Time for the Atherton line to connect to Piccadilly?

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Basically if we want trams on the Atherton line, we need full requadrupling with Wigan and Southport train services retained, but running non-stop on the reinstated fast lines and a superior stopping service operated on the upgraded slow lines

Are there not items of railway usage that have been installed on the former LYR Atherton line quad lines that would need removing and reinstalling elsewhere?

 

[507020]

Are there not items of railway usage that have been installed on the former LYR Atherton line quad lines that would need removing and reinstalling elsewhere?

Very few and these are preferable to items of non-railway usage. Would that constitute significantly greater work than would be required for Metrolink conversions anyway, as these items would still have to be removed?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Very few and these are preferable to items of non-railway usage. Would that constitute significantly greater work than would be required for Metrolink conversions anyway, as these items would still have to be removed?

Have you any access to the last formal financial and cost evaluation on returning the quadruple track system with separate double lines for both heavy rail and for the Metrolink system, with the works and infrastucture requirements that would be required to enable Metrolink use. How many railway overbridges will need conversion work and what is proposed for the situation existing at Crow Nest Júnction?

 

[507020]

Have you any access to the last formal financial and cost evaluation on returning the quadruple track system with separate double lines for both heavy rail and for the Metrolink system, with the works and infrastucture requirements that would be required to enable Metrolink use. How many railway overbridges will need conversion work and what is proposed for the situation existing at Crow Nest Júnction?

I’m not aware that requadrupling has ever actually formally proposed, only that Network Rail owned equipment in the trackbed would likely have to be removed whether requadrupling, or Metrolink conversion requiring a different set of equipment, was proceeded with.

With any Metrolink conversion the street running section would probably have to commence east of Crow Nest Junction, especially with 25kV electrification now progressing there, with masts in the fast line trackbed.

What I genuinely don't understand is the decision not to use twin track cantilevers on the north side of the formation between Hindley No. 3 and Crow Nest Junctions, so as not to preclude any future requadrupling. The only good news I can see is that having the Metrolink call at Hindley is unlikely to be useful, if it needs a street running alignment into Wigan town centre.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What I genuinely don't understand is the decision not to use twin track cantilevers on the north side of the formation between Hindley No. 3 and Crow Nest Junctions, so as not to preclude any future requadrupling. The only good news I can see is that having the Metrolink call at Hindley is unlikely to be useful, if it needs a street running alignment into Wigan town centre.

I was recently talking to a person in the local authority who is on the team that are looking into the £135 million updating of the Galleries Shopping Centre about the Metrolink using street running in the town centre. She was horrified by the idea and said that pedestrianisation of areas were a great asset to the town centre and the absence of vehicular traffic in those pedestrianised areas made the town centre safer for people and a far nicer place than it once was. I am no expert on the pedestrianisation areas of Wigan town centre, so if anyone could comment on these, I would be most grateful.

 

[507020]

I was recently talking to a person in the local authority who is on the team that are looking into the £135 million updating of the Galleries Shopping Centre about the Metrolink using street running in the town centre. She was horrified by the idea and said that pedestrianisation of areas were a great asset to the town centre and the absence of vehicular traffic in those pedestrianised areas made the town centre safer for people and a far nicer place than it once was. I am no expert on the pedestrianisation areas of Wigan town centre, so if anyone could comment on these, I would be most grateful.

There is a very large area of Wigan town centre which has been cleared for a new public open square, surrounded by streets which are already pedestrianised. Given that half way along one side is the newly refurbished Wigan bus station, this would make an absolutely ideal location for a Metrolink terminus.

I’m not a fan of “pedestrianised except buses” but there is no issue with trams running through pedestrianised streets. They even manage it at Piccadilly Gardens.

 

[yorksrob]

I was recently talking to a person in the local authority who is on the team that are looking into the £135 million updating of the Galleries Shopping Centre about the Metrolink using street running in the town centre. She was horrified by the idea and said that pedestrianisation of areas were a great asset to the town centre and the absence of vehicular traffic in those pedestrianised areas made the town centre safer for people and a far nicer place than it once was. I am no expert on the pedestrianisation areas of Wigan town centre, so if anyone could comment on these, I would be most grateful.

So we would end up pootling around the town streets on toiletless pacers, taking goodness knows how long.

This is what the bus network is for, not the Atherton line.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

So we would end up pootling around the town streets on toiletless pacers, taking goodness knows how long.

This is what the bus network is for, not the Atherton line.

What in heaven's name is a toiletless pacer? There are toilets in the Wigan bus station last time I used that facility.

 

[yorksrob]

What in heaven's name is a toiletless pacer? There are toilets in the Wigan bus station last time I used that facility.

A tram.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Basically if we want trams on the Atherton line, we need full requadrupling with Wigan and Southport train services retained, but running non-stop on the reinstated fast lines and a superior stopping service operated on the upgraded slow lines. They can’t coexist on 2 tracks without destroying one or the other in some way. A through service would either be incredibly slow, continuing as a tram, being stuck behind one or unable to run at all, or you could simply close all the intermediate stations.

Why would they need doubling to coexist, just have all services stop at all stops, works pretty much fine with the existing trains (poor Moorside)

Why are we actually in such a poor situation with what was intended as a high speed main line from the Liverpool docks and south Lancashire collieries into Bury and Yorkshire?

Because wasn't this one of three or four "Manchester to Liverpool" railways?
The Atherton line is not a main line any more, it's a local service.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Because wasn't this one of three or four "Manchester to Liverpool" railways?
The Atherton line is not a main line any more, it's a local service.

The Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway fast Manchester to Liverpol service that ran via Atherton did not have to contend with the line blockage that now exists in the Kirkby/Headbolt Lane area.

 

[HSTEd]

A high speed railway in the 'Golden Age ' of railways is not high speed today.
We don't have traffic to retain all the original Liverpool-Manchester railways, and we should be glad the route via Wigan has found a new role.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

A high speed railway in the 'Golden Age ' of railways is not high speed today.
We don't have traffic to retain all the original Liverpool-Manchester railways, and we should be glad the route via Wigan has found a new role.

It was when rationalisation came into force when the number of railway lines carrying fast Manchester to Liverpool train services was the end of the former LYR line for that to play its former role. Reducing the line to double track was inevitable in that case. The former three stations in the Salford area, Pendleton Broad Street (a 4-platform station), Irlams-o'-the-Height and Pendlebury all met their doom.

 

[507020]

Why would they need doubling to coexist, just have all services stop at all stops, works pretty much fine with the existing trains (poor Moorside)

Because wasn't this one of three or four "Manchester to Liverpool" railways?
The Atherton line is not a main line any more, it's a local service.

Because it really doesn’t work. By all means you can have a local passenger service on it, but you can’t extend those stopping trains any further west than Wigan, or the journey time becomes too long and they become too overcrowded.

We probably also want to facilitate growth of rail freight from the Port of Liverpool, especially in opposition to Sefton Council’s untenable plans for it’s Rimrose Valley link road, which it thinks should built through what is currently a country park to instead grow road traffic.

You don’t need to use the Atherton line for Liverpool - Manchester expresses, but it’s not good enough as it is and would be worse as a tramway.

A high speed railway in the 'Golden Age ' of railways is not high speed today.
We don't have traffic to retain all the original Liverpool-Manchester railways, and we should be glad the route via Wigan has found a new role.

But it hasn’t found a new role. Of the several roles it had, Liverpool/Southport Express, Bolton avoiding, coal, Port of Liverpool and suburban traffic, it has been stripped of all but the least lucrative and now fulfils that role badly, while the others are either fulfilled badly by other lines, or road transport.

The former three stations in the Salford area, Pendleton Broad Street (a 4-platform station), Irlams-o'-the-Height and Pendlebury all met their doom.

I’m under the impression that if a Metrolink service on the Atherton line was to start, that those stations closest to Manchester, or similar ones would inevitably reopen, which would improve the suburban service a lot, but degrade the line’s use for all other purposes.

It’s one thing saying the “golden age” of railways has passed, it’s another trying to justify the existence of infrastructure purely for a half hourly all stops Sprinter and then repeatedly proposing to downgrade the service yet again, just because it’s convenient.

 

[yorksrob]

Because it really doesn’t work. By all means you can have a local passenger service on it, but you can’t extend those stopping trains any further west than Wigan, or the journey time becomes too long and they become too overcrowded.

We probably also want to facilitate growth of rail freight from the Port of Liverpool, especially in opposition to Sefton Council’s untenable plans for it’s Rimrose Valley link road, which it thinks should built through what is currently a country park to instead grow road traffic.

You don’t need to use the Atherton line for Liverpool - Manchester expresses, but it’s not good enough as it is and would be worse as a tramway.

But it hasn’t found a new role. Of the several roles it had, Liverpool/Southport Express, Bolton avoiding, coal, Port of Liverpool and suburban traffic, it has been stripped of all but the least lucrative and now fulfils that role badly, while the others are either fulfilled badly by other lines, or road transport.

I’m under the impression that if a Metrolink service on the Atherton line was to start, that those stations closest to Manchester, or similar ones would inevitably reopen, which would improve the suburban service a lot, but degrade the line’s use for all other purposes.

It’s one thing saying the “golden age” of railways has passed, it’s another trying to justify the existence of infrastructure purely for a half hourly all stops Sprinter and then repeatedly proposing to downgrade the service yet again, just because it’s convenient.

To be fair, it's not a bad service and is particularly handy for getting to that part of Greater Manchester, however it needs main line electrification eventually IMO.

 

[daodao]

To be fair, it's not a bad service and is particularly handy for getting to that part of Greater Manchester, however it needs main line electrification eventually IMO.

The way forward in the longer term for the Atherton line is to convert it to Metrolink, with separate tracks and partial street-running from Hindley to Wigan and from Pendleton to Manchester city centre. There could be a branch diverging at Walkden to run to Leigh along the existing busway and former LNW line. Standard trams (not tram-trains) could be used, every 12 minutes alternately to Wigan and Leigh.

All Southport trains would then run via Bolton to Manchester Victoria (not Piccadilly) and beyond. The Kirby-Wigan line could be served by class 777 battery-electric trains as a Merseyrail extension, ideally half-hourly Mon-Sat (hourly evenings/Sundays) and connect into Manchester trains at Wallgate station.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Under the Bee Network forward planning schedule for bringing rail services under their umbrella, how is the Atherton line viewed? Has there been any provisional budgetry submissions that would cover the cost of the "in this thread" proposal for quad tracking and would TfGM expect NR to pay for part or all of that required part?

 

[yorksrob]

The way forward in the longer term for the Atherton line is to convert it to Metrolink, with separate tracks and partial street-running from Hindley to Wigan and from Pendleton to Manchester city centre.

So we keep being told.

I can see why GM wants the route contributing to its Bee network. I think that for this and perhaps the CLC line, the London Overground model, with speedy, relatively frequent electric trains would be better (albeit with toilets and without the booze ban) rather than going off around the Streets.

LO doesn't go off trundling down the Old Kent Road. Neither should the Manchester network.

 

[Topological]

So we keep being told.

I can see why GM wants the route contributing to its Bee network. I think that for this and perhaps the CLC line, the London Overground model, with speedy, relatively frequent electric trains would be better (albeit with toilets and without the booze ban) rather than going off around the Streets.

LO doesn't go off trundling down the Old Kent Road. Neither should the Manchester network.

Croydon Tramlink does, and that took over lines which were at least comparable with the Atherton line.

Remembering that conversion to Metrolink does not sever the heavy rail connection between Southport and Manchester.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Remembering that conversion to Metrolink does not sever the heavy rail connection between Southport and Manchester.

Indeed. There is still the route via Bolton for heavy rail trains.

It's a nuisance for the Kirkby, but the fix for that is to extend Merseyrail to Wallgate.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It's a nuisance for the Kirkby, but the fix for that is to extend Merseyrail to Wallgate.

Some cunning plan by Merseyrail trying to go under the radar with their takeover of Upholland, Orrell and Pemberton.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some cunning plan by Merseyrail trying to go under the radar with their takeover of Upholland, Orrell and Pemberton.....

Why ?

Yes, they'd lose their direct service to Manchester. But how is 4tph from 5am to midnight not immeasurably better than 1tph during daylight hours only, particularly as two of those would have Manchester connections plus the option of the tram? Those intermediate stations are very poorly used because of the dire service, improve it and things would change.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

But how is 4tph from 5am to midnight not immeasurably better than 1tph during daylight hours only?

Could you even fit 4tph in both directions through the single track from Rainford to Headbolt Lane?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could you even fit 4tph in both directions through the single track from Rainford to Headbolt Lane?

As you'd need to do some digging up, I'm assuming that would be redoubled. But if not, you could still do 2tph, which would still be an improvement on both operating day length and frequency including (connections) to Manchester.

An hourly 40 year old DMU for only roughly a 12 hour operating day is not better by any measure at all. It's not even a particularly good way of getting to Manchester, it stops everywhere, takes ages and goes to Victoria rather than Castlefield.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why ?

Yes, they'd lose their direct service to Manchester. But how is 4tph from 5am to midnight not immeasurably better than 1tph during daylight hours only? Those intermediate stations are very poorly used because of the dire service, improve it and things would change.

Because their direct services to Manchester will no longer exist. The Bee Network under Mayor Andy Burnham concerns itself with all areas in its administered area (and a bit outside such as the 632 bus from Wigan to Chorley via Coppull) and would be unhappy at such a proposal.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because their direct services to Manchester will no longer exist.

So? It would be an immeasurable improvement which would grow usage at those stations and allow housing development and regeneration. It'd also give Liverpool a better service to Wigan than that which operates (or can operate) via St Helens.

The Bee Network under Mayor Andy Burnham concerns itself with all areas in its administered area (and a bit outside such as the 632 bus from Wigan to Chorley via Coppull) and would be unhappy at such a proposal.

I don't think Burnham would care. The route is a basket case subsidy pit which is lucky it survived closure under BR (and probably only did because privatisation set the network in aspic - in the 1990s talk of threats to that route and Ormskirk-Preston were ten a penny). Grow usage alongside housing development and improvements to Upholland ("Skelmersdale South Parkway") and it may be quite different.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If there is such a stated demand for services to the Liverpool region from Pemberton, Orrell and Upholland, where are the bus services that would meet this stated demand, as what has been stated would see these to be profitable?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If there is such a stated demand for services to the Liverpool region from Pemberton, Orrell and Upholland, where are the bus services that would meet this stated demand, as what has been stated would see these to be profitable?

It's even an improved service to Manchester with a quick cross platform change at Wallgate (or a wander to North Western on the opposite 15 minutes). For instance, an evening out to Manchester by train would become possible. It isn't now.

The demand would be created - the Liverpool commuter area would move out along the line. Rainford could grow, and Skelmersdale could be better provided for via expansion of Upholland.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It's even an improved service to Manchester with a quick cross platform change at Wallgate (or a wander to North Western on the opposite 15 minutes). For instance, an evening out to Manchester by train would become possible. It isn't now.

Just as a matter of interest, does the Merseyrail service at Orrell Park station serve parts of Orrell?

The demand would be created - the Liverpool commuter area would move out along the line. Rainford could grow, and Skelmersdale could be better provided for via expansion of Upholland.

Has West Lancashire Council any say in the matter of what happens in Upholland? Does their strategic plan for the future area development include your ideas?

Anyway, I have just realised that this thread concerns itself with the Atherton line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just as a matter of interest, does the Merseyrail service at Orrell Park station serve parts of Orrell?

No, the two are nowhere near each other. Orrell Park is near Aintree, not Wigan. They're about ten miles apart.

Has West Lancashire Council any say in the matter of what happens in Upholland? Does their strategic plan for the future area development include your ideas?

Lancashire doesn't give a monkey's about rail and has no interest in funding it whatsoever.