Manchester Airport railway station, discussion and ideas

[B&I]

I know that Manchester Airport employs something like 40,000 people. That is a lot! Many of these people travel in by public transport.
Just under 30m people use the airport each year.

A simple 'no' in response to my question would have sufficed

 

[pemma]

• The HS2 Station will require a people mover type link to reach the terminal areas

The idea is to extend the Airport Metrolink line to Airport City with a stop at Manchester Airport HS2. However, knowing TfGM airport passengers wanting to use the HS2 station won't get to use the Metrolink for no additional cost.

 

[B&I]

But you have to start somewhere. The airport links are still, in railway terms at least, a relatively new business, and one that is starting to expand rapidly. To cut back the services to some Manchester only shuttle would kill that stone dead. Despite what a few people like to claim, the airport station has seen a 25% increase in just a few years, and this is before many of the services get the full Inter City treatment as opposed to the commuter plus that is TPE if we are honest.

As for passengers only wanting to arrive into Manchester city centre, I say again Manchester Airport does not just serve Manchester. Many passengers arriving there will have onward journeys to Yorkshire & the North East, the North West, Lake District, Merseyside etc. So I strongly dispute your claim about them only going to Manchester initially. For example, someone arriving from the States or the Middle East on an early arriving flight wanting to travel on is far more likely to make connections onwards to their final destination than hotel for a full day in Manchester



This is one of its big problems, I've landed there at silly o'clock and there's little option save a long wait or taxi transfer onwards. I wonder if a basic hourly service through the night might be an option, or at least one that meets much of the very early morning arrivals.



I like T5, it flows far better than many other terminals I've been to and has a nice, light airy feel to it thanks to the amazing engineering of the main terminal building.

Just getting back on topic, on this and other threads there appears to be the assumption that the current timetable problems are caused by airport services, but they are not. The biggest problems, especially for TPE are caused through he North TP core with the now obviously unrealistic expectation of getting 6 fast, semis & stoppers between Leeds and Manchester per hour. This is what is causing so many delays, so for me the obvious starting point would be to split the stoppers at Huddersfield so at least they can get out of the way of the quicker services sooner & allow them to keep closer to their timings & so get closer to their slots through Manchester. Plus once the new stock starts to land, dwell times should improve meaning they are not holding up services behind them and improve the efficiency through Manchester.

And beyond that, the stalled Piccadilly P15/16, & North TP electrification have added to the problems through Manchester. All the wiring projects, along with Ordsall Chord & the Manchester station upgrades were supposed to be part of a bigger overall upgrade. Take one or more out and you are left with what we have today. Cheaping out, and/or fragmenting major upgrades will result in this & is why as a country we should commit fully to these projects instead of making excuses & offering half-arsed solutions. Yes it will cost, but how much is currently being lost through reduced productivity, tourism etc with the current issues?

Yes, but where are a lot of those clogged-up trains through the core going ? I'm sure everyone here would.like to see the additional infrastructure you describe. Personally, I'd lile to see it, plus a cross-Manchester high speed tunnel. But the point is, we don't have that level of infrastructure, and while we don't have it, we are left providing a single northern airport with a gold-plated service at the expense of a reliable railway for day to day travellers

 

[B&I]

A few thoughts:

• The airport terminals are generally considered to need significant redevelopment
• The existing station is quite a hike even from T3, and requires passengers to walk outside and cross service roads to get to other terminals
• The HS2 Station will require a people mover type link to reach the terminal areas

Would there be a case for closing the existing station, developing a new through one at the Styal Junction and running the people mover from the Airport HS2 Station, under and providing direct access to each terminal, and across to an Airport Regional Station?

The Airport Regional Station might be configured to provide bays for an Airport <> City non-stop Express service, as well as through-services from elsewhere in the North and Midlands.

I’ve no idea how the detailed operations would work, naturally, but I got a new packet of crayons yesterday so I thought that I’d try them out.

It might be most sensible to ascertain how exactly the airport plans to develop in future, and re-configure rail around that. If, for example, the terminal moves to the west side of the runways, the HS2 station might look a lot less isolated.

 

[Altfish]

A few thoughts:

• The airport terminals are generally considered to need significant redevelopment
• The existing station is quite a hike even from T3, and requires passengers to walk outside and cross service roads to get to other terminals
• The HS2 Station will require a people mover type link to reach the terminal areas

Would there be a case for closing the existing station, developing a new through one at the Styal Junction and running the people mover from the Airport HS2 Station, under and providing direct access to each terminal, and across to an Airport Regional Station?

The Airport Regional Station might be configured to provide bays for an Airport <> City non-stop Express service, as well as through-services from elsewhere in the North and Midlands.

I’ve no idea how the detailed operations would work, naturally, but I got a new packet of crayons yesterday so I thought that I’d try them out.

The redevelopment is happening. T2 is under massive construction work, when finished it will be the main terminal; IIRC T1 will then close and T3 be redeveloped and expanded.

 

[Altfish]

It might be most sensible to ascertain how exactly the airport plans to develop in future, and re-configure rail around that. If, for example, the terminal moves to the west side of the runways, the HS2 station might look a lot less isolated.

Which is exactly what is happening; there are plans (no more than that) to extend the trams towards the M56 with a new T2 tram station

 

[FQTV]

I think having the entire machinery of government, and pretty mich the whole financial servicws industry (about the only viable large-scale industry we have left in this country) has done more to boost London's success than Heathrow. Again, if Manchester Airport is such a spectacular economic dynamo and direct services to it are so vital to the economic health of the places concerned, why are so many of the places with direct links to it economic basket cases ?

The profile of services in and out of Manchester is quite varied; it’s a bit of a Gatwick ‘plus’ in that it’s historically been known for outbound shorthaul leisure traffic, but has developed into quite a significant inbound and long haul destination.

Outbound shorthaul leisure travellers are often separated from other users, be that by terminal, time of day, or just the specific facilities that they use. Passengers for an early Tenerife thronging the bars and duty free shops in family and friends group may not notice the Munich, Frankfurt, Zurich etc., solo business business travellers who arrive much closer to departure time, and go straight from Security to gate.

The shorthaul leisure passengers may also not be aware of the sheer numbers of arriving passengers from all over the world on multiple Emirates A380s each day; on two Etihad arrivals; on Qatar Airways; on Turkish, Oman, Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines, Hainan, American etc., etc.

Those arriving from points East are funnelling a huge number of particularly Chinese and Middle Eastern inbound visitors, but also a lot of Indian visitors, many of whom are focussed on football in both Liverpool and Manchester. If you look at hotel rates in Manchester around weekends in the season, and then sit in the lobbies, it’s very apparent that there’s very significant demand from outside of the UK.

It’s a whole different discussion about whether this kind of demand is sustainable, but at the moment it would appear that the airport, the region and the football clubs have a symbiotic relationship.

The key thing is that, from an airport operations point of view, the traditional, discretionary, infrequent, charter leisure business is not the key driver of development.

 

[pemma]

Those arriving from points East are funnelling a huge number of particularly Chinese and Middle Eastern inbound visitors, but also a lot of Indian visitors, many of whom are focussed on football in both Liverpool and Manchester. If you look at hotel rates in Manchester around weekends in the season, and then sit in the lobbies, it’s very apparent that there’s very significant demand from outside of the UK.

Chinese tourists seem just as interested in the national parks and rural stately homes as the big cities.

Barclay's bring over large number of Indian people to train at Radbrooke Hall, Cheshire before in most cases they return to India. However, these people aren't travelling to and from the airport every day like someone who is employed by the airport is.

Don't forget that not all people born in Asia staying in hotels currently reside in Asia. They could just as easily be living in London and have gone up to Manchester by train for business purposes.

 

[notlob.divad]

Chinese tourists seem just as interested in the national parks and rural stately homes as the big cities.

Quite. I am pretty convinced there is a NW England by rail, guidebook for Chinese students. Huge numbers seem to travel to Manchester have a day there. Then onwards to Liverpool for the oldest chinatown in Europe and the obvious Beatles trail. Then up to the Lake District for the Wordsworth - Beatrix Potter / beautiful english countryside (although what they think of being forced to change trains at Wigan heaven only knows.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite. I am pretty convinced there is a NW England by rail, guidebook for Chinese students. Huge numbers seem to travel to Manchester have a day there. Then onwards to Liverpool for the oldest chinatown in Europe and the obvious Beatles trail. Then up to the Lake District for the Wordsworth - Beatrix Potter / beautiful english countryside (although what they think of being forced to change trains at Wigan heaven only knows.)

You don't have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere in China either. I'm sure they cope.

 

[Bantamzen]

I think having the entire machinery of government, and pretty much the whole financial service industry (about the only viable large-scale industry we have left in this country) has done more to boost London's success than Heathrow. Again, if Manchester Airport is such a spectacular economic dynamo and direct services to it are so vital to the economic health of the places concerned, why are so many of the places with direct links to it economic basket cases ?

And quite a lot of the financial sector at least has been helped by London's connectivity to the rest of the world.

As for the "basket cases", its down in part to the far less developed transport infrastructure that the region had, some would even say suffered from for decades. That is in part being addressed, but before the Northern economies can start to really develop two things need to happen. Firstly is the continuing improvement of the infrastructure, and that needs to be combined with some amount of devolution to allow local politicians and businesses better effect what happens here, rather than the piecemeal start & drop approach to investment that Whitehall has adopted for the regions (not just the North of England BTW) for so long. Sadly we are still a long way from that.

Yes, but where are a lot of those clogged-up trains through the core going ? I'm sure everyone here would.like to see the additional infrastructure you describe. Personally, I'd lile to see it, plus a cross-Manchester high speed tunnel. But the point is, we don't have that level of infrastructure, and while we don't have it, we are left providing a single northern airport with a gold-plated service at the expense of a reliable railway for day to day travellers

The airport services are not the reason for the issues through Manchester. 12tph should be easily achievable with a more robust timetable, especially from TPE that doesn't see the delays start to build long before they enter Greater Manchester.

A tunnel would be an ideal solution, but frankly if the Minister & DfT hadn't delayed on the P15/16 and North TP project decisions we would be well on the way to a more rounded solution to the problem. Ideally no trains would terminate at Oxford Road, especially on the through platforms but extend to Piccadilly, where they can be moved out of the way or pass through to an onward destination especially if there were four through platforms available. And that's the whole point, the Ordsall Chord and airport services were planned as part of a wider set of upgrades that would together improve the capacity. It isn't that airport services aren't viable or desirable, it is that the government have once again short changed improvements in the region.

The key thing is that, from an airport operations point of view, the traditional, discretionary, infrequent, charter leisure business is not the key driver of development.

This is a key point for Manchester, they are redeveloping to become more of an international airport as opposed to simply another bucket & spade take off point. And this is reflected in the increasing number of long haul flights now serving Manchester & the board's desires and efforts to get more in. It is also as a result that smaller airports like LBA and Liverpool are seeing increased demand for charter and European flights as Manchester slowly shifts from regional airport to regional hub. And as a potential hub for the North of England, it needs better connectivity to the rest of that region. It simply isn't viable for Manchester to be served from the other local airports as they are too close and as such there simply wouldn't be demand given the check in times, and as the road connections particularly to the east are far from ideal at best, the rail network represents an ideal network to be better plugged into.

 

[notlob.divad]

You don't have direct trains from everywhere to everywhere in China either. I'm sure they cope.

It was less the issue of changing, more the issue of doing so at Wigan North-Western Station. (I am not sure the guidebook stretches to recommending a pint in Wigan Central.)

 

[Ianno87]

Which is exactly what is happening; there are plans (no more than that) to extend the trams towards the M56 with a new T2 tram station

Hasn't TfGM developed a business case for the T2 extension, and made a funding application to DfT?

 

[si404]

It was less the issue of changing, more the issue of doing so at Wigan North-Western Station. (I am not sure the guidebook stretches to recommending a pint in Wigan Central.)

Surely you can change at Preston?

While lower frequency from Liverpool, there's higher frequency from Preston to Lakeland destinations.

----

The everywhere-everywhere else problem isn't necessarily solved by having completely linear services (this line goes to this line, that one to that one, and no interlining) - you can still have multiple routes serve the airport, but instead of basically every service through Oxford Road being a 1tph service (some being 2x1tp2h services), have 2tph services (maybe 2x1tph services). The issue is that it would need another radical re-working of the timetable. And probably needs to wait until NPR, which would give Leeds, Bradford, Warrington and Liverpool services to Manchester Airport, meaning that only local services need to be linked to the airport on those corridors - leaving just the NW long distance services and Liverpool-Warrington-Manchester-Sheffield.

 

[Altfish]

Hasn't TfGM developed a business case for the T2 extension, and made a funding application to DfT?

Fair enough, but it is awaiting approval.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was less the issue of changing, more the issue of doing so at Wigan North-Western Station. (I am not sure the guidebook stretches to recommending a pint in Wigan Central.)

As a place to change there's nowt wrong with it. I can't necessarily recommend the town centre, but with UK style high frequency services they aren't going to be there for hours.

 

[Killingworth]

Eh? That looks pretty half hourly to me. Seven minutes, what's the problem there?

The timetable bears only a vague resemblance to current reality when catching a train?

 

[InOban]

As I used to say to my father. "The fact that you have demonstrated that you understand what I have written by correcting the spelling mistakes within, shows that I have achieved the aim I set myself, when I started writing."

Very Interesting the two errors you picked up on, and not some of the others, such as Kraków, Gdańsk, and Warsawa. It seems there is some level of spelling inaccuracy that is willingly accepted. Although it is not immediately obvious to me where the pass/fail line is.

Once the good people of Leipzig stop refering to my most frequently traversed airport as Danzig, I will make a better effort to get the spelling of Leipzig-Halle flughafen correct.

And we keep calling it Cologne rather than Köln.

 

[Greybeard33]

Step back and look at what is being proposed. Who the hell would sit on a train for an extra hour plus to travel from Sheffield to Liverpool by that route ? Isn't the Liverpool-Manchester-Crewe service enough of a warning about what happens when you try to knit together local services into something ludicrously long ?

Nothing like wild exaggeration to make your case!

There are freight trains scheduled to take about 30 minutes between Hazel Grove High Level Junction and Ashley. With line speed increases, a passenger train should be able to cover the extra couple of miles along the western link to the Airport station in the same time.

Hazel Grove HL Jn to Piccadilly, with a stop at Stockport, takes about 20 minutes by EMT, roughly the same as Airport to Piccadilly by Northern. So no more than 30 minutes extra for the loop round through Altrincham and the Airport.

Admittedly this is uncompetitive time-wise with the Stockport route for journeys from Sheffield to Liverpool or central Manchester, but low Advance fares could attract price-conscious passengers.

But the main attraction would be the reduced journey time for Sheffield to Manchester Airport, compared with changing or reversing at Piccadilly. Sheffield does not have its own airport, and there must be plenty of suppressed demand for a better rail link, compared with the road journey across the Pennines or the long journey to Heathrow. See this post:

The A6 to Manchester Airport Relief Road Scheme will provide 10 kilometres of new 2-lane dual carriageway on an east-west route from the A6 near Hazel Grove (south east Stockport), via the 4 kilometres of existing A555 to Manchester Airport and the link road to the M56. It is programmed to open in late Summer 2018.

It remains to be seen what effect this will have but I'd estimate it will save me 10 minutes on my drive from Sheffield to the airport. I've always driven, even though there are trains from within a mile of my house. I'd rather have one change from car to airport car park shuttle bus than chance a train that may be cancelled, late, or misses a connection at Piccadilly.

Others are happy to plan differently, and by the numbers of heavy cases I see on our local station platform, many do. Increase the reliability and more will use the trains.

 

[Killingworth]

Quite. I am pretty convinced there is a NW England by rail, guidebook for Chinese students. Huge numbers seem to travel to Manchester have a day there. Then onwards to Liverpool for the oldest chinatown in Europe and the obvious Beatles trail. Then up to the Lake District for the Wordsworth - Beatrix Potter / beautiful english countryside (although what they think of being forced to change trains at Wigan heaven only knows.)

I'm similarly convinced there are Chinese sources of tourist information relying on rail services for students, employees and those coming on holiday. Over here in Sheffield we regularly see small numbers leaving trains at Dore & Totley (another curious place to change) to get the 218 bus to Chatsworth House. The leader of their 2 week vacation said it was Edinburgh tomorrow as they continued their tour of Britain, heading back towards Manchester for the night. Our well to do ancestors would do a European tour as part of their education. The well educated Chinese are now doing much the same!

 

[Killingworth]

Sheffield does not have its own airport, and there must be plenty of suppressed demand for a better rail link, compared with the road journey across the Pennines or the long journey to Heathrow. See this post:

Oh yes it does (formerly RAF Finningley), although Doncaster thinks it belongs to them. Not big in number of flights, destinations or passengers, yet, but Peel Group are aiming to do something about that! Long runway, plenty of space on and around the airfield, and it's flat. The Doncaster Sheffield Airport rail link is planned for only 5 years time.

They also want to support SELRAP to provide an alternative rail link for bio-mass from their docks in Liverpool to Drax avoiding congested tracks over the Pennines.

They talk a good talk. But that's for two other threads. If you can believe Peel both are achievable by 2023/4.

 

[mmh]

Nobody is proposing to close Manchester Airport, just for it not to have direct trains to places other than Manchester. You will note that Heathrow does not have direct trains to anywhere other than London and still manages to be the UK's premier airport.

Busiest, not premier. It also has less than 50% of passengers using public transport despite being the main airport for the largest business and tourist destination in Britain, despite billions being spent on rail and road connections to it.

Manchester has a little 30 year old railway spur to it.

Heathrow is a really low standard to judge anywhere else against.

 

[Greybeard33]

Again, if Manchester Airport is such a spectacular economic dynamo and direct services to it are so vital to the economic health of the places concerned, why are so many of the places with direct links to it economic basket cases ?

I presume you would exclude Liverpool from your roll call of economic basket cases with direct links to Manchester Airport?

And I doubt that many of the citizens of Edinburgh, Glasgow, Chester, Leeds, York, Sheffield or Newcastle would concur with such a description of their fine cities!

 

[snowball]

The Doncaster Sheffield Airport rail link is planned for only 5 years time.

A very misleading statement. Nobody is proposing to pay for such a link as far as I know. Even the enthusiastic website you link only claims it "could" be built in five years.

 

[Killingworth]

A very misleading statement. Nobody is proposing to pay for such a link as far as I know. Even the enthusiastic website you link only claims it "could" be built in five years.

Oh, but you weren't at their upbeat and very slick presentation. All afternoon, overlooking the runway - during which time one aircraft took off! It was a quiet period, they said. Most flights are early morning and evening and they have absolutely masses of unused capacity. But this is a digression. Manchester is, and will remain, the first airport of the north.

 

[B&I]

I presume you would exclude Liverpool from your roll call of economic basket cases with direct links to Manchester Airport?

And I doubt that many of the citizens of Edinburgh, Glasgow, Chester, Leeds, York, Sheffield or Newcastle would concur with such a description of their fine cities!

No, I wouldn't, as I live there and see how little economic activity there is. And I don't think I would exclude the others, apart from Edinburgh. Nor would I exclude the giant-size Potemkin village of Manchester itself.

While a certain number of people seem capable of being bought off with great shiny aeroplanes, the reality is that the whole of Britain, outside London, has been in recession for the last decade

 

[B&I]

Nothing like wild exaggeration to make your case!

There are freight trains scheduled to take about 30 minutes between Hazel Grove High Level Junction and Ashley. With line speed increases, a passenger train should be able to cover the extra couple of miles along the western link to the Airport station in the same time.

Hazel Grove HL Jn to Piccadilly, with a stop at Stockport, takes about 20 minutes by EMT, roughly the same as Airport to Piccadilly by Northern. So no more than 30 minutes extra for the loop round through Altrincham and the Airport.

Admittedly this is uncompetitive time-wise with the Stockport route for journeys from Sheffield to Liverpool or central Manchester, but low Advance fares could attract price-conscious passengers.

But the main attraction would be the reduced journey time for Sheffield to Manchester Airport, compared with changing or reversing at Piccadilly. Sheffield does not have its own airport, and there must be plenty of suppressed demand for a better rail link, compared with the road journey across the Pennines or the long journey to Heathrow. See this post:

30 minutes extra ? So will the trains teleport from Piccadilly to Ashley Junction, pausing only to deposit the molecules of unfortunate passengers at Ringway, where they will have become hopelessly mixed up with the molecules of people who think that Manchester Airport is the centre of the known universe ?

If they take 30 minutes from Ashley to Hazel Grove, you will need to add to that the time they take to get from Piccadilly to the airport to Ashley, which will be rather more, I suspect, than current times from Piccadilly to Hazel Grove.

The supposedly vital Sheffield to Manchester Airport market is already served by the TPE service via Piccadilly. But if someone wants to spend money (their own, not the taxpayer's) on proving that the Sheffield-airport (rather than the Sheffield-Manchester city centre) flow would sustain a service, let them go ahead, although I'd be grateful if they didn't pretend that this was for Liverpool's benefit (not least because whoever is behind this plan is too dim to notice that a far faster way of connecting to Liverpool from a western airport link would be via Hartford). Perhaps Manchester Airport Group could use some of its profits to do so, rather than the local authorities who own it treating what little money is spent on rail in the north as their private piggy bank.

 

[bbrez]

Yes, they hope to get that money from the taxpayer with the awful argument that Heathrow can't possibly survive without expansion as a "hub" airport bigger than any other because otherwise our economy will collapse because, err, people might change planes in Amsterdam and not spend a penny in the Netherlands rather than not spending a penny in Britain. The people who benefit from transiting passengers are the airports and airlines.

I've long wished for a politician to be brave enough to temper the "it's necessary for the country" (perhaps it is) line about Heathrow expansion with a proper questioning of who it would benefit. Not holding my breath on that.

This reminds me of this...

 

[Altfish]

No, I wouldn't, as I live there and see how little economic activity there is. And I don't think I would exclude the others, apart from Edinburgh. Nor would I exclude the giant-size Potemkin village of Manchester itself.

While a certain number of people seem capable of being bought off with great shiny aeroplanes, the reality is that the whole of Britain, outside London, has been in recession for the last decade

Well that post proves what I'd suspected, you are just trolling the Northerners on this forum. Well done.

 

[Bantamzen]

No, I wouldn't, as I live there and see how little economic activity there is. And I don't think I would exclude the others, apart from Edinburgh. Nor would I exclude the giant-size Potemkin village of Manchester itself.

While a certain number of people seem capable of being bought off with great shiny aeroplanes, the reality is that the whole of Britain, outside London, has been in recession for the last decade

Well at least you've helped answer your question about the "basket case" Northern cities. Given the massive difference in per capita spending within the capital's area & without, it should be obvious that London gained a massive advantage over pretty much the rest of the country, especially where commuting there is simply not a option.

TfN's aspirations, and let's be honest this is all they are at this stage, is to have significant investment in the North's transport infrastructure that might help build up struggling economies through attracting new businesses into the region, as well as improve tourism connectivity. However compared to the capital's infrastructure projects, those in the North of England and elsewhere have been piecemeal at best, and at worst have been treat with deliberate neglect from successive governments.

For example, driving new bores through the centre of London was considered a challenge but doable, including threading the needle at Tottenham Court Road. But sticking a pair of electric wires through Standedge is considered apparently so complicated that it may never happen. I loved watching the BBC(?) documentary on the Crossrail project, especially that bit at Tottenham Court Road. Amazing engineering, especially operating past / over live running LU lines. So if that is possible, why the heck is wiring the North TP, or for that matter building P15/16 considered so onerous by some that the proposals can sit at the bottom of an in-tray for years? And frankly it makes the objections to a few services ploughing across Manchester to the airport look patently ridiculous!

I don't want to be that guy, but the more I read about the objections to the airport services & any associated projects, the more I can't help but wonder that they might stem only from them not being London-centric.