Merseyrail semi-fast

[L+Y]

I'll prefix this by saying I understand the reasons why Merseyrail operates as it does, with a regular clockface all stations service.

So purely in terms of speculation - would it even be possible to timetable semi-fast services, and if so, how could it be achieved and what frequency would need to be sacrificed at smaller stations to do so?

I know prior to the severance of the Ormskirk line, an approximate 3tph stopper operated alongside semi-fasts roughly every couple of hours, three or four true expresses, and the odd freight working- could such a pattern be improved on 50 years later?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's being done on the Chester line at present, though it's not very well thought through.

On that line I'd go with the base service being 4tph all stations, 2 to Ellesmere Port and 2 to Chester, but overlaid on that a self contained 2tph semifast to Chester. On the other hand with the TfW service coming is it needed?

Southport is the only other line where it would make some sense, but would people rather 4tph stopper or 2 and 2, which would halve the effective service but make it a bit quicker?

All the other lines are really to short to benefit.

 

[cle]

Metro patterns tend to prevail - simplicity and uniformity/regularity in these things usually does. I think the CLC is languishing due to stupid stopping anomalies - and thus poor frequency and uptake.

Chester is also only 1tph and not especially fast. If there was a second tph one day - which missed Frodsham/Helsby, likely the Cardiff - it might be more appealing as a fast option. But all of those stations are benefitting from better frequent service (although the Leeds skips/skipped).

 

[roadierway77]

I did some exploration with timetabling of faster services on the Merseyrail network a while ago and it's possible to timetable semi-fast services on the Northern line between Central and Southport - have 2 of the 4tph between Central and Southport run fast between Sandhills and Hall Road, reducing journey times to Southport by approximately nine minutes, and introduce an additional 2tph between Central and Hall Road, utilising the reversing siding, to maintain 4tph along the entire line. The weaknesses of this approach though are fewer direct services from Southport to stations between Sandhills and Hightown, with a change required at Hall Road, and of course the loss of clockface frequencies at Southport.

It's probably possible on the Wirral Line as well, but you'd run into the same issues - less provision in some places and loss of clockface service, and it would only really make sense on the Liverpool - Chester/Ellesmere Port section.

 

[cle]

Wouldn't people on average save more time and have more freedom with 6tph stopping services to Southport for example? Go from commuter rail to true metro (TUAG).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wouldn't people on average save more time and have more freedom with 6tph stopping services to Southport for example? Go from commuter rail to true metro (TUAG).

Pathing can be an issue on the Southport line due to all the level crossings.

 

[Northumbriana]

Any scope for additional fast tracks to allow overtaking? I'm sure the Paris RER has some services which skip stations outside of the city centre. I wonder how they fit them in alongside frequent all station trains?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Any scope for additional fast tracks to allow overtaking? I'm sure the Paris RER has some services which skip stations outside of the city centre. I wonder how they fit them in alongside frequent all station trains?

There are some sections that were 4 track but I am not sure the locations (e.g. Kirkdale) would be useful.

 

[L+Y]

I did some exploration with timetabling of faster services on the Merseyrail network a while ago and it's possible to timetable semi-fast services on the Northern line between Central and Southport - have 2 of the 4tph between Central and Southport run fast between Sandhills and Hall Road, reducing journey times to Southport by approximately nine minutes, and introduce an additional 2tph between Central and Hall Road, utilising the reversing siding, to maintain 4tph along the entire line. The weaknesses of this approach though are fewer direct services from Southport to stations between Sandhills and Hightown, with a change required at Hall Road, and of course the loss of clockface frequencies at Southport.

I wonder actually if that's a trade off the residents of Southport, Ainsdale and Formby would make- I can't believe there's a colossal amount of traffic between the north and south Sefton stations, or at least not enough that requires more than 2tph.

I think the loss of a clockface timetable might be more of a sticking point - out of interest, in your simulation what were the departure times from Southport and Central respectively?

Any scope for additional fast tracks to allow overtaking? I'm sure the Paris RER has some services which skip stations outside of the city centre. I wonder how they fit them in alongside frequent all station trains?

You could quadruple Sandhills to Bootle New Strand and Sandhills to Walton Jn in theory - both were four tracked historically.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Pathing can be an issue on the Southport line due to all the level crossings.

This. Six trains each way through Waterloo would not be popular with residents who aren't on the trains in that St John's Road and Brooke Road are quite major traffic routes.

 

[315801]

I might get ripped to pieces by saying this but either way I'm going to take my chances.

I reckon the only way semi fast or fast services could be run on the southport route would be to have a structre similar to what was built for the Liverpool Overhead Railway which operated between 1893 & 1956.

The route could still have teains stopping at sandhills if it was ever to be 4 tracked with enough platforms to suit, upon leaving sandhills the trains would head towards a ramp style structure to take the trains up and above the existing tracks aswell as houses and roads but it would also allow the services to run either limited stop or non stop if required while at the same time completely bypassed the crossings and without the risk of being caught up behind an all station stopping service.

The only other way if there was significant objections by the residents around where the LOR style structure would be built would be to excavate new tunnels for these services but either way, a significant amount of cost would be involved.

 

[MattRat]

Technically more of a fast than semi fast, but you could run a Merseyrail branded service between Lime Street and Chester/Ellesmere Port, pathing and available rolling stock permitting.

 

[Foxcover]

The Wirral line was 4-track north of Hooton once - you can see the alignment quite readily for most of the route, with redundant spans of road over-bridges etc. It would be expensive to reinstate all the way but:
- there are some stations eg Spital where the alignment is still there and not used for car parks, so could be reinstated a bit more easily as a point for a semi fast to overtake a stopper;
- if you look at Apple Maps in 3d from Hooton northward, you can see that the four track alignment is all present and correct, including the four track alignment under the M53, from Hooton almost until Port Sunlight.
Certainly scope if there’s the will!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Notably the semi fast Chesters, from today's experience, are only missing Green Lane (very slowly) and Bromborough Rake, and then sitting outside Chester for far longer than they would take stopping there. All a bit pointless.

 

[HSTEd]

Given that the service is only 4tph on most legs of the system, will the marginal improvements in journey times really be worth it in the face of the alternative of higher service density?