How could rail services be improved in the Manchester area?

[scrapy]

Leeds has six through platforms I think?, and an avoiding through line. Victoria has four and Piccadilly has two, which makes six (but without an avoiding line). As for bays, we could have two at Victoria West, two Victoria East, two at Oxford Road (using Platform 1) and of course the main shed at Piccadilly has 12. Yes this would take investment, but considerably less than building tunnels and / or widening the viaduct* and / or building a 20km freight line for Trafford park going in the wrong direction.

*unless they were going to happen anyway for NPR, but even so that's what 15 - 20 years away?

Western side bays have been looked into at Victoria. Whilst there is space for bays on the western side of Victoria (3 or 4 carriages max) there is not the space to properly connect them to the through lines. If you were to put bays in it would simply add to congestion as the exiting train would stop at least 2 through lines being used and reduce capacity more than if you had just the through platforms paired by destination and used efficiently. (Trains from Stalybridge to go towards Deansgate/Eccles, and trains from Rochdale to go towards Salford Crescent)

If 3 or 4 car length bay platforms were built, with no space for extension then in 10 years time this forum would probably be branding them a waste of money as hopefully by then most trains in the area would be at least 6 car.

For the same reason its proposed in the Oxford Rd rebuilding to eliminate the bay and have longer through platforms instead.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Leeds has six through platforms I think?, and an avoiding through line. Victoria has four and Piccadilly has two, which makes six (but without an avoiding line). As for bays, we could have two at Victoria West, two Victoria East, two at Oxford Road (using Platform 1) and of course the main shed at Piccadilly has 12. Yes this would take investment, but considerably less than building tunnels and / or widening the viaduct* and / or building a 20km freight line for Trafford park going in the wrong direction.

*unless they were going to happen anyway for NPR, but even so that's what 15 - 20 years away?

Of course, the Manchester Victoria station that I first knew from the early 1950s onwards had six through platforms (11-16), ten east-facing bay platforms (1-10), plus the mysterious bay platform 17.

 

[Greybeard33]

So the government's threat is they'll leave them with timetable that has more trains in it than the option they're trying to force them to pick... interesting strategy.

I think the DfT "threat" is to keep all the TPE services at the current reduced frequencies, which would hurt all the Northern cities. Only 2tph between Leeds and Victoria, versus 4tph in Option B+. Only 1tph between Liverpool and Victoria, versus 2tph in B+. Only 1tp2h between Manchester and Scotland, versus 1tph in B+. And no direct services between Sheffield and Manchester Airport, whereas TfN staff have been discussing with the Task Force and DfT a possible amendment to B+ to restore direct services in the early morning and late evening.

B+ also restores some extra Northern services in the Manchester commuter peaks, which are not in the current timetable.

 

[Rhydgaled]

this "Thameslink for Manchester", still would have freight and still has the Cheshire Lines Committee over it. And you would lose any potential long distance from North to South through Manchester (I don't think there is that much now anyway, but back in the day there used to be loco-hauled Cross Country from Scotland to Birmingham and we shouldn't lose the possibility of that if it becomes feasible again in a post HS2 world, maybe? I'm not so sure, but closing routes doesn't usually end well).

I expect you would need to cut the frequency a fair bit if you want long-distance stuff to continue using platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly and have a reliable and comfortable service.

for a lot less than four tracking Castlefield (which I really can't see achieves anything useful other than dwell times, since the same bottlenecks still exist at either end)

Dwell times are key though if you want long-distance trains to use it. Platforms 15 and 16, even without widening the rest of the viaduct (although some works may be needed at Oxford Road depending on what calls there) would be very helpful if you keep long distance services as scheduled dwell times could be extended to allow this, with two platforms per direction the following train would be able to run into the other platform as the one ahead of it is departing after its long dwell. With just one platform per direction, the following trains are stuck behind the one with the long dwell screwing the whole thing up.

Western side bays have been looked into at Victoria. Whilst there is space for bays on the western side of Victoria (3 or 4 carriages max) there is not the space to properly connect them to the through lines. If you were to put bays in it would simply add to congestion as the exiting train would stop at least 2 through lines being used and reduce capacity more than if you had just the through platforms paired by destination and used efficiently. (Trains from Stalybridge to go towards Deansgate/Eccles, and trains from Rochdale to go towards Salford Crescent)

If 3 or 4 car length bay platforms were built, with no space for extension then in 10 years time this forum would probably be branding them a waste of money as hopefully by then most trains in the area would be at least 6 car.

For the same reason its proposed in the Oxford Rd rebuilding to eliminate the bay and have longer through platforms instead.

Makes sense; if you have bays they need to be long enough. One problem is that pairing the through platforms at Victoria by direction means Ordsall Chord services have to come from the Stalybridge line, and the pre-COVID service map on the first page shows only 2tph Northern service between Victoria and Stalybridge (one from Southport and one from the bays at Victoria) which doesn't give much scope for local services via the chord. Rochdale - Ordsall Chord - PICC - Airport/Styal local services would benefit from grade seperation to get between the lines on the north side of Victoria and those on the south side.

 

[Watershed]

Dwell times are key though if you want long-distance trains to use it. Platforms 15 and 16, even without widening the rest of the viaduct (although some works may be needed at Oxford Road depending on what calls there) would be very helpful if you keep long distance services as scheduled dwell times could be extended to allow this, with two platforms per direction the following train would be able to run into the other platform as the one ahead of it is departing after its long dwell. With just one platform per direction, the following trains are stuck behind the one with the long dwell screwing the whole thing up.

Yep, having two platforms per direction (with sufficiently large overlaps to allow simultaneous arrival and departure) at both Piccadilly and Oxford Rd would effectively reduce the corridor's headway to 2 minutes throughout. Whereas currently it's 4 mins for most trains (as the planning, i.e. departure-to-arrival headway is 2 mins, and the minimum dwell at Piccadilly is 2 mins).

 

[The Planner]

Yep, having two platforms per direction (with sufficiently large overlaps to allow simultaneous arrival and departure) at both Piccadilly and Oxford Rd would effectively reduce the corridor's headway to 2 minutes throughout. Whereas currently it's 4 mins for most trains (as the planning, i.e. departure-to-arrival headway is 2 mins, and the minimum dwell at Piccadilly is 2 mins).

The original work on that could never get the headways down unless you were accepting running on yellows.

 

[Watershed]

The original work on that could never get the headways down unless you were accepting running on yellows.

Having the headway as 2 mins through the corridor effectively guarantees running on yellows. It's 2 mins from Picc to Oxford Rd, so if a train arrives into Pic 2 mins after the previous departure, it's guaranteed to have, at best, a single yellow at the end of the platform when it pulls in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having the headway as 2 mins through the corridor effectively guarantees running on yellows. It's 2 mins from Picc to Oxford Rd, so if a train arrives into Pic 2 mins after the previous departure, it's guaranteed to have, at best, a single yellow at the end of the platform when it pulls in.

What's the problem with running on yellows when the linespeed is so low? The Merseyrail loop is only 2-aspect anyway, isn't it?

 

[The Planner]

What's the problem with running on yellows when the linespeed is so low? The Merseyrail loop is only 2-aspect anyway, isn't it?

Depends on what the TOC driving policy is as a driver will react differently, it may be negligible it may not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Depends on what the TOC driving policy is as a driver will react differently, it may be negligible it may not.

It would strike me that a specific policy for this line would be appropriate even if another policy applies on plain line. Were it not for e.g. Oxford Road's 5 platforms you could almost argue for low-speed on-sight operation. Perhaps even consider reducing it to 2-aspect.

 

[Dspatula]

The original work on that could never get the headways down unless you were accepting running on yellows.

It already runs on yellows anyway, especially towards Piccadilly.

Depends on what the TOC driving policy is as a driver will react differently, it may be negligible it may not.

TPE are generally most defence, Northern the lest but its probably far more down to the individual driver. Some signallers are also shall we say much less attentive about setting routes than others, signal policy is also to clear both signals towards Piccadilly and mid signals at oxford rd are only cleared as a last resort. Policy is also against putting 6 car set on platform 3 due to a SPAD a while ago.
Two useable platforms in each direction would certainly reduce most of these issues but the chance of any government commitment to doing this out of this situation seems pretty close to nil, services will be reduced and that will be that.

 

[childwallblues]

Victoria is a large, well-located station. I think I said already on this or a speculative thread, there is space for bays at the Western side, to make a new "Exchange" station for Victoria terminators, and for a lot less than four tracking Castlefield (which I really can't see achieves anything useful other than dwell times, since the same bottlenecks still exist at either end) you could extend the Eastern bay platforms at Victoria and make Oxford Road platform 1 fully usuable with turnback provision. You then use the various bays for the various local services (Oxford Road, Picadilly and Victoria all within reasonable distance for day-trippers, shoppers, etc.) and the through trains can use Victoria or Castlefield as appropriate. Ordsall Curve could be used as an art installation. Perhaps pin £20 notes to the bridge and call it modern art (in the mould of KLF in 1990s). And if some town no longer have a direct train to Manchester Airport (mostly off-peak, daytimes and evenings only, different timetable on Weekends, which is hardly conducive for use to catch a plane), then so be it.

There is no point in having west end bays as most services from Wigan and Bolton no longer terminate at Victoria instead running through to Rochdale, Blackburn and Leeds. Terminators are electrically hauled from Preston and the peak service from Liverpool which could be extended to Stalybridge after electrification.

 

[Ianno87]

What's the problem with running on yellows when the linespeed is so low? The Merseyrail loop is only 2-aspect anyway, isn't it?

There is a very specific issue going Eastbound - if a first train has not departed Oxford Road, then a second train will be running in on a red at Deansgate (as that is the last signal before Oxford Rd in that direction) If the train is not booked to stop at Deansgate, then it will be crawling from the previous signal (before Castlefield) to avoid standing in the platform.

Then when the first train Departs Oxford Rd, the second train will get a single Yellow at Deansgate. Which, for long trains matters because they cannot stop within the "inner" signal at Oxford Rd, so have to approach that slowly too, until it steps up from Red to Yellow to permit approach to the "outer" signals.

Resulting in one pretty slow crawl all the way from Water Street Jn to Oxford Rd.

So running on Yellows really does matter.

 

[CAF397]

Which is part of the problem freight trains have being signalled through the corridor. They straddle several signal sections at once, and if held for late running freights they will just clog up the whole corridor.

I've always said freight trains to and from Trafford Park should have priority because of their length - give them greens and get them out of the way. It's frustrating to see one waiting at Castlefield Jn having departed Trafford Park early, but it's lost its path due to being held for late running passenger services - which will cause more disruption crawling on yellows.

 

[BrianW]

There is a very specific issue going Eastbound - if a first train has not departed Oxford Road, then a second train will be running in on a red at Deansgate (as that is the last signal before Oxford Rd in that direction) If the train is not booked to stop at Deansgate, then it will be crawling from the previous signal (before Castlefield) to avoid standing in the platform.

Then when the first train Departs Oxford Rd, the second train will get a single Yellow at Deansgate. Which, for long trains matters because they cannot stop within the "inner" signal at Oxford Rd, so have to approach that slowly too, until it steps up from Red to Yellow to permit approach to the "outer" signals.

Resulting in one pretty slow crawl all the way from Water Street Jn to Oxford Rd.

So running on Yellows really does matter.

I have seen others suggest closing Deansgate- would that help?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I have seen others suggest closing Deansgate- would that help?

Not much stops there anyway, though it has been proposed as part of the Oxford Road upgrade which would have the platforms extended a fair way that way anyway.

I'm not sure why not stopping in the platform is that important these days - it was in the days of slamdoor, of course. And I've been on loads of trains that have stopped in the platform.

 

[Purple Orange]

Closing Deansgate is the wrong thing to do entirely.

 

[CAF397]

Deansgate has the Interchange with Metrolink. Bit far from Oxford Road to make it attractive for passengers to change from tram to train.

 

[NorthWestRover]

Agreed. That area of Manchester City Centre is now far livelier than when I was growing up and I am surprised more trains don't stop there.

 

[Purple Orange]

Agreed. That area of Manchester City Centre is now far livelier than when I was growing up and I am surprised more trains don't stop there.

Everything should stop there. The whole line, from Piccadilly to Victoria, the CLC and to Bolton needs the Merseyrail treatment. Infrastructure investment is of course needed.

 

[Ianno87]

I'm not sure why not stopping in the platform is that important these days - it was in the days of slamdoor, of course. And I've been on loads of trains that have stopped in the platform.

If it's a regular occupance, some people get wise and pull the passcom and jump out, which causes yet more delay (as one example). Hence drivers are taught to avoid doing it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If it's a regular occupance, some people get wise and pull the passcom and jump out, which causes yet more delay (as one example). Hence drivers are taught to avoid doing it.

I don't think I have ever heard of that happening. I'm sure it does, but I don't think demand for Deansgate is very high, to be honest. It's always empty even when there are trains due to stop.

 

[faltskog36abba]

There is no point in having west end bays as most services from Wigan and Bolton no longer terminate at Victoria instead running through to Rochdale, Blackburn and Leeds. Terminators are electrically hauled from Preston and the peak service from Liverpool which could be extended to Stalybridge after electrification.

What if the TFW North trains were sent to Victoria? Or Barrow/Windermere?. Doesnt the Kirkby service terminate in the through platforms anymore?.

 

[Kite159]

What if the TFW North trains were sent to Victoria? Or Barrow/Windermere?. Doesnt the Kirkby service terminate in the through platforms anymore?.

Kirkby services go to Blackburn via Burnley nowadays.

 

[HSTEd]

None of the solutions long term are going to be cheap.

So I expect none of them will happen as a result.

 

[Dspatula]

I have seen others suggest closing Deansgate- would that help?

Yes many trains are almost able to make up time but then delayed having to stop and Deansgate. More importantly many trains are forced to wait on the wrong side of various junctions because they have a stop a Deansgate to allow a late running train that doesn't stop to pass, extending what would might been a 3-4 minute delay as Oxford Rd into an 8-10 minute one. The opposite is also quite common with late non-stop trains forced to wait until a scheduled stop at Deansgate it done with similar increases in delay.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I don't think I have ever heard of that happening. I'm sure it does, but I don't think demand for Deansgate is very high, to be honest. It's always empty even when there are trains due to stop.

May I be so bold as to ask if you live reasonably local to Deansgate station as you seem to have very definite opinions as to its viability. I have used that station to disembark and then to use the road overbridge to Deansgate-Castlefield Metrolink station which has tram services to many directions on that network. There have always been people on both platforms when I disembarked there.

 

[jfollows]

I don't think I have ever heard of that happening. I'm sure it does, but I don't think demand for Deansgate is very high, to be honest. It's always empty even when there are trains due to stop.

Is some of that cause versus effect, though? As in, the service isn't frequent so the demand isn't high?

I commuted Wilmslow-Sale by train for a short period a long time ago and found it very useful as an interchange station.

More recently, but pre-Covid, I sometimes go Wilmslow-Manchester Airport to change for a train from there which calls at Deansgate because I sometimes find it a convenient station for my destination - not always, of course, it varies.

But I'm put off by the infrequent service. I'd like more trains to stop there but of course this would make the existing unworkable timetable even worse i know.

EDIT I meant to say, but forgot to say, that I change at Manchester Airport if I can to avoid having to change at Manchester Piccadilly and to use platforms 13 & 14 there, which are just horrible these days. Stockport is sometimes an alternative place to change I know.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

EDIT I meant to say, but forgot to say, that I change at Manchester Airport if I can to avoid having to change at Manchester Piccadilly and to use platforms 13 & 14 there, which are just horrible these days. Stockport is sometimes an alternative place to change I know.

Up to the start of 2020, when we lived somewhat further away, we always commenced journeys to York and to Durham from Manchester Airport railway station, as we still had the use of the consultancy parking places there as one of my post-retirement benefits.

 

[AGH]

My TFW train stops at Deansgate most mornings as we have to wait for the Northern CLC train to cross from platform 5 and enter Deansgate before we are released. Loads of time to offload. I use Deansgate at night as its closer to Spinningfields than Oxford Road. Now if they reintroduced platforms at Salford Central on the Liverpool line that may help spread the load a bit. Loads of buildings going up around there.