Platform 15 and 16 project at Manchester Piccadilly.

[notlob.divad]

My question 1 is relevant because whilst NPR is theoretically on the table, however unlikely, they won’t want to pay for something NPR will fix (which would also damage the NPR business case)

The cynic in me says this is exactly why NPR was put on the table. Have two projects on the table then you can indefinitely delay work on both whilst considering which is better. As soon as 1 starts to gain some traction, you can bring out an 'improvement' to the one falling behind, and go back into the evaluation loop. It is the same with 'Digital Railway' it is another bit of potential jam tomorrow terminology which that can be conveniently used to avoid facing the fact that nothing is worthwhile is actually being done.

 

[notlob.divad]

The issue with the Chord is that it turns services from the east back to the east. So each Chord service takes up two paths, one into Victoria and the other into Oxford Road, which could otherwise be used for services from the west. That is why it was unwise, IMO, to build the Chord before P15/16.

absolutely 100% correct. Manchester already had a massive problem with a lack of west facing terminal platforms (1: Oxford Road P5). vs a delluge of East/SE facing terminal platforms. (14, 2 Vic plus 12 Pic). This means predominately services from the west have to waste capacity by terminating in a through platform, or run through to a 'west' facing location on the otherside. Every service that utilises the chord further removes capacity for those western services as it uses 2 cross city paths. This is why it would be far better for (particularly long distance TPE) services from the East to go through Victoria and keep heading West, Warrington-Chester/Preston-Blackpool as you are optimising the use of those limited cross Manchester Paths.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This is why it would be far better for (particularly long distance TPE) services from the East to go through Victoria and keep heading West, Warrington-Chester/Preston-Blackpool as you are optimising the use of those limited cross Manchester Paths.

There is a none-so-small matter of what the Newcastle trains in particular coming into the Manchester area tend to have in the way of intending passenger onward travel with large items of luggage and it is not one that can be solved by the use of the Metrolink Victoria to Manchester Airport line. I was amazed early last Saturday morning at Manchester Airport station at the number of the hordes disembarking from such a TPE service with "luggage galore" who were obviously heading off to fly to "warmer climes" at this time of the year.

 

[notlob.divad]

There is a none-so-small matter of what the Newcastle trains in particular coming into the Manchester area tend to have in the way of intending passenger onward travel with large items of luggage and it is not one that can be solved by the use of the Metrolink Victoria to Manchester Airport line. I was amazed early last Saturday morning at Manchester Airport station at the number of the hordes disembarking from such a TPE service with "luggage galore" who were obviously heading off to fly to "warmer climes" at this time of the year.

See my post 885 for your answer to this.

Interestingly if you had been in Munich last Thursday you would have seen me reclaim the proverbial 'large' luggage from the carousel (Borderline Lufthansa weight limit) and together with a second overnight case on the hand luggage limit, Transport it between the terminals and down into the S-Bahn. Then after alighting at Munich East, I successfully navigated the station subway to change trains onto the regional services.
If you had continued to stalk me, you would have seen I was able to make a second rail connection again via a subway onto a branch line. After making both connections with enough luggage to emigrate, let alone 2 weeks of Sun, Sea and Sand: the world did not end. If Munich airport doesn't need a direct connection to every settlement in Bavaria, then Manchester airport certainly doesn't need a direct connection to everywhere in the North.

 

[Bletchleyite]

See my post 885 for your answer to this.

Interestingly if you had been in Munich last Thursday you would have seen me reclaim the proverbial 'large' luggage from the carousel (Borderline Lufthansa weight limit) and together with a second overnight case on the hand luggage limit, Transport it between the terminals and down into the S-Bahn. Then after alighting at Munich East, I successfully navigated the station subway to change trains onto the regional services.
If you had continued to stalk me, you would have seen I was able to make a second rail connection again via a subway onto a branch line. After making both connections with enough luggage to emigrate, let alone 2 weeks of Sun, Sea and Sand: the world did not end. If Munich airport doesn't need a direct connection to every settlement in Bavaria, then Manchester airport certainly doesn't need a direct connection to everywhere in the North.

Wheelie cases really do make this kind of thing a non-issue, provided there are ramps or lifts, which at a major interchange there always are.

 

[Bantamzen]

Good grief, its like Groundhog Day in this thread! Perhaps if we use the chord to serve the real centre of the universe (Milton Keynes) to everywhere in the known universe a few more would be happy...

Or perhaps apply a few tweaks to TPE paths once the new stock arrives, so that services don't snarl up the Castlefield by tipping entire train loads of passengers and suitcases onto busy platforms? And perhaps the same could apply for Northern crew changes in the corridor? Or split the North TP stoppers so they don't trip up the services heading for the airport? Nah, real world solutions won't work so let's tip a growing passenger market on the other side of the city to make their own way, then wonder why they all disappear whilst the M62/60/56 get a little more snarled up....

 

[B&I]

Good grief, its like Groundhog Day in this thread! Perhaps if we use the chord to serve the real centre of the universe (Milton Keynes) to everywhere in the known universe a few more would be happy...

Or perhaps apply a few tweaks to TPE paths once the new stock arrives, so that services don't snarl up the Castlefield by tipping entire train loads of passengers and suitcases onto busy platforms? And perhaps the same could apply for Northern crew changes in the corridor? Or split the North TP stoppers so they don't trip up the services heading for the airport? Nah, real world solutions won't work so let's tip a growing passenger market on the other side of the city to make their own way, then wonder why they all disappear whilst the M62/60/56 get a little more snarled up....

'A little' more snarled up being the operative phrase. The numbers of travellers who benefit from Ringwaymania is tiny, particularly when compared to the numbers who suffer because of said affliction's effects on the reliability of the wider railway network.

 

[Greybeard33]

absolutely 100% correct. Manchester already had a massive problem with a lack of west facing terminal platforms (1: Oxford Road P5). vs a delluge of East/SE facing terminal platforms. (14, 2 Vic plus 12 Pic). This means predominately services from the west have to waste capacity by terminating in a through platform, or run through to a 'west' facing location on the otherside. Every service that utilises the chord further removes capacity for those western services as it uses 2 cross city paths. This is why it would be far better for (particularly long distance TPE) services from the East to go through Victoria and keep heading West, Warrington-Chester/Preston-Blackpool as you are optimising the use of those limited cross Manchester Paths.

Alternatively, as I pointed out in post #1716, it would be possible to reduce congestion in the Castlefield corridor, pending construction of P15/16, by temporarily switching the TPE Airport services back to the Guide Bridge route. This would not deprive anywhere (except Victoria) of its direct services to the Airport.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not so very long ago, people on certain threads stated it was better if incoming services to Manchester Airport were terminated in the terminal platforms of the main train shed at Manchester Piccadilly, as there were both the Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Airport "shuttle" service and the Manchester Piccadilly to Crewe (via the Styal line) service that both terminated in the same terminal platforms of the train shed, which would make the "slight inconvenience" involved in a train change worthwhile.

What do we now have? No "Airport Shuttle" service and the Manchester to Crewe (via the Styal line) service no longer running into the train shed, but now a Liverpool Lime Street-Manchester Piccadilly-Crewe service that uses the congested platform 13 and 14.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Alternatively, as I pointed out in post #1716, it would be possible to reduce congestion in the Castlefield corridor, pending construction of P15/16, by temporarily switching the TPE Airport services back to the Guide Bridge route. This would not deprive anywhere (except Victoria) of its direct services to the Airport.

Manchester Oxford Road station appears to have been forgotten above.

 

[krus_aragon]

Manchester Oxford Road station appears to have been forgotten above.

While it would lose TPE services, there'd still be the TfW ex-Llandudno services at Oxford Road.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

While it would lose TPE services, there'd still be the TfW ex-Llandudno services at Oxford Road.

In any 24 hour period, how many of TfW services are there in comparison to the number of TPE services are there at Manchester Oxford Road?

 

[krus_aragon]

In any 24 hour period, how many of TfW services are there in comparison to the number of TPE services are there at Manchester Oxford Road?

Far fewer, but it would not be deprived of (all of) its services to the Airport, as I believe Victoria would under such a scheme.

 

[Tomnick]

There’s not many TfW services perhaps, but there’s plenty of Northern services that are far better suited to a local journey like that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Which were the bodies that were originally instrumental in both conceiving the idea of the Ordsall Chord project and the actual construction of it and what were the cited reasons for doing so?

 

[PR1Berske]

See my post 885 for your answer to this.

Interestingly if you had been in Munich last Thursday you would have seen me reclaim the proverbial 'large' luggage from the carousel (Borderline Lufthansa weight limit) and together with a second overnight case on the hand luggage limit, Transport it between the terminals and down into the S-Bahn. Then after alighting at Munich East, I successfully navigated the station subway to change trains onto the regional services.
If you had continued to stalk me, you would have seen I was able to make a second rail connection again via a subway onto a branch line. After making both connections with enough luggage to emigrate, let alone 2 weeks of Sun, Sea and Sand: the world did not end. If Munich airport doesn't need a direct connection to every settlement in Bavaria, then Manchester airport certainly doesn't need a direct connection to everywhere in the North.

But then we start the loop again; if not the Airport then where do we terminate trains in the North?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

But then we start the loop again; if not the Airport then where do we terminate trains in the North?

Indeed, it is a wonder that a suggestion for reinstating the New Allen Street viaduct in the Miles Platting/Collyhurst area to a newly rebuilt Manchester Oldham Road terminal station has not yet surfaced. After all, that was good enough for the Manchester and Leeds Railway until the Manchester Victoria station that connected with the Liverpool and Manchester Railway was opened in 1844......

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The cynic in me says this is exactly why NPR was put on the table.

I do love the addition of even more acronyms, such as NPR, being added to those already made over the years on this website. It could refer to Noise Power Ratio....or even Nepalese Population Review...

 

[notlob.divad]

I do love the addition of even more acronyms, such as NPR, being added to those already made over the years on this website. It could refer to Noise Power Ratio....or even Nepalese Population Review...

Or 'Not Particularly Relevent'

 

[notlob.divad]

But then we start the loop again; if not the Airport then where do we terminate trains in the North?

Using the airport as a terminal of convenience for local services from West of Manchester, makes sense, due to the low number of west facing terminating platforms. On the other hand, it makes no sense to use it for services that arrive from the east, (particularly express services) which have plenty of other places to serve without each service using twice the number of paths crossing Manchester.

 

[Bantamzen]

'A little' more snarled up being the operative phrase. The numbers of travellers who benefit from Ringwaymania is tiny, particularly when compared to the numbers who suffer because of said affliction's effects on the reliability of the wider railway network.

Manchester Airport has moved on from the Ringway days, and is no longer the preserve of the package holiday crowd but is developing into an important international airport with a rapidly growing long haul market. It is also seen by many movers and shakers across the region as an important part of the infrastructure, and key to the development of economies across the North of England. So it's impact is far more wide ranging than some on here are prepared to accept.

Alternatively, as I pointed out in post #1716, it would be possible to reduce congestion in the Castlefield corridor, pending construction of P15/16, by temporarily switching the TPE Airport services back to the Guide Bridge route. This would not deprive anywhere (except Victoria) of its direct services to the Airport.

It wouldn't, but how about another idea that doesn't effectively involve mothballing the chord, and encouraging the more austere in the government into using this as an example why investment in the North isn't so pressing? Instead why not split some of the local services such as Wigan to Alderley Edge, and the rather pointless Crewe-Liverpool, with perhaps one of the two western facing routes switched to start at Victoria. At the same time reduce the number of TPEs stopping at Oxford Road to quicken up their paths through the corridor?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Manchester Airport has moved on from the Ringway days, and is no longer the preserve of the package holiday crowd but is developing into an important international airport with a rapidly growing long haul market. It is also seen by many movers and shakers across the region as an important part of the infrastructure, and key to the development of economies across the North of England. So it's impact is far more wide ranging than some on here are prepared to accept.

And Heathrow is most probably the most significant and important airport in the world, but seems to manage without a through service from every obscure corner of the Home Counties.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It wouldn't, but how about another idea that doesn't effectively involve mothballing the chord, and encouraging the more austere in the government into using this as an example why investment in the North isn't so pressing? Instead why not split some of the local services such as Wigan to Alderley Edge, and the rather pointless Crewe-Liverpool, with perhaps one of the two western facing routes switched to start at Victoria. At the same time reduce the number of TPEs stopping at Oxford Road to quicken up their paths through the corridor?

Stopping at Oxford Road is no great issue - it has 4 platforms, 2 in each direction.

It's Piccadilly, that doesn't, that is the issue.

 

[Altfish]

Stopping at Oxford Road is no great issue - it has 4 platforms, 2 in each direction.

It's Piccadilly, that doesn't, that is the issue.

I would also state based on my own eyes that more commuters alight/board at Oxford Road than do at Piccadilly 13 & 14; Oxford Road is better located for commuters

 

[Bantamzen]

And Heathrow is most probably the most significant and important airport in the world, but seems to manage without a through service from every obscure corner of the Home Counties.

Just because Heathrow doesn't have the links, doesn't mean its the right solution. A trip around the western part of the M25 will tell you all you need to know. I'm pretty, nay absolutely certain that if Heathrow was better served from the Home Counties the services would rapidly fill up.

Stopping at Oxford Road is no great issue - it has 4 platforms, 2 in each direction.

It's Piccadilly, that doesn't, that is the issue.

No, Oxford Road can also act as a choke point if Northern services are terminated in one of the platforms, and there are often terminiated services sitting on at least one of the platforms. Stopping services terminating there by running through & beyond Piccadilly, would free up a path through which could be used by a non-stop TPE, thus freeing up that line for the next service behind it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would also state based on my own eyes that more commuters alight/board at Oxford Road than do at Piccadilly 13 & 14; Oxford Road is better located for commuters

If nothing else the massive demand for both staff and students at the University. And as I mentioned, it has 2 platforms in each direction (though for some reason a single platform is mostly used for westbound services rather than splitting evenly between 1 and 2 as is done between 3 and 4 eastbound) so the dwell times can be twice those at Picc without causing problems.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, Oxford Road can also act as a choke point if Northern services are terminated in one of the platforms

And there is your problem.

Northern should not be terminating any services in the through platforms of any stations on the Castlefield line (so only the Picc reversing siding or Platform 5 at Oxford Road should be used for this purpose). This only becomes an issue because Northern do planned crew changes in central Manchester, and this is itself utterly nonsensical and needs to be stopped, either by changing crew diagrams / route learning (so the same crew can operate the whole thing, or the change is done before Manchester e.g. at Bolton or after it e.g. at Stockport) or by changing the service pattern.

Only in the event of an "everybody off" unit failure (e.g. loss of door interlock) should this be happening, which really shouldn't even be a daily occurrence.

 

[Bantamzen]

And there is your problem.

Northern should not be terminating any services in the through platforms of any stations on the Castlefield line (so only the Picc reversing siding or Platform 5 at Oxford Road should be used for this purpose). This only becomes an issue because Northern do planned crew changes in central Manchester, and this is itself utterly nonsensical and needs to be stopped, either by changing crew diagrams / route learning (so the same crew can operate the whole thing, or the change is done before Manchester e.g. at Bolton or after it e.g. at Stockport) or by changing the service pattern.

Only in the event of an "everybody off" unit failure (e.g. loss of door interlock) should this be happening, which really shouldn't even be a daily occurrence.

And I do agree with that. Keeping all four through platforms free will help smooth the flow a bit, especially for services coming in from the west where several alignments are merging. It will however require a step free access / lift as well as better shelters being incorporated for P1, but with the planned closure of P5 this must surely be on the cards anyway?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What was the reason why the platform 6 terminating platform was taken out of use at Manchester Oxford Road station?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What was the reason why the platform 6 terminating platform was taken out of use at Manchester Oxford Road station?

Probably just BR retrenchment, it's been out of use for years, since the 1990s at the very least.