Chester services

[Taunton]

Just to add to the irony, when the loop first opened with its 26 trains per hour, never attained again since, half the trains in service were 1938 build, which I think made them the oldest trains in service on the BR network!

Not that they felt it, they were in fine condition to the end, inside and out, and even photos on the web of them being scrapped in Birkenhead Docks shows them not rusted or down-at-heel in any way.

From May 1977, the three signals in the river section were reduced to one

Interesting. I wonder if this was the reason behind the early abandoning of the extra Birkenhead Park short-working peak trains - and why all that money was spent on remodelling Park station at just about the same time as this reduction in signalling took place.

 

[Foxcote]

Interesting. I wonder if this was the reason behind the early abandoning of the extra Birkenhead Park short-working peak trains - and why all that money was spent on remodelling Park station at just about the same time as this reduction in signalling took place.

I have always understood that the B'head Park bay and the two peak hour services was a pet project of someone at Hatton Gardens. It was after they discovered that there was a spare live 6 car at B'head Central which was often used for a changeover with units that had problems. This cross-platform move of passengers could often be achieved with two minutes delay. This could also be done at B'head North.

The Park setup made no sense in railway operating terms. These were the first trains to be cancelled (sometimes before they even started) by the traffic manager if the least little thing looked like going wrong with the service. The crew could then be used as required.

I agree with Taunton, that apart from their age, the 503 units remained in remarkably good order. The more experienced drivers would say that most running faults could be overcome to keep the unit going. There were 19 units of 1938 vintage, and 24 units of 1956. Apart from C2 exams which were on a four year cycle at Horwich, and wheel lathe work at Allerton, all maintenance/repairs was carried out at B'head North.

The 507/08s were more powerful (I have a story of 100 mph running!) and were designed for easy maintenance with a lot of electrical equipment in cabinets under the solebar. They had problems with freezing up in the winter, water ingress, wheel slip protection, coupling up/splitting, lack of battery power when current lost and many other things that the battleship engineered 503s never, or rarely experienced.

Victorian motto of the M.R. - Shall ride in triumph over all mischance.

 

[martynbristow]

The capacity round the loop is limited to 1 train per 2.5 minutes from practical experience.
The time it takes to stop, load/unload and close the doors and move off is your problem. If you can speed that up then you might be able to get another through.

Chester-Elersmere port was always 30 minutes each all day (4 trains combined per hour) from when I was younger now its 15 & 30 (making 6 trains per hour during the day)

 

[Philip C]

The capacity round the loop is limited to 1 train per 2.5 minutes from practical experience.
The time it takes to stop, load/unload and close the doors and move off is your problem. If you can speed that up then you might be able to get another through.

Chester-Elersmere port was always 30 minutes each all day (4 trains combined per hour) from when I was younger now its 15 & 30 (making 6 trains per hour during the day)

There have been comments that the current signalling isn't up to running more than the historical norm of 24tph but I doubt that the time to process passengers at stations need be a constraining factor. If Underground Lines in London can work at frequencies in excess of 30tph then I can see no inherent reason that the Wirral Lines could not.

Back in the (good) old days when there were trains every 5 minutes to Rock Ferry, every 10 minutes to West Kirby and every 10 minutes to New Brighton the whole lot reversed in a single headshunt beyond Liverpool Central Station and operated over a flat junction at Hamilton Square. I'm fairly sure about that single turn-back road but do stand to be corrected.

 

[Welshman]

Back in the (good) old days when there were trains every 5 minutes to Rock Ferry, every 10 minutes to West Kirby and every 10 minutes to New Brighton the whole lot reversed in a single headshunt beyond Liverpool Central Station and operated over a flat junction at Hamilton Square. I'm fairly sure about that single turn-back road but do stand to be corrected.

Richard Hardy in his memoirs tells how this happened at Liverpool Central.
One man got into the rear cab of the arriving train, then the train was driven into the headshunt by the driver who'd brought it in. Then as soon as the points had changed, the man who'd got in the back drove it out into the departing platform, got out, crossed over the island platform to the next arriving train and repeated the process.
The other drivers simply stepped-back so the service was maintained. But what a job for the man reversing the trains - 24 times an hour for a whole shift!

 

[Taunton]

Hands up who else, in their younger years, used to jump into the arrival train at Liverpool Central after the porter had cleared it, for a quick hop into the reversing siding and back I even talked a (potential) girlfriend into doing it once.

Trains in the peak were allowed just 3 minutes between arrival and departure, in which time they were emptied, ran forward into the headshunt, the points changed automatically as the track circuit cleared (part of the Westinghouse automatic signalling bought by the Mersey Railway), and then ran back and reloaded. The drivers at each end appeared able to pass control from one to another in seconds. Points changed pneumatically, like those on the London Underground still do, and the hiss of the air valve and the slam of the point blades were audible right through the station.

I wonder if the bit in Dick Hardy's book (wasn't he Manager of the Liverpool Division?) is entirely accurate, because my recollection is the incoming driver, once relieved, walked back the length of the platform and stepped back, but it was him who then became the turnover driver who joined the rear of a subsequent train and thus drove it forward from the headshunt, stopped, and continued forward. Trains always returned to their starting point, and the drivers I recall stepped back two trains, as Rock Ferry services were crewed from Birkenhead Central while New Brighton/West Kirby services were crewed from Birkenhead North.

There were 19 units of 1938 vintage, and 24 units of 1956

Two of the units had two of their three cars of 1956 build, and one of 1938 build. This occurred because four cars from two sets were destroyed by bombing at Birkenhead North in 1941, and replacements were built with the 1956 batch. Now the two batches were readily distinguishable because the 1938s had door release buttons on the door leaf, whereas the 1956s had these on the bodyside alongside the doorway. However, I never recall seeing any set with mixed door controls, so I am guessing that those two remaining 1938 cars must have been rebuilt to 1956 standards. If their two running mate cars were destroyed they must have needed some quite extensive repairs anyway. I wonder where they were kept for the 15 years before the new cars were built.

 

[edwin_m]

I wonder if the bit in Dick Hardy's book (wasn't he Manager of the Liverpool Division?) is entirely accurate, because my recollection is the incoming driver, once relieved, walked back the length of the platform and stepped back, but it was him who then became the turnover driver who joined the rear of a subsequent train and thus drove it forward from the headshunt, stopped, and continued forward.

That would certainly be more logical, because as well as avoiding the boring turnover duty it saves one crew change. However it does mean that a different driver takes the train out, which means that if the trains spend all day working the same route the drivers will end up going all over the place. Possibly not a problem on Merseyrail as apart from Chester and Southport most of the duties would return to Liverpool before very long.

Perhaps different systems were used at different times?

 

[martynbristow]

There have been comments that the current signalling isn't up to running more than the historical norm of 24tph but I doubt that the time to process passengers at stations need be a constraining factor. If Underground Lines in London can work at frequencies in excess of 30tph then I can see no inherent reason that the Wirral Lines could not.

Back in the (good) old days when there were trains every 5 minutes to Rock Ferry, every 10 minutes to West Kirby and every 10 minutes to New Brighton the whole lot reversed in a single headshunt beyond Liverpool Central Station and operated over a flat junction at Hamilton Square. I'm fairly sure about that single turn-back road but do stand to be corrected.

I don't doubt you could however its the type of clientele we have here. Just came to work and we got held at every underground station for longer than needed because of prams and the rest. Some woman got off at Moorfields then got back on as she'd got off at the wrong stop.
Then when I was getting off a Central you couldn't get off with the people trying to get on.
Theres also the issue of the platform interface London Underground isn't too bad but you have to phone for a ladder at Hamilton Square its that bad.
It might work at peak time but I avoid that like the plauge.
I think you'll find passengers have moved on and now take the kitchen sink for good measure :P
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That would certainly be more logical, because as well as avoiding the boring turnover duty it saves one crew change. However it does mean that a different driver takes the train out, which means that if the trains spend all day working the same route the drivers will end up going all over the place. Possibly not a problem on Merseyrail as apart from Chester and Southport most of the duties would return to Liverpool before very long.

Perhaps different systems were used at different times?

As far as I'm aware crews tend to be Wirral or Liverpool with there preferred route, there a few wirral-kirkdale diagrams so I assume most sign both. But trains from the Wirral currently don't head to Central.
I'm surprised they don't run trains up the transfer line for events like the races personally it would make it easier

 

[Foxcote]

I wonder if the bit in Dick Hardy's book (wasn't he Manager of the Liverpool Division?) is entirely accurate, because my recollection is the incoming driver, once relieved, walked back the length of the platform and stepped back, but it was him who then became the turnover driver who joined the rear of a subsequent train and thus drove it forward from the headshunt, stopped, and continued forward. [/QUOTEi
I
Richard Hardy was the Divisional Manager Liverpool. D.M's were the lynch pin of the local organisations, because they were in charge of every department in their area, with the exception of railway workshops. Decisions made at D.M. level bound the railway family together in concert to achieve common objectives. He had a great affinity to train crews and often rode with Merseyrail drivers. He was my boss, and I'm sure that any errors in his book are not of his making. Sadly, the railway industry seems most unlikely to ever have another such Manager with his knowledge, experience and character.

Just to clarify the turnover procedures at L. Cent. A driver and guard worked as turnover crew on Mon to Fri in the morning and evening peak only.
On arrival, on what is now no 1 platform, the driver was relieved by a guard, who travelled in the cab for the shunt, ready to apply the brake if needed. (the siding was only a few feet longer than a 6 car). The driver then began walking to the opposite end of the platform.
The guard left his brake compartment and began walking to the opposite end of the platform as the turnover driver entered the rear cab. The turnover driver propelled the train into the siding and then into what is now no 2 platform. By this time, the crew who had brought the train in had walked to be in a position to relieve the turnover crew and rejoin their train. The turnover crew then walked the width of the island platform to relieve the next arrival. This movement took less than 2 minutes. About 20 seconds after a train arrived at L. Cen a track circuit actuated the automatic sequence of the points and signals. Also, a time (but no train identity) was recorded on a paper roll.

When Central closed for reconstruction
James St became the terminus for Wirral line trains. No shunt was required here, but crew step back 1 train was introduced in the off-peak, and crew step back 2 trains in the peak.

 

[Welshman]

Thank you for that full explanation.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

There are reasons why the Ellesmere Port branch appears to be a poor performer.

There is no parking at Little Sutton or Overpool stations, while the huge car park at Ellesmere Port is perceived as unsafe.

So many people from the area drive to Hooton where they can enjoy the benefits of much cheaper fares (Hooton counts as Merseyside for this purpose), more frequent services, a ticket office and a safe manned car park.

And I suspect that passenger counts are underestimates as there are seldom conductors to check tickets.

And of course the E.Port - Helsby service is a joke.

The Chester lobby tried to get the Hooton - Ellesmere Port service relegated to a shuttle some years ago, but I was part of the local passenger transport liaison committee which opposed this. If it had happened at the time, many E. Port passengers would have faced four flights of stairs to visit the ticket office at Hooton before continuing their journeys. And evening and Sunday services would soon have been be culled. These are now critical as bus services in the town at these times are non-existent apart from the no 1 route.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Electrification would be quite akward in North Wales I think. The Llandudno - Manchester wouldn't be able to use electrification if it was only between Chester and Manchester (unless bi-modes are built for the job). If you wire west of Chester at all, I think you need to go all the way to Holyhead and do the Blaenau Festiniog branch otherwise there will be an awkard diesel island (unless you build a new line from Bangor to Porthmadog). Blaenau Festiniog's a problem in terms of micro-fleets anyway though I suppose. You also have the 175s that are based at Chester. If north Wales was wired they would only be used on MAN-CDF/SWA and Chester-Cardiff services, which would allow much-needed longer trains on MAN-CDF/SWA but might still leave some surplus units.

The Welsh Government have been going completely the wrong way about the Holyhead - Cardiff service if you ask me. They had the right idea with the original Y Gerallt Gymro I think, just 7 (I seem to recall) intermediate stops between Holyhead and Cardiff and an exception to the standard pattern, rather than a frequent service. It ought to be 2-3 such express trains each way per day, and a change of train required at other times.

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.

What route would the TPE service take between Chester and Manchester? The franchise consultation seemed to suggest everything on TPE would run either to Manchester Airport or Liverpool, Chester doesn't seem to fit with either of those. You have a similar question too about whether it should continue to Llandundo, Bangor or Wrexham rather than terminating in Chester.

I agree about having Chester to Birmingham trains via Crewe and Stafford. That's one reason why the planned HS2 terminus in Birmingham is such a missed opertunity. If, as I propose, there was a tunnel mouth at the north end of the station (like Stratford International, maybe), HS2 trains could reach Chester. Then, the hourly Euston-Chester/Holyhead and Birmingham-Chester/Holyhead links could be catered for by a single hourly service instead of two. On the north Wales coast, you could end up with something like:

• 1tph Holyhead - Chester - Crewe - Birmingham (HS2) - Euston (fast)
• 1tph Llandudno - Manchester (similar to today)
• 1tph Bangor (Holyhead every 2hrs) - Llandudno (all stops)
• 3 trains per day Holyhead - Cardiff (express)

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.

Or use electro-diesels (eg. upgraded class 73s) via one of the existing routes, provided Merseyrail will let you have a path. With regard to the above point about direct Chester-Birmingham services too, I think the current Birmingham - Holyheads should be reduced to Birmingham - Wrexham, terminating in the bays used by Wrexham and Shropshire (to save them traversing the single track bottleneck between Wrexham and Chester).

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.

Even the current every 2hrs Holyhead-CDF is too much for north Wales electrification. The Holyhead-Birmingham also stands in the way of north Wales wires. Everything from north Wales needs to go to Crewe/MAN otherwise the marches line will need wiring too.

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.

Liverpool-Chester-North Wales would require wiring the Halton Curve too, otherwise it causes the same problem as too many Cardiff-Holyhead trains. Liverpool-Chester-Wrexham-Shrewsbury therefore makes more sense, maybe continuing to Cardiff (or maybe alternately to Cardiff and Bristol). I don't see any point in taking up paths on the single track between Chester and Wrexham with Birmingham services, especially since Wrexham should be able to have through trains to Birmingham without them running through to Chester.

 

[Philip]

On the subject of electrifying Crewe to Chester, I think one obstacle is Christleton tunnel and if it is then this will be a difficult one because the Shropshire Union Canal goes directly overhead. Re-routing the line of the canal either by changing direction or locking up then back down would be a huge project and an expensive one for Canal and River Trust.

 

[pablo]

If you look carefully, you can see that the canal at Christleton can be raised by a sufficient amount between successive locks. It would need the downstream lock raising or another one built adjacent and the banks raised to the next lock upstream.
The heads of the twin 'tunnels' would be broken out and raised to form a higher invert. Simples! Just £££.
"I can do dat. Gi's a job!"

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What route would the TPE service take between Chester and Manchester? The franchise consultation seemed to suggest everything on TPE would run either to Manchester Airport or Liverpool, Chester doesn't seem to fit with either of those.

"Chester to Yorkshire" is a neat way of avoiding the question of routes.
The Northern Hub documents presume that an extra service from Chester to Manchester will operate via Warrington.
This was expressed as Chester-Leeds via Bradford, to improve connectivity at both ends and on both routes.
However, that was before electrification took off, with Warrington/Crewe-Chester added to the wish list.
If electrification happened, you would need to extend the extra train to Leeds (or beyond) via Huddersfield.
None of this changes the ATW service or the North Wales electrification options.
But I think we can say no wires from the east to Chester means no wires to the west either.
We might find ourselves in an "All Change" position at Chester if we are not careful.

 

[catfordbags]

Any thoughts on a curve linking the the line at hawarden bridge to the north wales line thus providing west Wirral a train link into Chester.... No doubt it would cost a fortune but the A540 road is painfully slow.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Based on the supposed signalling and infrastructural costs of the single track Todmorden Chord, as a benchmark, what would the envisaged cost be for the Hawarden Bridge chord shown in the previous posting ?

 

[Chester1]

Based on the supposed signalling and infrastructural costs of the single track Todmorden Chord, as a benchmark, what would the envisaged cost be for the Hawarden Bridge chord shown in the previous posting ?

I think the Todmorden Chord is £7m due to having to basically rebuild it. An entirely new chord would be needed but there are no buildings to demolish etc so probably £10m tops. The issue isnt just that but also the cost of upgrading the line which is 40mph from just north of Shotton. The only service that would make sense via Chester would be Bidston to Manchester which could put Neston, Heswall, Upton and Beachwood etc into its commuter range if it could be done in less tham an hour. This would probably only make sense cost wise if either the Mid Cheshire Line was signifcantly sped up + the Manchester airport tunnel built, or HS3 built through Warrington Bank Quay low level (an option in 20mm report) allowing highspeed trains via Chester or the current line via Newton le willows being speed up to by at least a third. While one may happen, I cant see a Shotton chord happening as well, unless the government writes a virtually blank cheque for one north.

 

[The Planner]

Are there significant earthworks involved? If so you could probably double or triple the cost of Todmorden as that had the benefit of the route already being there.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Are there significant earthworks involved? If so you could probably double or triple the cost of Todmorden as that had the benefit of the route already being there.

It would be elevated at the Hawarden Bridge end, so the curve would be on a downward slope eastwards.
Coming off the bridge there is about 500m before you hit the Chester & Holyhead line.
It would also destroy what I call the John Summers Sports Ground (now TATA).
Plain daft, like all suggestions for new spurs at Shotton.
You just have to look at the map, and the siting of stations on the line.
On the Wirral, it carefully avoids all centres of population except Neston.

 

[Chester1]

It would be elevated at the Hawarden Bridge end, so the curve would be on a downward slope eastwards.
Coming off the bridge there is about 500m before you hit the Chester & Holyhead line.
It would also destroy what I call the John Summers Sports Ground (now TATA).
Plain daft, like all suggestions for new spurs at Shotton.
You just have to look at the map, and the siting of stations on the line.
On the Wirral, it carefully avoids all centres of population except Neston.

I wouldnt say it was "plain daft" but it would only benefit Heswall and Neston so wouldnt be worth the money unless the One North idea became a policy with a blank cheque. North of Heswall would be better served by extending Merseyrail (depending on frequency). The better curve would have been to allow Chester-Wrexham via the line. I suspect a curve plus upgrading Wrexham-Shotton to 75mph would have cost less than the £40m it cost to redouble half of Chester-Wrexham. The speed gains would allow extending services to Birkenhead North + much better punctuality and would only add a few minutes to Chester-Wrexham journey times (and only for some services) while providing long distance services for the stations along the route.

 

[martynbristow]

I wouldnt say it was "plain daft" but it would only benefit Heswall and Neston so wouldnt be worth the money unless the One North idea became a policy with a blank cheque. North of Heswall would be better served by extending Merseyrail (depending on frequency). The better curve would have been to allow Chester-Wrexham via the line. I suspect a curve plus upgrading Wrexham-Shotton to 75mph would have cost less than the £40m it cost to redouble half of Chester-Wrexham. The speed gains would allow extending services to Birkenhead North + much better punctuality and would only add a few minutes to Chester-Wrexham journey times (and only for some services) while providing long distance services for the stations along the route.

Its worth noting that it doesn't serve the major population centres NOW, however if you were to improve this line drastically there would be a case for development around the railway. Chester has the potential for growth whereas Liverpool is pretty well developed now.
I think it would be sensible to say its "ambitious" or "optimistic" and not "plain daft".

Extending into Birkenhead North would be useful

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I think it would be sensible to say its "ambitious" or "optimistic" and not "plain daft".
Extending into Birkenhead North would be useful

Maybe I should have said "poor BCR" then.
The line is a very poor one in structural terms, and is stuck at 40mph south of Hawarden Bridge, and 50mph* north of it (though the southern half has had some renewals lately).
It must be one of the worst performing regional lines in terms of revenue/cost.
The electrification proposals never seem to gain any traction, probably because is it qualified out of any priority by better schemes.
Extending to Birkenhead North by increasing line speeds is a good idea, and trying a higher frequency.
But the demographics of the line tell against it.
I could be a regular user of the line to Liverpool, in fact 3 of the stations are physically my closest.
But 6tph through trains from Hooton win hands down compared to a 1tph connection.

* small stretch of 55mph on one line north of Heswall.

 

[Taunton]

Extending into Birkenhead North would be useful

Of course, in the 1970s it did run to Birkenhead North, where it terminated in the up road and the Liverpool-bound electrics went round the outer face of the island platform. It was cut back in an attempt to run an hourly service with two trains, a strange approach.

You must remember that the route almost deliberately runs as far away from any development all the way down through the Wirral to Neston. Bidston station, middle of nowhere. Upton, a long way from Upton centre and with little development around. Heswall station, nowhere near Heswall town, until recently it was well out into the country, there has been more development nearby in recent times. Neston, station for once in the town. Then it's into Wales and a different demographic, where the population focuses much more on Chester than Liverpool.

Where do people think additional patronage will come from?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Of course, in the 1970s it did run to Birkenhead North, where it terminated in the up road and the Liverpool-bound electrics went round the outer face of the island platform. It was cut back in an attempt to run an hourly service with two trains, a strange approach. You must remember that the route almost deliberately runs as far away from any development all the way down through the Wirral to Neston. Bidston station, middle of nowhere. Upton, a long way from Upton centre and with little development around. Heswall station, nowhere near Heswall town, until recently it was well out into the country, there has been more development nearby in recent times. Neston, station for once in the town. Then it's into Wales and a different demographic, where the population focuses much more on Chester than Liverpool.

Where do people think additional patronage will come from?

Many lines were constructed in early Victorian times that seemed to make sense to the promoters at the time, but now in 2014, matters can seem vastly different to us. Has anyone any recourse to sight of the prospectus issued by the original North Wales and Liverpool Joint Railway ?

 

[Chester1]

Of course, in the 1970s it did run to Birkenhead North, where it terminated in the up road and the Liverpool-bound electrics went round the outer face of the island platform. It was cut back in an attempt to run an hourly service with two trains, a strange approach.

You must remember that the route almost deliberately runs as far away from any development all the way down through the Wirral to Neston. Bidston station, middle of nowhere. Upton, a long way from Upton centre and with little development around. Heswall station, nowhere near Heswall town, until recently it was well out into the country, there has been more development nearby in recent times. Neston, station for once in the town. Then it's into Wales and a different demographic, where the population focuses much more on Chester than Liverpool.

Where do people think additional patronage will come from?

Extending services to Birkenhead North would double the number of connections to Liverpool making it be appealing for comuters and speeding up the line would also allow punctuality improvements, both while still using two trains (or 4 for half hourly). The geography isnt as bad as you say it is. New stations at Woodchurch and Beachwood would significantly increase the number of people within walking distance of stations. A more regular and reliable service would encourage people to commute to Liverpool which the current service doesnt encourage.

I dont think NR will ever get around to finding the money, I think its reliant on the Welsh Government funding speeding up the Welsh part of the line. Speeding up this section from 40mph to 75mph would easily cut journey times by enough to have good punctuality and extension to Birkenhead North.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Many lines were constructed in early Victorian times that seemed to make sense to the promoters at the time, but now in 2014, matters can seem vastly different to us. Has anyone any recourse to sight of the prospectus issued by the original North Wales and Liverpool Joint Railway ?

It was built as a blocking line in the battle between the MS&L and LNWR/GWR for control of the Wirral routes to Birkenhead.
In 1889 the Birkenhead Railway (LNWR/GWR joint line) introduced a Bill to buy the Wirral Railway and the unbuilt "Seacombe, Hoylake and Deeside Railway".
This would have restored its monopoly of surface lines on the Wirral.
To prevent this the MS&L and the Wrexham, Mold and Connah's Quay Railway (WMCQ) agreed to promote the present line as the North Wales & Liverpool Railway.
The MS&L (by then the GC) bought the bankrupt WMCQ and NW&L in 1904.
John Summers opened the steelworks at Hawarden Bridge in 1896, just as the NW&L opened.

 

[martynbristow]

The line runs very close to centres of population with the additional stations already suggested by merseytravel it wouldn't be difficult to boast patronage. Currently the areas rely on Arriva buses.
It's the unknown, people would rather get a bus or drive than risk the train, because you need to get a connection.
For people who live on the Wirral like me it's £7 the drive in and park daily excluding petrol!

 

[TDK]

The line from Wrexham to Bidston is not run to capacity with only a handful of passengers on off peak services. It would of course be a complete waste of money that could be spent elswhere

 

[martynbristow]

The line from Wrexham to Bidston is not run to capacity with only a handful of passengers on off peak services. It would of course be a complete waste of money that could be spent elswhere

Exactly
But why is it?
It will be because there are poor frequencies and connections into Liverpool so people prefer to get the bus or drive and the cattle wagon the investment isn't as good as Arriva's put in. Its because the route was given to Wales & Borders who don't understand the connection and tie in to Liverpool.
But then the question is who do you give it to ..

My boss lives out that way and gets the bus in everyday as he says driving into the city is such a pain :/