• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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.

flypie

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
225
If anyone want to check my tunnel calcs here is a spread sheet and an image. If the spread sheet doesn't works it is because I did it in OpenOffice but I can only upload xls.

I would have intended the tram station to be available for all Lime Street users and perhaps using the route of the LOR at either extent.
 

Attachments

  • Lime Street Int.xls
    620 KB · Views: 7
  • Station Tunnel s.jpg
    Station Tunnel s.jpg
    52.4 KB · Views: 26
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

UrbanWorld

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2014
Messages
106
I can understand why you would want to use the rest of the tunnel, but I doubt the Council would approve it because they would probably prefer passengers to enjoy the attractions of Liverpool and spend some money. They can't do this on a tram in a tunnel under Liverpool. I doubt the business case would succeed because the cruise terminal is presently not operational all year round, while the link to Liverpool Waters would need to probably need to service other locations to make it attractive to passengers.
The map of the Waterloo Tunnel. The track needs to run over the Costco site to make a turn south. It is best any tram-trains run along the Dock Rd and into Liverpool Waters running over cheap concrete bridges across dock water spaces, as in London's Docklands.

The cruise business is taking off like wildfire. Liverpool has the all the north of England, Scotland and Midlands market. They must be able to get directly to the terminal in comfort and fast. That means only rail. Liverpool has most infrastructure in place.

It is not expensive to enter the city centre from the south of the city. The Northern Line tunnel is wide enough for HS2 trains. The Northern Line can put on the streets with tram-trains which run though district centres and down onto the south docks adding much value which the Northern Line currently does not. A HS2/HS3 underground station could terminate under Williamson Square and be between Central and Lime St; walk down a tunnel to each. HS3 could terminate at Central to continue down the Central to James St tunnel and through the Mersey Rail Tunnel onto North Wales when the time comes.

The more I think of it the better this solution appears to shine. The only cost is laying tram-train track, opening Dingle station & tunnel and building a HS2/HS3 underground station in the city centre

The Bootle Branch may have to abandon passengers as rail traffic increases out of the port. Stoppers on this line may be very disruptive. The eastern section of the Outer Loop would serve many districts. It would also take much nuisance football traffic off the roads. Liverpool has a mass-transit metro, so it must be used to serve the population in serving large regular crowds.

To me the Exchange site ticks few boxes, the loss of direct connectivity with the regional lines at Lime Street Station as HS2/HS3 will be fully served. HS2/HS3 needs direct services to be used fully.

The attraction of the Mersey is that there are not cross river cable on the bed, so ships can anchor anywhere.
 
Last edited:

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
709
The map of the Waterloo Tunnel. The track needs to run over the Costco site to make a turn south. It is best any tram-trains run along the Dock Rd and into Liverpool Waters running over cheap concrete bridges across dock water spaces, as in London's Docklands.

The cruise business is taking off like wildfire. Liverpool has the all the north of England, Scotland and Midlands market. They must be able to get directly to the terminal in comfort and fast. That means only rail. Liverpool has most infrastructure in place.

It is not expensive to enter the city centre from the south of the city. The Northern Line tunnel is wide enough for HS2 trains. The Northern Line can put on the streets with tram-trains which run though district centres and down onto the south docks adding much value which the Northern Line currently does not. A HS2/HS3 underground station could terminate under Williamson Square and be between Central and Lime St; walk down a tunnel to each. HS3 could terminate at Central to continue down the Central to James St tunnel and through the Mersey Rail Tunnel onto North Wales when the time comes.

The more I think of it the better this solution appears to shine. The only cost is laying tram-train track, opening Dingle station & tunnel and building a HS2/HS3 underground station in the city centre

The Bootle Branch may have to abandon passengers as rail traffic increases out of the port. Stoppers on this line may be very disruptive. The eastern section of the Outer Loop would serve many districts. It would also take much nuisance football traffic off the roads. Liverpool has a mass-transit metro, so it must be used to serve the population in serving large regular crowds.

To me the Exchange site ticks few boxes, the loss of direct connectivity with the regional lines at Lime Street Station as HS2/HS3 will be fully served. HS2/HS3 needs direct services to be used fully.

The attraction of the Mersey is that there are not cross river cable on the bed, so ships can anchor anywhere.

If I remember correctly the ventilation buildings and shaft of the Wallasey tunnel block the original crossing point across the Dock Road which pointed towards the Pier Head. To reach Liverpool Waters site it would need to cross slightly further north. However, I not convinced at this stage that serving the site by tram or light rail is the way forward as this would introduce another type of transport to the Merseytravel network, and we all know what happened the last time a similar project was planned.

Yes the cruise business is beginning to take off, but it is still only seasonal although perhaps by the time that HS2/3 takes off, it could be operational longer. However, what you have to remember is the terminal is now a turn-around terminal which means the cruise ship can be in port a couple of days whilst the stores are replenished etc. Speaking from a little experience of working for a company that used to handle cruise ships, I can assure you that not every passenger turns up on the day straight from the railway station and boards the ship. Instead, and especially if they are travelling some distance, they will book a hotel room and arrive the day before they have to depart especially if it is an early start. The reverse also tends to happen when the passenger leaves the ship especially if the ship is schedule to arrive in port late in the day. As I posted earlier, you only have to look at the number of hotels of all varieties that have opened in the city centre since the resumption of cruise vessels serving the port. Yes and before it is said, there was a shortage of hotel accommodation in the city centre, but the supply now vastly exceeds the normal requirements for business and holidaying visitors, so why build more unless they were for cruise business? The other point, is the crusie terminal is operated by the Merseytravel on behalf of Liverpool City Council who has invested millions over the years in first of all getting the terminal built, and then arguing the case to convert it to a stop over terminal. Why would they possibility want to take such an enormous risk in laying the foundations for cruise industry in Liverpool and justifying the business the case to central Government and EU, if they thought passengers would not spend money whilst in the city?

Converting the Northern Line to a tram-train is not going to go down well to those regular travellers from Southport and whilst Merseytravel have yet to announce the exact specification for the stock to replace the 507 & 508/s, the one thing I would be fairly sure of is that it will not be a tram-train, which would likely rule out any conversion to a tram-train network by 30 to 40 years.

An electrified passenger service along the Bootle Branch is only going to work if the North Mersey Line is reopened and electrified as well as perhaps the Ormskirk to Preston line. Operating a passenger service out of Lime Street around the Branch and back to Central and reverse is probably not going be economical, particularly if you start operating three or four car units. A service every 15 or 20 minutes from Lime Street to Preston or Blackpool would help provide additional capacity between Ormskirk and Liverpool as well as some additional journey opportunities and still leave enough capacity for freight services on the line. A bus interchange at Towend Lane and a new station would enable it to serve Anfield whilst buses could be used to connect to any new Everton stadium built at Walton Hall Park on match days. Revival of the north end of the Outer Loop is not going to happen if the Bootle Branch is electrified and passenger services returned to the route.

The loss of regional direct connectivity using Exchange cannot be a large loss, considering the regional destinations currently served from Lime Street. Blackpool and Preston would connect to HS2 with local services at Wigan and HS3 at Manchester. Warrington and Manchester Victoria, Oxford Road, Airport and Wigan would all connect to HS2 and probably HS3 at Piccadilly or the Airport and probably. Crewe and Birmingham would have their own connections whilst it may be even quicker from Runcorn to go via Manchester or Crewe on HS2 because of the increase frequencies. Passengers joining the conventional services on theses service would have the choice of either travelling via Liverpool or say Manchester, Wigan or Crewe on HS2, or to nearest HS3 station which is only likely to be Warrington or Manchester on HS3 .
Contrary to your statement that vessels may anchor "anywhere" in the Mersey this is far from true. In fact where as vessel anchors in the River is strictly controlled, in order not to block access vessels navigating the river to Eastham, and Garston as well as Birkenhead Docks, let alone Langton and Gladstone Dock.
 

flypie

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
225
If I remember correctly the ventilation buildings and shaft of the Wallasey tunnel block the original crossing point across the Dock Road which pointed towards the Pier Head. To reach Liverpool Waters site it would need to cross slightly further north. However, I not convinced at this stage that serving the site by tram or light rail is the way forward as this would introduce another type of transport to the Merseytravel network, and we all know what happened the last time a similar project was planned.

Yes the cruise business is beginning to take off, but it is still only seasonal although perhaps by the time that HS2/3 takes off, it could be operational longer. However, what you have to remember is the terminal is now a turn-around terminal which means the cruise ship can be in port a couple of days whilst the stores are replenished etc. Speaking from a little experience of working for a company that used to handle cruise ships, I can assure you that not every passenger turns up on the day straight from the railway station and boards the ship. Instead, and especially if they are travelling some distance, they will book a hotel room and arrive the day before they have to depart especially if it is an early start. The reverse also tends to happen when the passenger leaves the ship especially if the ship is schedule to arrive in port late in the day. As I posted earlier, you only have to look at the number of hotels of all varieties that have opened in the city centre since the resumption of cruise vessels serving the port. Yes and before it is said, there was a shortage of hotel accommodation in the city centre, but the supply now vastly exceeds the normal requirements for business and holidaying visitors, so why build more unless they were for cruise business? The other point, is the crusie terminal is operated by the Merseytravel on behalf of Liverpool City Council who has invested millions over the years in first of all getting the terminal built, and then arguing the case to convert it to a stop over terminal. Why would they possibility want to take such an enormous risk in laying the foundations for cruise industry in Liverpool and justifying the business the case to central Government and EU, if they thought passengers would not spend money whilst in the city?

Converting the Northern Line to a tram-train is not going to go down well to those regular travellers from Southport and whilst Merseytravel have yet to announce the exact specification for the stock to replace the 507 & 508/s, the one thing I would be fairly sure of is that it will not be a tram-train, which would likely rule out any conversion to a tram-train network by 30 to 40 years.

An electrified passenger service along the Bootle Branch is only going to work if the North Mersey Line is reopened and electrified as well as perhaps the Ormskirk to Preston line. Operating a passenger service out of Lime Street around the Branch and back to Central and reverse is probably not going be economical, particularly if you start operating three or four car units. A service every 15 or 20 minutes from Lime Street to Preston or Blackpool would help provide additional capacity between Ormskirk and Liverpool as well as some additional journey opportunities and still leave enough capacity for freight services on the line. A bus interchange at Towend Lane and a new station would enable it to serve Anfield whilst buses could be used to connect to any new Everton stadium built at Walton Hall Park on match days. Revival of the north end of the Outer Loop is not going to happen if the Bootle Branch is electrified and passenger services returned to the route.

The loss of regional direct connectivity using Exchange cannot be a large loss, considering the regional destinations currently served from Lime Street. Blackpool and Preston would connect to HS2 with local services at Wigan and HS3 at Manchester. Warrington and Manchester Victoria, Oxford Road, Airport and Wigan would all connect to HS2 and probably HS3 at Piccadilly or the Airport and probably. Crewe and Birmingham would have their own connections whilst it may be even quicker from Runcorn to go via Manchester or Crewe on HS2 because of the increase frequencies. Passengers joining the conventional services on theses service would have the choice of either travelling via Liverpool or say Manchester, Wigan or Crewe on HS2, or to nearest HS3 station which is only likely to be Warrington or Manchester on HS3 .
Contrary to your statement that vessels may anchor "anywhere" in the Mersey this is far from true. In fact where as vessel anchors in the River is strictly controlled, in order not to block access vessels navigating the river to Eastham, and Garston as well as Birkenhead Docks, let alone Langton and Gladstone Dock.

The connection to Bury would have been useful. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_and_Bury_Railway
 

markindurham

Member
Joined
1 Nov 2011
Messages
385
Additional comment to Wavertreelad's posting about ships anchoring - there are very strong currents in the Mersey too, especially off the Pier Head & in the 'narrows' - it is not good seamanship to anchor in such places except in an emergency.
 

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
709
Additional comment to Wavertreelad's posting about ships anchoring - there are very strong currents in the Mersey too, especially off the Pier Head & in the 'narrows' - it is not good seamanship to anchor in such places except in an emergency.

Exactly, readers may be interested to know that vessels entering any port are subject to local restrictions such as where they anchor and what works can be carried to the ship, ie welding etc. Peel Ports as the operator of the Port of Liverpool and relevant authority for the River Mersey issue regular updates to Mariners to make Masters and their crews aware of all the restrictions. Here is one such notice concerning the places where vessels may NOT anchor.

http://peelports.com/wp-content/upl...es-in-River-Mersey-and-Approaches-Amended.pdf
 

UrbanWorld

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2014
Messages
106
Additional comment to Wavertreelad's posting about ships anchoring - there are very strong currents in the Mersey too, especially off the Pier Head & in the 'narrows' - it is not good seamanship to anchor in such places except in an emergency.
Correct markindurham. The volume of water coming in from the Irish Sea when running through the narrows speeds up in flow rate. This speeding up of the water keeps the narrows deep and clear of sand, hence why Liverpool is the only deep water port on that coast. The sand brought in from Liverpool Bay is dumped in the wide estuary basin. Then the water is taken back out. One of the UKs biggest engineering feats post WW2 was the building of the underwater training walls on the Mersey estuary approaches. This ensures deep water channels and the volume of water entering the estuary to keep the narrows deep. But as it is out of site so one knows about it.

I believe some oil pipes were temporary run across the river bed in WW2 as a part of the PLUTO oil pipeline to the Normandy D-Day beaches. The fuel was pumped from the Dingle Oil terminal.
 

Mutant Lemming

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
3,194
Location
London
I can understand why you would want to use the rest of the tunnel, but I doubt the Council would approve it because they would probably prefer passengers to enjoy the attractions of Liverpool and spend some money. They can't do this on a tram in a tunnel under Liverpool. I doubt the business case would succeed because the cruise terminal is presently not operational all year round, while the link to Liverpool Waters would need to probably need to service other locations to make it attractive to passengers.

I totally agree laying tracks in the road causes lots of disruption, and I was not suggesting that is should be done for that reason and the cost. What I was highlighting was the tunnel proposal would take passengers away from much of the city centre and even with a stop in the Byrom Street area I couldn't see it being particularly popular. A much easier and cheaper solution would be for Merseytravel to lay on a bus service from Lime Street when cruise ships are in port. Liverpool Waters is a bit more difficult because it depends on what exactly is built and when as the site is presently largely derelict open quays.



I'd agree there could be an option of entering the city centre from the south of the city but think it would very expensive so had discounted it. Using the existing Merseyrail line from the Gartston for HS2/3 and putting trams or light rail on to Aigburgh Road etc is going to be hugely disruptive and expensive whilst you also reduce the options for trains from the north of the city especially if the Edge Hill spur was not constructed. In any event you would not want HS2/3 terminating in an expanded Central Station, assuming it was possible as it would be total chaos.

I can't see the Outer Loop being used in the foreseeable future in any shape or form for metro style services, especially if the Bootle Branch is eventually electrified and passenger services return to it. As for approaching Exchange from the Wigan direction, yes I'd agree it is practical, but my own preference would be share this route with freight from the Port of Liverpool as per my earlier proposal.

To me the Exchange site ticks all the right boxes, the loss of direct connectivity with the regional lines at Lime Street Station is to my mind not a major problem as many of these services will originate in locations already served either by HS2 or HS3 so why travel to Liverpool when it could be quicker and probably cheaper to travel on conventional services. Assuming the Edge Hill Spur was completed, Exchange would have access to all the local Merseyrail lines plus those on the City Line that could be diverted or combined with Merseyrail services.





Sorry I may have slightly mislead readers here, the point I was making was the Garston Channel extends from the Pier Head to the entrance of Garston Docks so it would not be possible to build the HS2/3 route along the river either above or below water. There is a huge turning circle mainly on the Wirral side of the river which extends east of the Tranmere Oil Terminal to allow the large tankers that still use the berths to turn through 180 degrees. Whilst it does not extend the complete width of the river at this point it would be clearly impossible to build anything in the river which would potentially interfere with the movement of craft on the river because the closer to the Pier Head you get the wider the dredged channels become.

Slightly off the bottom right of this photo lies the village of Daresbury which was home to the Reverend Charles Dodgson. It would have been apt to include it as many of the notions on this whole thread are as fanciful as any thing he dreamt up in his literary works and they're probably more likely to occur in our lifetimes.
What is fanciful, what is actually needed and what will actually happen will all be different. Most likely in our lifetimes is a link from HS2 to existing lines in to Liverpool and a couple of new stations and access curves and a bit more electrification.
 

UrbanWorld

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2014
Messages
106
Liverpool Waters and Wirral Waters need to have Merseyrail connections, whether direct tunnels into the say Liverpool Waters or more likely tram-trains. Otherwise they will fail. Tram-trains have been proposed for a number of new lines in Liverpool. Merseytravel have delayed their procurement of rolling stock assessing what sort of trains are needed for the future of the city. Light-rail, as per Docklands, or tram-trains are the ideal rolling stock for Liverpool and Wirral Waters. The stand alone Merseytram cannot be compared to integrated Merseyrail tram-trains.

The cruise business is beginning to take off big time. What it is now and what it can be are very different. Liverpool can offer round the UK cruises, Irish Sea cruises, Scottish Island cruises, cruises to Portugal and Spain - all long and short cruises and some weekend cruises. Of course there will be more in the summer but it can be an all year around business. Offer up the cruises and promote them well and the city provide easy transport access with adjacent stations and the business will expand greatly. Cruising is now filtering down to families and the younger set, they are now not just floating care homes. They could be be a short booking thing in tat someone could say, "let's go on a weekend cruise" the week before departing and via it via the web. Done properly with enough hotels in Liverpool and the essential "direct" transport access and the business will boom in the city. Liverpool will be cruise port of choice for much of the UK.

The stop over cruisers do spend money in the city, with Liverpool being one of the favoured destinations. The last I read the city was short of around 30 hotels.

Few people travel from end to end from Southport to Hunts Cross. The service to the centre would be exactly the same. Getting from the north of the city to the south via tram-train would mean running down the Wapping tunnel to the Dock Road (could be elevated to give a historical link to the LOR) , through to Dingle and down Aigburth road joining up with the old Merseyrail tracks to Hunts Cross.

Services to Blackpool via Merseyrail tracks is going too far. The extreme northern terminal could be Preston. Freight over Merseyrail track is also going too far. Freight and stopper do not mix.

A bus interchange at Townsend Lane would make little impact on a 60,000 football crowd. Only 6 car rail stations with multiple platforms can make an impact on large crowds. Revival of the eastern section of the the Outer Loop can happen if the Bootle Branch is electrified and the port freight traffic increases. Stopping passenger service will have to be taken off the line. The Outer Loop can also easy access a station at airport if one is eventually built. Huge sections of north and east Liverpool will have direct access via the eastern section which currently just a trackbed.

The loss of regional direct connectivity using Exchange will be a large loss. HS2/HS3 needs easy and seamless access from all over the region.

Of course vessels cannot block access to channels or locks, tat f goes without saying. But anchors can be freely dropped knowing that no pipe or cable is on the bed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
what is actually needed and what will actually happen will all be different. Most likely in our lifetimes is a link from HS2 to existing lines in to Liverpool and a couple of new stations and access curves and a bit more electrification.
The political climate is pointing to that HS2 and HS3 may come Liverpool. There is also political pressure to expand Merseyrail. It is a matter of "analysis", not fancy, to gain an effective and cheap solution. Merging the HS2/HS3 access with Merseyrail expansion will bring dividends. Treating them separately and the usual cludge will emerge.
 
Last edited:

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
709
Liverpool Waters and Wirral Waters need to have Merseyrail connection, whether direct tunnels into the say Liverpool Waters or more likely tram-trains. Tram-trains have been proposed for a number of new lines in Liverpool. Mereytravel have delayed their procurement of rolling stock assessing what sort of trains are needed for the future of the city. Light-rail, as per Docklands, or tram-trains are the ideal rolling stock for Liverpool and Wirral Waters. The stand alone Merseytram cannot be compared to integrated Merseyrail tram-trains.

The cruise business is beginning to take off big time. What it is now and what it can be are very different. Liverpool can offer round the UK cruises, Irish Sea cruises, Scottish Island cruises, cruises to Portugal and Spain - all long and short cruises and some weekend cruises. Of course there will be more in the summer but it can be an all year around business. Offer up the cruises and promote them well and the city provide easy transport access with adjacent stations and the business will expand greatly. Cruising is now filtering down to families and the younger set, they are now not just floating care homes. They could be be a short booking thing in tat someone could say, "let's go on a weekend cruise" the week before departing and via it via the web. Done properly with enough hotels in Liverpool and the essential "direct" transport access and the business will boom in the city. Liverpool will be cruise port of choice for much of the UK.

The stop over cruisers do spend money in the city, with Liverpool being one of the favoured destinations. The last I read the city was short of around 30 hotels.

Few people travel from end to end from Southport to Hunts Cross. The service to the centre would be exactly the same. Getting from the north of the city to the south via tram-train would mean running down the Wapping tunnel to the Dock Road (could be elevated to give a historical link to the LOR) , through to Dingle and down Aigburth road joining up with the old Merseyrail tracks to Hunts Cross.

Services to Blackpool via Merseyrail tracks is going too far. The extreme northern terminal could be Preston. Freight over Merseyrail track is also going too far. Freight and stopper do not mix.

A bus interchange at Townsend Lane would make little impact on a 60,000 football crowd. Only 6 car rail stations with multiple platforms can make an impact on large crowds. Revival of the eastern section of the the Outer Loop can happen if the Bootle Branch is electrified and the port freight traffic increases. Stopping passenger service will have to be taken off the line. The Outer Loop can also easy access a station at airport if one is eventually built. Huge sections of north and east Liverpool will have direct access via the eastern section which currently just a trackbed.

The loss of regional direct connectivity using Exchange will be a large loss. HS2/HS3 needs easy and seamless access from all over the region.

Of course vessels cannot block access to channels or locks, tat f goes without saying. But anchors can be freely dropped knowing that no pipe or cable is on the bed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The political climate is pointing to that HS2 and HS3 may come Liverpool. There is also political pressure to expand Merseyrail. It is a matter of "analysis", not fancy, to gain an effective and cheap solution. Merging the HS2/HS3 access with Merseyrail expansion will bring dividends. Treating them separately and the usual cludge will emerge.

Yes Liverpool Waters and Wirral Waters will need connecting with public transport to the rest of their local networks. Liverpool Waters being somewhat remote from the city centre could be connected to Edge Hill through the Waterloo Tunnel, but this would mean that City Line trains would no longer serve Lime Street, or potentially Central or Exchange Stations. It's difficult to see how the site could be connected to the rest of the rail network from the city centre end, but it would be possible from Canada Dock by reopening the branch and connecting at Atlantic Junction to the Bootle Branch, a project that Peel I know has been looking at but probably more connected to the movement of freight from the Canada and Huskisson Dock area which is now cut off from the rest of the rail network within the Port. Much of course depends on what is finally built on the site, given that it is a very long term development and for moment my money would be on a bus service. If you look at the developments in the south dock system, apart from Brunswick Station and a few bus stops, there is not a huge amount of public transport, yet the area appears to prosper.

As far as Wirral Waters is concerned, I suspect there may be an opportunity for a combination of separate rail and tram systems serving the site along with the bus, but again with it being such a long term development it's difficult to predict the final outcome. The one thing is certain about both schemes is neither of them appear on the 30 year plan what ever is posted here on these developments is unlikely to happen for many years yet, although one would assume the respective councils will have pencilled in rough plans before approving the developments.

Perhaps at this stage it may be worthwhile we remind ourselves of what the Merseytravel 30 year strategy actually contains which is briefly described on their website as follows.

" Liverpool City Region’s 30-year rail future detailed in new strategy

Published on 27/08/2014

The rail schemes that will support and grow the Liverpool City Region economy over the next 30 years by improving links within it and to cities and towns further afield, have been detailed in a Long Term Rail Strategy.

The document will be put to the Merseytravel Committee next week (4 September) before going to the Combined Authority for approval on 19 September.

A draft blueprint, which outlined the package of 12 rail priorities, was approved by both bodies in May. The full strategy details potential individual schemes within these ‘themes’, the rationale behind them and possible timescales.

The transformation HS2 could bring is reflected in the schemes being taken forward as is the importance of developing east – west connectivity across the whole of the north, including key programmes already in development such as electrification of the lines between Liverpool and Manchester to reduce journey times.

Said Cllr Liam Robinson, Chair of Merseytravel:

"This is real 'big picture' thinking by the Liverpool City Region. Such strategies are not traditionally driven by local bodies. Doing it this way, working with Network Rail, ensures that our transport planning is intrinsically linked to our economic planning.

"There's growing confidence in our City Region economy and a recognition of the key role that we have in the 'northern powerhouse' as a means to rebalance the whole UK economy. But this can only be properly realised by ensuring that we are geared up for a significant increase in passengers and freight over the next 30 years.

"The rail strategy is about co-ordination and building on our successes, most notably the Merseyrail network. It is about ensuring that the rail connections we have within our city region link seamlessly with those beyond, not only to what we would consider the untapped potential of local catchment areas such as North Wales and Skelmersdale but to London and to places like Manchester and across the Pennines to Leeds through better, faster and more frequent connections.

"Delivering on our strategy will make us 'HS2 ready' and it puts us ahead of the game in taking forward east – west connectivity across the north. The need for City Regions to develop their own plans to feed into this bigger picture was one of the recommendations of the 'One North' report presented to the Chancellor earlier this month."

The Long Term Rail Strategy, developed by Merseytravel as strategic transport advisor to the Combined Authority, is intended to be regularly reviewed to ensure it reflects changing economic circumstances and funding opportunities over the next 30 years. All individual schemes proposed will demand full feasibility studies and robust business cases to progress.

As a result of all these factors, it is unlikely that all those projects listed will become a reality. Conversely, there may be new schemes proposed during the life of the strategy in response to new demands, for instance, as yet, unplanned regeneration schemes.

The scheme areas proposed to be taken forward are:

• Improving National Passenger and Freight Connections
Increasing frequency of Liverpool – London services; new direct routes including to Scotland and South Wales; extending platforms at Liverpool South Parkway to take longer trains.

• Enabling Growth on the Merseyrail Network
Replacing the stock with higher capacity units with the capability to run on parts of the network where they do not currently; power upgrade to the network; improvements to station accessibility.

• Increasing Capacity in Liverpool City Centre
Encouraging more use of James St and Moorfields stations especially at peak times; extending and increasing platforms at Lime Street to accommodate additional services (including high speed trains); creating more platform space at Liverpool Central; investigating the potential for a new city centre station.

• Improving Connectivity on the City Line
Improving the level and quality of services in line with the success of Merseyrail. Increasing capacity at Wavertree junction for services between Mossley Hill and Edge Hill; extending Merseyrail services between South Parkway and the Airport, Speke and Runcorn; creating new stations to serve the universities and Smithdown Road corridor.

• Facilitating a High Quality Service on the Cheshire Line
Electrification and capacity enhancements allowing for more and faster trains; extending Merseyrail services to Warrington and beyond; new stations at Tarbock Interchange (or Halewood South) and Warrington West.

• Connecting via Halton Curve
Restoring direct connections to Wrexham and North Wales from Liverpool and Liverpool Airport; faster journeys and increased frequency to Chester; direct link to Frodsham and Helsby; creating an alternative route between Liverpool and Cardiff via Shrewsbury.

• Improving Connections to Chester and Ellesmere Port
Electrification of Chester–Crewe line (Crewe being HS2 hub), North Wales mainline and Chester– Warrington line and Ellesmere Port – Helsby line; new route between Chester and Leeds via Newton-le-Willows.

• Serving New Development on the Southport – Wigan and Ormskirk – Preston Line
Improving links with new developments in West Lancashire and South Preston. Electrification of the Ormskirk – Preston line; reinstatement of Burscough curves between Ormskirk/Preston and Southport directions; interchange station at Burscough Bridge allowing connections between Ormskirk/Liverpool services and Southport/Wigan services.

• Connecting to Skelmersdale and New Development in Wigan
Electrification of the line between Kirkby and Wigan; electric spurs between Rainford and Skelmersdale and Upholland and Skelmersdale; new stations at Headbolt Lane (Kirkby) and Skelmersdale; increased services between Kirkby and Manchester Victoria/Rochdale line.

• Enhancing the Borderlands Line
Increasing service frequency between Wrexham and Bidston; new station at Deeside industrial Park; full electrification of the line longer term. This would be incorporated into the Merseyrail Wirral line.

• Converting Freight Lines to Passenger Usage
Review the findings of the Northern Ports study to better understand the requirements for freight access to Port of Liverpool, but current plans include upgrade of North Mersey and Bootle branchlines to passenger services creating new routes to Ormskirk and Edge Hill; new stations at Anfield, Tuebrook and Edge Lane.

• Selected New Stations
Responding to new developments, new markets and areas of latent demand, including stations that do not fit into other packages. Proposed new stations at Carr Mill, Ditton, Maghull North, St James, Vauxhall, Town Meadow. All these would be subject to an evaluation exercise to better understand the potential. This would have to be satisfied before progressing to the statutory development framework (GRIP stages).

To read the Committee report and Long Term Rail Strategy in full, please visit the website http://moderngov.merseytravel.uk.net/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=1109&x=1 "

http://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/abou...ear-rail-future-detailed-in-new-strategy.aspx


Having read this several times I am yet to see any mention of Tram or Tram-Train lines, instead I see reference to electrification and re-openings as well as faster trains, something that a tram-train is unlikely to be.

I'm not disputing the cruise business can grow, and yes it needs promotion and this is already happening as both Fred Olsen and P&O are currently advertising on Bauer commercial radio network across the North of England as an example, including specific mentions to cruising from Liverpool. I'm not sure the number of hotels being required is accurate as despite the recession there has been a mini boom in creating a wide variety of hotels in the city centre over the last few years. Of course we should not forget that the cruise business is only part of the reason why hotels are required in the city, the Liverpool Echo Arena and Bt Confernce facilities generate huge numbers of visitors as do the two major football clubs whose stadiums are due to be extended or rebuilt in the coming years. Add traditional tourist attractions such as the global interest in the Beatles, and of course three Universities
and it becomes apparent that increasing Liverpool's direct connectivity by rail become more important and urgent.

I would not dispute that not many passengers travel the full length of the line from Southport to Hunts Cross, in the same way there are probably very few passengers who travel on the 60, 61, 68 and 81 bus routes which cross the city from north to south but you will find most of these services are full at various times of the day and in various different places. If you curtail all the Northern Line services at Central, every train has to reverse in the same way that Ormskirk and Kirkby line trains have too. This causes delays and limits the capacity of the Central Station which is reaching capacity. If the Edge Hill Spur is constructed the Ormskirk and Kirkby trains could continue on through the spur on to the City Line, assuming of course the new Merseyrail stock is dual voltage which seems to be the likely option. This not only would boost capacity of Central but it would lead to more efficient use of rolling stock as it would no longer be sitting in a station waiting for it's next turn. Instead the train is carrying passengers and thus raising revenue for the operator to the benefit of all concerned. The new travel opportunities would also benefit the Merseyside public as not every passenger wants to travel to and from the outskirts of the city to and from the city centre as you and many others suggest.

My suggestion for a Merseyrail Blackpool service via the Bootle Branch and North Liverpool Line was just in illustration of perhaps what might be possible with a little thought. For example, let's say the fracking industry takes off on the Flyde coast, there could be a need for more services to and from Blackpool. It may be difficult to add additional services to say Manchester, but terminating a Merseyrail service at Blackpool could provide additional capacity between there and Preston where passengers could then reach Manchester or London etc on other services. At the same time the same train would provide the capacity between Preston and Ormskirk and also relieve capacity between there and Liverpool. passengers wishing to travel to Moorfields, Central or beyond could change at Bootle Oriel Road, or stay on the same train to Lime Street via the Bootle Branch providing new travel opportunities in both direction for residents along this section of the route. I'm not necessarily saying the service would be branded as Merseyrail, as it will probably be operated by the new Northern franchise operator, in the same way that Northern already operates service for Merseytravel on the City Line. The same model could also be used for other "Merseyrail extensions" but all are likely to see improvements to the ticketing arrangements to protect revenue.

I doubt there is football ground in the country were 60000 supporters are going to use the train to attend a football match, witness the queue of traffic at the end of M62 at the Rocket and along Queens Drive from Liverpool and Everton home games. A station at Townsend Lane would not only serve the football grounds on match days as it would serve the whole area to the wider benefit of the community for the rest of the week. The Outer Loop does not feature in the strategy plan so it must be assumed that even if Everton relocate to Walton Hall Park any resumption of services along the Outer Loop is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future. As for mixing freight with passenger services, I have proposed an alternative route via the Kirkby to Wigan line for freight services which would alleviate the problem. Much is also going to depend on which projects Merseytravel implement first together with the volumes of freight moving through the Port of Liverpool. Please also consider that it's highly likely that at least initially the majority of intermodal trains would operate over night when passengers are either reducing in frequency or have ceased altogether.

The present Prime Minister and Chancellor certainly seem supportive of Liverpool, when last did any Tory PM visit the City so often in recent history? The Power House of the North proposal would seem to suggest the big Northern Cities should be better connected and HS3 would appear to be one of the projects which would be the heart of idea. Connecting Liverpool to HS2 would then be far easier to justify, especially if phase1 was extended to Crewe as Higgins proposed last year. The Northern Councils are also generally supportive of the scheme despite their differences on other policies with the current Government as everybody appears to recognise that investment in infrastructure is becoming increasing necessary to help boost the economic of the whole of the North of England.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,440
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
The map of the Waterloo Tunnel. The track needs to run over the Costco site to make a turn south. It is best any tram-trains run along the Dock Rd and into Liverpool Waters running over cheap concrete bridges across dock water spaces, as in London's Docklands.

I do so wish that you had not made reference to those proposed bridges in that particular terminology that I have emboldened.. Any bridges should be constructed in a manner that will be acceptable in engineering parlance, noting the public transport that will be making use of them.
 

flypie

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
225
I did raise the the lack of Train Tram with the head of the committee that received the report, the response was that the plan was not fixed and would evolve in response to developments.
I think by not officially placing all rail development, tram, train-Tram and suburban heavy rail with Merseyrail, we are likely not to get a sensible system.
 

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
709
I did raise the the lack of Train Tram with the head of the committee that received the report, the response was that the plan was not fixed and would evolve in response to developments.
I think by not officially placing all rail development, tram, train-Tram and suburban heavy rail with Merseyrail, we are likely not to get a sensible system.

I could see in the very long term a tram service from Liverpool Waters to the perhaps Harrington Dock working, with a loop through Liverpool 1 into Lord and Church Street, Bold Street back down to the dock road near the present police HQ. A junction at Lord Street and Whitechapel would a allow another root along towards either William Brown Street and along Lime Street and down Elliot Street to Church Street. Most of these routes would be existing pedestrian areas so disruption to traffic would be minimal.
 

flypie

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
225
I could see in the very long term a tram service from Liverpool Waters to the perhaps Harrington Dock working, with a loop through Liverpool 1 into Lord and Church Street, Bold Street back down to the dock road near the present police HQ. A junction at Lord Street and Whitechapel would a allow another root along towards either William Brown Street and along Lime Street and down Elliot Street to Church Street. Most of these routes would be existing pedestrian areas so disruption to traffic would be minimal.

If you going as far at Harrington you might as well use the old LOR tunnel to get you to Dingle. Not sure how high the tunnel floor is but you need about 100m to climb 6.5 meters, using the maximum gradient on MetroLink.
 

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
709
If you going as far at Harrington you might as well use the old LOR tunnel to get you to Dingle. Not sure how high the tunnel floor is but you need about 100m to climb 6.5 meters, using the maximum gradient on MetroLink.

I was actually thinking that the South Liverpool line would run largely with old dock estate where the old MDHB lines once ran, but I stress it would only proceed if you were building a similar system to connect Liverpool Waters to the Pier Head area and beyond.
 

UrbanWorld

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2014
Messages
106
If you going as far at Harrington you might as well use the old LOR tunnel to get you to Dingle. Not sure how high the tunnel floor is but you need about 100m to climb 6.5 meters, using the maximum gradient on MetroLink.
The LOR Dingle Tunnel was designed to extend further inland from Dingle station. If the station is to be reused the tram-trains may as well run to the surface after Dingle station and run south down Aigburth Rd.

Any trams have to be tram-trains to merge into Merseyrail. Stand-alone tram networks will not deliver.
 

UrbanWorld

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2014
Messages
106
Yes Liverpool Waters and Wirral Waters will need connecting with public transport to the rest of their local networks. Liverpool Waters being somewhat remote from the city centre could be connected to Edge Hill through the Waterloo Tunnel, but this would mean that City Line trains would no longer serve Lime Street, or potentially Central or Exchange Stations.
Liverpool Waters will merge into the city centre. The centre is moving to the waterfront.

Atlantic junction and the path to Canada Dock are protected against development. Freight is the best use of this short path. The Dock estate has to acquire more land and remove the Dock Road in the north end. This has been partially removed. Then trains can freely run along the docks. Freight lines will need to be extended to cope with the increased wood pellet trade from the USA. Atlantic Junction is a way from Liverpool Waters.

The City Line is best taken out of mainline Lime St. All urban rail should be taken underground.

Buses can only be a temporary infill.

• Improving National Passenger and Freight Connections
Increasing frequency of Liverpool – London services; new direct routes including to Scotland and South Wales; extending platforms at Liverpool South Parkway to take longer trains.
Freight is essential.

• Increasing Capacity in Liverpool City Centre
Encouraging more use of James St and Moorfields stations especially at peak times; extending and increasing platforms at Lime Street to accommodate additional services (including high speed trains); creating more platform space at Liverpool Central; investigating the potential for a new city centre station.
Unlike London, Liverpool does not have multiple entrances/exits to metro stations. Central needs an entrance in Leece St. Moorfields needs a few more around the station. James St needs another elevator at the far end of the platforms. The same can be said for Hamilton Square.

• Facilitating a High Quality Service on the Cheshire Line
Electrification and capacity enhancements allowing for more and faster trains; extending Merseyrail services to Warrington and beyond; new stations at Tarbock Interchange (or Halewood South) and Warrington West.
Runcorn and Widnes need to be brought onto Merseyrail. Runcorn is easier as it is electrified.
• Serving New Development on the Southport – Wigan and Ormskirk – Preston Line
Improving links with new developments in West Lancashire and South Preston. Electrification of the Ormskirk – Preston line; reinstatement of Burscough curves between Ormskirk/Preston and Southport directions; interchange station at Burscough Bridge allowing connections between Ormskirk/Liverpool services and Southport/Wigan services.
They want Preston as Merseyrail termimus.
• Connecting to Skelmersdale and New Development in Wigan
Electrification of the line between Kirkby and Wigan; electric spurs between Rainford and Skelmersdale and Upholland and Skelmersdale; new stations at Headbolt Lane (Kirkby) and Skelmersdale; increased services between Kirkby and Manchester Victoria/Rochdale line.
Manchester want their trams to terminate at Wigan. Merseyrail could terminate at Wigan via Kirkby, fully electrifying the northern Liverpool-Manchester line.
• Converting Freight Lines to Passenger Usage
Review the findings of the Northern Ports study to better understand the requirements for freight access to Port of Liverpool, but current plans include upgrade of North Mersey and Bootle branchlines to passenger services creating new routes to Ormskirk and Edge Hill; new stations at Anfield, Tuebrook and Edge Lane.
Passengers on the Bootle Branch line may be short lived if freight predictions out of the port are accurate enough.

The 30 years document (wish list) does not mention any specific type of train either. It is broadbrush. Much of it depends on HS3/HS2, if they are run into the city. HS3, in a dumbed down affair, looks like entering the city. Updating the local rail can make space for long haul routes. So both are inter-dependent. Central needs expanding with the 30 yr doc stating so. THis can go hand in hand with any new lines into the city.
not every passenger wants to travel to and from the outskirts of the city to and from the city centre as you and many others suggest.
That is where the Outer Loop comes in. The Outer Loop should keep many thousands of football fans away from the city centre.

Merseyrail to Blackpool is like having Merseyrail extend to Manchester. Merseyrail is primarily a local metro. There has to be a cut-off point.

60000 supporters at Arsenal mainly use rail to and from he stadium. Liverpool can achieve something approaching Arsenal. The 30 year plan was formulated before EFC had nailed down Walton Hall Park, so no mention of the Outer Loop reuse.
The present Prime Minister and Chancellor certainly seem supportive of Liverpool, when last did any Tory PM visit the City so often in recent history?
They are? More like vote grabbing. I see HS2 is off the menu at Liverpool and they are on about a high-speed link on HS3 between Mcr and Leeds only. Wait and see after a new gvmt in May. What this bunch say is worthless. The Tory hatred towards the city is no secret. I live in London and believe me the city is not liked because te Daily mail said so. It looks like a Labour led coalition may come about in May. They may be more favourable to Liverpool. We must wait; probably until summer after any new gvmt gets its bum in the seats.
 

Olaf

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2014
Messages
1,054
Location
UK
Aside from all the fantasies, have there been an substantial developments in the plan over the last two months?
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Not really, its all the academic feasibility studies stage. There wont be any significant advancement until the next round of infrastructure funding becomes available, the next NR Control period begins and they finally get round to ordering some trains.
 

Olaf

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2014
Messages
1,054
Location
UK
Meanwhile the the cost of procuring the new trains has likely passed the £5m mark.

Given that there is no substance to any of teh proposals they have made they should be getting started now on building their case - they can not always rely Labour giving them freebies.
 

L+Y

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2011
Messages
452
Given that there is no substance to any of teh proposals they have made they should be getting started now on building their case - they can not always rely Labour giving them freebies.

To be political, here, might it be the case that a lot of these Northern Labour councils can rely on a Labour Government not giving them freebies? Labour, unlike the Tories, has no real incentive to prove goodwill towards the North.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
You saying they are above pork barrel politics of the US? Don't think anyone could deny Osbornes been flashing the cash in his local area.
 

UrbanWorld

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2014
Messages
106
Was there not structural problems in recent times with the former LOR Dingle tunnel?
A short section of the roof collapsed. It was not that serous. It just needed all putting back properly. The tunnel if in constant passenger use would have had periodic structural inspections, which has not happened for nearly 60 years.
 

L+Y

Member
Joined
4 Jul 2011
Messages
452
You saying they are above pork barrel politics of the US? Don't think anyone could deny Osbornes been flashing the cash in his local area.

Not at all: my point is that Labour in areas like Liverpool and Manchester don't need to bother pork barreling: the only relevant barrels in these areas are barrels of Labour votes!

Away from politics, I got a response from a chap who knows the ex L+Y network around North Liverpool like the back of his hand, about the de-electrification of the North Mersey Branch ad discussed a few pages back. He reports it was still used for empty stock EMU movements until 1963. Given the lack of space at Exchange station (Kirkdale depot was of course not built until 1976) EMUs immediately before and after the peaks would run along the North Mersey to stable in Aintree's excursion platforms, before rejoining the main system at peak times. He thinks that the power was turned off sometime in 1964.
 

martynbristow

Member
Joined
15 Jun 2005
Messages
426
Location
Birkenhead
Unlike London, Liverpool does not have multiple entrances/exits to metro stations. Central needs an entrance in Leece St. Moorfields needs a few more around the station. James St needs another elevator at the far end of the platforms. The same can be said for Hamilton Square.

Runcorn and Widnes need to be brought onto Merseyrail. Runcorn is easier as it is electrified.

They want Preston as Merseyrail terminus.
Sorry cut the original post down to make it easier.
I think going to Preston is essential, with the Northern Electrification potentially Northern could be split moving the EMU operations to Merseyrail in the future. Dual stock on the whole Merseyrail network.

The Merseyrail stations have nearly all had lots of money *sprucing them up*. But its not improved them really just a lick of paint really, it hasn't improved the huge passenger flow issues, as much as i think your idea is brilliant its a non starter. I read the network rail RUS before the redevelopment and the advice wasn't followed.
 

Wavertreelad

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2013
Messages
709
Liverpool Waters will merge into the city centre. The centre is moving to the waterfront.
.

Liverpool1 certainly did, but that was largely because it was built between the traditional retail area and the "new" waterfront attractions such as Albert Dock and Liverpool Echo Arena. Liverpool Waters is never going to have the same appeal because of the commercial developments at Princes Dock and around Old Hall Street. The official Liverpool Waters website describes the development as having mixed use floor space and planning permission for a cruise terminal, this one presumably operated by Peel Ports. It would therefore be reasonable to assume the site will comprise a mixture of retail and office accommodation with either high quality residential or hotel accommodation either above the retail outlets or in high quality locations around the site. Connecting the site to rest of Liverpool City Centre with a quality public transport would be possible initially with buses, but I'd agree a tram service perhaps linking it with Princes Dock, The Three Graces and Liverpool 1 could be possible without huge amounts of distruption to the Strand if an underpass could be constructed. There could be an option to extend the route to encompass the docks to the south of Liverpool 1 but building the whole network would be extremely costly with the difficulty that Peel might be willing to fund the northern section, but finding a willing party to pay for the rest might prove to be difficult and it's unlikely it would be funded in the foreseeable future though public funds.[/QUOTE]

Atlantic junction and the path to Canada Dock are protected against development. Freight is the best use of this short path. The Dock estate has to acquire more land and remove the Dock Road in the north end. This has been partially removed. Then trains can freely run along the docks. Freight lines will need to be extended to cope with the increased wood pellet trade from the USA. Atlantic Junction is a way from Liverpool Waters.

I'd largely agree, interestingly the "recent" improvement to the dock road focussed on a section just to the north of where the Canada Dock Branch tracks cross the Dock Road to Millers Bridge. Constructing a south facing connection to avoid the need to reverse around trains would probably be possible by installing a junction where the existing route emerges under Derby Road, but in order to reach Canada and Huskisson Docks, would require the entrance to the Bibby site to be modified which would probably be a lot cheaper than reopening the Canada Dock Branch. [/QUOTE]

The City Line is best taken out of mainline Lime St. All urban rail should be taken underground.

Buses can only be a temporary infill. .

I think it would be difficult to take all the City Line trains out of Lime Street because it would potentially require a huge increase in capacity of say Central Station which is going to be expensive.

There will always be services which buses can provide more economically than the train, and they have been around a long time.

Freight is essential.

Would not disagree

Unlike London, Liverpool does not have multiple entrances/exits to metro stations. Central needs an entrance in Leece St. Moorfields needs a few more around the station. James St needs another elevator at the far end of the platforms. The same can be said for Hamilton Square..

I'm note sure building more entrances/exists is necessarily going to solve the overcrowding problems, but I did see talk fairly recently of connecting James Street to the other side of the Strand which would make access from the Pier Head and the Three Graces considerably easier. Moorfields requires a complete rebuild.

Runcorn and Widnes need to be brought onto Merseyrail. Runcorn is easier as it is electrified.

They want Preston as Merseyrail termimus.

Manchester want their trams to terminate at Wigan. Merseyrail could terminate at Wigan via Kirkby, fully electrifying the northern Liverpool-Manchester line.

I'm not sure that all the proposed extensions proposed by Merseytravel necessarily mean that the services would be operated by Merseyrail. I suspect that it would be in all parties interests if some were operated by the successor to Northern, like the City line but perhaps with Merseyrail ticketing arrangements.

I'd agree Runcorn is a no brainer assuming a local service is started running via Halton curve to Chester and/or Wrexham. Widnes will likely be included when the CLC Route is eventually electrified but then why stop at Widnes when it would make more sense to include the route to Warrington?

Electrifying Ormskirk to Preston is another example of were the service may not be operated by Merseyrail, if the Bootle Branch was electrified. As I posted earlier, this would allow the Northern successor to operate Preston to Lime Street services whilst Merseyrail continued to serve Ormskirk to Central and perhaps beyond. On the other hand electrifying the Kirkby to Wigan line and Bidston to Wrexham line could be operated by Merseyrail dual voltage stock..[/QUOTE]

Passengers on the Bootle Branch line may be short lived if freight predictions out of the port are accurate enough.

Assuming that any passenger services along the branch would be towards Preston or beyond the most intensive service is unlikely to exceed four trains per hour during the day, which I suspect would still allow enough capacity for freight, especially if there was another alternative via the Kirkby to Wigan line.
.[/QUOTE]

The 30 years document (wish list) does not mention any specific type of train either. It is broadbrush. Much of it depends on HS3/HS2, if they are run into the city. HS3, in a dumbed down affair, looks like entering the city. Updating the local rail can make space for long haul routes. So both are inter-dependent. Central needs expanding with the 30 yr doc stating so. THis can go hand in hand with any new lines into the city.

That is where the Outer Loop comes in. The Outer Loop should keep many thousands of football fans away from the city centre.
.

Independent of the 30 year plan I believe Merseytravel have indicated that the future stock will be dual voltage. I'd certainly agree that the plan is to a certain extent interdependent on HS2/HS3 but whether the Outer Loop features in the Merseytravel plan or HS2/3 plans is another matter, but I could see the southern section reopened perhaps as far as the Broadgreen area.


Merseyrail to Blackpool is like having Merseyrail extend to Manchester. Merseyrail is primarily a local metro. There has to be a cut-off point..

A Blackpool stopper service via the Bootle Branch, North Liverpool Line and Ormskirk to Preston line would probably not be operated by Merseyrail, but again like the City Line to Warrington etc it would be operated by the successor to Northern with joint ticketing in the Merseytravel region.

60000 supporters at Arsenal mainly use rail to and from he stadium. Liverpool can achieve something approaching Arsenal. The 30 year plan was formulated before EFC had nailed down Walton Hall Park, so no mention of the Outer Loop reuse.
.
Yes but the Emirates Stadium is in London which as you have already observed has an excellent metro system which covers all of London. There are large parts of the Liverpool area which have no access to Merseyrail or the City Line so it's very unlikely that even when the Anfield rebuilding scheme is completed that it could attract a substantial number of fans by rail. Equally if Evertons plans come to fruition, any station on the Outer Loop route would be further away from Anfield thus further reducing the chances of it's use on match days.

They are? More like vote grabbing. I see HS2 is off the menu at Liverpool and they are on about a high-speed link on HS3 between Mcr and Leeds only. Wait and see after a new gvmt in May. What this bunch say is worthless. The Tory hatred towards the city is no secret. I live in London and believe me the city is not liked because te Daily mail said so. It looks like a Labour led coalition may come about in May. They may be more favourable to Liverpool. We must wait; probably until summer after any new gvmt gets its bum in the seats.

I can't see the logic of the Tory party trying to grab votes with HS3 in the North of England, especially in the major cities of Liverpool, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield and Hull which are run by Labour controlled councils. Furthermore, I can't imagine building a HS3 line is going to be vote changer for many voters, although in reverse I could see HS2 being a vote changer in the south of England in the constituencies through which the line will pass. I wouldn't believe everything you read in the Daily Mail and whilst the Tory party and Liverpool City Council may have had disagreements in the past, and still do there appears to be an acceptance on both sides that it is in both their interests to work together at least on some projects including HS2/3. Whilst I agree nothing definite has come out of Whitehall to indicate that phase 2 of HS2 has been changed yet, the development of HS3 and the Power House of the North scheme, again promoted this week by both the Prime Minister and Chancellor in the North West, would seem to make HS2 more plausible. I'm also not sure that Labour would offer any advantage to the Northern Cities especially if it didn't have a substantial majority in the House of Commons.

Sorry cut the original post down to make it easier.
I think going to Preston is essential, with the Northern Electrification potentially Northern could be split moving the EMU operations to Merseyrail in the future. Dual stock on the whole Merseyrail network.

The Merseyrail stations have nearly all had lots of money *sprucing them up*. But its not improved them really just a lick of paint really, it hasn't improved the huge passenger flow issues, as much as i think your idea is brilliant its a non starter. I read the network rail RUS before the redevelopment and the advice wasn't followed.

I'd agree electrification to Preston from Ormskirk would seem desirable it does to my mind not automatically mean that services would be operated by Merseyrail, although I'd agree dual voltage Merseyrail stock is an absolute must for serving other routes that could be extended.

I'd agree Merseytravel has spruced up many of the Merseyrail and City Line stations without really expanding the capacity of them or the network. Liverpool South Parkway is now only beginning to see the intended passenger footfall, but there remains complaints about the lack of parking during the week, a complaint common to many other Merseyrail stations. Once Hamilton Square is finished later this year, Moorfields will be the only major station still to undergo a major refurbishment, and it shows, so the funds should be available to spruce up some of the other stations on the network. I also read that Merseytravel are introducing the local equivalent of the Oyster card on the regions buses to be followed by the rail network. Once would assume this would also extend to the City Line services which combined with more train capacity should enable better revenue protection to the benefit of all.
 

flypie

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2014
Messages
225
One thing to keep in mind is that by extending the Wirral line from Ellsmere port to Warrington BQ can add a lot of places including Runcorn to the Merseyrail network. Going East from Ellesmere port is a nightmare often people end up going via Chester.
 
Last edited:

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
7,352
There are about 50 cruise ships scheduled to visit Liverpool during 2015, with a maximum during late spring & summer, but also some gaps of 2-3 months in winter & autumn. I see no way that anyone is going to spend a fortune to provide rail, or tram-train facilities when there is no passenger need for long periods. Rail construction is expensive and needs a consistent daily demand to have any hope of justifying the expenditure.

Likewise, a station for football - with little more than 50 match days per year - there are over 300 days each year without football matches. It is hard to justify spending lots of money on a facility that will only see significant use on only about one day in seven.

(Plus, hopefully, Everton will not be allowed to wreck Walton Hall Park - indeed they may even have descended to lower levels before they get the chance to build a new stadium.)

Even Merseytravel can dream of what it might like to happen, but it is our money that they would need to spend, and if they are seen to be wasting our money, the council representatives are liable to find themselves "off the council" at elections.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top