Cheadle station

[davechis]

I read in the Manchester Evening News today that the proposed station for Cheadle (in Stockport MBC) has been approved for construction & that work will start next week. As far as I can recall, funding for this scheme was approved as far back as 2022 but final Government approval was withheld because of capacity and timetabling issues which would arise from the implementation of the station (it will be constructed on a long single track section of the Mid Cheshire line with no passing loop). Just wondering whether anyone knows what's changed the Government's mind (retiming/rerouting freight movements for example) or whether they're just resigned to living with the consequences?

 

[pr1]

I read in the Manchester Evening News today that the proposed station for Cheadle (in Stockport MBC) has been approved for construction & that work will start next week. As far as I can recall, funding for this scheme was approved as far back as 2022 but final Government approval was withheld because of capacity and timetabling issues which would arise from the implementation of the station (it will be constructed on a long single track section of the Mid Cheshire line with no passing loop). Just wondering whether anyone knows what's changed the Government's mind (retiming/rerouting freight movements for example) or whether they're just resigned to living with the consequences?

Just read the equivalent article in Place North West. I'm still baffled, if I'm honest, about what services will call here so looking forward to finding out a few more things.

 

[sportzbar]

Just read the equivalent article in Place North West. I'm still baffled, if I'm honest, about what services will call here so looking forward to finding out a few more things.

One train per hour in each direction. Its an extra stop on the Manchester Piccadilly to Chester via Altrincham service. I expect there will be some changes to the current timetable to fit it in.

 

[pr1]

One train per hour in each direction. Its an extra stop on the Manchester Piccadilly to Chester via Altrincham service. I expect there will be some changes to the current timetable to fit it in.

Thank you

 

[M60lad]

Am I right in the thinking that there's no choice but to change to the timetable to fit in calls to the new Station? As at the moment due to parts of the line being single track if one train ends up late it has a knock on to other trains on the line if I'm right?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Am I right in the thinking that there's no choice but to change to the timetable to fit in calls to the new Station? As at the moment due to parts of the line being single track if one train ends up late it has a knock on to other trains on the line if I'm right?

Might just need a tweak the timetable by maybe two or three minutes or so, which I think still happens during the leaf-fall season. Problem of course with the handful of single track sections is timetabling the inter-working of passenger trains in the opposite direction, as well continuing to accomodate several freight workings also using the Mid Cheshire line (most days).

 

[davechis]

Yes I'd agree with Mcr warrior about the freight workings. I carried out a study of the possible effect of the proposed station and it came out with a 25% reduction in capacity. This would be OK if the only use of the line was for passenger traffic but I'm aware that it's also significant as a freight route, eg for the Drax trains. I suspect that this capacity reduction is what's been holding up approval. I did suggest to the station management committee that constructing a passing loop at the proposed station (which could be accommodated on existing railway land) would resolve the issue but I've not received a response.

 

[Bantamzen]

Am I right in the thinking that there's no choice but to change to the timetable to fit in calls to the new Station? As at the moment due to parts of the line being single track if one train ends up late it has a knock on to other trains on the line if I'm right?

There's usually 11 or so minutes between a Manchester bound service leaving the single track section, to the Chester bound one entering. So small delays can be handled, but with a possible extra couple of minutes with a stop at Cheadle it probably would need reworking slightly as even something over 5 late might start to cause issues.

 

[Llandudno]

Presumably the new station on the single track section would scupper any chance introducing 2 passenger trains per hour between Chester/Greenbank and Stockport…?

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Presumably the new station on the single track section would scupper any chance introducing 2 passenger trains per hour between Chester/Greenbank and Stockport…?

I believe the platform is being designed so that it can be easily trimmed back should double track ever be reinstated. The bridges over the M60 slip roads would have to be widened however, so it is fairly unlikely.

 

[davechis]

Yes it's unlikely that the M60 bridges would be widened. But I think it would be possible to provide a passing loop in the section between these bridges which would be long enough to accommodate the longest freight trains currently in operation. This part of the route retains the double trackbed width including over existing bridge structures in the section.

 

[The Planner]

Not sure where the MEN is getting that from, its not gone through any regulatory change that operators have to sign off on that Ive seen.

 

[davechis]

Yes it surprised me as well. The article does include the following passage

Now Stockport council said the rail industry latest position recognises that more work will need to be done so that the removal of services at Ashley and Plumley is no longer required.

But it doesn't go into any detail about what this work would entail.

 

[Rail Ranger]

As things stand if the existing service was to call at a new station at Cheadle then trains will have to skip either Ashley or Plumley so each of those stations would end up with a two-hourly service. Basically the paths at the Chester and Stockport ends are fixed in stone so there isn't time in the schedule for an extra station call without missing out another station. Ashley and Plumley are the two least used stations on the Mid Cheshire Line. Other options would be infrastructure enhancements to raise the line speed (raising the 20mph over Northwich viaduct?) or using rolling stock with better acceleration (but Northern's new stock is still some way off).

 

[Farigiraf]

As things stand if the existing service was to call at a new station at Cheadle then trains will have to skip either Ashley or Plumley so each of those stations would end up with a two-hourly service. Basically the paths at the Chester and Stockport ends are fixed in stone so there isn't time in the schedule for an extra station call without missing out another station. Ashley and Plumley are the two least used stations on the Mid Cheshire Line. Other options would be infrastructure enhancements to raise the line speed (raising the 20mph over Northwich viaduct?) or using rolling stock with better acceleration (but Northern's new stock is still some way off).

I normally wouldn't be a fan of that, but the combined usage of both Ashley and Plumley is about 26k, which is really quite small compared to how many could use Cheadle. I think that there's little reason to construct the station right now though, 1tph is way too low for an urban station (see usage stats at Belle Vue and Ryder Brow for reference) so it'd barely justify the costs, especially if it makes it harder to upgrade the line in the future.

Missing out on an interchange with trains on the Styal line at Gatley is fair, as such a station wouldn't be well-located for most of Cheadle anyway, but it does add to the list of reasons why building Cheadle station (with the current state of the line) would be negatively impactful for the other stations on the line. Wasn't there also a plan for a tram- rail interchange stop at Baguley at some point - would be useful for accessing Wythenshawe, but again it wouldn't make sense to construct while it's an hourly single-track diesel railway.

Northwich/Greenbank, Hale and Knutsford are more than busy enough to justify 2tph into Manchester, so that should be the priority for any Mid-Cheshire line improvements. Then you also have the line to Middlewich/Crewe which could do with passenger services in addition to that, though any train to Middlewich would avoid the fairly busy Greenbank, so 3tph on the line would be ideal. It's just not the sort of route where infill stations make sense right now, while the existing stations have so much potential that's yet to be unlocked.

 

[Rail Ranger]

The journey time to Manchester was already increased by 15 minutes with the diversion via Stockport in 1989 and adding a station at Cheadle would increase it further. One solution would be 2tph (promised in the 2017 franchise renewal) with one of the trains running semi-fast.

 

[tumbledown]

What if one of the 2tph turned at Stockport?

 

[Rail Ranger]

That already happens at peak periods but I suspect that Network Rail wouldn't be keen on it happening through the day. It entails the use of the fast to fast crossover north of the station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Now Stockport council said the rail industry latest position recognises that more work will need to be done so that the removal of services at Ashley and Plumley is no longer required.

Presumably these two would be skip stopped so drop to 0.5tph to free up time?

 

[Rail Ranger]

Yes, as explained above.

 

[M60lad]

Why is Northwich Viaduct limited to 20mph is there an unknown problem with the Viaduct? Just seems to have been 20mph for ages with no rush to fix whatever the problem is?

How would the new station affect the additional Stockport-Chester peak services especially the ones in the evening that when they get to Chester then go onto Helsby branch to Ellesmere Port?

 

[py_megapixel]

I normally wouldn't be a fan of that, but the combined usage of both Ashley and Plumley is about 26k, which is really quite small compared to how many could use Cheadle. I think that there's little reason to construct the station right now though, 1tph is way too low for an urban station

1tph is a poor service, I agree, but I don't think it's a reason not to build the station.

(see usage stats at Belle Vue and Ryder Brow for reference)

This is a very poor comparison IMO. Belle Vue and Ryder Brow are much nearer the city centre than Cheadle, and they're both on a high-frequency bus corridor to Manchester that takes barely any longer than the train while costing slightly less.

A better comparison would be Bramhall, a few miles from Cheadle, which has a very similar, poor service of 1tph with a couple of peak extras, but is much better used, sitting somewhere between Hale and Altrincham in the usage stats.

Northwich/Greenbank, Hale and Knutsford are more than busy enough to justify 2tph into Manchester, so that should be the priority for any Mid-Cheshire line improvements. Then you also have the line to Middlewich/Crewe which could do with passenger services in addition to that, though any train to Middlewich would avoid the fairly busy Greenbank, so 3tph on the line would be ideal. It's just not the sort of route where infill stations make sense right now, while the existing stations have so much potential that's yet to be unlocked.

But the point of this project is not to "improve the mid-Cheshire line" but to address the suboptimal public transport situation in Cheadle - a significant south Manchester suburb with lots of demand to travel to Stockport and Manchester, but which has trains to Stockport and Manchester passing through without stopping.

If the station is a success at 1tph - which I think it will be - then that strengthens the argument for 2tph, which will benefit Hale, Altrincham etc. as well. It's not either/or.

 

[Rail Ranger]

Why is Northwich Viaduct limited to 20mph is there an unknown problem with the Viaduct? Just seems to have been 20mph for ages with no rush to fix whatever the problem is?

How would the new station affect the additional Stockport-Chester peak services especially the ones in the evening that when they get to Chester then go onto Helsby branch to Ellesmere Port?

Northwich Viaduct is limited to 20mph I think because the town of Northwich has historically suffered from subsidence due to the salt industry. Now that the Pacers have been withdrawn I believe that the speed restriction could be increased (which would presumably entail some work to establish the current state of the viaduct).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Today at 08:52 ==

1tph is a poor service, I agree, but I don't think it's a reason not to build the station.


This is a very poor comparison IMO. Belle Vue and Ryder Brow are much nearer the city centre than Cheadle, and they're both on a high-frequency bus corridor to Manchester that takes barely any longer than the train while costing slightly less.

A better comparison would be Bramhall, a few miles from Cheadle, which has a very similar, poor service of 1tph with a couple of peak extras, but is much better used, sitting somewhere between Hale and Altrincham in the usage stats.


But the point of this project is not to "improve the mid-Cheshire line" but to address the suboptimal public transport situation in Cheadle - a significant south Manchester suburb with lots of demand to travel to Stockport and Manchester, but which has trains to Stockport and Manchester passing through without stopping.

If the station is a success at 1tph - which I think it will be - then that strengthens the argument for 2tph, which will benefit Hale, Altrincham etc. as well. It's not either/or.

Bramhall does well despite having a station with a much better service (Cheadle Hulme) only a mile away. Cheadle will probably do well despite having Gatley station with its three trains an hour to Manchester only a mile away.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

A link:

The latest assessment by Network Rail and Northern Trains Ltd concludes that Cheadle Station could be introduced without r removing a significant barrier that had put the project at risk.

The latest assessment by rail industry partners has demonstrated that the risks of delay to services along the line can be reasonably managed and should not be considered as a reason for stopping further progress being made on the Cheadle project.

Source: aboutmanchester.co.uk

Not from the Manchester Evening News but from a site actually readable! (that is without a zillion pop-ups, adverts, auto-play videos and sign-up requests).

 

[Rail Ranger]

It's actually nonsense. The rail industry is still looking into the implications of opening Cheadle station on the train service on the Mid Cheshire Line.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

It's actually nonsense. The rail industry is still looking into the implications of opening Cheadle station on the train service on the Mid Cheshire Line.

Perhaps they could 'do a Butetown' and build the station but serve it just once per week? Other examples of such limited service exist closer to Cheadle but those are historic remnants rather than new provision. Yes, I do remember the Stalybridge shuttle of old!

The reference to Butetown is the suggestion that the station (Cardiff Bay Branch) must open this year to avoid repayment of grant funds to Europe but infrastructure work has not been carried out to enable a full service to be provided for the time being.

 

[davechis]

Perhaps they could 'do a Butetown' and build the station but serve it just once per week? Other examples of such limited service exist closer to Cheadle but those are historic remnants rather than new provision. Yes, I do remember the Stalybridge shuttle of old!

The reference to Butetown is the suggestion that the station (Cardiff Bay Branch) must open this year to avoid repayment of grant funds to Europe but infrastructure work has not been carried out to enable a full service to be provided for the time being.

Interesting theory & perhaps that's what's happening in this case. The problem though would be that if they installed the platform at Cheadle to the current design, it would remove the possibility of providing a passing loop at a later date as the platform would be sited on the currently disused portion of the trackbed which would be needed to provide a loop.

 

[The Mercian]

If Network Rail are serious about doing anything with the Mid Cheshire Line then a new Cheadle station would be down my list of priorities. Doing the Mobberley-Airport connection would be my first port of call, then electrification. I’d convert the old Ashley-Stockport section to Metrolink.

 

[Rail Ranger]

Interesting theory & perhaps that's what's happening in this case. The problem though would be that if they installed the platform at Cheadle to the current design, it would remove the possibility of providing a passing loop at a later date as the platform would be sited on the currently disused portion of the trackbed which would be needed to provide a loop.

They've said that they are going to build the platform in such a way that it could be moved to accommodate the reinstatement of the second track.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Interesting theory & perhaps that's what's happening in this case. The problem though would be that if they installed the platform at Cheadle to the current design, it would remove the possibility of providing a passing loop at a later date as the platform would be sited on the currently disused portion of the trackbed which would be needed to provide a loop.

I'm a cynic and have a scheming mind.

1) Make a lot of noise about a station, so that it gets funded and built regardless of technical practicalities such as capacity.
2) Introduce a full service which then leads to a meltdown in performance.
3) Convene a taskforce and conduct a study into said meltdown which then recommends unpopular service cuts which get pushed through regardless as they are 'essential to restore performance'.

Now, has such a scenario ever occurred on the GB rail network?

Where would those service cuts fall?
a) at a shiny new urban station with big voices behind it or,
b) at one or more lightly used rural stations with established usage figures on the relatively low side?

Ashley and Plumley, get your campaigning hats on, tonight.