Calling patterns once Trans Pennine Route Upgrade is complete

[LNW-GW Joint]

Moderator note: Split from

Transpennine Route Upgrade and Electrification updates

Well it was suggested in the Manchester - Liverpool Electrification thread that we have a seperate Transpennine thread. Now I know that Manchester - Stalybridge is actually part of the Northern Hub project , but to me, haulage bashing Peaks in the 1970s-1980s - Liverpool-Newcastle was classed as...

www.railforums.co.uk

I doubt Northern/TPE will want to stop a second train per hour at Greenfield (and/or Mossley).
Most of the smaller stations on the already-electrified Chat Moss line (and at Ashton under Lyne) only have 1tph off-peak.

 

[AndrewE]

I doubt Northern/TPE will want to stop a second train per hour at Greenfield (and/or Mossley).

TPE might not want to, in which case Northern ought to. That's what it is there for.

Most of the smaller stations on the already-electrified Chat Moss line (and at Ashton under Lyne) only have 1tph off-peak.

Which is not really good enough across a conurbation/city region. Ashton may have trams but (like buses) they are a painfully slow way to reach the centre, let alone get to somewhere out the other side.

 

[notspy]

Greenfield and Mossley could really do with a 2nd train per hour, they're usually full and standing from these stations off-peak. The limit of a single 185 via Normanton really reduces capacity

 

[Halish Railway]

Greenfield and Mossley could really do with a 2nd train per hour, they're usually full and standing from these stations off-peak. The limit of a single 185 via Normanton really reduces capacity

There is certainly an aspiration to have both stations served by 2tph throughout the day. Whether that’s possible whilst running the planned freight trains throughout the day remains to be seen.

The next best option would probably be to have the planned 2tph semi-fast service between Hull and Manchester Piccadilly call at those stations - One per hour calls at Greenfield, the other calls at Mossley.

One thing that remains to be seen is how the expansion of the Bee Network will affect passenger trends. With the integration of bus and train ticketing people may find it easier to take a bus to Stalybridge, where they will have the choice of 2tph to both Victoria and Piccadilly.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

My original post was as a comment on the consultation response to the NR plans from the local council, wanting a commitment to 2tph at Greenfield from the TRU project (and services to both Piccadilly and Victoria in Manchester).
The overall TRU project will have cost more than the current £11 billion spend, and will have many benefits.
But I'm not sure additional local trains figured in the business case, which was more about reducing journey times and increasing capacity for inter-regional services and freight.
Giving away that precious new capacity for an extra local train on a constrained 2-track railway is not really what the upgrade is for.
One for the local mayors versus GBR, I think.

 

[3RDGEN]

The stated benefits of TRU are;

https://thetrupgrade.co.uk/benefits/ - "More trains to choose from and more seats - Our improvements will enable more trains to run between Manchester, Huddersfield, Leeds and York with up to six fast services every hour between Leeds and Manchester and up to two stopping services for local connectivity."

From what has been published Leeds - Huddersfield stoppers will be 2tph and Huddersfield - Manchester remains 1tph with 2tph at peak times but there will be capacity for 2tph all day. The stoppers could also be extended to six coaches once TRU is completed as Northern are planning to order 12 * 3 car EMU's for the local stopping services on the Transpennine route.

 

[hwl]

The stated benefits of TRU are;

From what has been published Leeds - Huddersfield stoppers will be 2tph and Huddersfield - Manchester remains 1tph with 2tph at peak times but there will be capacity for 2tph all day. The stoppers could also be extended to six coaches once TRU is completed as Northern are planning to order 12 * 3 car EMU's for the local stopping services on the Transpennine route.

The 2tph will be to the same Manchester terminus no split between Picc and Vic as the local council want. They obviously haven't thought about the return journey situation. This this might be over thinking it with two groups each favouring a different terminus and the council trying to back both camps.
The 2tph will be to single terminus but the council will feel "disrespected" because what they said wasn't actioned. They have possibly linked what they want not being actioned because of impracticality and "not being listened to".

 

[3RDGEN]

The 2tph will be to the same Manchester terminus no split between Picc and Vic as the local council want. They obviously haven't thought about the return journey situation. This this might be over thinking it with two groups each favouring a different terminus and the council trying to back both camps.
The 2tph will be to single terminus but the council will feel "disrespected" because what they said wasn't actioned. They have possibly linked what they want not being actioned because of impracticality and "not being listened to".

I haven't see details of were the Huddersfield stopper is going to, the two semi fasts are reported to be running Picc to Hull so is there capacity from Guide Bridge - Picc or at Piccadilly itself for 1tph stopper and 2tph semi-fasts? It's currently only the stopper that runs via Guide Bridge to Picc and there's no upgrade planned for that route so it maybe an issue.

 

[LittleAH]

I haven't see details of were the Huddersfield stopper is going to, the two semi fasts are reported to be running Picc to Hull so is there capacity from Guide Bridge - Picc or at Piccadilly itself for 1tph stopper and 2tph semi-fasts? It's currently only the stopper that runs via Guide Bridge to Picc and there's no upgrade planned for that route so it maybe an issue.

Wasn’t there an infographic posted on a thread a while ago? Which showed the planned post TRU timetable.

Guide Bridge isn’t the issue with a second stopper between Huddersfield and Manchester, it’s the capacity between Marsden and Stalybridge, and whether freight paths are prioritised.

 

[3RDGEN]

Wasn’t there an infographic posted on a thread a while ago? Which showed the planned post TRU timetable.

Guide Bridge isn’t the issue with a second stopper between Huddersfield and Manchester, it’s the capacity between Marsden and Stalybridge, and whether freight paths are prioritised.

It's a stated output of TRU that there will be the six TPE services, two stoppers and up to 15 freight paths a day, so presumably hourly with gaps at peak times. I can see that it may need to wait until ETCS is rolled out across the route in the mid/late 2030's but that is what should be delivered.

"https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/new-funding-boost-for-transpennine-route-upgrade" - The TRU programme is delivering:

• More frequent services – up to six fast trains per hour between Leeds and Manchester, plus improved local stopping services.
• Faster journeys – Manchester to York in as little as 63 minutes, and Manchester to Leeds in 41 minutes.
• Greener travel – full route electrification, reducing reliance on diesel and supporting Net Zero ambitions.
• Improved stations – enhancements at key stations will provide a better travel experience and increased accessibility for all passengers.
• More freight capacity – enabling up to 15 extra freight trains per day, removing over 1,000 lorries from the roads.

"https://thetrupgrade.co.uk/benefits/" - "More trains to choose from and more seats - Our improvements will enable more trains to run between Manchester, Huddersfield, Leeds and York with up to six fast services every hour between Leeds and Manchester and up to two stopping services for local connectivity."