A thought on the Ormskirk Branch.

[Gathursty]

Considering the Preston-Blackpool South and the Preston-Ormskirk Branch see very few passengers (except for spikes for trips to the Pleasure Beach) and the location of these lines, is there a case to make combine and create a service from Ormskirk to Blackpool South?

This question came about from noting someone on here saying the Preston-Ormskirk service occurs every 90 minutes and my recent travels near Lytham St Annes. Furthermore, would increasing the frequency of the Ormskirk service be attractive to passengers/economical?

I was tempted to add this on to a thread about the Fylde Lines but it didn't quite fit.

 

[WestCoast]

As a regular on the Fylde Lines, I am shocked that you think the South Fylde Line (Preston - Blackpool South) has "very few passengers". The line has a clockface timetable running every 60 minutes, seven days a week in the summer. Based on data for tickets sales (which really can't be relied upon as considerable amounts of people use Blackpool North tickets) - I'd estimate very roughly that around 650,000-700,000 people used the route in the financial year period 2009/10. I'd say Ormskirk is not close to that.

This isn't comparable to the Ormskirk branch, which operates with just a single 153 most of the time. Busy 142s are the norm on the South Fylde Line.

The trains are very well loaded at peak times Monday - Friday and can become overcrowded on the weekends due to additional tourist traffic. It sees significant use from St. Annes and Lytham to Preston for commuting and leisure traffic. A lot of people use it to go to work or education.

In the year 2008 – 2009, 112,000 people used the Blackpool South railway station which is an increase of around 7,000 on the previous year and a significant increase on 2004 – 2005 when only 82,804 people used the railway station. St. Annes-On-Sea served 121,938 passengers in the same period, with Lytham serving 71,000.

Let's compare this to Ormskirk Line: most passengers using Ormskirk station are using Merseyrail Electrics, so the busiest intermediate station is Burscough Junction which saw just over 40,000 people in 2008-09. Not much compared to say, St. Annes?

There is a lot of suppressed demand on the South Fylde Line, it has the potential to be far busier with a passing loop and more frequent service to say, Manchester Victoria.

So, absolutely not is the answer to your question. Try the South Fylde Line on a Saturday Morning, it's often packed with shoppers (note: not tourists) going from St. Annes / Lytham to Preston. Equally, the Pleasure Beach has masses of passengers on those days. All this combined, makes some very busy trains!

 

[First class]

The Ormskirk-Preston line can be VERY full at times, especially during the peak.

The line used to have a Cl142 on it for a while but reverted to 153. For the Grand National I believe both a 156 and 158 visited the line.

A 153 would be sufficient if the timetable was regular, e.g. hourly.

As for extending it to Blackpool, it is a good idea providing paths are available.

The main problem with the Ormskirk line is the connection on to the WCML Slow. Obviously paths are very limited.

 

[The Planner]

There is work going on about improvements to the Ormskirk line as part of the RUS to provide an hourly service with one unit. Will need linespeed improvements and probably getting rid of the token at Medge Hall.

 

[mwmbwls]

There is work going on about improvements to the Ormskirk line as part of the RUS to provide an hourly service with one unit. Will need linespeed improvements and probably getting rid of the token at Medge Hall.

And the loop at Rufford. The line is still just too long for a reliable hourly "one engine in steam service", with consequences for the WCML approaches to Preston - extending the Merseyrail line from Ormskirk to Burscough would cut the Preston service back to robust timetabling and integrate Burscough, one of West Lancashire growth nodes into the Liverpool TTWA. Everybody wins

 

[PR1Berske]

I use the Preston - Ormskirk branch on a semi-regular basis to watch the mighty Burscough (not that that's going to be possible the way things are going )

The current set up is not quite as under-used at you might think. There are always passengers on board, there and back, first and last trains (though it sometimes feels as though Northern have put on the train just for my benefit!)

The full journey duration, and the single track for some of its length, makes expansion difficult though not impossible. Extending it beyond Preston to the Fylde Line would mean a lot more work on stock, timetables, and crew, than just letting the driver take the single unit on a longer journey!

One thing from the RUS I don't agree with - and that's closing both Burscough stations for a newly placed "interchange" where PRE-ORM goes over the Wigan - Southport line. It would be a very expensive folly to undertake such a change for minimal improvements (and with the Curves unlikely to be opened, I can't see much justification in any case)

Finally, it's "Midge" not "Medge"

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There is also the matter of the possible Merseyrail 3rd rail future extension northwards from Ormskirk to at least the Burscough Bridge area to be considered.

 

[The Planner]

And the loop at Rufford. The line is still just too long for a reliable hourly "one engine in steam service", with consequences for the WCML approaches to Preston - extending the Merseyrail line from Ormskirk to Burscough would cut the Preston service back to robust timetabling and integrate Burscough, one of West Lancashire growth nodes into the Liverpool TTWA. Everybody wins

Apparently early indications show it can be done with one unit providing various infrastructure works are done. The line gets resignalled in CP5 aswell. The third rail extension seems very low on the agenda.

 

[mwmbwls]

Apparently early indications show it can be done with one unit providing various infrastructure works are done. The line gets resignalled in CP5 aswell. The third rail extension seems very low on the agenda.

Resignalling is ahb's at Midge Hall and Rufford. Yes I have read that too but the only improvement will be the elimination of the stop at Midge Hall signal box to change tokens -removing five minutes each way from the journey. The elimination of the other token change at Rufford will not add much as the train has to stop at the platform anyway. If the intention is to raise the frequency to an hourly clock face service then they are still looking for spare minutes which can only be achieved by cutting the route back to Burscough. This is, in effect, just a cost reduction exercise now driven by the need to compete with Stagecoach's 2A bus service from Ormskirk to Preston

 

[WestCoast]

Yes, as others have said, Ormskirk sees considerable use as well.

Both of these lines, I wouldn't call "underused".

However, for the Ormskirk line I'd like to an extension of the Merseyrail Electrics services to Preston, thus reinstating the more direct line between the two points of Liverpool and Preston.

For the Blackpool South Line, it needs a passing loop (St. Annes would be a good candidate, however, there is a thoughtless plan to build houses on the land). I reckon there is sufficient demand for an hourly service through to Manchester Victoria from Blackpool South. It used to have a token service (mainly for stock positioning), that was removed.

I'd probably then divert the Colne service to Ormskirk.

 

[driver9000]

The Blackpool South line carries good loads throught the day, certainly far from under used or carrying few passengers. I think it would warrant a winter Sunday service during shopping hours, as would the Ormskirk line.

To divert Colne services to Ormskirk once the linespeed is raised would chew up the time saved on the line by moving it to Preston while the crew change ends and the signals pulled off. Once the Ormskirk line is upgraded then an hourly service using current resources is possible, I think a joyrney of 23 minutes was mentioned. An extra unit and crew brings on extra cost which the operators don't want to spend.

 

[The Planner]

Resignalling is ahb's at Midge Hall and Rufford. Yes I have read that too but the only improvement will be the elimination of the stop at Midge Hall signal box to change tokens -removing five minutes each way from the journey.

Nowhere near 5, probably 3 at most.

The elimination of the other token change at Rufford will not add much as the train has to stop at the platform anyway. If the intention is to raise the frequency to an hourly clock face service then they are still looking for spare minutes which can only be achieved by cutting the route back to Burscough

Raising the linespeed to 75mph makes it work, it has already been looked at.

 

[Gareth]

I think re-opening the Burscough Curves and adding additional services to Southport would be more practical/realistic, though direct services to the Fylde Coast isn't a bad idea.

 

[tbtc]

Raising the linespeed to 75mph makes it work, it has already been looked at

Something as simple as this, allowing a clockface hourly service (instead of the "hard to remember" current frequency" could have a huge difference to passenger levels

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'd probably then divert the Colne service to Ormskirk.

Is there a reason why the existing users of the Colne to Blackpool South service should find the need to visit Rufford and Ormskirk more often and to have to give up a direct link to Blackpool, with the Pleasure Beach as a main tourist attraction?

I know that the National Trust has Rufford Old Hall as a top "wedding" venue and that Ormskirk has the Perpendicular Church of St. Peter and St. Paul that has the coffin of the 7th Earl of Derby who was beheaded for being a Royalist in the English Civil War, but all in all, the young people who live in Colne, Nelson, Burnley, Accrington, Rishton and Blackburn are more likely to be swayed by the attractions of "The Big One" et al and the hedonistic pleasures of Blackpool.

Pier League Division One
Blackpool 3 Ormskirk 0

 

[WestCoast]

Is there a reason why the existing users of the Colne to Blackpool South service should find the need to visit Rufford and Ormskirk more often and to have to give up a direct link to Blackpool, with the Pleasure Beach as a main tourist attraction?

I know that the National Trust has Rufford Old Hall as a top "wedding" venue and that Ormskirk has the Perpendicular Church of St. Peter and St. Paul that has the coffin of the 7th Earl of Derby who was beheaded for being a Royalist in the English Civil War, but all in all, the young people who live in Colne, Nelson, Burnley, Accrington, Rishton and Blackburn are more likely to be swayed by the attractions of "The Big One" et al and the hedonistic pleasures of Blackpool.

You have put a convincing argument forward for visiting Rufford and Ormskirk.

At the moment, the Colne to Blackpool South service feels rather more like a Blackpool South to Preston service and a separate Preston to Colne service. From observing movements, there seems to be a changeover of passengers at Preston. That's not of course to say that the stations towards Colne don't use the Blackpool link, and you put forward a convincing argument for this too, it's just that the flow doesn't seem particularly strong (especially not outside Summer weekends!). The key stations on the East Lancashire Line already have a link to Blackpool North.

I would really like to see a Blackpool South to Manchester Victoria service, as I feel demand for this flow already exists, particularly from the core South Fylde stations.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think re-opening the Burscough Curves and adding additional services to Southport would be more practical/realistic, though direct services to the Fylde Coast isn't a bad idea.

Gareth, you would have had trouble today, as there was flooding in the area and the trains were going no further than Parbold in the Southport direction.

Unfortunately, cable theft was also reported in the area.

 

[Lampshade]

At the moment, the Colne to Blackpool South service feels rather more like a Blackpool South to Preston service and a separate Preston to Colne service. From observing movements, there seems to be a changeover of passengers at Preston.

I noticed this the other day, the 1622 to Colne pulled into Preston, a full 142 load got off and a full 142 load got on, very few passengers from Blackpool South etc stayed on past Preston.

I would really like to see a Blackpool South to Manchester Victoria service, as I feel demand for this flow already exists, particularly from the core South Fylde stations.

Logic suggests this would be easy; cut the Colne service back to Preston (use the bay platforms), divert the Manchester Victoria service to Blackpool South and extend the Hazel Grove service to Blackpool North to compensate.

 

[WestCoast]

I noticed this the other day, the 1622 to Colne pulled into Preston, a full 142 load got off and a full 142 load got on, very few passengers from Blackpool South etc stayed on past Preston.

It is very often the case. From listening to requested destinations on the South Fylde Line, Preston and Manchester feature heavily, however stations on the East Lancashire Line do not.

Logic suggests this would be easy; cut the Colne service back to Preston (use the bay platforms), divert the Manchester Victoria service to Blackpool South and extend the Hazel Grove service to Blackpool North to compensate.

That sounds like a good plan, how much time does the current Hazel Grove - Preston service spend on its layover at Preston? I often see the unit operating this service (usually a 150 or 156) parked near the Preston Fylde Junction north of Preston station.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I would really like to see a Blackpool South to Manchester Victoria service, as I feel demand for this flow already exists, particularly from the core South Fylde stations.

There used to be such a service, so what was the reason given for terminating it. :roll:

I remember using the Manchester to Colne service, but that too came to an end.:cry: