What should a 'potential' underground station in Manchester be used for ?

[Halifaxlad]

So there has been a thread about creating 400m platforms in Manchester, another about terminating 400m services in Liverpool.

Previously an underground station for Manchester has been discussed but there doesn't seem to be a consensus on what it would be for, so I though I should create a poll.

I've drawn some 'representative' lines on a map so please no comments about feasibility as I haven't undertaken any geological surveys for this 'speculative' thread which is merely about routing options!

Manchester (underground) options – Google My Maps

Manchester (underground) options

www.google.com

 

[Topological]

East-West for me, any tunneling should be about local capacity and benefitting the wider region. Taking Liverpool to Leeds/Sheffield out of the Castlefield Corridor and away from Victoria would give the paths needed for a meaningful suburban service coming in from the North West and make it sensible to have a regular shuttle over the Ordsall Chord to Manchester Airport (probably a train every 10 minutes).

If absolutely necessary faster trains could also continue to the airport, but would be pathed behind stoppers and show as such in the timetable.

 

[HSTEd]

I'm not sure I fully agree with any of the three choices, but Option 2 (Orange on the map) is probably the best.
It allows more trains to be routed via the more popular stations (the Castlefield corridor ones), which is a major advantage.

 

[Manutd1999]

I would go with Option 1, but emerging around Ashburys not Longsight. That could then take 4-6ph from Leeds plus 2-3ph from Sheffield, continuing along the Chat Moss line to Liverpool/Chester/WCML etc.

I feel like that would do the most to relieve Castlefield, enable a metro-style service through Manchester and provide lots of good options for a "Northern Powerhouse Rail" operation.

 

[daodao]

There should be an option "none of the above". IMO, the key through route is east-west, but such a route already exists through Victoria, so a tunnel would be a white elephant.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There should be an option "none of the above". IMO, the key through route is east-west, but such a route already exists through Victoria, so a tunnel would be a white elephant.

Instead I would propose:

• Den Haag style cut and cover "Tramtunnel" to put Metrolink underground as a proper U-Bahn and allow significant frequency and tram length increases
• CLC, Atherton line, Hadfields and Marples (other than the hourly Hope Valley local which should run via Stockport instead) onto Metrolink, releasing a load of capacity - not quite sure about how to handle Marple-New Mills C though, I'd not want to close it
• 400m platforms in Piccadilly trainshed (see other thread)
• Purchase and demolish Arena at Victoria and rebuild the station into a proper high quality Intercity through station along the lines of Berlin Hbf but without the multi-level thing. Proper glass trainshed etc and a quality concourse with facilities as good as Piccadilly. 8 x 400m through platforms (typically used in halves like New St). Metrolink to be underground so the entirety of the old part and "bubble roof" would be walled in and become the concourse, it could feel a bit like "new new St".
• Liverpool line platforms at Salford Central
• Castlefield to take local DMU/EMU services only with long distance services moved to Victoria - if it can't be worked with 195s it goes to Vic. Basically turn it into a Thameslink/Merseyrail hybrid.

You could probably have all of that and money over compared to an Intercity tunnel line.

 

[HSTEd]

• CLC, Atherton line, Hadfields and Marples (other than the hourly Hope Valley local which should run via Stockport instead) onto Metrolink, releasing a load of capacity - not quite sure about how to handle Marple-New Mills C though, I'd not want to close it

I think the most operationally convenient option for New Mills C would just be to run the trams through.
However much TfGM would need to be paid to run the few kilometres beyond the nominal boundary it is likely cheaper than the alternative options, all of which would impose major operational costs/inconvenience long term.

 

[AlastairFraser]

• Castlefield to take local DMU/EMU services only with long distance services moved to Victoria - if it can't be worked with 195s it goes to Vic. Basically turn it into a Thameslink/Merseyrail hybrid.

Agreed with the rest of it, but what would you do with the Blackpool to MIA/Liverpool to Wilmslow via MIA services in this case? They still need to use Castlefield.

Also extend half of the Marple central terminators to Hayfield down the existing line and Sett Valley trail, and half to Chinley where you would reinstate 4 platforms (with 2 bays if possible this time). This would make it easier for people from the Hope Valley/Sheffield to access Marple/Reddish/east Manchester and vice versa, and in all honesty wouldn't be a massive issue with capacity, if you built the bays properly.

 

[Rail Quest]

• Den Haag style cut and cover "Tramtunnel" to put Metrolink underground as a proper U-Bahn and allow significant frequency and tram length increases
• CLC, Atherton line, Hadfields and Marples (other than the hourly Hope Valley local which should run via Stockport instead) onto Metrolink, releasing a load of capacity - not quite sure about how to handle Marple-New Mills C though, I'd not want to close it

Totally agree with this and I think such a tunnel and surrounding integrations would do a lot more for Manchester by relieving traffic from the Castlefield Corridor and Manchester Victoria. At which point, the frequency of the existing Regional and InterCity services could be increased without pushing capacity at those pinch points. Additionally the speed of the metrolink (which is currently quite slow through the city centre when compared to an U-Bahn) could be drastically increased.

And all of that for a cost that would undoubtedly lower than building a propper tunnel for Regional services - win win!!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed with the rest of it, but what would you do with the Blackpool to MIA/Liverpool to Wilmslow via MIA services in this case? They still need to use Castlefield.

These would be a key part of the Thameslink-a-like and would be (and are) run using 331s. I meant 195/331, not abandoning the wires - the principle being the door positions are consistent (and doors wide with standbacks) so they can be marked on the platform and boarding and alighting can be super quick.

 

[Howardh]

The red one, trains could disappear underground around Salford Crescent and re-emerge south of Piccadilly with Picc being like St Pancras with platforms A and B underground. Frees up capacity on the corridor too!

Might cost a few bob but at least the corridor wouldn't need to extend to four lines!

 

[AlastairFraser]

These would be a key part of the Thameslink-a-like and would be (and are) run using 331s. I meant 195/331, not abandoning the wires - the principle being the door positions are consistent (and doors wide with standbacks) so they can be marked on the platform and boarding and alighting can be super quick.

Ah OK, so all services run through the corridor with CAF stock, still use it. Makes sense

 

[mwmbwls]

I think the most operationally convenient option for New Mills C would just be to run the trams through.
However much TfGM would need to be paid to run the few kilometres beyond the nominal boundary it is likely cheaper than the alternative options, all of which would impose major operational costs/inconvenience long term.

The boundary between High Peak and Greater Manchester is a tributory brook of the River Goyt that runs under the track south east of Strines Station and just north east of the railway bridge at Hague Bar.The route from New Mills Central to Hayfield is now obstructed by buildings at the New Mills end - a Doctors Surgery IIRC..

 

[Jamesrob637]

Instead I would propose:

• Purchase and demolish Arena at Victoria and rebuild the station into a proper high quality Intercity through station along the lines of Berlin Hbf but without the multi-level thing. Proper glass trainshed etc and a quality concourse with facilities as good as Piccadilly. 8 x 400m through platforms (typically used in halves like New St). Metrolink to be underground so the entirety of the old part and "bubble roof" would be walled in and become the concourse, it could feel a bit like "new new St".

Would you exclusively use the Co-Op Arena then, plus the Theatre of Dreams and the Emptyhad?

 

[HSTEd]

The boundary between High Peak and Greater Manchester is a tributory brook of the River Goyt that runs under the track south east of Strines Station and just north east of the railway bridge at Hague Bar.The route from New Mills Central to Hayfield is now obstructed by buildings at the New Mills end - a Doctors Surgery IIRC..

In that case, extending the trams to New Mills Central and replacing all the other services on that section would seem to be the sensible option rather than trying to operate that section as a shuttle.

I'm sure some deal would be possible to pay TfGM for running the trams the few extra kilometres from Marple to New Mills, especially as only ~2km is outside Greater Manchester.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would you exclusively use the Co-Op Arena then, plus the Theatre of Dreams and the Emptyhad?

If there's a need for another arena, someone will build one. But the Nynex (yes, I'm old) should never have been built because of the constraints it places on the railway.

 

[SteveM70]

I'm sure some deal would be possible to pay TfGM for running the trams the few extra kilometres from Marple to New Mills, especially as only ~2km is outside Greater Manchester.

There’s a sort-of precedent for this across the border with the Leeds NW electrification extending across the boundary to Skipton

 

[Northumbriana]

Instead I would propose:

• Den Haag style cut and cover "Tramtunnel" to put Metrolink underground as a proper U-Bahn and allow significant frequency and tram length increases
• CLC, Atherton line, Hadfields and Marples (other than the hourly Hope Valley local which should run via Stockport instead) onto Metrolink, releasing a load of capacity - not quite sure about how to handle Marple-New Mills C though, I'd not want to close it
• 400m platforms in Piccadilly trainshed (see other thread)
• Purchase and demolish Arena at Victoria and rebuild the station into a proper high quality Intercity through station along the lines of Berlin Hbf but without the multi-level thing. Proper glass trainshed etc and a quality concourse with facilities as good as Piccadilly. 8 x 400m through platforms (typically used in halves like New St). Metrolink to be underground so the entirety of the old part and "bubble roof" would be walled in and become the concourse, it could feel a bit like "new new St".
• Liverpool line platforms at Salford Central
• Castlefield to take local DMU/EMU services only with long distance services moved to Victoria - if it can't be worked with 195s it goes to Vic. Basically turn it into a Thameslink/Merseyrail hybrid.

You could probably have all of that and money over compared to an Intercity tunnel line.

If there's a need for another arena, someone will build one. But the Nynex (yes, I'm old) should never have been built because of the constraints it places on the railway.

Infairness it's been a very successful arena, but it should have been built in conjunction (is that the right word?) with a rebuild of the station. The alternative now would have to be to build a new arena of at least equal status, quality, capacity, central location elsewhere and then tear this one down. Maybe build a new arena on top of the HS2 platforms at Piccadilly?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Infairness it's been a very successful arena, but it should have been built in conjunction (is that the right word?) with a rebuild of the station.

It was. But that rebuild was short sighted and terribly designed.

It would have been OK, to be fair, if it had been built on stilts above the station with enough room safeguarded for 6-8 through platforms rather than blocking one side of the station.

 

[SJL2020]

The Arena at Victoria is currently being refurbished and the capacity increased to 24K.

 

[Howardh]

Would you exclusively use the Co-Op Arena then, plus the Theatre of Dreams and the Emptyhad?

The Theatre of Waterfalls? Now that whats-his-name has taken over (at least partly) and Very Old Trafford is re-designed, if it ever happens, will it have a roof thus making another major arena so Manchester could lose one (Arena over Victoria) and the station as a hole could be extended, improved etc and be more like Piccadilly with top floor shopping/cafe area, waiting rooms etc? It's what the station desperately needs.

 

[Manutd1999]

The red one, trains could disappear underground around Salford Crescent and re-emerge south of Piccadilly with Picc being like St Pancras with platforms A and B underground. Frees up capacity on the corridor too!

Might cost a few bob but at least the corridor wouldn't need to extend to four lines!

I agree with this. The tunnel becomes "Northern Powerhouse Rail" with ~8ph from Liverpool/Chester/WCML to Leeds/Sheffield.

Castlefield then becomes "Greater Manchester Metro" with ~10ph from the Airport splitting into five branches, terminating at maybe Liverpool (via CLC), Blackpool, Southport, Rochdale and Stalybridge.

 

[Jamesrob637]

The Theatre of Waterfalls? Now that whats-his-name has taken over (at least partly) and Very Old Trafford is re-designed, if it ever happens, will it have a roof thus making another major arena so Manchester could lose one (Arena over Victoria) and the station as a hole could be extended, improved etc and be more like Piccadilly with top floor shopping/cafe area, waiting rooms etc? It's what the station desperately needs.

Victoria station used to be a (hell) hole, but those days are gone, concourse-side at least.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Victoria station used to be a (hell) hole, but those days are gone, concourse-side at least.

Still is in my view. Horrible station with awful facilities.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Victoria station used to be a (hell) hole, but those days are gone, concourse-side at least.

The gateline and stair/lift arrangements to get to most of the platforms are still very awkward and a barrier to capacity. The Arena above platforms with 1980s diesels and poor ventilation makes waiting an unpleasant experience too.

 

[Howardh]

Victoria station used to be a (hell) hole, but those days are gone, concourse-side at least.

Still is in my view. Horrible station with awful facilities.

Yes, it's bland and boring and offers little for the passenger. Sure we now have that new bar, and Greggs, but there's very few areas to sit down and none that I know of in the warm, and once through he barriers there are no toilets, and you are stuck with vending machines there only. If Huddersfield can have two heated shelters on the platform, I'm sure Victoria can!

 

[GJMarshy]

East-West for me, any tunneling should be about local capacity and benefitting the wider region. Taking Liverpool to Leeds/Sheffield out of the Castlefield Corridor and away from Victoria would give the paths needed for a meaningful suburban service coming in from the North West and make it sensible to have a regular shuttle over the Ordsall Chord to Manchester Airport (probably a train every 10 minutes).

If absolutely necessary faster trains could also continue to the airport, but would be pathed behind stoppers and show as such in the timetable.

I would go with Option 1, but emerging around Ashburys not Longsight. That could then take 4-6ph from Leeds plus 2-3ph from Sheffield, continuing along the Chat Moss line to Liverpool/Chester/WCML etc.

I feel like that would do the most to relieve Castlefield, enable a metro-style service through Manchester and provide lots of good options for a "Northern Powerhouse Rail" operation.

Fully agree with the above. A simple east-west bypass tunnel for inter-city/fast trains makes a whole load of sense. Finally lets the core routes and stations in Central Manchester be used optimally (S-bahn style core.)

Such a tunnel that isn't reliant on HS2 also means much shorter platform lengths (and therefor stations) means the mooted underground station at Piccadilly would only need be half the length and width of the Old Oak Common HS2 station, making the whole thing a much more realistic prospect. There's also opportunities for a secondary station in east Salford to fully relieve Castlefield by reducing the number of "feeder" trains into Piccadilly for passengers to reach the new line, as well as providing fast and convenient connections to Media City and North Manchester. The site is brownfield with multiple rail lines crossing it, making for the perfect interchange and prime for transit-oriented-development to help fund the project.

This is all show in think tank "NorthOnTrack"s "CrossNorth" plan below:



To start you'd be able to run 8tph through it assuming a turn back facility east of Salford Interchange for 2tph. Once connected to a new, segregated link toward Liverpool/Warrington that can be increased to 10tph all through-running.

Also, unlike previous NPR plans, it actually connects Sheffield, Chester & North Wales to create a true "CrossNorth" network, fully relieving Castlefield of all inter-city services.

In terms of airport connections, as mooted by the posters above, with the existing network free to run S-Bahn style, you'd get metro-frequency services to it from Piccadilly, a trip no longer than 20mins, and finally using the densely populated "Styal" line through South Manchester for local services, rather than a "sink" to turn inter-city services around at the airport due to lack of west-facing terminating capacity in Central Manchester.

Seems like a win-win to me personally, although I understand everyone will have their own views on this one. The Manchester problem has always been somewhat controversial!

Marshy.

 

[dosxuk]

It was. But that rebuild was short sighted and terribly designed.

It would have been OK, to be fair, if it had been built on stilts above the station with enough room safeguarded for 6-8 through platforms rather than blocking one side of the station.

An alternative view is that the railway shouldn't have sold the station land if they thought it may be useful in the future. You make it sound like the arena developers snuck in one night and walled off half the station and have refused to hand it back. The arena could never have been located or designed as it is if it wasn't for the full agreement of the railway, so you can hardly blame them for doing what was done.

 

[Bletchleyite]

An alternative view is that the railway shouldn't have sold the station land if they thought it may be useful in the future. You make it sound like the arena developers snuck in one night and walled off half the station and have refused to hand it back. The arena could never have been located or designed as it is if it wasn't for the full agreement of the railway, so you can hardly blame them for doing what was done.

I'm not blaming the Arena operators, I'm blaming the railway. A design was possible that didn't cause the problems the actual one did.

 

[Howardh]

Fully agree with the above. A simple east-west bypass tunnel for inter-city/fast trains makes a whole load of sense. Finally lets the core routes and stations in Central Manchester be used optimally (S-bahn style core.)

Such a tunnel that isn't reliant on HS2 also means much shorter platform lengths (and therefor stations) means the mooted underground station at Piccadilly would only need be half the length and width of the Old Oak Common HS2 station, making the whole thing a much more realistic prospect. There's also opportunities for a secondary station in east Salford to fully relieve Castlefield by reducing the number of "feeder" trains into Piccadilly for passengers to reach the new line, as well as providing fast and convenient connections to Media City and North Manchester. The site is brownfield with multiple rail lines crossing it, making for the perfect interchange and prime for transit-oriented-development to help fund the project.

This is all show in think tank "NorthOnTrack"s "CrossNorth" plan below:

View attachment 153327

To start you'd be able to run 8tph through it assuming a turn back facility east of Salford Interchange for 2tph. Once connected to a new, segregated link toward Liverpool/Warrington that can be increased to 10tph all through-running.

Also, unlike previous NPR plans, it actually connects Sheffield, Chester & North Wales to create a true "CrossNorth" network, fully relieving Castlefield of all inter-city services.

In terms of airport connections, as mooted by the posters above, with the existing network free to run S-Bahn style, you'd get metro-frequency services to it from Piccadilly, a trip no longer than 20mins, and finally using the densely populated "Styal" line through South Manchester for local services, rather than a "sink" to turn inter-city services around at the airport due to lack of west-facing terminating capacity in Central Manchester.

Seems like a win-win to me personally, although I understand everyone will have their own views on this one. The Manchester problem has always been somewhat controversial!

Marshy.

Would the "Salford Interchange" be between Oldfield Road and Ordsall lane, or just before (west of) Oldfield Road as at that point the rail splits into two? The latter would be less problematic looking at a map/staellite photo. Either way wish it would happen!!