Potential Merseyrail expansion beyond Headbolt Lane and/or timetable improvements

[Elecman]

So, firstly if Skelmersdale is out, let's improve Upholland Station and make it suitable for Skelmersdale traffic with easy access for buses, taxis, cycling and car parking to the town. Currently the access to Upholland Station is via a road disconnected from the main Skelmersdale network. You have to travel along a semi-rural road north and then either divert onto a dual carrigeway (which only allows exit southbound) and then loop round a huge roundabout and junction for the M58 motorway and then travel north again OR go through residential streets with speedbumps, a children's park, a sharp right turn, a 6 foot width restriction enforced with bollards and then turn back on yourself.

I'd suggest making a station entrance and car park in the shaded area would be cheap as chips compared to the sorts of money a Skelmersdale station would cost. I've shaded the area here.View attachment 129576

Then I'd suggest a new station at Saddle, which is convenient for Wigan Pier, the Retail Park and the Sports Stadium. I've shaded the area here.
View attachment 129578

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Feb 2023 ==

Then is the issue of the Wallgate bridge.

Here is a picture of the two props, from the video posted earlier.

View attachment 129579

And a close up of the Kirkby / Southport bound line
View attachment 129580

And a close up of the Manchester bound line
View attachment 129581

It seems clear that it is only the part of the bridge supporting the buildings on top which has needed to be propped. Presumably if these buildings were demolished the line could be lowered and clearance would not be an issue.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Feb 2023 ==

Finally, the buildings above are low value, under-utilised cr*p.
View attachment 129583

Noticing the tunnel appears to be wide enough for four tracks it also ocurred to me that the platforms could be rebuilt towards the Manchester end, as highlighted in red here.
View attachment 129590

You could keep the original station entrance (or perhaps not - if you knock down the shops you could rebuild a new station entrance in their place and sell the old station off maybe?

You could also then have direct access to North Western in one of the two places I've marked in blue.

Costly, but I guess not as much as rebuilding both stations further north which is another suggestion I've seen bandied about.

Those buildings are Network Rail owned ( or possibly were if already they have already been sold to The Arch Company)

 

[najaB]

Building a diveunder at the southern end would likely not require closure of the WCML for as long as you would need to close the road to rebuild the bridge.

That may be true, but I'm willing to bet that an hour's closure of the WCML would have the same overall economic hit as a day's closure of the road.

 

[Starmill]

What I have heard from Northern is that they are to receive the 769s from TfW in order to expand their bi-mode operations. They can do AC, they just need new pantographs purchasing and fitting. The originals are stored, but Northern never operated 319s with the original pantographs.

I never said they should necessarily, but this came from Northern, not a 3rd party rumour, but it is my view that a larger fleet (17 as opposed to 8) would be better able to tolerate low availability.

Sounds like you've been had to me.

The reason the wires aren't going to Wigan Wallgate is because they will not need to without any electro-diesels. 2tph to Wigan North Western worked by EMUs are the answer, and provide substantially more capacity at lower operating cost. There is a chance Wigan - Southport will be reduced to hourly as part of the cuts.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Feb 2023 ==

A 4 track corridor either through Castlefield or Sandhills could be configured with the 2nd pair of tracks being used only for late running trains, with punctuality of other services thus unaffected.

So you'd spend several billion pounds for a line used a few times per day? To achieve the same results as actually tackling the root causes of the delay, but at far higher cost?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

So you'd spend several billion pounds for a line used a few times per day? To achieve the same results as actually tackling the root causes of the delay, but at far higher cost?

I feel like there's no way it'd be empty due to the costs, although if we say the corridor is at 100% utilisation today maybe with the second line that could drop to like 80% or so, still giving chances for late trains to sneak through without causing as much risk to other trains.

 

[Greybeard33]

That bit of track is very steep, I don't really know how steep stations would/could/can work, but something tells me that a station on a heavy angle would not be good, especially for wheelchair users.

Indeed I believe the original L&Y station was on the southern side of the Wallgate bridge, nearer North Western, and the steep gradient was one reason why it was relocated.

 

[507020]

Sounds like you've been had to me.

The reason the wires aren't going to Wigan Wallgate is because they will not need to without any electro-diesels. 2tph to Wigan North Western worked by EMUs are the answer, and provide substantially more capacity at lower operating cost. There is a chance Wigan - Southport will be reduced to hourly as part of the cuts.

It would have been greatly useful for the wires to go into Wallgate as well as North Western for terminating services as well, 769s or not. I'm sure the reason doesn't take those into account and that it is because electric services can use North Western without having to tackle the bridge, or as I suggested, a diveunder. Most main stations which still see mostly Diesels have already been electrified, which simplifies future electrification projects. Wiring into Wallgate would likely have also necessitated doing the sidings.

I am well aware of the benefits of running EMUs, but there is perhaps a degree of complacency in the assumption that the service can be reconfigured as such resulting in the permanent loss of direct Southport - Bolton connectivity, until there is further work to extend the overhead wires. I highly doubt that Southport - Wigan services will be reduced to 1tph. My money would be on 3tph via Atherton, perhaps with one of the Southports running non-stop and continuing to Piccadilly.

So you'd spend several billion pounds for a line used a few times per day? To achieve the same results as actually tackling the root causes of the delay, but at far higher cost?

Tackling the route cause of delays may well be irrelevent, if knock on delays to other services are caused by a lack of capacity on the busy core sections, so I would spend several billion on rail capacity increases and the associated resiliency.

I feel like there's no way it'd be empty due to the costs, although if we say the corridor is at 100% utilisation today maybe with the second line that could drop to like 80% or so, still giving chances for late trains to sneak through without causing as much risk to other trains.

That is a question of whether you run a service simply because the money has been sent, as on the Ordsall Chord, or if trains will naturally use the line due to the capacity available. Merseyrail do seem to consider Sandhills - Central to be at 100% utilisation with 12tph. Note that it was preferable to them to cancel a Kirkby diagram in creating a half hourly gap in favour of an intended driver training 777 diagram in anticipation of an agreement with ASLEF (which ultimately did not pass) rather than attempt to run 13tph and potentially affect the reliability of all other services.

When reversing trains at Sandhills recently, all branches were reduced to 2tph to allow the reversing siding to only have to handle 6tph and when trains will reverse at Moorfields next week, 3tph will run on all branches with Kirkby services reversing at Sandhills, Moorfields also being seen as only able to handle 6tph. In the evenings, service will reduce to 2tph and Kirkby services will reverse at Moorfields, filling the 6tph. Kirkdale - Birkenhead North ECS movements that reverse at Central only run after the Ormskirk and Kirkby services reduce to 2tph, so there is definitely some sentiment of 100% utilisation.

Evidently, the Castlefield corridor is likely being operated above 100% utilisation and money has so far not been spent on doing anything.

 

[WatcherZero]

I remember when it was three tracks under the bridge with the 3rd being for freight, clearances were already very tight then as rail carriages got longer it was impossible to maintain.

Council is still looking at stations integration and redevelopment, this is an illustrative design from this year.

 

[WAO]

I do like the footbridge (or do we call it a transfer deck?).

A pity the development omits the condition of the Wallgate bridge.

WAO

 

[domcoop7]

I do like the footbridge (or do we call it a transfer deck?).

A pity the development omits the condition of the Wallgate bridge.

WAO

Yes does seem to be a bit of an omission! Also notice that on the CGI, it shows the name as "Wigan Station". Is this implying that they envisage it would operate as a single station (Manchester Piccadilly style) with the Wallgate platforms numbered in series with the North Western platforms?

I must say as rendered it seems like quite a large unsupported span!

 

[WatcherZero]

Yeah they want a single station operation with integrated platform numbering and a single departures board, though NR has previously maintained an integrated departure display was impossible due to the stations having seperate signalling.

Looks to be an arch bridge though agree unfeasibly large looking centre, its only an illustration not a completed engineering design. I personally dont see why you wouldnt carry it across through the platform elevators and add another level to them making that the primary platform access as otherwise you have to go down to basement level then back up again to bridge level. Use the underpass to form a street/emergency exit opposite site 6.

Have ticket office in main structure then escalator up into a lounge with spacious cafe and newsagent (existing ones are tiny) then walk across and down stairs/escalators onto platforms which are cleared of everything except waiting rooms and drink stalls.

...

It was a pity they cancelled Skelmersdale as it would have been a great interchange and transport hub, I understand the government was quite supportive despite the low BCR until abruptly it wasnt and it had more to do with ministerial changes in Westminster than the viability of the scheme itself. I personally am not forseeing anything beyond Headbolt lane for quite some time, possibly nothing this decade.

 

[Starmill]

Yeah they want a single station operation with integrated platform numbering and a single departures board, though NR has previously maintained an integrated departure display was impossible due to the stations having seperate signalling.

Very random explanation. There are quite a lot of places with unconnected interlocking within one station. Tamworth for example.

 

[WatcherZero]

Its excuse NR has always given for 30 years for why one cant be provided when asked for, so places like the Wigan Central cafe and the Bus Station just made their own using data from National Rail Enquiries instead rather than the station feed and weve been left with no primary source mirrorred feed at the stations themselves. Not sure if still the case with all the moves, seperate control Wallgate at Manchester ROC and North Western at Rugby ROC or has the Northern WCML now been consolidated at Manchester too?

 

[Starmill]

I highly doubt that Southport - Wigan services will be reduced to 1tph. My money would be on 3tph via Atherton, perhaps with one of the Southports running non-stop and continuing to Piccadilly.

I suppose time will tell but the current direction of travel is strongly towards cost savings and not towards more frequent services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Feb 2023 ==

Tackling the route cause of delays may well be irrelevent

I can assure you that it is very relevant!

 

[snowball]

seperate control Wallgate at Manchester ROC and North Western at Rugby ROC or has the Northern WCML now been consolidated at Manchester too?

I always thought the WCML northwards from (and including) Crewe was supposed to be controlled eventually from Manchester.

 

[WAO]

Why not just have two screens, side by side, from the separate feeds, with the platforms numbered consecutively?

WAO

 

[najaB]

Why not just have two screens, side by side, from the separate feeds, with the platforms numbered consecutively?

Or, if that's too difficult, 1 to 6 and A & B.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

1 to 6 and A & B.

What about Wallgate's (current) platform 3, I assume that'd get C?

 

[507020]

I suppose time will tell but the current direction of travel is strongly towards cost savings and not towards more frequent services.

There is still the need to reinstate 2tph Victoria - Ashton-under-Lyne - Stalybridge. With 2tph Wigan North Western - Bolton and both lines electrified, these services could be joined. With 2tph DMUs stopping via Atherton and also 2tph to Southport with 1 to Victoria and 1 to Piccadilly, that is not more frequent service. I'm sure the savings and increased revenue of running EMUs and either the withdrawal of 769s or their transfer to other services will be enough to justify retention of 2tph to Southport and Atherton stations.

I can assure you that it is very relevant!

So is it more achievable to carry out blanket infrastructure upgrades and procure new rolling stock for all lines in order to tackle the root cause of all delays, or to provide targeted improvements where the infrastructure is unable to handle the volume of delayed services?

Surely rail capacity and service provision should be on an upward trend to follow increasing demand? By the time the electrification is completed we could have a new government who perhaps will implement more improvements rather than suggesting unfulfillable cuts.

I always thought the WCML northwards from (and including) Crewe was supposed to be controlled eventually from Manchester.

Is nothing controlled from Warrington or Preston?

 

[najaB]

What about Wallgate's (current) platform 3, I assume that'd get C?

Yes, sorry. Forgot that there were three platforms.

 

[Meerkat]

I don't get it - the passenger bridge lands the wrong side of the road for Wallgate, and doesn't link to the platforms at North Western. Won't it be quicker and less effort to avoid all the stairs and just walk along the road?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't get it - the passenger bridge lands the wrong side of the road for Wallgate, and doesn't link to the platforms at North Western. Won't it be quicker and less effort to avoid all the stairs and just walk along the road?

The walk isn't itself that unpleasant. If I was doing it I'd remove the traffic from the road other than cycles and just make it a nice streetscape to walk along, with places to sit, trees and encouraging cafes and similar businesses, or if it's necessary to keep road access to the businesses make it a narrow one way access only road with the rest of it pedestrianised and a 20 limit. If closing it entirely you'd need to move the station car park, but there's enough semi-derelict buildings round there that could be demolished to fit it in. Wallgate could be accessed via King St and King St West - as that's one way too then you've got a logical circuit there if you did make it one way and narrower.

Bridges like that (which always ended up smelling of wee) are a 1970s solution.

 

[Meerkat]

The walk isn't itself that unpleasant. If I was doing it I'd remove the traffic from the road other than cycles and just make it a nice streetscape to walk along, with places to sit, trees and encouraging cafes and similar businesses, or if it's necessary to keep road access to the businesses make it a narrow one way access only road with the rest of it pedestrianised and a 20 limit. If closing it entirely you'd need to move the station car park, but there's enough semi-derelict buildings round there that could be demolished to fit it in. Wallgate could be accessed via King St and King St West - as that's one way too then you've got a logical circuit there if you did make it one way and narrower.

Bridges like that (which always ended up smelling of wee) are a 1970s solution.

The car park would be better off to the south side of the station anyway (is there a southern entrance?) where it would be next to the main roads rather than having to drive inside the 'ring road'
If the bridge was paid side, from lift shafts to lift shafts, it would make sense. Otherwise it looks like a waste of money that wont get used unless it is really chucking it down.

 

[najaB]

If the bridge was paid side, from lift shafts to lift shafts, it would make sense.

I assumed that it would be.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The car park would be better off to the south side of the station anyway (is there a southern entrance?) where it would be next to the main roads rather than having to drive inside the 'ring road'
If the bridge was paid side, from lift shafts to lift shafts, it would make sense. Otherwise it looks like a waste of money that wont get used unless it is really chucking it down.

There isn't a southern entrance at present, but you could add one.

The land where it could go is low-value businesses like car workshops, probably wouldn't cost much to purchase it, particularly if you just offered to build them new premises elsewhere. Wigan is full of underused/derelict land.

 

[Meerkat]

I assumed that it would be.

Doesn't look like it from the render. Down to the subway, up several floors of steps to bridge, down steps to the street, cross street, down steps in Wallgate.
As opposed to down steps to subway, walk along street, down steps to Wallgate platforms.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Doesn't look like it from the render. Down to the subway, up several floors of steps to bridge, down steps to the street, cross street, down steps in Wallgate.
As opposed to down steps to subway, walk along street, down steps to Wallgate platforms.

It's not a crossing I make terribly frequently (most recently maybe three months ago, and that was for the first time in maybe four or five years) but the only bit which I remember as being terrible is getting out of North Western - if I remember rightly you come out of what feels very much like a freight bay (was this where the papers used to come off the London train?), and then wander up the street to Wallgate station.

If I'm right, then arguably most of the benefits of integration could be got just by sorting out the entrance/exit to North Western: it wouldn't even be 20/80 (20% of the cost for 80% of the benefits) but maybe nearer 10/90.

 

[Starmill]

It's not a crossing I make terribly frequently (most recently maybe three months ago, and that was for the first time in maybe four or five years) but the only bit which I remember as being terrible is getting out of North Western - if I remember rightly you come out of what feels very much like a freight bay (was this where the papers used to come off the London train?), and then wander up the street to Wallgate station.

If I'm right, then arguably most of the benefits of integration could be got just by sorting out the entrance/exit to North Western: it wouldn't even be 20/80 (20% of the cost for 80% of the benefits) but maybe nearer 10/90.

Perhaps you didn't actually use the main entrance at Wigan North Western. This is in front of the taxi rank directly on Wallgate, and it's where the ticket office and machines are.

It's easy to descend from the platforms and just walk straight into the old loading bay in the car park if this has been left open, without realising there's more of the station if you turn left, and an exit that's not through the car park.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps you didn't actually use the main entrance at Wigan North Western. This is in front of the taxi rank directly on Wallgate, and it's where the ticket office and machines are.

Does the station have any other entrances? I'm only aware of the one, unless the lifts are separate?

It's not super nice, it's sort of like a mini version of what Stockport was before P0 was built, but the OP's description seems harsh.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Perhaps you didn't actually use the main entrance at Wigan North Western. This is in front of the taxi rank directly on Wallgate, and it's where the ticket office and machines are.

It's easy to descend from the platforms and just walk straight into the old loading bay in the car park if this has been left open, without realising there's more of the station if you turn left, and an exit that's not through the car park.

<looks at Google Street View>

You seem to have a point. (Edit - having now seen @Bletchleyite's post, I'm referring to the bit on street view which appears to have bike shelters and BTP van in it)

Maybe I need to revise my view to 'if the former freight bay was improved (and, having looked at Google Street View, some sort of walking route defined across the car park) then arguably (etc.)'

 

[snowball]

Is nothing controlled from Warrington or Preston?

Yes, some is controlled from there, but I used the word "eventually". Warrington and Preston boxes are 50 years old or coming up to it. Watcher and I were discussing whether control of the area will go to Rugby ROC or Manchester ROC. At least, I was, and I think Watcher was.