Thank you for your reply. Please could you explain why it is not operationally possible. The services around Manchester are generally pathed on a "half hourly" pattern, so if 1 tph is possible, would there not be a vacant path in the "opposite half hour"? If not, how could a half-hourly service be achieved on this route? I suggested that the Southport-Manchester trains could all be routed via Atherton which might potentially free up capacity.
Because the Taskforce requires a service between Southport and Manchester Oxford Road, and Leeds - Southport is not going to be coming back because the turnaround time at Southport was very tight. The Taskforce won't make any further changes anyway now until after the new platform at Salford Crescent and turnback at Manchester Victoria are complete. After that it depends whether they're willing to send both of the Southport services via Manchester Victoria. A three car 323 could provide a Wigan North Western - Stalybridge service at 2tph if that happened for example, with all trains calling at all stations except Clifton. I doubt that would be considered acceptable either though for capacity reasons.
What’s stopping a Southport to Oxford Road via Atherton service happening? You could run Leeds to Southport and Oxford Road to Southport both via Atherton, with trains coming in from Leeds going back out to Oxford Road and vice versa, which solves the turnaround time problem. Either that, or the Leeds to Southport service could go semi fast between Salford and Wigan via Atherton, reinstating 3 trains per hour along that line, with the Headbolt Lane - Blackburn.
There aren't enough trains on the Neville Hill circuit for that at present. Hypothetically there's a possibility of an Atherton - Manchester Oxford Road in the long term but not with the current structure.
Firstly demand in the peaks more than justifies the service. Secondly that 5-10 minutes at Salford Crescent all too often becomes 20+ and it's a miserable place to change trains. Perhaps if Grayling had pushed the Piccadilly 15/16 scheme through we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Maybe the service could be made peak time only then? Salford Crescent is a pretty good place to change trains compared to many on the network. Fully staffed station, no need to use any lifts or stairs (until the new platform opens). Try going between Aberystwyth and Pwllheli in the winter months, changing at Dovey Junction, if you think changing at Salford Crescent is bad! Or, try going between Walsden and Burnley, where most of the journey time is spent on a platform!
In practice given the congestion prevalent on the Castlefield corridor if the path exists in the peaks then it exists all day. As for interchanges comparing Salford Crescent with Dovey Junction or Rose Grove isn't exactly setting a high bar! But given its location so close to Manchester's urban core it should be very much better.
In what way could changing at Salford Crescent be made better?
They're not. Opsta are, and they've managed to get enough local politicians on side that everyone else is scared of them.
Last time I was there even the previous vending machine had gone. There was an accessible toilet for Radar key users only, of course out of use.
But that is conflating simplicity with efficiency. It's a principle which is only true some of the time. When it comes to pathing the main aim is to plan timetables such that trains avoid, as much as possible, having to stop and wait to pass through junctions, enter complex stations, etc. Pathing a train from Windsor Bridge North Junction to Castlefield Junction it makes no practical difference what the train's origin is.
Alternatively that's democracy in action with elected representatives actually supporting the stated interests of their constituents! I take it you're not suggesting that some intimidation is taking place?
Is it democracy that a very small number of people have a very loud voice, while a number many, many times greater are not being represented?
What experience is that? You personally finding it convenient?
Are you making an argument for the might is right principle? On this subject it always seems that there is bitterness about the ability of people living outside of Greater Manchester to have some influence over the routeing of trains within the city centre. But the service is just as much theirs as anybody's. To suggest otherwise is pure parochialism.
Such snarkiness is surely beneath you. Fact is I used to work trains over the route and was well aware of its usefulness. The direct link from west of Wigan to Bolton was also much appreciated.
I'm afraid we can't spend tens of millions of pounds of public subsidy a year on the evidence of the vibes we pick up from the train crew either, as much as I am sure these vibes are useful in certain situations.
It doesn't really concern me either way if Southport has trains to Piccadilly or Victoria so I'm not sure I'm in any position to comment, although I don't agree with a description of might is right. In the next few years the current structure will prevail so it doesn't really matter if people object to it or not.
The full details are available here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...anchester-area-timetable-consultation.224868/
I can assure you that my thoughts on the subject have had precisely zero influence on any decision making. I am merely stating my opinion. It wouldn't be much of a forum without varied individual viewpoints being expressed.
Again, just an expression of opinion. Compared with what could have been under the original Manchester Hub proposals what we are going to get is simply not as good. It also illustrates how popular a move it was when Regional Railways first introduced the Southport-Manchester Airport service. Personally I accept that we can't turn back the clock but that doesn't mean we have to feign pleasure at the new reality.
When you look at all the most punctual, successful rail networks in the UK, such as Merseyrail, London Overground, the Glasgow suburban network, they all have one distinct thing in common: trains go on routes and stick to them! The current Southport situation is the equivalent to Merseyrail's Hunts Cross services being split three ways between Ormskirk, Headbolt Lane, and Southport, which doesn't happen, because it's inefficient. I'm sure many people from Headbolt Lane and Ormskirk would like a direct link to Hunts Cross, but in practice, its impractical to have infrequent services from all three branches serving Hunts Cross.
Indeed I've proposed pretty much exactly that in the past, it would be a more reliable service that delivers far more capacity where it's needed most. Unfortunately the reality is that Leeds - Southport isn't going to be coming back because it's too long and doesn't have enough turnaround time, and this would need the platforms at Kearsley, Farnworth and Moses Gate to be extended to six car which is unlikely to happen.
Yes. Not the upcoming timetable but a future one. These sidings are frequently being referred to by Network Rail as "Oldfield Road turnback".
From a punctuality and capacity perspective I’d say that the biggest benefit would be allowing the Leeds to Manchester Victoria via Bradford Interchange service to terminate at Salford Central, rather than crossing the entire eastern station throat to access platforms 1 and 2.
Is the mention of the "Met" some pipe-dream in the foreseeable future?
Nothing too grandiose. As in, that space could be handed over to Metrolink - could be another platform, or waiting space/tickets/whatever... but yes maybe the bays (or one) could run shorter peak extras to Oldham/Rochdale or Bury, I suppose.
On the note of Leeds to Chester/Manchester Victoria, soon to be Salford Central services, their length is also constrained by the length of the platforms available at Leeds, many of which can only accommodate 4 carriages. Northern can run 5 carriage trains on this route when there are TransPennine route upgrade blockades as there are far fewer trains running through Leeds.
Good to know - what would options be for taking these above 4 cars? Run on to elsewhere? Other platforms at Leeds?
Leeds already has 18 platforms (numbered 0 - 17). Surely they don't need more than that,
