-
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!
New fourth platform at Manchester Airport station.
- Thread starter Xenophon PCDGS
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
On 7 Feb last year, when Osborne visited and NR falsely claimed work was starting on platform 4 (it had actually started the previous summer as an add-on to the Metrolink contract), they said in this press release merely that it would open by the end of 2015:
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...-600m-rail-investment-in-the-north-of-england
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...-600m-rail-investment-in-the-north-of-england
Last edited:
Class 170101
On Moderation
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 8,664
CheshireCrusty
Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 99
As noted earlier in this thread passengers to an airport station are less inclined to accept a change of train at an intermediate station. (I recall myself voluntarily extending my Berne to Zurich Airport journey by 90 minutes so as to use a direct but stopping service.) It therefore appears that the part of the heavy congestion on the M56 south of the airport junction (currently being converted for 4th lane running) is being created by airport based staff and passengers using road transport to the airport rather than attempting a rail journey. There therefore does appear to be a real need to provide increased direct services to the airport from places like Chester and North Wales.
I therefore wondered whether the Welsh services could not use the underused Airport south link via Wilmslow - but then the impact on the throat of Crewe station would not bear thinking about if that route was used to reverse to Chester. An alternative would be to reroute the Shrewsbury services via MIA rather than Stockport (although now on a different path they are not creating an additional load between Slade Lane and Piccadilly).
I also wondered what was the current state of play on the discussed link between the Airport and the mid Cheshire line
"in 2009 Network Rail stated that the creation of the third platform has meant that the capacity at Manchester airport will become constrained by the layover of the trains and congestion at the throat. To solve this issue they have recommended building a line underneath the Airport towards Northwich in the 2019 to 2024 period." Quote from Wikipedia entry on Knutsford station
That would seem a sensible alternative linking the airport to Knutsford, Northwich, Chester and onwards. It would also reduce travel times between Knutsford and Manchester Picadilly by avoiding the Deansgate Junction to Stockport section - leaving that route for the proposed tramtrains?
Another similar unserved demand is for a direct service from Stoke on Trent to the Airport - even if only an extension of the (NT) Crewe service (which presently clogs up Platform 1 at Crewe - preventing it being used as through platform). The former (?EMT) hourly service from Derby/Nottingham via Crewe always seemed to carry double digit passenger numbers from MIA (and would have been much more if it had stopped at WML, HCH, & SDB).
I therefore wondered whether the Welsh services could not use the underused Airport south link via Wilmslow - but then the impact on the throat of Crewe station would not bear thinking about if that route was used to reverse to Chester. An alternative would be to reroute the Shrewsbury services via MIA rather than Stockport (although now on a different path they are not creating an additional load between Slade Lane and Piccadilly).
I also wondered what was the current state of play on the discussed link between the Airport and the mid Cheshire line
"in 2009 Network Rail stated that the creation of the third platform has meant that the capacity at Manchester airport will become constrained by the layover of the trains and congestion at the throat. To solve this issue they have recommended building a line underneath the Airport towards Northwich in the 2019 to 2024 period." Quote from Wikipedia entry on Knutsford station
That would seem a sensible alternative linking the airport to Knutsford, Northwich, Chester and onwards. It would also reduce travel times between Knutsford and Manchester Picadilly by avoiding the Deansgate Junction to Stockport section - leaving that route for the proposed tramtrains?
Another similar unserved demand is for a direct service from Stoke on Trent to the Airport - even if only an extension of the (NT) Crewe service (which presently clogs up Platform 1 at Crewe - preventing it being used as through platform). The former (?EMT) hourly service from Derby/Nottingham via Crewe always seemed to carry double digit passenger numbers from MIA (and would have been much more if it had stopped at WML, HCH, & SDB).
Last edited:
It has recently been claimed on Skyscrapercity that plans to extend the airport line under the apron and connect with the mid-Cheshire line have been dropped -or at least no longer form part of the airport's development plan - because HS2 interferes with the proposed route.
However I don't understand that because I would have thought that, if such interference occurs, it would be easy to amend the route of the airport line extension to remain to the south of HS2, possibly running alongside it for a stretch.
However I don't understand that because I would have thought that, if such interference occurs, it would be easy to amend the route of the airport line extension to remain to the south of HS2, possibly running alongside it for a stretch.
Last edited:
CheshireCrusty
Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 99
I agree with you - probably the real reason is that the most sensible routing would run under/through the Airport City site - however one of the major problems with that scheme is that the only transport links currently being planned are the extension of some local bus services. While an extended Metrolink might increase usage of the Wythenshawe line to more acceptable levels, it would still not meet the demand for travel from its main employment catchment area of Knutsford, (George Osborne's constutency), Northwich, Warrington, Chester and Wrexham. I would suggest that the Airport to mid Cheshire link could reasonably have an additional stop at Airport City thereby providing heavy rail links to employment catchment areas and also a fast service to Manchester City Centre. (much more effective than an HS2 station a mile away).
northwichcat
Veteran Member
I don't understand that either.
It wasn't part of the Airport's development plan. It was originally proposed by Cheshire County Council and Network Rail warmed to the idea when they realised they'd needed to come up with ideas to reduce the amount of congestion around Manchester. It's not the Airport who would submit a planning application to Cheshire East council for a new rail line either, that's Network Rail's job.
However, planning permission for the second runway was conditional on the airport striving to maximise the proportion of staff and passengers who use public transport for their ground journeys to and from the airport, and the airport did produce a Ground Transport Strategy:
http://www.manchesterairport.co.uk/manweb.nsf/Content/StrategyDocuments
http://www.manchesterairport.co.uk/manweb.nsf/Content/StrategyDocuments
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 19,728
Was it a FoI request though? different thing to just asking them what the score is.
Joseph_Locke
Established Member
And the extension of the Airport Branch to the west (codenamed "The Western Link" to avoid detection) is different from the western half of the Wythenshaw Loop on the tramway.
I concur that the first one, whilst supported by MAG, isn't theirs, but there again neither is the Wythenshaw Loop. That said, both westward extensions are being safegaurded by the Airport's planners, as far as they can.
As to HS2, that conflicts with everything anyway, including the new A556(M) alignment ...
No such thing. The new alignment is just the A556.
CheshireCrusty
Member
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 99
What I was referring to was the World Logistics Hub part of the Airport City plan. The logistics hub development which is currently the most obvious part of the Airport City development with the first building now occupied by DHL and is on land south of the A538 between the M56 and the Airport tunnels. It is that part of the plan that appears to be on the most obvious route for a rail link between the existing airport station and the Mid Cheshire Line. There are details and outline maps available at http://www.airportcity.co.uk/masterplan/
I was therefore probably incorrect to suggest that the majority of the employees in the Airport City development would benefit from a new station on a mid Cheshire link. Instead they will have fairly good access to the existing Airport Station (but not to the proposed HS2 station). Assuming those employees are drawn from the same catchment area as the Airport employees in 2006, about a third would benefit from a rail link to the Mid Cheshire Line and are likely to have a greater preference for rail over car transport as more likely to work regular business hours.
I would also suggest that a the proposed link could also provide rail freight access to the Logistics Hub, but that doesn't seem to figure in the discussions.
Last edited:
northwichcat
Veteran Member
While an extension of the Airport spur would provide improvements to local services, improvements to regional services need to be identified first. Being able to provide a regular North Wales-Airport service would be a good primary objective. An improved journey time from Northwich to Manchester would be a secondary objective.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It also says it was delivered early and was due to the delivered in December 2016, when the next Manchester area recast was due before Ordsall Chord and electrification delays.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It also says it was delivered early and was due to the delivered in December 2016, when the next Manchester area recast was due before Ordsall Chord and electrification delays.
Since it would quite likely not be electrified initially there is a good case for making the North Wales and Chester services to Man Airport turn back towards Northwich at the Airport Station. Through running only exceptionally.
Most obvious route is cut and cover construction that curves across the Terminal 2 apron and runs (cut and lightweight cover) close to and parallel to Runway 2. Down the entire length of Runway 2 on existing airport land. That way only a minimum of green fields land need be taken.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
At the moment it's possible that Stockport-Chester will be electrified in CP6: http://www.railnorth.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/EFT_Final_Report_FINAL_web.pdf If that's the case I can't see a new section of line between the Airport and Mobberley not being electrified at the same time as it's built.
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
It will be Self dispatch from The 2nd week in June as well...let the f**k ups begin! (Mainly due to people from Numerous Countries, Not Surprising being an Airport) Distracting the Guard and Driver and taking that one safety step away to save a few quid.
That seems like a very silly move. The indicators are there... use them!
craigybagel
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 5,829
Is that applying just to Northern or to everyone? Tpex withdrawing their staffs dispatch competencies?
NotATrainspott
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,304
It would also help the case for the tunnel that the trains using it would be electrified, since then you don't need to worry as much about ventilation and gradients. Having only diesel services was one of the reasons EARL didn't get off the ground, I believe.
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
Self Dispatch for all TOC's. I don't know anyone who is happy with it. A SPAD waiting to happen.
It seems to be the TPE way at their managed stations (e.g. Huddersfield, Dewsbury, Warrington Central) and they don't take up the option of staff dispatch where it's clearly available at larger stations e.g. York, Doncaster, Darlington. Have the lessons from their Newcastle incident been learned? I take it they're removing the local instruction. I wonder if the same will happen at Oxford Road (which doesn't have it as a local instruction if I'm remembering rightly?).
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
Oxford Road is a Northern Station and viewing Signals is quite a big issue on the Platforms so I can't see Self Dispatch happening there anytime soon.
This claim has now been partially confirmed.
This quote is from the "Land Use" document (one of five draft documents at this link). Other stuff about ground transport, including continued support for the Metrolink western extension, is in the "Economy and surface access" document at the same link.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Whilst all recent off-thread postings are most interesting in their own right, is it now possible for the ACTUAL matter in the thread title to be discussed,,,,,
New Fourth Platform at Manchester Airport
New Fourth Platform at Manchester Airport
northwichcat
Veteran Member
Might be worth pointing out that you've created a thread for future Airport developments: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=116579
I'm aware a number of Councillors are unhappy with their suggestion of dropping the western Airport link and not proposing any other heavy rail investment (other than HS2 and HS3) and will be pushing the Airport for their reasoning for that but Paul's new thread is the best place for discussing that.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Many thanks for your posting. Indeed, some of the contributors to this thread may be unaware of that new thread that I created very recently.
Viscount702
Member
- Joined
- 7 Sep 2011
- Messages
- 336
Back on topic do we actually know if platform 4 is ready for use.
We all thought it was back in February and NR said the work was finished.
However it came to light subsequently in March or April that the emergency stairs were still being installed the station name plates were not all there and there were no **** (PIDs).
Do we know if all this work has been finished and the platform is now ready for use. The Todmorden Curve syndrome comes to mind
We all thought it was back in February and NR said the work was finished.
However it came to light subsequently in March or April that the emergency stairs were still being installed the station name plates were not all there and there were no **** (PIDs).
Do we know if all this work has been finished and the platform is now ready for use. The Todmorden Curve syndrome comes to mind
- Status