Mid-Cheshire Line Post-December 2017 Timetable

[Greybeard33]

From the Northern ITT and associated TSRs, the following can be deduced about the post-Dec 2017 weekday timetable on the Mid-Cheshire:

• The existing two morning peak Chester to Stockport and the two evening peak Stockport to Chester services will be extended to Manchester, continuing to call at all stations between Chester and Stockport
• The existing morning peak Chester to Manchester and evening peak Manchester to Chester services will also continue to call at all stations between Chester and Stockport
• There will be an additional hourly off-peak and contra-peak service between Northwich and Manchester, calling at all stations between Northwich and Stockport
• The existing hourly off-peak and contra-peak services between Chester and Manchester will become semi-fast between Northwich and Stockport, calling at Knutsford and Altrincham only
• One of the morning contra-peak services to Northwich will terminate at Greenbank

Clearly the stations that will benefit most will be Northwich, Knutsford and Altrincham, with 2tph off-peak.

Greenbank, Cuddington, Delamere, Mouldsworth and Chester will gain faster off-peak journey times to/from Altrincham, Stockport and Manchester.

Navigation Road, Hale, Ashley, Mobberley, Plumley and Lostock Gralam will have a worse service than at present, in that they will no longer have through trains to/from Chester off-peak.

The new timetable seems rather harsh on Navigation Road, Hale and Greenbank, which had 2014 footfall of 94000, 164000 and 177000 respectively (ORR figures).

Navigation Road (unlike Altrincham) has a large free car park and is well used by railheaders and cyclists. I suppose (with integrated ticketing) the railheaders could take the Metrolink to Altrincham to change to the semi-fast services, and the cyclists (who cannot use Metrolink) could cycle to Altrincham instead. Navigation Road is on a single line section, so stops there are particularly detrimental to line capacity.

Hale is only 20 minutes walk from Altrincham, but I doubt that many existing users would walk to Altrincham to get the semi-fast service. The bus service between Hale and Altrincham is slow and infrequent.

 

[edwin_m]

How many passengers travel between the smaller stations east of Northwich and stations west of Northwich?

Greenbank will have a better service; presumably by being hard on it you are suggesting that the Northwich terminator should finish there instead? I've a feeling that would need some signalling changes unless the train goes empty to the CLC junction to reverse there, which might break the timetable given the constraints of the single line sections at both ends. Also terminating at Northwich keeps open the prospect of reopening to Middlewich sometime in the future.

Navigation Road is about 10min brisk walk from Altrincham, as I found out one day when the trams were terminating short there. Integrated ticketing would be good.

 

[WatcherZero]

Its minimum spec rather than what will happen, bidder could include extra stops if they can fit them in. The Spec is however quite close to what I suggested as an alternate to MCRUAs campaign for an extra limited stop express.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Its minimum spec rather than what will happen, bidder could include extra stops if they can fit them in. The Spec is however quite close to what I suggested as an alternate to MCRUAs campaign for an extra limited stop express.

I am surprised that a certain forum member who makes many postings concerning the mid-Cheshire line has yet to make a posting on this thread.

 

[Philip]

I think it'd be a good idea to run the semi-fast from Chester through to Bolton or Preston to give better connections to places north of Manchester. Maybe it could join up with the new service from New Mills at Stockport then run doubled up as a portion train to Manchester and Bolton and vice versa? The proposed second train from Stockport to Bolton could come from Alderley Edge as an EMU.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

You can't please all the folks all the time, but I think the proposed timetable is a vast improvement on the current service. The principal traffic flows, I would suggest, are to / from Manchester for employment and leisure purposes rather than Chester. The current service is interminably slow (88 minutes for 45 1/4 miles), especially in a heavily laden Pacer! This adopts the model common in the London area by serving all stations in the outer area and then running fast to town. Intermediate stations to Northwich can access Chester by changing there - or at Knutsford - they are not exactly being cut-off. The proposal also restores through Piccadilly services in the peak, which avoids the lottery of taking Metrolink to Altrincham and hoping your (hourly) train hasn't departed.

 

[pemma]

I am surprised that a certain forum member who makes many postings concerning the mid-Cheshire line has yet to make a posting on this thread.

If you mean me - give me a chance. The thread was started after I went to bed last night.

I think at school/college finishing times the semi-fast service will make additional calls at Lostock Gralam (to keep a direct Lostock Gralam-Greenbank service) and also at Hale (which gets a lot of scholars.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think it'd be a good idea to run the semi-fast from Chester through to Bolton or Preston to give better connections to places north of Manchester. Maybe it could join up with the new service from New Mills at Stockport then run doubled up as a portion train to Manchester and Bolton and vice versa? The proposed second train from Stockport to Bolton could come from Alderley Edge as an EMU.

The ITT does include a requirement for 2tph between Stockport and Bolton.

Maybe the best way to do that is for Crewe-Stockport-Manchester and Alderley Edge-Stockport-Manchester services to continue to Bolton and beyond to give a roughly half-hourly service using large EMUs opposed to 2 car DMUs?

 

[Philip]

If you mean me - give me a chance. The thread was started after I went to bed last night.

I think at school/college finishing times the semi-fast service will make additional calls at Lostock Gralam (to keep a direct Lostock Gralam-Greenbank service) and also at Hale (which gets a lot of scholars.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The ITT does include a requirement for 2tph between Stockport and Bolton.

Maybe the best way to do that is for Crewe-Stockport-Manchester and Alderley Edge-Stockport-Manchester services to continue to Bolton and beyond to give a roughly half-hourly service using large EMUs opposed to 2 car DMUs?

Ideally it could be split 3 ways to give direct services between the North Manchester area and Chester, Crewe and Hazel Grove. Could push the boat at further and use 175s for the Chester semi-fasts, if stock transfers between ATW and Northern is a possibility.

 

[gordonthemoron]

this should be good for levelling the demand for the 'bank' buses from Knutsford Station as most workers are travelling to/from Manchester direction in the contra peak, although a number do get on/off at Hale. There seems far less demand from the Chester direction although there is some

 

[Greybeard33]

Maybe the best way to do that is for Crewe-Stockport-Manchester and Alderley Edge-Stockport-Manchester services to continue to Bolton and beyond to give a roughly half-hourly service using large EMUs opposed to 2 car DMUs?

From a timetable resilience point of view it would be better for the existing Hazel Grove to Preston service (which will become EMU) to continue and Alderley Edge to provide the additional 1tph link to Bolton, rather than linking the Crewe service. On the present timetable that would provide a maximum 44 minute interval (between southbound services), but it might be possible to reduce that in the 2017 timetable recast.

 

[pemma]

From a timetable resilience point of view it would be better for the existing Hazel Grove to Preston service (which will become EMU) to continue and Alderley Edge to provide the additional 1tph link to Bolton, rather than linking the Crewe service. On the present timetable that would provide a maximum 44 minute interval (between southbound services), but it might be possible to reduce that in the 2017 timetable recast.

They'll also be extra Macclesfield-Piccadilly services which will be electric.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

They'll also be extra Macclesfield-Piccadilly services which will be electric.

Which pleases me greatly.

 

[Greybeard33]

Which pleases me greatly.

Unfortunately, Paul, Prestbury is also slated to suffer from being skipped, like the lesser stations on the Mid-Cheshire. It looks as though the Stoke service will run fast between Poynton and Macclesfield off-peak, so you will still only have 1tph and no longer have through trains to Stoke.

Incidentally, this change might enable 319s to replace 323s on the Stoke line without holding up the following express, so that the Northern franchise could send the 323s to join their siblings in the Midlands and standardise on a 319 EMU fleet. The more sluggish 319 might be able to take advantage of its 100mph top speed on the semi-fast Stoke service. The ITT requires the franchisee to retain the 333s, at least until July 2020, but there is no such stipulation for the 32x's.

 

[pemma]

Incidentally, this change might enable 319s to replace 323s on the Stoke line without holding up the following express

With Macclesfield/Stoke services it looks like at peak times stations like Prestbury will still get 2tph so it may not make any difference for some diagrams. I know Northern had a nightmare trying to get a Stoke departure from Piccadilly pathed between 17:00 and 17:30, the 17:09 Deansgate-Stockport path was originally supposed to be for a Mid-Cheshire service but they couldn't put a Stoke service in the 17:09 path from Piccadilly, so they got switched.

The ITT requires the franchisee to retain the 333s, at least until July 2020, but there is no such stipulation for the 32x's.

There is a small requirement for the 32xs and 158s to remain in their respective areas or be replaced by trains fitted with CCTV, as they've all had CCTV fitted using PTE funding.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Someone's worked out the below as an illustrative example for running a December 2017 timetable on the Mid-Cheshire line to the minimum spec specified in the ITT.

Departures from Piccadilly:
06:15 Chester (all stations)
07:15 Chester (all stations)
07:45 Greenbank (all stations)
08:15 Chester (semi-fast between Stockport and Northwich)
08:45 Northwich (all stations)
09:15 Chester (semi-fast between Stockport and Northwich)
09:45 Northwich (all stations)
then at the same times each hour until:
16:15 Chester (all stations)
16:45 Chester (all stations)
17:15 Chester (all stations)
17:45 Chester (all stations)
18:15 Chester (all stations)
then hourly until
23:15 Chester (all stations)

Arrivals at Piccadilly:
07:30 Chester (all stations)
08:00 Chester (all stations)
08:30 Chester (all stations)
09:00 Chester (all stations)
09:30 Chester (all stations)
10:00 Northwich (all stations)
10:30 Chester (semi-fast between Northwich and Stockport)
then at the same times each hour until:
16:30 Chester (stopping at all stations to Northwich, then Knutsford, then all stations to Stockport)
17:00 Northwich (all stations)
17:30 Chester (semi-fast between Northwich and Stockport)
18:00 Northwich (all stations)
18:30 Chester (semi-fast between Northwich and Stockport)
19:00 Northwich (all stations)
19:30 Chester (stopping at all stations to Knutsford, then Altrincham and Stockport)
20:30 Chester (all stations)
21:30 Chester (all stations)
22:45 Chester (all stations)
00:15 Chester (all stations)

Obviously it's an illustrative example not an actual proposed timetable, a timetable as clockface as that probably won't work

 

[Greybeard33]

Someone's worked out the below as an illustrative example for running a December 2017 timetable on the Mid-Cheshire line to the minimum spec specified in the ITT.

Obviously it's an illustrative example not an actual proposed timetable, a timetable as clockface as that probably won't work

Thanks for posting this - it looks good as a first cut.

I think the approx. 15 minute turnround at Northwich is tight. I believe the present signalling requires a shunt move to get from the Chester-bound platform to the Manchester-bound platform, which would not leave much recovery time. It would be better if the signalling could be changed to allow "wrong road" departures towards Manchester from the Chester platform, up to the trailing crossover at Northwich East Junction. However, signalling changes seem to take forever and cost a fortune!

One pathing constraint is that opposing Chester and Northwich services will have to cross on the fairly short double track section between Sharston Junction and Deansgate Junction, in order to avoid conflicts on the Navigation Road or Cheadle single line sections. This may prove difficult to match with the available paths through Stockport and so require pathing allowances to be built into the timetable, increasing journey times.

in the evening peak, an issue is that the 1645 from Piccadilly continues to Chester, so the same diagram cannot form the final service from Northwich, arriving Piccadilly 1900. Maybe the 1515 to Chester could be a double (helping with the scholar crush) and the second unit could be uncoupled at Chester and depart about 1730 to form the 1900 arrival at Piccadilly?

 

[Philip]

Before the ITT came out, there were suggestions for a direct service between Sheffield and Chester which have now gone on the back-burner because of the Leeds/Calder Vale service. Would there be scope or paths for a future Chester-Sheffield service using the CLC route then the old Midland Heaton Mersey-New Mills line via the existing junction at Northenden? There is quadruple track between Hazel Grove and Disley Tunnel to allow slower freight trains to let express trains pass. Obviously paths on the Dore and Chinley route is an issue in itself but it seems a bit of a waste seeing that short section of line only used by freight when it could provide much quicker journeys between Chester and Sheffield than present. Is going through Manchester absolutely necessary?

 

[Ash Bridge]

Before the ITT came out, there were suggestions for a direct service between Sheffield and Chester which have now gone on the back-burner because of the Leeds/Calder Vale service. Would there be scope or paths for a future Chester-Sheffield service using the CLC route then the old Midland Heaton Mersey-New Mills line via the existing junction at Northenden? There is quadruple track between Hazel Grove and Disley Tunnel to allow slower freight trains to let express trains pass. Obviously paths on the Dore and Chinley route is an issue in itself but it seems a bit of a waste seeing that short section of line only used by freight when it could provide much quicker journeys between Chester and Sheffield than present. Is going through Manchester absolutely necessary?

Hazel Grove to Disley Tunnel is actually only double track. There is a short loop at the site of the former Hazel Grove Midland Station.

 

[Philip]

Hazel Grove to Disley Tunnel is actually only double track.

I'm sure there's a section just after the junction with 4 tracks, it is double track through the tunnel. Unless it's the Hazel Grove chord and the old Midland tracks running parallel but without any crossover?

 

[telstarbox]

At the moment the hourly connections at Stockport are 5 minutes for Sheffield to Chester (arrive xx25, depart xx30) and 12 minutes for Chester to Sheffield (arrive xx16, xx28) although in both directions passengers need to cross to the opposite platforms via the subway. Are these connections good enough to justify not running through services, considering the likely demand for through travel compared to the existing demand from Sheffield to Manchester?

 

[Ash Bridge]

I'm sure there's a section just after the junction with 4 tracks, it is double track through the tunnel. Unless it's the Hazel Grove chord and the old Midland tracks running parallel but without any crossover?

That's the section where the old midland station was sited, but I think you will find its a short stretch with 3 tracks. Edit: wrong about the the loop, more like what you describe above, although still only 3 tracks.

 

[edwin_m]

That's the section where the old midland station was sited, but I think you will find its a short stretch with 3 tracks.

Yes, there is one track that acts as a loop so that trains heading for the single freight line can wait if it is occupied, without blocking following trains heading for Hazel Grove.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Yes, there is one track that acts as a loop so that trains heading for the single freight line can wait if it is occupied, without blocking following trains heading for Hazel Grove.

That's what I was thinking at first Edwin, then I ended up disagreeing with myself thanks for clarifying !

 

[Philip]

It's a loop anyway so it seems plausible putting passenger services back onto the Hazel Grove-Heaton Mersey part. It seems to be one area which has never been explored as any suggestions of a through service between Chester and Sheffield has involved going through Manchester. I think even reopening Woodhead has been discussed more than making better use of the Midland line!

A service such as Chester-Northwich-Knutsford-Altrincham-Sheffield would surely cut journey times dramatically than the present best options of changing at Manchester or Stockport.

 

[edwin_m]

It's a loop anyway so it seems plausible putting passenger services back onto the Hazel Grove-Heaton Mersey part. It seems to be one area which has never been explored as any suggestions of a through service between Chester and Sheffield has involved going through Manchester. I think even reopening Woodhead has been discussed more than making better use of the Midland line!

A service such as Chester-Northwich-Knutsford-Altrincham-Sheffield would surely cut journey times dramatically than the present best options of changing at Manchester or Stockport.

It would, but although a direct Sheffield-Altrincham service would be really useful for me I can't see enough others needing it to make it a worthwhile use of a scarce path on either route. It would also conflict with TfGM's idea of using this route for tram-trains.

 

[Greybeard33]

It would, but although a direct Sheffield-Altrincham service would be really useful for me I can't see enough others needing it to make it a worthwhile use of a scarce path on either route. It would also conflict with TfGM's idea of using this route for tram-trains.

Even in the railway heyday of the early 20th century I don't think there were ever direct services between Chester and Sheffield. The only passenger trains that used the west to south chord at Cheadle Heath, which now forms part of the freight line, were Midland expresses from Liverpool Central to the South, via Warrington Central, Glazebrook, Millers Dale and Matlock.

It might have been possible to get from Chester Northgate to Sheffield Victoria via Woodhead without going through Manchester, by changing twice, at Altrincham and then Godley. But very few of the passengers on these three trains would have been making the end-to end journey.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It would, but although a direct Sheffield-Altrincham service would be really useful for me I can't see enough others needing it to make it a worthwhile use of a scarce path on either route. It would also conflict with TfGM's idea of using this route for tram-trains.

What is the number of daily freight trains in both directions that now use the line through the former Hazel Grove (Midland) station site ?

 

[Greybeard33]

What is the number of daily freight trains in both directions that now use the line through the former Hazel Grove (Midland) station site ?

Taking Tuesday 03 March as an example, and excluding Network Rail engineering trains but including light engine movements, RTT shows that there were 19 freight paths scheduled through Hazel Grove High Level Junction. 3 of these were over the Hazel Grove chord to/from the ex-LNWR route through Stockport and Denton. The other 16 were over the Mid-Cheshire Line via the ex-Midland route through Cheadle Heath. Only one was scheduled to wait in the Hazel Grove freight loop, on the site of the former station.

Only 3 of the 19 paths were actually used, the remainder being "runs as required" or cancelled. The three trains that ran were:
631F from Hope St Peakstone P.Sdgs (Salford) to Peak Forest Cemex Sdgs via Manchester Victoria and Stockport - passed at 0545
678K from Tunstead Sdgs (limestone quarry) to Lostock Works (Northwich) - passed at 1625 (this is the regular limestone working to the Tata soda ash plant)
677J from Willesden Euroterminal (NW London) to Tunstead Sdgs via Crewe, Middlewich and Northwich - passed at 1842.

 

[gordonthemoron]

are they also likely to do something about the poor Sunday service (i.e. 2 hourly and early finish)?

 

[pemma]

are they also likely to do something about the poor Sunday service (i.e. 2 hourly and early finish)?

Post-December 2017 requirement is for 14 Sunday services stopping at all stations.

In the Chester direction the first train must departure Manchester no later than 09:30 and the last train no earlier than 22:00. In the Manchester direction the first train must arrive at Manchester no later than 10:30 and the last train must arrive no earlier than 23:15.

 

[Altfish]

A service such as Chester-Northwich-Knutsford-Altrincham-Sheffield would surely cut journey times dramatically than the present best options of changing at Manchester or Stockport.

The current mid-Cheshire service to Stockport is very useful for catching London and other connections; missing it out would cause more problems than it solves.