Temporary Closure for Rose Hill Marple

[Ianno87]

It would be better, as I said, to reduce (but lengthen) service on a number of lines than entirely remove it from one. Hourly Southport, for example, rather than 2tph, but run all of it as pairs of 156s to maximise capacity. One of the New Mills services removed to cover this. Basically run a Sunday service but with the branch lines still served.

However as a bare minimum they must be required to provide RRBs, if nothing else a Rose Hill<->Marple shuttle taxi.

Why pay for an RRB (for, lets face it, what will likely be one or two passengers per bus) when there are local bus routes that already connect the two stations?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why pay for an RRB (for, lets face it, what will likely be one or two passengers per bus) when there are local bus routes that already connect the two stations?

Because if the railway doesn't retain responsibility for provision, it's a very, very slippery slope indeed, particularly with the provision of RRBs becoming more expensive because of PSVAR.

As a bare minimum, the TVM at Rose Hill should remain in commission and acceptance be arranged on buses. Same at the other stations.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Why pay for an RRB (for, lets face it, what will likely be one or two passengers per bus) when there are local bus routes that already connect the two stations?

Do you seriously think they'll bother arranging ticket acceptance for a period of (at least) several months ? No, Northern will get away with ripping off season ticket holders, as they always have.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

That's saved me a post.
The December shambles has been around for the last few years.
I think I got caught up in it in 2017 and got stuck at Oxford road.
and they want to bring back the Rose Hill Marple service back in December? I wouldnt hold your breath.

This is precisely what I would be concerned about if I were a user of one of the affected stations. Just how many changes has the rail industry put back in terms of timetable changes - too many to count. I would rate the chances of services returning to Rose Hill Marple in December as roughly the same as the chance of face coverings no longer being mandated on public transport at that point - i.e. nil.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you seriously think they'll bother arranging ticket acceptance for a period of (at least) several months ? No, Northern will get away with ripping off season ticket holders, as they always have.

It's probably worthy of note that if we had proper zonal integrated ticketing in our cities rather than operators having any of their own this wouldn't actually be an issue. There is the CountyCard which offers this, but it's overpriced compared with what it would be if the other options didn't exist, and unlike countries that do it properly it isn't offered zonally, so you have to fork out for the whole of Greater Manchester even if you go to Wigan once a Preston Guild. (note: deliberate mixing up of references there )

This is precisely what I would be concerned about if I were a user of one of the affected stations. Just how many changes has real industry put back in terms of timetable changes - too many to count. I would rate the chances of services returning to Rose Hill Marple in December as roughly the same as the chance of face coverings no longer being mandated on public transport to that point - i.e. nil.

Yes, I'd presently expect this to be another Denton. And as I said I'm more concerned about the other stations, many of which are quite deprived areas, where the last thing they need is the kick in the nads of losing their rail service as well as no doubt their jobs.

It is simply not on. Thinning the overall service with maxed out train lengths at all times would be a preferable option to closing a route.

Can you imagine Liverpool going "oh, the Kirkby line is a bit quiet and they've got buses, mind if we close it for 6 months?" No, what they'd do is what they did do - drop the network to half hourly with 6 car trains throughout.

 

[Llandudno]

It poses a considerable accessibility issue as it's at the the bottom of (well, 2/3 of the way down) a fairly steep hill, probably too steep for quite a lot of manual wheelchair users and probably for those with breathing difficulties or who walk with a stick too. Though somewhere like Germany you'd probably have a bus (with integrated ticketing) running a circuit of Marple town and arriving at the station perfectly timed for the train, which if only we could do things properly might be better.

I'm actually more concerned about the other stations that will lose their service at the drop of a proverbial hat than Rose Hill itself which I agree is a bit of an oddity.

A Marple town service connecting with trains and through ticketing is a novel idea!

Even better, make the town bus free for rail passengers, after all TfGM seem to be able to find £’000s for free buses in Manchester City Centre and Stockport etc.

Also it would be some consolation for the good people of Marple, who have not benefited from the £1billion+ spent on Metrolink over the years

 

[Bletchleyite]

A Marple town service connecting with trains and through ticketing is a novel idea!

The best idea would be that ALL ticketing in conurbations is cross-modal at all times, with single mode/operator tickets simply not offered. To vary the price, you use zones and time-of-day restrictions. This sort of thing is far less of an issue where that is done.

 

[py_megapixel]

However as a bare minimum they must be required to provide RRBs, if nothing else a Rose Hill<->Marple shuttle taxi.

I agree, though Rose Hill to Romiley would make far more sense

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree, though Rose Hill to Romiley would make far more sense

3 times as far though due to the road layout.

 

[py_megapixel]

3 times as far though due to the road layout.

It actually wouldn't take much longer to shuttle to Hazel Grove, which is far preferable, than to Marple.
It's much further, but because the roads are better it takes far less time per kilometre

 

[Dspatula]

Given that last December was before the Coronavirus, it suggests that the "absolute mess" would be around with or without the virus, in which case, what hope is there of anything improving, ever.

The mess at the end last year was coursed by a need to train up large numbers of drivers on new trains all at once because they were delivered late and the promise of leave when ever they wanted to get them to come in a do it which unsurprisingly they all took at Christmas. The shortage of staff is still there and its only being hidden by the reduced timetable, a large number of trainees have been taken on at Piccadilly but they've going to have take the driver trainers off normal services to do the training, and I'm guessing the issue has been further compounded by some older staff not coming back at all now. I have to assume someone has run the numbers and decided this is the route that can most easily be accommodated by other routes and buses and they assume the PR will be less bad from losing one route than making them all sporadic.

I'm not staying I agree, just speculating as to why the decision was made, I honestly think they'll have to rethink this one because its single issue which is easy to create a media campaign around.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not staying I agree, just speculating as to why the decision was made, I honestly think they'll have to rethink this one because its single issue which is easy to create a media campaign around.

I agree. As I mentioned above, it would be better to thin but lengthen some other services - say 1tph to Southport rather than 2, Kirkby-Wigan a shuttle, remove one of the Manchester-Blackpool North trains, perhaps Ormskirk back down to the single unit 1h10ish service, Cumbrian Coast through services to 2 hourly, trim Barrow/Windermere back to Lancaster, maybe services between New Mills and Sheffield 2-hourly etc. I don't think wholly removing service from any route is the right way to do it.

 

[Starmill]

Lib Dem councillors have said there is to be a daily parliamentary train to Rose Hill Marple.
Before you get excited about a day out, it’s one-way. It’ll run mid morning.

Indeed! One guesses that the 1039 arrival, in the open data, as mentioned above by another poster is to be the one.

 

[Starmill]

My suggestion was to run one of the New Mills terminators that way, and to run longer trains on the remaining ones to ensure there isn't a capacity problem on the remaining service.

They would all be through from Sheffield, and I believe they're already all four cars. So it would be an out and out cut because they can't be extended. Northern know that, and that's why they've made the decision to remove the service from the less used route instead.

 

[yorksrob]

That's saved me a post.
The December shambles has been around for the last few years.
I think I got caught up in it in 2017 and got stuck at Oxford road.
and they want to bring back the Rose Hill Marple service back in December? I wouldnt hold your breath.

Glad to be of assistance !

The mess at the end last year was coursed by a need to train up large numbers of drivers on new trains all at once because they were delivered late and the promise of leave when ever they wanted to get them to come in a do it which unsurprisingly they all took at Christmas. The shortage of staff is still there and its only being hidden by the reduced timetable, a large number of trainees have been taken on at Piccadilly but they've going to have take the driver trainers off normal services to do the training, and I'm guessing the issue has been further compounded by some older staff not coming back at all now. I have to assume someone has run the numbers and decided this is the route that can most easily be accommodated by other routes and buses and they assume the PR will be less bad from losing one route than making them all sporadic.

I'm not staying I agree, just speculating as to why the decision was made, I honestly think they'll have to rethink this one because its single issue which is easy to create a media campaign around.

That does seem plausible, which fits in with my view that the state of Northern's temporary timetables has everything to do with the underlying issues with the franchise, as much as Coronavirus.

This case does set a potentially worrying precedent. Rail users need to "stay alert" indeed - but not just from the virus !

 

[Bletchleyite]

That does seem plausible, which fits in with my view that the state of Northern's temporary timetables has everything to do with the underlying issues with the franchise, as much as Coronavirus.

I would completely agree that that is likely. And I do support thinning of the service to make Castlefield reliable (basically going back to a tweaked version of the pre-1998 timetable would work just fine, and indeed was the last time the North West routes were truly punctual and reliable in general), but not the closure of entire routes.

 

[yorksrob]

I would completely agree that that is likely. And I do support thinning of the service to make Castlefield reliable (basically going back to a tweaked version of the pre-1998 timetable would work just fine, and indeed was the last time the North West routes were truly punctual and reliable in general), but not the closure of entire routes.

Indeed. Tweaking and frequency reductions are justifiable in these circumstances but a route closure (and closure of evening services as with some other routes) is a poor "solution".

I wonder if there is scope for other TOC's to temporarily take over some of Northern's services so that a decent basic service can be maintained on all routes !

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed. Tweaking and frequency reductions are justifiable in these circumstances but a route closure (and closure of evening services as with some other routes) is a poor "solution".

Exactly.

I wonder if there is scope for other TOC's to temporarily take over some of Northern's services so that a decent basic service can be maintained on all routes !

I'd imagine TPE aren't needing to operate 6-car 185s at present, this being the case could they maybe take over the Hope Valley stopper, freeing Northern units and crews for Rose Hill? Would depend if they've got the crews, though.

Can't think of many others, but there are places where they could lop a bit out because other TOCs take up the slack - Barrow/Windermere lopped back to Preston or Lancaster (and Windermere as a shuttle to Oxenholme only) seems an obvious one but I'm sure there are others.

 

[yorksrob]

Exactly.



I'd imagine TPE aren't needing to operate 6-car 185s at present, this being the case could they maybe take over the Hope Valley stopper, freeing Northern units and crews for Rose Hill? Would depend if they've got the crews, though.

Funnnilly enough, when I was on a TPE Hope valley service last week, it was six carriages and reasonably busy, (in socially distanced world).

Do 185's have SDO, because that could be a reasonable solution, but more so if retaining six carriages.

 

[Starmill]

I think it's near certain that TPE have the necessary rolling stock to displace the Northern services between Chinley and Sheffield yes. They've signed for the 15 185s that will go off lease until the end of the year, and only some need to cover for missing locomotive hauled train sets.

What's unclear is if TPE have the necessary staff.

 

[yorksrob]

I think it's near certain that TPE have the necessary rolling stock to displace the Northern services between Chinley and Sheffield yes. They've signed for the 15 185s that will go off lease until the end of the year, and only some need to cover for missing locomotive hauled train sets.

What's unclear is if TPE have the necessary staff.

I was thinking more of inserting stops into their existing service, but if they could run an additional stopper, that would be even better.

 

[Starmill]

I was thinking more of inserting stops into their existing service, but if they could run an additional stopper, that would be even better.

If you inserted the calls you'd need to split the service at Sheffield and add another pair of units to the circuit, hence needing another crew. You'd also lose through trains for trips like Manchester to Doncaster.

 

[yorksrob]

If you inserted the calls you'd need to split the service at Sheffield and add another pair of units to the circuit, hence needing another crew. You'd also lose through trains for trips like Manchester to Doncaster.

In that case, an additional stopper service is probably necessary.

 

[Greybeard33]

I agree. As I mentioned above, it would be better to thin but lengthen some other services - say 1tph to Southport rather than 2, Kirkby-Wigan a shuttle, remove one of the Manchester-Blackpool North trains, perhaps Ormskirk back down to the single unit 1h10ish service, Cumbrian Coast through services to 2 hourly, trim Barrow/Windermere back to Lancaster, maybe services between New Mills and Sheffield 2-hourly etc. I don't think wholly removing service from any route is the right way to do it.

According to the information currently loaded in RTT for 14 September, some Barrow/Windermere services will be trimmed back to Lancaster or Preston, and services between New Mills Central and Sheffield will indeed be 2-hourly (hourly between NMC and Piccadilly). And how do you know that Northern is not planning to lengthen other services anyway? There should be plenty of DMUs available, e.g. the Liverpool - Airport via Warrington semi-fast is not running, nor are most of the Wigan - Blackburn via Todmorden services; Piccadilly to Buxton is only 1tph not 2tph, as is Rochdale to Blackburn via Bolton.

In any case, how would driver training at Piccadilly be helped by thinning services that are crewed from other depots?

 

[Bletchleyite]

OK, so that's a much heftier cut than I expected (well beyond going back to 1998). They must really be in trouble. Does that mean only 1tph on the entire Piccadilly-Marple-New Mills Cen stretch?

Edit: nope, there is also 1tph of New Mills terminator. This is the one I'd send via Hyde.

Realtime Trains - Departures from Marple

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

(Ormskirk-Preston stays hourly, though, but with a couple of 2 hour gaps, Kirkby-Wigan full service including through to Manchester, Barrow/Windermere as you say fewer through services than normal)

 

[Greybeard33]

Edit: nope, there is also 1tph of New Mills terminator. This is the one I'd send via Hyde.

Realtime Trains - Departures from Marple

Realtime Trains provides live realtime running information for the Great British railway network using open data.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

But that would leave only 1tph at Bredbury, Brinnington and Reddish North. And the Sheffield service would have to make additional stops at Ryder Brow and Belle Vue or they would be left with no service. Even with a 4-car, there would be an increased risk that loadings would become high enough to compromise social distancing and increase the risk of infection.

Collectively, the 2018-19 footfall at these stations was much higher than for those on the Hyde branch. You would be "robbing Peter to pay Paul".

 

[Bletchleyite]

Collectively, the 2018-19 footfall at these stations was much higher than for those on the Hyde branch. You would be "robbing Peter to pay Paul".

Better to share the pain.

 

[Starmill]

Better to share the pain.

I agree with the principle, but given this is a very obvious case where trains on one route would run empty and trains on another, notably more popular route, would run at overcrowded capacity I suspect that this closure will actually be beneficial to the reputation of the railway.

Principles can be good principles, but sensible people reassess when they see that sticking to a principle results in an inefficient outcome.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Because it'd make sense to run the tram service via Brinnington/Bredbury rather than Hyde, as the former is a lot busier.

Plus the Hyde route is needed for heavy freight trains. The would be no vital need at all to retain heavy rail sharing via Brinnington.

 

[Ianno87]

Plus the Hyde route is needed for heavy freight trains. The would be no vital need at all to retain heavy rail sharing via Brinnington.

More specifically, the Denton route cannot be accessed from the Brinnington route (short of building a connecting chord between them)