I'm not sure how light rail would solve the Castlefield issue or indeed have any impact on it at all, as the services which could most logically be Metrolinked (Atherton, Hadfield, Marple/Rose Hill) all go from the main trainshed or Victoria.
Yes. I find Burnham’s lack of interest in heavy rail incredibly frustrating
Unfortunately Grayling’s takeaway message from his meetings with Burnham seemed to be that there were other options for Castlefield than the expensive ones, new more efficient stock, longer trains, 15&16, new signalling. Hence the endless reviews and no action.
There are three trains an hour each way that do not serve the Airport. Hazel Grove - Blackpool, Alderley Edge - Wigan and (not a local of course) Nottingham - Liverpool . None of these cross the throat in the way that Liverpool-Leeds used to but the southbound versions all make conflicting moves at Slade Lane Junction which is a significant issue in the area. Get rid of all those and it would certainly improve things.Which is the only train serving platform 13 that does not go to the Airport (if I recall correctly). Hardly going to cause masses of issues on its own, is it?
It also doesn't cross Piccadilly throat, both the WCML and the Styal line are on that side.
If you mean the TPEs reversing in 1/2, yes, can the Airport leg of those.
Otherwise, looks like a thorough report!
There are three trains an hour each way that do not serve the Airport. Hazel Grove - Blackpool, Alderley Edge - Wigan and (not a local of course) Nottingham - Liverpool . None of these cross the throat in the way that Liverpool-Leeds used to but the southbound versions all make conflicting moves at Slade Lane Junction which is a significant issue in the area. Get rid of all those and it would certainly improve things.
Maybe so, but it's a different matter if they injure someone else. And either way there's the potential for delay and disruption at the time and legal consequences later.If people injure themselves lifting their own luggage that's their issue.
I agree.
The report is a good analysis of why the May2018 service can't work, and reflects the feelings of many posters to this forum at the time the new service was introduced. It seems to do a good job of quantifying and explaining the reasons for the failure, which was probably hard to do at the time in such detail.
It also highlights something which I feel to be a concern: that a greater emphasis than was warranted was placed on sectional timings and therefore on a flawed model of reality at the bottom of the current timetabling systems than on local knowledge. That the sectional timings were wrong seemed not to have been questioned properly but instead taken as a true representation of reality. I think this is something we have seen again and again in other places.
There are three trains an hour each way that do not serve the Airport. Hazel Grove - Blackpool, Alderley Edge - Wigan and (not a local of course) Nottingham - Liverpool . None of these cross the throat in the way that Liverpool-Leeds used to but the southbound versions all make conflicting moves at Slade Lane Junction which is a significant issue in the area. Get rid of all those and it would certainly improve things.
These services plus the Liverpool stopper are all full to bursting from Castlefield out to the West at peak times. I’m sure there would be serious resistance to them being removed. Being re-routed beyond Piccadilly, probably much less so.
Similarly, I suspect the demand is not Wigan-Alderley Edge or Hazel Grove-Blackpool, but rather Wigan-Manchester, Manchester-Alderley, Blackpool-Manchester and Manchester-HG? If so splitting these services would cause no harm at all.
Having skimmed the report (and noting that it is only the first part of the congestion analysis) I was struck by how little it focuses on Manchester Piccadilly platforms 13 and 14. In the context of this particular thread it seems that ‘15 & 16’ on their own would actually achieve very little.
Afaict on a normal daytime hour there are three services in each direction that go through 13/14 and do not go to the airport.Which is the only train serving platform 13 that does not go to the Airport (if I recall correctly).
But is the demand split? Would a half-hourly 6-car Class 195 Liverpool<->Manchester fast service be better?
Similarly, I suspect the demand is not Wigan-Alderley Edge or Hazel Grove-Blackpool, but rather Wigan-Manchester, Manchester-Alderley, Blackpool-Manchester and Manchester-HG? If so splitting these services would cause no harm at all.
Merely splitting the services wouldn't solve the problem though because Piccadilly doesn't have any northwest facing bays. So any service from the northwest that terminates at picadilly has to either reverse in one of the congested through platforms or go off to a siding somewhere.Similarly, I suspect the demand is not Wigan-Alderley Edge or Hazel Grove-Blackpool, but rather Wigan-Manchester, Manchester-Alderley, Blackpool-Manchester and Manchester-HG? If so splitting these services would cause no harm at all.
I believe tht you are correct....certainly as a Davenport resident I would much prefer a reliable train to Manchester to an unreliable one to Blackpool. It's not just the Castlefield issue....I have had the experience of a delayed journey home from work in Manchester due to a problem in Preston. At present I think that there is a requirement in the Northern franchise for Stockport to Bolton services. so we are stuck with them just now.
Merely splitting the services wouldn't solve the problem though because Piccadilly doesn't have any northwest facing bays. So any service from the northwest that terminates at picadilly has to either reverse in one of the congested through platforms or go off to a siding somewhere.
To relieve congestion on picadilly 13/14 you would have to not only split the services, but re-route the northwest parts of them to somewhere else and that is going to upset people.
Use Victoria. It's no further from the centre than Piccadilly and has plenty of trams to get people there.Merely splitting the services wouldn't solve the problem though because Piccadilly doesn't have any northwest facing bays. So any service from the northwest that terminates at picadilly has to either reverse in one of the congested through platforms or go off to a siding somewhere.
To relieve congestion on picadilly 13/14 you would have to not only split the services, but re-route the northwest parts of them to somewhere else and that is going to upset people.
Can't see the point of using the reversing siding.....to get there a train has already squeezed through the corridor. Divert the trains to Victoria.There is a reversing siding - how many times per hour could it reliably be used?
There's also the Airport.
Use Victoria. It's no further from the centre than Piccadilly and has plenty of trams to get people there.
Everything has a downside!!The problem with Victoria is the lack of going anywhere near Oxford Road more than anything.
Use Victoria. It's no further from the centre than Piccadilly and has plenty of trams to get people there.
I don't criticise the people on the 'ground' but those making the decisions it is clear that NR management should have told DFT and the bidders the plans weren't viable. Upto and including Mark Carne/CEO telling the minister.That is a bit of a sweeping statement, it was the decisions made taking into account/ignoring the advice given by people developing it all.
Whilst it would be entirely possible to introduce a Thameslink style service through this corridor I really think that there is a danger that it would finish up as a reliable way to transport fresh air. Like it or not a strategic decision has been taken that the airport should have connectivity to the north of England as a whole....and this means through trains. If there has to be a reduction in trains through the corridor (and there must be one) then it makes far more sense to knock out some of the local trains. It's all very well having through services from Stockport (where I live) to Bolton and points north but in truth most people from Stockport get off at Piccadilly ....a service that terminates there is more reliable and gives us a shorter walk into town. Dedicate 13/14 to trains going to the airport and finish the job of getting rid of trains which cross the Piccadilly throat. There will still be conflicts at the West of the city but if all trains coming from Bolton run into Victoria then things can be further improved.
(Edit: When I say local trains I mean the locals that do not serve the airport...Hazel Grove to Blackpool for example)
As the report says, terminating trains in Victora, won't help. It will actually cause more problems as it will block up the through platforms there.Actually there is a fourth candidate ....the Liverpool to Crewe stopper. This does go by the Airport but I'm not sure that it makes sense as a through service. If we 're trying to clear the Castlefield corridor then I would certainly split this and run it as Victoria to Liverpool and Piccadilly to Crewe. Of course tere is a reason for this running (just as there are reasons for the other three) but we are agreed that something has to give.
Something has to give. Blackpool and Wigan trains always used to stop at Victoria. There is a free bus service to get you across town. Salford Central provides an alternative place to stop trains.People need to go to the Oxford Road corridor. It’s South Manchester nowhere near Victoria.
It was always presented as a package but only the Ordsall Chord bit got the go-ahead. I don't remember if the Piccadilly and Oxford Road works were also ready to go at that point or would have had to be announced later, but I get the impression there was a nod and a wink that those would be authorized to be completed at about the same time.I don't criticise the people on the 'ground' but those making the decisions it is clear that NR management should have told DFT and the bidders the plans weren't viable. Upto and including Mark Carne/CEO telling the minister.
Run them through to somewhere else then. Look .....there is no perfect solution. For better or for worse there is a strategic plan to link the Airport to the rest of the north of England and (in case we have all forgotten) the Ordsall chord was put in place to enable this to happen for Yorkshire services WITHOUT CROSSING THE THROAT OF PICCADILLY. It wasn't done specifically to enable these trains to stop at three different stations.As the report says, terminating trains in Victora, won't help. It will actually cause more problems as it will block up the through platforms there.
My reading (between the lines) of that issue from the report is that indeed 15 & 16 won't achieve much / delivery a truly robust service unless all the other flat junctions feeding into it can be upped to match its capability.
I.e. the "bunce" that 15/16 would provide doesn't really do anything about all the flat junctions around the area - performance issues there are the symptom (where it happens to be most visible), not the cause.
Not necessarily grand stuff like grade separation, but parallel moves, segregating flows, etc. at places like Salford Crescent (an example of a minimalist 1980s layout with an increasing amount of stuff crammed through it over the years)
Fully agree with your reading of it. In fact, it seems more to point towards the removal of platforms at Oxford Road, to give 1 full length in each direction plus a central turnback facility would be more useful than 15/16