MidnightFlyer
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 16 May 2010
- Messages
- 12,856
Are there 9 paths an hour (plus freight) throught the tunnels at Standedge / Diggle?
Last edited:
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
North TPE May 2014 proposed timetable
- Thread starter northwichcat
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Nym
Established Member
There is when the route is four tracked again and the loop re-opened giving 4 track between Diggle / Stalybridge and Huddersfeild.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I feel that areas such as Manchester and Liverpool can have a different case for routing services from the North-East. Why do you think that Newcastle was given the service link to Manchester Airport that currently exists, rather than a link to Liverpool, which admittedly is now in the new proposals.
Superiority, as you state, is not really the terminology to use in this matter.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
We have been at Durham today, as part of her monthly committee meetings that are held there. The Thirsk/Northallerton matter was covering travel to a sub-committee that, after only one meeting, was not really one that she wished to be a member of, despite other committee members pleading with her to take over as chair of that sub-committee.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
What is the current forward Network Rail proposal information on:-
1)...Four track lines in the area leading to the Standedge tunnels
2)...How many of the Standedge tunnels will eventally be in full service operation
3)...Will a station with both through and terminal bay platforms be reinstated at Diggle.
Last edited:
Waverley125
Member
Precisely my thoughts. There is space for 4 running lines from Dewsbury to Diggle, meaning that you'd only have to space trains between Stalybridge and Diggle. Currently that takes 13 minutes including calls at Greenfield and Mossley. If you re-open Diggle station (to allow for a call where trains would pass & swap paths) then as long as the stopper leaves immediately after the fast, it'll get to Stalybridge before the express, so yes, there's space.
On what the plan is, I would assume full reinstatement of 4 lines through Dewsbury-Diggle, as well as the reopening of Diggle station for through trains on both bores. There would possibly be implications for Stalybridge station as well, with an extension of the southern platform out to give a second platform face, and the reinstatement of the avoiding lines through the central reservation.
This would allow the Piccadilly-bound stoppers to leave the main line before the station, and continue to be isolated on the southern platform, while Wigan-Victoria-Stalybridge 'crossrail' trains could use the current platform one, where they could be passed by TPE services.
Last edited:
tbtc
Veteran Member
Why do you think that the Liverpool service currently runs to Hull?
Because of a rise in the number of Scousers wanting to watch The Chuckle Brothers on the Yorkshire Riviera? Or just because its a way of balancing the need for an hourly TPE service to Liverpool with an hourly TPE service to Scarborough (rather than any specific demand to travel from one to the other)?
Why are you happy for Middlesbrough to lose its direct link to Manchester Airport?
johnnychips
Established Member
The TPE Hull services start from Manchester Picc currently, not Liverpool.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I am glad that you made this posting....I thought for a minute that we were back in the good old days of the Class 124 units running the Liverpool to Hull service..
Waverley125
Member
I think the obvious requirement is for half-hourly services to Hull, Newcastle, Liverpool and Manchester Airport. Other than that, exact connections between them are irrelevant.
A couple per day do however run to Liverpool.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
I am only making a justification for some of your postings earlier this year, when you were querying the need for the number of places in the North of England who had a direct service to Manchester Airport. Middlesbrough would still be served from Manchester on a Liverpool - Manchester Victoria - York - Middlesbrough service, using the Chat Moss routing.
Do you consider that Middlesbrough would provide more passenger railway journeys to Manchester Airport than Newcastle, if a choice between the two were to be made?
Gareth
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 1,505
With deepest respect, you've not really answered my question here.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
There's a half-hourly semi-fast proposed with Slaithwaite, Marsden, Greenfield and Mossley served by one of the two every hour, with the Victoria-Huddersfield service withdrawn. I've not heard anything about them calling at Morley and Mirfield, the Huddersfield-Leeds stopper will continue to be half-hourly.
Based on the proposed May 2014 TPE timetable with 5 trains between Manchester and Leeds I think it's likely that one of the two semi-fasts will continue to Hull or York.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
If you look back at the ATN timetables you'll find it was a Liverpool-Newcastle-Sunderland service. The changes were made more for punctuality reasons than for passenger benefit - the shorter the services the less chance of delays.
pdq
Member
- Joined
- 7 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 849
Currently there's only one LDS - HUD stopper (via Dewsbury) an hour. The other stopper through DEW is the LDS - Man Vic via Brighouse.
Can't say I'm thrilled about losing the fast service from DEW to MAN. Do you reckon the morning and afternoon peaks would retain the fast link, or am I looking at a substantial increase in my travel time?
northwichcat
Veteran Member
Yes you're right. There's no plans to remove local services through Dewsbury or Mirfield anyway.
Depends what you mean by the fast services. The 07:34 Dewsbury-Manchester Airport service calls at Stalybridge as well. So 2 extra calls may add around 3-4 minutes but then hopefully 3-4 minutes can be saved by using EMUs and by having less congestion around Ardwick.
tbtc
Veteran Member
You're absolutely right
I'd hope that my subsequent paragraph (and reference to The Chuckle Brothers, who always seem to be playing Scarborough when I'm in town...) shows that I was meaning the seaside resort (and not the city by the Humber)
I honestly don't think that there are enough people travelling from Tyneside or Teesside to Manchester Airport for it to make that much of a difference to the TPE service patterns. The TPE service is really two "halves" bolted together through the Leeds - Manchester "core" (in the way that Thameslink isn't designed to meet the huge number of people in Bedford wanting to travel to Brighton, but just makes a handy couple of routes to pair up).
Yes, there are the Geordies who take an annual holiday in Florida (who I know you have mentioned in the past), but what about the Liverpool fans going to the Stadium of Light? Or Newcastle fans headed to Everton?
There are all sorts of "once a year" travel patterns - the railway cannot be built around these.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Agreed - the destinations at each end of a Transpennine service are more for operational convenience than a huge demand from one place on the east side of the Pennines to get to another on the west side of the Pennines
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Fair enough, you make your point well. I suppose Merseyside football fans heading to the North East fall into the same category as Geordie holidaymakers travelling to Manchester Airport, under your "once a year" travel patterns.
But please bear with me one last time. Why was Newcastle ever chosen for a direct service to Manchester Airport, if all the known facts pointed to Liverpool being the correct terminal directional point. Is the fact that the 2014 schedule shows a Liverpool to Newcastle service a confirmation that they now accept that a Newcastle to Manchester Airport was a wrong decision to have been made when this was first made ?
Whilst we are on the subject of Manchester Airport, having now taken one North East destination away in the form of Newcastle, why not also do the same with Middlesbrough and run that service also to Liverpool. As you have said in past postings, Newcastle Airport already has routes to overseas holiday directions, so why force these holidaymakers to travel all the way to Manchester Airport? Can the airport at Newcastle be better marketed to air travellers in its own environs? You have finally convinced me that not all places in the North East need a direct connection to Manchester Airport..
.....This will free up new paths for other services to use Manchester Airport in lieu of the North East services.My wife will be finishing with her committee involvement in 2013, so the lack of a direct Manchester Airport to Durham service, upon which she travels each month to these meetings, will cease to be a concern of hers.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
TPE had a rewrite the North TPE timetable to include a half-hourly York to Airport service and a hourly York to Liverpool service. Where they continued after York wasn't seen as that important as long as Newcastle, Middlesbrough and Scarborough all got services. Newcastle got an Airport service just because it's further from Liverpool than Scarborough, so it was more likely to help TPE run a more punctual timetable.
Passenger demand is looked at when ever changes are made. For instance, when it was proposed the Salford Crescent call was removed from Scottish services, it was found that something like 98% of passengers from Salford Crescent didn't continue beyond Manchester or Bolton. If 5% of passengers went to Glasgow it would have been a completely different matter.
Waverley125
Member
I think Newcastle-Liverpool probably works best as a 'flagship' TPE service, i.e. it's long-distance and very definitely intercity, given it runs Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-York-Newcastle.
In terms of lobbying for the right stock for TPE services to use (Class 344s, five coaches, one all of first class, full catering) it's probably the best example to have up.
Beyond that I just don't see this as a problem-surely the right answer is
1) Liverpool-Newcastle
2) Liverpool-Hull
3) Newcastle-Manchester Airport
4) Hull-Manchester & beyond
5) Middlesbrough-Manchester & Beyond
6) Somewhere East-Somewhere West (via Leeds & Manchester)
you bring in what is, to my mind, the necessary 'every 10 minutes' journey time between Leeds & Manchester (given a reduction in journey time with EMUs and fewer stops, probably to 45 minutes) and then give a base half-hourly service on other important flows (e.g. Leeds-Newcastle, Manchester-Liverpool) etc.
In terms of lobbying for the right stock for TPE services to use (Class 344s, five coaches, one all of first class, full catering) it's probably the best example to have up.
Beyond that I just don't see this as a problem-surely the right answer is
1) Liverpool-Newcastle
2) Liverpool-Hull
3) Newcastle-Manchester Airport
4) Hull-Manchester & beyond
5) Middlesbrough-Manchester & Beyond
6) Somewhere East-Somewhere West (via Leeds & Manchester)
you bring in what is, to my mind, the necessary 'every 10 minutes' journey time between Leeds & Manchester (given a reduction in journey time with EMUs and fewer stops, probably to 45 minutes) and then give a base half-hourly service on other important flows (e.g. Leeds-Newcastle, Manchester-Liverpool) etc.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
It won't be like that though. It'll be every 15 minutes to Victoria from Leeds via Huddersfield. Half of those will continue to the Airport via Piccadilly. Then they'll be two slower services that'll fit in around the other 4 to Piccadilly only - hopefully not too close in timing to the services to/from the Airport.
tbtc
Veteran Member
Unless anyone has specific passenger data available then I think its a fair bet that the Transpennine timetable was based around linking:
- An hourly Newcastle service
- An hourly Middlesbrough service
- An hourly Scarborough service
- An hourly Hull service
- A half hourly Manchester Airport service
- An hourly Liverpool service
No "coast to coast" flow appears big enough to *demand* one direct link over an other (there will be some people from Newcastle/ Middlesbrough/ Scarborough/ Hull wanting direct trains to Liverpool/ Manchester Airport, but then there will be some people from Newcastle/ Middlesbrough/ Scarborough/ Hull wanting direct trains to Blackpool/ Chester etc too)
The forthcoming changes seem to be more about giving a headline *fast* service to show a big cut in journey times - that will be the Newcastle - Liverpool service (because they will be able to demonstrate the biggest time saving overall as this is the longest journey).
But otherwise there's no significant reason why Newcastle - Liverpool is any better or worse than Newcastle - Manchester Airport (or any other Transpennine combination), in the same way that Bedford - Brighton isn't any bigger than Bedford - Sutton, but Thameslink chose to "pair up" their services that way.
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 9,111
As long as everywhere has a link to Leeds and Manchester i dont think it matters overly (agreeing with tbtc above)
Whichever combination allows the timetable to work to its most efficient and highest capacity.
However i would run a Newcastle Liverpool as that is where headline time savings are made and that is where more paying passengers come from!
ALthough i must add, post electrification (still hoping that hull is included) whichever combination also allows for the best use of electricfied track.
Whichever combination allows the timetable to work to its most efficient and highest capacity.
However i would run a Newcastle Liverpool as that is where headline time savings are made and that is where more paying passengers come from!
ALthough i must add, post electrification (still hoping that hull is included) whichever combination also allows for the best use of electricfied track.
Gareth
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 1,505
Well, for one thing, I don't see why every area in the North needs a direct connection with Manchester Airport, certainly, when it comes to places as distant as Newcastle. So long as it's relatively straight forward regarding changes, then I don't see the beef outside of some sort ideological desire to reinforce Mancunian aviation supremacy on other areas of the North.
Whilst Newcastle is a more 'exotic' destination than Middlesbrough and I think it's a good frequent link to return to post-SRA Liverpool Lime Street, I wouldn't be massively gutted if it was Middlesbrough instead. To be frank, Liverpool's got a whole host of bigger connectivity problems (Wales, Scotland, the South, the airport etc). Of course, one way around it, if there is to be two Newcastle services per hour, would be to send one to Lime Street and one to Manchester Airport. Personally though, I think having 2tph to Liverpool or 2tp to Manchester Airport would make the time table a bit neater. I can see the logic behind Newcastle going to Ringway instead of Liverpool because of the shorter difference helping operational efficiency and if we were to work on that, you'd possibly have Newcastle/Middlesbrough - Manchester Airport and Scarborough/Hull - Liverpool Lime Street.
However, you can turn that on its head and note that the more southerly termini are geographically closer to Ringway and have very small airports or no airports at all, whereas Newcastle has a a modestly sized airport which is the third largest in the North (after Manchester and that small, unimportant city known as Liverpool). It's also marginally closer to Edinburgh than Manchester, which has a rather busy airport; not as busy as Ringway but it still has connections to European hub networks and transatlantic services.
That all said, I do largely agree with what some have already hypothesized; that being that no great impetus is put on what easterly termini connected with certain western termini. Timetabling and operational performance probably dictate a lot more.
Just a question; when the electification & northern hub are completed, what will the arrangement be at Lime Street Station? I ask because currently, long distance services usually come in on the southern half of the approaches into platforms 7-9 (and 6 to some extent) whereas the Northern stoppers usually use 1-6. I believe 7-9 are longer than 1-6 and 1-6 are also barriered. Also, Virgin has its lounge between 7 & 8. But once the Transpennine Norths start coming in from along the Chat Moss, they'll be on the northern side and will surely have to crossover, am I right? Won't this cause capacity issues around Lime Street/Edge Hill?
Whilst Newcastle is a more 'exotic' destination than Middlesbrough and I think it's a good frequent link to return to post-SRA Liverpool Lime Street, I wouldn't be massively gutted if it was Middlesbrough instead. To be frank, Liverpool's got a whole host of bigger connectivity problems (Wales, Scotland, the South, the airport etc). Of course, one way around it, if there is to be two Newcastle services per hour, would be to send one to Lime Street and one to Manchester Airport. Personally though, I think having 2tph to Liverpool or 2tp to Manchester Airport would make the time table a bit neater. I can see the logic behind Newcastle going to Ringway instead of Liverpool because of the shorter difference helping operational efficiency and if we were to work on that, you'd possibly have Newcastle/Middlesbrough - Manchester Airport and Scarborough/Hull - Liverpool Lime Street.
However, you can turn that on its head and note that the more southerly termini are geographically closer to Ringway and have very small airports or no airports at all, whereas Newcastle has a a modestly sized airport which is the third largest in the North (after Manchester and that small, unimportant city known as Liverpool). It's also marginally closer to Edinburgh than Manchester, which has a rather busy airport; not as busy as Ringway but it still has connections to European hub networks and transatlantic services.
That all said, I do largely agree with what some have already hypothesized; that being that no great impetus is put on what easterly termini connected with certain western termini. Timetabling and operational performance probably dictate a lot more.
Just a question; when the electification & northern hub are completed, what will the arrangement be at Lime Street Station? I ask because currently, long distance services usually come in on the southern half of the approaches into platforms 7-9 (and 6 to some extent) whereas the Northern stoppers usually use 1-6. I believe 7-9 are longer than 1-6 and 1-6 are also barriered. Also, Virgin has its lounge between 7 & 8. But once the Transpennine Norths start coming in from along the Chat Moss, they'll be on the northern side and will surely have to crossover, am I right? Won't this cause capacity issues around Lime Street/Edge Hill?
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 9,111
Personally i think we should merge tpe and northern and see how class 333s do on TPE 
northwichcat
Veteran Member
Personally i think we should merge tpe and northern and see how class 333s do on TPE
Presumably fitted with 2+2 seating first.
John55
Member
Although the layout at Lime St is very poor it is in the pipeline for resignaling sometime relatively soon.
The problems post electrification and northern hub are not due to TP going to the Chat Moss line and therefore slow line between Lime St and Edge Hill, after all you could just swop the EMT trains and the TP trains between P6 and P9. The more difficult problem is how do you fit 2 x 4 car units into P1 - 5?
If money was no object when resignaling takes place platforms 10 and 11 could be restored (some of the OHLE supports are still in place!) and if the redundant loco sidings are taken out 2 more platforms could be put under the old Train Shed and with a better track layout at the throat all would no doubt work fine.
You could do even better and knock down the buildings at the end of P1-6 and restore the view of the old train shed and the platform lengths but that might restrict NRs retail offer so that wouldn't do would it!
tbtc
Veteran Member
That's the big "caveat" for me - I know it won't be popular with some but we should consider cutting some of the direct routes to Middlesbrough/ Scarborough/ Hull if they aren't wired as the "next stage".
For example,
- Hull's current TPE service replaced by a service as far as Leeds (or maybe a Caldervale service), with potential for a Hull - Manchester service to run via Doncaster/ Sheffield/ Stockport
- Scarborough's current TPE service replaced by the suggested extension of the Blackpool - York service (or maybe another Caldervale service - the important thing is the Leeds connection for Scarborough)
- Middlesbrough's current TPE service could be replaced by a tweaking of the current XC services as previously discussed, allowing (more) TPE EMU services from Leeds to Newcastle (and Edinburgh)
...but if Middlesbrough/ Scarborough/ Hull *are* electrified then they make logical eastern termini for TPE services on the Manchester - Leeds line. It really all depends about what is electrified though.
YorkshireBear
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 9,111
I had never really considered your option to hull before that is very interesting. Turn it into a south TPE destination. Question is, via selby and ECML or via goole? Id say goole for ECML capcaity issues.
So i would say from Hull (without electrification) 2 TPE services.
1) hull brough goole doncaster meadowhall sheffield stockport picadilly (chester or liverpool etc etc)
2) hull brough selby garforth leeds bradford hebden-bridge rochdale victoria (liverpool etc etc)
Scarbrough i would do as you say as i think it is also in thr RUS.
Middlsborough would be interesting to give to XC network i must say. And would seem the logical choice from a electrification utilisation point of view.
Gareth
Established Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 1,505
Wow, interesting. Never knew there were any platforms 9 & 10. I assume they were where the taxi rank/drop off point is, down the side of the station. When were they removed? When the old taxi rank between platforms 7 & 8 was taken out?
Also, where are the old loco sidings. Not sure I've ever noticed them before.
1, 2 and 5 aren't a problem - they often have 8 cars in them for ECS moves late evening. It is only 8x20m remember. 3 and 4 might need looking at.
tbtc
Veteran Member
I was thinking of an extension of the current Hull - Sheffield service (to Manchester, maybe replacing the EMT Norwich - Liverpool service at Sheffield?), so Doncaster - Manchester would go half hourly.
I appreciate that "via Sheffield" and/or "via Hebden Bridge" would make a longer Hull - Manchester journey, but it would allow all/most services on the "via Huddersfield" line to be EMU run (so save DMUs).
My thinking of Middlesbrough going to XC is that it would allow more Manchester - Leeds - Newcastle EMUs to run (by diverting some Voyagers to Teesside instead).
When I lived in Leeds there were a fair few people from the Middlesbrough area who went down to study/live in West Yorkshire, so I can agree that some kind of through service would be needed (rather than just a shuttle to York).
- Status