• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Merseyside: New stations planned

Status
Not open for further replies.

stockport1

Member
Joined
5 Apr 2011
Messages
169
Whether it's the biggest benefactor would depend how you measure it. I don't think it's benefitted more than Manchester particularly. It's like trying to measure if Roby has benefitted more than Lea Green.

Services to Scotland, electric or otherwise, are still far from certain. I certainly hope they happen in the next few years, as it's a bit pathetic that Preston is the most northerly place on the WCML where one can get a direct Liverpool service.

Halton Curve will be good, though, like NW Electrification, long overdue. Word on the grapevine is that they're looking at a Liverpool-London service via Chester. Can't see the end-to-end journey time being competitive but it might provide direct services to additional intermediate destinations. Also, I can't see London Midland being happy with the idea.

liv-chester-London might make sense if it covered shrewsbury + other non WCML stops (Chiltern) as a fast service. wouldn't really encroach on midlands service then. kind of replaces the old Birkenhead-London service.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Geeves

Established Member
Joined
6 Jan 2009
Messages
2,353
Location
Rochdale
The CLC is on the radar now for future electrification. It will be a single island of diesel in a sea of OHLE. The North Wales coast is also on the cards too, but all good news for Lime Street :D
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,077
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
The CLC is on the radar now for future electrification. It will be a single island of diesel in a sea of OHLE. The North Wales coast is also on the cards too, but all good news for Lime Street :D

The electrification of the CLC Liverpool-Manchester route and that of the North Wales coast line are matters that have differing implications as long as the National Assembly for Wales retains its current powers.
 

martynbristow

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Messages
426
Location
Birkenhead
Whether it's the biggest benefactor would depend how you measure it. I don't think it's benefitted more than Manchester particularly. It's like trying to measure if Roby has benefitted more than Lea Green.

Services to Scotland, electric or otherwise, are still far from certain. I certainly hope they happen in the next few years, as it's a bit pathetic that Preston is the most northerly place on the WCML where one can get a direct Liverpool service.

Halton Curve will be good, though, like NW Electrification, long overdue. Word on the grapevine is that they're looking at a Liverpool-London service via Chester. Can't see the end-to-end journey time being competitive but it might provide direct services to additional intermediate destinations. Also, I can't see London Midland being happy with the idea.
Liverpool is getting the biggest boost!
2nd phase of the electrification came here. Its helping us get 2tph to MIA, 2tph MCV and an extra to Pic.
Journey times slashed too.
We should see huge growth, more than Manchester will get in the short term
 

Camden

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2014
Messages
1,949
Liverpool is getting the biggest boost!
2nd phase of the electrification came here. Its helping us get 2tph to MIA, 2tph MCV and an extra to Pic.
Journey times slashed too.
We should see huge growth, more than Manchester will get in the short term

I don't think this is quite accurate. The Trans-pennine Express service via Warrington will switch to Newton-Le-Willows. The Warrington train will be replaced by a Northern service to Manchester (possibly the airport). All other services will remain the same.

That is a net gain of one train through Warrington. Warrington itself also gets some extra services to Manchester and Leeds via Bank Quay station, however Liverpool's services are largely static. It definitely isn't getting the largest boost, and I would rather hope in the coming years that this is not the sum use of its extra capacity as it would appear otherwise to be a bit of a waste.

With electric trains, though, yes I would imagine Liverpool would provide much more growth in use as its population makes much higher use of rail generally, along with the large number of stations in its administrative area. Still no firm agreement to run services to Scotland though and that is an unnecessary disappointment for the area.
 
Last edited:

martynbristow

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Messages
426
Location
Birkenhead
I don't think this is quite accurate. The Trans-pennine Express service via Warrington will switch to Newton-Le-Willows. The Warrington train will be replaced by a Northern service to Manchester (possibly the airport). All other services will remain the same.

That is a net gain of one train through Warrington. Warrington itself also gets some extra services to Manchester and Leeds via Bank Quay station, however Liverpool's services are largely static. It definitely isn't getting the largest boost, and I would rather hope in the coming years that this is not the sum use of its extra capacity as it would appear otherwise to be a bit of a waste.

With electric trains, though, yes I would imagine Liverpool would provide much more growth in use as its population makes much higher use of rail generally, along with the large number of stations in its administrative area. Still no firm agreement to run services to Scotland though and that is an unnecessary disappointment for the area.

Read the ITT documents. It specifies 2 Northerns to the Airport. This gives a net gain of 1 via Newton.

The specification states in the notes:
Sixteen services departing from Liverpool Lime Street to Newton-le-Willows shall also call at Deansgate and Manchester Airport.
Transpenine are required to run 2tph via Newton-le-willows which has been requested to use Victoria but isn't specified as such
 
Last edited:

Camden

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2014
Messages
1,949
Read the ITT documents. It specifies 2 Northerns to the Airport. This gives a net gain of 1 via Newton.

The specification states in the notes:

Transpenine are required to run 2tph via Newton-le-willows which has been requested to use Victoria but isn't specified as such

One to the airport that Liverpool has already (via Newton-Le-Willows), and one new train to (possibly) Manchester Airport via Warrington Central.

A trans-pennine train from Liverpool would never stop at Deansgate or Manchester Airport for obvious reasons. The sixteen services mentioned are a combination of stopping services and the Manchester Airport trains. The stopping services pre-exist, and so does one of the Manchester Airport trains.

That gives net gain of one singular service for Liverpool (the Warrington service). The trans-pennine express is a switch, not a gain.
 

158756

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2014
Messages
1,568
That gives net gain of one singular service for Liverpool (the Warrington service). The trans-pennine express is a switch, not a gain.

The Warrington service is a switch rather than a gain as well isn't it, unless you mean the possible final leg to the Airport. The Northern semi-fast simply replaces the TPE diverted via Newton. Bank Quay gains the slow Chester-Leeds service though.

No service increase seems to be proposed around Liverpool however.

How much is the work at Roby and Huyton costing? It seems rather a waste if the only increase has already happened before the capacity works, and train performance will improve this year, which should further reduce the need for extra capacity.
 

martynbristow

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Messages
426
Location
Birkenhead
The Warrington service is a switch rather than a gain as well isn't it, unless you mean the possible final leg to the Airport. The Northern semi-fast simply replaces the TPE diverted via Newton. Bank Quay gains the slow Chester-Leeds service though.

No service increase seems to be proposed around Liverpool however.

How much is the work at Roby and Huyton costing? It seems rather a waste if the only increase has already happened before the capacity works, and train performance will improve this year, which should further reduce the need for extra capacity.
Exactly, as I clearly showed its a Newton gaining one service. The 16 trains to the airport won't be slows would they? The chat moss flows go to Victoria and Oxford Road slows go via CLC
Summary gain of 1tph via chat Moss! Chat moss isnt loosing its Newcastle or Airport service
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,781
Location
Nottingham
Exactly, as I clearly showed its a Newton gaining one service. The 16 trains to the airport won't be slows would they? The chat moss flows go to Victoria and Oxford Road slows go via CLC
Summary gain of 1tph via chat Moss! Chat moss isnt loosing its Newcastle or Airport service

The existing fast train via Chat Moss has only been going for about a year, so you could argue it is two extra fast trains per hour for Liverpool over a slightly longer period.
 

158756

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2014
Messages
1,568
Exactly, as I clearly showed its a Newton gaining one service. The 16 trains to the airport won't be slows would they? The chat moss flows go to Victoria and Oxford Road slows go via CLC
Summary gain of 1tph via chat Moss! Chat moss isnt loosing its Newcastle or Airport service

We don't know if the trains to the Airport will be slows. It isn't specified that they must be fast, and none of the station call requirements suggest a fast Northern service via Chat Moss. It's entirely possible to meet the service required without the Victoria stopper.

The (Northern)TSR specifies 1tph Liverpool-Newton and 2tph Manchester-Newton. One from Manchester will continue to Chester, leaving Newton with one Northern train per hour serving both Manchester and Liverpool. There are currently two. The TPE calls at Newton and St Helens Jn look to me like they're intended to replace Northern's fast service.
Of course bidders may choose, at a cost, to exceed the minimum service requirements.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,081
Location
Mold, Clwyd
I think you'll find the current LIV-NLW-MIA will become a stopper.
The new LIV-WAC-MAN fast service replaces the TPE service and it is not clear where it terminates - probably MAN.
Check the Northern/TPE ITT thread (notably recent post 463).

Don't forget all electric services with be 4-car 319s, replacing 2-car DMUs.
Capacity almost doubled even if services stay at the current frequency.
The Huyton 3-tracking was for the extra TPE services plus new freight.
I could see the 4-tracking being prioritised out though, depending on what happens to Northern Hub.
 

Camden

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2014
Messages
1,949
Two separate services are getting mixed up. The ask is for 16 trains to deansgate and Manchester Airport, that doesn't mean that they have to be the same train, simply that 16 trains must stop at Deansgate, and 16 trains must stop at Manchester Airport.

Deansgate is currently a station call for the stopper via Warrington (which is remaining). Manchester Airport is currently a station call for the service via Newton-Le-Willows to the airport, which will soon also be joined by a service via Warrington. This service via Warrington may or may not be a stopper (might call at Deansgate if so), and it may or may not go to Manchester Airport (but it is likely that it will).

A "gain" for Liverpool services in my book is a service that didn't previously run, not one which simply travels via a different route (a reorganise) and so the new service is the Northern service via Warrington Central (which is to compensate for the loss of the long distance train that has switched lines).
 
Last edited:

martynbristow

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Messages
426
Location
Birkenhead
I'm confused by the deansgate reference though.
Why is it so poorly served?
Deansgate has the best connection to Metrolink and personally I feel most trains should serve it
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,379
Location
Liverpool
I'm confused by the deansgate reference though.
Why is it so poorly served?
Deansgate has the best connection to Metrolink and personally I feel most trains should serve it

It only has 2 platforms and is further away from the city centre? Are the 2 platforms long enough? For many people they will have to change tram anyway?
 

martynbristow

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Messages
426
Location
Birkenhead
It only has 2 platforms and is further away from the city centre? Are the 2 platforms long enough? For many people they will have to change tram anyway?

Not for Altringham and Eccles.
2 platforms is an issue but the same is true for Piccadilly and to an Extent Oxford Road as they seem to use the same platform
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,379
Location
Liverpool
Not for Altringham and Eccles.
2 platforms is an issue but the same is true for Piccadilly and to an Extent Oxford Road as they seem to use the same platform

Yeah but Piccadilly is a massive station that doesn't just have 2 platforms and also has the Metrolink and Oxford Road is right on one of the busiest bus routes in the country and right in the centre of the city. Which one would you have Deansgate replace as a stop for longer distance services?
 

martynbristow

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Messages
426
Location
Birkenhead
Yeah but Piccadilly is a massive station that doesn't just have 2 platforms and also has the Metrolink and Oxford Road is right on one of the busiest bus routes in the country and right in the centre of the city. Which one would you have Deansgate replace as a stop for longer distance services?

Its just if I travel to Manchester I would prefer if I could go straight to the Metrolink avoiding Piccadilly which is a nightmare. To me it seems appropriate to have trains stop there now with more Metrolinks heading West out of the city.
It wouldn't replace Piccadilly but added as an extra stop would help to reduce the number of people using Picadilly.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,077
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
26,781
Location
Nottingham
Not for Altringham and Eccles.
2 platforms is an issue but the same is true for Piccadilly and to an Extent Oxford Road as they seem to use the same platform

The Northern Hub is adding two more platforms at Piccadilly and lengthening those at Oxford Road so all four can be used equally. Doing this at Deansgate as well would be a huge job so stops at this station will most definitely be a bottleneck after the others are finished.
 

Camden

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2014
Messages
1,949
Its just if I travel to Manchester I would prefer if I could go straight to the Metrolink avoiding Piccadilly which is a nightmare. To me it seems appropriate to have trains stop there now with more Metrolinks heading West out of the city.
It wouldn't replace Piccadilly but added as an extra stop would help to reduce the number of people using Picadilly.

Victoria is directly on the Bury/Altrincham Metrolink line and so you can change there, via a faster journey to Manchester and less of a walk to the Metrolink. Having had a lot of money spent on it, Victoria will be taking passengers away from Piccadilly.

If you like though you can always sit on the stopper via Warrington Central and change at Deansgate.
 

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
731
I've had the unusual pleasure for me of travelling to and from work on the Victoria stopper to Eccles for the last two days whilst the car is off the road. What immediately struck me, was compared to the Merseytravel stations on the route, how poor the facilities were at the station. Not a single timetable on the platform, no train information displays, shelters with no seats, no apparent disabled access to street level, and a platform that appears to be considerably lower than those in Merseyside. With only the Lime Street to Victoria trains stopping at the station the lack of facilities could perhaps be understandable, but with the terminus of the Metrolink service to Salford Quays and Piccadilly as well as a bus station less than five minutes walk away, why it seems that opportunities are being missed. There's a passing loop that is wired and just needs a platform face and the existing platforms appear much longer than those on Liverpool end of the line. There seems to be a potential for the station to act as an interchange for passengers travelling to Salford Quays by tram and the Trafford Centre by bus as well as for locals to certain parts of Manchester far quicker than the tram. There must be potentially hundreds of passengers who would the station, perhaps spend a little bit of money in the local shops, or pub and in doing so help regenerate the area, as well as reduce crowding at Piccadilly. Congratulations therefore go to Merseytravel for the station of their City Line Stations, they are clearly well ahead of those in the TfGM area if Eccles is anything to go by.
 

martynbristow

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Messages
426
Location
Birkenhead
I've always felt disappointed with metrolink itself. It's inly recently they have had service information.
It is very disappointing though :/
 

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
7,833
I've had the unusual pleasure for me of travelling to and from work on the Victoria stopper to Eccles for the last two days whilst the car is off the road. What immediately struck me, was compared to the Merseytravel stations on the route, how poor the facilities were at the station. Not a single timetable on the platform, no train information displays, shelters with no seats, no apparent disabled access to street level, and a platform that appears to be considerably lower than those in Merseyside. With only the Lime Street to Victoria trains stopping at the station the lack of facilities could perhaps be understandable, but with the terminus of the Metrolink service to Salford Quays and Piccadilly as well as a bus station less than five minutes walk away, why it seems that opportunities are being missed. There's a passing loop that is wired and just needs a platform face and the existing platforms appear much longer than those on Liverpool end of the line. There seems to be a potential for the station to act as an interchange for passengers travelling to Salford Quays by tram and the Trafford Centre by bus as well as for locals to certain parts of Manchester far quicker than the tram. There must be potentially hundreds of passengers who would the station, perhaps spend a little bit of money in the local shops, or pub and in doing so help regenerate the area, as well as reduce crowding at Piccadilly. Congratulations therefore go to Merseytravel for the station of their City Line Stations, they are clearly well ahead of those in the TfGM area if Eccles is anything to go by.

I think that Eccles is poorly served by rail, with (for most of the day) only one train per hour. I think they have missed an opportunity by not diverting the Lime St. - Warrington Bank Quay stopping service to run instead to Manchester Victoria.

Eccles to Manchester Victoria by train is about three times quicker than Eccles to Manchester city centre by tram, and a more frequent train service would probably attract a lot more passengers.
 

Olaf

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2014
Messages
1,054
Location
UK
I see that the local press has reported that Peel has finally announced that it has pulled out of the Trade Centre development. Meanwhile, real funding from the same national origin has gone into the development around Manchester airport.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Peel indeed saying they have pulled out of the ITC in Wirral Waters, they no longer want to be involved with these kind of property developments according to the Chairman. Their Chinese financiers Sam Wa will be taking full ownership of the proposed development project.

No idea what your talking about with national funding though, Wirral Waters received a £3m European Regional Development Fund grant to decontaminate the land and make it fit for development, there was no ERDF funding for Manchester Airport LEZ. Wirral waters received £5.5m from Government to build infrastructure for the LEZ while Manchester Airport LEZ was awarded £6m.
 

Gareth

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2011
Messages
1,505
And what's it got to do with the title of the thread? Nothing. Makes Olaf feel better about himself though.
 

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
731
Peel indeed saying they have pulled out of the ITC in Wirral Waters, they no longer want to be involved with these kind of property developments according to the Chairman. Their Chinese financiers Sam Wa will be taking full ownership of the proposed development project.

No idea what your talking about with national funding though, Wirral Waters received a £3m European Regional Development Fund grant to decontaminate the land and make it fit for development, there was no ERDF funding for Manchester Airport LEZ. Wirral waters received £5.5m from Government to build infrastructure for the LEZ while Manchester Airport LEZ was awarded £6m.

Yes I saw the report that Peel had pulled out of the Wirral Waters scheme, but of course I think they will still own the land as it will remain within the waterway system for which Peel are legally responsible. As far as I know Peel is not involved in the Manchester LEZ scheme, but will be looking forward to plans being approved for the Metrolink to be extended to Trafford Park. I don't remember any plans or discussions about extending Merseyrail to Wirral Waters?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top