Warrington Bank Quay to Chester line closed (10th August)

[Camden]

Something like this will effect people from all over the country with both road and rail closed. I find it amusing that people 2nd guess and come up with wild and wonderful ideas on what the TOC's could and should do without the knowledge to make a constructive and possible problem solving post :roll:

Talking about the BBC's lack of geographical awareness?

Breakfast, Radio 5, Sports and Children are the main departments at MediaCity. While a number of Breakfast and Radio 5 journalists actually live in Cheshire, the ones involved with the news channel later in the day and updating the news website are still mainly London based.

Figures! I think the Beeb must just have one of those filters installed in their browser that replaces anything to do with the north with "Manchester"

Think half the government might do too thinking about it!

 

[8A Rail]

Well the line was only closed north of Helsby, I believe. It could have reversed there to reach Chester.

Helsby Station and Junction was part of the exclusion zone so no trains could go near. The fire on the motorway was not that far from the station, hence being included in the no go zone.

 

[craigybagel]

I find it surprising Llandudno Junction crews sign Warrington to Crewe given that line doesn't usually have any ATW services on it.

I think a lack of capacity between Stockport and Manchester would also be relevant though. ATW were unable to divert the 17:19 via Stockport despite that service being a DMU presumably worked by Chester crews.

If you refer to earlier posts correcting incorrect info, it would have been a Holyhead Driver. I should imagine ATW would have arranged a Route Conductor, probably from a Freight Company. Route knowledge was the reason the 17 50 couldn't have been diverted via CLC to answer an earlier question.

Crewe-Warrington is signed by all drivers and guards at Crewe. It has 2 ECS runs per week each way to keep up competency. The loco is signed by half of the drivers at Crewe,and since it ran in service to Warrington then empty to Crewe all they needed to do was get a Crewe driver to Warrington to either pilot or drive the loco down to Crewe.

The 17:19 is a Chester driver, but a Holyhead conductor, which rules out the Cheshire lines. Although I do agree that trying to fit an extra train down that line in the peak would also be difficult even if you did have the traincrew for it.

 

[Philip C]

Well the move to Media City doesn't seem to have helped any!

I can understand with something like this going on signposting the nearest big city, but to get the location of this so badly wrong it really does make you wonder, it must have massively affected the Liverpool area directly, assuming it's not still doing so, not to mention all the traffic heading in and out of Wales through Chester.

Helsby is, of course, in Cheshire (Cheshire West and Chester Unitary Authority if you wish) and I would have been quite happy with the incident being reported as "near Chester". As Helsby is in neither Merseyside nor Greater Manchester I can see no need to ascribe it to Liverpool or Manchester when Chester is nearer.

From the point of view that the affected train services were those joining North Wales with Manchester and the limited one joining Ellesmere Port and Helsby; and that the M56 is the motorway linking Manchester (specifically the Sharston Spur and the south end of Princess Parkway - one within the City of Manchester and the other in the Metropolitan Borough of Stockport but within one quarter of a mile of the Manchester boundary) with a point roughly midway between the City of Chester and Ellesmere Port I can understand some purpose in news reports referencing Manchester - though calling the incident "near Manchester" seems odd by comparison with "near Chester".

As neither railway nor road (especially in the vicinity of Helsby) have a lot of effect on travel to/from Liverpool reporting the incident as "near Liverpool" would have been unhelpful. When diversions had an impact on travel through Liverpool (Mersey Tunnels) and may have affected flights at Speke this seems to have been duly reported.

In conclusion my view is that it was fair enough that Manchester was referenced and, at least at first, Liverpool was not; but that the incident should have been located as "Helsby near Chester" and not as "near Manchester".

PS. The airport angle of this fascinated me. Does anyone have a view as to what height an exploding propane tanker might ascend and how this relates to airline flight paths in this area?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

PS. The airport angle of this fascinated me. Does anyone have a view as to what height an exploding propane tanker might ascend and how this relates to airline flight paths in this area?

Manchester flight paths don't normally cross Helsby.
Liverpool is only 5 miles to the north across the Mersey, but flight paths are east west.
There is a lot of overlying of the area by trans-Atlantic traffic to London and the continent, but it is very high.
The closest flight path would be into Hawarden, where the daily Airbus Baluga often flies low virtually along the M56 when landing from the east.
I should think they would treat it pretty much like a volcano!

 

[pemma]

I should think they would treat it pretty much like a volcano!

That's what I was thinking. Were they trying to be 100% sure no ash from the fire gets in to the aeroplanes?

 

[Domh245]

I'm no chemist, but propane, combined with lots of air, should burn pretty cleanly. It would however give out a not inconsiderable amount of heat, which could set up local turbulence as the heated air rises and cool air flows in to replace it (and then get heated). Then again, that could all just be nonsense!

 

[pemma]

The 17:19 is a Chester driver, but a Holyhead conductor, which rules out the Cheshire lines. Although I do agree that trying to fit an extra train down that line in the peak would also be difficult even if you did have the traincrew for it.

Things could be so much better if crews signed both lines and the rolling stock for both lines. For instance, yesterday they could have used the 142 which did the 17:09 Piccadilly-Chester to run a Piccadilly-Warrington Bank Quay shuttle and used one of the 3 car 175s which was running between Piccadilly and Warrington Bank Quay to run the 17:09 Piccadilly-Chester.

 

[craigybagel]

Things could be so much better if crews signed both lines and the rolling stock for both lines. For instance, yesterday they could have used the 142 which did the 17:09 Piccadilly-Chester to run a Piccadilly-Warrington Bank Quay shuttle and used one of the 3 car 175s which was running between Piccadilly and Warrington Bank Quay to run the 17:09 Piccadilly-Chester.

If you could predict the future that might work. But what if the 142 got to Warrington, and then the line reopened? You're left with the first train from there to Chester and beyond being a 142, and even more of a mess to fix in terms of sets being in the wrong place.

As far as train crew are concerned, in an ideal joined up railway you could possibly make a case for Chester crews signing 142's so they could work the Northern Chester-Manchester services at the extreme ends of the day that currently rely on inefficient ECS and taxi journeys (like they did when it was all one TOC), but even if you did you'd never have a case for training Holyhead crews on them.

 

[Camden]

That's what I was thinking. Were they trying to be 100% sure no ash from the fire gets in to the aeroplanes?

I may be wrong but I think the part about air travel being affected is a case of the BBC having information as shonky as their atlas skills.

I believe Liverpool Airport was unaffected, passengers stuck on the motorway notwithstanding https://twitter.com/LPL_Airport/status/630769623877578754.

(Manchester Airport was also unaffected, what with it being 30 odd miles away, and so too was Luton, in case the Beeb were wondering )

 

[pemma]

If you could predict the future that might work. But what if the 142 got to Warrington, and then the line reopened? You're left with the first train from there to Chester and beyond being a 142, and even more of a mess to fix in terms of sets being in the wrong place.

Well ATW (presumably after consulting with Network Rail or emergency services) announced before 5pm that the Chester-Warrington line would not reopen until after 7pm, so presumably they based their emergency planning around that. For instance, it's been mentioned already that they sent a Crewe driver up to Warrington so that they could get the loco-hauled set back where it should be.

You could argue it's more of a mess having passengers trying to use an alternative service out of Manchester in the evening peak, when that service is usually an overcrowded 2 car Pacer even without any extra passengers, than it would be to split what's advertised as a through service at an intermediate station if things return to normal sooner than expected. Incidentally, Chester does finish up with a surplus of both Northern and ATW units during the evening peak, with both running extra trains to Chester but not from Chester.

As far as train crew are concerned, in an ideal joined up railway you could possibly make a case for Chester crews signing 142's so they could work the Northern Chester-Manchester services at the extreme ends of the day that currently rely on inefficient ECS and taxi journeys (like they did when it was all one TOC), but even if you did you'd never have a case for training Holyhead crews on them.

When the North Wales routes were originally transferred there were agreements in place to reduce such inefficiencies and there were services on the Warrington line worked by FNW crews and/or units and ones on the Mid-Cheshire line worked by W&B crews and/or units.

I recall a crew member in Arriva uniform working a 142 from Manchester to Chester via Altrincham one day late 2003/early 2004 when a passenger asked if it was the train for Chester. He responded telling him not to travel on it if he was going to Chester as it's a very old train that takes an indirect route.

Then Northern came along. Apparently there were talks about continuing to work each others trains/services but the stumbling block was Northern didn't want their Manchester crews to continue to keep 175s on their cards, as well as wanting to put 156s on Mid-Cheshire services and no longer use 158s, so ATW weren't interested.

 

[Philip C]

I may be wrong but I think the part about air travel being affected is a case of the BBC having information as shonky as their atlas skills.

I believe Liverpool Airport was unaffected, passengers stuck on the motorway notwithstanding https://twitter.com/LPL_Airport/status/630769623877578754.

(Manchester Airport was also unaffected, what with it being 30 odd miles away, and so too was Luton, in case the Beeb were wondering )

You seem to have a problem with the BBC. The following is from the Cheshire Police web-site:

M56 Update - Still closed between Junction 12 and 15
Date published: 10th August 2015 6pm

Cheshire Constabulary and Cheshire Fire & Rescue continue to work together to deal with this afternoon’s vehicle fire on the M56 motorway.

Firefighters have now brought the incident under control and the precautionary safety cordon that had been in place since the incident occurred at around 3pm has now been reduced.

This means that many of the road closures that had been put in place will now be lifted. Although this means traffic will start flowing again, we would ask motorists caught in the tailbacks to remain patient as the incident prompted significant congestion throughout the north of the county and it may take some time for you to get moving again.

Meanwhile, action has also been taken to help those motorists trapped between the incident and the road closures to leave the motorway. Significant police, fire and ambulance resources have been assigned to both the incident itself and supporting the wider community until the traffic situation is back to normal.

With the cordon reduced, the previous safety advice issued to residents and motorists has now been lifted.

The Manchester to Chester railway line has now re-opened, but the Helsby to Hooton line remains shut. Flights to John Lennon Airport are no longer being diverted.

Whether this is correct or not the BBC would hardly have felt the need to check whether flights had indeed been diverted from Liverpool Airport.

 

[craigybagel]

Well ATW (presumably after consulting with Network Rail or emergency services) announced before 5pm that the Chester-Warrington line would not reopen until after 7pm, so presumably they based their emergency planning around that. For instance, it's been mentioned already that they sent a Crewe driver up to Warrington so that they could get the loco-hauled set back where it should be.

I should point out I was only speculating about the Crewe driver being sent to Warrington. That would be the easiest option if there was a driver available but I don't know if it actually happened. And whilst yes they might have been planning on a reopening around 7, sometimes things are fixed a lot quicker than normal. And it's a lot easier to get things back to normal again the closer trains are to where they're meant to be.

You could argue it's more of a mess having passengers trying to use an alternative service out of Manchester in the evening peak, when that service is usually an overcrowded 2 car Pacer even without any extra passengers, than it would be to split what's advertised as a through service at an intermediate station if things return to normal sooner than expected. Incidentally, Chester does finish up with a surplus of both Northern and ATW units during the evening peak, with both running extra trains to Chester but not from Chester.

You could indeed argue that. I however would argue that control have enough on their plate trying to keep things moving without adding to their workload. It's unfortunate but I'm not going to blame either Northern or ATW if that 142 ended up being overcrowded.