Petition for Manchester Piccadilly platforms 15 & 16

[Bantamzen]

It perplexes me as well that we have so much more difficulty in this country with certain (actually, make that any) infrastructure, compared to most other advanced countries. As the same laws of physics apply here as elsewhere, I assume it.must be something to do with our political, administrative and economic systems

Its because here public transport is seen as a liability rather than an asset. So we constantly seek to assure ourselves that any new project will pay for itself in simple cost vs revenue terms, rather than accepting that some projects just need doing to make gains that are not so easily quantifiable. And of course even when projects get off the planning table, there is often a lack of the necessary experience amongst the decision makers which often leads to poor management & projects going over budget. This in turn has created a fear culture which results in business case making more difficult again.

 

[Meerkat]

Its because here public transport is seen as a liability rather than an asset. So we constantly seek to assure ourselves that any new project will pay for itself in simple cost vs revenue terms, rather than accepting that some projects just need doing to make gains that are not so easily quantifiable. And of course even when projects get off the planning table, there is often a lack of the necessary experience amongst the decision makers which often leads to poor management & projects going over budget. This in turn has created a fear culture which results in business case making more difficult again.

Doesn’t sound like you have ever read a BCA or business case. Very, very little would get built if it was just done on cost v revenue!

 

[Bantamzen]

Doesn’t sound like you have ever read a BCA or business case. Very, very little would get built if it was just done on cost v revenue!

Well you'd be wrong on that first point, although to be fair these have been public sector ones. That should tell you all you need to know...

 

[HSTEd]

Don't know about other people, but one of the points I am trying to make is that we need additional infrastructure to create more of.a distinction between.local and long distance trains. In far too many places, the same trains are expected to provide both local and long distance services, making a good job of neither. Where separate local and long distance services do exist, they are often forced to share the same tracks, to the detriment of capacity and workability

In the era of very high performance multiple units, stopping pattern has become considerably less important, at least on relatively slow <140mph railways.

This is especially true for modern electric units but even the Class 195s make the Sprinter/Turbostar look positively slovenly, and they themselves make what came before look slovenly.

Certainly on electric routes it seems likely that a train really can perform both roles.

 

[faltskog36abba]

I just cannot believe that you are not aware that pavements exist on BOTH sides of the island platform of Market Street. One on the Debenhams side and the other on the Primark side. I honestly think the conversation that views the Manchester Metrolink system as just something of a connection between the Piccadilly and Victoria stations totally ignores the fact that this tramway system in the core area of the city fulfils far more useful needs for other purposes than heavy rail connection.

I would be interested to know the annual passenger footfall at the following inner city core tram stops:-
Exchange Square
Shudehill
Market Street
Piccadilly Gardens
St Peters Square
Deansgate-Castlefield

Look at how other locations have opened and extended new tramway systems in Croydon, Sheffield, Nottingham, Birmingham and Edinburgh and the annual passenger usage on these. Links to heavy rail stations are often noted. Even the Blackpool Tramway now has a modern fleet of trams and their system now includes a connection with Blackpool North railway station.

Tramways have made their mark to fulfil supplementary city centre travel needs that did not exist in recent times, noting Blackpool never gave up its trams as others once did.

I don't know the annual usage of the tram stops in the central area, But the daily usage is as follows.
Exchange square-6.061.
Shudehill-3.349.
Market street-10.088.
Piccadilly gardens-13.303.
St peters square-25.021.
Deansgate/Castlefield-12.708.

 

[B&I]

In the era of very high performance multiple units, stopping pattern has become considerably less important, at least on relatively slow <140mph railways.

This is especially true for modern electric units but even the Class 195s make the Sprinter/Turbostar look positively slovenly, and they themselves make what came before look slovenly.

Certainly on electric routes it seems likely that a train really can perform both roles.

This is not my experience of electric stopping services around the northwest (or in other parts of the country) at all

 

[bluenoxid]

Just realised how long that the TWA application has been sat on the Transport Secretary’s desk. 1,425 days since the inquiry report was handed over.

 

[HSTEd]

This is not my experience of electric stopping services around the northwest (or in other parts of the country) at all

Electric stopping services in the North West are hardly equipped with modern units.

As an example of what sort of capability is available can be seen in the performance of the Class 395.
A Cl444 would be rather stunning if it wasn't limited by third rail's power restrictions.

 

[LOL The Irony]

A Cl444 would be rather stunning if it wasn't limited by third rail's power restrictions.

They do have a pantograph well.

 

[HSTEd]

They do have a pantograph well.

Yes, but in service the control system will limit power output above a few miles per hour to prevent the third rail system collapsing.

They would have much higher performance on AC than the 319 due to the larger number of powered axles and superior power output.

 

[B&I]

Electric stopping services in the North West are hardly equipped with modern units.

As an example of what sort of capability is available can be seen in the performance of the Class 395.
A Cl444 would be rather stunning if it wasn't limited by third rail's power restrictions.

Time for another thought experiment.

Why don't we scrap London-bound expresses on the ECML, WCML and GWML, replace them with services using up to the minute EMUS stopping at all local stations along the way, and see if any travellers notice the difference ?

 

[HSTEd]

Why don't we scrap London-bound expresses on the ECML, WCML and GWML, replace them with services using up to the minute EMUS stopping at all local stations along the way, and see if any travellers notice the difference ?

Quite difficult due to track layout limitations (stations without fast line platforms).

Meanwhile we have tha railway persisting in a fast and slow stopping pattern on Grantham-Nottingham line, even though both sets of units have near identical travel times.

 

[Jozhua]

It perplexes me as well that we have so much more difficulty in this country with certain (actually, make that any) infrastructure, compared to most other advanced countries. As the same laws of physics apply here as elsewhere, I assume it.must be something to do with our political, administrative and economic systems

Money. Working infrastructure just isn't a priority here.

Oh and a ridiculous amount of paperwork and beurocracy, although I have a feeling much of that is there as an excuse to stall things and avoid spending money.

Into a tunnel and under the city centre. Assuming we don't want to see radical service cuts to a service which is already inadequate for a city of its size, Manchester needs new infrastructure

Yeah, a tunnel would be even more costly than a couple extra platforms at Piccadilly and Oxford Road. Really, it would be best to put some kind of Manc-bahn into that instead. Especially due to the fact a lot of long distance services are diesel, so everyone would probably suffocate should it all be in a tunnel!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Looking at the thread title, since the General Election has another petition needed to be made to replace the previous one as there is a new administration now in power?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Yeah, a tunnel would be even more costly than a couple extra platforms at Piccadilly and Oxford Road. Really, it would be best to put some kind of Manc-bahn into that instead.

Not being knowledgeable about matters Germanic and only recognising the "bahn" nomenclature from words such as autobahn in a road sense, could the Mancunian Way with its city core crossing be thought of as being a "Manc-bahn" entity?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not being knowledgeable about matters Germanic and only recognising the "bahn" nomenclature from words such as autobahn in a road sense, could the Mancunian Way with its city core crossing be thought of as being a "Manc-bahn" entity?

No, or not in this sense. The term was I believe coined by @Bantamzen (I think) to refer to my concept for turning Platforms 13/14 into a pseudo-Thameslink/Merseyrail 25kV AC heavy rail metro system, which would in Germany be known as an S-Bahn (nobody quite knows what it stands for or stood for, but "Staedteschnellbahn" is probably it - city fast railway).

"Bahn" sort of translates as "piece of infrastructure on which vehicles run", whether they happen to be rubber or steel tyred.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

No, or not in this sense. The term was I believe coined by @Bantamzen (I think) to refer to my concept for turning Platforms 13/14 into a pseudo-Thameslink/Merseyrail 25kV AC heavy rail metro system, which would in Germany be known as an S-Bahn (nobody quite knows what it stands for or stood for, but "Staedteschnellbahn" is probably it - city fast railway).

"Bahn" sort of translates as "piece of infrastructure on which vehicles run", whether they happen to be rubber or steel tyred.

I am indeed grateful for this detailed explanation. It seems strange that there are no English phrases in common use that clearly could convey such information.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am indeed grateful for this detailed explanation. It seems strange that there are no English phrases in common use that clearly could convey such information.

Quite possibly because there aren't very many of them in the UK or indeed other English speaking countries, though there are plenty of lines that exhibit some of the properties (e.g. London Overground, Manc Picc-Hadfield, Long Island Railroad, Thameslink, Metropolitan Line). Merseyrail is near enough a "textbook" example. "Heavy rail metro" is probably the closest term but it doesn't fully convey the concept.

The concept is essentially a heavy rail local service (not long distance like Thameslink) on which all trains typically serve all stations, with high capacity and a relatively high frequency, regular interval service. Typically there is a central core (often a city centre tunnel like Thameslink or Merseyrail, but it could be something like the Castlefield line) and a load of branches feeding into it.

Thinking of another UK example, when it eventually opens in full Crossrail will near enough be one, though Reading is a long way out for the German concept.

 

[B&I]

Quite difficult due to track layout limitations (stations without fast line platforms).

Meanwhile we have tha railway persisting in a fast and slow stopping pattern on Grantham-Nottingham line, even though both sets of units have near identical travel times.

But if we are scrapping fast trains and replacing them.with all stops services, why do we need trains calling at all platforms ?

 

[B&I]

Money. Working infrastructure just isn't a priority here.

Oh and a ridiculous amount of paperwork and beurocracy, although I have a feeling much of that is there as an excuse to stall things and avoid spending money.



Yeah, a tunnel would be even more costly than a couple extra platforms at Piccadilly and Oxford Road. Really, it would be best to put some kind of Manc-bahn into that instead. Especially due to the fact a lot of long distance services are diesel, so everyone would probably suffocate should it all be in a tunnel!

Being the optimist that I am (in the teeth of the evidence when it comes to investment in the railways up this end if the country) I would hope that, by the time any cross-Manchester tunnel opens, any.long distance services using it would be electric, or at least bi-mode. Anyway, there are numerous longish tunnels around the country with diesel services using them.

What I think tilts the balance for me to putting the long distance rather than local services into tunnels is the question of journey time versus geographical coverage required. I've just been on a TPE service countering fairly slowly round from Oxford Rd to Victoria. Imagine how much more quickly a service crossing central Manchester by tunnel, stopping at a single major station, would be. Long-distance passengers are less likely to make full use of the ring of stations round the city centre on the Piccadily-Victoria corridor than local passengers.

 

[Purple Orange]

Being the optimist that I am (in the teeth of the evidence when it comes to investment in the railways up this end if the country) I would hope that, by the time any cross-Manchester tunnel opens, any.long distance services using it would be electric, or at least bi-mode. Anyway, there are numerous longish tunnels around the country with diesel services using them.

What I think tilts the balance for me to putting the long distance rather than local services into tunnels is the question of journey time versus geographical coverage required. I've just been on a TPE service countering fairly slowly round from Oxford Rd to Victoria. Imagine how much more quickly a service crossing central Manchester by tunnel, stopping at a single major station, would be. Long-distance passengers are less likely to make full use of the ring of stations round the city centre on the Piccadily-Victoria corridor than local passengers.

I think it a no-brainer to aim for the Vic-Picc line to be dedicated to regional metro services. Furthermore, ‘Metrolink’ as a brand could be used here too, to marry the two networks as an entity - similar liveries, logos and fonts like we see with London Underground, Overground, Tramlink etc.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think it a no-brainer to aim for the Vic-Picc line to be dedicated to regional metro services. Furthermore, ‘Metrolink’ as a brand could be used here too, to marry the two networks as an entity - similar liveries, logos and fonts like we see with London Underground, Overground, Tramlink etc.

I've certainly thought that something like "Metrolink Express" or "Metrolink Rail" could be used, and I wouldn't be surprised, if the Mayor gets his way, if we saw "Metrolink Bus".

 

[Jozhua]

Yeah if I was gonna shove a tunnel under Manchester, I'd probably put metro trains through it. At one end have Victoria Station, a central Manchester stop and then split off into two directions, one towards Piccadilly and the other towards deansgate/Cornbrook.

Use the existing rail-converted metrolink lines (E.g Bury) either side of Manchester to run the 'metro' services and have captive stock that don't on street run, maybe about 4 carriages long.

I just unfortunately don't see the existing picc-vicc, Castlefield area as a great opportunity for intra-urban travel around Manchester. Every drop of capacity is needed for existing commuter & long distance services!

 

[B&I]

I think it a no-brainer to aim for the Vic-Picc line to be dedicated to regional metro services. Furthermore, ‘Metrolink’ as a brand could be used here too, to marry the two networks as an entity - similar liveries, logos and fonts like we see with London Underground, Overground, Tramlink etc.

And most importantly, straightforward combined tickets

 

[Purple Orange]

Yeah if I was gonna shove a tunnel under Manchester, I'd probably put metro trains through it. At one end have Victoria Station, a central Manchester stop and then split off into two directions, one towards Piccadilly and the other towards deansgate/Cornbrook.

Use the existing rail-converted metrolink lines (E.g Bury) either side of Manchester to run the 'metro' services and have captive stock that don't on street run, maybe about 4 carriages long.

I just unfortunately don't see the existing picc-vicc, Castlefield area as a great opportunity for intra-urban travel around Manchester. Every drop of capacity is needed for existing commuter & long distance services!

Surely the point is to remove TPE, EMR and TfW through NPR & HS2. Then we could be left with the possibility of defining a network ranging from Liverpool, Southport, Blackpool, Blackburn, Burnley, Leeds via Rochdale, all the way round the clock face to the Airport culminating in a metro style service.

 

[londonmidland]

I don’t mean to go off topic but wouldn’t the Class 365 be a better option for Northern than the Class 319s? Granted they weren’t available at the time but there’s quite a few advantages over the latter:

- Superior acceleration
- Newer
- 2+2 seating

Seems a waste seeing them all stored doing nothing when they look internally better than the Class 319s.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Surely the point is to remove TPE, EMR and TfW through NPR & HS2. Then we could be left with the possibility of defining a network ranging from Liverpool, Southport, Blackpool, Blackburn, Burnley, Leeds via Rochdale, all the way round the clock face to the Airport culminating in a metro style service.

Is this an aspiration to resurrect the famous Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway?

 

[Bantamzen]

I think it a no-brainer to aim for the Vic-Picc line to be dedicated to regional metro services. Furthermore, ‘Metrolink’ as a brand could be used here too, to marry the two networks as an entity - similar liveries, logos and fonts like we see with London Underground, Overground, Tramlink etc.

Surely the point is to remove TPE, EMR and TfW through NPR & HS2. Then we could be left with the possibility of defining a network ranging from Liverpool, Southport, Blackpool, Blackburn, Burnley, Leeds via Rochdale, all the way round the clock face to the Airport culminating in a metro style service.

I don't think you'd have too many arguments from anyone about creating a case for Manc-Bahn, once a new long distance alignment through the city had been achieved, be this though HS2/3, NPR or some other solution.

Until then Manchester can't have it's cake and eat it. Long distance travellers will continue to need to travel to and pass through the city. If you botch the solution and try to go the other way around, you'll need a lot more P13/14 red line shouty staff to deal with a lot more people clogging up the Castlefield Corridor platforms.

 

[DarloRich]

Money. Working infrastructure just isn't a priority here.

Oh and a ridiculous amount of paperwork and beurocracy, although I have a feeling much of that is there as an excuse to stall things and avoid spending money.

Have you much experience of this kind of thing?

So we constantly seek to assure ourselves that any new project will pay for itself in simple cost vs revenue terms, rather than accepting that some projects just need doing to make gains that are not so easily quantifiable.

good morning Mr Barclays. May I borrow £27bn to build something. Yes. When will I get my money back. Well, the thing is...........................

Even with government funding you need to show that spending tax payers money here ( that is UK tax payers money remember, not Manchester tax payers) offers a better return than building a motorway in Glasgow or a new hospital in Plymouth and Cardiff or 12 new schools in Newcastle or building a new submarine.

 

[notlob.divad]

Have you much experience of this kind of thing?

good morning Mr Barclays. May I borrow £27bn to build something. Yes. When will I get my money back. Well, the thing is...........................

Even with government funding you need to show that spending tax payers money here ( that is UK tax payers money remember, not Manchester tax payers) offers a better return than building a motorway in Glasgow or a new hospital in Plymouth and Cardiff or 12 new schools in Newcastle or building a new submarine.

You are correct with everything apart from the submarine. When it comes to that, it does appear that nothing needs to be 'proven' just believed.