Platform 15 and 16 project at Manchester Piccadilly.

[Altfish]

What was the reason why the platform 6 terminating platform was taken out of use at Manchester Oxford Road station?

I stand to be corrected but that platform ceased use c 1963/4 when passenger trains to Ditton (?) over the now closed Lymm/Warrington line ceased. It was very occasionally used by the MSJ&A electrics prior to conversion to 25kV

 

[LOL The Irony]

What was the reason why the platform 6 terminating platform was taken out of use at Manchester Oxford Road station?

I believe Metrolink taking over the CLC line was the reason it was closed as it became redundant.

 

[sprunt]

Of course, it is not in the least inflammatory to talk about laughing at people, acvuse them of having chips on their shoulders, or attempt to write off everything they say because of your mistaken assumption that they are from Liverpool (I'm not even English), but I'm entirely used to this sort of patronising insecurity, so if that's what floats your boat, carry on.

And a ten point plan, each point of which includes a sneery sarcastic "Manchester is the centre of the known universe" is the platonic ideal of conciliatory, I suppose?

 

[CdBrux]

See my post 885 for your answer to this.

Interestingly if you had been in Munich last Thursday you would have seen me reclaim the proverbial 'large' luggage from the carousel (Borderline Lufthansa weight limit) and together with a second overnight case on the hand luggage limit, Transport it between the terminals and down into the S-Bahn. Then after alighting at Munich East, I successfully navigated the station subway to change trains onto the regional services.
If you had continued to stalk me, you would have seen I was able to make a second rail connection again via a subway onto a branch line. After making both connections with enough luggage to emigrate, let alone 2 weeks of Sun, Sea and Sand: the world did not end. If Munich airport doesn't need a direct connection to every settlement in Bavaria, then Manchester airport certainly doesn't need a direct connection to everywhere in the North.

Part of the strategy of the 2nd Munich city tunnel (due 2026 IIRC) and the almost built northern chord from the S1 airport line is to give Munich airport regional connectivity.

 

[CdBrux]

And Heathrow is most probably the most significant and important airport in the world, but seems to manage without a through service from every obscure corner of the Home Counties.

the relevance of which is? Especially considering the two LHR rail access projects under consideration

 

[Greybeard33]

It wouldn't, but how about another idea that doesn't effectively involve mothballing the chord, and encouraging the more austere in the government into using this as an example why investment in the North isn't so pressing? Instead why not split some of the local services such as Wigan to Alderley Edge, and the rather pointless Crewe-Liverpool, with perhaps one of the two western facing routes switched to start at Victoria. At the same time reduce the number of TPEs stopping at Oxford Road to quicken up their paths through the corridor?

My post #1716 did in fact suggest splitting the Crewe - Liverpool service. However, the Wigan - Alderley Edge provides an important and well used link between the Bolton and Stockport corridors. Keeping the TPE North services in the Castlefield corridor, but omitting the Oxford Road stop, would further worsen passenger congestion on Piccadilly P13/14 and increase dwell times there.

The Victoria through platforms are another choke point, and there are franchise requirements for additional through Northern Connect services from Chester and Liverpool to the Calder Valley, which have not yet started. Diversion of the TPE Airport services back to the Guide Bridge route would free up platform capacity at Victoria and might enable the Northern Chat Moss stopper to terminate there again, as in the old timetable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

the relevance of which is? Especially considering the two LHR rail access projects under consideration

That the North West policy of through trains from everywhere to Manchester Airport is not sensible. Some through trains are justified, but the ones operating on the Ordsall Chord are causing nothing but trouble.

 

[Bantamzen]

That the North West policy of through trains from everywhere to Manchester Airport is not sensible. Some through trains are justified, but the ones operating on the Ordsall Chord are causing nothing but trouble.

What has not been sensible is the Minister sitting on the P15/16 for long enough for it to have left the public consciousness. Ditching the TPE airport services at a time when they are still in growing would kill them stone dead, especially if passengers had to make two changes, including possibly a change of mode in the middle. You would simply transfer the loads back to the motorways, people are not going to stop using MIA anytime soon.

Transferring them back to the Guide Bridge route has at least more merit, although falling back to previous workings is not a permanent option, as this risks future investment in the region's infrastructure. But the Castlefield corridor problems are not insurmountable, no matter what some think. Some careful planning will see the Chord come into its own without causing problems (though it is far from the only cause) until some Minister has the courage to authorise the rest of the improvements that were supposed to happen alongside it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What has not been sensible is the Minister sitting on the P15/16 for long enough for it to have left the public consciousness.

I do agree here - with P15/16, the Ordsall Chord has definite benefits. Without it...well, I think P15/16 should have been done instead. The trouble is that punctuality and reliability improvements, while they are what every commuter wants, are not sexy.

 

[Greybeard33]

And I do agree with that. Keeping all four through platforms free will help smooth the flow a bit, especially for services coming in from the west where several alignments are merging. It will however require a step free access / lift as well as better shelters being incorporated for P1, but with the planned closure of P5 this must surely be on the cards anyway?

Oxford Road P1 is only 105m long, like P5, versus 160m for P2-4. In normal operation there is no point in using P1, because all westbound through services come from Piccadilly P14 and can be handled by P2. P1 is used in times of disruption, e.g. a failed/delayed train in P2 or a westbound queue through Deansgate. P1 can also be used as an additional terminal platform, e.g. for a short working or during engineering works.

Closure of P5 is part of the Oxford Road remodelling project, which is subject to the same TWAO approval as Piccadilly P15/16.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oxford Road P1 is only 105m long, like P5, versus 160m for P2-4. In normal operation there is no point in using P1, because all westbound through services come from Piccadilly P14 and can be handled by P2.

That's a very good point I hadn't thought of. Westbound trains have, as you say, all come from Picc P14, and are therefore already spaced out by the dwell time at Picc which will tend to be higher than Oxford Road as it's busier. Eastbound they have come from either the CLC or the Windsor Link and may or may not have called at Deansgate, so there is the potential for them to be closer together and thus need the "padding" provided by two eastbound platforms.

This does mean that if 15/16 get built, Oxford Road will need to start using 1 more, because there will no longer necessarily be that spacing. If it doesn't, Oxford Road will simply become the bottleneck westbound instead.

 

[Bantamzen]

I do agree here - with P15/16, the Ordsall Chord has definite benefits. Without it...well, I think P15/16 should have been done instead. The trouble is that punctuality and reliability improvements, while they are what every commuter wants, are not sexy.

And that could still be achieved with small but vital changes, some of which have been suggested here. A failure of the May recast does not have to mean there is no way to make it work for commuters and long distance travellers alike.

Oxford Road P1 is only 105m long, like P5, versus 160m for P2-4. In normal operation there is no point in using P1, because all westbound through services come from Piccadilly P14 and can be handled by P2. P1 is used in times of disruption, e.g. a failed/delayed train in P2 or a westbound queue through Deansgate. P1 can also be used as an additional terminal platform, e.g. for a short working or during engineering works.

Closure of P5 is part of the Oxford Road remodelling project, which is subject to the same TWAO approval as Piccadilly P15/16.

Then perhaps in the short run the TPEs should run through Oxford Road at least then getting out of the way of commuter trains that can use it more effectively.

 

[B&I]

And a ten point plan, each point of which includes a sneery sarcastic "Manchester is the centre of the known universe" is the platonic ideal of conciliatory, I suppose?

Again, read the whole thing, and you will notice that I have drawn a distinction between the aggrandisement of Manchester's civic leaders (and a certain proportion of its online booster community), and the poor deal the ordinary citizens of Greater Manchester get (along with everyone else oop north) from our current transport policies. I've no particular desire to be emollient towards the former 2 groups as it is their attitudes which are responsible for many of the current defects in the north of England's transport system.

This forum is certainly a corrective to the oft-stated clichés about Scousers being England's touchiest people.

 

[sprunt]

This forum is certainly a corrective to the oft-stated clichés about Scousers being England's touchiest people.

Yeah, that'll be why so much of the whining about Manchester on here comes from people in Leeds then won't it? What?

 

[B&I]

Not so very long ago, people on certain threads stated it was better if incoming services to Manchester Airport were terminated in the terminal platforms of the main train shed at Manchester Piccadilly, as there were both the Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Airport "shuttle" service and the Manchester Piccadilly to Crewe (via the Styal line) service that both terminated in the same terminal platforms of the train shed, which would make the "slight inconvenience" involved in a train change worthwhile.

What do we now have? No "Airport Shuttle" service and the Manchester to Crewe (via the Styal line) service no longer running into the train shed, but now a Liverpool Lime Street-Manchester Piccadilly-Crewe service that uses the congested platform 13 and 14.

Whose fault is that ? The Lime Street-Crewe 'congestion special' really is the answer to a question that no-one outside Northern's management asked

 

[Bletchleyite]

Then perhaps in the short run the TPEs should run through Oxford Road at least then getting out of the way of commuter trains that can use it more effectively.

As per @Greybeard33's point, though, it isn't Oxford Road that is the bottleneck westbound, because the trains have already all stopped at Picc P14 and thus are leaving spaced out by the dwell time at Picc anyway. So I'm not sure that there is any need to do that nor anything to gain from doing it, as they would (eastbound) just be queued up for Picc P13 anyway, or (westbound) spaced properly.

What is needed is to reduce the number of trains through 13/14 until such time as the service stabilises, and one way to do this in the short term (and free up two Class 185s for strengthening) would be to remove the two Ordsall Chord services and send them back into Picc to terminate in P1/2/3, and to add 2tph of Class 319 or 323 operated dedicated airport services from P11 or P12 in their path. What other options might there be to achieve this? I guess the rather silly Liverpool-Crewe service could be split into Liverpool-Vic and Picc main trainshed-Crewe?

Additionally, as per my other posting, Northern (and if applicable TPE) need to rejig their crew diagrams and route learning so there are no planned crew changes at any Central Manchester station.

 

[B&I]

Yeah, that'll be why so much of the whining about Manchester on here comes from people in Leeds then won't it? What?

Dear oh dear. So, it's no longer permitted to question the wisdom of policies pursued by Manchester's civic leadership, or to point out how little these policies benefit ordinary Mancunian public transport users, without being accused of 'whining about Manchester'. Whereas the hyper-sensitivity that certain people display online to any criticism of the city, and its attribution to being Scouse (which, I have made it clear several thousand times, I am not) is perfectly alright.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whose fault is that ? The Lime Street-Crewe 'congestion special' really is the answer to a question that no-one outside Northern's management asked

Yes, that service is a piece of prime grade A idiocy and needs lopping back up again.

 

[Bantamzen]

Whose fault is that ? The Lime Street-Crewe 'congestion special' really is the answer to a question that no-one outside Northern's management asked

Yes, that service is a piece of prime grade A idiocy and needs lopping back up again.

Well that's half the problem solved already. See, its not that hard after all...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Looking at the service for 1500-1600 today, I note the Wigan to Alderley Edge DMU which is another rather bizarre one that might well stand being split too (not least because that would also stop DMUs being wasted beyond Picc). That said, that would require respacing other services, as it's right next to the Crewe service in the timetable.

 

[Greybeard33]

Looking at the service for 1500-1600 today, I note the Wigan to Alderley Edge DMU which is another rather bizarre one that might well stand being split too (not least because that would also stop DMUs being wasted beyond Picc). That said, that would require respacing other services, as it's right next to the Crewe service in the timetable.

I believe Wigan to Alderley Edge is slated to be worked by 769 bi-modes, as and when they finally enter service.

There is a franchise requirement for 16 direct services daily from Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme to Salford Crescent and Bolton, and vice versa. Although that can be satisfied by the Hazel Grove to Piccadilly EMU service, once it is extended to Blackpool North via Bolton in the May 2019 timetable change (in place of the current Piccadilly to Blackpool DMU).

 

[B&I]

While it would lose TPE services, there'd still be the TfW ex-Llandudno services at Oxford Road.

There'd also be multiple Northern services

 

[B&I]

But then we start the loop again; if not the Airport then where do we terminate trains in the North?

Depending on origin, Victoria, Piccadilly and a range of other towns east and west of Manchester ?

 

[B&I]

Or 'Not Particularly Relevent'

'Not Presently Realistic'

 

[B&I]

Manchester Airport has moved on from the Ringway days, and is no longer the preserve of the package holiday crowd but is developing into an important international airport with a rapidly growing long haul market. It is also seen by many movers and shakers across the region as an important part of the infrastructure, and key to the development of economies across the North of England. So it's impact is far more wide ranging than some on here are prepared to accept.



It wouldn't, but how about another idea that doesn't effectively involve mothballing the chord, and encouraging the more austere in the government into using this as an example why investment in the North isn't so pressing? Instead why not split some of the local services such as Wigan to Alderley Edge, and the rather pointless Crewe-Liverpool, with perhaps one of the two western facing routes switched to start at Victoria. At the same time reduce the number of TPEs stopping at Oxford Road to quicken up their paths through the corridor?

We have had this debate many times before, so I will.simply state that, for the vast majority of ordinary people who are not 'movers and shakers' a reliable train service for 48 weeks of the year to their places of employment is a lot more important than an airport service they are unlikely to use more than twice annually, so that, for so long as resources require us which to choose to prioritise, I'd suggest the former.

BTW if Ringway is so crucial, why are you proposing cutting services to it from Liverpool and Wigan, both of which are presumably fairly healthy markets for travel to it, so as to maintain TPE services to it from the far side of the country ? Have the people arguing in favour of airport services given any real thought to where most demand for travel to Manchester Airport is actually likely to come from, and the fairly poor links to it from much of Greater Manchester ? Or is it more important that it has direct services to Grimborough-on-Sea so that Councillers Cox and Evans can maintain the delusion that they're connected to the high-flying world of international capitalism ?

 

[B&I]

As per @Greybeard33's point, though, it isn't Oxford Road that is the bottleneck westbound, because the trains have already all stopped at Picc P14 and thus are leaving spaced out by the dwell time at Picc anyway. So I'm not sure that there is any need to do that nor anything to gain from doing it, as they would (eastbound) just be queued up for Picc P13 anyway, or (westbound) spaced properly.

What is needed is to reduce the number of trains through 13/14 until such time as the service stabilises, and one way to do this in the short term (and free up two Class 185s for strengthening) would be to remove the two Ordsall Chord services and send them back into Picc to terminate in P1/2/3, and to add 2tph of Class 319 or 323 operated dedicated airport services from P11 or P12 in their path. What other options might there be to achieve this? I guess the rather silly Liverpool-Crewe service could be split into Liverpool-Vic and Picc main trainshed-Crewe?

Additionally, as per my other posting, Northern (and if applicable TPE) need to rejig their crew diagrams and route learning so there are no planned crew changes at any Central Manchester station.

The problem with re-routing the Liverpool-Crewe is that it was supposed to replace the previous Liverpool-Chat Moss-MancAirport service. Thanks to Liverpool's pathetic long distance connections, getting to Piccadilly really is quite important for making a lot of journeys to points further east and south from anywhere east of Lime Street (I'm coming from Broad Green, and it's very often much, much faster to change at Piccadilly than at Lime Street).

This is in the addition of whether ir would be a good idea ro maintain direct services to Manchester Airport from a large swathe of Merseyside, and a decent whack of Manchester's own western suburbs, rather than from towns 150 miles and 2 international airports away.

 

[Bantamzen]

We have had this debate many times before, so I will.simply state that, for the vast majority of ordinary people who are not 'movers and shakers' a reliable train service for 48 weeks of the year to their places of employment is a lot more important than an airport service they are unlikely to use more than twice annually, so that, for so long as resources require us which to choose to prioritise, I'd suggest the former.

BTW if Ringway is so crucial, why are you proposing cutting services to it from Liverpool and Wigan, both of which are presumably fairly healthy markets for travel to it, so as to maintain TPE services to it from the far side of the country ? Have the people arguing in favour of airport services given any real thought to where most demand for travel to Manchester Airport is actually likely to come from, and the fairly poor links to it from much of Greater Manchester ? Or is it more important that it has direct services to Grimborough-on-Sea so that Councillers Cox and Evans can maintain the delusion that they're connected to the high-flying world of international capitalism ?

Firstly, continuing to call it Ringway does nothing for your argument save making you sound like some voice from the past.

Secondly the aspirations of the movers and shakers are to attract business and tourism to the region, which in turn will drive the local economies, which in turn might mean those commuters don't have to shoehorn onto small commuter trains into Manchester, or any other city. Its about developing the North of England into a credible economic area that can attract business, and improve job prospects in the region instead of the ridiculous model of cramming all the eggs into one basket in the capital.

 

[notlob.divad]

Firstly, continuing to call it Ringway does nothing for your argument save making you sound like some voice from the past.

Secondly the aspirations of the movers and shakers are to attract business and tourism to the region, which in turn will drive the local economies, which in turn might mean those commuters don't have to shoehorn onto small commuter trains into Manchester, or any other city. Its about developing the North of England into a credible economic area that can attract business, and improve job prospects in the region instead of the ridiculous model of cramming all the eggs into one basket in the capital.

And that aspiration is failong miserably. As all that is happening is that businesses from across the North are relocating into Manchester. So more people will have to shoehorn themselves onto those Manchester commuter services.

 

[Bantamzen]

And that aspiration is failong miserably. As all that is happening is that businesses from across the North are relocating into Manchester. So more people will have to shoehorn themselves onto those Manchester commuter services.

And that is because....? Survey says, the government are stalling on projects to improve the infrastructure that will support the wider growth.

 

[notlob.divad]

The problem with re-routing the Liverpool-Crewe is that it was supposed to replace the previous Liverpool-Chat Moss-MancAirport service. Thanks to Liverpool's pathetic long distance connections, getting to Piccadilly really is quite important for making a lot of journeys to points further east and south from anywhere east of Lime Street (I'm coming from Broad Green, and it's very often much, much faster to change at Piccadilly than at Lime Street).

This is in the addition of whether ir would be a good idea ro maintain direct services to Manchester Airport from a large swathe of Merseyside, and a decent whack of Manchester's own western suburbs, rather than from towns 150 miles and 2 international airports away.

Yes it is funny how it is the Chat Moss stopper that is the one everyone always suggests gets cut. Like the people who live along that line are not worthy enough. For years the Chat Moss stopper went to Victoria, and as a result people who lived in the vicinity of stations along the line west of Earlestown had to change trains twice to get anywhere beyond Manchester. Whilst occasionallly this was a nice same platform change, more often than not it was a trek (often with the proverbial heavy suitcase) across the wilderness of the Earlestown Triangle. And try explaning that to someone coming to visit for the first time.

Now the TPEs are routed across Chat Moss and provide the link to Victoria and beyond, it is sensible to serve the Castlefield Corridor with the stopping service. Want to turn it in the Mayfield siding. Fine do it. Want to turn it at Oxford Road, fine do it. But sending a 3rd Chat Moss service to Victoria, where it will likely terminate right in front of a TPE express, is the same kind of backward illogical thinking that the UK is renowned the world over for. And they wonder why some of us feel the railways are being configured more and more to serve a cream of the elite rather than provide the public transport network the country desperatly needs.