Plans for Castlefield Corridor

[Chester1]

If the Big Bang projects aren’t done (p13/14, / full Salford Central - solves for terminating trains either side of Victoria…) - then pairing and limiting / simplifying seems to be the best option for the interim.

With the Wigan wiring and Salford Crescent third platform, we do have some incremental infrastructure. What’s next? Rochdale wires?


I do like the idea of all Airport line services being all-stations - and encouraging a ton of development along those lines. Manchester itself has a lot more potential for intra rail commuting - as seen by the Met - and Airport to inter-regional fast demand isn’t that high.

East Didsbury specifically could end up as a big future transport hub, but also for employment. There are already a lot of jobs there (Towers… Siemens not so far) - but largely driven to. Has high potential.

The post 2018 timetable debacle, post pandemic plan is:

A) Salford Crescent 3rd platform
B) Budget rebuild of Oxford Road and replacing signalling
C) Bewery Lane turnback near Victoria

Very lightly sketched out after that is improvements to Victoria within existing railway owned land. Electrification is focused in TRU but Rochdale would be a good future candidate.

East Didsbury would be an excellent candidate for a new town centre but I can't see Greater Manchester being short of that kind of space and facilities for best part of a generation. The exisiting town centres have only recently started to see any major redevelopment. At current levels of construction a new Central Business District will probably be necessary around 2040. My bet would be next to Eitihad Stadium. The council and Abu Dhabi are doing huge redevelopment projects nearby together. The Philips Park line runs through the area with an industrial estate on one side and the other side has the athletics stadium (Commonwealth games training facility). If Manchester City Council doesn’t want to stop construction of skyscrappers when the city centre is full then that is probably the best site. The alternative is lower development south of the city centre or letting Salford have that kind of construction.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The post 2018 timetable debacle, post pandemic plan is:

A) Salford Crescent 3rd platform
B) Budget rebuild of Oxford Road and replacing signalling
C) Bewery Lane turnback near Victoria

Very lightly sketched out after that is improvements to Victoria within existing railway owned land. Electrification is focused in TRU but Rochdale would be a good future candidate.

In the seven years since 2018, have any new or changed priorities been considered by the relevant official transport bodies?

 

[Bantamzen]

The dash over the bridge would be dangerous - you could only do that if you made it two islands.

Just as dangerous as growing number of passengers on a single platform as delays start to mount up. We've all seen how quickly P2/3 fills up when services fall behind, and how this has resulted up in the evolution of the shouty "behind the red line" staff.

The Oxford Road redevelopment as four platforms was dropped because it was going to cost a small fortune. The viaduct is not in a great state and the plan required significant land purchases and demolition. Northern hub wasn’t completed because it was eventually realised that DfT would end up forking out the best part of a billion pounds to move the bottleneck to the southern approaches of Piccadilly. The budget redesign of Oxford Road stays within the existing foot print. It will probably enable 1tph extra through Castlefield but crucially alows longer trains.

This is one of the most frustrating facet about any kind of infrastructure projects on the network these days. Ideas to make big improvements are made, then someone declares "it's gonna cost you mate" whilst sucking the air through their teeth. Then plans are scaled back to half-arsed solutions that themselves result in more changes needed. Had the government(s) committed to the original plan for both Oxford Road & Piccadilly, we'd be at least on the way to a real improvement. Instead it's going to be yet another can kicked down the road.

Still discussions going on about the layout. I'll be surprised if the proposed central bay doesn't end up as a through line.

Blimey, nothing gets done fast! A bi directional through platform would be better but they need to get on with it.

As above, infrastructure projects have become so convoluted, with so much regulation and long consultation periods that those that should be delivering real change end up being clipped back to a viable minimum, leaving the problems left unsolved and the cost of the solutions ever growing. I can't help but think that sometimes this is by design, at least by some parties.

 

[dodecahedron67]

Not withstanding a lack of investment into proper (very expensive) full-fat solutions (Picc 15 & 16, Occy Rd 4 tracking etc.), simplification and pairing is the way to go

1tph Airport - Picc - Oxford Road - N Wales (TfW) kept solely for Political reasons
1tph Airport - Picc - Oxford Road - Scotland (TPE)
2tph Airport - Picc - Oxford Road - Victoria - Yorkshire (TPE)
2tph Airport - all stops - Picc - Oxford Road - Blackpool (Northern EMU)
1tph Airport - all stops - Picc - Oxford Road - Liverpool via Chat Moss (Northern EMU)
1tph Crewe - all stops - Airport - all stops - Picc - Oxford Road - Victoria (Northern EMU) requires Brewery Jn turnback, Rochdale electrification, or running through to Stalybridge

Which forms a 4tph Airport - Picc "fast" and 4tph Airport - Picc all stops. Flighting the stoppers behind a fast with all stops services timed for 23 mins Picc - Airport and fasts timed for 18 would work once freight is out the equation. These times allow for a couple minutes padding as well to try and ensure right-time presentation, especially on the longer distance fast services. Each slow would, in theory, end up 8 min in front of the following fast at Picc and 3 min in front at the Airport, creating a roughly clockface every 7-8 minute service through Castlefield.

Add on 2tph Cleethorpes/Notts - Sheffield - Picc - Oxford Road - Liverpool and you have 10tph through Castlefield, albeit a small fudge where you'd have 2tph laid on top of a base 7-8min frequency.
Oxford Road turnbacks to solely be the CLC stoppers if that line isn't Merseyrail/Metrolinked.

Southport goes to 2tph Southport - Stalybridge and Barrow/Windermere services use Manchester Victoria, same platform connections at Preston/Bolton with the TPE Scotland for travel to the Airport.

If you get rid of the need to serve the CLC by Metrolink-ing & Merseyrail-ing it, you end up with 10tph through Castlefield split Northbound 4tph Chat Moss, 3tph Bolton and 3tph Victoria. Southbound it would be 8tph Airport, 2tph Sheffield. If not, you get 11/12tph (if CLC is 1 or 2tph) but only 10tph through Picc. Northbound it would be 3/4tph CLC, 2tph Chat Moss, 3tph Bolton, 3tph Victoria. Southbound it would be 8tph Airport, 2tph Sheffield, 1/2tph Occy Rd terminators.

Ideally all the TPE airport services are operated by the same stock which allows for on-the-fly (but not booked) interworking at the Airport to keep the service running if necessary.

Something like (at Oxford Road)
Airport/Picc direction
XX00 Northern stopper to Airport (from L'pool via Moss)
XX03 CLC stopper arrival
XX08 TPE to Cleethorpes
XX11 TPE to Airport (from Yorkshire)
XX15 Northern stopper to Airport (from Blackpool)
XX23 TPE to Airport (from Scotland)
XX30 Northern stopper to Airport (from Victoria)
XX33 CLC stopper arrival
XX38 EMR to Notts & beyond
XX41 TPE to Airport (from Yorkshire)
XX45 Northern stopper to Airport (from Blackpool)
XX53 TfW to Airport

Away from Manchester
XX00 Northern to Victoria
XX08 TPE to Yorkshire
XX11 TPE to Liverpool via CLC
XX14 CLC stopper
XX15 Northern to Blackpool*
XX23 TPE to Scotland
XX30 Northern to Liverpool via Chat Moss
XX38 TPE to Yorkshire
XX41 EMR to Liverpool via CLC
XX44 CLC stopper
XX45 Northern to Blackpool*
XX53 TfW to North Wales via Chat Moss

*XX15/45 become 17/47 if CLC stopper is needed

Annoyingly it doesn't quite work Northbound with the Blackpool and Scotland TPE north of Bolton, but if the Blackpool services dwelled at Bolton and got overtaken by the TPE it seems to work, at the cost of extended journey times northbound

 

[Chester1]

In the seven years since 2018, have any new or changed priorities been considered by the relevant official transport bodies?

Only for the very long term e.g. cross city tunnel has become a focus since then and Northern Powerhouse Rail plans have been developed further. The short and medium term problems are about compensating the failure of Northern Hub, delivering most of its capacity at a cheaper cost and without creating chaos for half of the north. Improvements to Victoria and three additional platforms at Salford Central were lobbied for long before 2018. Salford Central is an interesting problem. With the scale of development in the area makes it seem like an obvious project but it largely fails because of the question of what services would use the platforms. The track through 3 and 4 is no longer connected to Bolton lines and is about 70cm higher than before the track layout was changed when the Ordsall Chord was built.

This is one of the most frustrating facet about any kind of infrastructure projects on the network these days. Ideas to make big improvements are made, then someone declares "it's gonna cost you mate" whilst sucking the air through their teeth. Then plans are scaled back to half-arsed solutions that themselves result in more changes needed. Had the government(s) committed to the original plan for both Oxford Road & Piccadilly, we'd be at least on the way to a real improvement. Instead it's going to be yet another can kicked down the road.

With hindsight Piccadilly platforms 15 and 16 would have been a bigger disaster than the Ordsall Chord was. Imagine an extra 7tph more than today going between Stockport + airport to and from Castlefield. The extra benefit of two through platforms wouldn't compensate for the mess that would have caused. Northern Hub was great on paper but was driven by political not practical demands. If everywhere wants a service to Piccadilly then the station throat needs a billion pound grade seperation, remodelling and resignalling project.

 

[Bantamzen]

With hindsight Piccadilly platforms 15 and 16 would have been a bigger disaster than the Ordsall Chord was. Imagine an extra 7tph more than today going between Stockport + airport to and from Castlefield. The extra benefit of two through platforms wouldn't compensate for the mess that would have caused. Northern Hub was great on paper but was driven by political not practical demands. If everywhere wants a service to Piccadilly then the station throat needs a billion pound grade seperation, remodelling and resignalling project.

I'm not so sure it would have been a disaster, and certainly can't see the need for another 7tph. Yes that might be the theoretical capacity increase through the corridor, it didn't mean it would have to happen especially if it couldn't be sustained south of Manchester. But it would have allowed Piccadilly to have 2 loading / unloading in both directions, and then alternating through the corridor. But with the evolving new fleets planned for the 2030s, as well as track improvements towards Stockport there may well be capacity in the future for a few more.

 

[Chester1]

I'm not so sure it would have been a disaster, and certainly can't see the need for another 7tph. Yes that might be the theoretical capacity increase through the corridor, it didn't mean it would have to happen especially if it couldn't be sustained south of Manchester. But it would have allowed Piccadilly to have 2 loading / unloading in both directions, and then alternating through the corridor. But with the evolving new fleets planned for the 2030s, as well as track improvements towards Stockport there may well be capacity in the future for a few more.

It would have almost certainly been 16tph or very close to it because that was what the business case was based on. The 2018 timetable was 11tph + 2tph terminating at Oxford Road, these would have been extended due to removal of Oxford Road platform 5 as part of Northern Hub. This has dropped to 9tph + 2tph after 2018 mess. The political importance of services to Piccadilly means that Castlefield will always run at its maximum capacity. All that has happened recently is acknowledgement that 11tph + 2tph worked on paper but not in real world conditions. Any changes to Piccadilly or rolling stock won't significantly help unless there is some grade seperation. The fundamental block to more trains on Castlefield is that the southern end is the approach to a major terminal station and link to the airport. Ideally the solution would be six tracking to Slade Lane Junction and a flyover for Stockport - Castlefield services. The cheaper option for the rest of this decade and the next one is focusig on Victoria after the current projects are done.

 

[cle]

P15/16 would have given far more options (terminating services, passing / pathing) as well as upping frequency. As agree, it can’t all go into Castlefield.

Not to mention a better, safer customer experience.

East Didsbury would be an excellent candidate for a new town centre but I can't see Greater Manchester being short of that kind of space and facilities for best part of a generation. The exisiting town centres have only recently started to see any major redevelopment. At current levels of construction a new Central Business District will probably be necessary around 2040. My bet would be next to Eitihad Stadium. The council and Abu Dhabi are doing huge redevelopment projects nearby together. The Philips Park line runs through the area with an industrial estate on one side and the other side has the athletics stadium (Commonwealth games training facility). If Manchester City Council doesn’t want to stop construction of skyscrappers when the city centre is full then that is probably the best site. The alternative is lower development south of the city centre or letting Salford have that kind of construction.

I don’t it would or should preclude skyscrapers and the development in the city centre. Manchester is going gangbusters and it’s very welcome.

I’d see East Didsbury as more ‘Chiswick Park’ or M4 type office developments and companies. Or Cambridge / Oxford tech and science campuses. Benefitting from the Airport and Cheshire proximity. Not wholly car-centric business parks, but something more realistic.

 

[HSTEd]

I'm not sure expecting major new construction of commercial floor space is realistic in the medium-long term.

Haven't most of the towers in the city centre been residential?

 

[Chester1]

P15/16 would have given far more options (terminating services, passing / pathing) as well as upping frequency. As agree, it can’t all go into Castlefield.

Not to mention a better, safer customer experience.


I don’t it would or should preclude skyscrapers and the development in the city centre. Manchester is going gangbusters and it’s very welcome.

I’d see East Didsbury as more ‘Chiswick Park’ or M4 type office developments and companies. Or Cambridge / Oxford tech and science campuses. Benefitting from the Airport and Cheshire proximity. Not wholly car-centric business parks, but something more realistic.

The plan for 13-16 was for trains to be approaching their platform as a train on its paired platform was about to leave. Any trains terminating at Piccadilly from the west would still needed to have used Mayfield siding. The business case for 15 and 16 doesn't stack up for extending Oxford Road terminators and an extra service or 2 and Piccadilly wouldn't have been able to cope with 14-16tph through Castlefield. I was really disappointed when Northern hub was cancelled but it was a politically driven project that ignored the reality that Salford Central and Victoria can absorb city centre passenger growth at a fraction of the cost of what was necessary to make Northern hub work in the real world.

I'm not sure expecting major new construction of commercial floor space is realistic in the medium-long term.

Haven't most of the towers in the city centre been residential?

It has always leaned than way and there was a massive switch to residential because of the pandemic. The renters right act will push more students into purpose built accommodation from next summer and this is a big element in Manchester city centre. However, the proportion of commercial and mixed use developments applying for planning permission started to rise again this year so the underlying demand is there and growing. I reckon the shift to hybrid work probably knocked off 20-25% off demand but that is set against growth rates of probably 3-4% per year. Developers have started to put commerical and mixed schemes back in their pipeline again expecting spare office capacity to run out in 2 or 3 years time. Construction at Mayfield has finally started and a large chunk of that will be office space. I can't see Manchester Council being willing to surrender the prestige developments to Salford once the current areas zoned for high rises have been built on.

 

[cle]

I was really disappointed when Northern hub was cancelled but it was a politically driven project that ignored the reality that Salford Central and Victoria can absorb city centre passenger growth at a fraction of the cost of what was necessary to make Northern hub work in the real world.

But then Salford Central was cancelled, and Victoria is still the pits, with no expansion in sight.

So, a straighter, slightly longer Oxford Road - with a through road that will turn the same tph to CLC is what we have to look forward to.

So what’s the passenger growth to be absorbed?

 

[TrainzBK]

Work is supposedly starting on the Salford Central turnbacks and Brewery Turnback at the beginning of 2026, we will see if it actually happens though.

 

[HSTEd]

Any serious expansion of Victoria is going to cost a lot of money, and solidify the decidedly suboptimal situation of having two major stations in the city that are not really shared.

You might get a siding or an additional bay platform, but after that its going to be a total reconstruction.

 

[The Planner]

Work is supposedly starting on the Salford Central turnbacks and Brewery Turnback at the beginning of 2026, we will see if it actually happens though.

Brewery will be summer.

 

[Chester1]

But then Salford Central was cancelled, and Victoria is still the pits, with no expansion in sight.

So, a straighter, slightly longer Oxford Road - with a through road that will turn the same tph to CLC is what we have to look forward to.

So what’s the passenger growth to be absorbed?

Through longer trains. They foul signals at Oxford Road and in the case of double 350s that TPE used to run, they fouled the points too. The budget upgrade of Oxford Road combined with ongoing platforms extensions elsewhere should make 6x23m and 5x26m the norm for Castlefield. After that the focus will switch to Victoria and hopefully Salford Central and then moving freight to Parkside. There needs to standing up to local interests and say if a service can't justify 5-6 coaches then it can’t serve Castlefield and stop trying to turn it into a Thameslink for short trains.

The big problem with additional platforms at Salford Central is which services serve them? The lines to Bolton aren't connected anymore because of a significant height difference to Chat Moss line and Ordsall Chord. Unless there is a recast then it would mean stopping Chester - Leeds and both TPE services to Liverpool. That means the business case would only be for 3tph. Something needs to change because it is the best station for Spinningfields and Salford city centre is a growing business destination. The case for platform 5 is weak because there is only 1tph using the chord and if that is substantially increased the delay from a stop will make the single track a bottleneck. The work done this year will make additonal platforms much easier (improving circulation and facilities).

Any serious expansion of Victoria is going to cost a lot of money, and solidify the decidedly suboptimal situation of having two major stations in the city that are not really shared.

You might get a siding or an additional bay platform, but after that its going to be a total reconstruction.

Maybe there will be one bay platform squeezed next to platform 3, some platform lenghening and signalling improvements. A platorm 2.5 would probably enable a stopping service to Lime Street and terminating Chester services to allow Leeds service to serve somewhere else west of Victoria. The bulk of the work will need to be lengthening platforms at other stations to standardise 5-6 coach services. Manchester City Centre is too big to be adequately served by one primary station and that problem is getting worse.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Dec 2025 ==

Brewery will be summer.

That is excellent news. Will it be ready for December 2026 timetable change?

 

[biggerisbetter]

Through longer trains. They foul signals at Oxford Road and in the case of double 350s that TPE used to run, they fouled the points too. The budget upgrade of Oxford Road combined with ongoing platforms extensions elsewhere should make 6x23m and 5x26m the norm for Castlefield.

Looking at the consultation material for the Oxford Road redevelopment, it doesn’t state platform lengths in metres but advises that the new platforms will be lengthened to “8 carriages”. Does anyone know if this will be 8 x 23m? This would make sense in my view as would allow for lengthening of TPE services to 7 x 26m which I think may be justified in the medium term.

The big problem with additional platforms at Salford Central is which services serve them? The lines to Bolton aren't connected anymore because of a significant height difference to Chat Moss line and Ordsall Chord. Unless there is a recast then it would mean stopping Chester - Leeds and both TPE services to Liverpool. That means the business case would only be for 3tph. Something needs to change because it is the best station for Spinningfields and Salford city centre is a growing business destination.

I presume the Wigan North Western via Golborne service would also use these platforms.

One of the benefits of additional stops for services passing through the city centre in addition to standardising calling patterns would also be to spread the number of passengers around the stops, reducing pressure on existing stations.

 

[cle]

For Salford Central - I would assume that the sidings would enable an all day Victoria-Liverpool Chat Moss stopper, as well as an all day Wigan NW, whether it stayed as express or not.

So that would add 2tph each way - plus TPE and Leeds-Chester. That’s 10tph total added - seems reasonable to me.

We might see more added (addl Vic-Preston again) - in future which would of course use existing platforms. But still, a lot of growth to support the quarter.

 

[Chester1]

Looking at the consultation material for the Oxford Road redevelopment, it doesn’t state platform lengths in metres but advises that the new platforms will be lengthened to “8 carriages”. Does anyone know if this will be 8 x 23m? This would make sense in my view as would allow for lengthening of TPE services to 7 x 26m which I think may be justified in the medium term.

I presume the Wigan North Western via Golborne service would also use these platforms.

One of the benefits of additional stops for services passing through the city centre in addition to standardising calling patterns would also be to spread the number of passengers around the stops, reducing pressure on existing stations.

Platforms 2, 3 and 4 are already 160m. The problem for them is signalling positions and points. The technical consultation document doesn't give the proposed platform length in metres. I would hope the side platforms would be able to fit 8 x 23m. The 6 coaches for the middle platform must surely be 6 x 23m. Fitting double 4 coach 331s and single 807 into the side platforms and double 3 coach 331s into the middle platform should be the minimum for future proofing.

For Salford Central - I would assume that the sidings would enable an all day Victoria-Liverpool Chat Moss stopper, as well as an all day Wigan NW, whether it stayed as express or not.

So that would add 2tph each way - plus TPE and Leeds-Chester. That’s 10tph total added - seems reasonable to me.

We might see more added (addl Vic-Preston again) - in future which would of course use existing platforms. But still, a lot of growth to support the quarter.

The convention for tph is to only count one direction so it would be 5tph assuming both TPE services, the Golborne service, Chester and a new Chat Moss stopping service uses it. That is viable if Victoria can handle it too.

 

[The Planner]

That is excellent news. Will it be ready for December 2026 timetable change?

I believe its a case of having to be.

 

[Manutd1999]

The convention for tph is to only count one direction so it would be 5tph assuming both TPE services, the Golborne service, Chester and a new Chat Moss stopping service uses it. That is viable if Victoria can handle it too.

My understanding was that the Salford Central sidings will be used to terminate Calder Valley services, not trains from the west. Together with the Brewery Lane turnback, this will allow the Wigan-Leeds service (and others?) to be split at Victoria and potentially allow recasts in future. A Wigan/Golborne service would terminate at Stalybridge.

 

[cle]

Platforms 2, 3 and 4 are already 160m. The problem for them is signalling positions and points. The technical consultation document doesn't give the proposed platform length in metres. I would hope the side platforms would be able to fit 8 x 23m. The 6 coaches for the middle platform must surely be 6 x 23m. Fitting double 4 coach 331s and single 807 into the side platforms and double 3 coach 331s into the middle platform should be the minimum for future proofing.



The convention for tph is to only count one direction so it would be 5tph assuming both TPE services, the Golborne service, Chester and a new Chat Moss stopping service uses it. That is viable if Victoria can handle it too.

For termini, sure. Here, they all run through. So yes adding 5 new services is actually + 10tph through SC - 5 to new places west, 5 to Victoria and possibly onward points, which is also valuable.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

For termini, sure. Here, they all run through. So yes adding 5 new services is actually + 10tph through SC - 5 to new places west, 5 to Victoria and possibly onward points, which is also valuable.

My understanding is that it also applies to through stations. So I would say that (e.g.) Bootle New Strand has 4 tph, meaning that there are 4 heading north to Southport and 4 heading south to Liverpool.

 

[Chester1]

I believe its a case of having to be.

I guess its to time it with Salford Crescent third platform being utilised in a timetable for the first time. Hopefully reliability should start to improve towards end of year and some additional peak services launch next December.

My understanding was that the Salford Central sidings will be used to terminate Calder Valley services, not trains from the west. Together with the Brewery Lane turnback, this will allow the Wigan-Leeds service (and others?) to be split at Victoria and potentially allow recasts in future. A Wigan/Golborne service would terminate at Stalybridge.

What is happening with sidings at Salford Central? Will they be located to east or west of station?

 

[TrainzBK]

What is happening with sidings at Salford Central? Will they be located to east or west of station?

There will be 2 of them at the west end of the station.

 

[Elecman]

Are the 2 former turnback sidings at Salford Crescent ever used nowadays?

 

[Manutd1999]

I've thought a bit more about this lately and this is how I'd propose to arrange the services once the planned upgrades are complete, with the aim of achieving a standardised half-hourly pattern wherever possible.

Starting with the Styal line, a mix of 4x fast and 4x stoppers seems sensible. The fasts go at 15 min intervals and are slowed down so that it takes ~15 mins to Piccadilly. Each stopper is sent out 4 mins after a fast service a takes ~22 mins, arriving at Piccadilly 4 mins before the next fast train.

That gives a turn-up-and-go frequency for local stations whilst keeping plenty of paths for long-distance services. I'd divide them up as follows:
2ph Local Airport-Blackpool
2ph Local Airport-Chat Moss (1ph Liverpool, 1ph Wigan via Golborne)
2ph Fast Airport-Preston-Scotland/Barrow
2ph Fast Airport-Victoria-Leeds-onwards

Then add 2ph Sheffield-Liverpool, 2ph Oxford Rd - Warrington and 1x freight to give a total of 13ph along the corridor. All trains would call at all stations through Castlefield, including Deansgate. This would help to maintain an even flow, spread out the loads slightly and also improve Metrolink connections.

Away from Castlefield, I'd use the 2x new turnbacks at Salford to terminate the 4ph Calder Valley trains which continue beyond Rochdale. That would allow a re-cast to setup a similar 4ph fast, 4ph stopper pattern from Platforms 5/6 at Victoria towards Rochdale, which becomes the terminus of the local DMU network. Atherton line trains would start from Southport and be timed to connect onto the Blackpools at Salford Crescent, reducing the impact of Southport losing Castlefield. Headbolt Ln becomes a shuttle to/from Wigan.
2ph Local Southport-Atherton-Salford-Victoria-Rochdale
2ph Local Blackburn-Bolton-Salford-Victoria-Rochdale
4ph Fast Salford-Victoria-Rochdale-onwards (3ph Leeds, 1ph Blackburn)

Platforms 3/4 at Victoria are then used for services from Chat Moss - the TPEs, a re-routed TfW Llandudno and the Northern Chester service which currently continues to Leeds. The new siding at Brewery Lane would be used for the terminating trains to layover as needed. Finally, there would be 2ph from Wigan NW to Stalybridge via Victoria, which has long been planned but never implemented.
2ph Liverpool-Victoria-Leeds-onwards
2ph Airport-Victoria-Leeds-onwards
2ph Wigan NW-Bolton-Victoria-Stalybridge
2ph Chester/Holyhead-Victoria

Overall this results in a more consistent, organised pattern compared to today. Stations towards Rochdale, Bolton and along the Styal line would particularly benefit from increased frequency. Plenty of loud opposition could be expected from TfW and Southport, but personally I think it's a price worth paying for a better overall service.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I've thought a bit more about this lately and this is how I'd propose to arrange the services once the planned upgrades are complete, with the aim of achieving a standardised half-hourly pattern wherever possible. Starting with the Styal line, a mix of 4x fast and 4x stoppers seems sensible. The fasts go at 15 min intervals and are slowed down so that it takes ~15 mins to Piccadilly. Each stopper is sent out 4 mins after a fast service a takes ~22 mins, arriving at Piccadilly 4 mins before the next fast train.

Does this still allow the continuation of the standard container freight timetable on the Styal Line to be unchanged?

 

[The Planner]

Does this still allow the continuation of the standard container freight timetable on the Styal Line to be unchanged?

Presumably if a fast is catching up the previous stopper, it sounds like no.

 

[Topological]

Could you feasibly drop Mauldeth Road from one stopper to fit the freight train through? Not perfect, but if it needs something like that to work then at least Mauldeth Road is close to the city centre anyway.

I like the majority of @Manutd1999 suggestions, so it would be good if there was a way to get 4 stoppers, 4 fasts and a freight along the Styal line.

The other thought is that this now leaves no Crewe stopper via Styal. Presumably that could be an extension of any of the locals mentioned though.

 

[Class 323 Fan]

I've thought a bit more about this lately and this is how I'd propose to arrange the services once the planned upgrades are complete, with the aim of achieving a standardised half-hourly pattern wherever possible.

Starting with the Styal line, a mix of 4x fast and 4x stoppers seems sensible. The fasts go at 15 min intervals and are slowed down so that it takes ~15 mins to Piccadilly. Each stopper is sent out 4 mins after a fast service a takes ~22 mins, arriving at Piccadilly 4 mins before the next fast train.

That gives a turn-up-and-go frequency for local stations whilst keeping plenty of paths for long-distance services. I'd divide them up as follows:
2ph Local Airport-Blackpool
2ph Local Airport-Chat Moss (1ph Liverpool, 1ph Wigan via Golborne)
2ph Fast Airport-Preston-Scotland/Barrow
2ph Fast Airport-Victoria-Leeds-onwards

Then add 2ph Sheffield-Liverpool, 2ph Oxford Rd - Warrington and 1x freight to give a total of 13ph along the corridor. All trains would call at all stations through Castlefield, including Deansgate. This would help to maintain an even flow, spread out the loads slightly and also improve Metrolink connections.

Away from Castlefield, I'd use the 2x new turnbacks at Salford to terminate the 4ph Calder Valley trains which continue beyond Rochdale. That would allow a re-cast to setup a similar 4ph fast, 4ph stopper pattern from Platforms 5/6 at Victoria towards Rochdale, which becomes the terminus of the local DMU network. Atherton line trains would start from Southport and be timed to connect onto the Blackpools at Salford Crescent, reducing the impact of Southport losing Castlefield. Headbolt Ln becomes a shuttle to/from Wigan.
2ph Local Southport-Atherton-Salford-Victoria-Rochdale
2ph Local Blackburn-Bolton-Salford-Victoria-Rochdale
4ph Fast Salford-Victoria-Rochdale-onwards (3ph Leeds, 1ph Blackburn)

Platforms 3/4 at Victoria are then used for services from Chat Moss - the TPEs, a re-routed TfW Llandudno and the Northern Chester service which currently continues to Leeds. The new siding at Brewery Lane would be used for the terminating trains to layover as needed. Finally, there would be 2ph from Wigan NW to Stalybridge via Victoria, which has long been planned but never implemented.
2ph Liverpool-Victoria-Leeds-onwards
2ph Airport-Victoria-Leeds-onwards
2ph Wigan NW-Bolton-Victoria-Stalybridge
2ph Chester/Llandudno-Victoria

Overall this results in a more consistent, organised pattern compared to today. Stations towards Rochdale, Bolton and along the Styal line would particularly benefit from increased frequency. Plenty of loud opposition could be expected from TfW and Southport, but personally I think it's a price worth paying for a better overall service.

Only problem is, there is 1thp to Holyhead with TFW