S-Bahn-Manchester?

[Bletchleyite]

So let's drag this out from the other threads - what if we did turn Castlefield into a pure "S-Bahn" and move the long-distance stuff elsewhere...what would make sense?

Large infrastructure spend is not part of the deal (so things like building 15-16 are out), though odd tweaks may be viable.

My thoughts:

Rolling stock to be 3 or 6-car 195 or 331 only, so door positions can be marked at Picc 13/14 to ease boarding

Services to the west:

• 2tph from Wigan via Bolton (from Southport)
• 2tph from Wigan via Atherton (one terminator, one originating from Kirkby)
• 2tph from Blackpool North via Chorley (15 mins apart from the Southports)
• 2tph from Liverpool Lime St semifast via Warrington (South Parkway, Widnes, Warrington W, Warrington C, Birchwood, Urmston, Irlam)
• 2tph from Warrington C all stations, terminating at Oxford Road. Perhaps reinstate the crossover so 3 would become the terminal platform and 1/5 could be used only for emergencies
• All services call at Deansgate

Services to the east:

• 4tph all stations to Manchester Airport, 1 or 2 of which extend to Crewe
• 4tph via Stockport (calling Levenshulme and Heaton Chapel) but to where - ideas?
  • Hazel Grove?
  • Buxton?
  • Wilmslow?
  • Hope Valley local?

Any other thoughts on these? It would remove 4tph from Vic to allow terminating of long distance services, i.e. Barrow/Windermere, North Wales and Scotland? Liverpool-Notts cut back to Picc main trainshed.

Barrow/Windermere/Scotland to call at Bolton and Salford Crescent for interchange to Vic.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

What would this do to fast services to/from Liverpool? If I have read you properly (and I hope to be told that I haven't) Liverpool would have 2 semifasts, but other fast services (e.g. Nottingham (currently Norwich)) would end at Manchester rather than running through to Liverpool.

I am all in favour of having all trains from Manchester to a given location going from one Manchester station, but if this meant Liverpool dropping from 4 fast/semifast services (I think 2 each at Picc and Vic) plus 1(?) slow to Oxford Road to two semifast (Deansgate/Oxford Road/Piccadilly) plus 1 slow to Oxford Road (change at Warrington Central) I can be certain that this would be unpopular and I suspect that the service would struggle with capacity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What would this do to fast services to/from Liverpool? If I have read you properly (and I hope to be told that I haven't) Liverpool would have 2 semifasts, but other fast services (e.g. Nottingham (currently Norwich)) would end at Manchester rather than running through to Liverpool.

I am all in favour of having all trains from Manchester to a given location going from one Manchester station, but if this meant Liverpool dropping from 4 fast/semifast services (I think 2 each at Picc and Vic) plus 1(?) slow to Oxford Road to two semifast (Dransgate/Oxford Road/Piccadilly) plus 1 slow to Oxford Road (change at Warrington Central) I can be certain that this would be unpopular and I suspect that the service would struggle with capacity.

It would remove the two fasts from the Castlefield side, yes, though the two semifasts wouldn't be much slower as they don't add many calls.

The two fasts via Vic (TPE) would remain. I've not discussed everything that would stay at Vic, just things that would change.

 

[Ianno87]

So Victoria would need to accommodate, from the West, as a minimum:

-2tph Lakes/Scotland via Bolton/Chorley
-2tph from Blackburn/Clitheroe
-2tph fast from Liverpool via Chat Moss
-2tph from Chester/North Wales

And from the East:
-6tph from Rochdale (2tph Rochdale, 1tph Tod Curve, 3tph Calder Valley or some permutation thereof)
-At least 2tph slow from Stalybridge or beyond
-4tph TPE (unless some/all sent back to Piccadilly)

Looking for opportunities to join stuff up:
-2tph Blackburn to Rochdale works neatly
-2tph Chester to Stalybridge (let's say)
-2tph Liverpool to TPE

So that leaves 2tph terminating from the West (Lakes / Scotland). Let's say that takes one platform, Platform 6 nominally

And from the East:
-4tph from the Calder Valley direction. At least one platform, probably two (Platforms 1 and 2, nominally)
-2tph TPE, let's say one platform, Platform 5

Leaving Platforms 3/4 for through trains. The problem you' reach is that this is conflicting for at least some trains, either Blackburn-Rochdale crossing to P3/4 to cross back again at Miles Platting, or vice-versa for TPE to use 5/6.
And terminating Calder Valley services need to cross everything to get to 1/2 - 4tph crossing 6tph.

That's why joining Calder Valley services to the Atherton route is neat - joins up DMU routes and also keeps everything "through" Platform 5/6.

 

[JonathanH]

I think the Liverpool via Chat Moss local is missing unless Patricroft and Eccles go in the Chester services. You could possibly do this by running Liverpool to Warrington Bank Quay and making people from Newton-le-Willows needing intermediate stops changing at Earlestown.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the Liverpool via Chat Moss local is missing unless Patricroft and Eccles go in the Chester services. You could possibly do this by running Liverpool to Warrington Bank Quay and making people from Newton-le-Willows needing intermediate stops changing at Earlestown.

Lots of things are missing - you can assume that any existing service not listed is diverted to Victoria.

Had another thought - will 2 more fit in, in which case what would we send over Ordsall - 2tph from Hudds local? Has to fit the same parameters - operated by Northern, only formations allowed are single or double 3-car 195s or 331s, not from miles away.

 

[JonathanH]

Lots of things are missing - you can assume that any existing service not listed is diverted to Victoria.

Making Victoria more congested really isn't the answer to this.

You need to *remove* some long-distance services (eg Scotland / Cumbria) and put stops in the other longer-distance services (eg Patricroft and Eccles) in the Chester services.

Diverting the Liverpool to Chat Moss stopper to Wigan North Western might be feasible with people changing at Newton-le-Willows.

 

[Ianno87]

I think the Liverpool via Chat Moss local is missing unless Patricroft and Eccles go in the Chester services. You could possibly do this by running Liverpool to Warrington Bank Quay and making people from Newton-le-Willows needing intermediate stops changing at Earlestown.

Yes, you can add that at Victoria too.

Basically, you run out of platforms to turn all this stuff back in.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jan 2021 ==

Diverting the Liverpool to Chat Moss stopper to Wigan North Western might be feasible with people changing at Newton-le-Willows.

Not necessarily a terrible idea, assuming the "fast" TPE still picked up Lea Green etc. Would be interesting to see Manchester-bound demand numbers from the likes of Whiston etc.

 

[tbtc]

I've got to give the OP some credit - that first post is a clever way of saying "mothball the eighty five million pound Ordsall Chord" without feeling the need to be explicit. I bet that omission will go over a few heads...

Good to see the traditional obsession with a half hourly service from Southport to Piccadilly too, of course (can't possibly amend that service that started in the 1980s, although apparently fine to get rid of the Piccadilly services to Wales/ Cumbria/ Scotland and get rid of the entire Manchester service to local stations west of Warrington - but Southport is more important...)

For me, I'd go with something like Option C on the recently discussed "recovery taskforce" thread - something like eight trains per hour made up of

• 0.5x Edinburgh
• 0.5x Glasgow
• 0.5x Windermere
• 0.5x Barrow
• 2x Blackpool
• 2x Liverpool semi-fast
• 2x West Yorkshire (argue all you want about the relative merits of Hull/ Scarborough/ Middlesbrough/ Newcastle etc, but I think there needs to be a half hourly service from at least Leeds)
• (and the stopping services from the CLC terminating at Oxford Road as now)

...that would give four trains per hour from Preston to Manchester Piccadilly, with four trains per hour from Wigan Wallgate to Manchester Victoria (and four per hour from Bolton to Manchester Victoria, when the Wigans service is added to the Blackburn service), thus giving people a nice simple reliable set of core routes, on top of which other services can be added.

Stop everything at Deansgate, stop Airport-bound trains at at least a couple of the five "local" stations, thus giving local passengers more (say each station should have at least four trains per hour into Manchester?).

To the east... I really can't see the Hope Valley locals running through to Castlefield, given the disruption of getting across the Piccadilly throat from Ardwick!

TBH I'd be okay with all eight Castlefield services being all eight Airport services, with everything operationally separate at Piccadilly, but I can't see that going down very well on Merseyside.

joining Calder Valley services to the Atherton route is neat - joins up DMU routes and also keeps everything "through" Platform 5/6.

I've suggested this a few times - four trains per hour from (Southport/ Kirkby) Wigan Wallgate to Todmorden (Leeds/ Burnley) - matches up on frequency, matches up two DMU routes, seems to balance up pretty well.

The successful networks are the simple networks. Look at how Merseyrail keeps it simple by running all Southport services through to Hunts Cross, rather than trying to provide some Kirkby/ Ormskirk services to the Airport, which would mean awkwardly balanced timetables. Look at how Metrolink has just two services on each branch, rather than trying to provide one Airport service per hour to each of Bury/ Rochdale/ Ashton etc. Look at how the Tyne'n'Wear Metro has all Airport services running through to Wearside, rather than having one service per hour from South Shields on top. It means well balanced timetables, it means services recover quickly in the event of disruption (as I've said a few times, "when everything is half an hour late, nothing is half an hour late").

If you have a good frequency with a well balanced distribution of services on each branch then people will trust connections, people will be confident enough to travel without cross referencing multiple timetables, they aren't basing everything on meeting that one service per hour.

 

[JonathanH]

• 0.5x Edinburgh
• 0.5x Glasgow
• 0.5x Windermere
• 0.5x Barrow
• 2x Blackpool

One thing which unbalances this relative to the current timetable is the lack of services from Salford Crescent to Castlefield - the Scottish services genuinely aren't helpful with this. If they go to Victoria you start to have a lack of connections at Salford Crescent for Victoria. It is why a difficult decision needs to be made with long distance services in favour of the S-Bahn idea - removing the Scottish services and more standardisation on the Preston corridor is an integral part of having a regular timetable on all routes within Manchester.

It would be perfectly reasonable for passengers from Scotland to change at Preston for Manchester just as they do for Liverpool. In fact, thinking about it a bit more, the same applies for North Wales (change at Chester) and indeed east of Leeds and Sheffield.

S-Bahn needs to be Piccadilly and Victoria for the concept to work and that may mean compromises with longer distance services.

 

[Ianno87]

It would be perfectly reasonable for passengers from Scotland to change at Preston for Manchester just as they do for Liverpool. In fact, thinking about it a bit more, the same applies for North Wales (change at Chester) and indeed east of Leeds and Sheffield.

It's hard to argue with how much the Manchester-Scotland market had grown between the couple of direct trains per day in the early 1990s to the hourly TPE service.

Should the rail industry be letting that demand disappear out of the door so easily?

Regardless, you still need 4tph between Preston and Manchester to provide some combination of stops at local stations and faster longer distance journey opportunities. And one of them might as well be from Scotland.

 

[tbtc]

One thing which unbalances this relative to the current timetable is the lack of services from Salford Crescent to Castlefield - the Scottish services genuinely aren't helpful with this. If they go to Victoria you start to have a lack of connections at Salford Crescent for Victoria. It is why a difficult decision needs to be made with long distance services in favour of the S-Bahn idea - removing the Scottish services and more standardisation on the Preston corridor is an integral part of having a regular timetable on all routes within Manchester.

It would be perfectly reasonable for passengers from Scotland to change at Preston for Manchester just as they do for Liverpool. In fact, thinking about it a bit more, the same applies for North Wales (change at Chester) and indeed east of Leeds and Sheffield.

S-Bahn needs to be Piccadilly and Victoria for the concept to work and that may mean compromises with longer distance services.

Those are good points - I think that we might have to accept compromises like having the Edinburgh/ Glasgow - Manchester Airport service stopping at Salford Crescent, Deansgate and probably a couple of "local" stations on the Airport line too.

This will upset the kind of "purists" who cannot countenance an "InterCity" station stopping at a smaller station, but I think we need to accept the messy set of lines around Manchester and the complicated set of demands - there's just not enough space on the lines to preserve the integrity of an "InterCity" service (in the minds of binary enthusiasts) - those trains are going to have to cater for some local passengers too.

If you have a line with four trains per hour like (Manchester -) Bolton - Preston should probably be then I'm fine with some intermediate stations having only a half hourly service or an hourly service or even a bi-hourly service - however I think that it'd be too messy to have one train per hour skipping stations - just my personal view but I think that your average passenger will struggle with awkward gaps in the timetable.

Having everything stopping at Salford Crescent apart from the Scottish services is going to makes things complicated for local passengers, so I think that the answer would have to be stop everything at Salford Crescent. That would mean four per hour from Salford Crescent to Piccadilly (all ex Preston) and six per hour from Salford Crescent to Victoria (four from Wigan, two from Blackburn), so plenty of changes available, which might placate the awkward noise from the local "stakeholder" groups (who, let's face it, are only interested in their pet line, even if it mucks about other people's services)

 

[JonathanH]

It's hard to argue with how much the Manchester-Scotland market had grown between the couple of direct trains per day in the early 1990s to the hourly TPE service.

Should the rail industry be letting that demand disappear out of the door so easily?

Regardless, you still need 4tph between Preston and Manchester to provide some combination of stops at local stations and faster longer distance journey opportunities. And one of them might as well be from Scotland.

It is a difficult matter but if the Scottish service and extensions of services beyond Chester, Sheffield and Leeds are constraining the ability to operate reliable and balanced services through the Castlefield and Victoria corridors in Manchester because of pathing issues elsewhere then they probably need to be sacrificed in favour of regular pattern regional or local services. I'd argue it is better to have Salford Crescent, Bolton and Chorley stops in a 'fast' Northern service for connections and running to time than to put those stops in the TPE service.

Let's not forget that the possible diminution of travel away from office workers to essential workers making short distance journeys in conurbations and occasional longer distance travel gives a clear steer to which services should be given priority.

Clearly they could run through at the end of the day but a situation where no train on the west, north and east side of Manchester comes from any further afield than Chester, Liverpool, Southport, Blackpool / Preston, Clitheroe, Leeds or Sheffield must offer more flexibility for timetabling and reliability.

Does the Manchester to Scotland route run without subsidy? How much would actually be lost if people had to change to Avanti at Preston and the TPE didn't run at all? The experience of riding a 331 is not the same as a journey on a 142 or 150 in days gone by.

The compromise is bringing in the Scottish service to Victoria via Wigan but it is another service to fit in that conflicts with other things and can't be linked to anything on the east side.

 

[43096]

Services to the east:

• 4tph all stations to Manchester Airport, 1 or 2 of which extend to Crewe
• 4tph via Stockport (calling Levenshulme and Heaton Chapel) but to where - ideas?
  • Hazel Grove?
  • Buxton?
  • Wilmslow?
  • Hope Valley local?

I'd send one of the Airports to Crewe and two of the 4 via Stockport could go to Wilmslow, with one turning round at Alderley Edge and the other going through to Crewe. You could also send one down to Macclesfield.

As for stock, wouldn't 323s be equally acceptable, being 23m with doors at thirds, so similar door config to the CAF junk.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd send one of the Airports to Crewe and two of the 4 via Stockport could go to Wilmslow, with one turning round at Alderley Edge and the other going through to Crewe. You could also send one down to Macclesfield.

As for stock, wouldn't 323s be equally acceptable, being 23m with doors at thirds, so similar door config to the CAF junk.

If you want to mark the door positions on the platform, which I think would be of benefit, they'd have to be spot-on - they aren't quite.

 

[43096]

If you want to mark the door positions on the platform, which I think would be of benefit, they'd have to be spot-on - they aren't quite.

Arguably a 323 is more of an S-bahn type unit than a 331!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Arguably a 323 is more of an S-bahn type unit than a 331!

Possibly so, but there's not a DMU with identical door positions to a 323.

Consistency is very important - see Thameslink.

 

[Purple Orange]

I think there should be an aim of delivering a Thameslink type operation through Manchester. Thameslink has 24 tph, but I suggest a model based on 12 tph through a triangular core

The Ordsall Chord should be central to this and certainly not ditched. Without long distance services and a uniform fleet, there is opportunity to make a core network that is the equivalent of an underground metro, but on a viaduct instead.

It’s also important to recognise that this is a long-term aspiration. A network like this also depends on the Metrokink plans for tram-train and a tunnel under central Manchester, taking on the CLC route to Warrington and the Atherton line to Wigan, therefore we are looking at 2035-2040 at the earliest.

Such a proposal can only come about with the delivery of NPR to Liverpool, otherwise there will always be long-distance services cluttering central Manchester.

The three core routes being:

1. Piccadilly, Oxford Road, Deansgate, Salford Central, Victoria
2. Piccadilly, Oxford Road, Deansgate, Salford Crescent
3. Chat Moss, Salford Central, Victoria
   • The 3rd core route being required for long distance TPE services.

Core Route 1:

• 2 tph Airport, Piccadilly, Victoria, Rochdale, Bradford
• 2 tph Airport, Piccadilly, Victoria, Stalybridge
• 2 tph Buxton, Piccadilly, Victoria, Rochdale, Burnley

Core Route 2:

• 2 tph Airport, Piccadilly, Salford Crescent, Blackpool
• 2 tph Airport, Piccadilly, Salford Crescent, Blackburn, Clitheroe
• 2 tph Stoke, Piccadilly, Salford Crescent, Blackpool

Core Route 3 (regional & long distance mix)

• 2 tph Southport, Salford Central, Victoria, Rochdale, Burnley
• 2 tph Chester, Salford Central, Victoria, Rochdale, Leeds
• 2 tph Liverpool, Victoria, Huddersfield, Leeds (TPE)
• 1 tph TPE Scotland-Victoria (2 new terminating platforms)
• 2 tph Liverpool-Victoria (2 new terminating platforms)

Terminating services:

• 2 tph Crewe, Stockport, Piccadilly (all stops)
• 1 tph North Wales, Piccadilly (as per option C from DfT consultation)

 

[4-SUB 4732]

So let's drag this out from the other threads - what if we did turn Castlefield into a pure "S-Bahn" and move the long-distance stuff elsewhere...what would make sense?

Large infrastructure spend is not part of the deal (so things like building 15-16 are out), though odd tweaks may be viable.

My thoughts:

Rolling stock to be 3 or 6-car 195 or 331 only, so door positions can be marked at Picc 13/14 to ease boarding

Services to the west:

• 2tph from Wigan via Bolton (from Southport)
• 2tph from Wigan via Atherton (one terminator, one originating from Kirkby)
• 2tph from Blackpool North via Chorley (15 mins apart from the Southports)
• 2tph from Liverpool Lime St semifast via Warrington (South Parkway, Widnes, Warrington W, Warrington C, Birchwood, Urmston, Irlam)
• 2tph from Warrington C all stations, terminating at Oxford Road. Perhaps reinstate the crossover so 3 would become the terminal platform and 1/5 could be used only for emergencies
• All services call at Deansgate

Services to the east:

• 4tph all stations to Manchester Airport, 1 or 2 of which extend to Crewe
• 4tph via Stockport (calling Levenshulme and Heaton Chapel) but to where - ideas?
  • Hazel Grove?
  • Buxton?
  • Wilmslow?
  • Hope Valley local?

Any other thoughts on these? It would remove 4tph from Vic to allow terminating of long distance services, i.e. Barrow/Windermere, North Wales and Scotland? Liverpool-Notts cut back to Picc main trainshed.

Barrow/Windermere/Scotland to call at Bolton and Salford Crescent for interchange to Vic.

A nice idea. If anything though, one has to argue potentially in favour of both sets of Wigan services (Atherton and Bolton ways) being 15-minutely leaving Salford each way, therefore connecting with 15-minutely services towards Castlefield from Blackpool (half-hourly) and Blackburn/Clitheroe (half-hourly). That way, Wigan gets an entirely standardised set of services, and with the Barrow / Windermere / Scotland services going to Victoria, it creates excellent linkage at Bolton on repeating 15-minutely timetables.

Does that make sense? Hope so. By carefully planning, you end up with a departure board from Salford Crescent potentially along the lines of:
XX00 NB Kirkby via Walkden
XX04 NB Clitheroe / Blackburn via Bolton
XX11 NB Edinburgh / Glasgow via Bolton
XX15 NB Southport via Bolton
XX19 NB Blackpool via Bolton
-XX23 NB Peak extra, fast Wigan via Walkden.
XX30 NB Wallgate via Walkden
XX34 NB Clitheroe / Blackburn via Bolton
XX41 NB Barrow / Windermere via Bolton
XX45 NB Southport via Bolton
XX49 NB Blackpool via Bolton
-XX53 NB Peak extra, Preston via Bolton (XX49 misses Lostock, Adlington).

XX01 SB Stalybridge via Victoria (ex Walkden)
XX05 SB Piccadilly area, ex Blackburn/Clitheroe.
-XX09 SB Victoria peak extra, ex Walkden.
XX16 SB Stalybridge via Victoria (ex Southport / Bolton)
XX20 SB Piccadilly area, ex Blackpool.
XX24 SB Victoria, ex Scotland.
XX31 SB Stalybridge via Victoria (ex Walkden)
XX35 SB Piccadilly area, ex Blackburn/Clitheroe.
-XX39 SB Victoria peak extra, ex Preston.
XX46 SB Stalybridge via Victoria (ex Southport / Bolton)
XX50 SB Piccadilly area, ex Blackpool.
XX54 SB Victoria, ex Cumbria.

This gives Deansgate times of, say, XX00/XX15/XX30/XX45 towards Bolton, XX08/XX23/XX38/XX53 towards Piccadilly from Bolton.

You then want to drop the paths in from Warrington Central, however these will "bunch", as the services will leave Warrington and Birchwood about 10 minutes apart, but then be close together at Deansgate. E.g XX12, XX19, XX42 and XX49 towards Piccadilly; creating spaces for XX04, XX27, XX34, XX57 ex Liverpool via Chat Moss. That creates a space for two all stoppers, and two semi-fast. It also gives the space for two TPE fast and two Chester to Victoria fast.

South of Piccadilly, the obvious thing I would think is to drop the Clitheroe/Blackburn and Blackpool services actually to a mix of Buxton and Hazel Grove (Clitheroe being diesel, so Buxton; Blackpool electric so Hazel Grove), and therefore a continuation of the standard quarter-hourly service in entirety to run between Salford Crescent and Stockport including Levenshulme and Heaton Chapel.

The Warrington and Liverpool services, combined with the four trains from Liverpool via Chat Moss, can therefore all go to the Airport. Stoke and Alderley Edge services can run off Main Shed.

The spacing of services e.g. XX04, XX12, XX19, XX27, XX34, XX42, XX49, XX57 from Piccadilly to Airport also gives a chance to run 'skip stop' along the Airport line; albeit probably a quarter-hourly all stops service and the following trains catching up.

 

[Glenn1969]

At the moment my area gets a raw deal on both speed and connectivity grounds. So how can Calder Valley and Rochdale lines benefit from whatever is proposed. Bradford probably has the poorest direct service for a city of its size in England. it was promised quite a few enhancements in the 2017 consultations that appear to have been abandoned?

 

[Ianno87]

At the moment my area gets a raw deal on both speed and connectivity grounds. So how can Calder Valley and Rochdale lines benefit from whatever is proposed. Bradford probably has the poorest direct service for a city of its size in England. it was promised quite a few enhancements in the 2017 consultations that appear to have been abandoned?

Calder Valley probably has the best it can get out of the present route, irrespective of what happens in Central Manchester. There's only so far you can push a two track route with a ix of stopping and semi-fast services.

 

[Greybeard33]

The OP considers it acceptable for the "S-Bahn" to extend as far as Blackpool, yet it is not permitted to serve Chester, Crewe, Stoke on Trent, Sheffield, Bradford or Leeds, all of which are a similar or shorter distance from Manchester. Apparently just on the basis of rolling stock standardisation and an aversion to any use of the Ordsall Chord.

The proposed service pattern has 5tphpd between the Chat Moss line and Victoria, crossing the paths of 6tphpd between Salford Crescent and Castlefield, on the flat junction at Ordsall Lane. A recipe for even more congestion than the 2019 mess!

A proper S-Bahn requires serious investment in new infrastructure and rolling stock. Not just crayoning a new service pattern on to the existing inadequate infrastructure.

Timetable improvements on the existing infrastructure are best developed by professional modelling, taking account of all the constraints and planning rules, and trade studies between the resultant realistic options. That is the process the Manchester Recovery Task Force is following.

 

[PTR 444]

I think completely separating the Castlefield/Airport corridor from the Piccadilly - Stockport line would only be achievable in a post-NPR scenario, since doing so beforehand would sever the direct rail link between Liverpool and Sheffield. With NPR, all TPE services would use the new line, and i’d also expect fast Liverpool - Sheffield trains to use it via Leeds since it would likely be a faster route despite being the long way round. This would free up both Liverpool - Manchester lines for use by local trains and I would suggest that all Liverpool - Victoria trains go via Chat Moss, and all Liverpool - Piccadilly services go via the CLC. This would help reduce the number of conflicts in Manchester, which brings me to my proposed “Castlefield Metro” service pattern:

• 2tph Manchester Airport - Liverpool Lime Street via Warrington Central
• 2tph Manchester Airport - Southport via Bolton
• 2tph Manchester Airport - Blackpool via Bolton
• 2tph Manchester Airport - Rochdale via Victoria
• 2tph Manchester Airport - Huddersfield via Victoria
• 2tph Manchester Oxford Road - Liverpool Lime Street via Warrington Central

Under this plan, the TfW Llandudno, TPE Edinburgh/Glasgow and Northern Barrow-in-Furness would be diverted to Victoria, the latter also going via Bolton instead of Wigan.

 

[JonathanH]

This would help reduce the number of conflicts in Manchester, which brings me to my proposed “Castlefield Metro” service pattern:

• 2tph Manchester Airport - Liverpool Lime Street via Warrington Central
• 2tph Manchester Airport - Southport via Bolton
• 2tph Manchester Airport - Blackpool via Bolton
• 2tph Manchester Airport - Rochdale via Victoria
• 2tph Manchester Airport - Huddersfield via Victoria
• 2tph Manchester Oxford Road - Liverpool Lime Street via Warrington Central

But that is too many trains to put through the Castlefield corridor and you have to decide which one you are going to put stops in on the Airport branch. You are also running the airport line almost entirely with diesel units.

 

[PTR 444]

But that is too many trains to put through the Castlefield corridor and you have to decide which one you are going to put stops in on the Airport branch. You are also running the airport line almost entirely with diesel units.

That’s not to say those lines won’t be electrified by the time NPR comes along.

As for stops, I was envisaging that the corridor becomes a “metro” type service with every train stopping at all shacks between Deansgate and the Airport. I’d also look into extending 2tph to Alderley Edge via Styal. 10tph for Airport - Castlefield may be too many but you might as well make the most of available capacity without importing delays from the Stockport lines.

 

[Purple Orange]

But that is too many trains to put through the Castlefield corridor and you have to decide which one you are going to put stops in on the Airport branch. You are also running the airport line almost entirely with diesel units.

There can be no Manchester Metro or S-Bahn without significant infrastructure having been built. It needs NPR to take away the long distance Liverpool & Leeds service, electrification must happen regardless too.

Having said all of that, there is a better chance the Metrolink tunnel will be built than any of the S-bahn ideas for the Castlefield corridor. That will essentially create a version of the Tyne & Wear Metro in Manchester. Perhaps when the flavour of one tunnel is built, a second may come along too!

The tunnel is considered to start east of Piccadilly, which will allow trains from Glossop, Hadfield and New Millstone run underground. The line emerges after Cornbrook, connecting on to the CLC to Warrington. If I had the power, I’d have such a tunnel split at St. Peter’s Square towards Victoria and a junction to the Metrolink one to Trafford Bar. This would enable Bury, Altrincham & East Didsbury trains to become part of a Metro light rail network.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But that is too many trains to put through the Castlefield corridor and you have to decide which one you are going to put stops in on the Airport branch. You are also running the airport line almost entirely with diesel units.

It's not too many trains to put through Castlefield with a Thameslink-style operational and rolling stock concept, which is the premise of this thread. Thameslink puts far more trains through the core.

I'd put the Airport branch stops in all services myself. As a minimum 4tph but all might be easier and would provide a Metrolink style frequent service on the branch.

DMUs are probably unavoidable to start with (though 195s have EMU-like performance), but this would need to be a driver for electrification (or bi-modes for Southport?)

 

[JonathanH]

It's not too many trains to put through Castlefield with a Thameslink-style operational and rolling stock concept, which is the premise of this thread. Thameslink puts far more trains through the core.

Thameslink has far superior signalling though doesn't it (which as an infrastructure upgrade is outside the premise of this thread) and not the problems with flat crossings which again reduce the throughput. Added to the fact that the freight trains need to be accommodated.

 

[Purple Orange]

If “everywhere-to-everywhere” is an issue, and there are a maximum 10 or 12 tph permitted through Castlefield, why couldn’t we utilise the chord to it’s maximum capability? For example:

• 6 tph Rochdale to Manchester Airport, calling at all stops.
  • This ensures that wherever you are in Manchester, there is a 10 min interval to the airport.
  • 3 tph to start at Bradford and 3 tph to start at Burnley.
  • 6-car 195s, upgraded to 331s upon electrification.
  • All TPE north services go to Victoria
    • 4 tph from Leeds continue to Liverpool and 2 tph terminate
    • TPE Scotland terminates at Victoria.
  • Nottingham & Cleethorpes terminate at Piccadilly
  • TfW all terminate in Piccadilly
  • All remaining paths through Castlefield are dedicated to stoppers, including stopping at Deansgate, focussing on Blackpool, Liverpool via CLC and Southport.

 

[PTR 444]

TfW all terminate in Piccadilly

Are you intending to reroute the Bangor service via the Mid-Cheshire line then under this plan?