

The Buxton line is essentially a self contained shuttle as far as Piccadilly (used to run to Blackpool until the changes), which runs under the wires for half its journey, so ought to be a good business case to wire, especially as its restricted in terms of suitable stock (Pacers can't do it) and there's both "commuter" and "tourist" markets.

 

[Whistler40145]

tbtc, I just wonder how far a Pacer would get on the Buxton line before collapsing?

 

[Whistler40145]

I know there is the possibility of Class 319s being cascaded to the Northwest, but National Express East Anglia are having new EMUs built for Stansted Express, why not cascade Class 317s instead?

The reason I mention 317s, they were refurbished as dedicated trains for Stansted Express, thus suitable for Manchester Airport services, 319s would be good, but better suited for GWML services, especially their 3rd rail capability being useful if they had to divert from Reading to Waterloo or Victoria if Paddington was shut.

 

[ukrob]

ukrob, the re-routing of Virgin Services wasn't a permanent thing, but what could be when engineering works close parts of the WCML following electrification of the Northwest project is completed, but to enable this to happen, at least one train a week should be pathed via a diversionary route, for route refreshing.

So e.g. If Liverpool-Weaver Jn is closed, then services would run non-stop to Manchester Piccadilly, then run via Macclesfield & Stoke on Trent, but if only Liverpool-Runcorn was shut, then services would run non-stop to Warrington Bank Quay & then via Crewe.

Likewise, Glasgow/Preston-Euston services would call @ Wigan & Manchester Piccadilly via Chat Moss if Wigan-Crewe was shut, but would call @ Bolton & Manchester Piccadilly if Preston-Crewe was shut.

Do you now see where I am coming from?

I can see what you are coming from, but it is not what you said or suggested at all.

But it would be best to start all these time consuming diversions on late evening services, not Sundays which is one of the busiest days for Intercity travel. How crowded do you think a Pendolino would be on a Sunday afternoon departing Liverpool and then calling at Manchester? Unbearable.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I know there is the possibility of Class 319s being cascaded to the Northwest, but National Express East Anglia are having new EMUs built for Stansted Express, why not cascade Class 317s instead?

They are older and there is less of them? Remember the 319 cascade was for services on the Thames valley too.

 

[ainsworth74]

Because the 317s are 6 years older than 319s?

 

[Whistler40145]

ukrob, you are right!

Late Saturday night would be better than a Sunday!
You could send one of the last Saturday evening Euston-Manchester Pendolinos via Crewe & Warrington Bank Quay, then run it ECS from Piccadilly to Longsight?

Or a Euston-Liverpool service via Warrington Bank Quay

 

[WatcherZero]

Because the 317s are 6 years older than 319s?

I heard someone else wanted the 317's too.

 

[Invincibles]

Have you seen on CrossCountry timetables where it recommends where possible you change at Wolverhampton to avoid changing at Birmingham New Street? That is what people do at Stockport, change there instead of at Piccadilly as it's quicker to make a connection. Adding extra changes or removing convenient connections between services will put people off travelling by rail - you only have to see what happened when XC removed the Stockport stop from some of their services, only to later add it back in.

The only direct connection that is lost is Liverpool, Hazel Grove - Preston is already a slow train and that routing via Denton and Victoria will slow it, but that is still possible for people who want the direct train.

Maybe taking the Liverpool - Norwich out of Stockport is not necessary, I was just trying to simplify 13/14 and provide fewer crossing paths from the east to 13/14.

The connections avoiding Birmingham New Street that CrossCountry promote is a good idea, they use Leamington, Derby, Cheltenham and Wolverhampton, but it is not perfect as not all trains go through all stations meaning that you still have some thinking to do. I am not convinced that Stockport is any better than Piccadilly if your train arrives and departs from different islands. Clearly if you are on 3/4 or 1/2 then the connection is good, but in the Sheffield direction most trains use 0 meaning less convenience (and a fuller train at Stockport to try and board). So to me the real issue will only be with northbound connections, with only the Preston slow and Liverpool trains as potential connections it is not a big loss imo.

I assume the potential to signal more through 13/14 if they all continue on the same 2 track line to the airport is much greater than if there are moves across the throat?

 

[button_boxer]

I am not convinced that Stockport is any better than Piccadilly if your train arrives and departs from different islands. Clearly if you are on 3/4 or 1/2 then the connection is good, but in the Sheffield direction most trains use 0 meaning less convenience (and a fuller train at Stockport to try and board).

When I lived round that area I always used to prefer changing at Stockport but that was back before they opened platform 0, so all southbound services on one island, all northbound on the other, no exceptions.

 

[pemma]

The only direct connection that is lost is Liverpool, Hazel Grove - Preston is already a slow train and that routing via Denton and Victoria will slow it, but that is still possible for people who want the direct train.

In 2008 Stockport had a direct change to Blackpool, now it involves a change at Preston and your proposal would see that Preston service take around 10-15 minutes longer. Will anyone actually use that service?

The connections avoiding Birmingham New Street that CrossCountry promote is a good idea, they use Leamington, Derby, Cheltenham and Wolverhampton, but it is not perfect as not all trains go through all stations meaning that you still have some thinking to do. I am not convinced that Stockport is any better than Piccadilly if your train arrives and departs from different islands.

You're suggesting sending Liverpool and Preston services via Victoria. As you know these depart from platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly. Most Stockport-Manchester services obviously use platforms 1-12, with generally only services from Chester and Cleethorphes using the higher numbers, so it will be a longer walk for most people.

If I change from my local service (Chester to Manchester via Altrincham) to the Norwich-Liverpool service I have 5 minutes to get from platform 4 at Stockport to platform 3. Doing the same connection at Piccadilly I have 3 minutes to get from possibly platform 11 to platform 14 so can't officially make the connection.

Also, for passengers travelling to Sheffield from Chester and the Wirral they are advised to change at Stockport. In the westbound direction they wouldn't have a Stockport connection if Norwich-Liverpool was re-routed so again face longer journey times.

 

[Invincibles]

I am well aware of the additional inconvenience that is caused to those journeys.

However, if it does indeed create a large amount of extra capacity between the North West and Manchester / Manchester Airport then it has more benefits than it does costs.

I did suggest an aspiration would be a Midlands to Manchester Piccadilly train, this would presumably follow the Liverpool - Norwich along the Hope valley. As such the Westbound connection would be maintained (depending if the extra runs through Sheffield - is Sheffield to Liverpool the main market? as I imagine only one of the trains can use Sheffield while the other would avoid it)

Because I do not know the paths well enough I do not know how many extra you gain by not having the trains crossing Piccadilly.

It may be that Liverpool - Norwich can stay through Oxford Road, but I think it has too much potential to disrupt what should be a simple westbound timetable through 14 if all services had started at the airport.

 

[pemma]

I did suggest an aspiration would be a Midlands to Manchester Piccadilly train, this would presumably follow the Liverpool - Norwich along the Hope valley. As such the Westbound connection would be maintained (depending if the extra runs through Sheffield - is Sheffield to Liverpool the main market? as I imagine only one of the trains can use Sheffield while the other would avoid it)

Nottingham City Council do wish to have a fast Manchester-Nottingham service that would avoid Sheffield and consquently avoid reversing out the same way it goes in to Sheffield.

Both York-Liverpool and Sheffield-Liverpool get one direct train per hour and an additional journey option every hour changing at Piccadilly.

It may be that Liverpool - Norwich can stay through Oxford Road, but I think it has too much potential to disrupt what should be a simple westbound timetable through 14 if all services had started at the airport.

Victoria may be best placed for shoppers visiting Manchester as well as a proportion of commuters, which is why many people are saying more services for Victoria is a good thing. However, Oxford Road is best placed for the University, a lot of the student accommodation and possibly more commuters than any other Manchester station.

Northern have a franchise requirement to provide direct services between Oxford Road and Stockport and I doubt that'll change in favour of reducing direct services as a result of the Manchester Hub as the market is too great. If the Oxford Road stop was removed from Liverpool-Norwich, I imagine the requirement for local services will be enhanced like what's happened between Manchester, Bolton and Preston.

 

[Invincibles]

Well the Scarborough to Liverpool is the main offender for crossing the throat, so surely that one can go to Victoria.

As a former student and lecturer of the University of Manchester I know well the usefulness of Oxford Road, but the stairs make it not perfect. The 147 bus from Piccadilly is very useful and ideally would be worked later into the evening.

Students from York/Leeds would travel via Victoria and into Oxford Road using the new Chord anyway

 

[Masboroughlad]

Anyone know where I can see a map of the local lines and how the chord fits in please?

 

[Whistler40145]

Does anyone know where the remains of a railway viaduct went to near Ardwick?

 

[swt_passenger]

Anyone know where I can see a map of the local lines and how the chord fits in please?

Have a look back at post #38 from IVO on the third page of this thread.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

Does anyone know where the remains of a railway viaduct went to near Ardwick?

I saw a map of the old lines last year and one of the lines I can't remember is that one...typical! (I wouldn't mind as well)

I know it crosses Ashton Old Road near to Fairfield Street Then heads off towards Collyhurst, I presume it links onto the approach to Victoria, Probably near the line from Stalybridge (alot of presumption here lol)

 

[Statto]

Well the Scarborough to Liverpool is the main offender for crossing the throat, so surely that one can go to Victoria.

As a former student and lecturer of the University of Manchester I know well the usefulness of Oxford Road, but the stairs make it not perfect. The 147 bus from Piccadilly is very useful and ideally would be worked later into the evening.

Students from York/Leeds would travel via Victoria and into Oxford Road using the new Chord anyway

That would cut off a lot of passengers using TPE from Warrington & Brichwood, & passengers dont just go to/from Manchester from those stations either. I can't the see TPE cutting off a source of revenue as, as i've already mentioned TPE is standing room only once past Warrington in the Rush Hour, & very busy till about 8pm.

 

[Invincibles]

That would cut off a lot of passengers using TPE from Warrington & Brichwood, & passengers dont just go to/from Manchester from those stations either. I can't the see TPE cutting off a source of revenue as, as i've already mentioned TPE is standing room only once past Warrington in the Rush Hour, & very busy till about 8pm.

It forces a change at Manchester Oxford Road, and with the right planning that would be platform 2 to 3.

Add a few more minutes and change from 13 to 14 to get an Airport to Yorkshire train.

I just struggle to justify having two trains crossing the whole throat of Piccadilly when more capacity can be created by routing it a different way.

If there is demand from Warrington to the North East then what about a train from Chester - Warrington Bank Quay - Newton Le Willows - Victoria -> ?

 

[tbtc]

If there is demand from Warrington to the North East then what about a train from Chester - Warrington Bank Quay - Newton Le Willows - Victoria -> ?

Chester - Leeds could well work, as could a link from Yorkshire to the North Wales holiday towns (Chester - Manchester really ought to be better than hourly, unless you want the long treck through Knutsford etc)