• 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!

Northern timetable plan for May 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Why not Northern? The geography of the route means it's more or less 50/50 in terms of mileage in the North West and mileage in the Midlands and would serve either Crewe and Wilmslow or Macclesfield which are all considered to be in the North West. On the flip side; yes I know that Stoke, Stafford and Wolves are in the Midlands, so for that reason it's difficult to judge which pot such a service should go in.

It's irrelevant as far as this route goes, but there could be a few questions regarding this matter should the new Wales franchise not include running the shuttles on the Crewe to Shrewsbury and Crewe to Chester lines.

As I already mentioned an option looked at was extending the Manchester-Stoke stopper to Birmingham via Stone but that option wasn't taken up. At present if that service was to be introduced then for crew knowledge purposes it would make most sense under the XC franchise - apart from the hourly Stoke service no other Northern service goes beyond Cheadle Hulme on that route, while XC run 2tph between Manchester and Birmingham via Stoke. However, obviously XC don't have suitable EMUs for such a service in their fleet.
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,063
Shouldn't be too expensive or difficult. The issue might be the signalling and retimiming passing freight trains.
I would guess that a new platform (even though it is an old platform) would have to be accessible, meaning an expensive pair of lifts rather than just a footbridge.
 

ag51ruk

Member
Joined
29 Oct 2014
Messages
629
As I already mentioned an option looked at was extending the Manchester-Stoke stopper to Birmingham via Stone but that option wasn't taken up. At present if that service was to be introduced then for crew knowledge purposes it would make most sense under the XC franchise - apart from the hourly Stoke service no other Northern service goes beyond Cheadle Hulme on that route, while XC run 2tph between Manchester and Birmingham via Stoke. However, obviously XC don't have suitable EMUs for such a service in their fleet.

This article from 2015 described the planned benefits of the Norton Bridge works.

Mention of a Class 350 suggests they were thinking London Midland would operate the additional Birmingham - Manchester service, and extending either of the stopping Northern services between Manchester and Crewe/Stoke could hardly produce a fast train. More likely would be diversion of one of the existing LM Birmingham - Liverpool every hour to Manchester instead, replaced between Crewe and Liverpool by an extension of the Euston - Crewe hourly service (but that would then leave Stafford - Stoke - Crewe needing a replacement service)

https://www.railengineer.uk/2015/07/30/easing-the-flow/

"Benefits

The requirements of SAIP are to create the capability to deliver more services, facilitating a recast of the timetable by the winter of 2017.

Two additional fast trains per hour (off-peak, each direction) between London Euston and the North West – these paths are to be created by moving the twice-hourly Birmingham/Liverpool services to the slow lines.

» One extra fast train per hour (each direction) between Manchester and Birmingham – pathed for a Class 350.

» One extra freight train path per hour (each direction) through Stafford."
 
Last edited:

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
"Benefits
The requirements of SAIP are to create the capability to deliver more services, facilitating a recast of the timetable by the winter of 2017.
Two additional fast trains per hour (off-peak, each direction) between London Euston and the North West – these paths are to be created by moving the twice-hourly Birmingham/Liverpool services to the slow lines.
One extra fast train per hour (each direction) between Manchester and Birmingham – pathed for a Class 350.
One extra freight train path per hour (each direction) through Stafford."

These were part of the business case for the Norton Bridge project.
So far the only benefit has been the retiming of one of the XC services through Norton Bridge.
The proposed VT and/or Alliance services to Blackpool will also use some of the new capacity.
But no other franchise proposals exist to use the remaining capacity - we'll have to see if W&B propose to run more than a token service from Chester/North Wales.
One of the Birmingham-Liverpools is already on the Slow lines.
Of course the WCML performance has improved significantly - probably the most important benefit.
A Birmingham-Preston service would be nice...
 

frodshamfella

Established Member
Joined
25 Sep 2010
Messages
1,659
Location
Frodsham
This article from 2015 described the planned benefits of the Norton Bridge works.

Mention of a Class 350 suggests they were thinking London Midland would operate the additional Birmingham - Manchester service, and extending either of the stopping Northern services between Manchester and Crewe/Stoke could hardly produce a fast train. More likely would be diversion of one of the existing LM Birmingham - Liverpool every hour to Manchester instead, replaced between Crewe and Liverpool by an extension of the Euston - Crewe hourly service (but that would then leave Stafford - Stoke - Crewe needing a replacement service)

https://www.railengineer.uk/2015/07/30/easing-the-flow/

"Benefits

The requirements of SAIP are to create the capability to deliver more services, facilitating a recast of the timetable by the winter of 2017.

Two additional fast trains per hour (off-peak, each direction) between London Euston and the North West – these paths are to be created by moving the twice-hourly Birmingham/Liverpool services to the slow lines.

» One extra fast train per hour (each direction) between Manchester and Birmingham – pathed for a Class 350.

» One extra freight train path per hour (each direction) through Stafford."

So are you suggesting that Liverpool to Birmingham go to hourly ...? That surely a backward step and wouldn't be a good move for heavily used stations such as Runcorn and Hartford.
 

theshillito

Member
Joined
29 Jan 2014
Messages
284
Location
Crewe
So are you suggesting that Liverpool to Birmingham go to hourly ...? That surely a backward step and wouldn't be a good move for heavily used stations such as Runcorn and Hartford.
I read it as the following services hourly:
1 x Birmingham to Liverpool (as current)
1 x Birmingham to Manchester (redirect current Brum to Liverpool service)
1 x Euston to Liverpool (extend current Euston to Crewe service)

Considering the LM plans (if I recall correctly) are to have a Crewe to Birmingham via Stoke stopping service, with the Crewe to Euston service running fast to Stafford on the main line, this doesn't sound super impossible.
 

frodshamfella

Established Member
Joined
25 Sep 2010
Messages
1,659
Location
Frodsham
I read it as the following services hourly:
1 x Birmingham to Liverpool (as current)
1 x Birmingham to Manchester (redirect current Brum to Liverpool service)
1 x Euston to Liverpool (extend current Euston to Crewe service)

Considering the LM plans (if I recall correctly) are to have a Crewe to Birmingham via Stoke stopping service, with the Crewe to Euston service running fast to Stafford on the main line, this doesn't sound super impossible.


Is LM going though ? Just I got an email from I think West Midland Trains, or something like that, and they said they are taking over the franchise. I actually asked if they planned to do some improvements at Acton Bridge ( expand parking ) and improve service, which they suggested they were including a Sunday service which is not available now.
 

theshillito

Member
Joined
29 Jan 2014
Messages
284
Location
Crewe
Is LM going though ? Just I got an email from I think West Midland Trains, or something like that, and they said they are taking over the franchise. I actually asked if they planned to do some improvements at Acton Bridge ( expand parking ) and improve service, which they suggested they were including a Sunday service which is not available now.
In my post, if you replace "London Midland" with "West Midlands Trains" from 10th December, that'll work.

As for Acton Bridge, "at least 4 additional station calls at Acton Bridge Monday to Saturday, and a new Sunday service from December 2018" according to http://maps.dft.gov.uk/west-midlands/ (change the dropdown to "Liverpool to Birmingham"). All the LM changes are here. No mention of Manchester anywhere, but I was re-parsing what ag51ruk said before, and that is more likely to be up in the air as that would change franchise boundaries.
 

Railway Dave

Member
Joined
30 Mar 2016
Messages
8
The TPE/Northern services using platforms 13/14 will be:

TPE:
Airport to Newcastle (via Ordsall Chord)
Airport to Middlesbrough (via Ordsall Chord)
Airport to Scotland (via Bolton)

(All Liverpool services will go via Victoria and they'll be 2tph starting at Piccadilly going via Guide Bridge - one to Hull and one to Leeds only.)


Northern:
Crewe to Manchester Airport to Liverpool (via Chat Moss)
Manchester Airport to Liverpool (via Warrington Central)
Manchester Airport to Leeds (via Bradford)
Manchester Airport to Barrow/Windermere (via Wigan)
Alderley Edge to Wigan (via Bolton)
Macclesfield to Blackpool North
Manchester Airport to Blackpool North

I'm not sure if I've missed any. There's also a proposal for an Airport-Blackburn via Ordsall Chord service but that won't start in May 2018.

This would seem to be three trains an hour each way over the Ordsall Chord so it will not realise its full benefit in May as Airport to Leeds trains will still cross the Piccadilly throat. Anyone got any thoughts on the extent to which the seemingly deferred proposal for platforms 15 & 16 at Piccadilly would enable better use to be made of the Ordsall Chord
 

frodshamfella

Established Member
Joined
25 Sep 2010
Messages
1,659
Location
Frodsham
In my post, if you replace "London Midland" with "West Midlands Trains" from 10th December, that'll work.

As for Acton Bridge, "at least 4 additional station calls at Acton Bridge Monday to Saturday, and a new Sunday service from December 2018" according to http://maps.dft.gov.uk/west-midlands/ (change the dropdown to "Liverpool to Birmingham"). All the LM changes are here. No mention of Manchester anywhere, but I was re-parsing what ag51ruk said before, and that is more likely to be up in the air as that would change franchise boundaries.

Ok, well that's good news. They said to me in their email that they are aware of the car parking issues at Acton Bridge, so I will keep an eye on that, as its been a problem for years since car park was reduced.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
8,677
This would seem to be three trains an hour each way over the Ordsall Chord so it will not realise its full benefit in May as Airport to Leeds trains will still cross the Piccadilly throat. Anyone got any thoughts on the extent to which the seemingly deferred proposal for platforms 15 & 16 at Piccadilly would enable better use to be made of the Ordsall Chord

No it won't. It will go via the Chord and not cross the throat. Via Bradford also means via Chord.
 

lejog

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2015
Messages
1,321
I think Palmersears was asking about the platforms themselves.

As far as I know it is just a removal of clutter from the platforms. Removing the waiting rooms and generally trying to improve passanger flows, thus speeding up platform dwell times.

According to the Franchise Agreement, as you say Northern have to remove obstructions, possibly resite waiting rooms and improve passenger information so they wait in the correct place for their trains, but there was also another measure which was sensitive enough to be redacted from the document.

It appears from the Welsh Franchise thread that the North Wales to Airport service can continue as long as dwell times at Oxford Rd and Piccadilly are less than 1 minute. I'd guess this applies to Northern and TPE services too.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
According to the Franchise Agreement, as you say Northern have to remove obstructions, possibly resite waiting rooms and improve passenger information so they wait in the correct place for their trains, but there was also another measure which was sensitive enough to be redacted from the document.

It appears from the Welsh Franchise thread that the North Wales to Airport service can continue as long as dwell times at Oxford Rd and Piccadilly are less than 1 minute. I'd guess this applies to Northern and TPE services too.

I think it's very different. DfT have said to the WG your devolved franchise can run 1tph to Manchester Airport/Wilmslow provided dwell times at Oxford Rd are reduced, otherwise you can run to Victoria/Stalybridge. On the other hand DfT require Northern and TPE to run Manchester Airport services with no alternative option.
 

BurtonM

Member
Joined
3 Feb 2014
Messages
823
Location
Manchester
Will there be any Northern services running between Manchester and Stalybridge after the May timetable change? I need to take a bicycle into the city (often at short notice) for my job and if Stalybridge is only served by TPE, their supposedly incoming mandatory cycle reservation policy will cause me quite some inconvenience and expense (by having to travel to and from somewhere on the Glossop line instead as it's a Northern service).
 

scrapy

Established Member
Joined
15 Dec 2008
Messages
2,081
Will there be any Northern services running between Manchester and Stalybridge after the May timetable change? I need to take a bicycle into the city (often at short notice) for my job and if Stalybridge is only served by TPE, their supposedly incoming mandatory cycle reservation policy will cause me quite some inconvenience and expense (by having to travel to and from somewhere on the Glossop line instead as it's a Northern service).
Yes Northern will still operate a regular service between Victoria and Stalybridge although these will no longer continue to Huddersfield.

They will also run 3 or 4 trains a day between Piccadilly and Huddersfield in the peaks which will call at Stalybridge.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
So 3tph over the Chord, wasn't there supposed to be 4tph?

There was only supposed to be 2tph between Dec 17 and Dec 19. Calder Vale to the Airport has been brought forward. They'll be a Blackburn to Airport introduced in 2019 if the paths get approved.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Will there be any Northern services running between Manchester and Stalybridge after the May timetable change? I need to take a bicycle into the city (often at short notice) for my job and if Stalybridge is only served by TPE, their supposedly incoming mandatory cycle reservation policy will cause me quite some inconvenience and expense (by having to travel to and from somewhere on the Glossop line instead as it's a Northern service).

You should be getting an hourly class 769 service from Stalybridge to Wigan and I think another Northern service as well.
 
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Messages
8
Any particular reason given for it remaining via Barnsley? I am guessing capacity on the Westgate route but I note they've found a path to fit in the extra stopper from Knottingley to Leeds via Wakefield.

The report on potential new stations for West Yorkshire a couple of years back dismissed sites at Ardsley on the basis of no track capacity but suddenly the new Northern franchise promised the Nottingham and Knottingley additional trains.

There’d be a heck of a lot more capacity if the Ardsley Tunnel - Outwood section was increased to four tracks. There’s plenty of space! A new Ardsley station and a rebuilt Outwood station could both have slow line platforms only.
 
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Messages
8
I lost what I was looking at earlier as regards the Huddersfield Line hence this post. Why on earth is it the loops at Diggle (down) and Marsden (up) can’t be regularly used for overtaking? This would surly create a lot more capacity between Stalybridge and Huddersfield. Also, a loop or slow line at Batley and the creation of a platform three would work wonders.

Any thoughts people?
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
I lost what I was looking at earlier as regards the Huddersfield Line hence this post. Why on earth is it the loops at Diggle (down) and Marsden (up) can’t be regularly used for overtaking? This would surly create a lot more capacity between Stalybridge and Huddersfield. Also, a loop or slow line at Batley and the creation of a platform three would work wonders.

Any thoughts people?

Becaue the train being overtaken in either direction has to sit in the loop for at least 7-8 minutes to give a headway in front and behind the overtaking train (it is one signal section onwards from each loop right through to the other end of Stanedge Tunnel.

And the effect is an even less efficient use of capacity on the route. Each train being overtaken effectively consumes *both* the path before *and* the potential path after the fast train that is overtaking it. Better to just keep the stopper going* in one 'large' path rather than split over two 'medium-large' paths.

*You've got super efficient layouts at both Stalybridge and Huddersfield to dive the stopper straight out of the way of a following fast.
 
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Messages
8
Becaue the train being overtaken in either direction has to sit in the loop for at least 7-8 minutes to give a headway in front and behind the overtaking train (it is one signal section onwards from each loop right through to the other end of Stanedge Tunnel.

And the effect is an even less efficient use of capacity on the route. Each train being overtaken effectively consumes *both* the path before *and* the potential path after the fast train that is overtaking it. Better to just keep the stopper going* in one 'large' path rather than split over two 'medium-large' paths.

*You've got super efficient layouts at both Stalybridge and Huddersfield to dive the stopper straight out of the way of a following fast.

So the simple answer with this would be to add a couple of stop signals inside Standegde Tunnel? Other than that; what happened to reopening the single track Standedge Tunnels?
 
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Messages
8
As I already mentioned an option looked at was extending the Manchester-Stoke stopper to Birmingham via Stone but that option wasn't taken up. At present if that service was to be introduced then for crew knowledge purposes it would make most sense under the XC franchise - apart from the hourly Stoke service no other Northern service goes beyond Cheadle Hulme on that route, while XC run 2tph between Manchester and Birmingham via Stoke. However, obviously XC don't have suitable EMUs for such a service in their fleet.

Are Wedgwood and Barlaston ever going to be served again? The current situation is crazy!
 

Philip

On Moderation
Joined
27 May 2007
Messages
3,646
Location
Manchester
Why are neither of the two new services along the Atherton line scheduled to stop at Swinton, Moorside and Walkden? Given that Wigan will be retaining a fast train to Manchester, why don't Northern focus on improving services for all stations along the Atherton line, rather than just Atherton and Daisy Hill? I think Moorside and Hag Fold will remain hourly!

In the same area, different line, why on earth is Clifton still on a one train per day frequency? Places like Ashley, Plumley, Glazebrook and Hope Valley line stations have or will have hourly or bi-hourly services yet Clifton remains at one train per day, despite being in a more urban area and having Pilkingtons/Chloride on the doorstep.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Why are neither of the two new services along the Atherton line scheduled to stop at Swinton, Moorside and Walkden? Given that Wigan will be retaining a fast train to Manchester, why don't Northern focus on improving services for all stations along the Atherton line, rather than just Atherton and Daisy Hill? I think Moorside and Hag Fold will remain hourly!

In the same area, different line, why on earth is Clifton still on a one train per day frequency? Places like Ashley, Plumley, Glazebrook and Hope Valley line stations have or will have hourly or bi-hourly services yet Clifton remains at one train per day, despite being in a more urban area and having Pilkingtons/Chloride on the doorstep.

I've not sure of the method used for the Atherton line but for Mid-Cheshire the franchise specification required 2tph to Manchester from stations with at least 200,000 journeys per annum. That meant Northwich, Knutsford and Altrincham. However, both Hale and Greenbank were just under 200,000 and the local RUG showed Arriva their own figures which suggests those stations easily get over 200,000 but a number of passengers travel without tickets. Looking at the Atherton line Swinton only gets 130,000 journeys per annum and it already gets 2tph, so what justification is there for it getting even more services?

Not sure about Glazebrook or all the Hope Valley stations but for Ashley and Plumley the train is the only public transport which serves those villages. However, even considering that 1tph stopping at those stations all day seems to be an over provision of services.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
So the simple answer with this would be to add a couple of stop signals inside Standegde Tunnel? Other than that; what happened to reopening the single track Standedge Tunnels?

All that would do would reduce the stand time down to 5-6 minutes.

And you'd still have the 'path before and path after' problem.
 

BurtonM

Member
Joined
3 Feb 2014
Messages
823
Location
Manchester
Thanks for the answers folks, that's good news. I'll be boycotting TPE then if there are starters I can board. The new setup only stands to make the through trains even more full so it's an no brainer.

*You've got super efficient layouts at both Stalybridge and Huddersfield to dive the stopper straight out of the way of a following fast.

Not after holding the fast up by at least five minutes mind (on the current timetable) - that'll come to an end though which is good.

Are Wedgwood and Barlaston ever going to be served again? The current situation is crazy!

There are separate threads for this, and besides it's probably not Northern's problem, but London Midland's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top