EMUs to Hazel Grove

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It’s crazy to me that Davenport, Woodsmoor and Hazel Grove on the Buxton line (and also on the route EMR/TPE take between Manchester and Sheffield via Hope Valley) are served by one electric train in each direction per day.

The hourly Buxton service is obviously going to be diesel, but Manchester to Hazel Grove every hour is a 150 or 156 completely under the wires.

(I’m aware it used to run from Blackpool as a 331)

Currently one AM service from Hazel Grove to Picc (arriving from Manchester as an ECS) and one return PM service (going ECS to Ardwick on arrival) is a 323 and that’s it.

I’m guessing it’s because the Buxton and Hazel Grove interwork?
Still sucks a bit.

 

[LowLevel]

It's come and gone over the years to suit operational convenience. When it was first wired I think the trains ran via Deansgate through to Altrincham. Once that closed for Metrolink conversion it has gone backwards and forwards between EMU and DMU with varying proportions of shuttle trains to Manchester, and through trains to other destinations either starting at Hazel Grove or running through from Buxton.

There was a shortish period whereby the Hazel Grove turnbacks were through 6 car 331s to Blackpool which was probably the high point of their existence, but the Manchester simplification saw the end of that and the change to mostly DMU shuttles again.

 

[td97]

All the more ludicrous given Northern's chronic lack of DMU stock whilst spare 323s are stored

 

[Fedupnorthern]

Northern need to up their game on this type of activity. We are constantly told about climate, electrification etc etc and forced to pay through the nose for improved outcomes in taxes, farebox etc. Meanwhile, aside from spare 323's mentioned above, entire classes of units such as 350/2's languish in sidings waiting for use whilst TOC's, supported by, DfT consider additional builds.

What about the embodied carbon already present and being wasted in sidings around the country?

 

[Peter749]

All these Armchair Experts saying this and that should happen

Try looking at Piccadilly Station -
If the inbound Hazel Grove returned to there and the inbound Buxton returned to Buxton the trains would be on short turnarounds each hour which would not be reliable enough
So you would end up blocking the platform they arrived on for over an Hour and that is two platforms with trains on them for a long time.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

It’s crazy to me that Davenport, Woodsmoor and Hazel Grove on the Buxton line (and also on the route EMR/TPE take between Manchester and Sheffield via Hope Valley) are served by one electric train in each direction per day.

The hourly Buxton service is obviously going to be diesel, but Manchester to Hazel Grove every hour is a 150 or 156 completely under the wires.

(I’m aware it used to run from Blackpool as a 331)

Currently one AM service from Hazel Grove to Picc (arriving from Manchester as an ECS) and one return PM service (going ECS to Ardwick on arrival) is a 323 and that’s it.

I’m guessing it’s because the Buxton and Hazel Grove interwork?
Still sucks a bit.

The morning one was a four car 331 when I used it a couple of weeks ago - also today when I checked RTT. next working is to Alderley Edge

17.58 from Picc today is a 323 but pathed (timed) as diesel, perhaps in case they are short of EMUs on the day!

Some years ago there was just one EMU, 19.22 from Picc which then returned ecs.

 

[Class 170101]

All these Armchair Experts saying this and that should happen

Try looking at Piccadilly Station -
If the inbound Hazel Grove returned to there and the inbound Buxton returned to Buxton the trains would be on short turnarounds each hour which would not be reliable enough
So you would end up blocking the platform they arrived on for over an Hour and that is two platforms with trains on them for a long time.

But does the DMU have to go back to the Buxton route? Its noted about the short turnarounds at Manchester for both Buxton and Haxel Grove routes if they went back to their respective origins but the Hazel Grove route has previously interworked with EMU routes and presumably during this period the Buxton route also interworked with other DMU routes.

 

[td97]

All these Armchair Experts saying this and that should happen

Try looking at Piccadilly Station -
If the inbound Hazel Grove returned to there and the inbound Buxton returned to Buxton the trains would be on short turnarounds each hour which would not be reliable enough
So you would end up blocking the platform they arrived on for over an Hour and that is two platforms with trains on them for a long time.

So interwork with Hadfield/Alderley Edge/Stoke on Trent/Crewe or Chester/New Mills/Rose Hill. It's not a radical problem and doesn't require a radical solution.

 

[1D53]

Interworking South Manchester with East Manchester services is basically impossible with the conflicting moves and platform constraints at Piccadilly.

 

[td97]

So that reduces the list above to Alderley Edge/Crewe/Stoke on Trent and Chester

 

[driverd]

All these Armchair Experts saying this and that should happen

Try looking at Piccadilly Station -
If the inbound Hazel Grove returned to there and the inbound Buxton returned to Buxton the trains would be on short turnarounds each hour which would not be reliable enough
So you would end up blocking the platform they arrived on for over an Hour and that is two platforms with trains on them for a long time.

Ironic to call us armchair experts when theres more than a small majority on here who are 'the' actual experts working in the industry...

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Ironic to call us armchair experts when theres more than a small majority on here who are 'the' actual experts working in the industry...

I do know @Peter749 is a retired railwayman with a wide operational experience (I think around 40 years) including latterly a role in Train Planning which involved working out what could work what and what couldn't which does mean he is one of the 'actual experts'!

 

[driverd]

I do know @Peter749 is a retired railwayman with a wide operational experience (I think around 40 years) including latterly a role in Train Planning which involved working out what could work what and what couldn't which does mean he is one of the 'actual experts'!

But not the only one by any stretch of the imagination.

To suggest diagrams couldn't possibly be interworked in any other way is to over-simplify things.

I'm sure with a little time and focus, there would be plenty of perfectly sensible solutions - a very simple one (with zero sense checking, don't shoot me if it doesn't work) that springs to mind is to simply extend the Hazel Grove to Buxton in one direction and shorten the opposite Buxton to Hazel Grove, meaning the DMUs stick to one circuit and the EMU(s) another, all platforming arrangements at Piccadilly are maintained.

Although the point of my post was merely that, whatever the posters experience, he shouldn't assume others bring none to the table - infact it's rather impolite.

 

[Bevan Price]

It won't happen for many years, but the logical solution would be to electrify the line to Buxton......

 

[Bletchleyite]

It won't happen for many years, but the logical solution would be to electrify the line to Buxton......

Or to order bi/tri-mode units, which is what they're going to be doing, so they can run on the wires to Hazel Grove and on diesel/battery thereafter.

 

[Peter749]

To suggest diagrams couldn't possibly be interworked in any other way is to over-simplify things.

I'm sure with a little time and focus, there would be plenty of perfectly sensible solutions - a very simple one (with zero sense checking, don't shoot me if it doesn't work) that springs to mind is to simply extend the Hazel Grove to Buxton in one direction and shorten the opposite Buxton to Hazel Grove, meaning the DMUs stick to one circuit and the EMU(s) another, all platforming arrangements at Piccadilly are maintained.

Although the point of my post was merely that, whatever the posters experience, he shouldn't assume others bring none to the table - infact it's rather impolite.

In theory the Buxton and Hazel Groves could be swapped over at HAZ during the day to allow an EMU to cover the HAZ turn.
In the evening peak there are only a few Hazel Groves turns as the Buxton service goes to 30 mins and the DMU off the Hazel Grove works to Buxton.
One of the evening peak trains, as mentioned, is worked by an EMU so the working of the Buxton service would have to be covered by an extra ECS in to Picc.

I was not suggesting everyone was an "Armchair Expert" - there are a some.

 

[cle]

It's a fair observation (we clamour for wires, we have wires and don't use them) - so insulting people isn't that necessary. Multi-modal stock is indeed the solve here, but yes these could easily interwork with other Stockport-bound EMU services.

 

[Peter749]

It's a fair observation (we clamour for wires, we have wires and don't use them) - so insulting people isn't that necessary. Multi-modal stock is indeed the solve here, but yes these could easily interwork with other Stockport-bound EMU services.

So please tell everyone how it would work at Piccadilly - does not have to fully detailed but just what would you change

Lots of people with "they should do this and that" but nobody comes up with a plan and they assume that it has not been looked at by the planners.

 

[cle]

What needs to change? They are the same set of platforms - or could be - at Piccadilly. All via Stockport and they can move across to various pairs/platforms for Stockport - on the way.

Unlike the Glossop etc interworking comment which obviously doesn't work.

 

[Peter749]

What needs to change? They are the same set of platforms - or could be - at Piccadilly. All via Stockport and they can move across to various pairs/platforms for Stockport - on the way.

Although interworking sounds good the timetable was done to keep the same trains on the route - "We are sorry for the delay to the Stoke Service - this is due to Problems at Wilmslow"

 

[317 forever]

All the more ludicrous given Northern's chronic lack of DMU stock whilst spare 323s are stored

What could work upon the next timetable change is for the 323s to work to Wigan via Ince, Southport trains to run via Atherton as 156s, and the 769s to move to Hazel Grove/Buxton services. The 769s would run in electric mode from Piccadilly to Hazel Grove and in diesel mode beyond there to Buxton.

 

[davidhg]

Hazel Grove to Dove Holes should give the 769s a good workout, with 6 stations to stop and restart at.

 

[Peter749]

What could work upon the next timetable change is for the 323s to work to Wigan via Ince, Southport trains to run via Atherton as 156s, and the 769s to move to Hazel Grove/Buxton services. The 769s would run in electric mode from Piccadilly to Hazel Grove and in diesel mode beyond there to Buxton.

I presume you mean Westhoughton as all services run via Ince - where would the 323s start from and what do you do at Wigan?

Running the Southport service via Atherton would give it 4 trains per hour each way - Leeds - Wigan, Blackburn - Wigan, Oxford Road - Southport and Stalybridge - Southport.

Also I don't think the 769s would be passed to work to Buxton

 

[amahy]

Although interworking sounds good the timetable was done to keep the same trains on the route - "We are sorry for the delay to the Stoke Service - this is due to Problems at Wilmslow"

You say this, Northern run several cross Manchester services where there is almost no demand to go across Manchester. When I lived on the Calder Valley line, I was always facing disruption due to problems at Wigan!

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Time for a Manchester Crossrail

 

[Peter749]

You say this, Northern run several cross Manchester services where there is almost no demand to go across Manchester. When I lived on the Calder Valley line, I was always facing disruption due to problems at Wigan!

And I live in Salford and at Salford Crescent we get sorry for the delay due to problems between Todmorden and Halifax