• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!

Potential expansions of the Merseyrail network.

Status
Not open for further replies.

507021

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2015
Messages
4,749
Location
Chester
I disagree. Southport has more than double the population of Skelmersdale and reopening the Burscough curves would also benefit the residents of Meols Cop, New Lane, Bescar Lane, Burscough, Rufford, Croston and Midge Hall (if reopened), as all intermediate stations along the route would gain new and/or more frequent and reliable services to Southport, Ormskirk and Preston. Through services at Ormskirk would also benefit the residents of Aughton, Maghull and Aintree, as well as anyone wishing to travel there.

I'm not denying the benefits of re-opening the Burscough Curves, but the fact is the transport provision in Skelmersdale is absolutely woeful and needs addressing far more urgently than improving rail connectivity for a town which already has a good provision for rail. Your argument of "Southport a is bigger settlement, so the curves should be reopened before Skelmersdale gets a rail link" is in my view a poor and selfish justification.

There is absolutely no excuse for the Burscough curves to remain closed in this day and age, whether the service is Diesel or battery operated. Being forced to change stations at either Burscough or Wigan to reach Preston from Southport is totally unacceptable, as is travelling over an hour out of your way to Sandhills to reach Ormskirk. Bus journey times from Southport to Preston and Ormskirk are also totally unacceptable. Travelling via Wigan also puts you at the mercy of Greater Manchester evening peak fares and should therefore be avoided unless travelling to another destination in Greater Manchester.

You've conveniently omitted the fact there is a half-hourly express bus to Preston and two buses per hour to Ormskirk from your argument. Under the current timetables, Southport also has three trains per hour to Liverpool and two trains per hour into Manchester. Southport isn't as hard done by as you're trying to make out.

Skelmersdale, while it also urgently needs doing, actually inconveniences some passengers at intermediate stations, for example anyone travelling between Rainford and Upholland, which is quite a common journey on that line, will now have to change at Skelmersdale, more than doubling their journey time, but of course passengers from Rainford to Liverpool will no longer have to change at Kirkby (or Headbolt Lane) and will have a more frequent service, so there’s a trade off somewhere.

I think it's an inconvenience worth having if it gives Skelmersdale the rail link it desperately needs.

If the Kirkby line is “converted” to be 100% operated by 777s (including 8 car services), then I don’t expect the 3rd rail will ever be extended, as there will be no requirement for the remaining 507s to ever run past Kirkby and at least some 777s will be equipped with batteries.

The Kirkby route is going to be the first to transfer over to 777 operation.

I am not happy with the present situation at all and can’t wait for it to be rectified!

Genuine question - have you asked your MP to raise the subject of the Burscough Curves in Parliament?

I'm not against them being reopened, but I'd say Skelmersdale needs to be reconnected to the railway network before Merseytravel start looking at the more luxury options like the provision of direct rail services from Southport to Preston and Ormskirk. I'd also argue a further expanded Anfield stadium makes reopening the Canada Dock Branch to passengers more of a priority as well. The fact the line is already there and in regular use makes that scheme the biggest no-brainer for me.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

507020

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2021
Messages
1,919
Location
Southport
Both the Burscough Curves and Skelmersdale fall under West Lancashire, which is unfortunately not part of the Merseytravel area or the Liverpool City Region combined authority, with all the benefits that brings (however Rainford is located in St Helens). What is important is not to allow what is an essential scheme in Skelmersdale to overshadow the reopening of the Burscough Curves as they are extremely different projects.

Reopening the Burscough Curves would at most involve relaying less than 1 mile of single track over an existing embankment which is currently owned by Network Rail, with some obvious devegetation work needed and minor signalling enhancements required to create capacity for new services. This is by no means a “luxury” scheme, in fact it would be particularly low cost, with benefits to a very large number of people. The combined populations of Southport, Ormskirk, Burscough, Rufford and Croston alone are 130k, not including any of the smaller settlements in the vicinity, or anyone in Preston wishing to travel to Southport. How exactly is it selfish for me to suggest that a number of communities in a wide area of West Lancashire gain better connections with each other and with Southport. This would NOT be at the expense of Skelmersdale.

By contrast, the full Skelmersdale scheme could, by my calculations, require laying a total of up to 10.3 single track miles of new track, of which 7 miles may need to be electrified, in addition to electrifying 1 mile of existing double track between Rainford and the new Skelmersdale/Upholland West Junction. This would include redoubling the single track section between Fazakerley and Rainford, which would require widening of the existing embankment at Headbolt Lane to provide a 3 track layout for continued access to the Knowsley waste facility by freight trains and replacing several single track bridges, including one over the M57, to create the capacity needed for a Skelmersdale service. Rainford station will need both platforms to be significantly lengthened to accommodate an 8 car 777, at present only a 2 car 150 will fit. Beyond Rainford, a new spur of approximately 1.9 miles will need to be built to a new Skelmersdale station, running over a new embankment which will have to be constructed on land where there has never previously been a railway of any kind, requiring land purchase. This would be a similar scheme to the construction of the line to Manchester Airport, but longer, as this is only 1.5 miles. I envisage the new line being built as 2 parallel tracks, with the western track used by Merseyrail and the eastern track used by Northern, this way only the western track would need to be electrified. The direct connection between Rainford and Upholland would need to be retained for the aforementioned freight access to Knowsley.

Skelmersdale currently enjoys 4 buses an hour to Wigan, Ormskirk and Southport, 2 to Maghull and Liverpool and some smaller local ones, but I agree they need to be supplemented by a rail link as soon as possible. The population of Skelmersdale is 38k. This is still a very significant number of people, deserving of such a rail link, but the Burscough Curves with far less complexity involved could easily be fully operational several years before the Skelmersdale rail link can be delivered and I believe this should happen.

Southport is the 13th largest town in the North West (and the 17th largest settlement overall as Liverpool, Manchester, Salford and Preston are cities) and is well connected with Liverpool to the south, but to nowhere else. It may be technically connected but not well. In terms of buses, there are 5 an hour to Liverpool, 2 to Ormskirk/Skelmersdale/Wigan and 4 to Preston, of which 2 are “Express” (the X2) and the others are an extension of a previous Preston-Tarleton service which only seem to have appeared when Stagecoach ordered a new fleet of buses for the X2, using the older bus fleet.

While is good that we have retained a service to Manchester, it is frequently publicised for its poor performance and overcrowding, even being the main subject of a Channel 4 Dispatches programme not that long ago. It frequently saw 142s until 2019 and has never seen a 195 in service, only on a single test run, as the plug doors foul the platforms and Meols Cop and this is apparently not a priority to rectify despite all Merseyrail platforms being modified for level boarding and the much less used platforms at New Lane being lengthened. We may also be the last to receive the 777s on any services at all. Hillside station, which gets extremely busy when The Open golf is held at the Royal Birkdale in Southport is only now having lifts installed, many years after several much less used stations closer to Liverpool received disabled access. The introduction of the Class 769 units (which are a fundamentally good idea) has seen Manchester services frequently arriving 30-45 minutes late at Southport due to powertrain faults and their subsequent withdrawal due to these faults has seen services short formed of 2 car 150s or 156s with no capacity for social distancing.

In my personal experience the X2 is frequently 20 minutes late, making it impossible to rely on to get a train from Preston and while they are modern vehicles and the seats are comfortable, the ride quality is awful owing to the poor condition of the road surface north of Southport and the journey time of almost an hour is unacceptable for a shorter distance than the trip to Liverpool. Buses I’ve been on from Ormskirk have taken over 3 hours to reach Southport in the complete gridlock traffic of pre COVID rush hour. Travelling via Sandhills, the service to Ormskirk waits for connection with the one arriving from Southport as it is a conflicting movement, but in the other direction, the Southport service doesn’t wait unless it’s busy and a few minutes late from Hunts Cross, but in the peak it tended to be crush loaded and impossible to board. The last time I tried to change stations at Wigan for a connection, the Southport service was 20 minutes late arriving so I had a 55 minute wait and the last time I travelled back from Manchester I arrived almost 45 minutes late, after sitting at Gathurst for half an hour.

Based on this evidence I would argue that Southport is definitely hard done by, but perhaps not to the same extent as Skelmersdale. The rail connection to Skelmersdale would appear to reduce journey times from Skelmersdale to Liverpool by nearly an hour. The Burscough Curves would reduce the journey time from Southport to Ormskirk by a similar amount, but without needing to build 2 new stations at Skelmersdale and Headbolt Lane or potentially several expensive new substations for electrification, only needing a tenth of the amount of new track to be laid. I’m all for building the line to Skelmersdale, even for it to be extended from Skelmersdale to Ormskirk, as with the amount of road traffic between them, for future rail passengers to be expected to change at Kirkdale is unacceptable, particularly as this would also provide a direct route from Ormskirk to Wigan via Skelmersdale.

The Burscough Curves remain a vastly cheaper scheme to deliver directly benefitting almost 100k more people, but there is still very high value in connecting the population of Skelmersdale. Take the example of Macclesfield, population 51k, which has direct services to Manchester, Stockport, Stoke-on-Trent, all intermediate stations between Manchester and Stoke-on-Trent, Milton Keynes, London Euston as well as Stafford, Wolverhampton, Birmingham, Coventry, Oxford, Reading, Southampton and Bournemouth via the CrossCountry service and also Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme and Carlisle during diversions on the WCML such as those last weekend. Any population of this size deserves to be this well connected, so why is it that Southport, with almost double the population can’t even manage a local service to Ormskirk or Preston so far, let alone direct long distance services to anywhere beyond, or why Skelmersdale or Leigh, without being significantly smaller than Macclesfield, aren’t provided with anything at all?

In answer to your question, yes I have petitioned MP Damien Moore about the Burscough Curves and I have a video of Boris himself saying in Parliament that it is a good idea to reinstate them. I am told he is also mentioned building a new railway to Skelmersdale but I haven’t seen this. He has now been invited to visit Southport and see the Crossens pumping station.

With regards to your proposed no-brainer, the main rail artery for freight to and from the Port of Liverpool including the endless Drax trains, I’m unsure if it has the capacity for frequent stopping passenger services without negatively affecting freight throughput. Also are Merseytravel willing to spend the money to reinstate 6 stations at once? Perhaps matchday specials to Anfield are feasible. Where would these proposed services run from? Would it be Southport via Bootle Junction, a Bootle shuttle, a Lime Street shuttle, or perhaps Wigan/St Helens/Warrington Bank Quay/Manchester via the Olive Mount chord. To run from Ormskirk would also require the North Mersey branch from Aintree. There are endless possibilities. It is beneficial to provide as many as possible, without causing conflicts, instead of prioritising them over each other.
 

507021

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2015
Messages
4,749
Location
Chester
Both the Burscough Curves and Skelmersdale fall under West Lancashire, which is unfortunately not part of the Merseytravel area or the Liverpool City Region combined authority, with all the benefits that brings (however Rainford is located in St Helens). What is important is not to allow what is an essential scheme in Skelmersdale to overshadow the reopening of the Burscough Curves as they are extremely different projects.

I think that's going to be the difficulty getting them reopened any time soon. Nobody seems all that keen on paying for it.

Reopening the Burscough Curves would at most involve relaying less than 1 mile of single track over an existing embankment which is currently owned by Network Rail, with some obvious devegetation work needed and minor signalling enhancements required to create capacity for new services. This is by no means a “luxury” scheme, in fact it would be particularly low cost, with benefits to a very large number of people. The combined populations of Southport, Ormskirk, Burscough, Rufford and Croston alone are 130k, not including any of the smaller settlements in the vicinity, or anyone in Preston wishing to travel to Southport. How exactly is it selfish for me to suggest that a number of communities in a wide area of West Lancashire gain better connections with each other and with Southport. This would NOT be at the expense of Skelmersdale.

You said you disagreed with my belief the Skelmersdale Branch is a higher priority for construction than reopening the Burscough Chords, before stating the fact Southport has a higher population. If I have misinterpreted (as I often do, unfortunately!) what you meant by this statement, then I unreservedly apologise.

Based on this evidence I would argue that Southport is definitely hard done by

I still wouldn't say it is. I don't find getting to Southport by public transport particularly difficult, although travelling there by bus is quite tedious.

The Burscough Curves remain a vastly cheaper scheme to deliver directly benefitting almost 100k more people, but there is still very high value in connecting the population of Skelmersdale.

It is cheaper, but the bodies paying for it are going to want a quick return on the investment. I think a rail link to Skelmersdale would pay for itself more quickly than reopening the Burscough Curves would. You've also got to consider where the trains to run the extra services are coming from. Northern don't have any spare diesels even with the introduction of the 769s. Merseyrail have options for another 59 units (one exercised so far, for the Headbolt Lane extension), but there's no guarantees they'd get them when they want them. There's an awful lot to consider with both schemes really.

With regards to your proposed no-brainer, the main rail artery for freight to and from the Port of Liverpool including the endless Drax trains, I’m unsure if it has the capacity for frequent stopping passenger services without negatively affecting freight throughput. Also are Merseytravel willing to spend the money to reinstate 6 stations at once? Perhaps matchday specials to Anfield are feasible. Where would these proposed services run from? Would it be Southport via Bootle Junction, a Bootle shuttle, a Lime Street shuttle, or perhaps Wigan/St Helens/Warrington Bank Quay/Manchester via the Olive Mount chord. To run from Ormskirk would also require the North Mersey branch from Aintree. There are endless possibilities. It is beneficial to provide as many as possible, without causing conflicts, instead of prioritising them over each other.

While difficult, running passenger and freight trains on the line is not impossible. I do doubt all six stations would reopen at once, in fact I'm not entirely sure all six of them would be reopened anyway. If I had to say which ones were the most likely, then Walton & Anfield, Tuebrook and Edge Lane. I have my doubts over the others.

If it were to reopen, then I expect Edge Hill would be the southern terminus. The northern terminus, probably in the Bootle area. Who knows.
 

option

Member
Joined
1 Aug 2017
Messages
637
It is cheaper, but the bodies paying for it are going to want a quick return on the investment. I think a rail link to Skelmersdale would pay for itself more quickly than reopening the Burscough Curves would. You've also got to consider where the trains to run the extra services are coming from. Northern don't have any spare diesels even with the introduction of the 769s. Merseyrail have options for another 59 units (one exercised so far, for the Headbolt Lane extension), but there's no guarantees they'd get them when they want them. There's an awful lot to consider with both schemes really.

Both Burscough curves together are ~1.5km.
Idea i've seen from others is that the services that currently terminate at Burscough Junction move to Burscough Bridge instead, so there aren't any extra services, & therefore no need for extra trains. You could also then close the Junction station.

A rail link to where in Skelmersdale?
From Ormskirk to where the old alignment runs out is ~5.25km. Then your into land acquisition & demolition.
The problem is that the 'centre', such as it is, is nowhere near the old line, & the old line runs along the very western edge of Skelmersdale & has been built on.
It's apparently cost £2m to acquire the site of an old school & demolish it, with no obvious route of how to get rails to the site!
It would also need extra trains.



So, in terms of 'quick return on investment';
Burscough would be a smallish one-off investment with no sizeable change to running costs
Skelmersdale would be a massive investment, £xxxm, with running costs, as it would need extra trains + infrastructure maintenance.

Even if there was no subsidy for the services, the Skelmersdale trains would have to cover the running costs before paying off the investment, & then only creating a return after that.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
100,530
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Both Burscough curves together are ~1.5km.
Idea i've seen from others is that the services that currently terminate at Burscough Junction move to Burscough Bridge instead, so there aren't any extra services, & therefore no need for extra trains. You could also then close the Junction station.

Why close Junction? They are quite a way apart. To me, running Merseyrail via Junction to Bridge (and possibly also add the long-proposed Mill Dam Lane station which would serve new developments around the south of Burscough), and Ormskirk-Preston to become Bridge-Preston, with the Manchester services unchanged, would be the way to do it. Merseyrail would require an extra unit or two (two if the line remains singled - this seems bizarre but I did work the diagrams out for it a while ago*!) but Preston would require only one unit for an hourly service (two at the moment), or keep the second one in and run Preston-Southport.

* The issue is that Ormskirk-Burscough-Ormskirk with a bit of a layover is more than 15 minutes, so either you need to double it and adjust elsewhere with the units passing between Ormskirk and Burscough, or you can keep it singled but you would need the Ormskirk terminator to wait at Ormskirk while the next unit went off to Burscough, then the terminator work back, then the unit from Burscough back and so on, so you would need layovers of over 15 minutes at Ormskirk on the terminator and so a reversing siding for it to sit in.

A rail link to where in Skelmersdale?
From Ormskirk to where the old alignment runs out is ~5.25km. Then your into land acquisition & demolition.
The problem is that the 'centre', such as it is, is nowhere near the old line, & the old line runs along the very western edge of Skelmersdale & has been built on.
It's apparently cost £2m to acquire the site of an old school & demolish it, with no obvious route of how to get rails to the site!
It would also need extra trains.

Skem is a solid proposal, the former Glenburn School site in the current centre has been acquired for a station and the connection would be south towards the Kirkby-Wigan line, which is open farmland and would easily fit in under existing bridges etc at the expense of a road closure that can easily be worked around. Running to Ormskirk would be more difficult (because there isn't a clear route in from that side and the trackbed has been built on at Westhead) and the buses probably provide OK for that anyway. The need is for connectivity to Liverpool.
 
Last edited:

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
8,111
Location
Leeds
It's apparently cost £2m to acquire the site of an old school & demolish it, with no obvious route of how to get rails to the site!
It would also need extra trains.
The route has been discussed on this site at least twice. It goes under the M58 by an existing bridge and I for one am not convinced there is any need to close the existing road under the bridge. The bridge was designed to allow the road to be dualled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top