Petition for Manchester Piccadilly platforms 15 & 16

Discussion in 'Infrastructure & Stations' started by Rhydgaled, 27 Apr 2019.

  1. Rhydgaled

    Rhydgaled Established Member

    Messages:
    3,256
    Joined:
    25 Nov 2010
    Some thoughtful soul has started a petition on the official UK Parliament petitions site calling for urgent implementation of the Castlefield corridor quadrupling project. Perhaps the most important part of the scheme is the two additional through platforms for Manchester Piccadilly. Unfortunately the petition doesn't seem to have reached a wide audience, with the 14th May deadline looming it has attracted only 657 signatures. I only found it because I happened to be signing another petition there and thought to have a look for any other worthy cases.

    Sadly reaching the 100,000 signatures required for a debate in Parliament in around two weeks doesn't seem like a realistic prospect. But, could the collective might of the membership here circulate it widely enough to reach 10,000 (I'm sure many of you are on Facebook)? At 10,000 the government would have to respond to the petition, which one hopes would focus minds on unblocking this important project. Even if it doesn't go that high, getting to a few thousand might help.

    I read something a few weeks back about red lines and shouty staff on platforms 13 & 14 due to fears passengers could spill over onto the tracks due to overcrowding. I'm not sure if that was an April fool, but even if it was there are some long-distance services passing through there. These shouldn't be turned into another Thameslink (passengers having to do long distances on a metro-style train) to keep the dwell times down when Network Rail have a solution in mind (extra platforms).
     
  2. Registered users do not see these banners - join or log in today!

    Rail Forums

     
  3. lancastrian

    lancastrian Member

    Messages:
    495
    Joined:
    2 Jan 2010
    Location:
    Bolton, Lancashire
    I have just signed it, and it is up to 674 now. It is a real pity that this didn't become well known a few months ago.
     
  4. Tom Maddox

    Tom Maddox Member

    Messages:
    260
    Joined:
    14 Apr 2019
    Location:
    Frodsham
    Sadly not an April Fools. Platforms 13 and 14 are a nightmare.
     
  5. Acfb

    Acfb New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Joined:
    12 Aug 2018
    Complete disgrace that this project hasnt started yet. The sooner the better.
     
  6. Crossover

    Crossover Established Member

    Messages:
    7,827
    Joined:
    4 Jun 2009
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    Signed - pl 13/14 are indeed a nightmare and the Network Rail staff attempting to enforce the red zone rule are very much a thing!
     
  7. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    42,148
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Signed. It's grim, and should have been done BEFORE the Ordsall Chord.

    (I don't fundamentally oppose the Chord, but 15/16 was needed FIRST, and like with Virgin CrossCountry's overcrowding problem the issues were utterly predictable).
     
    Last edited: 28 Apr 2019
  8. Jozhua

    Jozhua Member

    Messages:
    601
    Joined:
    6 Jan 2019
    Never signed a petition faster!
     
  9. 61653 HTAFC

    61653 HTAFC Established Member

    Messages:
    10,315
    Joined:
    18 Dec 2012
    Location:
    Another planet...
    Nor me!

    Bit of a shame that whoever set it up didn't initially publicise it on these fora. As a result the self-indulgent GWR Catering petition is getting more attention. :rolleyes:
     
  10. Elecman

    Elecman Established Member

    Messages:
    1,840
    Joined:
    31 Dec 2013
    Location:
    Lancashire
    Signed,
     
  11. LOL The Irony

    LOL The Irony Established Member

    Messages:
    2,600
    Joined:
    29 Jul 2017
    Location:
    Tracy Island
    Signed it. Also I think this should be pinned.
     
  12. faltskog36abba

    faltskog36abba Member

    Messages:
    160
    Joined:
    23 Apr 2012
    Location:
    radcliffe
    Signed.
     
  13. DarloRich

    DarloRich Veteran Member

    Messages:
    22,365
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2010
    Location:
    Work - Fenny Stratford(MK) Home - Darlington
    Result of this petition = Nothing. I am sorry to be cynical but this petition could have 6 million signatures and it will have absolutely no impact on the government or their funding of this project.
     
  14. TheSel

    TheSel Member

    Messages:
    126
    Joined:
    10 Oct 2017
    Location:
    Southport, Merseyside
    Agreed. But if it was first to be renamed 'London Manchester Piccadilly', like they've done with Stansted and Luton airports, the government might at least then have a look where it actually is? :oops:
     
  15. DarloRich

    DarloRich Veteran Member

    Messages:
    22,365
    Joined:
    12 Oct 2010
    Location:
    Work - Fenny Stratford(MK) Home - Darlington
    I think the government know where Manchester is.
     
  16. The Ham

    The Ham Established Member

    Messages:
    6,124
    Joined:
    6 Jul 2012
    Given that there's nothing stopping petitions being rerun once one closes, it maybe better to start a new one in a few weeks time and then push it through various channels.

    Ideally you'd want someone like the RMT to support it and push it with a press release.

    Mention about how it would provide capacity without building HS2 and you may find that it gets spread fairly widely...

    (Now I'm not suggesting that is a project to replace HS2, but plant that suggestion and some will latch onto it and do a lot of the legwork for you)
     
  17. Bantamzen

    Bantamzen Established Member

    Messages:
    3,280
    Joined:
    4 Dec 2013
    Location:
    Baildon, West Yorkshire
    This government? I'd be surprised they could tell their ar..., erm behinds from their elbows let alone where Manchester is. Perhaps just prefixing "London" in front of everything, or calling everywhere "<Place name here> for London" will get us the investment we'd like!
     
  18. FelixtheCat

    FelixtheCat Established Member

    Messages:
    2,821
    Joined:
    23 Jul 2015
    Location:
    Edinburgh, London, or somewhere else
    Like London Oxford Airport perhaps?
     
  19. Bantamzen

    Bantamzen Established Member

    Messages:
    3,280
    Joined:
    4 Dec 2013
    Location:
    Baildon, West Yorkshire
    Yeah, or London Manchester Piccadilly, or London Oxford Road. The Minister & his department will never notice that, if only we could sneak into the darkened basement underneath Whitehall to find where the P15/16 & Oxford Road redesigns are currently hidden, erm I mean stored.... :D
     
  20. The Ham

    The Ham Established Member

    Messages:
    6,124
    Joined:
    6 Jul 2012
    Just be prepared for the stairs also being missing too.
     
  21. Bantamzen

    Bantamzen Established Member

    Messages:
    3,280
    Joined:
    4 Dec 2013
    Location:
    Baildon, West Yorkshire
    And a sign on the lavatory door warning of a wild cat....
     
  22. krus_aragon

    krus_aragon Established Member

    Messages:
    4,865
    Joined:
    10 Jun 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Let's go back to LNWR days, and call it London Manchester London Road instead. :P
     
  23. wireforever

    wireforever Member

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    7 Feb 2019
    signed petition I was just wondering if the transport secretary has ever been to Manchester Piccadilly or is he too busy looking in his office cupboard for his hard hat and high vis gear to visit the once again delayed Crossrail
     
  24. Chester1

    Chester1 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,337
    Joined:
    25 Aug 2014
    I support the scheme but I am concerned that it will have unintended consequences like the Ordsall Chord. Where will the extra 4tph go? Manchester Airport Station has already become a bottleneck and it will be worse once TPE require full rather than half occupancy of platforms for 3tph. If every Northern service from Piccadilly to Stockport + Liverpool-Nottingham ran through Castlefield the south end would be 8tph Manchester Airport + 8tph Stockport (and onwards). That would mean a much larger area would be effected by problems in Castlefield and I don't think they will all go away with platforms 15 and 16.
     
  25. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    42,148
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    I would not support an extra 4tph or even 1tph. It is needed as a reliability improvement and nothing else.

    If more capacity is needed, let's set a minimum train length of 6 x 23m through Castlefield. (I support this anyway - Thameslink copes with far higher loadings and far busier platforms simply by having enough capacity).
     
  26. cle

    cle Established Member

    Messages:
    1,856
    Joined:
    17 Nov 2010
    In time perhaps higher frequency could happen, but it would need to be proven to be reliable at today's timetable first - with both P15/16 and the equivalent work at Oxford Road to provide good calling capacity and disperse passengers better - longer trains being a much quicker option.

    There is appetite for a Calder-Airport train for instance, and I would expect more from Preston and beyond.

    Two and three car trains shouldn't be running through the middle of our cities. Everything should call at Oxford Road and also at new platforms at Salford Central (possibly renamed) - like a proper S Bahn. It would help spread demand more overall, and change patterns.
     
  27. Chester1

    Chester1 Established Member

    Messages:
    2,337
    Joined:
    25 Aug 2014
    The business case is built on 16tph (combined with rebuild of Oxford and removal of platform 5). There is no way that the government will decide to spend £200m+ without a capacity increase.
     
  28. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    42,148
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Then the problem will never be solved. 15/16 is needed to operate the present service reliably.

    I shouldn't be surprised, though - the capacity issue on Liverpool-Norwich took about fifteen years to solve (from the point I noticed the issue to the provision of 4-car Class 158 formations).
     
  29. Jozhua

    Jozhua Member

    Messages:
    601
    Joined:
    6 Jan 2019
    I doubt the 4 car class 158 formations will be enough for much longer...
     
  30. DJH1971

    DJH1971 Established Member

    Messages:
    1,184
    Joined:
    10 Jun 2012
    Location:
    St Helens, Merseyside
    Just signed
     
  31. daodao

    daodao Member

    Messages:
    654
    Joined:
    6 Feb 2016
    Location:
    Dunham/Bowdon
    There are plenty of platforms at Manchester Piccadilly. There is no need to run so many services via the South Junction line. In particular, routeing TPE services from Leeds on beyond via the Ordsall curve wastes capacity as they pass through every M/c station instead of going direct via Guide Bridge to Piccadilly platforms 1-4. Use of the Ordsall curve should be confined to trains to/from Rochdale and beyond.

    In order to improve reliability on the Piccadilly-Knott Mill section, I suggest that the number of trains is restricted to:
    10 passenger per hour through trains
    2 passenger per hour terminating at Oxford Road (coming from Liverpool CLC line)
    2 freight paths per hour

    Lengthening the through trains to up to 6 coaches per hour would improve capacity far more cheaply. The UK government can't afford to spend the money needed to quadruple the South Junction line, and building platforms 15/16 is unlikely to be very helpful on its own.
     

Share This Page