Campaign to restore passenger services on the Middlewich Link Line

[Kettledrum]

The more work that might have to be done to accommodate Middlewich trains, the less chance there is of a passenger service on the Middlewich line. Best solution sounds like making ant new Middlewich service use platform 1 at Crewe and have a quick turnaround.

I did wonder if any new Middlewich trains could go beyond Crewe to serve Stoke on Trent as well?

 

[childwallblues]

? Do you mean islands? as in through track on both sides, or do you bays, as in dead end platforms?

Anyhow, a bay on the back of P5 at the north end would have a usable length of about 1m, unless you're also planning to seriously modify the Crewe Arms car park and associated retaining wall.

HS2 consultation docs suggest that the Chester Independent(s) and Up Manchester Independent would be heavily realigned to accommodate a very short curved island between the Dn Manc Ind and Up Manc Ind. This would imply that Salop Goods Jn gets relayed, so possibly resignalled too.

? Do you mean islands? as in through track on both sides, or do you bays, as in dead end platforms?

Anyhow, a bay on the back of P5 at the north end would have a usable length of about 1m, unless you're also planning to seriously modify the Crewe Arms car park and associated retaining wall.

HS2 consultation docs suggest that the Chester Independent(s) and Up Manchester Independent would be heavily realigned to accommodate a very short curved island between the Dn Manc Ind and Up Manc Ind. This would imply that Salop Goods Jn gets relayed, so possibly resignalled too.

Sorry should have said bay platforms.

 

[no commute yet]

The more work that might have to be done to accommodate Middlewich trains, the less chance there is of a passenger service on the Middlewich line. Best solution sounds like making ant new Middlewich service use platform 1 at Crewe and have a quick turnaround.

Yes, for trains to run asap the project should probably be kept to basics. The track is there so just a platform with shelter each needed for Gadbrook and Middlewich. Is there any reason the May 2018 new service to Greenbank couldn’t split at Northwich and part of it run via Middlewich to Crewe, returning to link back up again at Northwich for Manchester?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Yes, for trains to run asap the project should probably be kept to basics. The track is there so just a platform with shelter each needed for Gadbrook and Middlewich. Is there any reason the May 2018 new service to Greenbank couldn’t split at Northwich and part of it run via Middlewich to Crewe, returning to link back up again at Northwich for Manchester?

Are you saying that the new service to Greenbank was less or more than originally envisaged in terms of seat capacity in the full route to Greenbank, so it does not matter if that service was split at Northwich. What is the planned type and number of units scheduled for that new Greenbank service?

 

[no commute yet]

Are you saying that the new service to Greenbank was less or more than originally envisaged in terms of seat capacity in the full route to Greenbank, so it does not matter if that service was split at Northwich. What is the planned type and number of units scheduled for that new Greenbank service?

Good point - the school run to/from Greenbank definitely needs 4 cars and so do the rush hour services in to/from Manchester. Can the Mid Cheshire platforms handle more than 4 cars?

If splitting won't work then perhaps the Greenbank service can be timed not to wait in the siding at Winnington and could run down to Crewe and back to Winnington before returning to Manchester as planned?

 

[LOL The Irony]

Can the Mid Cheshire platforms handle more than 4 cars?

Knutsford & Northwich could handle 5. Alty could handle 6 at an extreme stretch.

 

[QueensCurve]

I hadn't realised just how much work Crewe station needs to get it sorted out. I'm sure when I did my work experience from school at Crewe station in the early 1980's, the local trains from Sandbach terminated in bay platforms - these are now platforms 9 and 10.

There were also express trains using the unused platform next to platform 12, and lots of trains crossed the paths of the other lines to get to their allocated platform. Since then many of the cross overs have been removed, and the tracks "simplified"

The footprint of the site is big enough, but the platforms don't give the flexibility to enable much expansion of the current network.

The 1980s remodelling removed a lot of flexibility in order to allow trains to pass through at 80 (?) mph as opposed to the previous 20 (?) mph limit.

Before the 1985 remodelling the current platform 6 and 11 island was 3 and 4. There was a bay at the North end 3a and 4a which were used by the Liverpool stoppers and Manchester stoppers respectively.

The present Platform 12 was Platform 2 with 1 on the opposite face. Down trains on the main line used 1, 2 or 3. Up trains used 4,5 or 6.

Only Platform 5 retained its original number and the present Platform 1 was 6.

I didn't know how deep the cutting for the Independent lines was but it explains why you cant see them from the old P1.

The current layout was seen as all that was required, but some speeds remain slow: 20mph still being the exit speed from most platforms. This applies over a long distance in the case of down trains off Platform 11 or using one of the two routes off P6. A handful of Xover speeds being increased could help a lot. There must have been a lot of energy wasted over the last 32y.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

The current layout was seen as all that was required, but some speeds remain slow: 20mph still being the exit speed from most platforms. This applies over a long distance in the case of down trains off Platform 11 or using one of the two routes off P6. A handful of Xover speeds being increased could help a lot. There must have been a lot of energy wasted over the last 32y.

The low North Junction speeds are a result of trying to keep a connection to Manchester from P6 and the South Junction from trying to retain the Potteries to P11 / Chester route. The very south end crossovers have flashing aspects for the approach from Basford but these were disabled post-Colwich.

The whole thing is a half-bodged layout built round a timetable created to meet falling demand. It is not fit for purpose.

 

[northwichcat]

Knutsford & Northwich could handle 5. Alty could handle 6 at an extreme stretch.

Knutsford and Northwich can handle 6 x 20. Altrincham and Navigation Road can handle 8 x 20. However, the longest some of the village stations can only manage is a 150+156 (or equivalent.)

 

[northwichcat]

The Northwich transport strategy consultation closes on 31st December. Returning services to Crewe via Middlewich and Sandbach and putting a station at Gadbrook are among the options being consulted on. The survey can be found on the Cheshire West Council web site.

Reminder that is today.

Also of note the survey recommends the possibly of an interchange station at 'Hartford North' is examined. I can see the DfT working group (as mentioned earlier) seeing that as a cheaper better option than reopening the Middlewich branch unless there is very strong evidence that Middlewich and Gadbrook need stations for the line to be reopened to passenger traffic. A lot of the strong BCR figure for the Middlewich branch is based on Knutsford having high usage and high demand for long distance travel but if there's a half-hourly service to Hartford North from Knutsford and a half-hourly service from Hartford North to Birmingham via Crewe that'll weaken the BCR for an hourly service on the Middlewich branch.

 

[QueensCurve]

I did wonder if any new Middlewich trains could go beyond Crewe to serve Stoke on Trent as well?[/QUOTE]

That might be a way of avoiding the need to terminate or cross the formation.

The low North Junction speeds are a result of trying to keep a connection to Manchester from P6 and the South Junction from trying to retain the Potteries to P11 / Chester route.

Thank you for the background to that. More frustrating to my perspective is the low speed of the Down Slow to Down Fast turnout used by trains leaving P11. Worse still is when it is used to route trains off P6 where they accelerate to a fair speed and then have to brake down to 20mph. If that could be increased to 60mph it would be much more efficient.

The very south end crossovers have flashing aspects for the approach from Basford but these were disabled post-Colwich.

That presumably is the 60mph Ladder crossing connecting the fast and slow lines. Does the lack of flashing yellows limit the speeds achievable?

The whole thing is a half-bodged layout built round a timetable created to meet falling demand. It is not fit for purpose.

Out of interest, how would you change it?

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Also of note the survey recommends the possibly of an interchange station at 'Hartford North' is examined. I can see the DfT working group (as mentioned earlier) seeing that as a cheaper better option than reopening the Middlewich branch unless there is very strong evidence that Middlewich and Gadbrook need stations for the line to be reopened to passenger traffic. A lot of the strong BCR figure for the Middlewich branch is based on Knutsford having high usage and high demand for long distance travel but if there's a half-hourly service to Hartford North from Knutsford and a half-hourly service from Hartford North to Birmingham via Crewe that'll weaken the BCR for an hourly service on the Middlewich branch.

The problem with "Hartford North" is the track layout - the slow lines on the WCML are not both on the outside.

That presumably is the 60mph Ladder crossing connecting the fast and slow lines. Does the lack of flashing yellows limit the speeds achievable?

Yes, because now they are approach controlled, meaning any train using them has to pretty much stop.

Out of interest, how would you change it?

Personally, I would try and get the SW - NE crossing services (all Cardiff - Manchester, & v/v, down direction London-Manchester and down direction HS2 to Manchester) away from the conflicts by creating grade separation at North Junction. Whilst I was there I'd consider moving the Manchester terminators out of P1 either by connecting them to Stoke and Derby terminators or use my new grade separation to put them on the west side and consider connecting them up to Shrewsbury terminators. The only conflict left is then the Up Chester to London and any service terminating from Stafford direction; these latter could be sent further north (say to Liverpool) if the HS2 services to Liverpool rejoined HS2 north of Crewe.

This removes most of the S&C at Crewe, allowing what little there is to be 70mph (I'd leave the 80mph restriction and the roof - it's nice) and free of any kind of approach controls.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I vaguely remember reading details of a shuttle service from Greenbank to Acton Bridge that connected the CLC to the LMS that closed over 70 years ago, which passed through Northwich, Middlewich and Sandbach. It was locally known as "The Dodger".

 

[Joseph_Locke]

I vaguely remember reading details of a shuttle service from Greenbank to Acton Bridge that connected the CLC to the LMS that closed over 70 years ago, which passed through Northwich, Middlewich and Sandbach. It was locally known as "The Dodger".

http://middlewichdiary.com/2017/05/the-dodger-at-crewe-1955.html

 

[Joseph_Locke]

http://middlewichdiary.com/2017/05/the-dodger-at-crewe-1955.html

via Acton Bridge would have required a reversal at Crewe and Acton Bridge?

EDIT - at Northwich in fact, just read the article!

 

[QueensCurve]

Yes, because now they are approach controlled, meaning any train using them has to pretty much stop.

Approach controlled from Red? If so that presumably explains why they are not used more often by passenger trains?

Would the criteria not allow a more relaxed approach control?

The problem with "Hartford North" is the track layout - the slow lines on the WCML are not both on the outside.

If space were made to move the down fast further west an island platform could perhaps be placed between the Down Fast and Down Slow?

Personally, I would try and get the SW - NE crossing services (all Cardiff - Manchester, & v/v, down direction London-Manchester and down direction HS2 to Manchester) away from the conflicts by creating grade separation at North Junction. Whilst I was there I'd consider moving the Manchester terminators out of P1 either by connecting them to Stoke and Derby terminators or use my new grade separation to put them on the west side and consider connecting them up to Shrewsbury terminators. The only conflict left is then the Up Chester to London and any service terminating from Stafford direction; these latter could be sent further north (say to Liverpool) if the HS2 services to Liverpool rejoined HS2 north of Crewe.

Thank you for that. It is very informative.

This removes most of the S&C at Crewe, allowing what little there is to be 70mph (I'd leave the 80mph restriction and the roof - it's nice) and free of any kind of approach controls.

That would be great.

 

[no commute yet]

What are the reasons passenger services aren't running via Middlewich yet? We know it's not paths in to Manchester, availability of land or the state of the track and it isn't any longer the availability of trains.

 

[Altfish]

What are the reasons passenger services aren't running via Middlewich yet? We know it's not paths in to Manchester, availability of land or the state of the track and it isn't any longer the availability of trains.

£££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££

 

[SeanM1997]

Surely the easiest solution would be to reroute the Manchester Piccadilly to Greenbank stopping service from Northwich to Middlewich, Sandbach and Crewe. A new platform is going to be built on the Manchester independent lines (potentially used for Manchester - Cardiff services), and this could allow a service to be extended to Shrewsbury calling at all stations (replacing the two-hourly Crewe to Shrewsbury stopping) - bringing better cross Cheshire connectivity, and an hourly service to all stations on the line

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Surely the easiest solution would be to reroute the Manchester Piccadilly to Greenbank stopping service from Northwich to Middlewich, Sandbach and Crewe. A new platform is going to be built on the Manchester independent lines (potentially used for Manchester - Cardiff services), and this could allow a service to be extended to Shrewsbury calling at all stations (replacing the two-hourly Crewe to Shrewsbury stopping) - bringing better cross Cheshire connectivity, and an hourly service to all stations on the line

Have you had sight of posting # 395 made by no connect yet where the matter of the new service serving Greenbank was discussed.

 

[no commute yet]

£££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££££

It can't be though -The Government/DfT is saying 'let's look at re-opening Beeching lines/let's make travel efficient in City Regions and then finds billions for London Bridge/HS2/Birmingham New St etc, etc. Stations for Gadbrook and Middlewich will cost pennies is comparison. I think money is just the last in the long list of excuses for inaction.

Maybe I should put my question another way: now there don't appear to be any reasons why passenger trains can't/shouldn't return to this line how is the return made to happen?

 

[Altfish]

It can't be though -The Government/DfT is saying 'let's look at re-opening Beeching lines/let's make travel efficient in City Regions and then finds billions for London Bridge/HS2/Birmingham New St etc, etc. Stations for Gadbrook and Middlewich will cost pennies is comparison. I think money is just the last in the long list of excuses for inaction.

Maybe I should put my question another way: now there don't appear to be any reasons why passenger trains can't/shouldn't return to this line how is the return made to happen?

Well, yes, I agree.
But look at the Government's 're-opening' statement. Then look for the money attached to it...no, I can't see it either, because there is none.

 

[no commute yet]

Well, yes, I agree.
But look at the Government's 're-opening' statement. Then look for the money attached to it...no, I can't see it either, because there is none.

Ok but let’s suppose that, having lost 2 of their 6 MPs along our route at the last election, the government decides they don’t want to lose any more and finds some money (by, for example, using cheaper light fittings at Kings Cross). If there’s the money how do you get your project implemented? I’m serous but I’m starting to wonder whether the system is so broken that there is no process or, if there is a process, that no one actually knows what it is.

 

[Jack Hay]

The cost that's being overlooked is the need to re-open Platform 3 at Northwich, or put in new connections at the west end of Northwich station to enable Middlewich trains to use P1 or P2. Although re-opening P3 looks like simple a case of removing rhe fence, the resulting island platform is narrow and some say it would not meet present standards. It also lacks step-free access which would be an embarrassment for a new service. The stations proposed at Gadbrook Park and Middlewich should be cheap because both will be single-platforms with no expensive access arrangements. Regarding the business case, a lot of the immediate benefit comes from improving access to Gadbrook Park. The other benefits are access to Crewe from the Mid Cheshire towns and reduced congestion in Middlewich.

 

[northwichcat]

The cost that's being overlooked is the need to re-open Platform 3 at Northwich, or put in new connections at the west end of Northwich station to enable Middlewich trains to use P1 or P2. Although re-opening P3 looks like simple a case of removing rhe fence, the resulting island platform is narrow and some say it would not meet present standards. It also lacks step-free access which would be an embarrassment for a new service. The stations proposed at Gadbrook Park and Middlewich should be cheap because both will be single-platforms with no expensive access arrangements. Regarding the business case, a lot of the immediate benefit comes from improving access to Gadbrook Park. The other benefits are access to Crewe from the Mid Cheshire towns and reduced congestion in Middlewich.

There's no reason why Northwich shouldn't get the platform heights adjusted (by putting a 'hump' along the whole of the platform like has been done at some Greater Manchester stations) or get a new footbridge with lifts like has been done at Altrincham station (and others) regardless of whether the Middlewich branch reopens to passengers. The railways are supposed to be improving accessibility but there's a lack of evidence of that at most stations in Cheshire. Given the barrow crossing is considered out-of-bounds unless passengers are accompanied by a staff member I'd suggest a new footbridge with lifts must be installed, unless Northern staff the station from first to last train every day.

 

[Altfish]

Ok but let’s suppose that, having lost 2 of their 6 MPs along our route at the last election, the government decides they don’t want to lose any more and finds some money (by, for example, using cheaper light fittings at Kings Cross). If there’s the money how do you get your project implemented? I’m serous but I’m starting to wonder whether the system is so broken that there is no process or, if there is a process, that no one actually knows what it is.

I suspect the Government is hoping for 'contributions' from business to help fund the new lines.

 

[LOL The Irony]

I suspect the Government is hoping for 'contributions' from business to help fund the new lines.

It wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There's no reason why Northwich shouldn't get the platform heights adjusted (by putting a 'hump' along the whole of the platform like has been done at some Greater Manchester stations) or get a new footbridge with lifts like has been done at Altrincham station (and others) regardless of whether the Middlewich branch reopens to passengers. The railways are supposed to be improving accessibility but there's a lack of evidence of that at most stations in Cheshire. Given the barrow crossing is considered out-of-bounds unless passengers are accompanied by a staff member I'd suggest a new footbridge with lifts must be installed, unless Northern staff the station from first to last train every day.

Have you any information on the total costs involved of the footbridge works associated with the costs of the new lifts at Altrincham station?

 

[Altfish]

Have you any information on the total costs involved of the footbridge works associated with the costs of the new lifts at Altrincham station?

It was part of an overall station improvement tied in with the bus station. So, don't think the footbridge costs were ever separated out.

 

[northwichcat]

It was part of an overall station improvement tied in with the bus station. So, don't think the footbridge costs were ever separated out.

It was also supposed to be linked to a development in the public car park behind platform 4 (not the railway car park) which explains why there's a section of metal fence which could easily be removed, opposed to a proper wall.