Campaign to restore passenger services on the Middlewich Link Line

Discussion in 'Infrastructure & Stations' started by no commute yet, 10 Aug 2015.

  1. 6Gman

    6Gman Established Member

    Messages:
    5,848
    Joined:
    1 May 2012
    Woah !

    So Middlewich will have no direct service to Crewe; nor to Northwich; but will have a through service to ... Preston !

    An interesting approach ...
     
  2. Jorge Da Silva

    Jorge Da Silva Established Member

    Messages:
    1,621
    Joined:
    4 Apr 2018
    Crewe is full and no capacity between Manchester and Stockport has meant some changes to the plan.
     
  3. The Planner

    The Planner Established Member

    Messages:
    9,618
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2008
    After a few minutes of going "eh?" are they proposing Sandbach reverse then on to the WCML at Hartford going across the job? Ignoring Northwich in the process? I hope they are talking to NR about that...
     
  4. 6Gman

    6Gman Established Member

    Messages:
    5,848
    Joined:
    1 May 2012
    Yes, I realise that (though the Crewe issue ought to be manageable I would have thought). I just wonder how many people in Middlewich fancy a trip to Preston...
     
  5. 6Gman

    6Gman Established Member

    Messages:
    5,848
    Joined:
    1 May 2012
    I assume the idea is to extend a Manchester - Alderley Edge to Sandbach (crossing Up to back platform), then reversing, picking up at Middlewich those residents who are desirous of travelling to Greenbank, Acton Bridge and stations to Preston - but not those who want to go Northwich or Knutsford (except by changing at Greenbank).

    Just can't see it working.
     
  6. Jorge Da Silva

    Jorge Da Silva Established Member

    Messages:
    1,621
    Joined:
    4 Apr 2018
    I assume the congestion is not platform capacity but congestion on the throat to Crewe as I thought the bay platforms were not heavily used?
     
  7. Bevan Price

    Bevan Price Established Member

    Messages:
    4,579
    Joined:
    22 Apr 2010
    The problem is that, following the 1980s rebuild at Crewe, there is no access to the Manchester line from any of the north end bays. One solution might be if they could fit a new platform near the Crewe Arms Hotel......
     
  8. Xenophon PCDGS

    Xenophon PCDGS Veteran Member

    Messages:
    26,237
    Joined:
    17 Apr 2011
    Location:
    A semi-rural part of north-west England
  9. daodao

    daodao Member

    Messages:
    733
    Joined:
    6 Feb 2016
    Location:
    Dunham/Bowdon
    There is no point in running a service just for the sake of it. The only logical route that is likely to attract reasonable custom, is Crewe-Northwich-Altrincham-Stockport-M/c Piccadilly.
     
  10. Jorge Da Silva

    Jorge Da Silva Established Member

    Messages:
    1,621
    Joined:
    4 Apr 2018
    And the next time Crewe is remodelled will be in 2027 and 2033 for HS2?

    Thanks for that information, that explains it.
     
  11. The Planner

    The Planner Established Member

    Messages:
    9,618
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2008
    No, it gets remodelled once starting in the next couple of years. There will be no extra bays put in. It also isn't for HS2, pretty much all of the assets at Crewe are now becoming life expired, HS2 turning up actually complicates matters.
     
  12. LNW-GW Joint

    LNW-GW Joint Veteran Member

    Messages:
    13,832
    Joined:
    22 Feb 2011
    Location:
    Mold, Clwyd
    Seems completely batty to me.
    Will the Middlewich line be upgraded from its current 20mph?
    If not, journey times will be useless.
    A local service Crewe-Warrington-Preston might be something worth thinking about, but not wandering off round rural Cheshire off the wires and blocking a couple of main lines in the process.
    Sounds like a solution in search of a problem.
    Things at Crewe would ease if the rumoured independent line platform was built.
     
  13. 6Gman

    6Gman Established Member

    Messages:
    5,848
    Joined:
    1 May 2012
    I would agree with the Hon Gentleman.

    Crewe - Middlewich - Northwich - Knutsford - Stockport - Manchester makes sense.

    This does not.
     
  14. Xenophon PCDGS

    Xenophon PCDGS Veteran Member

    Messages:
    26,237
    Joined:
    17 Apr 2011
    Location:
    A semi-rural part of north-west England
    Is there any need for three Crewe to Manchester local train routes? The existing ones via Stockport and via the Styal line seem enough.
     
  15. furnessvale

    furnessvale Established Member

    Messages:
    3,608
    Joined:
    14 Jul 2015
    Surely the purpose of "local" trains is to serve local needs, not the through Crewe to Manchester passengers.

    Neither of the existing routes serves Middlewich. Whether the proposals about Middlewich stand up to scrutiny is a totally different matter.
     
  16. Xenophon PCDGS

    Xenophon PCDGS Veteran Member

    Messages:
    26,237
    Joined:
    17 Apr 2011
    Location:
    A semi-rural part of north-west England
    Are you disputing the fact that it is the TOC as the entity who operate the rail services in their own franchise area who makes the decision on the viability of "local" train routes?
    A route via Middlewich did not appear in the previous Northern franchise.
     
  17. furnessvale

    furnessvale Established Member

    Messages:
    3,608
    Joined:
    14 Jul 2015
    And there's me thinking that in the environment of the UK's subsidised local railway network, such decisions were made by government.
     
  18. Xenophon PCDGS

    Xenophon PCDGS Veteran Member

    Messages:
    26,237
    Joined:
    17 Apr 2011
    Location:
    A semi-rural part of north-west England
    Since commercially run local commuter services last ran via Middlewich, what was the view of any government over the years that elapsed in those interim years that such services should re-commence?
     
  19. furnessvale

    furnessvale Established Member

    Messages:
    3,608
    Joined:
    14 Jul 2015
    You are asking the wrong person. I was simply questioning the idea that because 2 local routes between centres existed, there was no need to consider a third taking a different route and serving a different market. I specifically said that the question of the viability of that third route was open to discussion and has been, by others in this thread. I have neither the interest nor the expertise to enter that discussion.
     
  20. Altfish

    Altfish Member

    Messages:
    1,036
    Joined:
    16 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Altrincham
    The Mid-Cheshire Line has been promised 2 trains an hour (It currently has one) - it should have been in the 2018 timetable but it still awaits.
    It would make sense for the second train to go forward to Middlewich and Crewe; although it does miss Greenbank out.
     
  21. Greybeard33

    Greybeard33 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,541
    Joined:
    18 Feb 2012
    Location:
    Greater Manchester
    According to the chairman of the Mid Cheshire Rail Users Association, Network Rail has vetoed the second hourly train:
    http://www.mcrua.org.uk/chairmansbl...rail-study-stakeholder-meeting/#comment-30600
     
  22. furnessvale

    furnessvale Established Member

    Messages:
    3,608
    Joined:
    14 Jul 2015
    So it is safe to pass one train an hour but not two? If anything, more trains make potential misusers MORE aware, compared to the idea, "it's OK, there's not many trains on this line".
     
  23. Jack Hay

    Jack Hay Member

    Messages:
    56
    Joined:
    18 Aug 2016
    Network Rail has 'vetoed' a train service (two an hour on the Mid Cheshire) that was promised to the public in the Invitation to Tender for the franchise - it's part of the Minimum Service Requirement. They say they are becoming more passenger focussed. No they aren't. If they want to believe that, then it's time they started listening to passengers, otherwise heads will have to roll. In this example, and there are others, Network Rail are undermining what the DfT and politicians have promised the public. I can't see them getting away with that for long before the politicians act to 'reorganise' NR and the senior managers get shoved out. Good riddance to the buggers.
     
  24. Xenophon PCDGS

    Xenophon PCDGS Veteran Member

    Messages:
    26,237
    Joined:
    17 Apr 2011
    Location:
    A semi-rural part of north-west England
    Somehow, I do not think that particular explanation offered above would have been in the mindset of Network Rail.
     
  25. furnessvale

    furnessvale Established Member

    Messages:
    3,608
    Joined:
    14 Jul 2015
    Agreed, organisations do have a habit of missing the "bleedin' obvious" when assessing H & S.
     
  26. Jack Hay

    Jack Hay Member

    Messages:
    56
    Joined:
    18 Aug 2016
    I agree with that too. I don't see why Network Rail are so negative about the prospects of trains from Middlewich reaching Crewe. What is the problem? The Sandbach-Crewe line has only four passenger trains an hour each way (freights use the independent lines which start at Sandbach, effectively). Platform 1 at Crewe is used by two terminating Northern trains each hour and almost nothing else. Three trains an hour terminating in one platform is not excessive - especially when there is a stabling siding adjacent should the turnround times demand it; and when the platform is long enough to hold more than one train if required.
     
  27. 6Gman

    6Gman Established Member

    Messages:
    5,848
    Joined:
    1 May 2012
    Quite often used for the Euston - Manchester (via Crewe) service, in both directions. But I'm not convinced an hourly dmu couldn't be fitted in.
     
  28. The Planner

    The Planner Established Member

    Messages:
    9,618
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2008
    You mean the DfT and politicians that more than likely didn't ask NR if this would cause problems and specified the service spec in the franchise anyway? The NR that is clearly not being passenger focused and assessing the risk on the user worked crossings that would have increased due to more trains and then required an intervention that we aren't funded to deliver? Maybe it should be the DfT and politicians that are "re-organised" and senior managers get shoved out for getting away with it. Good riddance to the buggers.
     
  29. Jack Hay

    Jack Hay Member

    Messages:
    56
    Joined:
    18 Aug 2016
    The user-worked crossings 'issue' is an issue newly created by Network Rail. It wasn't aired when the Buxton line service was doubled recently and that line has lots of them. It's Network Rail's job to come up with solutions to allow the railway to function but it seems instead to be creating obstacles. The public doesn't want to hear reasons why things can't be done, it wants them done. Organisations that don't understand that don't survive.
     
  30. Glenn1969

    Glenn1969 Member

    Messages:
    891
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2019
    I thought capacity between Picc and Stockport ruled out the 2nd Mid Cheshire train. Maybe it should start at Stockport or Altrincham? Presume the Middlewich train could go via Styal between Manchester and Sandbach if it is going via Alderley Edge?
     

Share This Page