Plans for Castlefield Corridor

[Class 323 Fan]

Are there currently any plans to help with Capacity on the Corridor, apart from an underground system.
Northern could get a lot more services through if new platforms and infrastructure was made, they could start operating from Manchester Airport/Crewe to Leeds.

What do you all think?

 

[Topological]

If you want a radical suggestion then only the CLC route to Warrington Central should have longer distance trains on the corridor, everything else should operate via Victoria.

Manchester Airport to new west-facing bays at Victoria should be a metro frequency EMU serving all stations (Heald Green, Gatley, East Didsbury, Burnage, Mauldeth Road, Piccadilly, Oxford Road, Deansgate, Salford Central and Manchester Victoria.

All trains should call at Salford Central to allow interchange.

The north-facing junction from the Liverpool-Manchester line should then be built to allow trains from Manchester, calling at the Airport, to Scotland to run.

That is all radical, but is probably cheaper than the underground in Manchester (which is actually what should be done).

 

[biggerisbetter]

I would suggest:

- Close Deansgate and link the tram stop to a redeveloped Oxford Road via a bridge and walkway along the viaduct.

- Build platforms 3-5 at Salford Central.

- Complete the eastern reversing sidings at Victoria and the western reversing sidings at Salford Central.

- Relocate the Trafford Park freight terminals to Parkside.

- Stop every service that passes through Manchester at every station with each service passing through the Castlefield corridor stopping at every station (Piccadilly, Oxford Road, Salford Crescent, Salford Central and Victoria).

- Rationalise services to a degree so that for example all services from Wigan and Southport go to Victoria.

 

[fandroid]

Get all freight off the route and rationalise rolling stock so that only longer trains are using it. Ideally it would aim at a Thameslink style uniformity of stock, but a policy of deliberately moving towards that would help a lot. Grade separate key junctions too. Obviously not an easy or simple solution but Manchester is a big and important city with much rail infrastructure and it deserves constant investment in improvements.

 

[Mgameing123]

Get all freight off the route and rationalise rolling stock so that only longer trains are using it. Ideally it would aim at a Thameslink style uniformity of stock, but a policy of deliberately moving towards that would help a lot. Grade separate key junctions too. Obviously not an easy or simple solution but Manchester is a big and important city with much rail infrastructure and it deserves constant investment in improvements.

Maybe get services to couple with each other before entering the corridor and then split up after the corridor?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

- Rationalise services to a degree so that for example all services from Wigan and Southport go to Victoria.

Yes to this. I know it annoys the good people of Southport, who want a train directly to Oxford Road for the universities etc, but (a) it's an operational nuisance and (b) it means that when going back to Southport from Manchester you effectively have to choose which one per hour service you want - Oxford Road or Victoria. It seems to me that most people would benefit from having two trains per hour from one central Manchester station - it's hardly a turn up and go frequency but if your planned train is cancelled waiting half an hour or so for the next train is far less irritation than waiting a whole hour.

I do also wonder whether there are any services through Castlefield that would work as well with fewer but longer trains (so fewer movements through the corridor). I strongly suspect that the answer is 'no' but the whole thing is so delicate that any reduction in booked services would help, so the point should be looked at rather than being dismissed out of hand.

 

[Halwynd]

Yes to this. I know it annoys the good people of Southport, who want a train directly to Oxford Road for the universities etc, but (a) it's an operational nuisance and (b) it means that when going back to Southport from Manchester you effectively have to choose which one per hour service you want - Oxford Road or Victoria. It seems to me that most people would benefit from having two trains per hour from one central Manchester station - it's hardly a turn up and go frequency but if your planned train is cancelled waiting half an hour or so for the next train is far less irritation than waiting a whole hour.

Spot on 100% - I wish more people could appreciate this.

 

[amahy]

Yes to this. I know it annoys the good people of Southport, who want a train directly to Oxford Road for the universities etc, but (a) it's an operational nuisance and (b) it means that when going back to Southport from Manchester you effectively have to choose which one per hour service you want - Oxford Road or Victoria. It seems to me that most people would benefit from having two trains per hour from one central Manchester station - it's hardly a turn up and go frequency but if your planned train is cancelled waiting half an hour or so for the next train is far less irritation than waiting a whole hour.

I do also wonder whether there are any services through Castlefield that would work as well with fewer but longer trains (so fewer movements through the corridor). I strongly suspect that the answer is 'no' but the whole thing is so delicate that any reduction in booked services would help, so the point should be looked at rather than being dismissed out of hand.

Another +1 to this. Southport/Headbolt Lane/Wigan to Manchester trains should all be simplified to trains at even intervals.

 

[faltskog36abba]

Another +1 to this. Southport/Headbolt Lane/Wigan to Manchester trains should all be simplified to trains at even intervals.

I agree all Southport trains should use Victoria.

 

[fandroid]

I agree all Southport trains should use Victoria.

Is there scope for passengers from Oxford Road or Piccadilly to easily interchange with Southport trains from Victoria?

(my local knowledge is limited!)

Except perhaps for passengers to/from the airport (with luggage) Manchester should adopt a strategy of using interchanges more, so allowing services to be simplified and thus potentially more reliable.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

Is there scope for passengers from Oxford Road or Piccadilly to easily interchange with Southport trains from Victoria?

(my local knowledge is limited!)

I'm not sure there is: but Piccadilly and Victoria are linked by tram and free bus. It had occurred to me that a similar free bus from Victoria to the Oxford Road area (i.e. where people are actually going as their end destination rather than up the hill to Oxford Road station) would be a desirable mitigation for losing the through train.

 

[Fedupnorthern]

Freightliner relocation to Parkside will be the easiest win. Scarce capacity released in Castlefield corridor. Parkside to provide easy access to WCML (requiring some upgrades in Cheshire to accommodate southbound freight), and also Chat Moss, permitting extra east west freight (from Seaforth, Garston, also interfacing with TRU into Yorkshire).

In the event that NPR is delivered, in whatever form, then that even further turbocharges the gain. Personally I would avoid the airport altogether (business travel is minimal from MIA) and focus NPR off of the current proposed alignment, as a shorter tunnel from Carrington via Old Trafford redevelopment (metrolink interchange) through and under Salford Central / Victoria heading east. Surface level RER style for Vic, Salford Cent, Deansgate, Ox Rd, Picc towards airport, contributing to GM rail vision and 4 train per hour aspirations.

 

[The Planner]

Parkside doesn't solve any issues between Crewe and Winwick, namely power and capacity. Unless you solve those then you are just moving the Trafford Park problem elsewhere.

 

[Fedupnorthern]

Parkside doesn't solve any issues between Crewe and Winwick, namely power and capacity. Unless you solve those then you are just moving the Trafford Park problem elsewhere.

Agreed that it isn't zero cost, but WCML work will be needed for futureproofing, aligned with Tri-link programme anyway.
Population catchment of Parkside within 30km (as a proxy for "economic activity") is around 10% greater than Old Trafford, with more appropriate road access, so it makes sense for end users as well.

 

[Fokx]

I would suggest:

- Close Deansgate and link the tram stop to a redeveloped Oxford Road via a bridge and walkway along the viaduct.

St Peter's Square would still be closer/a similar distance and is also step free. You wouldn't need to build anything in reality

 

[The exile]

Is there scope for passengers from Oxford Road or Piccadilly to easily interchange with Southport trains from Victoria?

As long as some kind of service is still using the Windsor Link, then yes - changing at Salford Crescent. (I’m assuming the question was referring to trains to/from Victoria, rather than passengers joining/leaving at Victoria.

 

[amahy]

Is there scope for passengers from Oxford Road or Piccadilly to easily interchange with Southport trains from Victoria?

(my local knowledge is limited!)

Except perhaps for passengers to/from the airport (with luggage) Manchester should adopt a strategy of using interchanges more, so allowing services to be simplified and thus potentially more reliable.

Another, none rail, option, would be to run a direct Victoria to Piccadilly and Oxford Road “free to rail ticket holders” bus, similar to the one that runs between Central and Queen Street in Glasgow.

 

[The exile]

Another, none rail, option, would be to run a direct Victoria to Piccadilly and Oxford Road “free to rail ticket holders” bus, similar to the one that runs between Central and Queen Street in Glasgow.

Or just make cross-Manchester rail tickets valid on Metrolink in the central core.

 

[The Planner]

Agreed that it isn't zero cost, but WCML work will be needed for futureproofing, aligned with Tri-link programme anyway.
Population catchment of Parkside within 30km (as a proxy for "economic activity") is around 10% greater than Old Trafford, with more appropriate road access, so it makes sense for end users as well.

TriLink doesn't solve that section. That is just OLE renewal in the short term.

 

[Fedupnorthern]

TriLink doesn't solve that section. That is just OLE renewal in the short term.

In the longer term there is signalling improvement to support greater freight demand. This is aligned to support relocation of freight terminal capacity to Parkside.

Back on topic Old Trafford freight removal from Castlefield will negate some complex movements in the event that Manchester is better connected with Scotland in freight terms.

 

[faltskog36abba]

As long as some kind of service is still using the Windsor Link, then yes - changing at Salford Crescent. (I’m assuming the question was referring to trains to/from Victoria, rather than passengers joining/leaving at Victoria.

I always change at Salford crescent or Bolton for onward Connections to Blackpool from Victoria. The same should apply to Southport trains for Connections to the Castlefield Line.

 

[The Planner]

In the longer term there is signalling improvement to support greater freight demand. This is aligned to support relocation of freight terminal capacity to Parkside.

Back on topic Old Trafford freight removal from Castlefield will negate some complex movements in the event that Manchester is better connected with Scotland in freight terms.

Trilink/West Coast North doesnt resignal south of Warrington. The moves through Castleifeld aren't complex, its just train length causing the issue.

 

[xotGD]

Some of us are still waiting for the Bradford to Manchester Airport service to see the light of day.

 

[Fedupnorthern]

Trilink/West Coast North doesnt resignal south of Warrington. The moves through Castleifeld aren't complex, its just train length causing the issue.

They would be complex if Manchester to Scotland services were initiated, with Crewe reversals or use of Chat Moss.
Parkside is better sited to cater for latent Scotland demand.
Agreed Warrington to Crewe would still need attention.

 

[The Planner]

They would be complex if Manchester to Scotland services were initiated, with Crewe reversals or use of Chat Moss.
Parkside is better sited to cater for latent Scotland demand.
Agreed Warrington to Crewe would still need attention.

Crewe reversals would be fine and easy to do if it was required now. Happens offline in Basford Hall, but extemely unlikely for the reasons above.

 

[Rail Quest]

If you want a radical suggestion then only the CLC route to Warrington Central should have longer distance trains on the corridor, everything else should operate via Victoria.

Manchester Airport to new west-facing bays at Victoria should be a metro frequency EMU serving all stations (Heald Green, Gatley, East Didsbury, Burnage, Mauldeth Road, Piccadilly, Oxford Road, Deansgate, Salford Central and Manchester Victoria.

All trains should call at Salford Central to allow interchange.

The north-facing junction from the Liverpool-Manchester line should then be built to allow trains from Manchester, calling at the Airport, to Scotland to run.

That is all radical, but is probably cheaper than the underground in Manchester (which is actually what should be done).

I agree with all of this, but do we need the longer distance services on the CLC? If the EMR and TPE services could start at Piccadilly, provided there are ample connections at Piccadilly for Liverpool passengers to change, then removing them could have a really positive impact on performance and capacity for stopping services. As a previous user of the line, waiting for a delayed express to depart Oxford Rd ahead of the stopper frequently caused 10+ minute delays for the latter.

On a separate note, is it a fair comment to say that, in retrospect, scaling down Manchester Victoria during its remodelling by such a drastic extent was a bad idea? The policy of forcing most traffic through Castlefield and Piccadilly has been detrimental for performance on that section, and, given how tight the space is at Victoria with the arena, I can't imagine it's possible to expand it. Perhaps this wouldn't have been so bad if the Castlefield corridor had been four-tracked at the time.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2025 ==

Northern could get a lot more services through if new platforms and infrastructure was made, they could start operating from Manchester Airport/Crewe to Leeds.

Perhaps a bit off topic, but out of interest, how big would the market be for Crewe-Leeds? If there was enough forecasted usage, Northern wouldn't necessarily need to run this through Manchester and could instead run Crewe-Stockport-Guide Bridge-Leeds. It could give Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport direct access to Leeds, as well as finally giving Denton/Reddish South regular services.

 

[Class 323 Fan]

Some of us are still waiting for the Bradford to Manchester Airport service to see the light of day.

If so, I’d reckon Victoria could be a through station instead of a terminus.

Crewe to York, Via Manchester Airport, Manchesrer Piccadilly/Victoria,
Bradford Interchange and Leeds would be good. Would then intersect with the Blackpool North to York services, and could replace the existing Manchester Piccadilly to Crewe route.


If there's not enough platforms to accommodate the services, move some to start at Crewe.

 

[jfollows]

Crewe reversals would be fine and easy to do if it was required now. Happens offline in Basford Hall, but extemely unlikely for the reasons above.

For example, 4F66 Trafford Park to Arpley today. Reverses at Gresty Green Through Siding.

 

[Class 323 Fan]

Perhaps a bit off topic, but out of interest, how big would the market be for Crewe-Leeds? If there was enough forecasted usage, Northern wouldn't necessarily need to run this through Manchester and could instead run Crewe-Stockport-Guide Bridge-Leeds. It could give Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport direct access to Leeds, as well as finally giving Denton/Reddish South regular services.

Currently, the TPE services are quite busy, so I'd say the market is good.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Dec 2025 ==

Perhaps this wouldn't have been so bad if the Castlefield corridor had been four-tracked.

Why wasn't it 4 tracked in the first place?

 

[daveo]

- Rationalise services to a degree so that for example all services from Wigan and Southport go to Victoria.

Why do passengers from Southport, and stations to Wigan, have to continue being deprived of a direct service to the Airport?
We also have luggage, and some of us have reduced mobilities that make changing trains uncomfortable at best!!!