Time for the Atherton line to connect to Piccadilly?

[Shaw S Hunter]

TfGM may very well have aspirational plans for 2040 and beyond but in practice the most concrete idea they have publicised with regards to Metrolink in Salford is an extension from Salford Quays to a new street-level terminus at Salford Crescent station. Connecting Metrolink to the Atherton line would be rather difficult as there is no obvious location to do this and I am not aware of any suggestions on the matter. And there will also be the issue of 25kV OHLE between Crow Nest Jn and Wigan Station Jn to contend with. It might well be better for any further Metrolink trackage in Salford to be strictly street-running only and refocus planning of services on the Atherton line back to heavy-rail.

It's worth noting that pre-Covid passenger numbers had led to TfGM actively pursuing a 4tph service for the route but the combination of pathing difficulties in the Ordsall Lane Jn and Castlefield corridor area with the continuation of historical signal sections on the Atherton line made it impossible to path reliably. Fully modernised signalling along with restoration of the previous 70mph line speed would doubtless help a little but without grade separation at Ordsall Lane there is little additional capacity to be squeezed out of the area.

I suspect that the extra capacity, which would benefit all services in the area, would be best provided by a new tunnelled route across Manchester connecting the Pendleton and Longsight areas, effectively an updated Picc-Vic scheme which recognises the extent to which the Windsor Link has created demand for through services. But until the future of HS2/NPR is definitively settled there seems to be little point in discussing this idea in any detail. The most pragmatic way forward, as for many routes in the North, is to replace the increasingly tired Sprinter fleet, preferably with electrification but bi-modes will surely also be part of that solution. Network capacity issues are going to be expensive to solve but improving the on-board environment by replacing time-expired trains is a relatively easy win.

 

[javelin]

How fast can Manchester trams go? If it's 40mph then realistically Atherton to the centre of Manchester would take at least 45 minutes, allowing for delays and slower speeds once it goes to street level around Chapel Street. The Atherton line could also be upgraded to 70mph with improved signalling to deliver the 4tph frequency which was promised in 2018, bringing a 25 minute journey time from Atherton down to 15-20.

Manchester's trams have a top speed of 50 mph, but it is more likely tram-trains would be used. The Class 398 tram-trains in Cardiff have a top speed of 62 mph. Combined with the better acceleration than diesel trains it would be pretty much a wash in journey time on the heavy rail sections even if parts were upgraded to 70mph. The bigger issue is signalling; assuming tram-trains used the existing block signalling, so the line was still open to heavy rail traffic, there shouldn't be a difference in speed. The Metrolink lines are especially slow since the transfer to line-of-sight operation.

 

[yorksrob]

Do those from Atherton / Walkden etc. not want access to a more regular service with better city centre penetration, better access to parts of Salford (Pendleton, Pendelbury, Little Hulton, Chapel Street), similar journey times, contactless payments and level boarding?

The main downside I accept is that connections to other mainline services will not be quite as good but without a direct connection to Piccadilly at present anyway which has the greater range of services across the country, this negative is in my view more than outweighed by the positives. I would imagine most people along the Atherton line would agree as evidence from the Oldham Loop conversion showed that patronage increased over four fold following Metrolink conversion.

If they do, they already have a mass-transit solution running right through their areas. Why not use that.

 

[HSTEd]

I suspect that the extra capacity, which would benefit all services in the area, would be best provided by a new tunnelled route across Manchester connecting the Pendleton and Longsight areas, effectively an updated Picc-Vic scheme which recognises the extent to which the Windsor Link has created demand for through services. But until the future of HS2/NPR is definitively settled there seems to be little point in discussing this idea in any detail. The most pragmatic way forward, as for many routes in the North, is to replace the increasingly tired Sprinter fleet, preferably with electrification but bi-modes will surely also be part of that solution. Network capacity issues are going to be expensive to solve but improving the on-board environment by replacing time-expired trains is a relatively easy win.

An underground tunneled solution is probably going to cost an order of magnitude more than some sort of surface tram solution.
I don't think its likely to happen any time soon, there are still a lot of streets available for tram crossings in the centre of Manchester.

 

[yorksrob]

A more regular service is exactly what I'd love to have.
Especially with the current Sunday issues meaning there are often 3 hour gaps without trains.

A decent regular interval service on a sunday would be feasible without turning it into a tram.

 

[daodao]

A decent regular interval service on a sunday would be feasible without turning it into a tram.

Conversion to Metrolink would be an excellent idea. Replacing suburban heavy rail lines with light rail is in general a good way to increase service frequency and connectivity and reduce running costs.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

An underground tunneled solution is probably going to cost an order of magnitude more than some sort of surface tram solution.
I don't think its likely to happen any time soon, there are still a lot of streets available for tram crossings in the centre of Manchester.

No doubt. However I think we are currently under a form of planning blight arising from the HS2 debacle and we need a bit of time to evaluate options. Messrs Burnham and Rotheram seem quite keen on a new L&M route: if such a thing comes to fruition its design could have significant implications for other rail routes (at both ends). For Manchester it might allow removal of some services from the Castlefield corridor, or not. It might make tramification of a particular route more beneficial, or not. Release of some capacity from the existing rail network would seem inevitable but how much and where is unknown. And of course it could easily not happen at all. In which case other options, like a NE-SW cross-Manchester link, would need to at least be evaluated.

Clearly the state of the country's public finances means any major expenditure on any from of rail expansion is likely multiple Parliaments away in the future. As such it makes little sense to be too concerned about "final solutions". Local schemes will work best as complementary pieces to larger projects but we don't know what those projects will deliver (if anything). Hence my suggestion that we concentrate in the short term on the relatively easy to deliver idea of fleet renewals but seeking to maximise train lengths as a way of fully exploiting the capacity that currently does exist. And to return to the OP ensuring that connections work well for passengers since through trains for so many journeys just aren't feasible right now.

Conversion to Metrolink would be an excellent idea. Replacing suburban heavy rail lines with light rail is in general a good way to increase service frequency and connectivity and reduce running costs.

The electrification of the Westhoughton line does complicate matters somewhat. And despite everything we are still no nearer to seeing a true tram-train operation in this country ie a vehicle capable of using both street-compatible and mainline electrification systems. As such the idea of tram-trains on Metrolink is just a pipe-dream until such time as a commitment is made to developing such a vehicle suitable for UK operating conditions. It shouldn't be difficult yet we have been talking about it for an awfully long time without making progress.

 

[yorksrob]

Conversion to Metrolink would be an excellent idea. Replacing suburban heavy rail lines with light rail is in general a good way to increase service frequency and connectivity and reduce running costs.

If it's that good an idea, why not replace the busway with it ?

 

[daodao]

The electrification of the Westhoughton line does complicate matters somewhat.

It may be possible for the Metrolink line to run separately through Hindley station where there was originally a quadruple track alignment and then run along the old Wigan cut-off trackbed as far as the point where it cuts across the former ex-GC line into Wigan Central and follow this alignment northwards into Wigan town centre, possibly with some street running where this alignment has been lost. This is somewhat speculative, as I don't know the area in detail. More problematic would be the route from Pendleton/Salford Crescent into Manchester city centre, where an on street alignment along Chapel Street may be needed.

If it's that good an idea, why not replace the busway with it ?

As part of the Metrolink conversion, I would split the line at Walkden, with one line continuing on the ex-LYR line via Atherton, and another diverted to join the ex-LNWR line to Leigh near Ellenbrook, which is currently operated as a busway.

 

[HSTEd]

If it's that good an idea, why not replace the busway with it ?

Even leaving aside that it doesn't really go to the same place, replacing the busway with a tram would require several kilometres of greenfield tram line to even reach the nearest MEtrolink line - which is the end of the notoriously slow Eccles Line.
To get close to the centre of the city you'd be looking at rather more money than conversion of the Atherton line, and it wouldn't go to the same places.

Ironically conversion of the Atherton line would make conversion of the busway rather more practical.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The electrification of the Westhoughton line does complicate matters somewhat.

How? Southport services aren't going to terminate at Wigan any time soon, so via Westhoughton and Bolton would remain a heavy rail route. By the time this conversion had taken place Northern would have some
bi-modes which it would presumably run on its Southport services.

A decent regular interval service on a sunday would be feasible without turning it into a tram.

But not going past 2tph. Merseyrail shows 4 as rather a sweet spot (though Metrolink uses 5). And (looking at the thread title) there's clearly no room for even another 2tph on Castlefield, let alone 4.

 

[yorksrob]

How? Southport services aren't going to terminate at Wigan any time soon, so via Westhoughton and Bolton would remain a heavy rail route. By the time this conversion had taken place Northern would have some
bi-modes which it would presumably run on its Southport services.



But not going past 2tph. Merseyrail shows 4 as rather a sweet spot (though Metrolink uses 5). And (looking at the thread title) there's clearly no room for even another 2tph on Castlefield, let alone 4.

You wouldn't have four extra trains going via Castleford though. The majority would go through Victoria with connections at Salford Crescent and Victoria.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Does anyone remember the "Pacers " on the Southport service to Manchester Airport? Overseas air travellers having onward rail travel on "proper trains" from Manchester Airport railway station might well have thought some trams had accessed the wrong part of the railway station..

 

[Trainguy34]

Infrastructure-wise, would it be possible to connect from around Agecroft towards Weaste along Langworthy Road and then onto the tram route by Langworthy Tram Stop?

At the other end, would it work to connect from around Holt Town to Ashburys via the (Freight Only) Phillips Park Line? This would probably use the route drawn, albeit not in crayon.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You wouldn't have four extra trains going via Castleford though. The majority would go through Victoria with connections at Salford Crescent and Victoria.

There isn't really room to add another 2-3tph to Vic either to be honest. People think Vic has infinite capacity. If you just ram everything through there it'll get as bad as Castlefield.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

There isn't really room to add another 2-3tph to Vic either to be honest. People think Vic has infinite capacity. If you just ram everything through there it'll get as bad as Castlefield.

Salford Crescent is already bad enough, hopefully the 3rd platform will help but even there gets congested often.
One delay means another train gets held meaning another train can't pass the junction ahead of it and on and on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Salford Crescent is already bad enough, hopefully the 3rd platform will help but even there gets congested often.
One delay means another train gets held meaning another train can't pass the junction ahead of it and on and on.

It could really do with two islands for better interchange. Building the signalling centre on the trackbed was a monumental error.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It could really do with two islands for better interchange. Building the signalling centre on the trackbed was a monumental error.

Was that because it was decided that the junction to Red Bank area that gave trains an alternative to the steep climb up the Miles Platting bank would not form part of future rail routing?

 

[Philip]

There really needs to be a better service from Salford Crescent to Piccadilly to compensate for the lack of Piccadilly services from local Atherton & Bolton line stations; it has gone from 4tph in the 2000s to only 2tph (not including the Oxford Road-terminating train) and this isn't good enough. Why not stop the Barrow at Salford, instead of Deansgate which already has ample services?

 

[HSTEd]

Infrastructure-wise, would it be possible to connect from around Agecroft towards Weaste along Langworthy Road and then onto the tram route by Langworthy Tram Stop? View attachment 160130

At the other end, would it work to connect from around Holt Town to Ashburys via the (Freight Only) Phillips Park Line? This would probably use the route drawn, albeit not in crayon.View attachment 160129

Would heading south from the railway through Salford to Eccles really be better than a route along Chapel Street (or generally paralleling it) towards the City Centre?

The eccles line is not exactly quick at the best of times, and it would force even more trams through the Deansgate Castlefield bottleneck.

I'd prefer Chapel Street, then either Bridge Street into John Dalton Street into Princess Street or (New) Quay Street into Oxford Street. Then finishing up using Fairfield Street to Piccadilly.
Stations to be positioned however you fancy along that general axis.

The hard part will be working out how to get across the existing tram lines without breaking them entirely.
Quay Street has the advantage of getting pretty close to Oxford Road station, but Princess Street is probably the easier route in terms of corners, and avoids crossing the main tram corridor when it is only two tracks. It would end up using the Second City Crossing lines in the other direction though that might be an issue.

You could also try using both with trams going in one direction on each street, but that is not something Manchester Metrolink really does so might not fit well with signage.

The other major alternative is to continue along Chapel Street to near Victoria and then try to work your way over to the lines to Shudehill. But there might not really be capacity to do that.

 

[TC7]

Infrastructure-wise, would it be possible to connect from around Agecroft towards Weaste along Langworthy Road and then onto the tram route by Langworthy Tram Stop? View attachment 160130

At the other end, would it work to connect from around Holt Town to Ashburys via the (Freight Only) Phillips Park Line? This would probably use the route drawn, albeit not in crayon.View attachment 160129

I can only comment on the Agecroft proposal but I suspect it would be incredibly difficult. What Google maps doesn't show you is the elevation changes, the railways line is down in the valley and you'd have to come up 30/40m, then go over the A6 duel carriageway and immediately drop down the hill on the other side as the entirety of Langworthy Road is quite steep all the way from the top at Irlams o' th' Height right down to Langworthy tram stop. I'm no engineer however and if others know of sensible ways to overcome this I'll gladly let them explain.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

How? Southport services aren't going to terminate at Wigan any time soon, so via Westhoughton and Bolton would remain a heavy rail route. By the time this conversion had taken place Northern would have some
bi-modes which it would presumably run on its Southport services.

The issue I was alluding to is the presence of 25kV AC OHLE from Crow Nest Jn westwards. This would either necessitate the design and construction of actual tram-trains (no UK compatible design currently exists) or the provision of a fully segregated Metrolink route into Wigan. Providing suitable electrical insulation for parallel routes with completely different electrification systems would be an interesting challenge! I wonder if the current scheme has made passive provision for this?

There is also the issue of potentially pathing diverted existing Atherton line services (ie Southports/Headbolts) via Bolton, another route that is starting to look a little full. Any way you look at it any further expansion of rail based passenger services is really going to need additional trackage, possibly via new routes. HS2 would have helped but without it we need other alternatives. Simply converting further heavy rail routes to some form of light rail is no more than a sticking plaster approach.

 

[yorksrob]

There isn't really room to add another 2-3tph to Vic either to be honest. People think Vic has infinite capacity. If you just ram everything through there it'll get as bad as Castlefield.

Its four through platforms are rarely fully occupied. Every thing just seems to be produced into an excuse to turn the Atherton line into a tram. The Atherton line already has a good train service, I simply do not believe the assertions that there is no way to modestly improve it

 

[daodao]

There isn't really room to add another 2-3tph to Vic either to be honest. People think Vic has infinite capacity. If you just ram everything through there it'll get as bad as Castlefield.

Victoria has 4 through lines/platforms, so has twice the capacity of the Castlefield line. If there are to be more trains on the Atherton line, then they should all go to Victoria, as should all the trains from Southport. Victoria is a much a nicer station than Piccadilly for all services that have to traverse the Castlefield line to reach it.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The issue I was alluding to is the presence of 25kV AC OHLE from Crow Nest Jn westwards. This would either necessitate the design and construction of actual tram-trains (no UK compatible design currently exists) or the provision of a fully segregated Metrolink route into Wigan. Providing suitable electrical insulation for parallel routes with completely different electrification systems would be an interesting challenge! I wonder if the current scheme has made passive provision for this?

The Cl 399 Sheffield - Rotherham Vossloh trams are 25kV AC ready are they not?

 

[Philip]

Another problem with the Metrolink is antisocial behaviour, the trains aren't perfect in this regard but generally a lot better than the trams. You'll also be taking work away from guards and drivers who currently sign the Atherton line. Also removing a diversion route if the Bolton line is unavailable.

Why not just implement the 4tph Atherton line service which was promised and run one of them to Manchester Airport in place of the Southport-Oxford Road path through Castlefield? This would provide a frequent service without converting to an inferior transport method (and the cost of the conversion).

 

[The Planner]

Its four through platforms are rarely fully occupied. Every thing just seems to be produced into an excuse to turn the Atherton line into a tram. The Atherton line already has a good train service, I simply do not believe the assertions that there is no way to modestly improve it

Until TRU turns up and fills it to the brim. That is why the turnback sidings are to be built.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is also the issue of potentially pathing diverted existing Atherton line services (ie Southports/Headbolts) via Bolton, another route that is starting to look a little full. Any way you look at it any further expansion of rail based passenger services is really going to need additional trackage, possibly via new routes. HS2 would have helped but without it we need other alternatives. Simply converting further heavy rail routes to some form of light rail is no more than a sticking plaster approach.

At present there are two Atherton services (Headbolt and a Wallgate terminator) and two Bolton services (2 Southports). The logical outcome of that would be the two Atherton services go to Metrolink (increased to 5), Merseyrail extends from Headbolt to Wallgate (giving a choice of onward connection onto the Southports or Metrolink as preferred), and the two Southports continue as they do now. This wouldn't require any extra paths via Bolton or indeed anywhere else.

Another problem with the Metrolink is antisocial behaviour, the trains aren't perfect in this regard but generally a lot better than the trams.

Not unsolvable with security staff provision. This is something Metrolink needs to get a handle on.

You'll also be taking work away from guards and drivers who currently sign the Atherton line.

People have jobs because jobs need to be done. If the jobs no longer need to be done, then there is no job. Northern is not and must not be considered a job creation scheme.

However the railway is so short staffed at present that I couldn't see any redundancies taking place - far from it - it could finally render Northern fully staffed!

Also removing a diversion route if the Bolton line is unavailable.

There's Parkside. Do you need a third one?

Why not just implement the 4tph Atherton line service which was promised and run one of them to Manchester Airport in place of the Southport-Oxford Road path through Castlefield? This would provide a frequent service without converting to an inferior transport method (and the cost of the conversion).

There isn't a path onwards from Oxford Road for that service, which is why it doesn't itself run to the Airport.

 

[Philip]

At present there are two Atherton services (Headbolt and a Wallgate terminator) and two Bolton services (2 Southports). The logical outcome of that would be the two Atherton services go to Metrolink (increased to 5), Merseyrail extends from Headbolt to Wallgate (giving a choice of onward connection onto the Southports or Metrolink as preferred), and the two Southports continue as they do now. This wouldn't require any extra paths via Bolton or indeed anywhere else.



Not unsolvable with security staff provision. This is something Metrolink needs to get a handle on.

It's been going on for years but nothing seems to be being done about it, they're more interested in revenue protection.

People have jobs because jobs need to be done. If the jobs no longer need to be done, then there is no job. Northern is not and must not be considered a job creation scheme.

However the railway is so short staffed at present that I couldn't see any redundancies taking place - far from it - it could finally render Northern fully staffed!



There's Parkside. Do you need a third one?

Parkside isn't very efficient for track capacity as it's slow and can hold up fast Liverpool services. It was only brought into regular use as part of the Chat Moss electrification project, to allow TPE to run EMUs to Scotland before Bolton & Chorley was wired. Before Chat Moss was electrified, nearly all diversions from Bolton used the Atherton line, because it's more direct and less of a potential bottleneck.

There isn't a path onwards from Oxford Road for that service, which is why it doesn't itself run to the Airport.

In that case perhaps you could divert a Blackpool to Victoria or Stalybridge (once electrified) and run an Atherton service in the resulting path freed up through Castlefield. Does Blackpool itself need a half hourly frequency to Piccadilly & the Airport, particularly considering there is a seperate half-hourly fast service from Preston (Cumbria & TPE)?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Another problem with the Metrolink is antisocial behaviour,

There are some northern line sections of the Oldham/Rochdale Metrolink line that now carry a reputation for such behaviour.