Assuming Northern and TPE are merged.

[Prodigy]

There has been an adjustment in TPE's franchise that would enable the two to be merged easily. Basically TPE will now run until sometime between April 2014 and March 2015 whilst there remains another optional extension in Northern's franchise that could seem them run until April 2014.

You can read about it here (last bullet point).

Thanks pal

 

[PR1Berske]

My thoughts exactly...

1) How would you link it into Metrolink, it faces the wrong way out of Victoria
2) Why.... just why?
3) You'd need a lot of grade seperation to acceive it
4) You loose a perfectly good diversionary route
5) you'd need new track between Hindley and Wigan, for the metrolink lines
6) For the amount that would cost you could just build an electrified line into Leigh from Walkden with a station at Tyldley, and at a push, get all the way to the WCML too... (From Tyldsley) then with a bit of extra junction theres an extra no-reversals route into Liverpool via St Helens Central...

Or you could think like a TfGM person does and think "Trams or nowt", bung a junction halt/station at Platt Bridge and be all Metrolinked up by 2025.

Heck, you could see the yellow perils leave Victoria for the Liverpool platforms at North Western if you only believe

 

[Nym]

Or you could think like a TfGM person does and think "Trams or nowt", bung a junction halt/station at Platt Bridge and be all Metrolinked up by 2025.

Heck, you could see the yellow perils leave Victoria for the Liverpool platforms at North Western if you only believe

Alternatively, you could see sense and that Heavy Rail is the answer for the Atherton Loop, especially considering it's a very handy diversion from Salford to Wigan

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You could build a super duper route to Leigh for £140mil with heavy rail, electrification, and pay for the extra rolling stock and two stations...

The idea of spending £140 million on anything connected with Leigh, would give the local councillors there the view that either all their Christmases had come at once....or the Second Coming was imminent.:roll:

Isn't "the Wigan pie" the local currency in Leigh.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Alternatively, you could see sense and that Heavy Rail is the answer for the Atherton Loop, especially considering it's a very handy diversion from Salford to Wigan

I asked a question in my posting # 26 about the future plans for this line, that still has not brought a reply of any sort yet.

 

[Nym]

I've seen it mentioned in a few GMPTE (And even SELNEC) documents before but not as much recently...

 

[northwichcat]

Plans for integrating Marple and the Atherton line involve using tram-trains so the existing lines will not be converted but the types of vehicles used will change. Tram-train proposals are on hold until the Rotherham-Sheffield tram-train is in operation and evaluated.

 

[Nym]

Why not just order new sodding trains instead?

Where else could the Atherton or Marple line run that would mean it needs a tram/train? All it would do is close diversionary routes!

 

[northwichcat]

Why not just order new sodding trains instead?

Where else could the Atherton or Marple line run that would mean it needs a tram/train? All it would do is close diversionary routes!

Two likely reasons:

1. An Atherton line service could continue to Piccadilly or Deansgate after arriving at Victoria.
2. There would likely be at least a doubling of service frequency with a vehicle of half the size and the running costs will be lower or maybe in the case of Marple the same frequency off-peak but with units that aren't almost empty, unless the service is to/from Sheffield.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Two likely reasons:

1. An Atherton line service could continue to Piccadilly or Deansgate after arriving at Victoria.
2. There would likely be at least a doubling of service frequency with a vehicle of half the size and the running costs will be lower or maybe in the case of Marple the same frequency off-peak but with units that aren't almost empty, unless the service is to/from Sheffield.

Pardon my query, but would the Atherton service as you describe as continuing to Piccadilly or Deansgate, after arriving at Victoria require some form of reversal, as it would have already entered Victoria from a westerly direction.

Have there been any detailed published line proposals with regard to the development of the existing Sheffield-Marple-Manchester Piccadilly heavy rail route? There have been discussions on this forum in the past months concerning the standard of the central part of this route.

 

[WatcherZero]

On the Piccadilly approach from the east theres a reserved bit of land near Ashburys that would serve as an off ramp to street level. Approaching Victoria from the west no routes ever been suggested by officials though a direct Wigan-Marple service was an aspiration in the 90's supported by the rail industry, if they wanted to street run I would place a high chance on a street connection near Salford Crescent.

Of course they dont have to physically connect, a doubled frequency on the Atherton line with a service terminating in new western bays at Victoria for instance. The current limitation is the signalling headways on the Atherton line limiting frequency and the cost of improving them. So for example a tram train scheme could resignal the line as light rail, electrify at 750v, double the service frequency, add more stops (with the trains still benefiting from increased acceleration of electrification) then share the existing infrastructure from the end of the Atherton line to Victoria switching to 25kv and vice versa at the other end for the short stretch to Wigan. It would be cheaper to install and maintain and operate than a comparable heavy rail scheme making improvements currently considered unprofitable, practicable.

 

[northwichcat]

Pardon my query, but would the Atherton service as you describe as continuing to Piccadilly or Deansgate, after arriving at Victoria require some form of reversal, as it would have already entered Victoria from a westerly direction.

Well it might not be after but there would need to be a new link built to allow a tram-train from Atherton to get on to the city centre Metrolink track.

 

[Nym]

Two likely reasons:

1. An Atherton line service could continue to Piccadilly or Deansgate after arriving at Victoria.
2. There would likely be at least a doubling of service frequency with a vehicle of half the size and the running costs will be lower or maybe in the case of Marple the same frequency off-peak but with units that aren't almost empty, unless the service is to/from Sheffield.

1) It could anyway...

2) RE: Atherton if the line to Leigh is put in then Walkden - Victoria would be looking at 4tph and thats perfectly sufficent, 6tph would be sensible for the peaks. And, pepole prefer trains to trams, I don't think that the Atherton Loop users would appreciate having their line closed for 2 years for conversion when they could have it electrified and a branch to Leigh for the same price!...

Unless the're going to run off the viaduct and down Liverpool Street and down Deansgate I don't see any benifit to tramification of any heavy rail lines.

If TfGM is obsessed and wants more trams, they should look at either Tram-Training routes like the Mid Cheshire, East Lancs, or Bury - Rochdale / Altham - Stockport. Or building on disused trackbeds / roads, such as Navigation Road - Lymm - Warrington - ?Liverpool or Bolton - Bury, or entirely new routes like, Bolton - Trafford Park - Sale Water Park.

 

[BR Blue]

I`ve discovered this document from 10 years ago. It`s by the Yorkshire & the Humber Transport Activists Roundtable. They give their views on the, soon to be coming, trans-pennine franchise.

Most interestingly, on page seven, it refers to clapped-out "Pacers" units.

http://www.yhtar.org.uk/tpebriefnote.pdf

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I've discovered this document from 10 years ago. It's by the Yorkshire & the Humber Transport Activists Roundtable. They give their views on the, soon to be coming, trans-pennine franchise.

Most interestingly, on page seven, it refers to clapped-out "Pacers" units.

http://www.yhtar.org.uk/tpebriefnote.pdf

I got as far as the Strategic Rail Authority saying that CONNEX would have been the preferred bidder for the trans-Pennine franchise....and burst out laughing. Mind you, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

 

[HH]

...Those Categories are useless; last I knew, a certain 1M station close to hom was in Category F.)

Category F means an unmanned station. It has nothing to do with footfall. But the categories are seriously out of date. AFAIK they haven't been updated since privatisation, apart from a few exceptions.

 

[WatcherZero]

2009 was the last time the list was produced, I believe 2006 was the last time they were reassessed.

 

[HH]

2009 was the last time the list was produced, I believe 2006 was the last time they were reassessed.

Thanks

 

[WillPS]

I've discovered this document from 10 years ago. It's by the Yorkshire & the Humber Transport Activists Roundtable. They give their views on the, soon to be coming, trans-pennine franchise.

Most interestingly, on page seven, it refers to clapped-out "Pacers" units.

http://www.yhtar.org.uk/tpebriefnote.pdf

Wow! That document really shows the extent of the status quo we're enduring on the railways:

replacement/augmentation of the many clapped out “Pacer” units in
the north will not start until 2007.

Here we are, coming to the end of 2011 still with Pacer-replacement only a promised blip barely visible on the distant horizon.