Golborne station reopening - How might it be served?

[Bletchleyite]

A new station is proposed for Golborne, near Wigan, situated awkwardly on the WCML "proper" just north of Golborne Junction.

Here's an article in the MEN about it:

Multi-million pound plans to build railway station in Golborne to be considered

The project is part of a £69.5m scheme to improve transport links around the region

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

Multi-million pound plans to build a new railway station in Golborne are set to be considered.

The £15 million proposals will go before the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) today (January 29).

David Molyneux, the leader of Wigan Council, said: “The confirmation of funding for a new station at Golborne is superb news.

If the plans are given the go-ahead, it could give the town, near Wigan, direct access to the rail network for the first time in 50 years.

The question is with all three Castlefield options moving the Cumbrian trains to run via Bolton, how might it be served? One thing I've heard suggested before (and by @Ianno87) is a second hourly fast Liverpool-Preston service which could potentially run that way, but is there room on the western part of the Chat Moss route for that?

 

[Greybeard33]

A new station is proposed for Golborne, near Wigan, situated awkwardly on the WCML "proper" just north of Golborne Junction.

Here's an article in the MEN about it:

Multi-million pound plans to build railway station in Golborne to be considered

The project is part of a £69.5m scheme to improve transport links around the region

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

The question is with all three Castlefield options moving the Cumbrian trains to run via Bolton, how might it be served? One thing I've heard suggested before (and by @Ianno87) is a second hourly fast Liverpool-Preston service which could potentially run that way, but is there room on the western part of the Chat Moss route for that?

Golborne is in Greater Manchester and the station is being promoted by the GMCA. Would there be much demand for services to Liverpool?

 

[The Planner]

Is there anything that says exactly where this is proposed to be? is it where the original one was on the A573 bridge?

 

[Ianno87]

Golborne is in Greater Manchester and the station is being promoted by the GMCA. Would there be much demand for services to Liverpool?

Goes down to what is the objective of this station? Seems to be around providing transport connections to a relatively isolated part of Greater Manchester (and probably slightly deprived at that) to connect it to employment opportunities.

 

[NorthOxonian]

Golborne is in Greater Manchester and the station is being promoted by the GMCA. Would there be much demand for services to Liverpool?

By the locals, almost certainly. Wigan borough is quite distinct from the rest of Greater Manchester and is almost as close to Liverpool as it is to Manchester. There will also be some demand to Preston.

However, political considerations will push the station towards having a Manchester service. I know very little about the lines in that part of the world and so can't speculate about what such a service will look like, but GMCA are not going to want to spend £70 million on a station which will suck locals towards Liverpool.

The article mentions ambitions for services to "Wigan, Manchester, Cumbria and the Airport" - but as has been raised earlier the services to Cumbria have been rerouted, so take those with a pinch of salt.

 

[adamedwards]

Looking at the original site next to a modern map (the wonderful National Library of Scotland site) Side by side map, Golborne is on the 4 track section with the site the old platform in the middle still free and with separate over head posts not headspans so easier to modify.

The OS maps show the station as being slow lines only, which one would assme would keep it out of the way of the main line if reopened like this. So I would guess 4 car platform in each direction, service speculation I leave to those more expert than me.

 

[The Planner]

Nice 10mph conflict at the north of Wigan if it uses P6 and Golborne is on the slows, unless the goods are upgraded to go round the houses at Bamfurlong so it can use P1 on the up instead. That isn't a whole lot better when it comes to adjustments for approach control.

 

[jonnyfan]

CASTLEFIELD [all calling at Deansgate, Oxford Road & Piccadilly]
2tph Blackpool North to Airport via Bolton
2tph Southport to Buxton via Bolton
2tph Rochdale to Airport via Victoria
2tph Lime Street to Cleethorpes (1tph) / Nottingham (1tph) via Warrington Central
2tph Chat Moss Route to Airport... (1tph) Wigan North Western / (1tph) Liverpool Lime Street to Airport via Eccles (all stops)
2tph Warrington Central to Oxford Road


AIRPORT LINE
2tph Piccadilly to Crewe via Airport (all stops)
2tph Blackpool North to Airport via Bolton & Oxford Road (fast Piccadilly to MIA)
2tph Rochdale to Airport via Victoria & Oxford Road (fast Piccadilly to MIA)
2tph Chat Moss Route to Airport...(1tph) Wigan North Western / (1tph) Liverpool Lime Street to Airport via Eccles & Oxford Road (all stops)

All stations on the Airport line can have 4 tph

VICTORIA
2tph Clitheroe/Blackburn to Stalybridge via Bolton
2tph Kirkby/Wigan to Leeds/Blackburn via Atherton
1tph Glasgow/Edinburgh to Victoria via Bolton (calls at Chorley & Bolton only after Preston)
1tph Barrow/Windermere to Victoria via Bolton (calls at Chorley & Bolton only after Preston)
2tph Lime Street to Newcastle
2tph Chester to Scarborough (1tph) / Redcar (1tph)
2tph Victoria to Leeds via Halifax
(1tph Peak only Wigan to Victoria via Atherton)

Above is my modified idea for the 'Manchester Takt' taking into account the proposals in option C for the Manchester Rail Timetable Task Force & now Golborne station.

Golborne will be served by the 1tph from Wigan North Western along the Chat Moss route to the Airport, calling at all stations, giving an even 30 minute interval service for Patricroft & Eccles as a result

 

[Ianno87]

Above is my modified idea for the 'Manchester Takt' taking into account the proposals in option C for the Manchester Rail Timetable Task Force & now Golborne station.

Golborne will be served by the 1tph from Wigan North Western along the Chat Moss route to the Airport, calling at all stations, giving an even 30 minute interval service for Patricroft & Eccles as a result

I repeat my usual statement at this point. Where is the mythical capacity at Victoria to terminate 2tph from Lakes/Scotland in addition to a plethora of through services?

 

[jonnyfan]

I repeat my usual statement at this point. Where is the mythical capacity at Victoria to terminate 2tph from Lakes/Scotland in addition to a plethora of through services?

I understand where you are coming from, however the taskforce are planning on similar numbers of services terminating & running through 3-6 at Victoria - they must understand the capacity constraints more than me. I would say the two trains per hour from the Lakes & Scotland would terminate on platform 3 or 4 and shunt into the reversing sidings or terminate in 5 or 6 and reverse up at Brewery Junction as the Kirkby service currently does, services would have to be timetabled around these moves, and with 4 bi-directional platforms it is perhaps not impossible.

 

[Ianno87]

I understand where you are coming from, however the taskforce are planning on similar numbers of services terminating & running through 3-6 at Victoria - they must understand the capacity constraints more than me. I would say the two trains per hour from the Lakes & Scotland would terminate on platform 3 or 4 and shunt into the reversing sidings or terminate in 5 or 6 and reverse up at Brewery Junction as the Kirkby service currently does, services would have to be timetabled around these moves, and with 4 bi-directional platforms it is perhaps not impossible.

-Can't get to Brewery Jn, as it's not electrified
-Getting to P3/4 involves a crossing move, then a reversal to get to the siding. All whilst trying to get slow alighting luggage-laden long distance travellers off.

Having elaborate crossing moves and bi-di running to solve issues is a recipe for performance problems from the off.

 

[jonnyfan]

-Can't get to Brewery Jn, as it's not electrified
-Getting to P3/4 involves a crossing move, then a reversal to get to the siding. All whilst trying to get slow alighting luggage-laden long distance travellers off.

Having elaborate crossing moves and bi-di running to solve issues is a recipe for performance problems from the off.

Perhaps Brewery Junction for the Lakes services which are DMUs and reversing sidings for the Scotland services which are EMUs.

Crossing moves are timetabled already at many locations and can work if done properly, bi-directional running is there as a contingency.

But hey, I'm not a timetable planner so I understand there are numerous constraints and so my ideas may be absolute garbage.

The problem with Manchester is there are is no proper solution until there are infrastructure improvements, every proposal (and the current timetable) are a fudge. Even the Task force option C wants 4 tph terminating at Oxford Road, which is probably even worse than doing it at Victoria with the signalling restrictions on the through platforms at Oxford Road.

Going back to Golborne...it's difficult to serve if any of the Task force options are taken up.

 

[Greybeard33]

Nice 10mph conflict at the north of Wigan if it uses P6 and Golborne is on the slows, unless the goods are upgraded to go round the houses at Bamfurlong so it can use P1 on the up instead. That isn't a whole lot better when it comes to adjustments for approach control.

With the platforms on the slows, southbound services would have to cross both fasts at Golborne Junction (currently they are routed on the Up Fast). Would that crossing move be problematic?

 

[The Planner]

With the platforms on the slows, southbound services would have to cross both fasts at Golborne Junction (currently they are routed on the Up Fast). Would that crossing move be problematic?

Yes, that one is the obvious one and the law of sod will put an up and down fast train right where you don't want it, but people may think that is the only one.

 

[Starmill]

You could walk from most of Golborne to Newton-le-Willows station in 45 minutes. Not a nice walk granted but most of Golborne and Lowton are in a 2 mile radius. That in its own right doesn't mean you shouldn't build a new station, not least because Golborne would have Wigan services, unlike Newton-le-Willows and Earlestown. However there's going to be a significant issue with the business case as a result.

 

[Bevan Price]

The easiest solution might be to divert the Liverpool Lime St to Warrington Bank Quay service at Earlestown, to run instead to Newton Le Willows, Golborne & Wigan North Western. But, as suggested above, TfGM would probably prefer a service from Manchester.

[The Lime St / Warrington service is lightly used south of Earlestown, and since introduction of the Calder Valley / Chester services, there are (in most hours) 2 alternative trains per hour between Earlestown & Warrington.]

 

[Gathursty]

I think Golborne residents will be pleased with whatever service they get. It's nailed on to be serving Wigan one way avoiding the bus through Abram, Platt Bridge and Ince.

In the other direction, Manchester makes sense but so does Liverpool Lime Street and Warrington (fast or via Earlestown).

 

[PTR 444]

As my previous suggestion of diverting Liverpool - Manchester services appears to have been ruled out, I think it is clear that the only way to serve Golborne from Manchester would be to keep the Airport-Cumbria service running that way, rather than diverting it via Bolton as per the recovery taskforce. It would mean Castlefield - Bolton is reduced from 4tph to 3tph but in the greater scheme of things is probably better than introducing another 1tph through Ordsall Lane just to serve Golborne.

Post-NPR would be much easier, as the reduced need for direct Liverpool - Manchester services means you can run more trains to different destinations on the Chat Moss. I have previously suggested amalgamating the TPE fasts with the 1tph stopper to create 2tph semi-fast Liverpool - Leeds services, therefore you can reinstate the extra Windsor Link service as fewer trains from Chat Moss would be likely to interfere with these at Ordsall Lane.

So my summary for an amended recovery taskforce Pre-NPR would look like this for Ordsall Lane junction:

• 3tph Castlefield - Bolton (Blackpool and Scotland services)
• 2tph Castlefield - Chat Moss (Liverpool stopper and Cumbria service via Wigan)
• 4tph Victoria - Chat Moss (TPE and Chester services

Post-NPR pattern:

• 4tph Castlefield - Bolton (Airport/Stockport - Blackpool/Southport)
• 1tph Castlefield - Chat Moss (Airport - Cumbria via Wigan)
• 4tph Victoria - Chat Moss (Liverpool and Chester services)

Note that in the post-NPR plan the Scotland service would be diverted to run from Victoria instead of Castlefield.

 

[Starmill]

I suppose Gathursty is correct to point out that a Wigan to Warrington service calling at Golborne would avoid much of the Manchester capacity questions, and probably only require 1 unit if it didn't serve Newton-le-Willows. Of course, having to change to reach Manchester and Liverpool wouldn't be attractive at all.

 

[Ianno87]

As my previous suggestion of diverting Liverpool - Manchester services appears to have been ruled out, I think it is clear that the only way to serve Golborne from Manchester would be to keep the Airport-Cumbria service running that way, rather than diverting it via Bolton as per the recovery taskforce. It would mean Castlefield - Bolton is reduced from 4tph to 3tph but in the greater scheme of things is probably better than introducing another 1tph through Ordsall Lane just to serve Golborne.

Although, in "the greater scheme of things", reducing the Bolton corridor service (which is the second heaviest flow out of Manchester after London) with the sole purpose of serve one new station is perverse. If you factored that into the station's business case, it would be an appalling result.

 

[Greybeard33]

Although, in "the greater scheme of things", reducing the Bolton corridor service (which is the second heaviest flow out of Manchester after London) with the sole purpose of serve one new station is perverse. If you factored that into the station's business case, it would be an appalling result.

And the Cumbria service, stopping only at Wigan, currently takes around 10 minutes longer, both ways, between Preston and Oxford Road than does the Scotland service with a stop at Bolton. An additional stop at Golborne would make it even slower.

It would be crazy to penalise all the long distance passengers by a 12+ minute longer journey time, for the sake of the few who might use the Golborne station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And the Cumbria service, stopping only at Wigan, currently takes around 10 minutes longer, both ways, between Preston and Oxford Road than does the Scotland service with a stop at Bolton. An additional stop at Golborne would make it even slower.

It would be crazy to penalise all the long distance passengers by a 12+ minute longer journey time, for the sake of the few who might use the Golborne station.

TBH it all shouts for the need for an all-stations* Crewe-Carlisle local as FNW proposed but never actually started because suitable rolling stock wasn't available (they wanted to use 309s but weren't allowed to due to the slamdoors). There's a glut of EMUs out there, so it's time to get it running. Extending the LNR Trent Valley to Preston could be a good bet if the paths would match up.

* Possibly via Earlestown, possibly not

 

[Greybeard33]

I suppose Gathursty is correct to point out that a Wigan to Warrington service calling at Golborne would avoid much of the Manchester capacity questions, and probably only require 1 unit if it didn't serve Newton-le-Willows. Of course, having to change to reach Manchester and Liverpool wouldn't be attractive at all.

That was probably one reason why the original Golborne (South) station was closed in 1961. Before closure it was served mainly by a Wigan - Warrington via Earlestown local service.

 

[HST43257]

TBH it all shouts for the need for an all-stations* Crewe-Carlisle local as FNW proposed but never actually started because suitable rolling stock wasn't available (they wanted to use 309s but weren't allowed to due to the slamdoors). There's a glut of EMUs out there, so it's time to get it running. Extending the LNR Trent Valley to Preston could be a good bet if the paths would match up.

* Possibly via Earlestown, possibly not

Crewe to Preston would be fine, maybe extending to Blackpool and Stoke at each end. Could be the LNWR Trent Valley service, or it could be one of the LNWR Birmingham services, but these would both have reliability issues with extensions. A separate EMU service from Stoke to Blackpool every hour doesn’t sound too terrible...

 

[Ianno87]

TBH it all shouts for the need for an all-stations* Crewe-Carlisle local as FNW proposed but never actually started because suitable rolling stock wasn't available (they wanted to use 309s but weren't allowed to due to the slamdoors). There's a glut of EMUs out there, so it's time to get it running. Extending the LNR Trent Valley to Preston could be a good bet if the paths would match up.

* Possibly via Earlestown, possibly not

Capacity Crewe-Weaver Jn would probably scupper that plan, sadly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Capacity Crewe-Weaver Jn would probably scupper that plan, sadly.

Warrington BQ-Carlisle then?

 

[Ianno87]

Warrington BQ-Carlisle then?

Ditto capacity north of Preston!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ditto capacity north of Preston!

OK, Warrington BQ-Preston then

 

[Starmill]

And the Cumbria service, stopping only at Wigan, currently takes around 10 minutes longer, both ways, between Preston and Oxford Road than does the Scotland service with a stop at Bolton. An additional stop at Golborne would make it even slower.

It would probably be possible to add the stop and keep the same runtime to be honest, as they haven't been able to tighten up the timings significantly. Of course that doesn't help if your cause a conflict while you're at Golborne.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Feb 2021 ==

OK, Warrington BQ-Preston then

Would probably work out quite nicely, it would offer 2tph at Euxton Balshaw Lane too. Incidentally, Coppull would probably be a better case than Golborne, but as usual politics intervenes!

 

[Greybeard33]

OK, Warrington BQ-Preston then

Would there be capacity to reverse this at Bank Quay, in addition to the Liverpool service? The track layout means that reversals have to be in Platform 1, then depart wrong road on the Up Slow as far as Winwick Junction. But this line is also used by some Chester services and freights to avoid conflict with the southbound expresses.