Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
You keep saying this as if there's going to be an established service. There isn't. By the time this work is finished it will have been two years since there was a Southport to Manchester Piccadilly service.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Irlam only had 1tph last time I checked and it didn’t seem like an adequate service for it. The Airport service currently serves Birchwood anyway, so that is only 2 additional stops, which isn’t too unreasonable considering they are some of the bigger stations. Would it be possible for any of the others to have 0tph like Sankey for Penketh or the MUFC platform due to proximity to other more significant stations? What calls are planned to be made west of Warrington?
Forget the smaller stations, as I said. Just focus on Urmston, Irlam, and Birchwood. In 2019 the former two had 2tph and Birchwood 3tph. A similar service can clearly no longer be provided as a result of the changes to other services at Manchester Oxford Road. This means that more long distance trains have to stop, despite their not really having the capacity to and their layout (158s and locomotive hauled train sets) being poor for carrying the large numbers of standees which will result.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The current problems (beyond the lack of a Southport - Piccadilly/Airport service) are concentrated more in the centres of Manchester and Salford than as far out as Preston though aren’t they.
I did read it. Out of the three unfavourable outcomes, I'd rank York, Leeds etc. losing a direct Airport service as the worst, CLC stations having a reduced frequency (with Liverpool-Manchester passengers suffering longer journey times and more overcrowding) as the second worst, and Southport losing its Castlefield service as the least worst.
I did read it. Out of the three unfavourable outcomes, I'd rank York, Leeds etc. losing a direct Airport service as the worst, CLC stations having a reduced frequency (with Liverpool-Manchester passengers suffering longer journey times and more overcrowding) as the second worst, and Southport losing its Castlefield service as the least worst.
Southport losing its Castlefield service may be the least worst option of those 3, but it is a very narrow range of services comparing Southport to one of our largest cities and a place that has no alternative. There are of course some even less worse options such as Alderley Edge losing its Castlefield service and terminating in the main shed at Piccadilly (as it should, with Southport losing direct services to Alderley Edge which I doubt anyone has ever used end to end it is no great loss) or Chester - Airport services could run non-stop via the Mid Cheshire line and reverse in the main shed at Piccadilly for a journey time within 4 minutes of taking up a path through Castlefield and services to Warrington Bank Quay retained by the Chester - Leeds service, although running Chester - Stalybridge/Huddersfield would reduce crossing moves at Victoria.
The reality is passengers would rather have 1tph Southport - Piccadilly - Airport than 2tph Southport - Victoria, because it would be utterly useless to them. I would call that a need.
I did read it. Out of the three unfavourable outcomes, I'd rank York, Leeds etc. losing a direct Airport service as the worst, CLC stations having a reduced frequency (with Liverpool-Manchester passengers suffering longer journey times and more overcrowding) as the second worst, and Southport losing its Castlefield service as the least worst.
There's no "need" about it. It would be nice, of course. But the nature of MRTF is compromise.
The fact that you can rank the importance of having all these towns & cities linked to the airport (and castlefield) is a demonstration of the problem. Why does Manchester Airport have to have a rail connection with every region across the north? Heathrow doesn’t have that in the south, nor does Gatwick or Stansted. Connecting to Manchester Airport should be a case of connecting at one of the central Manchester stations for the majority of routes.
As for Southport, it’s services really should be centred on Salford Central & Manchester Victoria. There is no valid reason for having services split between Piccadilly & Victoria at all. It should be like most major cities, whereby you get to the centre and change trains if needed.
The reality is passengers would rather have 1tph Southport - Piccadilly - Airport than 2tph Southport - Victoria, because it would be utterly useless to them. I would call that a need.
The reality is passengers would rather have 1tph Southport - Piccadilly - Airport than 2tph Southport - Victoria, because it would be utterly useless to them. I would call that a need.
They are not adequate. I have attempted to connect at Salford Crescent onto a service from Victoria several times and on many of them it has not been possible.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The fact that you can rank the importance of having all these towns & cities linked to the airport (and castlefield) is a demonstration of the problem. Why does Manchester Airport have to have a rail connection with every region across the north? Heathrow doesn’t have that in the south, nor does Gatwick or Stansted. Connecting to Manchester Airport should be a case of connecting at one of the central Manchester stations for the majority of routes.
What would be the problem with limiting the number of paths through Castlefield and to the airport and then allocating them to the surrounding towns and cities in order of priority? That sounds like the perfect solution to me. Gatwick Airport has direct services to numerous regions via Thameslink and Heathrow will soon gain more via Crossrail.
As for Southport, it’s services really should be centred on Salford Central & Manchester Victoria. There is no valid reason for having services split between Piccadilly & Victoria at all. It should be like most major cities, whereby you get to the centre and change trains if needed.
Please explain why you think it would be “utterly useless to them”.
If passengers are travelling specifically to stations on the south side, e.g. for reasons of work to either Deansgate, Oxford Road or Piccadilly, not Salford Central or Victoria at all, then having 2 services neither of which serving their destination is utterly useless to them. Are connections genuinely reasonable or likely to be reliable enough to use? What if they are already full and it is impossible for them to board?
The fact that you can rank the importance of having all these towns & cities linked to the airport (and castlefield) is a demonstration of the problem. Why does Manchester Airport have to have a rail connection with every region across the north?
It doesn't have to have services to anywhere. But when places have had direct trains for 30 years, people come to rely on it. So changes shouldn't be undertaken lightly.
Heathrow and Stansted are on their own branches, with (mostly) dedicated clockface services to central London.
Gatwick meanwhile is like Manchester Airport - in that it doesn't necessarily get its high level of service because it justifies it, but rather because of where it happens to fall on the network.
In an ideal world, to reduce congestion and conflicting moves, CLC trains would go to Castlefield, Chat Moss trains would go to Victoria and then towards Stalybridge, and Bolton and Atherton trains would go to Victoria and then towards Rochdale. Manchester Airport would then have its own shuttle service from Piccadilly platforms 9-14, perhaps 4tph non-stop and 2tph stopping at the intermediate stations.
But you would lose a lot of connectivity if you did that. Hence why it is unpopular all round.
As for Southport, it’s services really should be centred on Salford Central & Manchester Victoria. There is no valid reason for having services split between Piccadilly & Victoria at all.
The real problem is that Victoria and Piccadilly are far apart from each other, and have poor links. Yes, there is the tram, but it only runs every 10 minutes and is not a great deal faster than walking. It's also not integrated, with cross-Manchester tickets from outwith Greater Manchester not valid on it, and no protection if you suffer delays.
If there were a sufficiently good quality connection, i.e. something like the Tube, then I think it would be rather less of an issue. Similarly, having a same-platform change at Salford Crescent is a reasonable alternative.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
They are not adequate. I have attempted to connect at Salford Crescent onto a service from Victoria several times and on many of them it has not been possible.
They are not adequate. I have attempted to connect at Salford Crescent onto a service from Victoria several times and on many of them it has not been possible
If passengers are travelling specifically to stations on the south side, e.g. for reasons of work to either Deansgate, Oxford Road or Piccadilly, not Salford Central or Victoria at all, then having 2 services neither of which serving their destination is utterly useless to them.
That predicament puts them in the exact same position as numerous other passengers who would like a service to Castlefield, but don't have one. Except that of course in their case, they have the option of a same-platform change, a luxury not afforded to other passengers.
Those are the kinds of questions that are reasonable to ask during the formulation of the timetable. As it turns out, the connections will be reasonable, and the whole aim of the game is to make the service more reliable.
But the vulgar political intervention that has resulted from OPSTA's lobbying completely ignores that kind of finer detail.
A hopefully unlikely prospect most of the time, given the reduction in commuters and the strengthening in services over recent years. But again, it's a problem no worse than that which will be suffered by CLC passengers.
It's so frustrating that the taskforce wasn't able to put the half-hourly Southport - Stalybridge via Bolton and Wigan North Western - Hazel Grove via Manchester Piccadilly idea forward with a little bit more force. It performs better on every metric, albeit they wanted the latter to be peak only and I think it should have been all day, but there we go.
Southport losing its Castlefield service may be the least worst option of those 3, but it is a very narrow range of services comparing Southport to one of our largest cities and a place that has no alternative. There are of course some even less worse options such as Alderley Edge losing its Castlefield service and terminating in the main shed at Piccadilly (as it should, with Southport losing direct services to Alderley Edge which I doubt anyone has ever used end to end it is no great loss) or Chester - Airport services could run non-stop via the Mid Cheshire line and reverse in the main shed at Piccadilly for a journey time within 4 minutes of taking up a path through Castlefield and services to Warrington Bank Quay retained by the Chester - Leeds service, although running Chester - Stalybridge/Huddersfield would reduce crossing moves at Victoria.
The reality is passengers would rather have 1tph Southport - Piccadilly - Airport than 2tph Southport - Victoria, because it would be utterly useless to them. I would call that a need.
You appear to be unaware of the MRTF timetable changes that are being introduced in December this year.
The Southport - Alderley Edge is being split into Southport - Oxford Road and Piccadilly - Alderley Edge.
The Barrow/Windermere - Airport is being rerouted via Chorley and Bolton instead of Wigan.
The Blackpool - Hazel Grove is being rerouted to become a second Blackpool - Airport.
The Preston - Victoria is being binned.
On the CLC, the Liverpool - Airport is being replaced by a TPE Liverpool - Cleethorpes, calling at Birchwood, Irlam and Urmston, while one of the Liverpool - Oxford Road stoppers is being split at Warrington Central, with the Warrington - Oxford Road part becoming peaks only.
This service pattern will have been in place for two years by the time the Wigan - Bolton electrification is delivered.
What would be the problem with limiting the number of paths through Castlefield and to the airport and then allocating them to the surrounding towns and cities in order of priority? That sounds like the perfect solution to me. Gatwick Airport has direct services to numerous regions via Thameslink and Heathrow will soon gain more via Crossrail.
If passengers are travelling specifically to stations on the south side, e.g. for reasons of work to either Deansgate, Oxford Road or Piccadilly, not Salford Central or Victoria at all, then having 2 services neither of which serving their destination is utterly useless to them. Are connections genuinely reasonable or likely to be reliable enough to use? What if they are already full and it is impossible for them to board?
Thats not a good enough reason. Earlier you said the Alderley Edge services should terminate in the main shed at Piccadilly, but by your logic, those trains should be split between Victoria and Piccadilly. How can you advocate for one line to have what you consider to be a lesser service than your local line?
As it happens, the Alderley Edge services are my local stoppers and I think they should terminate at Piccadilly, while there should be a good frequency services from Piccadilly P14 to Victoria. The point here is that priorities are all wrong for Manchester's rail network. In turn your 2 tph from Souhport should also only go to Salford Central and Victoria, where people can connect with a high frequency shuttle around the Ordsall Chord. It needs the additional platforms at Salford Central to implement this.
The real problem is that Victoria and Piccadilly are far apart from each other, and have poor links. Yes, there is the tram, but it only runs every 10 minutes and is not a great deal faster than walking. It's also not integrated, with cross-Manchester tickets from outwith Greater Manchester not valid on it, and no protection if you suffer delays.
If there were a sufficiently good quality connection, i.e. something like the Tube, then I think it would be rather less of an issue. Similarly, having a same-platform change at Salford Crescent is a reasonable alternative.
Yes they aren't very well connected, which is why the Ordsall Chord needs to be utilised far better than it is. A minimum 6 tph frequency calling at Picc, Oxford Rd, Deansgate, Salford Central, Victoria.
Southport losing its Castlefield service may be the least worst option of those 3, but it is a very narrow range of services comparing Southport to one of our largest cities and a place that has no alternative. There are of course some even less worse options such as Alderley Edge losing its Castlefield service and terminating in the main shed at Piccadilly (as it should, with Southport losing direct services to Alderley Edge which I doubt anyone has ever used end to end it is no great loss)
Alderley Edge, Wilmslow, Handforth and Cheadle Hulme are south of Manchester (so it makes sense for them to be connected to the south Manchester station). They don't really need a Castlefield service, but I think it has a greater justification than for Southport.
In contrast, Southport is a large provincial town over 30 miles from Manchester, where the network layout happens to permit services to either of the two large Manchester stations, but where the circumstances mean that running to Victoria is relatively easy, while running to Piccadilly is a huge pain. I fail to see how it merits a through service to Piccadilly any more than Halifax or Bradford, for example. In fact, if anything they need it more, as they don't get an opportunity to change onto Picc-bound services - unlike Southport where Salford provides that opportunity.
Chester - Airport services could run non-stop via the Mid Cheshire line and reverse in the main shed at Piccadilly for a journey time within 4 minutes of taking up a path through Castlefield and services to Warrington Bank Quay retained by the Chester - Leeds service
That would be a great idea, except for the fact that if connectivity to Piccadilly is the issue here (and it seems to be), WBQ is losing its service as the Chester-Leeds runs via Victoria!
I did read it. Out of the three unfavourable outcomes, I'd rank York, Leeds etc. losing a direct Airport service as the worst, CLC stations having a reduced frequency (with Liverpool-Manchester passengers suffering longer journey times and more overcrowding) as the second worst, and Southport losing its Castlefield service as the least worst.
I cannot possibly agree. There are very frequent connections from Picc to the Airport, so through services are utterly, trivially unimportant and should be based solely on operational convenience. This cannot possibly be less worse than an urban service being dropped to 0.5tph whereas if it was at the other end of the M62 it would likely be a 4tph Merseyrail service.
Don't say "but luggage", because the walk at the Airport end is much, much longer than a change at Picc, even from 1 to 13.
It is just a reversing siding for through services. Trains that need to reverse there can go there, but the gaps should be filled by a dedicated EMU operating from Picc P11.
I would counter that issue is not walking times but platform dwell times in Castlefield. Getting X passengers onto a train will always be faster than getting X passengers and X suitcases on.
Of course, the solution is to build platforms 15 and 16. Maybe even 17 - a north-facing bay for the Southport princesses. But that's been done to death already.
FWIW I would agree Glazebrook is useless (but rather than close it I would build a decent sized "eco suburb" centred on the station plus a bridge and quality cycle and pedestrian route so it is useful for west Cadishead too) but nothing else along there is really any different to a typical Merseyrail route, pick whichever you like. There are Merseyrail stations under 1km apart, but that doesn't make them pointless.
Alderley Edge, Wilmslow, Handforth and Cheadle Hulme are south of Manchester (so it makes sense for them to be connected to the south Manchester station). They don't really need a Castlefield service, but I think it has a greater justification than for Southport.
In contrast, Southport is a large provincial town over 30 miles from Manchester, where the network layout happens to permit services to either of the two large Manchester stations, but where the circumstances mean that running to Victoria is relatively easy, while running to Piccadilly is a huge pain. I fail to see how it merits a through service to Piccadilly any more than Halifax or Bradford, for example. In fact, if anything they need it more, as they don't get an opportunity to change onto Picc-bound services - unlike Southport where Salford provides that opportunity.
Exactly. I'd make the argument that the aim should be for all northern services coming in from Bolton should head in to Salford Central tral and Victoria before running on to Rochdale. Meanwhile once TRU has been complete, the Huddersfield and Stalybridge stoppers should be heading around the chord to the airport. That could be 4 tph.
Exactly. I'd make the argument that the aim should be for all northern services coming in from Bolton should head in to Salford Central tral and Victoria before running on to Rochdale. Meanwhile once TRU has been complete, the Huddersfield and Stalybridge stoppers should be heading around the chord to the airport. That could be 4 tph.
So no Preston-Castlefield services at all? That is, mothball the Windsor Link?
That would be a VERY retrograde step. We can argue all you like about how important Southport is or isn't, but Preston does need to be connected to Castlefield with at least 1tph, preferably two. Due to its connectivity, Preston should ideally have services to both, which it did before COVID.
So no Preston-Castlefield services at all? That is, mothball the Windsor Link?
That would be a VERY retrograde step. We can argue all you like about how important Southport is or isn't, but Preston does need to be connected to Castlefield with at least 1tph, preferably two. Due to its connectivity, Preston should ideally have services to both, which it did before COVID.
Not necessarily no Preston-Castlefield. I mentioned northern services particularly because the TPE Scotland service might still be better off going to Piccadilly.
It's amazing how many discussions here about Greater Manchester railways end up revolving around Southport line connections to the Castlefield corridor and the general state of local services on the CLC route. I would suggest we clearly have a case of Boiling Frog Syndrome here and it's been 30 years or so in the making.
Ever since the Windsor Link was opened the focus has always been on connections from the Chorley line with the Atherton line being completely ignored. The Southport connection only came about when the Airport branch was opened and it was recognised that Wigan could be connected relatively easily but has been well used since then. The decline in CLC local services is even worse: back in the day some services used to reach Piccadilly but of course reversals back then were no problem. The only other services affected were the Altrincham locals and later the hourly Liverpool-Hope Valley (& beyond) expresses. But as Manchester's commercial centre became increasingly focussed on the Piccadilly area rail services were gradually shifted there away from Victoria (or converted to Metrolink). This was done without any thought of long-term capacity implications, indeed Victoria was significantly slimmed down.
Of course we are where we are but getting services to more closely align with passenger needs is going to take a long time given the obvious need for infrastructure improvements whether that be additional/lengthened platforms, additional trackage or (ideally) grade-separation of key junctions. Sadly given the general lack of good political will regarding railways I doubt we will ever have a network capable of satisfying our needs and aspirations. As such trying to forecast future service patterns is very much a prisoner to short term expediency which is difficult to predict.
In the meantime decent connections to alleviate some of the shortfalls are absolutely vital. I have endured far too many 20+ minute waits at Salford Crescent!
It's amazing how many discussions here about Greater Manchester railways end up revolving around Southport line connections to the Castlefield corridor and the general state of local services on the CLC route. I would suggest we clearly have a case of Boiling Frog Syndrome here and it's been 30 years or so in the making.
Ever since the Windsor Link was opened the focus has always been on connections from the Chorley line with the Atherton line being completely ignored. The Southport connection only came about when the Airport branch was opened and it was recognised that Wigan could be connected relatively easily but has been well used since then. The decline in CLC local services is even worse: back in the day some services used to reach Piccadilly but of course reversals back then were no problem. The only other services affected were the Altrincham locals and later the hourly Liverpool-Hope Valley (& beyond) expresses. But as Manchester's commercial centre became increasingly focussed on the Piccadilly area rail services were gradually shifted there away from Victoria (or converted to Metrolink). This was done without any thought of long-term capacity implications, indeed Victoria was significantly slimmed down.
Of course we are where we are but getting services to more closely align with passenger needs is going to take a long time given the obvious need for infrastructure improvements whether that be additional/lengthened platforms, additional trackage or (ideally) grade-separation of key junctions. Sadly given the general lack of good political will regarding railways I doubt we will ever have a network capable of satisfying our needs and aspirations. As such trying to forecast future service patterns is very much a prisoner to short term expediency which is difficult to predict.
In the meantime decent connections to alleviate some of the shortfalls are absolutely vital. I have endured far too many 20+ minute waits at Salford Crescent!
You see I don't see the Piccadilly area as an area of focus over and above others these days. Spinningfields and NOMA are closer to Salford Central and Victoria respectively, and they are very important employment centres, moreso than anything near Piccadilly. Piccadilly will also see an increase increase in commercial activity with everything that is proposed around there, but so will the North side of the city centre. The whole city had changed and to view it all as a need to access Piccadilly is becoming a bit like saying all London services must go to Liverpool Street but not King's Cross.
My proposal is the one I've made several times (I've changed it a bit to make it more realistic). 10 tph through Castlefield:
- 2 tph TPE/EMR Liverpool to Cleethorpes/Norwich
- 2 tph Airport-Blackpool North
- 2 tph TPE Airport-Newcastle
- 2 tph Wigan North Western-Airport (electric operation whenever the wires are up)
- 2 tph Oxford Road-Liverpool stopper.
This would keep Castlefield simple and clock face and 2 tph to all CLC stations. Also a decent service in the Ordsall Curve. The airport line would get a 4 tph stopping service and TPE non-stop. All Northern services towards the south would run from Picadilly.
Chester services would be transferred to TPE and run to Hull/Huddersfield via Manchester Victoria, North Wales would run via Altrincham to Piccadilly shed, and Atherton would have 4 tph (all the Calder Valley service, to keep both sides of Victoria separate), 2 of which would go on to Southport and one to Kirkby (later Headbolt Lane). Stalybridge locals would be provided by the Chat Moss stopper and the Windermere/Barrow service, and the TPE WCML service would be extended to Staly after the wires are up. As neither the second mid-Cheshire service nor this can happen ATM (level crossing issues and electrification respectively), temporarily the Newcastle services would run to Piccadilly shed. I personally think this is a balanced timetable, even though there are losers too (mainly the places whose services move to Manchester Victoria). In the longer term IMO the solution is a third track from Oxford Road to the CLC junction, to isolate the CLC stoppers from the rest of traffic.
My proposal is the one I've made several times (I've changed it a bit to make it more realistic). 10 tph through Castlefield:
- 2 tph TPE/EMR Liverpool to Cleethorpes/Norwich
- 2 tph Airport-Blackpool North
- 2 tph TPE Airport-Newcastle
- 2 tph Wigan North Western-Airport (electric operation whenever the wires are up)
- 2 tph Oxford Road-Liverpool stopper.
This would keep Castlefield simple and clock face and 2 tph to all CLC stations. Also a decent service in the Ordsall Curve. The airport line would get a 4 tph stopping service and TPE non-stop. All Northern services towards the south would run from Picadilly.
Chester services would be transferred to TPE and run to Hull/Huddersfield via Manchester Victoria, North Wales would run via Altrincham to Piccadilly shed, and Atherton would have 4 tph (all the Calder Valley service, to keep both sides of Victoria separate), 2 of which would go on to Southport and one to Kirkby (later Headbolt Lane). Stalybridge locals would be provided by the Chat Moss stopper and the Windermere/Barrow service, and the TPE WCML service would be extended to Staly after the wires are up. As neither the second mid-Cheshire service nor this can happen ATM (level crossing issues and electrification respectively), temporarily the Newcastle services would run to Piccadilly shed. I personally think this is a balanced timetable, even though there are losers too (mainly the places whose services move to Manchester Victoria). In the longer term IMO the solution is a third track from Oxford Road to the CLC junction, to isolate the CLC stoppers from the rest of traffic.
It would have been much more useful if the Castlefield improvements hadn't been mothballed. The original purpose was to eliminate en-route reversals in Picc main shed by sending everything from the Airport round the chord, but Castlefield is too much of a bottleneck.
You’re looking at that piece of infrastructure all wrong. It is only because priority is given to other lines that it appears to be useless. Rail services through the city need to be completely overhauled and a part of that (once TRU upgrades allow an increase in frequency) is for the two Stalybridge and two Huddersfield stoppers to run through Victoria to the Airport, creating a very basic metro.
To be frank though, long distance services need to be removed from Castlefield. Every service that calls at Piccadilly P14 should also call at Oxford Road and Deansgate. If it was my choice, I’d sooner mothball the Windsor link than the Ordsall Chord because it prevents any form of proper cross city rail link and perpetuates this nonsensical idea that Piccadilly needs to be the destination. It doesn’t. People north west of Central Manchester should get used to the idea of changing trains.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
