Future of Wrexham-Bidston line, inc. possible franchise swap etc.

[headshot119]

There's 8TPH from Birkenhead North to Liverpool rather than 4TPH at Bidston.

It also allows people from Wrexham > Upton to be one change away from stations on the New Brighton line. (And vice versa)

 

[VT 390]

There's 8TPH from Birkenhead North to Liverpool rather than 4TPH at Bidston.

It also allows people from Wrexham > Upton to be one change away from stations on the New Brighton line. (And vice versa)

That does make sense as I had not thought about connections to New Brighton. Would this extension require an additional unit on the TfW service?

 

[headshot119]

That does make sense as I had not thought about connections to New Brighton. Would this extension require an additional unit on the TfW service?

In the TFW spec, they're supposed to be taking Wrexham > Bidston from the current 1TPH for most of the day to 2TPH, and when the service is 2TPH at the shoulders of the day, to 1TPH. This already involves increasing the number of units, with a dedicated fleet of Class 230s.

The current setup needs two units for a day, I suspect the new setup will need four units to go only as far as Bidston, it may be with better acceleration and the rumours of one train an hour being express that they can extend to Birkenhead North without needing a fifth unit.

 

[Taunton]

The problem with Birkenhead North is blocking the road while tipping out and reversing. The Sunday service used to operate from Wrexham to New Brighton which could have provided a better means of reversing the service without obstructing the through road but the Bidston curve was removed back in the 80s.

I used to use these. There were quite a range of northern termini for this line over time, it got varied every few years. When it used Birkenhead North (1970s) the trains reversed at the Up main platform, while the Wirral electrics all passed round the outer side of the island platform, giving a cross-platform connection. It worked very well, and had the advantage compared to Bidston that the timetable did not need to be arranged for when connecting electric services were not there. Plus there are twice as many Liverpool services.

When they went to New Brighton (1960s) they were quite empty beyond Bidston. New Brighton's heyday was in the 1930s. It was just used as a convenient turnround when Seacombe closed.

 

[krus_aragon]

Interestingly those paths do not include Birkenhead North station itself, just between the depot and Bidston. or me that would imply this:
[stabling units at Birkenhead]

Rather than implying a potential future passenger service.

What makes me doubt this possibility is the fact that TfW crew would need to taxi to and from Birkenhead, or pass along on Merseyrail services (changing trains at Hamilton Square). It seems like quite a bit of operational inconvenience to me.

 

[sw1ller]

What makes me doubt this possibility is the fact that TfW crew would need to taxi to and from Birkenhead, or pass along on Merseyrail services (changing trains at Hamilton Square). It seems like quite a bit of operational inconvenience to me.

We have jobs where we taxi further than that. I don’t think that would be an issue. TFW are more than happy to taxi us 2 hours here and there. So Birkenhead wouldn’t be an issue.

After posting this, I am a bit perplexed as to why it’s just the EMU depot they’re going to. But the lad that was telling us is involved with it and it’s for passenger services as far as he’s concerned.

Regards the stopping pattern. It was first said that one service would be a fast service. Every manager I’ve spoken to since has said that won’t happen. There’d be too much uproar from the stations it’d miss plus the boarders line association is against a fast service.

I think they’ll be 4 units working with a 5th spare. Stopping at every station. Would bring the transfer times at shotton and Wrexham right down as they’re awful at the moment.

 

[VT 390]

We have jobs where we taxi further than that. I don’t think that would be an issue. TFW are more than happy to taxi us 2 hours here and there. So Birkenhead wouldn’t be an issue.

After posting this, I am a bit perplexed as to why it’s just the EMU depot they’re going to. But the lad that was telling us is involved with it and it’s for passenger services as far as he’s concerned.

Regards the stopping pattern. It was first said that one service would be a fast service. Every manager I’ve spoken to since has said that won’t happen. There’d be too much uproar from the stations it’d miss plus the boarders line association is against a fast service.

I think they’ll be 4 units working with a 5th spare. Stopping at every station. Would bring the transfer times at shotton and Wrexham right down as they’re awful at the moment.

When you say every station does this include Hawarden Bridge?

 

[sw1ller]

When you say every station does this include Hawarden Bridge?

Possibly not. I dont think there’s a call for it for every run. It’s pretty much 9-5 for most of it. However, there are a few factories on the estate like Morrison’s that could do with earlier/later services.

 

[PR1Berske]

Possibly not. I dont think there’s a call for it for every run. It’s pretty much 9-5 for most of it. However, there are a few factories on the estate like Morrison’s that could do with earlier/later services.

Or someone could help fund a new station at the industrial park

 

[sw1ller]

Or someone could help fund a new station at the industrial park

That’s a good idea. Maybe in 2025!!

To be fair, I worked on that ind est for 4 years and I never knew that station existed. I wouldn’t have used it as I was in zone 1 so it’s a bit of a trek, but the station could be better promoted. We’ll see how it goes when the new ones built next to great bear.

 

[krus_aragon]

We have jobs where we taxi further than that. I don’t think that would be an issue. TFW are more than happy to taxi us 2 hours here and there. So Birkenhead wouldn’t be an issue.

Granted. (I believe Virgin send taxis all the way to Holyhead too.) I just couldn't see why one would choose to do that in preference to stabling them at Wrexham instead.

I suppose that there could be a shortage of space at Wrexham that's forcing TfW to stable some units elsewhere, but I'd have thought the two bay platforms used for WSMR stock were long enough to take four units between them.

 

[Djgr]

When they went to New Brighton (1960s) they were quite empty beyond Bidston. New Brighton's heyday was in the 1930s. It was just used as a convenient turnround when Seacombe closed.

Interestingly New Brighton (like Liverpool) is heaving with visitors these days following its regeneration.

 

[TheSel]

I used to use these. There were quite a range of northern termini for this line over time, it got varied every few years. When it used Birkenhead North (1970s) the trains reversed at the Up main platform, while the Wirral electrics all passed round the outer side of the island platform, giving a cross-platform connection. It worked very well, and had the advantage compared to Bidston that the timetable did not need to be arranged for when connecting electric services were not there. Plus there are twice as many Liverpool services.

When they went to New Brighton (1960s) they were quite empty beyond Bidston. New Brighton's heyday was in the 1930s. It was just used as a convenient turnround when Seacombe closed.

Fully agree with the above, but I think I'm right in saying that back in the 1970s when the Wrexham DMUs terminated in Birkenhead North, both the West Kirby and the New Brighton services ran (generally) every twenty minutes, so 6tph between Birkenhead North and Bidston East Junction. Now West Kirby & New Brighton trains are every fifteen minutes, that's 8tph on the Birkenhead North - Bidston East section, so there's less availability of paths. Also the westbound crossover and starter signal have long vanished (although presumably could be replaced if there was sufficient will and/or funding!).

On top of that a source "close to the line's Rail User Group" [RUG] (as newspapers would put it!) has suggested that there is politics at play here. If the RUG supports an extension to Birkenhead North, that would then make more difficult their objective of reaching Liverpool City Centre. From the RUG's own website:

The Association seeks to identify, justify and promote: ...

• The introduction of a through service between Wrexham and Liverpool, if and when suitable rolling stock (such as IPEMUs) becomes available.

 

[Taunton]

Fully agree with the above, but I think I'm right in saying that back in the 1970s when the Wrexham DMUs terminated in Birkenhead North, both the West Kirby and the New Brighton services ran (generally) every twenty minutes, so 6tph between Birkenhead North and Bidston East Junction. Now West Kirby & New Brighton trains are every fifteen minutes, that's 8tph on the Birkenhead North - Bidston East section, so there's less availability of paths.

That was off-peak, but for quite a number of hours each peak period both were doubled to every 10 minutes, that was 12 tph electrics into North, and the dmus continued to run interlaced with those without issue.

When the Bidston Dock-Shotton iron ore trains ran (when we lived there these started with 2-10-0s, changing to diesel quite late in the steam era) the signalmen at the various Bidston junctions used to manage to get these heavy and unbraked freights right across both electric lines, even in the peak period, without any delay to the passenger services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

On top of that a source "close to the line's Rail User Group" [RUG] (as newspapers would put it!) has suggested that there is politics at play here. If the RUG supports an extension to Birkenhead North, that would then make more difficult their objective of reaching Liverpool City Centre.

Er, why? It's closer to Liverpool city centre than Bidston.

 

[TheSel]

Er, why? It's closer to Liverpool city centre than Bidston.

I believe the fear is that if you desire 'X', and accept part of 'X' as a [so called] interim measure, then you are in the double-jeopardy position of not only being in a better place, but also now requiring less than you originally did (the other part of 'X' is clearly less than 'X' itself), so your business case (for the rest of 'X') is less strong.

We used that approach (from the other side) frequently in my professional career. Customers wanted "something". That was expensive, difficult to deliver, and/or non-contractual, so we gave them a little bit of what they wanted for free. It cost us little, made the customer feel that we were on-side, and then we could quietly kick the issue into the long grass until the contract was up for renewal.

Like I said, people are playing at politics.

 

[sw1ller]

It’s purely for ECS moves I’ve been told. Sorry to get everyone’s hopes up.

 

[PHILIPE]

I would suggest this..
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/V65379/2019/06/23/advanced

Here is the full running:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...3/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=AW

150262 is doing the honours

 

[sw1ller]

Page 9 of this document sounds promising. Line speed enhancements and connectivity to high speed rail!?!?

https://assets.publishing.service.g...Network_Enhancements_Pipeline_Publication.pdf

Scheme Name:
North Wales journey time improvement (Wrexham - Bidston and N Wales ML)

Anticipated Railway output:
To improve journey times in North Wales by increasing line speeds and connectivity to High Speed Rail.

 

[Dr Day]

I still read that as line speed enhancements on the Wrexham-Bidston line (as well as line speed enhancement and improved connectivity to High speed rail - ie Crewe? - on the North Wales Coast)

 

[sw1ller]

I still read that as line speed enhancements on the Wrexham-Bidston line (as well as line speed enhancement and improved connectivity to High speed rail - ie Crewe? - on the North Wales Coast)

It would be nice to see what is planned rather than just a few words buried in the middle of a general document.

 

[krus_aragon]

Page 9 of this document sounds promising. Line speed enhancements and connectivity to high speed rail!?!?

https://assets.publishing.service.g...Network_Enhancements_Pipeline_Publication.pdf

I still read that as line speed enhancements on the Wrexham-Bidston line (as well as line speed enhancement and improved connectivity to High speed rail - ie Crewe? - on the North Wales Coast)

I read it as speed improvements for both Wrexham-Bidston and Wrexham-North Wales. In other words, remodelling Wrexham North Jn.

As an aside, on page 11, I'm interested in the redevelopment of the "convectional" station at Euston. Are they going to do some work on the heating?

 

[TheSel]

I read it as speed improvements for both Wrexham-Bidston and Wrexham-North Wales. In other words, remodelling Wrexham North Jn.

As an aside, on page 11, I'm interested in the redevelopment of the "convectional" station at Euston. Are they going to do some work on the heating?

No - it's just a lot of hot air!

 

[Djgr]

None, as that posting was just a requested clarification.

Okay so I have no idea what the relevance of the original comment was, other than presumably anti Union or possibly anti Liverpool.

 

[Camden]

No, just stating a hard, cold, industrial relations truth.

And of course Arriva (currently running Northern) enjoy a much more cordial relationship, and would never have encountered such issues had their franchise been continued...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Okay so I have no idea what the relevance of the original comment was, other than presumably anti Union or possibly anti Liverpool.

Do you normally pre-judge matters? You say above that "you have no idea what the relevance of the original comment was", then immediately follow on with "other than presumably anti Union or possibly anti Liverpool". I hope that you give some thought to posting submissions in future before committing your ideas to print.

 

[sw1ller]

Do you normally pre-judge matters? You say above that "you have no idea what the relevance of the original comment was", then immediately follow on with "other than presumably anti Union or possibly anti Liverpool". I hope that you give some thought to posting submissions in future before committing your ideas to print.

To be fair Paul, it was a bit out of left field. The current state of any industrial action has no baring on this thread. And if I’m wrong, I’d like you to explain in detail why it should be included. If not, then it needs a new thread.
The service will get tight very soon. With the steel and the new concrete freights, pulse a half hourly service. Not only is there a need for line speed improvements, but I would argue there’s a need for extra signalling too. At least 1 extra between penyfford and Wrexham. And between Dee marsh and Bidston. For a little line, it can get quite backed up when things don’t run smoothly.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

To be fair Paul, it was a bit out of left field. The current state of any industrial action has no baring on this thread. And if I’m wrong, I’d like you to explain in detail why it should be included. If not, then it needs a new thread.
The service will get tight very soon. With the steel and the new concrete freights, pulse a half hourly service. Not only is there a need for line speed improvements, but I would argue there’s a need for extra signalling too. At least 1 extra between Penyfford and Wrexham. And between Dee Marsh and Bidston. For a little line, it can get quite backed up when things don’t run smoothly.

Most certainly, my point had the title thread in mind in which a possible change of franchise was mentioned. Had the franchise of which the line in question had actually been changed to Merseyrail, then any RMT proposed industrial action on Merseyrail would have affected stations on this particular line, but did not, as such a franchise change has not been made.

I do agree with all your other parts of your posting above.

 

[sw1ller]

Most certainly, my point had the title thread in mind in which a possible change of franchise was mentioned. Had the franchise of which the line in question had actually been changed to Merseyrail, then any RMT proposed industrial action on Merseyrail would have affected stations on this particular line, but did not, as such a franchise change has not been made.

I do agree with all your other parts of your posting above.

But it’s still susceptible to any union disputes from TfW? There are none looming but given the length of franchises, it’s not crazy to imagine one in the time frame? Why bring up a non-issue when it’s like saying, if a meteorite hit......

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Let us therefore look at current realities. When is it likely that all the newly procured Vivarail units will all be in operational service on this line?