The Norton Bridge Flyover.

[cle]

Are any changes going to be made to timetables based on the line speed changes? Or is it all being absorbed?

 

[RailAleFan]

Travelling north, Stafford > Stone, the point (literally!) within the new flyover section at which the single line track carries straight-on to rejoin the WCML is pretty uncomfortable for passengers - it's a massive "jolt" to the right, sending you and everything on your table to the left!

 

[yorksrob]

I definitely read that it was planned for regular use. It certainly makes sense: if a train from Stoke-on-Trent heading up the mainline uses the new flyover, it will have to cross all of the down lines to get to the up slow.

That sounds extremely plausible. You wouldn't cross over opposing traffic flows on the level, on a busy main line if you could avoid it !

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Are any changes going to be made to timetables based on the line speed changes? Or is it all being absorbed?

NR made a point of adding 1m to all southbound schedules on the Fast because of the 50mph TSR/PSR at the old Norton Bridge junction.
You'd expect that to be removed at the least, plus something for line speed increases and better pathing.
There should be significant time taken out of branch schedules with the new 100mph route without conflicts, but whether it makes any difference Stoke-Stockport and Stafford-Birmingham is another matter.
Cheadle Hulme and Wolverhampton North seem to be the new pinch points.
Then there are the extra trains we were promised with the new capacity...

 

[Starmill]

I think XC have already amended their schedule slightly? Their trains from Manchester now arrive at Wolverhampton with the required 7 minutes minimum connection time to the LM all-stations service, which I don't think used to be the case.

 

[The Planner]

NR made a point of adding 1m to all southbound schedules on the Fast because of the 50mph TSR/PSR at the old Norton Bridge junction.
You'd expect that to be removed at the least, plus something for line speed increases and better pathing.
There should be significant time taken out of branch schedules with the new 100mph route without conflicts, but whether it makes any difference Stoke-Stockport and Stafford-Birmingham is another matter.
Cheadle Hulme and Wolverhampton North seem to be the new pinch points.
Then there are the extra trains we were promised with the new capacity...

The earliest you would ever see a change in timetable is this December, and even then that is not guaranteed. Taking time out of the schedules on the up is all very well, but unless it works at Rugby then it is a bit futile. As for the extra trains, I have long commented that I don't see anything happening soon, if at all.

 

[Philip Elliott]

Are any changes going to be made to timetables based on the line speed changes? Or is it all being absorbed?

Checking TRUST earlier I spotted that from December, the XC Bournemouth to Manchester services (xx.57 off New Street) now arrive into Piccadilly ahead of the VT xx.20 off Euston - the arrival into Stoke is now a full 10 minutes earlier.

 

[AndrewE]

Still debate over whether it is used for timetabling, it is more useful for platform 1 at Stafford.

I used the up LM stopper last week, it used the flyover, then stood a while on the up slow waiting to cross over to platform 1, then waited about 8 mins for its booked departure time.
I guessed that it needed hang around to let the late-running Liverpool - Euston use the platform first.

 

[The Planner]

Checking TRUST earlier I spotted that from December, the XC Bournemouth to Manchester services (xx.57 off New Street) now arrive into Piccadilly ahead of the VT xx.20 off Euston - the arrival into Stoke is now a full 10 minutes earlier.

That was always the biggest win out of Norton Bridge for me, the next thing is to squeeze a bit more out of Stone now the level crossings are closed.

 

[mikestone1952]

;
RTT quite clearly shows the up Crewe-Euston services as having been retimed to use the East Chord from its original commissioning date.

 

[LesF]

In 2014, NR were saying Stafford Area Improvement Programme would deliver:
"Two extra trains per hour (each direction) between London and the north west of England
•One extra fast train per hour (each direction) between Manchester and Birmingham
•One extra freight train per hour (each direction) through Stafford"
but later I heard that the only increase in passenger services would be some extra off-peak trains. Anyone know the real picture?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In 2014, NR were saying Stafford Area Improvement Programme would deliver:
"Two extra trains per hour (each direction) between London and the north west of England
•One extra fast train per hour (each direction) between Manchester and Birmingham
•One extra freight train per hour (each direction) through Stafford"
but later I heard that the only increase in passenger services would be some extra off-peak trains. Anyone know the real picture?

There's a difference between having the capacity and utilising it.
There have been several scenarios for more WCML services, but the only one in prospect at the moment is the open access 2-hourly off-peak Alliance London-Blackpool service.
This is supposedly starting in 2018, however, no stock has been ordered so there is still some doubt over the service.
VT is stuck with its direct award until 2018 and not having any stock to run additional services (except maybe off-peak).
The RUS (now out of date) proposed an extra Euston-Preston/Liverpool to relieve the Glasgow direct, stopping in the Trent Valley.
If you then add in the supposed reduction in capacity at Euston because of HS2 construction, there is no immediate prospect of more London services.
HS2 also blights the planning for more services, eg Birmingham to Manchester.

Both VT and LM franchises are coming up for renewal, and you would expect some additional services as a result, but it is several years away.
DfT hasn't given us any real steer on what they want to see.
So for now, NR and the TOCs will simply be looking at improved PPM performance and trimming a few schedules, rather than running more trains.

 

[onlinespotting]

Do you think there's any space for a once weekly stop at Norton Bridge Halt? Therefore keeping the station open? Or will London Midland invoke the necessary procedure to close the station?

 

[Elecman]

No chance as there is now no means of accessing the platform(s).

 

[najaB]

No chance as there is now no means of accessing the platform(s).

(Almost) the same situation as obtains at British Steel Redcar and Lympstone Commando - you would be able to alight from the train but not leave the platform.

 

[Elecman]

If time could be saved elsewhere then stopping odd trains at Barlaston may be more beneficial.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Do you think there's any space for a once weekly stop at Norton Bridge Halt? Therefore keeping the station open? Or will London Midland invoke the necessary procedure to close the station?

Norton Bridge is as closed as it ever going to get, e.g. to all practical purposes but not legally*. The minimum parliamentary requirements are met by a permanent rail replacement bus.

* As I have been reminded by DFT Rail on more than one occasion, DFT Rail does not close stations.
Let the counter-example-fest begin!

 

[najaB]

Norton Bridge is as closed as it ever going to get...

I love the picture of the station on the NRE page!

Edit: For those who can't see the picture, it shows the pile of concrete rubble that used to be the station.

 

[endecotp]

I love the picture of the station on the NRE page!

Absolutely priceless.

Here's the link. Don't miss it: http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/NTB.aspx

 

[AndrewE]

;
RTT quite clearly shows the up Crewe-Euston services as having been retimed to use the East Chord from its original commissioning date.

If the up Liverpool is running late it seems that they hold the LM service on the up slow. Perhaps we need an up passenger loop just north of Stafford, or maybe the capability to run through platform 1 and set back into the bay...

 

[rdeez]

Absolutely priceless.

Here's the link. Don't miss it: http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/stations_destinations/NTB.aspx

That is hilarious

 

[6Gman]

If time could be saved elsewhere then stopping odd trains at Barlaston may be more beneficial.

Barlaston would be a useful reimstatement.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

That is hilarious

Someone at NR has a sense of humour?

Check out the picture for Longton - something of a rebuild since I was there on Tuesday.

And it has an identical twin at Blythe Bridge.

 

[mikestone1952]

If the up Liverpool is running late it seems that they hold the LM service on the up slow. Perhaps we need an up passenger loop just north of Stafford, or maybe the capability to run through platform 1 and set back into the bay...

The train I did the chord on on came to a stand in the platform as a VT service passed on the UF. I wonder if this ability has been called into question?

The planned working pre-remodelling was for the local to follow the Manchester from Norton Bridge and be passed by the Glasgow while in platform 1. As the pathing of the Manchester has been optimistic at Crewe ever since the Liverpool-Euston's gained Stafford stops it was common for them to be passed by both in platform 1.

Post flyover it was initially fairly common to put the Crewe-Euston in P.3 but departing from there can produce a clash with the equally over-optimistic timing of the xx.40 and xx.43 from Euston.

It seems odd that they retimed the Bournemouth-Manchester from xx.30 to xx.32 from Stafford in May, presumably to create a 30-minute interval given that it produced (a surprisingly workable) three-minute headway with the xx.01 ex New St if there were plans to change it to xx.28 in December.

 

[QueensCurve]

I was under the impression that the chord was only there for operational flexibility, not for regular timetabled usage. After all, doesn't it have a much lower speed limit (30mph vs 100mph for the up slow)? And it only provides access to the fast lines until Stafford North Junction.

40mph I understand. Slow, but faster than the 25mph that held under the previous layout.

As Up Crewe to Euston workings are presently having to cross the down fast on the flat. I would be interested if anyone with inside knowledge could advise whether they may be routed via the East Chord to obviate this.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Do you think there's any space for a once weekly stop at Norton Bridge Halt? Therefore keeping the station open? Or will London Midland invoke the necessary procedure to close the station?

I thought a better service for Norton Bridge and Chebsey could be provided by a new 2 platform station on the flyover line accessed from Searchlight Lane.

This wouldn't require trains to stop on the WCML and could be served by the new Manchester to Birmingham Stopper if it ever materialises.

 

[Ianno87]

40mph I understand. Slow, but faster than the 25mph that held under the previous layout.

As Up Crewe to Euston workings are presently having to cross the down fast on the flat. I would be interested if anyone with inside knowledge could advise whether they may be routed via the East Chord to obviate this.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I thought a better service for Norton Bridge and Chebsey could be provided by a new 2 platform station on the flyover line accessed from Searchlight Lane.

This wouldn't require trains to stop on the WCML and could be served by the new Manchester to Birmingham Stopper if it ever materialises.

1) The down side of routeing on the Up Fast is that, at Stafford, calling a train in Platform 1 effectively costs two Up Fast line paths due to its 'loop' arrangement (path on arrival > wait > second path on departure). Crossing the Down Fast on the flat (for which there are options) is, ironically, arguably less capacity-hungry in that respect, as only a single gap is required on each Fast Line, not two gaps suitably close together on the Up Fast. Plus, as someone has posted above, the Up Crewe-Euston cannot get to Stafford too early, it is limited by being fairly close behind the Liverpool-Euston, also needing to use Platform 1 first; and the Crewe service cannot 'wait' on the Fast Line for the platform for too long before the next Up service passes.



2) Supposing a station at Norton Bridge had never existed in the first place; would anyone be now actually proposing one? I would suspect that the likely low usage would not justify the cost of provision of a new station in this location.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

1) The down side of routeing on the Up Fast is that, at Stafford, calling a train in Platform 1 effectively costs two Up Fast line paths due to its 'loop' arrangement (path on arrival > wait > second path on departure). Crossing the Down Fast on the flat (for which there are options) is, ironically, arguably less capacity-hungry in that respect, as only a single gap is required on each Fast Line, not two gaps suitably close together on the Up Fast. Plus, as someone has posted above, the Up Crewe-Euston cannot get to Stafford too early, it is limited by being fairly close behind the Liverpool-Euston, also needing to use Platform 1 first; and the Crewe service cannot 'wait' on the Fast Line for the platform for too long before the next Up service passes.

All very valid points.
In my experience, the Up LM waits time at Stoke as well as up to 5 minutes at Stafford (on the old schedule).
I would have thought there was scope to retime it significantly later from Crewe to avoid the crossing problems at Stafford.
But then it would probably clash with the Crewe-Derby (how daft is it to have 2tph Crewe-Stoke, leaving at xx02 and xx07!).

2) Supposing a station at Norton Bridge had never existed in the first place; would anyone be now actually proposing one? I would suspect that the likely low usage would not justify the cost of provision of a new station in this location.

I should think the only reason for a station there was because it was initially the junction and interchange point between North Stafford and LNWR services, until they eventually decided to work together and the junction effectively moved to Stafford.
Colwich was similar, and lost its trains in 1958.

 

[FordFocus]

What's the speed into Platform 1 at Stafford?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What's the speed into Platform 1 at Stafford?

The turnout from the Fast is 40 (presumably with flashing yellows), the platform and exit to the Fast is 25 (southbound).
25/30 northbound (bi-directional, across to the slows).

 

[neilb62]

You do get flashed in off the Up Fast, the 40 in is virtually pointless as the 25 starts at the North end of the platform!


Sent from my iPhone using fat fingers and a squint.