Chester services

[Chester1]

I am wondering what peoples thoughts are on the future of rail services for Chester and the surrounding areas in the long term ie. 10-30 years time?

1) Dee-Mersey link (Halton Curve) - It seems in short term there will be some sort of ATW service, if not then perhaps Northern Rail. In the (very) long term if passenger numbers keep going up at some point the loop line in Liverpool will not have enough capacity. I believe at the moment its limited to 16 trains per hour. The Merseyside and / or Wales RUS has said that if the Borderlines line is electrified then the peak services (2 extra) from Ellesmere Port would likely be replaced with a shuttle to Hooton in order to keep to the maximum of 16 trains (outside of morning and evening commuting its only 2tph anyway). Also, there is limited capacity at Liverpool Central. In the long term are Merseyrail services from Chester and Ellesmere Port to Liverpool via the curve likely as a way of diverting passengers away from the loop line (presuming overhead electrification)? Would it make sense to have a (slightly longer) Hooton-Curve-Liverpool service to keep a max of 6tph from Chester and Ellesmere Port through Birkenhead? Could some Southport services be diverted south after Liverpool South Parkway to provide access to Liverpool Central and Moorfields?

2) Electrification of current ATW service to Manchester - this seems likely in the next 10 years. How fast do you think the service would be from Chester? The current service takes over an hour so its rubbish for commuters.

3) How far up the North Wales mainline is the Welsh Government likely to fund electification (assuming there is insufficent business case for Network Rail)? All the way to Holyhead or just to Llandudno (about half way). As Holyhead has a 2 hourly Voyager service to London that could run electric from London to Llandudno Junction and disel to Holyhead I think there is a strong argument for not electrifying the whole line and instead having a hourly Llandudno to Crewe EMU service and a hourly Holyhead-Llandudno junction disel service (in addition to having EMUs on the current hourly Llandudno-Manchester service). Is a (pointless) North-South Wales service too much of a political sacred cow?

4) Future of Mid Cheshire line - How likely is Network Rail's idea of a tunnel underneath Manchester Airport to Knutsford? My understanding is that there is a very good chance of capacity south of Manchester running out before HS2 completion in 2032 as Picadilly to Airport and Stockport lines are both close to being full already. Are there any alternative ways of increasing the capacity in these areas or is the tunnel the only signficant way? What sort of service would run along the Mid-Cheshre line? Id have thought running services though the airport and terminating at Altrincham would be a useful way of increasing capacity as its relatively little extra, has two platforms and provides an interchange with metrolink. Perhaps 1tph to Chester and others down the current Middlewich freight line to Crewe? Perhaps also a East-South chord between the Mid Cheshire Line and WCML to provide another way of getting to Crewe. Also, would the tunnel provide a good case for electrifying Chester-Altrincham and Sandbach-Northwich?

One extra thing -I have always thought its a bit odd when traveling down the mid Cheshire line that its single from Mickle Trafford to Mouldsworth but not along the rest of the line (apart from when next to Metrolink). What is the historical reason for this? Is it because of the old line to Helsby? Id have though that all of the line from Mickle Trafford to the WCML junction near Greenbank would be all double or all single rather than a bit of both.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I am wondering what peoples thoughts are on the future of rail services for Chester and the surrounding areas in the long term ie. 10-30 years time?

What difficult questions! And welcome to the forum by the way.

1) Dee-Mersey link (Halton Curve) and Liverpool services -

Too early to tell.
No service has yet been specified for the Halton Curve.
There are different views about local and long distance services.
Funding and rolling stock are significant problems, even with the curve reopened.
I think a local service and a few long distance ones are the most likely.
But the Ellesmere Port-Helsby shuttle may have to go as a result.

The Merseyrail Wirral line service is nowhere near capacity.
Passenger numbers are actually declining (an embarrassing fact in the latest footfall figures).
Practically all the trains are 3-car, they don't double up much now.
A 4-car fleet would easily cater for growth.
Ellesmere Port trains are particularly poor performers.

2) Electrification of current ATW service to Manchester - this seems likely in the next 10 years. How fast do you think the service would be from Chester? The current service takes over an hour so its rubbish for commuters.

There is frequent talk of a new hourly TP service from Chester to Yorkshire after Northern Hub, probably fast.
ATW would probably like to run 2tph but they haven't the stock and the decision about where to start it (Chester, Wrexham, Rhyl, Llandudno Jn) would take years to resolve.
The line is on the short list for early electrification (as is Crewe-Chester), but that is only likely to generate split services at Chester.
Chester-Euston (and Birmingham via Stafford, the proper route ) could go electric.

3) How far up the North Wales mainline is the Welsh Government likely to fund electification (assuming there is insufficent business case for Network Rail)?

There was optimism last year that between DfT and WG the whole line would get done.
But as they can't even agree on Cardiff Valleys wiring at the moment, it's a dead duck.
It would also beg the question of where North Wales trains go, and that has got increasingly political lately.

4) Future of Mid Cheshire line - How likely is Network Rail's idea of a tunnel underneath Manchester Airport to Knutsford?

There are many people on here who would want to answer that from the Cheshire East viewpoint.
The idea is still hovering but seems to have lost traction with all the fuss about Northern Hub and HS2.
I suspect it will come back to the fore when HS2 plans (and the new west-east fast line idea) firm up.
It could be built with the loose change from HS2 in the area.
Until then, unfortunately, the CLC line through Northwich will stay a low-grade route with minimal signalling and a line speed of 60mph (or less).
Mouldsworth-Mickle Trafford singling was a 70s downgrading scheme, put in when the junction layout at Mickle Trafford was reversed.
It has recently been resignalled into Mickle Trafford.
It is surprising that Greenbank-Mouldsworth was not singled.
There is still a decent amount of freight east of Hartford Jn.

Just my 5p on the above.
I'm sure you will get some alternative ideas!

PS I used the new East car park at Chester last week for the first time.
The old one is now a building site, not sure if it is for offices or railway use.
The odd thing is that it was not long ago that ATW professed no knowledge of a plan to upgrade Chester's "third world car parking".
They said their early plans did not get planning approval.
And yet here we have a brand new car park!
Sometimes the railway moves in mysterious ways.

 

[Bevan Price]

1. I think there are some people in Wales who would like to see some of the Birmingham/Shrewsbury - Wrexham - Chester services extended to Liverpool via Halton curve. For providing an improved access between Wrexham & Liverpool, that would certainly be a lot cheaper than electrifying Wrexham to Bidston.

2. Mid-Cheshire line. If a Knutsford - Manchester Airport tunnel is ever built, I think the best option for most passengers would be to make a connection to the existing line from the Airport to Heald Green, enabling through services to Manchester. Some kind of Northwich - Altrincham - Stockport / Manchester service (not via Airport) would need to remain, possibly in conjunction with possible new (reopened) stations to serve Baguley / Northenden / Cheadle.

3. If Chester - Warrington (for Manchester) is ever electrified, I think that journey times will probably be reduced by no more than 5 minutes, unless they can justify the cost (and find paths for) a fast service calling only at Warrington Bank Quay, and (maybe) Earlestown or Newton Le Willows.

4. North Wales Coast. I suspect it will be many years before wiring gets beyond Chester. In the very long term, wires might reach Bangor long before they reach Holyhead, leaving Holyhead to be largely served by shuttles to/from Bangor.

 

[Taunton]

if passenger numbers keep going up at some point the loop line in Liverpool will not have enough capacity. I believe at the moment its limited to 16 trains per hour.

As the majority of peak period trains are now only 3-car, rather than the universal 6-car of a generation and more ago, and as in those times the Wirral service into Liverpool had 24 trains per hour at peak periods (not an absolute limit but the daily timetabled service), I think it's got a fair way to go before "not enough capacity" is reached!

 

[Gareth Marston]

Network Rail planning for 2043 had the Halton Curve being used by a 2 hrly service to Cardiff alternating with a 2 hrly service terminating at Wrexham giving 1 Tph from Wrexham to Liverpool.

The same document had a lot of standard pattern services off the north wales coast and very tidy at odds with today's dogs dinner.

The a Welsh Government has an aspiration for an hourly Cardiff to Holyhead service this has been discussed many times on this forum. I am in the camp that says this service would undermine the prospects for the north wales coast being electrified.

 

[tbtc]

I am wondering what peoples thoughts are on the future of rail services for Chester and the surrounding areas in the long term ie. 10-30 years time?

Welcome to the Forum

As a non-local, my view is that Chester seems to be under-served on some corridors (only one "fast" train to Manchester is poor, especially such a short one and with so many longer distance passengers competing for seats too, only one train an hour to Wrexham seems really poor when you consider the bus frequency...).

However, Chester seems to be at the mercy of decisions made much further away. Liverpool, Cardiff, Westminster etc. The boundaries of the "North" depend on many things, but I can't see Chester having a big influence over the M62 dominated "Rail North".

I've mentioned many times on this Forum that the "Borders" bit of "Wales & Borders" seems to be a pretty low priority for Cardiff Bay. If you chop the Holyhead - Cardiff services then I'd suggest that the North Wales Coast line would have a reasonable case for CP6 electrification (since all services could be converted to EMU operation - from Manchester/ London/ "Birmingham via Stafford" - two or three services an hour west of Chester should justify electrification from Warrington to Holyhead).

However, Holyhead to Cardiff shows no sign of being cut - in fact, there are suggestions of it becoming hourly, which would spoil the case for electrification. Would Cardiff Bay prefer investment in North Wales that'd give people better/ faster links to Manchester/ Liverpool/ London, or would they prefer them to have a regular diesel link to Cardiff?

The Halton Curve... dunno. If you are going to spend money on it then it needs to have at least one train an hour, but it'd be a lot of money to spend just to give a further Liverpool - Chester service (considering the four direct services each hour). If it's to give Liverpool - North Wales a direct service then that sounds like more justification, but the current service frequency along the coast is pretty decent already - would a Liverpool service come at the expense of a Manchester/ Birmingham/ Cardiff service?

A Liverpool - Halton Curve - Chester - Wrexham - Shrewsbury - Hereford - Newport - Cardiff service every hour (or maybe bi-hourly, with a Liverpool Halton Curve - Chester - Wrexham - Shrewsbury - Wolverhampton - Birmingham service dovetailing) would be an ideal way of linking places whilst improving the case for North Wales Coast electrification. There's no reason why long distance links between cities *have* to be part of the Cross Country franchise.

There's always the argument on here that Chester - Crewe would be too hard to electrify due to the number of bridges, but if we can wire up rough terrain like Leeds - Manchester in the next few years then I think we'll cope somehow.

Wrexham ought to get more services - we seem to have found money for partial redoubling without having the stock (or even ideas) for where additional services could go. AIUI the current track layout at Wrexham mean you can't have services from Chester terminate there and reverse back to Chester (i.e. a simple extension of the Mid Cheshire services to Wrexham) - but the cost of a set of points ought to be fairly low compared to the money spent on the redoubling. Or was the redoubling just a political sop to North East Wales with no idea of what to do with it (other than it'll speed up the Cardiff - Holyhead services)? Were it not for electrification, I'd suggest a half hourly extension of Liverpool - Chester EMUs to Wrexham, but that's obviously impractical (and a long way to go on a toiletless train)!

the Ellesmere Port-Helsby shuttle may have to go

Whilst I know you're generally not allowed to suggest culling any services on this Forum (or face the wrath of someone saying that "YOU ARE WORSE THAN BEECHING"), I agree with you on this point and think that this is one we are going to have to scrap.

At the moment the four services a day can be accommodated by running off the Warrington BQ - Liverpool DMU service. With Chat Moss electrified in the near future, that service will become an EMU instead (and possibly extended to Manchester instead of Warrington - can't remember if this is confirmed?) which means you can't run the current Helsby service - so to keep serving the barely used stations between Ellesmere Port and Helsby, you're going to need to drag a DMU from... the Mid Cheshire? ...giving it to Wales & Borders?

Any "solution" would come at quite a "cost" (in terms of what else a unit could be doing) - how much are we prepared to "pay" to maintain a token service for the handful of people using Stanlow 'n' Thornton and Ince 'n' Elton? In an ideal world, Ellesmere Port would have some kind of service to Manchester, but any service from Ellesmere Port would be using a path/unit that could have been used for a further Chester - Manchester service (and that's a much bigger market).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Wrexham ought to get more services - we seem to have found money for partial redoubling without having the stock (or even ideas) for where additional services could go. AIUI the current track layout at Wrexham mean you can't have services from Chester terminate there and reverse back to Chester (i.e. a simple extension of the Mid Cheshire services to Wrexham) - but the cost of a set of points ought to be fairly low compared to the money spent on the redoubling.

The points are already there - it just needs a signalled move from the single line into P2 to reverse there.

 

[Philip C]

As the majority of peak period trains are now only 3-car, rather than the universal 6-car of a generation and more ago, and as in those times the Wirral service into Liverpool had 24 trains per hour at peak periods (not an absolute limit but the daily timetabled service), I think it's got a fair way to go before "not enough capacity" is reached!

And that was before the burrowing junction was built at Hamilton Square. I seem to remember a Merseyrail (or predecessor) brochure on the loop/link work, which included the elimination of the H Square flat junction, giving a capability of working 30 or more tph around the loop. With the scope for longer trains than at present it seems clear that the capacity of the infrastructure is several times that of the current service.

 

[Foxcote]

As the majority of peak period trains are now only 3-car, rather than the universal 6-car of a generation and more ago, and as in those times the Wirral service into Liverpool had 24 trains per hour at peak periods (not an absolute limit but the daily timetabled service), I think it's got a fair way to go before "not enough capacity" is reached!

Yes, all of the peak period trains were 6 cars and well loaded. The 24 trains per hour were composed of 12 from Rock Ferry and 6 from both West Kirby and New Brighton. A later addition to the service was the B'head Park turn backs of 2 tph thus making 26 tph in each direction over a flat junction at Hamilton Square.

This was possible because of the Mersey Railway Westinghouse 2 aspect signalling, (only two yellow aspects underground) with train stops and a greater number of signals. The only regular manned signal box was Hamilton Square, with the two boxes at Central and the one at James St in automatic, but manned in emergency or for monthly maintenance. This system was changed to standard BR practice with the introduction of James St PSB for the Loop/Link service in May 1977.

 

[Chester1]

The Merseyrail Wirral line service is nowhere near capacity.
Passenger numbers are actually declining (an embarrassing fact in the latest footfall figures).
Practically all the trains are 3-car, they don't double up much now.
A 4-car fleet would easily cater for growth.
Ellesmere Port trains are particularly poor performers.

As the majority of peak period trains are now only 3-car, rather than the universal 6-car of a generation and more ago, and as in those times the Wirral service into Liverpool had 24 trains per hour at peak periods (not an absolute limit but the daily timetabled service), I think it's got a fair way to go before "not enough capacity" is reached!

And that was before the burrowing junction was built at Hamilton Square. I seem to remember a Merseyrail (or predecessor) brochure on the loop/link work, which included the elimination of the H Square flat junction, giving a capability of working 30 or more tph around the loop. With the scope for longer trains than at present it seems clear that the capacity of the infrastructure is several times that of the current service.

Yes, all of the peak period trains were 6 cars and well loaded. The 24 trains per hour were composed of 12 from Rock Ferry and 6 from both West Kirby and New Brighton. A later addition to the service was the B'head Park turn backs of 2 tph thus making 26 tph in each direction over a flat junction at Hamilton Square.

This was possible because of the Mersey Railway Westinghouse 2 aspect signalling, (only two yellow aspects underground) with train stops and a greater number of signals. The only regular manned signal box was Hamilton Square, with the two boxes at Central and the one at James St in automatic, but manned in emergency or for monthly maintenance. This system was changed to standard BR practice with the introduction of James St PSB for the Loop/Link service in May 1977.

It appears I completely misunderstood the situation!!! I though with services to Chester switching to 4tph hour about 3 years ago and them being relatively full numbers were increasing but it must have been at the expense of Ellesmere Port services. I still think there is an issue with capacity if numbers grow at Liverpool Central both in terms of the Wirral Line platform and the station as a whole although the recent refurb significantly improved capacity.

Whilst I know you're generally not allowed to suggest culling any services on this Forum (or face the wrath of someone saying that "YOU ARE WORSE THAN BEECHING"), I agree with you on this point and think that this is one we are going to have to scrap.

I doubt the line will close as its not worth the effort and has a decent chance of having regular services in the long term plus has some freight traffic. I think the likelyhood is Northern or Arriva will run a weekly DMU service to keep the line legally open.

There was optimism last year that between DfT and WG the whole line would get done.
But as they can't even agree on Cardiff Valleys wiring at the moment, it's a dead duck.
It would also beg the question of where North Wales trains go, and that has got increasingly political lately.

The a Welsh Government has an aspiration for an hourly Cardiff to Holyhead service this has been discussed many times on this forum. I am in the camp that says this service would undermine the prospects for the north wales coast being electrified.

I agree on how political its become. I think the Welsh government's political interference could have any result, either blocking electrification, funding partial or whole electrification. Its too early to tell.

4. North Wales Coast. I suspect it will be many years before wiring gets beyond Chester. In the very long term, wires might reach Bangor long before they reach Holyhead, leaving Holyhead to be largely served by shuttles to/from Bangor.

I can't see any reason to terminate electric services at Bangor. While its a big stop, the service past Llandudno Junction largely exists to provide a connection with ferries from Holyhead to Ireland. I think its either to Llandudno or all the way to Holyhead.

However, Holyhead to Cardiff shows no sign of being cut - in fact, there are suggestions of it becoming hourly, which would spoil the case for electrification. Would Cardiff Bay prefer investment in North Wales that'd give people better/ faster links to Manchester/ Liverpool/ London, or would they prefer them to have a regular diesel link to Cardiff?

I think the Welsh governments preference is without doubt services to Cardiff for poltitical reasons, despite the economics pointing to a focus on Liverpool and Manchester. If ATW were given Meridian's after MML electrification (2020) or Voyagers after phase 1 of HS2 (2026) then it would change the situation allot but would need an increase in usage or a decrease in services to fill the seats.

However, Chester seems to be at the mercy of decisions made much further away. Liverpool, Cardiff, Westminster etc. The boundaries of the "North" depend on many things, but I can't see Chester having a big influence over the M62 dominated "Rail North".

Chester is a very marginal parliamentry seat which helps a little but yes its a frustrating situation.

3. If Chester - Warrington (for Manchester) is ever electrified, I think that journey times will probably be reduced by no more than 5 minutes, unless they can justify the cost (and find paths for) a fast service calling only at Warrington Bank Quay, and (maybe) Earlestown or Newton Le Willows.

Pathing might be an issue but will be reduced after 2032. I think there is justification for fast paths for a TPE service and given the reduction from Manchester to Newton-Le-Willows (for Liverpool services) will be about 7 minutes then the overall journey could be cut substantially, with 100mph use of WCML and the extra acelleration speeding up the many stops.

PS I used the new East car park at Chester last week for the first time.
The old one is now a building site, not sure if it is for offices or railway use.
The odd thing is that it was not long ago that ATW professed no knowledge of a plan to upgrade Chester's "third world car parking".
They said their early plans did not get planning approval.
And yet here we have a brand new car park!
Sometimes the railway moves in mysterious ways.

If an extra service is run between Chester and Manchester and an hourly service though the Halton Curve to Liverpool is run then one option might be to create a park and ride station between the ring road and A55 which would make car access much easier. Chester has a lack of stations. I think there needs to be one in Saltney as well. Atm its too difficult for allot of people in Chester to get to the station because of how bad city centre traffic is and it will not get better.

There are many people on here who would want to answer that from the Cheshire East viewpoint.
The idea is still hovering but seems to have lost traction with all the fuss about Northern Hub and HS2.
I suspect it will come back to the fore when HS2 plans (and the new west-east fast line idea) firm up.
It could be built with the loose change from HS2 in the area.
Until then, unfortunately, the CLC line through Northwich will stay a low-grade route with minimal signalling and a line speed of 60mph (or less).
Mouldsworth-Mickle Trafford singling was a 70s downgrading scheme, put in when the junction layout at Mickle Trafford was reversed.
It has recently been resignalled into Mickle Trafford.
It is surprising that Greenbank-Mouldsworth was not singled.
There is still a decent amount of freight east of Hartford Jn.

I agree but its really a seperate issue to HS2. The extra capacity will likely be needed long before 2032 (I think Network Rail said by 2024). If HS2 was dropped then a much larger solution would be needed though so I can see why they are waiting before considering it again. Its a shame because with, the tunnel, electrification, new signalling and 90-100mph running it could be a very signifcant route at least between Knutsford and Hartford and Sandbach.

2. Mid-Cheshire line. If a Knutsford - Manchester Airport tunnel is ever built, I think the best option for most passengers would be to make a connection to the existing line from the Airport to Heald Green, enabling through services to Manchester. Some kind of Northwich - Altrincham - Stockport / Manchester service (not via Airport) would need to remain, possibly in conjunction with possible new (reopened) stations to serve Baguley / Northenden / Cheadle.

That would require much longer tunnel rather than just a relatively short one under the terminal (then fields until Knutsford), it would also be problematic in terms of were trains would terminate, the problem with a loop is that delays are much worse when trains are only have catchup time at one end of a service .

Wrexham ought to get more services - we seem to have found money for partial redoubling without having the stock (or even ideas) for where additional services could go. AIUI the current track layout at Wrexham mean you can't have services from Chester terminate there and reverse back to Chester (i.e. a simple extension of the Mid Cheshire services to Wrexham) - but the cost of a set of points ought to be fairly low compared to the money spent on the redoubling. Or was the redoubling just a political sop to North East Wales with no idea of what to do with it (other than it'll speed up the Cardiff - Holyhead services)? Were it not for electrification, I'd suggest a half hourly extensionalthough a new Northern Line station around Lord Street or reopening St James would solve of Liverpool - Chester EMUs to Wrexham, but that's obviously impractical (and a long way to go on a toiletless train)!

The redoubling was done to have 2tph between Chester and Wrexham both to increase capacity on the section of the line to reduce the WG funded bus service (such a high frequency is only needed because of lack of trains) and to enable more north-south trains. I think like the Halton Curve, the redoubling is clearly a good idea but how it will be used will be a political battle. They key point is that one way or another there will be a hourly service across the curve and a half hourly service between Chester and Wrexham, when and were people have to change is secondary as both are a huge improvement. If Merseyrail gets dual voltage stock they will most likely have toilets so Wrexham-Chester-Aiport-Liverpool-Southport would be viable, especially as most people would only do part the journey. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Halton curve just has a Northern Rail DMU Liverpool to Chester service. Chester already has enough to liverpool but its not really about that, its about creating a link between Chester (and with or without a change, North Wales) and the airport/halton area.

P.S. Forgot to Add - I disagree with what I have seen in other threads about it being a bad idea to keep north of Wrexham single. While it would be much more expensive to go back and just do the two miles cut out of the redoubling, I can't see the line justifying more than 2tph for the forseeable future and the cost would have been allot to improve puntuality a bit more than the final plan will, especially when you consider that the extra cost would have been funded by the Welsh Government not Network Rail.

 

[Taunton]

The 24 trains per hour were composed of 12 from Rock Ferry and 6 from both West Kirby and New Brighton.

The Liverpool-Rock Ferry service was indeed every 5 minutes. I believe that made it the most frequent end-to-end service on the whole of British Rail (ah - Waterloo & City excepted).

I had also forgotten about those additional Birkenhead Park services in the 1970s. The station there was extensively remodelled to suit them, I recall the works, but in the end they hardly were run before being withdrawn - they ran for much less time than the timetables show.

 

[northwichcat]

LNW-GW Joint: There is actually some 75mph running on the Mid-Cheshire line between Skelton Junction and Edgley Junction. You really notice when the train has to slow down to 50mph through Northenden. As all regular trains are all-stops between Mouldsworth and Navigation Road or heavy freight services there wouldn't be much benefit from raising line speeds currently, it would just benefit this overnight service ATW have for crew knowledge retention purposes: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P22282/2014/08/23/advanced (which does Chester-Piccadilly in 59.5 minutes + 5.5 recovery time) and any diverted services. I understand the speed limit on the Leftwich viaduct will be raised to 50mph in 2016 when the signals get renewed. The fact that it's 20mph for all DMUs not just Pacers and freight is just because the necessary paperwork hasn't been completed!

tbtc: I think DfT are actually looking at formally closing routes instead of running token services which no-one uses. At least BBC North West Tonight implied that in a report with regards to Stockport-Stalybridge services, which was followed by an interview with Tony Miles in the studio who didn't question where they'd got the idea from.

Where the unit comes from for the afternoon Ellesmere Port-Helsby service is a complicated process.

* The 09:17 Manchester-Chester operates as 150+142.
* On termination the units are separated and the 142 works the 10:59 Chester-Manchester service alone leaving the 150 at Chester.
* The 12:17 Manchester-Chester operates as a 156. The crew off that train switch to the 150 stabled at Chester to work the 13:59 Chester-Manchester.
* A Lime Street based crew then arrive at Chester with a 150. They switch to the 156 and take it for the afternoon Helsby-Ellesmere Port services, then later it finishes up on one of the Lime Street evening peak departures that Merseytravel fund 156s on.
* The 150 which works the 13:17 Manchester-Chester is attached to the 150 left at Chester before running the 14:59 Chester-Manchester and then the 16:51 Manchester-Buxton. The latter bit means if they substitute a 150 for a 142 then the diagram doesn't work.

 

[Welshman]

I can't see any reason to terminate electric services at Bangor. While its a big stop, the service past Llandudno Junction largely exists to provide a connection with ferries from Holyhead to Ireland. I think its either to Llandudno or all the way to Holyhead.

Whilst I would certainly like to see the NW Coast line electrified right through to Holyhead, I think there is a domestic market past Llandudno Junction in addition to those intent on using the Irish boats.

Remember that Bangor acts as an important railhead for areas of NW Wales presently without a direct rail connection, eg Llanberis, Caernarfon, etc, and also during term time has traffic to and from the university.

Virgin Trains seem to think there is a market - the 0810 and 1610 off Euston stop short at Bangor, and the 1224 return starts short from there.

 

[edwin_m]

I can't see electrification finishing at Bangor. Holyhead is pretty deprived already and having to change to a shuttle would make it even more remote from everywhere else. It would also make the ferry a less attractive option for travel between North Wales and Ireland, moving further west the point at which it will be less hassle to drive to Liverpool or Manchester airports than take the train to Holyhead.

 

[Lukeo2311]

And that was before the burrowing junction was built at Hamilton Square. I seem to remember a Merseyrail (or predecessor) brochure on the loop/link work, which included the elimination of the H Square flat junction, giving a capability of working 30 or more tph around the loop. With the scope for longer trains than at present it seems clear that the capacity of the infrastructure is several times that of the current service.

Not this brochure by any chance is it?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lukeorourke/sets/72157635326825726

 

[Philip C]

Not this brochure by any chance is it?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lukeorourke/sets/72157635326825726

Luke,

Thank you for this, which is of considerable interest. I think the brochure I was half-remembering is a little different. It will be lying around somewhere in the house and I really must find it!

Meanwhile what you have found quotes 36tph as the service capacity for the post Loop and Burrowing Junction railway; this at least suggests that my memory wasn't too far out.

Thank You

 

[Lukeo2311]

it is from my personal collection, i was lucky to win it in eBay auction!

 

[Taunton]

That brochure, especially the map graphic, is suddenly familiar to me as well.

The stuff about the burrowing junction at Hamilton Square is notable, especially given that the service worked at a far higher frequency without it than it does nowadays with it. In schooldays I used to stand at the west end of Hamilton Square platform and watch the interleaving of services over the flat junction. It never seemed to be a cause of much, if any, delay. Inbound trains from Rock Ferry could be seen approaching down the tunnel slowly if the junction was occupied, but rarely getting stopped - they seemed to do this more for one ahead than an outbound train crossing in front of them. In the timetable trains made parallel moves over the junction.

More complex was on our West Kirby line, every 10 minutes both ways, where the iron ore trains, still steam hauled by 9Fs up to the mid-1960s, loose couples and unbraked, would be crossed right over the layout through Bidston station, even in the peak hour, without issue. I just can't see that happening nowadays as easily.

 

[Philip C]

Luke,

Thank you for this, which is of considerable interest. I think the brochure I was half-remembering is a little different. It will be lying around somewhere in the house and I really must find it!

Meanwhile what you have found quotes 36tph as the service capacity for the post Loop and Burrowing Junction railway; this at least suggests that my memory wasn't too far out.

Thank You

Found it! My brochure/booklet is entitled "The Story of Merseyrail" and was jointly published by Merseyside PTE and British Rail in December 1978 at a price of 35p. It may have been published in connection with commemoration of the Queen's visit on 25/10/78.

It doesn't actually use the expression 36tph but does state that "During peak hours there is a train path every 100 seconds on the Loop line, and every two minutes on the Link" A headway of 100 seconds = a frequency of 36 tph of course. There is also reference to the previous flat junction "being incompatible with long term plans to step up peak hour trains under the Mersey by 50%...."

 

[PHILIPE]

Welcome to the Forum. You will see on going discussion already on a thread on this Board on the Forum and titled "Chester to Liverpool Express" which should be of interest you by clicking on this Link:-

www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=100484

 

[Chester1]

I think the Chester to Liverpool express will only happen if Merseyrail take over an electrified Crewe - Chester line and vice versa. While a Chester express is good on its own its allot of money (building the passing loops) even though the line used to be 4 track. Crewe is too far if you assume 20 minutes to Chester and then 40 minutes to Liverpool compared with the current 43 minute service via Hartford and Runcorn. The other issue particarly for Crewe but also for Chester express is that Merseyrail trains are currently limited to 75mph both im terms of track and train top speed, although I suppose dual volt trains would be faster in AC and could probably do 100mph which would be necessary to be allowed to do Crewe to Chester. Personally I am surprised either were in Merseytravels 30 year plan.

Another thought I have had is why is no one advocating a half way house for the Borderlines line. My understanding is that allot of the expense of adding it to Merseyrail is upgrading the track to 75mph. Its currently limited to 50mph north of Dee Marsh junction and 40mph South of it. The junction is the obvious place for Dee Industrial estate station. I think the Welsh Assembly should be trying to co fund building the station and upgrading all the 40mph section (which is entirely in Wales) to 75 mph. It would cut 10 mins off travelings allowing for both extension to Birkenhead North for better connections to Liverpool and for 5 minutes much needed recovery time at each end. Crucially Wrexham to Dee Industrial estate would be just under 30 minutes so WA could co fund an extra unit to increase frequency to 30 mins for the bottom half of the line. If the section is ever added to Merseyrail it would just be a matter of adding overhead wires (presuming dual volt trains).

An alternative to extra unit just doing Wrexham Central to Dee Industrial Park could be a Cardiff - Birkenhead North Service. While not as glamrous as a direct service to Liverpool with 8 tph from Birkenhead North to Liverpool change over times would be mimimal. Especially as passengers would just be crossing to the otherside of the island platform at Birkenhead North. It would also create connections from parts of Wales that dont have a service to Cardiff. It would also make it easier to decide were Welsh trains down the Halton Curve start from i.e. North Wales Coast.

 

[Taunton]

The real shame about the Borderlands line was the loss of the line into Chester Northgate, which from me recalling the days when it was open was the busiest of the three arms of the network. Originally it was proposed to shut the whole lot as unremunerative, but there were protests, and while the old Crosville bus company provided good services from all around into Chester, the focus for all around, it was more challenging to reach Liverpool from the Welsh side, hence the service being retained that remains now. It is unfortunate no way was found to drop the trains down by a curve into the main Chester station, especially once the Manchester CLC trains were diverted into here (although the old Northgate station was actually more convenient for the city centre than the current main station).

The diesel trains used on these lines in the 1960s-70s were exceptionally powerful, using the twelve two-car units in the 50924-51561 series, with both cars powered. These had apparently originally been ordered by the LMR for the old Great Central main route as regular 2-car units, but when plans changed the driving trailer order was amended to power cars, hence the running numbers being well separated. This was done to cope with the steep climbs on the Welsh section, and was useful going up to Heswall Hills from both sides as well, but the timetable really didn't make the best of them, and they often were spinning out time at stations awaiting departure time. They would still see off the current units on end-to-end timings given the chance.

 

[Chester1]

Chester Northgate and the lines to it were a needless duplication and the land has been well used with a great deal of good social housing and Northgate Arena Leisure Centre. There was definately the space to do a double track curve into Chester General and just use the Northgate avoiding line. The Chester General avoiding curve would have had to been removed but wouldnt have been a big deal. There is just about the space to create a link now by building a curved bridge across the avoiding line, merseyrail tracks and arriva depot then going down along the right hand wall of the depot (next door land is owned by Network Rail) and by knocking through an extra archway in Hoole bridge, going across freight sidings and into platform 7b (at the end of 7a which is the Merseyrail platform). The slope would have to go down about 3.5m in 150-200m which is steep but usable. It would be quite expensive but its possible to reopen the line. Single track with passing loops would mean the cycle track could be kept. The line goes right next to Chester Universities main campus (near to the old Liverpool Street Ststion) so a station could be put there and Blacon reopened. Alternatively, a north-east curve at Shotton would be cheaper but less useful.

 

[Taunton]

You would be surprised at the extensive use of the West Avoiding Curve at Chester in the late 1960s (when Northgate was shut), by freight of course. There were many trains per day from Stanlow refinery (reversing at Hooton), and also from Birkenhead docks, most of which seemed to turn west and run down the old GW line to Shrewsbury, rather than heading for Crewe. Well into the diesel era there would be many class 24 and 47 outstabled at both Birkenhead and Stanlow over the weekend.

 

[leejayd]

I can't believe the Manchester train from Chester is known as the fast line - avg speed is around 30mph.

I doubt we'll see any benefit post Northern Hub either. Doesn't bode we'll for the economic future of Chester where resources are likely to be clustered around well connected locations a la Manchester.

 

[Grumpy]

It doesn't actually use the expression 36tph but does state that "During peak hours there is a train path every 100 seconds on the Loop line, and every two minutes on the Link" A headway of 100 seconds = a frequency of 36 tph of course. There is also reference to the previous flat junction "being incompatible with long term plans to step up peak hour trains under the Mersey by 50%...."

How naiive. Don't people realise that to run a service at such headways you need a unique automatic signalling system. This cannot possibly be retrofitted to existing rolling stock, which in turn justifies spending billions on a complete new fleet from Siemens.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I can't believe the Manchester train from Chester is known as the fast line - avg speed is around 30mph.

I doubt we'll see any benefit post Northern Hub either. Doesn't bode we'll for the economic future of Chester where resources are likely to be clustered around well connected locations a la Manchester.

There is an NR project called "Manchester-Chester Journey Time Improvements", but nobody seems to know what that means.
There is a similar project between Leeds and Huddersfield and that includes some signalling changes to avoid approach control slowing trains at Dewsbury.

Chester-Manchester is 40 miles in just an hour, so 40mph.
In FNW days it was a bit faster because the Manchester trains omitted Helsby and Frodsham which were served by Chester-Warrington-Liverpool services.
But when this service was cut back to Warrington-Liverpool the stops went back in.
Who knows, the Halton Curve may produce something similar.
Speeds have gone up between Newton-le-Willows and Patricroft (mostly 90mph now) but the timetable hasn't changed.
Approach control at Earlestown/Winwick, Warrington and Chester are reasons the times are so slack.

 

[Olaf]

And that was before the burrowing junction was built at Hamilton Square. I seem to remember a Merseyrail (or predecessor) brochure on the loop/link work, which included the elimination of the H Square flat junction, giving a capability of working 30 or more tph around the loop. With the scope for longer trains than at present it seems clear that the capacity of the infrastructure is several times that of the current service.

Yes, I recall that. The Loop was provisioned with a 2.5 minute headway capability, but was designed so that this could be reduced to 1.5 minutes if required.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not this brochure by any chance is it?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lukeorourke/sets/72157635326825726

Well done; I love it when these old documents are preserved - just shows how little progress has been made as well. I've got a stack of documents I should put on-line.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That brochure, especially the map graphic, is suddenly familiar to me as well.

The stuff about the burrowing junction at Hamilton Square is notable, especially given that the service worked at a far higher frequency without it than it does nowadays with it. In schooldays I used to stand at the west end of Hamilton Square platform and watch the interleaving of services over the flat junction. It never seemed to be a cause of much, if any, delay. Inbound trains from Rock Ferry could be seen approaching down the tunnel slowly if the junction was occupied, but rarely getting stopped - they seemed to do this more for one ahead than an outbound train crossing in front of them. In the timetable trains made parallel moves over the junction.

More complex was on our West Kirby line, every 10 minutes both ways, where the iron ore trains, still steam hauled by 9Fs up to the mid-1960s, loose couples and unbraked, would be crossed right over the layout through Bidston station, even in the peak hour, without issue. I just can't see that happening nowadays as easily.

There was also a pause (4 minutes IIRC) at Birkenhead North on the down side to facilitate conflict avoidance - I think at both Hamilton Square and the Bidston junction.

 

[Philip C]

How naiive. Don't people realise that to run a service at such headways you need a unique automatic signalling system. This cannot possibly be retrofitted to existing rolling stock, which in turn justifies spending billions on a complete new fleet from Siemens.

Grumpy,

I was merely quoting from a brochure published jointly by British Rail and Merseyside PTE. If you wish to challenge their conclusions I would suggest that you have left it a little late, as the brochure was produced in 1978!

 

[Foxcote]

Grumpy,

I was merely quoting from a brochure published jointly by British Rail and Merseyside PTE. If you wish to challenge their conclusions I would suggest that you have left it a little late, as the brochure was produced in 1978!

The Mersey Railway had a Westinghouse (mainly two aspect) signalling system with electro-pneumatic train stops designed for running between Liverpool Central/Rock Ferry/B'head Park. According to my 1928 Rule Book, many alterations were made in July of that year to the original system.

On the Up line between Ham. Sq. and James St. there became three stop signals, all semi-automatic. (as both the River Bed cabin and James St. were manned at times) Because train stops were provided, the signal overlaps were very much shorter than elsewhere. The result was that if sufficient delay occurred, three trains were brought to a stop in the river section, with further trains in both stations. In normal running of course, this provided the very short headways needed to run up to 26 tph.- and sometimes a little more when trains were recovering from delays!

From May 1977, the three signals in the river section were reduced to one -located on the approach to Mann Island Jct. which was given a long overlap. Thus the signal at the end of Ham. Sq.Up platform, (JS 13) would not clear until the preceding six car train was almost running into James St. no 1 or no 2 platform. I believe that this was the most restrictive part of the signalling underground.