Options for 319s

[northwichcat]

For example, as far as I can see, the TSRs do not require through services to Manchester Airport from Southport or Warrington Central.

Warrington Central is a strange one. The minimum spec document doesn't specify a Manchester Airport to Liverpool via Warrington service, yet the consultation response document (which is part of the Northern ITT) does say one will be introduced.

Maybe DfT want bidders to introduce such a service but will accept bids not proposing to introduce one if they can prove it would be too difficult to run such a service e.g. if the only path they can find for an Airport to Liverpool service interworking with Norwich to Liverpool involves a 10 minute dwell time somewhere then the bidder could argue there's a lack of real benefits for offering a through service.

Nor do they require that all the services on the Northwich/Chester, New Mills Newtown/Buxton and Rose Hill Marple via Hyde North lines run into Piccadilly - some could go to Victoria via Denton or Guide Bridge.

If you're going to propose every single option which isn't 'ruled out' by the ITT then you're going to come up with hundreds or thousands of proposals which no bidder would give serious consideration to.

In theory the minimum service spec doesn't rule out Levenshulme-Manchester requirements being met by a Levenshulme-Victoria service. So in theory a Piccadilly-Levenshulme-Stockport-Denton-Victoria service every 15 minutes with no northbound trains stopping at Heaton Chapel and Levenshulme meets the requirements. Do you think any bidder would seriously propose that?

The consultation response document talks about faster journey times to Manchester via Stockport from Chester/Northwich and Buxton/New Mills Newton. Diverting services to Victoria won't achieve that.

?
Using slightly upgraded 319s to Blackpool and Windermere would probably be financially advantageous

Proposing 'slightly upgraded' 319s should result in the bid being rejected. Blackpool and Windermere services need to be operated by 'Regional Express' trains which must have 2+2 seating, fixed or folded tables at 90% of seats, plug sockets, air conditioning and an accessible toilet with baby changing facilities. The rumoured 350/4s aren't far off meeting that requirement, the 319s are a long way from meeting that requirement.

 

[edwin_m]

Linking 1tph on the Atherton line with a Rose Hill Marple service via Victoria and Guide Bridge is another possible option. 1tph from Wigan to Manchester via Bolton could start from Wigan North Western and be a 319.

While I agree with most of your post I think this part is unlikely. Such a train would have to cross five of the six tracks between Piccadilly and Ardwick, and this type of move is exactly what the Northern Hub was trying to avoid because it potentially removes on path on each of the intervening four tracks.

The Glossop/Hyde/Marple services are likely to remain as now, terminating in the low-numbered platforms at Piccadilly, unless converted to tram-train.

 

[northwichcat]

1tph from Wigan to Manchester via Bolton could start from Wigan North Western and be a 319.

As discussed in the Northern ITT thread:

26 services per day from Stalybridge must go to Salford Crescent

60 services from Manchester to Salford Central shall also call at each of Salford Crescent, Bolton and Wigan.

34 services per day must call at Westhoughton, so 26 services per day between Bolton and Wigan can omit that call.

So it's likely they'll be 26 services per day from Stalybridge to Wigan (and back) calling at Ashton-under-Lyne, Victoria, Salford Central, Salford Crescent, Bolton and Wigan, which could obviously be operated by a 319.

The only stations between Manchester and Preston with a requirement for an Airport service are Bolton and Salford Crescent so it's possible the Airport-Blackpool services could be routed via Bolton and Wigan. In fact with a requirement for 18 Bolton-Airport services per day plus 16 services from Salford Crescent to Stockport including calls at Levenshulme and Heaton Chapel, routing the Blackpool-Airport services that way (except the one overnight service which then comes to 18 services) would tie in nicely with meeting those requirements. Then you need to find 16 'South Manchester' EMU services to extend to Wigan via Bolton to meet the other requirements (including the requirement for 2tph between Stockport and Bolton instead of 1tph.)

 

[Greybeard33]

While I agree with most of your post I think this part is unlikely. Such a train would have to cross five of the six tracks between Piccadilly and Ardwick, and this type of move is exactly what the Northern Hub was trying to avoid because it potentially removes on path on each of the intervening four tracks.

The Glossop/Hyde/Marple services are likely to remain as now, terminating in the low-numbered platforms at Piccadilly, unless converted to tram-train.

Yes, there will be no through trains across Piccadilly throat post Northern Hub. What I was trying to suggest was that some of Rose Hill Marple/New Mills Central diesel services could run into Victoria from Ashburys, using the Philips Park line, instead of Piccadilly. From Victoria they could form some of the diesel services to Southport/Kirkby via Salford Central, Atherton and Wigan Wallgate.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As discussed in the Northern ITT thread:

26 services per day from Stalybridge must go to Salford Crescent

60 services from Manchester to Salford Central shall also call at each of Salford Crescent, Bolton and Wigan.

34 services per day must call at Westhoughton, so 26 services per day between Bolton and Wigan can omit that call.

So it's likely they'll be 26 services per day from Stalybridge to Wigan (and back) calling at Ashton-under-Lyne, Victoria, Salford Central, Salford Crescent, Bolton and Wigan, which could obviously be operated by a 319.

The only stations between Manchester and Preston with a requirement for an Airport service are Bolton and Salford Crescent so it's possible the Airport-Blackpool services could be routed via Bolton and Wigan. In fact with a requirement for 18 Bolton-Airport services per day plus 16 services from Salford Crescent to Stockport including calls at Levenshulme and Heaton Chapel, routing the Blackpool-Airport services that way (except the one overnight service which then comes to 18 services) would tie in nicely with meeting those requirements. Then you need to find 16 'South Manchester' EMU services to extend to Wigan via Bolton to meet the other requirements (including the requirement for 2tph between Stockport and Bolton instead of 1tph.)

The Wigan numbers in the TSR do not add up! There are only 86 services per day from Manchester to Wigan, of which 51 are required to go via Atherton. This leaves only 35 that can go via Bolton, which correlates with 34 stopping at Westhoughton. So I think the requirement that "Sixty services departing from Manchester to Salford Central shall also call at each of Salford Crescent, Bolton and Wigan" is erroneous. In the other direction, the converse requirement is that "Sixty-four services departing from Bolton to Manchester shall also call at Salford Crescent", with no mention of Wigan (or Salford Central).

The inter-peak service requirement for Wigan is for 6tph to Manchester, 4tph via Atherton and 2tph via Westhoughton and Bolton. 2tph originate from Southport and 1tph from Kirkby, so these must be diesels via Wallgate. Assuming these 3tph are routed via Atherton, this leaves 1tph diesel via Atherton, which will presumably originate at Wallgate. The 2tph via Bolton can be electric from Wigan North Western. But these services are both required to call at Westhoughton (and in the other direction at Hindley too). So I think it is unlikely that either of them would be the Blackpool to Airport service.

 

[Class83]

Warrington Central is a strange one. The minimum spec document doesn't specify a Manchester Airport to Liverpool via Warrington service, yet the consultation response document (which is part of the Northern ITT) does say one will be introduced.

Maybe DfT want bidders to introduce such a service but will accept bids not proposing to introduce one if they can prove it would be too difficult to run such a service e.g. if the only path they can find for an Airport to Liverpool service interworking with Norwich to Liverpool involves a 10 minute dwell time somewhere then the bidder could argue there's a lack of real benefits for offering a through service.

Isn't this service just going to take the path of the Liverpool-Scarborough service. It then needs to turn around somewhere after Piccadilly so might as well do so at the airport, which in turn removes the need for the Chat Moss airport service allowing the 2nd fast LIV-MCV and possibly an extra stopper.

 

[158756]

Isn't this service just going to take the path of the Liverpool-Scarborough service. It then needs to turn around somewhere after Piccadilly so might as well do so at the airport, which in turn removes the need for the Chat Moss airport service allowing the 2nd fast LIV-MCV and possibly an extra stopper.

It must go to Manchester, which leaves open the possibility of terminating at Oxford Road. Liverpool-Newton-le-Willows-Manchester Airport is required in the new franchise, seemingly as a stopper, with no Chat Moss to Victoria stopping service.

 

[edwin_m]

It must go to Manchester, which leaves open the possibility of terminating at Oxford Road. Liverpool-Newton-le-Willows-Manchester Airport is required in the new franchise, seemingly as a stopper, with no Chat Moss to Victoria stopping service.

Doesn't the bay at Oxford Road disappear under Northern Hub? If so Network Rail won't be at all keen on using a through platform there for a turnback.

 

[WatcherZero]

Yeah bay platform is going