Electrification time scales update (North West)

[lancastrian]

are you being serious? You say 'just terminate' implying it's very easy to terminate at Timperly. It's quite awkward when compared with the set up at other end of line termini (so this obviously excludes Piccadilly, Victoria, Cornbrook) so you'd have to install crossovers at the end facing Sale. Then what, you've double tracked for the 1tph through navi but people in suburban manchester and the city centre who use the tram to go to Altrincham find themselves having to change onto the bus despite, while being less than ideal, the existing single track section operating fairly well. Furthermore I don't think you know the full benefits behind the TfGM TT proposal for the Altrincham line. While yes one obvious benefit is the removal of the navi bottleneck, the other was the ride quality. Even I who loves the M5000s thinks that compared with other line the ride quality on the Altrincham line is poor. The TT proposal also delivers ride quality improvements as well as removing the bottleneck.

However I want to know; how do you think terminating metrolink at Timperley will effect passenger flows and what you propose do to connect it reply with navi and alty

I have not given that aspect of it much thought to be honest, what I said was probably a gut reaction. This is because I think that Tram-Train combines the worst of Heavy & Light Rail without the benefits of either. Just a personal view which I am sure others will tell me that I am wrong.

Don't get me wrong, I am a big supporter of Metrolink in Greater Manchester, I think that instead of the unwanted Guided Busway to Leigh, the Metrolink should be extended there. If you read further down you will see that I gave an alternative to Tram-train on the mid Cheshire route. None of these ideas are perfect.

I was just giving my own views and opinions, others are welcome to comment on them and to shoot them down. I am not an engineer in any way. I am just a humble printer who is a great supporter of rail expansion. I know full well that i will make mistakes and daft comments, don't we all from time to time.

Anyway, lets agree to disagree and part on good terms.

 

[northwichcat]

But would there be enough residual users to sustain the existing hourly Mid-Cheshire line service via Altrincham and Stockport, after most Cheshire - Central Manchester passengers switch to the Airport route? If not, the losers would be the substantial minority of passengers (especially schoolkids) who currently use the connectivity provided by this service for more diverse journeys that do not start or finish in Central Manchester.

What I'd suggest as service pattern if the western link gets built:
* Southport-Airport service extended to Chester calling at all stations between Mobberley and Chester.
* Manchester Piccadilly-Chester via Stockport service calling at all stations between Stockport and Chester (as it is now.)
* Semi-fast Altrincham to Northwich service to help with connections between the above (e.g. Hale-Manchester Airport without involving a 30 minute interchange time) and between Northwich/Knutsford and Metrolink destinations. Could be extended to Crewe via Middlewich.

There should also be regional services operating on the line which could include calls at Northwich and Knutsford if the demand is there.

Well my answer to that is very simple. Also it is very cheap. Just terminate the Metrolink at Timperley and return the rest of the route to Heavy Rail, double track of course.

So how would that affect the pricing and timing for people travelling between Altrincham and Manchester? 30 minutes between Altrincham and Piccadilly on Metrolink is slow enough as it is.

 

[Lankyline]

Preston is another archaic example. It is not far off a 1 mile walk from the Railway station to the bus stattion.

I love Britain - but oh my god do we need some politicians with VISION

Without getting into this, which has been discussed at length on another thread, Preston Council missed a major opportunity when they built the Bus station as they could have looked at the old ELR goods yard area right next door to the station. This would have fitted in with "2Jags" vision

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Without getting into this, which has been discussed at length on another thread, Preston Council missed a major opportunity when they built the Bus station as they could have looked at the old ELR goods yard area right next door to the station. This would have fitted in with "2Jags" vision

Yes I was going to grammar school in the 1970s and I remember the old bus station getting demolished and the new one built at the same time as the Guild Hall was being built. I lived through the era and the location. Very sad there was no vision.

 

[Greybeard33]

Local stopper, 2tph over the old route with an interchange built at Baguley (usage could probably sustain two short trains per hour as the existing one is pretty full), rest of long distance traffic diverted via new airport line which would then have the paths to expand the number of destinations served.

I doubt that paths could be found through Stockport for increased frequency.

Well my answer to that is very simple. Also it is very cheap. Just terminate the Metrolink at Timperley and return the rest of the route to Heavy Rail, double track of course.

A key drawback of Timperley as a terminus is that there is no room for a car park to replace the Park and Ride facility at Navigation Road. Commuters would have to drive down the very congested Washway Road to Brooklands, greatly increasing journey times.

I agree that an extension from the Manchester Airport station would make good sense and then the Mid Cheshire services could be routed that way allowing Metrolink to be double track through Navigation Road. Plus if the new line from the Airport Station followed the route of the M56 and joined the Mid Cheshire line just before Ashley Station., then the Metrolink could be extended to Hale to retain a service from here to Manchester. It could even be extended to a platform interchange at Ashley to maintain a link from the Metrolink southwards.

This would not be possible as long as the limestone traffic from the Peak District quarries to the Northwich soda works continues. There is no feasible alternative route the freight trains could take to avoid Navigation Road.

What I'd suggest as service pattern if the western link gets built:
* Southport-Airport service extended to Chester calling at all stations between Mobberley and Chester.
* Manchester Piccadilly-Chester via Stockport service calling at all stations between Stockport and Chester (as it is now.)
* Semi-fast Altrincham to Northwich service to help with connections between the above (e.g. Hale-Manchester Airport without involving a 30 minute interchange time) and between Northwich/Knutsford and Metrolink destinations. Could be extended to Crewe via Middlewich.

There should also be regional services operating on the line which could include calls at Northwich and Knutsford if the demand is there.

Looks good. A possible variation might be for the Stockport services to terminate at Victoria or Stalybridge to alleviate congestion at Slade Lane and Ardwick junctions. I guess the Mid-Cheshire would need resignalling to provide enough capacity.

 

[ed1971]

Further to Lancastrian's posts above, I was alarmed to read recently about the proposals to run Tram-Trains on the Glossop to Manchester Piccadilly line.

As the Glossop line is already served by 2tph during the daytime, I fail to see what advantages Tram-Trains would offer over the three car Class 323s offering 284 seats. (Existing 2 car M5000 Metrolink trams seat just 104).

The only way I could see this being an improvement, would be if the half hourly Class 323 service was retained with an intermediate tram-train service continuing on to Metrolink lines to other destinations. I fear that this would not be the case and what is being proposed is the conversion of the Glossop line to Tram-Trains. This would require either dual voltage Tram-Trains or the expense of converting the electrification from 25KVAVC to 750VDC. Likewise, it would make more sense to electrify the Atherton line and keep it heavy rail.

As is the case where Metrolink have taken over from heavy rail, fares have become more expensive. I feel that the time has come to seriously consider putting the Metrolink operation under the control of the next TOC that runs the Northern franchise with through ticketing provided.

On another note I was at Altrincham one Saturday and my return train back to Manchester Piccadilly was cancelled due to signalling problems. I decided rather than wait an hour, I paid for a Metrolink single, (then costing £4.00) and got a M5000 tram back to Deansgate. I too noticed the bad ride quality on this line with a lot of swaying of the tram from side to side. I then caught a Class 142 back to Wigan and I have to say that despite not having bogies, the ride quality of the 142 was much better than the M5000 tram.

 

[northwichcat]

I doubt that paths could be found through Stockport for increased frequency.

You could probably find an extra hourly path weekdays off-peak or on Saturdays but not weekdays at peak times

Looks good. A possible variation might be for the Stockport services to terminate at Victoria or Stalybridge to alleviate congestion at Slade Lane and Ardwick junctions.

I think ideally the main stations on the line (including Hale and Altrincham) should have a direct Manchester heavy rail service. I know Altrincham has a Metrolink service but if you're travelling beyond Manchester and have 2 items of luggage then Metrolink isn't really suitable. There's also some ticketing issues with journeys involving both rail and Metrolink.

 

[RhysTheBeast]

Further to Lancastrian's posts above, I was alarmed to read recently about the proposals to run Tram-Trains on the Glossop to Manchester Piccadilly line.

As the Glossop line is already served by 2tph during the daytime, I fail to see what advantages Tram-Trains would offer over the three car Class 323s offering 284 seats. (Existing 2 car M5000 Metrolink trams seat just 104).

The only way I could see this being an improvement, would be if the half hourly Class 323 service was retained with an intermediate tram-train service continuing on to Metrolink lines to other destinations. I fear that this would not be the case and what is being proposed is the conversion of the Glossop line to Tram-Trains. This would require either dual voltage Tram-Trains or the expense of converting the electrification from 25KVAVC to 750VDC. Likewise, it would make more sense to electrify the Atherton line and keep it heavy rail.

As is the case where Metrolink have taken over from heavy rail, fares have become more expensive. I feel that the time has come to seriously consider putting the Metrolink operation under the control of the next TOC that runs the Northern franchise with through ticketing provided.

On another note I was at Altrincham one Saturday and my return train back to Manchester Piccadilly was cancelled due to signalling problems. I decided rather than wait an hour, I paid for a Metrolink single, (then costing £4.00) and got a M5000 tram back to Deansgate. I too noticed the bad ride quality on this line with a lot of swaying of the tram from side to side. I then caught a Class 142 back to Wigan and I have to say that despite not having bogies, the ride quality of the 142 was much better than the M5000 tram.

I would have to agree with you there regards the Atherton line. surely it would be cheaper to electrify and have EMU's running the line, which would then give more options regarding services along that stretch. And Victoria is a major Metrolink interchange so that would tie in. Also I would imagine it would become very popular if regular services to the airport were run along via Atherton as well.

 

[WatcherZero]

I doubt that paths could be found through Stockport for increased frequency.

The Airport line doesnt go through Stockport.

 

[Greybeard33]

Local stopper, 2tph over the old route with an interchange built at Baguley (usage could probably sustain two short trains per hour as the existing one is pretty full), rest of long distance traffic diverted via new airport line which would then have the paths to expand the number of destinations served.

I doubt that paths could be found through Stockport for increased frequency.

The Airport line doesnt go through Stockport.

The old route does go through Stockport, currently with only 1tph.

 

[northwichcat]

Local stopper, 2tph over the old route with an interchange built at Baguley (usage could probably sustain two short trains per hour as the existing one is pretty full), rest of long distance traffic diverted via new airport line which would then have the paths to expand the number of destinations served.

The Airport line doesnt go through Stockport.

The old route does go through Stockport, currently with only 1tph.

I think Watcherzero is suggesting that Chester-Stockport (and onwards to Manchester?) 2tph with a new station at Baguley. Then services doing Chester-Knutsford-Airport-Manchester would also call at Baguley to allow changes between the two.

However, as Greybeard33 says Chester-Stockport-Manchester at 2tph isn't possible with current paths. Also Chester-Stockport services would require either infrastructure changes at Stockport or to continue somewhere to avoid a disruptive shunting move.

 

[WatcherZero]

What I was suggesting was extension of the Airport spur to meet the mid cheshire line (which has been given serious weight before) then Airport services become through services to various new destinations and a current service through Stockport could then be switched to via the airport (Alderley edge service as an example) to allow an increase of the hourly frequency from mid Cheshire to Stockport. Theres also opportunities to do something more with the Styal line.

http://www.northernrail.org/pdfs/network_map/nr_network-map-may2013.pdf

 

[northwichcat]

then Airport services become through services to various new destinations and a current service through Stockport could then be switched to via the airport (Alderley edge service as an example) to allow an increase of the hourly frequency from mid Cheshire to Stockport.

I don't understand. Either your proposing something that could be done anyway (extending the Piccadilly-Airport stopper to Alderley Edge) or you're proposing a service which would go from Manchester to the Airport (then reverse) to Baguley to Stockport (then reverse) then to Alderley Edge which would seem a complete waste of new infrastructure and would probably require double tracking and electrification through Cheadle.

The whole point of extending the Airport spur would be to allow Airport through services without reversals and to increase the number of destinations served by using no more than 10 paths between Piccadilly and the Airport (the number that would be used under the Northern Hub plans.) Having trains reversing at the Airport and going back to Baguley wouldn't work.

Two examples of possible services using the proposed Airport western link:

* Cleethorpes-Sheffield-Piccadilly-Airport-Northwich-Runcorn-Liverpool
* Leeds-Bradford-Victoria-Piccadilly-Airport-Northwich-Chester

I think you're idea needs an eastern Airport link not a western Airport link.

 

[cle]

What will be the 9tph terminating at the airport?

In terms of movements at Piccadilly, services from platforms 13-16 would be the smartest to increase to provide more through services if the airport western route was built. But which...?

 

[edwin_m]

Do you really mean Baguley? I have always understood the former station site to be at Southmoor Road where the Airport Metrolink line goes over. If you want interchange between heavy rail service to Knutsford via Altrincham and Airport the location would be where the Styal line goes over the Altrincham-Stockport line. Having been tasked to take a photo of this some years back, I seem to recall it is virtually inaccessible between rows of houses and a motorway... so probably not the best site for a station.

HS2 would go very near to any connection between the Airport station and the Mid-Cheshire line. Possibly slightly simpler to do if they were run alongside each other?

 

[snowball]

The former Baguley station is further west, south of the roundabout where Brooklands Road meets the A560. The new Baguely station that many would like to see built is near Southmoor Road, to allow interchange between the Metrolink airport line (which has a stop just to the south) and the Stockport-Altrincham line.

 

[northwichcat]

What will be the 9tph terminating at the airport?

In terms of movements at Piccadilly, services from platforms 13-16 would be the smartest to increase to provide more through services if the airport western route was built. But which...?

It'll be up to more than that after Slade Lane Junction improvements. They'll be 4tph between Victoria and the Airport via the Ordsall Chord (2 of which will be North TPE and one of the other two is set to be Leeds via Bradford.) A full hourly Chester service will likely be the other new service. Cleethorpes services may be diverted to Liverpool to free up a path.

 

[WatcherZero]

I don't understand. Either your proposing something that could be done anyway (extending the Piccadilly-Airport stopper to Alderley Edge) or you're proposing a service which would go from Manchester to the Airport (then reverse) to Baguley to Stockport (then reverse) then to Alderley Edge which would seem a complete waste of new infrastructure and would probably require double tracking and electrification through Cheadle.

Neither, taking away the Stockport service that starts at Alderley Edge and rerouting it away and using the path for a more valuable service for the capacity constrained Stockport while at the same time adding new through journeys from an extended airport spur to Chester and other destinations.

You could then combine it with the Tram-train proposal of Altrincham-Airport and Stockport-Airport lines utilising the Metrolink airport line western loop with a new interchange at Baguley to allow Altrincham-Stockport journeys with at least some of the the former mid cheshire services rerouted via the extended Airport spur rather than going through Navigation Road. Net result would be a vast increase in connectivity and capacity and removing the capacity bottlenecks at Navigation Road.

 

[northwichcat]

Neither, taking away the Stockport service that starts at Alderley Edge and rerouting it away and using the path for a more valuable service for the capacity constrained Stockport while at the same time adding new through journeys from an extended airport spur to Chester and other destinations.

And how will that fit in with the Northern Hub plans which plan to use Piccadilly-Airport to it's maximum capacity without adding a new Alderley Edge service? Wouldn't it be simpler to just extend the Piccadilly-Airport stopper?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

A full hourly Chester service will likely be the other new service. Cleethorpes services may be diverted to Liverpool to free up a path.

Where has this information come from...hock:

 

[northwichcat]

Where has this information come from...hock:

Chester-Warrington-Manchester-Manchester Airport is from the Network Rail proposals for the Northern Hub.

I understand Network Rail envisaged a North Wales-Yorkshire service (running semi-fast between Chester and Manchester) and a Chester-Airport stopper. However, WAG didn't like the idea of losing control of North Wales Coast services so the idea is to now to keep the same stopping pattern on North Wales-Manchester and to extend to the Airport, while to extend a Yorkshire service to Chester.

The DfT HLOS for CP5 is based on a half-hourly Sheffield-Warrington-Liverpool service with no mention of a direct link being retained between the Airport and Sheffield. It also doesn't confirm that there won't be a direct Sheffield-Airport service hence why I said 'may be diverted.'