Extending TPE Scotland services further south

[Philip]

Do people think there would be substantial benefit in merging a Birmingham-Manchester service with the TPE Scotland? I'm referring to the Bristol path that is currently not running but, under this proposal, the service would start and terminate at Birmingham New Street and would then form the current Scotland service north of Manchester Piccadilly. In terms of the pros and cons of the idea; it would mean TPE having to order more 397s or Azumas and either CC traincrew having to learn these units, or TPE crew having to learn the Manchester-Birmingham route, but this would at least mean electric running for the service instead of Voyagers, and also would mean the 4-coach Voyagers are replaced with 5-coach units. Castlefield should not really be a problem because of the easing of capacity brought about by the task force, but would platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly be suitable for handling large numbers of passengers for Birmingham mixing with the Scottish passengers?

I'll also add that this would be restoring a through service which ran for many years but was cut in the mid-2000s. Would there be a stronger benefit in providing Bolton and Oxford Road with a through service for Crewe or Stoke, Stafford, Wolverhampton and Birmingham, than with providing North Lakes, Carlisle, Glasgow and Edinburgh with a direct Man Airport service?

 

[Spaceflower]

MIA might approve.

 

[30907]

Some problems here:
1. I think you are right that using Piccadilly 13-14 for a long-distance through service would extend dwell times, so that's a non-starter (it was OK when XC started running the occasional train through in the 80s, as far fewer trains were about).
2. Bristol-Manchester is an important enough flow not to lose (AIUI XC want it back as soon as resources/DfT allow).

 

[Ken H]

Some problems here:
1. I think you are right that using Piccadilly 13-14 for a long-distance through service would extend dwell times, so that's a non-starter (it was OK when XC started running the occasional train through in the 80s, as far fewer trains were about).
2. Bristol-Manchester is an important enough flow not to lose (AIUI XC want it back as soon as resources/DfT allow).

point 1. Big issue there
point 2. Why not a couple of through Manc - Bristols a day, and the rest are electric Manc - Brum. Maybe extended to Scotland.

 

[JonathanH]

It is a shame that the line through from Crewe through Shrewsbury and Hereford to Newport isn't electrified. Then they could be diverted onto Cardiff.

Personally, I'd divert both the TPE and TfW services away from Manchester and match them up via Warrington with a major interchange there to enable passengers to reach Manchester. However, it might work via Manchester as well.

 

[Starmill]

It is a shame that the line through from Crewe through Shrewsbury and Hereford to Newport isn't electrified. Then they could be diverted onto Cardiff.

Personally, I'd divert both the TPE and TfW services away from Manchester and match them up via Warrington with a major interchange there to enable passengers to reach Manchester. However, it might work via Manchester as well.

Would you just bin the idea of through trains between Edinburgh or Glasgow and Manchester completely then?

 

[A0]

Do people think there would be substantial benefit in merging a Birmingham-Manchester service with the TPE Scotland? I'm referring to the Bristol path that is currently not running but, under this proposal, the service would start and terminate at Birmingham New Street and would then form the current Scotland service north of Manchester Piccadilly. In terms of the pros and cons of the idea; it would mean TPE having to order more 397s or Azumas and either CC traincrew having to learn these units, or TPE crew having to learn the Manchester-Birmingham route, but this would at least mean electric running for the service instead of Voyagers, and also would mean the 4-coach Voyagers are replaced with 5-coach units. Castlefield should not really be a problem because of the easing of capacity brought about by the task force, but would platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly be suitable for handling large numbers of passengers for Birmingham mixing with the Scottish passengers?

I'll also add that this would be restoring a through service which ran for many years but was cut in the mid-2000s. Would there be a stronger benefit in providing Bolton and Oxford Road with a through service for Crewe or Stoke, Stafford, Wolverhampton and Birmingham, than with providing North Lakes, Carlisle, Glasgow and Edinburgh with a direct Man Airport service?

What's the problem you're trying to solve ?

There are already services from the Lakes etc to Birmingham which don't run via Manchester - so would be quicker than any via Manchester service.

 

[Ken H]

If you want Brum - Manc - Scotland services why not run them via Man Vic. Just needs a link at Ardwick. My crayoning.

 

[JonathanH]

What's the problem you're trying to solve ?

I think the OP's desire, expressed in a number of threads is direct trains from Bolton to the South and Wilmslow to the North. This is another manifestation of that idea.

 

[A0]

I think the OP's desire, expressed in a number of threads is direct trains from Bolton to the South and Wilmslow to the North. This is another manifestation of that idea.

OK - hadn't spotted those threads. Hardly a compelling problem that needs fixing then.

 

[Watershed]

If you want Brum - Manc - Scotland services why not run them via Man Vic. Just needs a link at Ardwick. My crayoning.
View attachment 107560

You couldn't possibly justify building a new stretch of line like that for 1tph. Especially when there's already a line that performs much the same role, being that from Ashton Moss North Jn to Denton and thence to Heaton Norris Jn.

 

[JonathanH]

You couldn't possibly justify building a new stretch of line like that for 1tph. Especially when there's already a line that performs much the same role, being that from Ashton Moss North Jn to Denton and thence to Heaton Norris Jn.

Especially one that is on the path of HS2 / NPR and would need to be removed within the next 20 years.

 

[Watershed]

Especially one that is on the path of HS2 / NPR and would need to be removed within the next 20 years.

Exactly - not to mention the need to demolish half of Ardwick depot, then somehow go above or below the Ardwick-Ashburys line (for grade separation), then descend/ascend again to meet the line to Stockport.

Arguably that's the sort of link that is needed in the longer term as part of the decongestion of the Castlefield corridor, but it'd be far easier to redouble the Stockport-Denton line than to do all that.

 

[Philip]

OK - hadn't spotted those threads. Hardly a compelling problem that needs fixing then.

Wilmslow to Glasgow and Edinburgh would probably have a substantial flow of passengers, like Wilmslow to London has.

Bolton and Salford are sort of both like the Wolverhampton of the North West. Aside from the issue of capacity in terminating trains at New Street, if the present Scotland-Birmingham-London was cut in half at Birmingham then there would probably also be strong arguments made against Wolverhampton losing it's direct London service. Bolton used to have direct trains to Birmingham and if these were fairly well used then it is a fairly good reason for reinstating them.

As mentioned upthread, what about running into Victoria via Denton? How much time would this add to the journey as far as Birmingham to Manchester goes?

 

[Bald Rick]

If you want Brum - Manc - Scotland services why not run them via Man Vic. Just needs a link at Ardwick. My crayoning.
View attachment 107560

As others have said, that goes right across HS2 and NPR.

Wilmslow to Glasgow and Edinburgh would probably have a substantial flow of passengers, like Wilmslow to London has.

Probably? I doubt it. I imagine almost all the Wilmslow - Scotland traffic is already on the rails via changing at Crewe or the airport.


I think perhaps a better question would be: what is the best mix of services on the WCML north of Crewe / Manchester.

 

[The Planner]

Wilmslow to Glasgow and Edinburgh would probably have a substantial flow of passengers, like Wilmslow to London has.

Bolton and Salford are sort of both like the Wolverhampton of the North West. Aside from the issue of capacity in terminating trains at New Street, if the present Scotland-Birmingham-London was cut in half at Birmingham then there would probably also be strong arguments made against Wolverhampton losing it's direct London service. Bolton used to have direct trains to Birmingham and if these were fairly well used then it is a fairly good reason for reinstating them.

As mentioned upthread, what about running into Victoria via Denton? How much time would this add to the journey as far as Birmingham to Manchester goes?

15 added minutes.

Why would Wilmslow have a substantial flow to Scotland? How many people were using Bolton to Birmingham?

 

[Bald Rick]

15 added minutes.

Why would Wilmslow have a substantial flow to Scotland? How many people were using Bolton to Birmingham?

Perhaps someone who hails from Bolton, who used to visit the West Midlands regularly, can comment on the size of Bolton - W Mids traffic. It would help if they also knew a bit about Timetabling. If only there was someone... @Ianno87 .... do you know anyone who could help

 

[Philip]

15 added minutes.

Why would Wilmslow have a substantial flow to Scotland? How many people were using Bolton to Birmingham?

For similar reasons that it currently has a substantial flow to London, because of the business links and wealth of the area. I suspect Wilmslow to Birmingham would also be a strong flow. If Wilmslow to Scotland and Birmingham was hourly direct, the vast majority of those passengers currently changing at Crewe or Manchester would just take the direct train.

 

[The Planner]

For similar reasons that it currently has a substantial flow to London, because of the business links and wealth of the area. I suspect Wilmslow to Birmingham would also be a strong flow. If Wilmslow to Scotland and Birmingham was hourly direct, the vast majority of those passengers currently changing at Crewe or Manchester would just take the direct train.

The reason it has a flow to London is because it can be done in less than two hours, Wilmslow to Edinburgh or Glasgow is 3½ hours direct, that isn't commuter territory.

 

[Bald Rick]

If Wilmslow to Scotland and Birmingham was hourly direct, the vast majority of those passengers currently changing at Crewe or Manchester would just take the direct train.

Indeed they would. That doesn’t bring in more revenue though.

You might be surprised how big the London market is for most stations compared to almost anywhere else. I’d be surprised if Wilmslow - Glasgow / Edinburgh generates 10% of Wilmslow - London.

 

[Chester1]

The last TPE franchise invitation to tender included an option to extend the Scotland service to Crewe. First didn't take it up.

 

[Philip]

In view of the problem of Piccadilly platforms 13 and 14 and the way it probably prevents long distance north-south running through Manchester, how do people think Oxford Road platforms and the station I general would handle a service such as this one suggested (or any north-south long distance traffic), if it was the only Manchester central station the train called at?

 

[Watershed]

In view of the problem of Piccadilly platforms 13 and 14 and the way it probably prevents long distance north-south running through Manchester, how do people think Oxford Road platforms and the station I general would handle a service such as this one suggested (or any north-south long distance traffic), if it was the only Manchester central station the train called at?

Goodness, I had to check it wasn't April 1st!

If anything, it's Oxford Rd that such a service might miss out (indeed they commonly do in the event of laterunning, diversions etc.).

There's no way that Piccadilly would be missed given that it's the interchange for so many other places, even if it's a bit less of a 'destination' compared to what's near Oxford Rd.

 

[Philip]

Goodness, I had to check it wasn't April 1st!

If anything, it's Oxford Rd that such a service might miss out (indeed they commonly do in the event of laterunning, diversions etc.).

There's no way that Piccadilly would be missed given that it's the interchange for so many other places, even if it's a bit less of a 'destination' compared to what's near Oxford Rd.

Yes, but taking this suggested service as an example; if it called at Bolton, Oxford Road, Stockport and then wherever, you already have many of these interchanges covered before adding Piccadilly to the list. Oxford Road for Sheffield, Liverpool, Leeds, York/NE, Chester/North Wales; Stockport for Sheffield, London/SE, South Coast, High Peak, East Midlands/East Anglia etc. Piccadilly has the Metrolink, but then again walking from platforms 13-14 to the tram stop isn't much better than walking from Oxford Road to St Peter's Square or Deansgate. Stockport and Oxford Road are also more accessible for changing than Piccadilly is between the through and terminating platforms.

The question wasn't relating so much to interchange options though, it was whether Oxford Road is more capable of handling a large movement of passengers than Piccadilly 13/14 is for this kind of service - and if it could cope as the standalone city centre station on the stopping pattern. Don't forget that Oxford Road will also be having large scale works over the next few years to bring it 'up to standard' for use as a mainline city centre station.

 

[LittleAH]

Don't forget that Oxford Road will also be having large scale works over the next few years to bring it 'up to standard' for use as a mainline city centre station.

It really won't though. At best it will be a 4 track through station, but even that's not a certainty - rumours are it may only be a 3 platform station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It really won't though. At best it will be a 4 track through station, but even that's not a certainty - rumours are it may only be a 3 platform station.

The number of platforms is not that important - at present only three (2, 4 and 5) are used most of the time anyway.

 

[30907]

You might be surprised how big the London market is for most stations compared to almost anywhere else. I’d be surprised if Wilmslow - Glasgow / Edinburgh generates 10% of Wilmslow - London.

(Greater) Manchester-London (3 full length tph) vs -Scotland (1 half-length tph), gives a ratio of service provision at 6:1, and that's before considering the fare levels where rumour has it that London commands a premium.

 

[Ken H]

Indeed they would. That doesn’t bring in more revenue though.

You might be surprised how big the London market is for most stations compared to almost anywhere else. I’d be surprised if Wilmslow - Glasgow / Edinburgh generates 10% of Wilmslow - London.

Be interesting if that is still as true post pandemic. I think London has lost its allure over recent years.

 

[Philip]

It really won't though. At best it will be a 4 track through station, but even that's not a certainty - rumours are it may only be a 3 platform station.

It is situated on a WCML loop so very much a mainline station; it's only the lack of investment that has made it not as fit for purpose as it should be.

 

[JonathanH]

It is situated on a WCML loop so very much a mainline station; it's only the lack of investment that has made it not as fit for purpose as it should be.

Not only lack of investment. Manchester Oxford Road is also on a very space constrained site. The station wasn't on a 'WCML loop' until the Windsor Link was opened.