Liverpool Norwich service to be split at Nottingham

[Camden]

You can't however have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere, and the Liverpool-Norwich service has long - possibly forever - been a seriously poor performer.

Poor performer in what respect?? Prior to ordsall chord the timeliness was alright, and the usage figures are high not low. 8 million passengers high.

TfN in their asks seem to believe that all major cities should have at least 2 trains a hour running between them. That doesn't sound unreasonable. Here we are talking about one, which connects the city to Sheffield and the East Midlands.

I agree not everywhere can have direct trains to everywhere. But the country's 4th biggest metro area should be able to have this. Given it is entirely possible by simply being sensible, there is no excuse not to.

 

[gazzaa2]

Liverpool will always be marginalised in a transport sense because of its location. It is not a useful connectional node to go anywhere other than itself. Therefore, all services are justified only by the need to travel to/from it, which will necessarily marginalise it over Manchester which is a vital connectional node - I'd venture that more people travel via it than to/from it or at least a similar number. The number travelling via Liverpool to somewhere not in the Liverpool City Region will either be zero or very near it.

These posts just smack of jealous Scousers[1], and that should not get in the way of proper transport provision. In any case, Liverpool has Merseyrail - most of Manchester would fight you for that and its hefty annual subsidy, at one point the second highest per passenger mile below only Island Line.

[1] Remember, I am one by birth.

Liverpool is still a major destination. Its not some sleepy seaside town. Why should South Parkway (let alone Widnes and Warrington) be robbed of another key service so Manchester Airport can reach more destinations?

Merseyrail is good but most of its stations are in Wirral or Sefton or Knowsley rather than the city itself. Many of the city districts have no station at all. Manchester do have the Metro.

 

[notlob.divad]

If you are going to split this service anywhere, by far the most sensible and logical place to do so is Sheffield. You split both this and the Leeds-Lincoln service that reverses at the opposite end of Sheffield station, at exactly the same time. Creating a Leeds-Nottingham-Norwich service which can be run by the existing franchise holder. Then a Liverpool to Lincoln service mirroring the historic A57 trading route which would fit perfectly into the Transpennine Express franchise.

 

[Grumpy Git]

If you are going to split this service anywhere, by far the most sensible and logical place to do so is Sheffield. You split both this and the Leeds-Lincoln service that reverses at the opposite end of Sheffield station, at exactly the same time. Creating a Leeds-Nottingham-Norwich service which can be run by the existing franchise holder. Then a Liverpool to Lincoln service mirroring the historic A57 trading route which would fit perfectly into the Transpennine Express franchise.

I wish you'd stop being sensible.

 

[scrapy]

If you are going to split this service anywhere, by far the most sensible and logical place to do so is Sheffield. You split both this and the Leeds-Lincoln service that reverses at the opposite end of Sheffield station, at exactly the same time. Creating a Leeds-Nottingham-Norwich service which can be run by the existing franchise holder. Then a Liverpool to Lincoln service mirroring the historic A57 trading route which would fit perfectly into the Transpennine Express franchise.

Surely a Leeds to Norwich would be too long and have reliability problems also. There would be even less demand for a service from Leeds straight through. Passengers for Grantham and Peterborough or east of Peterborough from Leeds wouldn't use it as they'd be much quicker via the East Coast mainline. Manchester would also lose its direct link to Nottingham.

 

[gazzaa2]

If it comes down to it why not just end the Manchester Airport train to Lime St if it keeps this service running? Not ideal but It rarely turns up anyway.

 

[Glenn1969]

Maybe the Liverpool to Airport service could be diverted via Crewe calling at South Parkway, Runcorn, Hartford, Crewe, Wilmslow and the Airport? Is that realistic?

 

[frodshamfella]

I would argue that if this situation is allowed to occur that Liverpool quite possibly has grounds to challenge in court. Given the mountains of evidence of dodgy arguments and public bodies successfully lobbying for Manchester Airport to be prioritised (including HS2) the notion that state aid hasn't been given is laughable.

Throw in an argument that the state is hindering a rival, and the discussion becomes less abstract and more serious.

It does appear quite a serious situation, anti-competitive. It will also push Liverpool Airport passengers back to their cars.

 

[frodshamfella]

Manchester Airport has always and will continue do everything in its power to diminish the competitiveness of Liverpool Airport, (the stopping of the wonderful 3x KLM shuttles to Amsterdam being one very good example). I sometimes wonder if BA had anything to do with this as well?

It would do well to keep its own house in order given the dire state of T1 and the bloody awful security areas.

T3 is no better !

 

[frodshamfella]

Liverpool will always be marginalised in a transport sense because of its location. It is not a useful connectional node to go anywhere other than itself. Therefore, all services are justified only by the need to travel to/from it, which will necessarily marginalise it over Manchester which is a vital connectional node - I'd venture that more people travel via it than to/from it or at least a similar number. The number travelling via Liverpool to somewhere not in the Liverpool City Region will either be zero or very near it.

These posts just smack of jealous Scousers[1], and that should not get in the way of proper transport provision. In any case, Liverpool has Merseyrail - most of Manchester would fight you for that and its hefty annual subsidy, at one point the second highest per passenger mile below only Island Line.

[1] Remember, I am one by birth.

what about people from Southport, Ormskirk and Wirral towns, don't these travel via Liverpool to go onwards ?

 

[notlob.divad]

Manchester would also loose its direct link to Nottingham.

Liverpool potentially looses it's direct link to Sheffield and Nottingham - forum's response: That's fair enough, no-one uses it anyway.
The hint of a suggestion that Manchester looses a direct link to Nottingham - response: you can't do that.

I love the fact that some on this forum want even more people to be changing on and off trains on Platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly. We have 2 of the most overcrowded and dangerous platforms in the country and rather than looking at routes that allow passengers to stay on the train through the platforms, and encourage them to change (where nessesary) at other places; people are suggesting splitting and culling services that are going to require more people to use the rest of the services on these congested platforms. Like it or not and short of spending more millions of pounds on extra infrastructure in the middle of Manchester, the CLC route to Liverpool have trains running through the Castlefield corridor. It is the only route into the city that face such a restriction. Every other route has the potential to terminate in the main shed at Piccadilly or run through Victoria. Therefore in order to keep the service pattern that the corridor requires, 2 paths for stoppers to Oxford Road and 2 paths for faster services beyond Piccadilly, should be reserved for the CLC as the baseline. Any requirements for a reduction in services through the Castlefield corridor, should come from other routes where there are options to be redirected.

Every service passing through a major city centre will see a high turnover of passengers, that is the nature of it being a city centre, a destination people want to go to and get from.

 

[frodshamfella]

Liverpool potentially looses it's direct link to Sheffield and Nottingham - forum's response: That's fair enough, no-one uses it anyway.
The hint of a suggestion that Manchester looses a direct link to Nottingham - response: you can't do that.

I love the fact that some on this forum want even more people to be changing on and off trains on Platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly. We have 2 of the most overcrowded and dangerous platforms in the country and rather than looking at routes that allow passengers to stay on the train through the platforms, and encourage them to change (where nessesary) at other places; people are suggesting splitting and culling services that are going to require more people to use the rest of the services on these congested platforms. Like it or not and short of spending more millions of pounds on extra infrastructure in the middle of Manchester, the CLC route to Liverpool have trains running through the Castlefield corridor. It is the only route into the city that face such a restriction. Every other route has the potential to terminate in the main shed at Piccadilly or run through Victoria. Therefore in order to keep the service pattern that the corridor requires, 2 paths for stoppers to Oxford Road and 2 paths for faster services beyond Piccadilly, should be reserved for the CLC as the baseline. Any requirements for a reduction in services through the Castlefield corridor, should come from other routes where there are options to be redirected.

Every service passing through a major city centre will see a high turnover of passengers, that is the nature of it being a city centre, a destination people want to go to and get from.

Here Here !

 

[Kite159]

Cutting the services back to Piccadilly makes sense, not for congestion via Castlefield but for the potential of delays on the Warrington Central route itself, with the stopper timetabled to depart Oxford Road normally within 5 minutes of the EMR service, so if the EMR is running late either the stopper is delayed for the EMR to go in front, or the stopper goes first and gets looped in the loop at Glazebrook, which then delays the next service from the airport.

In a crayonist world, replace the EMR Liverpool - Manchester service with 195s on something like Liverpool - Stockport [where they can use the bay platform]

 

[gazzaa2]

what about people from Southport, Ormskirk and Wirral towns, don't these travel via Liverpool to go onwards ?

And Knowsley/Sefton/parts of Cheshire.

 

[gazzaa2]

Liverpool potentially looses it's direct link to Sheffield and Nottingham - forum's response: That's fair enough, no-one uses it anyway.
The hint of a suggestion that Manchester looses a direct link to Nottingham - response: you can't do that.

I love the fact that some on this forum want even more people to be changing on and off trains on Platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly. We have 2 of the most overcrowded and dangerous platforms in the country and rather than looking at routes that allow passengers to stay on the train through the platforms, and encourage them to change (where nessesary) at other places; people are suggesting splitting and culling services that are going to require more people to use the rest of the services on these congested platforms. Like it or not and short of spending more millions of pounds on extra infrastructure in the middle of Manchester, the CLC route to Liverpool have trains running through the Castlefield corridor. It is the only route into the city that face such a restriction. Every other route has the potential to terminate in the main shed at Piccadilly or run through Victoria. Therefore in order to keep the service pattern that the corridor requires, 2 paths for stoppers to Oxford Road and 2 paths for faster services beyond Piccadilly, should be reserved for the CLC as the baseline. Any requirements for a reduction in services through the Castlefield corridor, should come from other routes where there are options to be redirected.

Every service passing through a major city centre will see a high turnover of passengers, that is the nature of it being a city centre, a destination people want to go to and get from.

Exactly. I've regularly used the service from Lime Street or South Parkway to Sheffield as my employer has an office there. Liverpool to Manchester always packed out (certainly once it's made the South Parkway to Warrington stops and there's plenty standing in the peaks even with 4 cars and unbearable with 2) and then a lot get off at Manchester. Loads then get on at Manchester. Loads then get off at Sheffield. Should Manchester therefore lose their service to Nottingham because so many leave the service at Sheffield? Presumably not.

It's the nature of cross country travel. The one thing with Cross Country is their services are always packed and overcrowded out but once it alights at a big city it empties out and you can then find a seat at least.

The free for all at 13/14 Piccaddilly was only exacerbated by the Scarborough train being taken off the CLC. Platform 14 is rammed full of passengers waiting to board a Liverpool train and elsewhere forcing people to change trains for north or west Yorkshire. When I come back from Sheffield and this train pulls up at Piccadilly around rush hour it's like a queue for the last flight out of Saigon on the platform. There's probably a good hundred people that then get off just at Warrington. It's about messing up the whole line if you take this service off, not just one stop.

 

[Bletchleyite]

what about people from Southport, Ormskirk and Wirral towns, don't these travel via Liverpool to go onwards ?

Last time I checked these were in (or may as well be) the Liverpool City Region and primarily served by Merseyrail Electrics. I already called those out as the only people who really go via Liverpool for onward destinations - and a lot of them don't - for instance Wigan NW is a popular IC railhead for people in West Lancashire, or Burscough Bridge which is basically West Lancs Parkway for Manchester, and those on the Wirral might go via Chester instead to London.

My point is that (give or take the odd cruise/IoM passenger) Liverpool Lime St is only really serving origins/destinations bounded by the WCML to the east, Preston to the north and Chester to the south, and even then many of those passengers will go via those alternative railheads.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In a crayonist world, replace the EMR Liverpool - Manchester service with 195s on something like Liverpool - Stockport [where they can use the bay platform]

I've proposed a sensible pattern above. If we want to keep the Notts, send it via Chat Moss, Vic and Denton. It would provide another useful connection between the Vic and Picc lines, too, avoiding strain on the TPEs.

 

[Bevan Price]

Cutting the services back to Piccadilly makes sense, not for congestion via Castlefield but for the potential of delays on the Warrington Central route itself, with the stopper timetabled to depart Oxford Road normally within 5 minutes of the EMR service, so if the EMR is running late either the stopper is delayed for the EMR to go in front, or the stopper goes first and gets looped in the loop at Glazebrook, which then delays the next service from the airport.

In a crayonist world, replace the EMR Liverpool - Manchester service with 195s on something like Liverpool - Stockport [where they can use the bay platform]

In my opinion, cutting the service at Manchester Piccadilly makes no sense. More sense would be a return to splitting the CLC locals into separate halves at Warrington Central. That way, they could be retimed so that there is less potential for interference with the CLC line fast services.

As I have commented elsewhere, Liverpool should have through services to at least Sheffield. Where they continue beyond Sheffield becomes a matter of choice; in my view, if not to Nottingham, then an alternative might be to link a Liverpool service to the Sheffield / Doncaster / Hull services currently operated by Northern.

As for using the bay at Stockport - southbound trains would need to cross over the down fast line - and create another potential source of conflicting movements - so a bad idea, I feel.

 

[Class 170101]

In a crayonist world, replace the EMR Liverpool - Manchester service with 195s on something like Liverpool - Stockport [where they can use the bay platform]

But this still crosses Slade Lane Jn. I would prefer to send it towards Manchester Airport or Wilmslow / Crewe.

I've proposed a sensible pattern above. If we want to keep the Notts, send it via Chat Moss, Vic and Denton. It would provide another useful connection between the Vic and Picc lines, too, avoiding strain on the TPEs.

But it doesn't help Warrington. This town deserves viable east to west regional services like the EMR service provides.

 

[Grumpy Git]

Piccadilly really does need the Castlefield corridor quad track and OLE to South Parkway. If it was dahn sarf it would have been done 30 years ago.

Northern Powerhouse my ar5e.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But it doesn't help Warrington. This town deserves viable east to west regional services like the EMR service provides.

Warrington is not very big, and as such direct fast connections to its two adjacent major cities plus the WCML connecting it to many others is more than sufficient.

It is smaller than Milton Keynes, which is nowhere near as well connected in terms of the number of destinations.

You cannot have direct services from everywhere to everywhere. Liv-Notts-Norwich is a stringing together of regional services because it was operationally convenient. It's no longer convenient.

 

[Class 170101]

Piccadilly really does need the Castlefield corridor quad track and OLE to South Parkway. If it was dahn sarf it would have been done 30 years ago.

Or possibly tunnel underneath Manchester Piccadilly.

Warrington is not very big, and as such direct connections to its two adjacent major cities plus the WCML connecting it to many others is more than sufficient.

You cannot have direct services from everywhere to everywhere. Liv-Notts-Norwich is a stringing together of regional services because it was operationally convenient. It's no longer convenient.

I'm not suggesting that it has to be Liverpool to Norwich but what it does do is provide for the intermediate flows east to west across the cvountry without changing. Regards the size of Warrington not warranting regional services east west I'm afraid I disagree. The town does warrant its services to Sheffield, Nottingham and Leeds.

 

[43074]

You cannot have direct services from everywhere to everywhere. Liv-Notts-Norwich is a stringing together of regional services because it was operationally convenient. It's no longer convenient.

But equally there are many other services through the Deansgate corridor which are there for the same reason and provide less useful direct services: Crewe to Liverpool all shacks via the Airport and Newton le Willows and Alderley Edge/Hazel Grove to the Bolton corridor to name a few account for 3tph of the throughput down the Castlefield corridor. Focusing on the long distance or regional services is a better use of the capacity in my view, it doesn't really serve as a local route very well.

Removing Liverpool > Nottingham and beyond is the equivalent of throwing the baby out with the bathwater really, it only creates more problems to be solved. It isn't unreasonable to be able to get a direct train between two of the largest cities in the North (i.e. Sheffield and Liverpool), nobody is asking for East Didsbury to Darwen direct or anything silly like that.

 

[Bevan Price]

Warrington is not very big, and as such direct fast connections to its two adjacent major cities plus the WCML connecting it to many others is more than sufficient.

It is smaller than Milton Keynes, which is nowhere near as well connected in terms of the number of destinations.

You cannot have direct services from everywhere to everywhere. Liv-Notts-Norwich is a stringing together of regional services because it was operationally convenient. It's no longer convenient.

Including the surrounding new town additions, the population of Warrington is almost 210,000 -- which can hardly be described as "small" - other than when compared to London or Birmingham.

 

[Grumpy Git]

I'm confused by your objection to why we want to RETAIN this service Bletcleyite?

 

[dk1]

Surely a Leeds to Norwich would be too long and have reliability problems also. There would be even less demand for a service from Leeds straight through. Passengers for Grantham and Peterborough or east of Peterborough from Leeds wouldn't use it as they'd be much quicker via the East Coast mainline. Manchester would also lose its direct link to Nottingham.

I don't think Leeds-Peterborough & beyond is the intended flow for this service. It's keeping Sheffield, Chesterfield & others still connected to Peterborough & East Anglia directly. I have always thought this the better option if losing the Liverpool section of the route. It would make a perfect match.

 

[adrock1976]

Next idea could be to extend Merseyrail Hunts X terminus to Piccadilly, then discontinue westbound services beyond Old Trafford Halt.

I put forward a suggestion back in the summer (which is somewhere in the vortex of the Speculative Ideas section) to extend the Southport - Hunts Cross to Warrington Central, calling all stations with a 30 minute service Manchester Airport - Warrington Central calling all stations.

Obviously, this would involve a bit of both quad tracking and construction of additional platforms at Warrington Central.

The aforementioned thread can be found at https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...rom-hunts-cross-to-warrington-central.190798/

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm confused by your objection to why we want to RETAIN this service Bletcleyite?

I'm of the view that the CLC would be better operated as a regional express line between Liverpool and Manchester using units with high acceleration, high capacity and doors at thirds.

I've used it extensively in the past, and am of the view that this is the only way to make it punctual and to give the Manchester side stations a reasonably frequent service.

 

[Grumpy Git]

I'm of the view that the CLC would be better operated as a regional express line between Liverpool and Manchester using units with high acceleration, high capacity and doors at thirds.

I've used it extensively in the past, and am of the view that this is the only way to make it punctual and to give the Manchester side stations a reasonably frequent service.

There is nothing wrong with the CLC, its the bloody Castlefield corridor that's the problem. Like someone said earlier, its like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[JonathanH]

There is nothing wrong with the CLC

There is - the route can't play its part in moving people from the built up area to the centre of Liverpool and Manchester effectively because it is two-track railway (although you then hit the capacity issues at each end).

That is why it is sometimes seen as a possible extension route for Merseyrail from Hunts Cross to Warrington and to Metrolink from Cornbrook to Warrington.