Manchester Piccadilly P13/14, could ETCS level 2 provide a large capacity increase?

[Chester1]

Platform 15 and 16 are off the table and NR is planning to redevelop Oxford Road by end of the decade on its existing footprint with three platforms. This would broadly speaking be removing platform 1, moving platforms 2 and 3 across, a wider platform 4 and no platform 5. The current platform 3 would become a bay platform for CLC stoppers. Platforms 2 and 4 would become about 200m long. It would bake in current infrastructure limitations for many years but allow longer trains.

This government or a future Tory government aren't going to spend a billion pounds in Manchester when train lengths are half that of Londons.

 

[The Planner]

Platform 15 and 16 are off the table and NR is planning to redevelop Oxford Road by end of the decade on its existing footprint with three platforms. This would broadly speaking be removing platform 1, moving platforms 2 and 3 across, a wider platform 4 and no platform 5. The current platform 3 would become a bay platform for CLC stoppers. Platforms 2 and 4 would become about 200m long. It would bake in current infrastructure limitations for many years but allow longer trains.

This government or a future Tory government aren't going to spend a billion pounds in Manchester when train lengths are half that of Londons.

Still has the overlaps in the platforms as the closing up signals will be on the platform ends. All three platforms effectively allow 6 x 24m trains without fouling the closing up signals. The bay is 157m.

 

[Chester1]

Still has the overlaps in the platforms as the closing up signals will be on the platform ends. All three platforms effectively allow 6 x 24m trains without fouling the closing up signals. The bay is 157m.

That is a shame because it wouldn't allow a significant increase in capacity, just supporting five to six coaches becoming the norm.

 

[The Planner]

That is a shame because it wouldn't allow a significant increase in capacity, just supporting five to six coaches becoming the norm.

You could stop 8 cars there on the through platforms, just means a longer gap for the following train, or adjustment and pathing for a train arriving in Deansgate as it will do so on a red aspect.

 

[biggerisbetter]

You seem to advocate for not disrupting the urban fabric of Manchester, but then come up with several instances of "improvements" that would result in a similar level of disruption of the 'urban fabric' but in 'nicer' areas of Manchester.
The viaduct through the former university area is not exactly going to suffer from 4 tracking, and it isn't exactly the highest value land at the far end.

Have you actually looked at the area that would accommodate the 4-tracking? It would require demolition of some listed buildings and/or construction over the top of roads, making Whitworth Street a pretty unattractive area. Would involve the loss of a couple of pubs and purchase of some relatively new buildings and sites with planning permission for large developments. All of this to achieve benefits not substantial greater than the Oxford Road redevelopment and platforms 15 & 16.

We know the approach of Manchester City Council towards the underground HS2/NPR station was to try and resist transport infrastructure from taking up development land that the infrastructure would in part encourage the development and regeneration of. I doubt they would support the loss of significant parts of the city centre for this project.

 

[ayubdaud]

Platform 15 and 16 are off the table and NR is planning to redevelop Oxford Road by end of the decade on its existing footprint with three platforms. This would broadly speaking be removing platform 1, moving platforms 2 and 3 across, a wider platform 4 and no platform 5. The current platform 3 would become a bay platform for CLC stoppers. Platforms 2 and 4 would become about 200m long. It would bake in current infrastructure limitations for many years but allow longer trains.

This government or a future Tory government aren't going to spend a billion pounds in Manchester when train lengths are half that of Londons.

Would operators have to change where they perform crew changes? I feel like if a driver bails and leaves the unit then surely the performance is even worse off than current?

 

[Chester1]

Would operators have to change where they perform crew changes? I feel like if a driver bails and leaves the unit then surely the performance is even worse off than current?

I don't think it would make things worse. It's a more efficient layout and platform 1 isn't used much because it doesn't have a lift. It more or less locks in the current frequency and rules out the big suggestions in this thread.

 

[edwin_m]

I don't think it would make things worse. It's a more efficient layout and platform 1 isn't used much because it doesn't have a lift. It more or less locks in the current frequency and rules out the big suggestions in this thread.

Also it reduces conflict because the CLC stopper can depart from the middle platform while something is coming in from the west. A few minutes delay to this departure can knock on to the following CLC fast, and holding a train (probably already late) approaching the Corridor probably knocks on to following trains there.

 

[MarkyT]

See https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...row-express-type-shuttle.246415/#post-6156336

The mid-platform overlaps on platforms 13 & 14 currently restrict trains, and don’t allow arrivals unless the departing trains have cleared the overlaps, which will generally only be once the first train has departed and moved along the platform. It’s not about not liking to do this, it’s because the signalling doesn’t allow it.

Simsig notes state this is the case for their simulation of Piccadilly.

As I think I posted in that thread at some point, I've seen it happen, stampede and all. Maybe only if the first train has stopped far enough forward to clear the overlap?

Or an unusually short train in front.

It might be better for throughput to move the mid-platform signals further back nearer the running-in end of each platform, and to permanently take out of use a portion of the faces at that end with A/B designations abandoned. The new signal positions would be selected specifically to allow the next train to approach much closer every time with overlap extents selected accordingly for typical length trains and stopping points. In the down direction, there may need to be additional controls to prevent an approach blocking back into the throat junctions.

 

[Halifaxlad]

A bit of a pain but not impossible to cope with.

Is this just an admission ?

This government or a future Tory government aren't going to spend a billion pounds in Manchester when train lengths are half that of Londons.

This goverment already want to spend billions in Manchester on what was going to be built for HS2 but now NPR instead!

Which will require yet more billions to route it to Marsden and the Mayor still wants an underground station, which he might still get.

Imagine if a Labour Mayor doesn't get what he's calling for from a Labour goverment!

 

[Chester1]

This goverment already want to spend billions in Manchester on what was going to be built for HS2 but now NPR instead!

Which will require yet more billions to route it to Marsden and the Mayor still wants an underground station, which he might still get.

Imagine if a Labour Mayor doesn't get what he's calling for from a Labour goverment!

I will believe this or a future UK government will spend billions on rail in Manchester area when the first spade is in the ground. The plans for Oxford Road station are a clear sign that there is no intention to do major work to Castlefield corridor. Why shrink Oxford Road from 5 to 3 platforms otherwise? The project will bake in capacity at 1tph higher than today. Platform extensions are the chose solution.

 

[BayPaul]

If this line can't reasonably be fixed with infrastructure, couldn't it be fixed with rolling stock.

Remove all long distance services from P13/14. Services from Sheffield terminate in the main shed of Piccadilly. Manchester - Scotland and North Wales services terminate in a slightly rearranged Oxford Road (where their narrow doors and slow turnarounds won't cause a problem, and there's a very frequent service onwards to the airport) or Victoria. Everything else runs through all the way to Manchester Airport, is run by Northern and is formed of Class 331 or a new 331 bimode or battery variant (replacing 150s in the fleet).

I'd want to see 4tph via the Orsdall Chord, to make an easy change for those coming from Leeds to the airport - probably 2tph towards Rochdale and 2tph Huddersfield stoppers replacing the TPE version. CLC services would all run through to the airport to free up terminating space in Oxford Road for longer distance services. Other services would probably be more or less as is, trying to get a 2tph clock face to each destination.

This should also reduce overcrowding on the platforms as the southbound platforms will have a train to the airport every 5 minutes, so no need for anyone to wait in that direction.

Having a single class of modern passenger trains on the route would make introducing ETCS and / or platform edge doors much more practical, which could lead to further increases in service levels.

I'm not a local, so I'm sure this plan is full of holes!

 

[Chester1]

If this line can't reasonably be fixed with infrastructure, couldn't it be fixed with rolling stock.

Remove all long distance services from P13/14. Services from Sheffield terminate in the main shed of Piccadilly. Manchester - Scotland and North Wales services terminate in a slightly rearranged Oxford Road (where their narrow doors and slow turnarounds won't cause a problem, and there's a very frequent service onwards to the airport) or Victoria. Everything else runs through all the way to Manchester Airport, is run by Northern and is formed of Class 331 or a new 331 bimode or battery variant (replacing 150s in the fleet).

I'd want to see 4tph via the Orsdall Chord, to make an easy change for those coming from Leeds to the airport - probably 2tph towards Rochdale and 2tph Huddersfield stoppers replacing the TPE version. CLC services would all run through to the airport to free up terminating space in Oxford Road for longer distance services. Other services would probably be more or less as is, trying to get a 2tph clock face to each destination.

This should also reduce overcrowding on the platforms as the southbound platforms will have a train to the airport every 5 minutes, so no need for anyone to wait in that direction.

Having a single class of modern passenger trains on the route would make introducing ETCS and / or platform edge doors much more practical, which could lead to further increases in service levels.

I'm not a local, so I'm sure this plan is full of holes!

It doesn't really need to be fixed. Overcrowding at Piccadilly has mostly been dealt with by removing the buildings on platform 13 and 14 and expanding the seating area upstairs. Oxford Road will have a more efficient layout with longer and wider platforms on its existing footprint by the end of the decade. The trade off is capacity is limited to 11tph through trains and 2tph Oxford Road terminators. Northern and TPE have significantly lengthened average train lengths using the corridor. TfW has switched to mid door units. That leaves 1tph EMR which mostly use aging 158s and 2tph TPE, mostly using 397s and 802s.