• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Revised Northern Hub plans proposed by DfT today

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,795
Location
Somewhere, not in London
To the side of 13/14, a widening of the viaduct built above the road but only for the platforms, no extra running lines between Pic and Oxford Road.

I'd love to see how many buildings would need flattening or modifying to allow 4 track between MAN and MCO.

Best we can hope for is a re-build of Oxford Road to cut off Platform 5 and provide longer, conflict free through platforms for 4x20m and 8x20m services on each line, ie. one long and one short per direction. (This can be done within the current viaducting)

If services stay running in the order of short, long, short, long etc. then it could be possible to stack arrivals towards piccadilly and departures toward deansgate, but not in the other direction unless it's two short services due to the lack of space on the Eastern thought.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Hoodedclaw545

Member
Joined
23 May 2011
Messages
5
Not sure if I'm missing something about the dft proposed plans, however I never noticed anything about the tpe south route Cleethorpes to Manchester airport.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,308
Not sure if I'm missing something about the dft proposed plans, however I never noticed anything about the tpe south route Cleethorpes to Manchester airport.

I think if there were no changes planned it wouldn't get mentioned. The HLOS 'illustrative options' is basically only covering services expected to change due to the wiring, it isn't the entire timetable?
 

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
I'd love to see how many buildings would need flattening or modifying to allow 4 track between MAN and MCO.

Best we can hope for is a re-build of Oxford Road to cut off Platform 5 and provide longer, conflict free through platforms for 4x20m and 8x20m services on each line, ie. one long and one short per direction. (This can be done within the current viaducting)

If services stay running in the order of short, long, short, long etc. then it could be possible to stack arrivals towards piccadilly and departures toward deansgate, but not in the other direction unless it's two short services due to the lack of space on the Eastern thought.

Your first point is why I had a doubt earlier in this thread

I happened to be on a Manchester train back to Preston earlier today.

There's enough space - JUST - until a rather large, rather close to the edge car park appears, and that's before/after University out-buildings, annexes and the like.

NR might *say* they can squeeze two tracks and platforms in before MCO - but I still doubt it VERY much.
 

snail

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2011
Messages
1,912
Location
t'North
NR might *say* they can squeeze two tracks and platforms in before MCO - but I still doubt it VERY much.
The Northern Hub technical study says nothing about rebuilding Oxford Road or the viaduct connecting it to Piccadilly, certainly nothing about additional tracks there. "Option 2" refers to '36hr possessions to remodel track layout' at MCO, that's all. As has previously been mentioned there is no need to do this because of the short distance between the stations. Resignalling to allow a train to leave one station while another is in the platform at the other end will reduce the intervals from 4 minutes to 3 minutes, giving a significant increase in capacity.

Why do you have a problem in accepting that people have been working on this for over a decade ;))) and are much better equipped than you or I to assess whether it is feasible?

You could try reading the study doc for starters...
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/6485_ManchesterHubRailStudy.pdf
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,795
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Your first point is why I had a doubt earlier in this thread

I happened to be on a Manchester train back to Preston earlier today.

There's enough space - JUST - until a rather large, rather close to the edge car park appears, and that's before/after University out-buildings, annexes and the like.

NR might *say* they can squeeze two tracks and platforms in before MCO - but I still doubt it VERY much.

There are 8 or 9 buildings in the way, at least three of these are listed and can't be demolished or modified, by any chance where you looking out the 'car park' side of the train and completely missing orient house, granaby house, Joshua Brooks etc?

Just a quick map of the buildings that are in the way...

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?m...&ll=53.474402,-2.237788&spn=0.003806,0.007843

These are all too close to allow another track alongside what is already there.

The car park in question is the University of Manchester Charles Street Car Park and there is enough space above the access road to the south for the viaduct, but no available construction zone to build it in without massive expenditure.

Also just to re-enforce the point that there isn't any point in four tracking unless you're putting 6 or 8 through platforms in at Oxford Road, and that REALLY won't happen unless it's Metrolink platforms and segregated.

The re-modelling at Oxford Road hasn't yet been specified, but it will likely result in the requirement of services needing to be sent in the 'right order' and some clever timetabling without some major work and hacking away at Platforms 2 and 3 to reduce them in length while increasing the length of Platform 1 to be the same as Platform 4, and remove conflicts from the Piccadilly end of Oxford Road, this is perhaps what is being planned under the Northern Hub plans, but it would mean new lifts needing to be installed, perhaps why NR is holding off on bringing the old ones back into use as it would likely need a new overbridge and the extension of Platform 1 anyway.

And whatever happens, there would likely need to be a new interlocking box, so this can be moved away from it's current location to allow the space for Platform 1 to extend towards Deansgate, and result in having two 6x23m (1&4) platforms and two 4x20/4x23m platforms (2&3) all now completely conflict free. But if the're doing this, perhaps it would be worthwhile bringing the likes of Platform 6 back into use for the AM peak to have additional services terminate here until the end of the peak, and in the PM peak, run these services from the sidings to the South of Piccadilly.

Last paragraph, honest.

Although if I was planning this I would be putting in reversing sidings between the slow lines to the South of Piccadilly for services terminating to use that area and then having nothing terminating at Oxford Road with all services running through, removing the need for platform 5 that could then be closed to allow Platform 4, and indeed also, platform 1 to be extended out to 8x20m length, but the tidying up to make fully conflict free at the Piccadilly end would be a very nice start if it included proper re-signalling and an extension of Platform 1, if Platform 6 could come into use, then the current infrastructure at Piccadilly could be used in it's current form by sending services in from the sidings at Longsight in the PM peak and terminating them at Oxford Road in the AM peak, toward/from Liverpool and Bolton.

• Option 2 (see Figure 5.8)
- Platforms 15 & 16 at Manchester Piccadilly
- Improved headways at Manchester Victoria
- Manchester Victoria western bay platforms
- Improved passenger environment at Manchester
Victoria station
- Ordsall Chord
- Marple linespeed improvements
- Four track Broad Green - Huyton
- Oxford Road platform and signalling improvements
- Chinley loops
- Grindleford loops
- Dore Jn redoubling
- Four track Marsden – Diggle
- Dewsbury Up Loop
- Signalling headway improvements on the Chat
Moss route at Astley
- Chat Moss route linespeed improvements
- Manchester Airport additional platform
- Rochdale bay platform
 
Last edited:

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
The Northern Hub technical study says nothing about rebuilding Oxford Road or the viaduct connecting it to Piccadilly, certainly nothing about additional tracks there. "Option 2" refers to '36hr possessions to remodel track layout' at MCO, that's all. As has previously been mentioned there is no need to do this because of the short distance between the stations. Resignalling to allow a train to leave one station while another is in the platform at the other end will reduce the intervals from 4 minutes to 3 minutes, giving a significant increase in capacity.

Why do you have a problem in accepting that people have been working on this for over a decade ;))) and are much better equipped than you or I to assess whether it is feasible?

You could try reading the study doc for starters...
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/6485_ManchesterHubRailStudy.pdf



Snail - I think the post below yours/above this, shows you why I'm very dubious about the proposals to build new platforms at Manchester Picadilly.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,473
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
I'd love to see how many buildings would need flattening or modifying to allow 4 track between MAN and MCO. Best we can hope for is a re-build of Oxford Road to cut off Platform 5 and provide longer, conflict free through platforms for 4x20m and 8x20m services on each line, ie. one long and one short per direction. (This can be done within the current viaducting)

I am writing this from my hospital bed on my wife's lap top. With regard to platform 5 at Manchester Oxford Road, as stated above, any through running from that area would not be feasible, as the existing bridge carrying the railway over Oxford Road, is virtually flush again the Palace Hotel (the former Refuge Assurance building). My thought capacity is still not totally clear, so I may have misunderstood the raison d'etre of your proposals above.

Happily, after being in hospital for six days on a Stroke Ward, after suffering from a mild T I A last Thursday, I will be returning home later today.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
5,661
It's never going to happen. Cities are more important than their servants, the trains - and it would involve too much demolition, old and new - housing, hotels, education, offices - forget it.

Congrats on your recovery.
 

snail

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2011
Messages
1,912
Location
t'North
With regard to platform 5 at Manchester Oxford Road, as stated above, any through running from that area would not be feasible, as the existing bridge carrying the railway over Oxford Road, is virtually flush again the Palace Hotel (the former Refuge Assurance building).
'Redevelopment of the Platform 5 area' is one of the Hub provisions. Whether this means taking out the platform altogether, allowing P4 to be extended into the junction, I don't know, but there have been proposals to use the area vacated by Cornerhouse for development. Cinema 1 backs on to Platform 5.

PS Good to know you are recovering. Keep up the good work. :)

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Snail - I think the post below yours/above this, shows you why I'm very dubious about the proposals to build new platforms at Manchester Picadilly.
But you are claiming there is no space to build them. That is very different from Nym's assertions that Oxford Road hasn't adequate capacity to feed trains into the new Piccadilly platforms.
 
Last edited:

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,728
Im not sure why people seem to think this is impossible to do, like many have said, the plans are already pretty advanced from what I have been told. Oxford Road just appears to be a slewing/shifting of the tracks and binning the bay platform and two new platforms on the other side of 13 and 14 at Picc.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,795
Location
Somewhere, not in London
I am writing this from my hospital bed on my wife's lap top. With regard to platform 5 at Manchester Oxford Road, as stated above, any through running from that area would not be feasible, as the existing bridge carrying the railway over Oxford Road, is virtually flush again the Palace Hotel (the former Refuge Assurance building). My thought capacity is still not totally clear, so I may have misunderstood the raison d'etre of your proposals above.

Happily, after being in hospital for six days on a Stroke Ward, after suffering from a mild T I A last Thursday, I will be returning home later today.

The increase in capacity from "Platform 5" based works at Oxford Road would take two potential forms:

1) Bring Platform 6 back into use and have two terminating bay platforms, this would allow two or more AM peak services to terminate in these platforms, where terminating capacity is not available at Piccadilly due to crossing movements across the slow lines, in the PM peak, these services would run from the Goods Loop sidings or the sidings at Longsight Manchester International Depot.

2) Remove Platform 5 and extend Platform 4, this would increase capacity by allowing longer services to use Platform 4 at Oxford Road, with the impending arrival of 4x20m stock for services using these routes, it would be rather sensible to have provision for 8x20m at Oxford Road, that is, and will continue to be available at Piccadilly for significantly longer services to run, as in the peaks currently 6x23m services cannot cope, so 4x20m services have no chance.

Regardless of the option carried out above, I believe that Platform 1 should be extended to the same length as Platform 4, as re-signalling work is being carried out anyway, the interlocking and working components boxes currently housed at the end of Platform 1 can be moved further West, past the bridge towards Deansgate, giving enough space for an 8x20m platform at a push.

Either option would also include a change to track layout at the Piccadilly end to remove all conflicting moves by nibbling into and shortening Platforms 2 and 3 down to 4x20m to allow conflict free movement from any platform in any direction, regardless of occupancy.

Hope that clears it up and glad you're recovering from your TIA.

Why would you think a tiny surface car park on Travis St is a hindrance?

I'd think that the Piccadilly Primary 132kV sub station would pose more of a hindrance than some green space, a taxi queuing area and Travis St car park, in deed, this area, one platforms are in place, should be developed into an additional entrance, with passive provision for an HS2 station in the Baring St Ind. Estate.

Either way, a new walkway from the main concourse Costa (the glassy bit) over to the new platform areas, that is nice and wide to accomadate HS2 passengers later on should be built as part of the new platform development, and include a better entrance flow to Platforms 13 - 16.

Im not sure why people seem to think this is impossible to do, like many have said, the plans are already pretty advanced from what I have been told. Oxford Road just appears to be a slewing/shifting of the tracks and binning the bay platform and two new platforms on the other side of 13 and 14 at Picc.

Yes, and thanks.

PS: The new platforms at Piccadilly will be shorter than the existing ones at 200m, according to the initial hub study, so there goes any plans for pendos running to Scotland via Manchester from Euston, the plans may change to have 265.3m long platforms before plans are confirmed, indeed if there is space, I'd rather see that, but anything calling at Oxford Road will be limited to 160m.
 

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
It's never going to happen. Cities are more important than their servants, the trains - and it would involve too much demolition, old and new - housing, hotels, education, offices - forget it.

Congrats on your recovery.

This is also worth keeping in mind. I doubt any of the "big hitters" in Manchester would allow a single brick to be removed for public transport.
 
Joined
13 Apr 2011
Messages
649
Location
Helsby
I am writing this from my hospital bed on my wife's lap top. With regard to platform 5 at Manchester Oxford Road, as stated above, any through running from that area would not be feasible, as the existing bridge carrying the railway over Oxford Road, is virtually flush again the Palace Hotel (the former Refuge Assurance building). My thought capacity is still not totally clear, so I may have misunderstood the raison d'etre of your proposals above.

Happily, after being in hospital for six days on a Stroke Ward, after suffering from a mild T I A last Thursday, I will be returning home later today.


Get well soon.
 

scrapy

Established Member
Joined
15 Dec 2008
Messages
2,313
Has any consideration been given to replacing both Oxford Rd and Deansgate with a single station located between the two?

It could be built on the viaduct between Gloucester St and Albion St, with a second viaduct built to the south with two additional platforms.The site would provide straight platforms in excess of 250m.Entrances could be provided at each end (similar to London Blackfriars) so the two markets served by Oxford Rd and Deansgate stations would still be served,with a footbridge to Deansgate Castlefield Metrolink at the West end, At the East end the current Oxford Rd station buildings, platform 5 area, station approach and Cornerhouse site could be redeveloped to provide bus interchange facilities and retail (keeping Oxford Rd's listed buildings.

It may not be the cheapest option, but may be cheaper in the long run if it is decided in 10/20 years time Oxford Rds platforms aren't long enough. With the demoliton of the platforms at Deansgate you may then be able to 4 track through if the need arises in the future.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Not as far as I know, theres a Manchester Council plan to build a couple more high rises near Deansgate and expand the Metrolink station to serve them with a station canopy and third platform, subject to the development going ahead.
 

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
This is probably worth another thread, but the thought of a combined 3-platform Deansgate Metrolink and combined Deansgate/Oxford Road station is making my heart flutter.....
 

snail

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2011
Messages
1,912
Location
t'North
It could be built on the viaduct between Gloucester St and Albion St
The new arts centre to replace the Cornerhouse (opposite One First Street) will be extended back to use the arches under the railway, so no.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,795
Location
Somewhere, not in London
The thing is, if we're building a new station in the car park of that new development that's just been thrown up, then why would we want something as simple as a four platform station, why don't we go all out and have a multi phase development to put in 260m long platforms to mirror those at Piccadilly, and place in extensive terminating facilities, combined with grade seperation at Ordsall Lane Junction.

I'm thinking of an 8 platform Network Rail station, two through platforms on the North and South sides each at 260m to be completed after a central core of four 180m long platforms to be built first, and used as terminating platforms with permissive working to allow two 80m units to terminate and/or split in the same platform.

This would then be combined with Metrolink platforms in two places, one set in roughly the same place as they are now, but slewed slightly further northbound, so all though services call there, and within the new "Whitworth Street" station complex, four additional Metrolink platforms of 8 car length to take longer services and tram trains on the Alty and Stockport lines that would be running as through services to Chester/Middlewich/Northwich/Crewe and Stockport/Hazel Grove/Chinley/Buxton respectively. Taking pressure off Piccadilly by running services via that route, and of course, providing intergrated ticketing with National Rail services and four tracking the viaduct between Cornbrook and Deansgate, services would then run under two TOCs, one operating the traditional all shacks metrolink services through 1CC and 2CC, and possibly 3CC (Direct route to Piccadily via Whitworth Street) and a 2nd TOC running the longer services out on the Mid Cheshire Line, towards and beyond Hazel Grove via Stockport (Pure metrolink services would run at 5tph to Stockport's current station and bus station with on street running while other services would continue to Hazel Grove independantly of this and continue from there to Buxton and/or Chinley, using the Freight lines to Hazel Grove, and then Diesel Tram/Train running to Chinley and Buxton)

So the Metrolink Long Distance Operator services that would be running from Oxford Road would look like 2tph Crewe via Middlewich and Sandbatch, 2tph Chester/Northwich via Alty, 2tph Chinley, 2tph Buxton. The 3CC link would run on a viaduct from these new platforms at high level until Whitworth Street on the other side of Oxford Road, then onto surface with a station at Princess Road, and then down onto Piccadilly Low Level with it's own new platforms, 50tph would run on Metrolink through the city with 20tph on the current link, and 15tph on the current 2CC, 25tph would be running between Deansgate and Victoria, 15 on 2CC and 10 on 1CC, the remaining 10 on 1CC would run to Piccadilly and 10tph would run on 1CC between Piccadilly and Victoria, 3CC would take the remaining 15tph off the Metrolink City routes, the 50tph would be divvied up to provide 10tph Alty (passing loops for the other 4tph put in place, leave the current network before Navvy Rd to use the NR platforms), 5tph Media City, 5tph Eccles, 10tph East Didsbury with 5tph extended to Stockport (again, passing loops), 10tph would run to Manchester Airport with the remaining 10tph running to Port Salford, with a later extention to Leigh.

1CC and 2CC services would use one pair of lines on the viaduct placing 35tph on that route with 3CC and TT services using the other, giving that pair of lines 23tph to deal with, paired of course by use and all handled back at Cornbrook.

The Metrolink network would then be changed and intergrated with a GM TTW Tube Map style network..

Enough fantasy yet?
 

snail

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2011
Messages
1,912
Location
t'North
The thing is, if we're building a new station in the car park of that new development that's just been thrown up, then why would we want something as simple as a four platform station, why don't we go all out and have a multi phase development
Simple. There is no money. Don't you think we have done well to get the Northern Hub funded in full?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top