• 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!

Platform 15 and 16 project at Manchester Piccadilly.

Status
Not open for further replies.

dggar

Member
Joined
16 Apr 2011
Messages
469
It appears that from 1000 to 1059 today, 24 in-service passenger trains pass through Deansgate (counting both directions) but only 8 of them call, if that's any help? It's a tiny minority.
so about 33% Not too dissimilar to % of eligible voters who voted to leave in the EU referendum.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,972
May I ask if you are aware of the location of the existing Heald Green railway station? It is situated on Finney Lane, the main road through Heald Green with bus stops close by in both the Wythenshawe and the Stockport bound routes. The station is almost on the border with the Moss Nook part of Wythenshawe and it is only a short distance from that railway station in a cutting of some depth to the chord that leads to the line to Manchester Airport.

Constructing a new railway station nearer to the existing chord leading to the Manchester Airport station away from the present site in that location would prove somewhat difficult and there are no pre-existing roads to use as connections to such a new railway station. There are business parks with buildings constructed up to the line of the existing railway and there appears to be some railway items in the said cutting.

Do not forget that the A555 new road leading to Manchester Airport already in construction passes through the same area with associated bridgeworks already constructed over the railway line.

I was suggesting it is what should have been done in the 90s not that it should be built now. If it was built now it could be a complete rebuild on the same site but perhaps starting very slightly south. Id suggest an island platform for through services and 2 platforms for terminating services. The Airport spur could be converted to Metrolink and run a short service of Airport Parkway - Terminal 1 and 3 - Terminal 2. The Styal line would require a huge upgrade to handle more services. The situation at Platforms 13 and 14 would remain similar but VT Crewe services could run that way instead to switch some airport passengers away. I am not sure if the idea would work now but with hindsight upgrading the Styal line to being part of the WCML would have had many benefits.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,270
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
I was suggesting it is what should have been done in the 90s not that it should be built now. If it was built now it could be a complete rebuild on the same site but perhaps starting very slightly south. Id suggest an island platform for through services and 2 platforms for terminating services. The Airport spur could be converted to Metrolink and run a short service of Airport Parkway - Terminal 1 and 3 - Terminal 2. The Styal line would require a huge upgrade to handle more services. The situation at Platforms 13 and 14 would remain similar but VT Crewe services could run that way instead to switch some airport passengers away. I am not sure if the idea would work now but with hindsight upgrading the Styal line to being part of the WCML would have had many benefits.

Would the existing container train traffic be affected by such plans?
 

Altfish

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
1,065
Location
Altrincham
I am not sure if the idea would work now but with hindsight upgrading the Styal line to being part of the WCML would have had many benefits.
I stand to be corrected but I believe that the Styal Line was the first part of the WCML to be electrified; it was done before the line through Stockport.
 

mmh

Established Member
Joined
13 Aug 2016
Messages
3,744
You must have a different understanding of the word "tiny" to me, as 8 trains out of 24 equate to 33%.

Quite. Using the same sophisticated method to judge whether there's demand for a service, 6 of the 20 Virgin services through Milton Keynes Central in the next hour stop there, an even more "tiny" 30%. These stops should therefore be removed, the impact of their withdrawl would be marginal.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,541
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Quite. Using the same sophisticated method to judge whether there's demand for a service, 6 of the 20 Virgin services through Milton Keynes Central in the next hour stop there, an even more "tiny" 30%. These stops should therefore be removed, the impact of their withdrawl would be marginal.

Those services are not causing a problem, as MKC has enough platforms for them not to (indeed, Platform 6 was built to allow Platform 5 to be a bi-directional fast line loop). Deansgate is, as it does not; for it not to cause issues it would need 4 platforms like all the stations on the Castlefield line do, but only Oxford Road has (well, 5).

If they were causing a problem, there would indeed be a solid reason for their withdrawal. Watford Junction does not have a fast line loop, and there isn't really anywhere to put one without a full rebuild, and as a result it has been cut right back to 1tph of VT. (MKC platform 6 was easy to add as the land on which it and its feeder lines are located was completely unused).
 

Andyjs247

Member
Joined
1 Jan 2011
Messages
707
Location
North Oxfordshire
I strongly support Man Airport having services from across the NW. A shuttle wouldn’t even cover Victoria or Oxford Road, and I imagine demand for airport services is very well distributed. It’s the only major airport in the region, especially for long haul, so it needs to serve wider than just Greater Manchester.

Is there any particular reason why MAN Airport could not have an EMU shuttle to Victoria via the Ordsall Chord rather than to the main shed at Piccadilly? Agree that the airport should have some trains from further afield, but the basic problem seems to be too many short trains at 1tph frequency from the airport to each destination. A higher frequency / higher capacity airport shuttle would hopefully take some of the pressure off other trains that people need to use for commuting.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,270
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Is there any particular reason why MAN Airport could not have an EMU shuttle to Victoria via the Ordsall Chord rather than to the main shed at Piccadilly? Agree that the airport should have some trains from further afield, but the basic problem seems to be too many short trains at 1tph frequency from the airport to each destination. A higher frequency / higher capacity airport shuttle would hopefully take some of the pressure off other trains that people need to use for commuting.

Is it not the case that the shuttle service from Manchester Airport to the terminal bay platforms at Manchester Piccadilly now has been translated to being a Manchester Airport to Liverpool Lime Street service?

Is there not a problem in terminating services at Manchester Victoria station that only has four through lines? If it were the case that such a shuttle were to run from the two east-facing terminal bay platforms, that would not impinge on the through lines, but unfortunately no such easy route to Manchester Airport from those terminal bay platforms currently exists.

There is the Manchester Metrolink direct service from Manchester Victoria railway station to Manchester Airport, but that is not a fast direct service but a service that is intended to serve many locations in the south side of the city and that service seems fated to run as a two-car service only.
 

Senex

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2014
Messages
2,752
Location
York
I stand to be corrected but I believe that the Styal Line was the first part of the WCML to be electrified; it was done before the line through Stockport.
That's right — as an experimental section for the then-new (to Britain) 25 kV system, and also for driver-training with the converted gas-turbine loco E1000 (Metro-Vick conversion).
 

Altfish

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
1,065
Location
Altrincham
In 2016/17 MKC had 6.851 million passengers, while Deansgate had 0.421 million. Think again?

(Oxford Road was 8.584 million, while Picc was 27.807 million)
It'd be interesting to know how many of those Piccadilly passengers use 15/16; I suspect less than use Oxford Road.
 

dggar

Member
Joined
16 Apr 2011
Messages
469
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,270
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
In 2016/17 MKC had 6.851 million passengers, while Deansgate had 0.421 million. Think again?

(Oxford Road was 8.584 million, while Picc was 27.807 million)

Since I assumed it was obvious from my posting that Milton Keynes Central was no-where near to being situated within a large city, whilst Deansgate is. I fail to see why I should "think again". Deansgate-Castlefield Metrolink station must have quite a good passenger footfall and was deemed worthy of having an extra platform added. Do not forget that the Manchester Central site that hosts political party conferences and events and exhibitions is just one of the important city centre sites in that area.

I might be 73 years of age but I still have lost none of my cognitive memory that covers geographical areas.
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,541
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Since I assumed it was obvious from my posting that Milton Keynes Central was no-where near to being situated within a large city, whilst Deansgate is. I fail to see why I should "think again".

I might be 73 years of age but I still have lost none of my cognitive memory that covers geographical areas.

My point was that it is much less used than MKC, and it causes an issue.

Ideally it'd be upgraded to 4 platforms and everything stop there, but I don't see how that could be done.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,270
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
My point was that it is much less used than MKC, and it causes an issue. Ideally it'd be upgraded to 4 platforms and everything stop there, but I don't see how that could be done.

Since this thread concerns the problems of the proposed through Platforms 15 and 16 project at Manchester Piccadilly and the effects upon nearby city centre railway stations, I think that bringing Milton Keynes Central station to use as a comparative is somewhat far removed from the reality of the situation.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Incidentally, it must have cost some amount of money to ensure that the new connecting bridge from Deansgate railway station to Deansgate-Castlefield Metrolink station (now with an extra tram platform there) was so constructed. If it was known that there would have been a possibility that Deansgate railway station was scheduled for closure, I am sure that the incurred costs of this new connection bridge would have not been spent.
Isn't the "new" bridge is just a refurbishment of the one that has been there for 20 years or so?

Milton Keynes Central is not in a comparable situation to a station in the middle of a large city such as Deansgate is.
Milton Keynes Central is in the middle of Milton Keynes, which while not a city is a large settlement. And unlike Deansgate all its trains don't also stop at another station a quarter of a mile away.
 

Altfish

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
1,065
Location
Altrincham
Isn't the "new" bridge is just a refurbishment of the one that has been there for 20 years or so?
Yes, but it was a substantial refurbishment and it also acts as a disabled access from the tram station in case the lift is out of order.

Milton Keynes Central is in the middle of Milton Keynes, which while not a city is a large settlement. And unlike Deansgate all its trains don't also stop at another station a quarter of a mile away.
Deansgate is very useful for tram connections (Oxford Road isn't), especially anyone working in Media City or Salford Quays
 

ajdunlop

Member
Joined
25 Jan 2009
Messages
217
It is unbelievably slow. Its faster and more reliable to walk. It would be better to have Liverpool CLC services stop at Cornbrook and Liverpool and Wigan NW services at a Eccles Metrolink/Rail interchange and just stop services from Salford Crescent direction at Deansgate which would help the timetable reliability.
Add a Metrolink spur from Exchange Quay to Salford Crescent and even the Bolton trains would have no need to stop at deansgate?
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,972
Add a Metrolink spur from Exchange Quay to Salford Crescent and even the Bolton trains would have no need to stop at deansgate?

Its over a mile and wouldn't be used enough to justify its own services. The best solution for closing Deansgate (in addition to Cornbrook and Eccles) could be building a travelator link between Oxford Road to Deansgate Railway Station closing the platforms but keeping the station to serve as entrance and exit for Great Jackson Street skyscraper developments and Castlefield. The transfer time with Metrolink would be reasonable and would be warm and dry walk. The question with any solution to city centre capacity is does it offer better value for money than platforms 15 and 16? I am not sure what the cost would be but probably a lot because the only route available after current development would be above a pedestrianised Hewitt Street and then over the viaduct and along Whitworth Street West to a rebuilt Oxford Road.
 

apk55

Member
Joined
7 Jul 2011
Messages
438
Location
Altrincham
What would be the effect of building the airport western link, to join the mid Cheshire line near Mobberley? All of the trains that would use it would probably be existing trains that become through trains so no extra traffic on the Style Line. The main Chester service would go via Manchester Airport and the existing service via Altrincham terminate at Stockport saving a Paths into Piccadilly.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,270
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
Add a Metrolink spur from Exchange Quay to Salford Crescent and even the Bolton trains would have no need to stop at Deansgate?

How many of the existing Bolton trains stop at Deansgate? I wonder if such a Metrolink spur as that referred to above has ever been part of any past discussions when the current Trafford Park Metrolink line under construction that branches off the existing line at Pomona was first considered.

As a brief aside, with Pomona in mind, from 1st June 1856 to 1st June 1865, the Manchester South Junction and Altrincham Railway had a short-lived Cornbrook station that served the then Pomona Gardens, being situated on the south side of Cornbrook Road.
 

notlob.divad

Established Member
Joined
19 Jan 2016
Messages
1,609
It'd be interesting to know how many of those Piccadilly passengers use 15/16; I suspect less than use Oxford Road.
Maybe not last year. But I bet it is a hell of a lot more this year given the stupid idea of running the trains to Yorkshire and the North East from there as well as none-stopping the Scottish services through Oxford Road.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
Its over a mile and wouldn't be used enough to justify its own services. The best solution for closing Deansgate (in addition to Cornbrook and Eccles) could be building a travelator link between Oxford Road to Deansgate Railway Station closing the platforms but keeping the station to serve as entrance and exit for Great Jackson Street skyscraper developments and Castlefield. The transfer time with Metrolink would be reasonable and would be warm and dry walk. The question with any solution to city centre capacity is does it offer better value for money than platforms 15 and 16? I am not sure what the cost would be but probably a lot because the only route available after current development would be above a pedestrianised Hewitt Street and then over the viaduct and along Whitworth Street West to a rebuilt Oxford Road.
Thought I'd repost this image:
deansgate.jpg
Whether or not the grade separation was built this idea would use a floor or two of the new skyscraper next to the railway as a new Oxford Road western entrance and a new pedestrian bridge could be thrown across the road to the east end of the Metrolink stop for interchange. Deansgate existing station entrance would be abandoned and the heritage listed building repurposed. The pedestrian walkway above the tracks would join directly onto the new footbridge planned at Oxford Road.
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,270
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
What would be the effect of building the airport western link, to join the mid Cheshire line near Mobberley? All of the trains that would use it would probably be existing trains that become through trains so no extra traffic on the Style line.

Considering the amount of local feeling when Runway 2 at Manchester Airport was first announced, I can well imagine what the local reaction would be to a proposal to a railway line being driven through the local area from Manchester Airport to the Mobberley area....<D

I do admire your new name of the Style line for the Styal line, which will go down well at those who patronise the Hoopers department store in Wilmslow..:lol:
 

B&I

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Messages
2,484
The journey time would be very long and even in the context of city centre capacity schemes it would be a large investment. Every Metrolink line has a cost more than platforms 15 and 16. Eccles town centre to station would be very comparable with the Media City spur (360 metres) which I think cost £18m including extra trams. Eccles to Harbour city still only needs a single tram every 12 minutes despite being opened in the late 90s while the rest of the line is regularly overcrowded with double the capacity. Linking Metrolink to Eccles Railway Station to redistribute passengers traveling from west of Manchester to Salford Quays including stopping Wigan services at Eccles would help both city centre railway and Metrolink capacity problems.


I made the suggestion not so.much because I particularly care about anyone getting to work at Media City, but because, if Manchester.doesn't want a proper heavy rail suburbam railway, it might at least try to plug some of the gaps with trams. Re-opening the Great Moor Street lime would serve a number of places which currently have poor public transport, such as Worsley, Little Hulton and the southern part of Bolton
 

Altfish

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2014
Messages
1,065
Location
Altrincham
What would be the effect of building the airport western link, to join the mid Cheshire line near Mobberley? All of the trains that would use it would probably be existing trains that become through trains so no extra traffic on the Style Line. The main Chester service would go via Manchester Airport and the existing service via Altrincham terminate at Stockport saving a Paths into Piccadilly.
The plan would be to run through the Airport to terminate at Piccadilly. It is envisaged that Chester/North Wales trains could run that way and possibly Liverpool trains via the link at Hartford.
It is still very much blue sky thinking so service patterns on an already crowded railway have not been worked out. There is talk of tram-train to Stockport, possibly from Knutsford. Add in the Middlewich line and there are a whole raft of possibilities.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top