Ideas for how the Denton and Middlewich lines could be better utilised

[Philip]

How could both the Denton line and the Middlewich Branch be better utilised if money was to be spent on upgrading these to mainline standard?

It's not really a question of whether the money gets spent on a big upgrade (line speed and signalling especially), but rather what kind of services could be run which would do justice to the money spent, if this was to happen?

Hourly service rather than weekly for Denton and Reddish South? Huddersfield/Leeds to the southern WCML? Wilmslow/Stockport/Sheffield to Scotland via WCML? Middlewich to Manchester and Crewe? To throw a few suggestions around...

 

[Bletchleyite]

For Denton I would run 2tph Manchester Vic to Stockport with a load of new stations (quite possibly closing Denton because it's a bit useless, but I did post a while back my suggestions for where the stations should be). However this can't be pathed until HS2 2B is complete.

 

[507020]

Note that Stockport - Stalybridge (avoiding Guide Bridge) would originally have been used by the L&NWR for Euston - Leeds services competing with the GNR and Midland which is quite comical, given the present capacity constraints both on the WCML and TransPennine route.

Crewe - Chester via Middlewich appears to be mothballed judging by the state of the triangle at Northwich but is likely to see moderately heavy diversionary use whenever Crewe - Chester electrification materialises, likely before the wires reach Holyhead and Llandudno.

Middlewich should probably have Manchester and Crewe services, which admittedly duplicate the WCML between Sandbach and Stockport. Not sure about going to Chester as well, or possibly Acton Bridge and beyond to Runcorn, Liverpool or Warrington Bank Quay. These might take a few local passengers off the Avanti and LNWR services, but might require a Manchester bay at Crewe.

For Denton I would run 2tph Manchester Vic to Stockport with a load of new stations (quite possibly closing Denton because it's a bit useless, but I did post a while back my suggestions for where the stations should be). However this can't be pathed until HS2 2B is complete.

Is your proposal to reverse in the bay at Stalybridge, or run directly avoiding both Ashton-under-Lyne and Stalybridge? There is probably quite a lot of demand between Ashton-under-Lyne, Stalybridge and Guide Bridge according to some guards who work the present weekly passenger service.

Again not sure if Piccadilly - Stalybridge all stops via Guide Bridge EMUs should run after electrification. If not, some TPE services should definitely serve Ashton-under-Lyne and Guide Bridge in addition to Stalybridge.

 

[Kite159]

Breaking out the crayons, Middlewich could be served by something like a Manchester Piccadilly - Sandbach (maybe even to Crewe at peak times) service running via Northwich (with Northwich station rebuilt for the branch platform), maybe calling all stations to allow the Manchester Piccadilly - Chester service to go semi-fast to skip some of the smaller stations on that line.

 

[The Planner]

Crewe - Chester via Middlewich appears to be mothballed judging by the state of the triangle at Northwich but is likely to see moderately heavy diversionary use whenever Crewe - Chester electrification materialises, likely before the wires reach Holyhead and Llandudno.

Its not mothballed, has a few freight paths along it. Avanti will normally use it whenever a Crewe Chester block occurs, electrifcation is a long way off.

 

[Bevan Price]

For Denton I would run 2tph Manchester Vic to Stockport with a load of new stations (quite possibly closing Denton because it's a bit useless, but I did post a while back my suggestions for where the stations should be). However this can't be pathed until HS2 2B is complete.

Pathing at Heaton Norris Junction, and thence to Stockport makes that difficult to achieve at present.
However, would it help if the Down Slow line between those locations could be resignalled for reversible running, and all these trains using Platform 0 at Stockport ??

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is your proposal to reverse in the bay at Stalybridge, or run directly avoiding both Ashton-under-Lyne and Stalybridge?

Run direct.

There is probably quite a lot of demand between Ashton-under-Lyne, Stalybridge and Guide Bridge according to some guards who work the present weekly passenger service.

That probably won't translate to real-world demand - most people who use the weekly service are just playing, you have to be very lucky for it to be useful for a genuine journey!

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Middlewich is certainly a growing town with a lot new houses, but the railway geography does conspire against it. Manchester, the main commuter and leisure flow, is very indirect by either Altrincham / Stockport or Sandbach. Maybe if tram-trains are a thing and are extended onto the Mid Cheshire line, this could be a better option by allowing direct running to Manchester via Sale?

 

[507020]

Its not mothballed, has a few freight paths along it. Avanti will normally use it whenever a Crewe Chester block occurs, electrifcation is a long way off.

Middlewich - Northwich is certainly in use for freight but the other side of the triangle is starting to look overgrown. Virgin usually used it for diversions, but Avanti don’t seem to care about Chester or Holyhead services at the best of times, so they’d probably just cancel them. Electrification might be the only serious enough blockade for them to do anything.

Pathing at Heaton Norris Junction, and thence to Stockport makes that difficult to achieve at present.
However, would it help if the Down Slow line between those locations could be resignalled for reversible running, and all these trains using Platform 0 at Stockport ??

Resignalling at Stockport for some reason isn’t achievable, is it?

Run direct.

Why? Forcing passengers from Stockport, Reddish South and Denton to double back to Victoria to reach Stalybridge is as bad as forcing passengers from the Guide Bridge direction to double back to Piccadilly.

That probably won't translate to real-world demand - most people who use the weekly service are just playing, you have to be very lucky for it to be useful for a genuine journey!

I think they were suggesting that Guide Bridge - Stalybridge demand would exist if there was a more frequent service, not that any weekly service is genuinely useful.

Middlewich is certainly a growing town with a lot new houses, but the railway geography does conspire against it. Manchester, the main commuter and leisure flow, is very indirect by either Altrincham / Stockport or Sandbach. Maybe if tram-trains are a thing and are extended onto the Mid Cheshire line, this could be a better option by allowing direct running to Manchester via Sale?

Navigation Road - Piccadilly with 1 stop at Stockport is basically the same journey time as all stops on the Metrolink, but there should really be a station at Northenden and you couldn’t rule out services being diverted back away from Stockport if a tunnel opens and Metrolink Z1 is given over to purely street running services.

 

[Arkeeos]

Given that Denton sort of acts as an orbital railway, maybe embracing that and building a new transfer station where it crosses the Rose Hill Marple Line, and then running stockport to stalybridge would be more successful.

You could even extend that service, build transfer stops along Woodley junction to Partington where the line intersects the tram, and airport branch, maybe even extending Metrolink at east didsbury to the line, and run Stalybridge to Sandbach.

Although given there isn't exactly the best track record of utilising transfers; the success of this would be down to how convinient could you make those transfers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why? Forcing passengers from Stockport, Reddish South and Denton to double back to Victoria to reach Stalybridge is as bad as

What do we think is the bigger demand?

1. Reddish S and Denton to Manchester city centre
2. Reddish S and Denton to Stalybridge

I think anyone would bet on (1).

forcing passengers from the Guide Bridge direction to double back to Piccadilly.

You can't stop everything everywhere.

 

[nr758123]

What do we think is the bigger demand?

1. Reddish S and Denton to Manchester city centre
2. Reddish S and Denton to Stalybridge

I think anyone would bet on (1).

It's the difference between not very much and even less.

Reddish S to Manchester city centre - limited because there are stations nearby at Heaton Chapel and Reddish North with a more direct and more frequent service.
Denton station to Manchester city centre - minimal. Denton station is handily placed for the railway line, but it's on a motorway slip road a long way from the town centre and residential areas.
Reddish S & Denton to Stalybridge -probably even less demand. Stalybridge is not a key business, retail, tourist or employment destination.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Reddish S to Manchester city centre - limited because there are stations nearby at Heaton Chapel and Reddish North with a more direct and more frequent service.

You're thinking car-based. Urban transport use isn't car-based (unless you drive all the way).

To get public transport use on foot in cities, you need a stop within 500m at most of each home.

 

[Chester1]

It's the difference between not very much and even less.

Reddish S to Manchester city centre - limited because there are stations nearby at Heaton Chapel and Reddish North with a more direct and more frequent service.
Denton station to Manchester city centre - minimal. Denton station is handily placed for the railway line, but it's on a motorway slip road a long way from the town centre and residential areas.
Reddish S & Denton to Stalybridge -probably even less demand. Stalybridge is not a key business, retail, tourist or employment destination.

Stockport to Victoria would be decent flow too if there journey time is reasonable, which it is unlikely to be if going to Stalybridge. Ashton could be partially served by a new station near Ashton West (before branch joins the main line). Reversing at Stalybridge is unlikely to be reasonable to path.

 

[zwk500]

You're thinking car-based. Urban transport use isn't car-based (unless you drive all the way).

To get public transport use on foot in cities, you need a stop within 500m at most of each home.

But heavy rail is rarely well-suited to 3 stops per km. I do wonder if a street-level extension of Metrolink into the Denton area might be more cost-effective than forever trying to find ways to justify using infrastructure simply because it exists.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But heavy rail is rarely well-suited to 3 stops per km.

Who's suggesting that?

I do wonder if a street-level extension of Metrolink into the Denton area might be more cost-effective than forever trying to find ways to justify using infrastructure simply because it exists.

Metrolink would be an option for it.

 

[Topological]

Could a second Buxton or a Hazel Grove be pushed through? That may be a bit too much wrong line running though for the northbound. Thinking there being it means one less train at Slade Lane / Ardwick on the Piccadilly approach. If the second Buxton is not back then the people on the line might be glad to have a second service even if Piccadilly requires a change at Stockport.

 

[BeijingDave]

I think only something like Leeds and Huddersfield to Wolverhampton and Birmingham would result in a decent regular passenger flow over the Denton line. Almost anything else is relying on extracting passengers from similar (but usually better) alternatives.

 

[zwk500]

I think only something like Leeds and Huddersfield to Wolverhampton and Birmingham would result in a decent regular passenger flow over the Denton line. Almost anything else is relying on extracting passengers from similar (but usually better) alternatives.

But even if these services did run you'd want to serve central Manchester.

 

[BeijingDave]

Fair point

 

[Philip]

But even if these services did run you'd want to serve central Manchester.

Not necessarily, if they're additional services rather than replacement then you could potentially get away with missing the city for the time benefit. I remember reading that in LMS/early BR days there were some services between south WCML/West Midlands and Huddersfield-Leeds which did this and used the Denton line.

 

[zwk500]

Not necessarily, if they're additional services rather than replacement then you could potentially get away with missing the city for the time benefit. I remember reading that in LMS/early BR days there were some services between south WCML/West Midlands and Huddersfield-Leeds which did this and used the Denton line.

Nowadays you don't save as much time and you miss out on the far greater revenue. Summer holiday reliefs to the west country may have avoided Manchester but times have changed Manchester City centre is one of the most valuable rail markets in the country.

 

[507020]

Not necessarily, if they're additional services rather than replacement then you could potentially get away with missing the city for the time benefit. I remember reading that in LMS/early BR days there were some services between south WCML/West Midlands and Huddersfield-Leeds which did this and used the Denton line.

I am all for the methodology of running separate trains duplicating part of the route of others, but with different stopping patterns or serving different destinations and it isn’t seen often enough today. Obviously the difference is that the L&NWR route from Birmingham to Leeds has been reduced to a weekly Sprinter shuttle while the Midland route from Birmingham to Leeds was standardised as the CrossCountry route, although diverted via the ECML from Moorthorpe.

Nowadays you don't save as much time and you miss out on the far greater revenue. Summer holiday reliefs to the west country may have avoided Manchester but times have changed Manchester City centre is one of the most valuable rail markets in the country.

Why wouldn’t the same shortening of the route save as much time now? What were mentioned were LMS/BR services from the West Midlands to Leeds running via the WCML, Denton and Huddersfield, as opposed to the Burton-on-Trent and the MML, the equivalent of CrossCountry running additional trains this way today.

No one is denying the obvious demand for rail travel into Manchester (which is not actually being met) but some people do not have any need to travel into Manchester and benefit from avoiding it. All drivers on the M60 will tell you why they aren’t able to use the railways.

If there was capacity to run new Manchester-avoiding trains in various directions, theoretically they should be able to absorb Manchester-avoiding car journeys from the roads.

 

[zwk500]

Why wouldn’t the same shortening of the route save as much time now? What were mentioned were LMS/BR services from the West Midlands to Leeds running via the WCML, Denton and Huddersfield, as opposed to the Burton-on-Trent and the MML, the equivalent of CrossCountry running additional trains this way today.

Talking strictly about time savings Stalybridge to Stockport, because the route via Derby will trounce Manchester every time. The reason is that the Denton route is itself very slow and has slow junctions at either end, whereas the lines in and out of Piccadilly have been improved.

If there was capacity to run new Manchester-avoiding trains in various directions, theoretically they should be able to absorb Manchester-avoiding car journeys from the roads.

This doesn't wash, unfortunately, because the drivers on the M60 are not making the same journey that the train would serve.

 

[Philip]

Talking strictly about time savings Stalybridge to Stockport, because the route via Derby will trounce Manchester every time. The reason is that the Denton route is itself very slow and has slow junctions at either end, whereas the lines in and out of Piccadilly have been improved.

This could be addressed with investment into the line; with new track and possibly improved signalling then you could be looking at double the line speed. Perhaps the Heaton Norris Jn conflict could be helped by pairing the lines into Stockport by use (if not already) and have the slow lines on the eastern side of the viaduct.

This doesn't wash, unfortunately, because the drivers on the M60 are not making the same journey that the train would serve.

A service like Huddersfield-Stalybridge-Stockport-Birmingham would help ease congestion on the roads for people travelling between the eastern M62 and the southbound M6 or westbound M56 - it would take some pressure off the M62 and eastern side of the M60.

 

[zwk500]

This could be addressed with investment into the line; with new track and possibly improved signalling then you could be looking at double the line speed.

Could, but for what revenue? It's just not going to be worth the value. This is a classic case of 'there is a train line, how can we use it' rather than asking 'how best can we serve the transport demand within the world we have'.

Perhaps the Heaton Norris Jn conflict could be helped by pairing the lines into Stockport by use (if not already) and have the slow lines on the eastern side of the viaduct.

Heaton Norris is paired by direction, and would be extremely difficult to change (It was looked at for the WCRM programme, somebody posted engineering plans on another thread). The potential benefits of such a change are minimal for the Denton line alone

A service like Huddersfield-Stalybridge-Stockport-Birmingham would help ease congestion on the roads for people travelling between the eastern M62 and the southbound M6 or westbound M56 - it would take some pressure off the M62 and eastern side of the M60.

This only helps people originating from Hudds. People from Bradford still have to drive, and people from Leeds or Sheffield have the XC or M1/M42 routes. I struggle to believe that Huddersfield is contributing so much traffic to the M60 on it's own that the West Mids portion of it would make such a substantial shift to rail that it would save even 1 second of congestion.

 

[tbtc]

I don’t see any need to prioritise the Denton line.

Diverting an existing Manchester-bound service over such a slow route to Victoria would be very unpopular (especially when some people from west of Manchester get so precious about retaining a castlefield/ Piccadilly link for their station but are happy for places like Buxton to have a time penalty and downgrade to Victoria…)

Running a longer distance route via Denton runs into the problem of how frequently to do it to make it worthwhile. A couple of services a day isn’t much use when there are such frequent services from West Yorkshire to central Manchester and central Manchester to the Midlands/ South.

And with the trundle through Denton, there’s not going to be much of a time saving for direct trains. But then running it more frequently would probably come at the cost of some existing services from West Yorkshire to central Manchester and central Manchester to the Midlands/ South (given the finite number of paths).

Who’d want their long established service into central Manchester to be replaced by this? (Since, although there’s a frequent route through Huddersfield/ Stockport, to divert an hourly service, running a long distance route that way might mean Middlesbrough or Oxford losing their train to central Manchester)

Or do you just run a shuttle from Stalybridge to Stockport and see if people doing something like Leeds to Stoke would prefer to change twice to avoid Piccadilly or just change once at busy Piccadilly?

The only (existing) service I could see the merits of extending to Stockport would be the Bradford - Huddersfield… But there’s nothing south of Stockport for it to run on to (without depriving somewhere of a long established link into central Manchester)

It’s a bit like the idea for a “Glasgow Crossrail”, easy to suggest that someone loses a direct train into the city centre to provide an “orbital” Link just as long as it’s not my own local line, eh?

Ultimately, if you want to improve the service from West Yorkshire to the West Midlands then resource the existing XC route better (or build HS2 through Yorkshire properly). Coming up with half baked alternatives is a bit like the suggestions that we need Leeds-Settle-Glasgow to relive pressure on XC (or more routes via the Marches etc)… run full length trains on XC and we wouldn’t need to come up with convoluted alternatives

 

[nr758123]

To get public transport use on foot in cities, you need a stop within 500m at most of each home.

That would make Denton station even more pointless. There are very few houses within 500m walking distance of Denton station. As others have pointed out, serving Denton properly by rail would require Metrolink and on-street running.

 

[Arkeeos]

That would make Denton station even more pointless. There are very few houses within 500m walking distance of Denton station. As others have pointed out, serving Denton properly by rail would require Metrolink and on-street running.

Denton station is poorly placed but reddish south is well placed, and there could be more stations built on the line.

Given the line isn't a direct line, its success is dependent off other lines, improve those lines and it will improve.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It may indeed be worth closing Denton station and replacing it with one in a more useful location.

This post contains my suggestions, which would make it more like Merseyrail with a station about every 1 to 1.5km.

Could Stockport to Stalybridge be made more frequent?

I agree that Parlies are a waste of time and money; they should just be properly closed. Though again there's maybe the odd one that might cost nothing, e.g. Stockport-Stalybridge is, or was, putting stops in an ECS that went that way anyway, and there will be fares income from enthusiasts...

www.railforums.co.uk