Petition for Manchester Piccadilly platforms 15 & 16

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
3,406
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).
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Tom Maddox

Member
Joined
14 Apr 2019
Messages
904
Location
Frodsham
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).
Sadly not an April Fools. Platforms 13 and 14 are a nightmare.
 

Crossover

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Messages
8,036
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!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
52,873
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:

TheSel

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2017
Messages
309
Location
Southport, Merseyside
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.
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:
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,204
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.
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)
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
4,684
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
I think the government know where Manchester is.
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!
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
7,204
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
Just be prepared for the stairs also being missing too.
 

wireforever

Member
Joined
7 Feb 2019
Messages
16
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
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
2,654
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.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
52,873
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).
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,089
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.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
2,654
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).
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.
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.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
52,873
Location
Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
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.
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).
 

Jozhua

Member
Joined
6 Jan 2019
Messages
1,017
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).
I doubt the 4 car class 158 formations will be enough for much longer...
 

daodao

Member
Joined
6 Feb 2016
Messages
863
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top