• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Crewe versus Stoke - who will win?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,750
Yeah but the Stoke Council proposal was build it to Stoke and then dont bother with any line further north to Manchester, just use existing lines and pocket the savings. That was one of the reasons it was regarded pretty much universally as crazy unrealistic.

Are you suggesting that £100,000 (rumoured) of Stokie council taxpayers money was p####d into the wind on a no hope proposal. Time for another wheelbarrow full of cash to the consultants to advise the council how best to get to Crewe I suppose. And to think this is the council which cut, without consultation, all of it's subsidised local bus services.:o
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,669
Are you suggesting that £100,000 (rumoured) of Stokie council taxpayers money was p####d into the wind on a no hope proposal. Time for another wheelbarrow full of cash to the consultants to advise the council how best to get to Crewe I suppose. And to think this is the council which cut, without consultation, all of it's subsidised local bus services.:o

One of my major annoyances. Councils claiming to not have money but spending vast sums opposing government schemes.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Yeah, funnily enough one of the things the Conservatives brought in was a rule banning local councils from spending money directly lobbying Westminster unless it came from a third party sponsor. I sent a letter to the DCLG a couple of years ago complaining that these councils were spending hundreds of thousands of pounds in direct contravention of the rules. DCLG's response was 'yes we know they are breaking the rules but you have to take it up with them not us' I.e. that they wouldnt intervene to enforce the rules they themselves created because it was Tory councils predominantly doing the rule breaking.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,934
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Handsacre Junction coming out is pretty much a given if it goes to Crewe in phase 1.

Not having a WCML junction at Lichfield means the whole route could be optimised through Staffordshire towards Crewe.
Maybe they wouldn't want to revisit it now, but it might deliver a better route at lower cost - eg going west of Stafford rather than east.
 

TheGrew

Member
Joined
31 Jul 2012
Messages
515
Not having a WCML junction at Lichfield means the whole route could be optimised through Staffordshire towards Crewe.
Maybe they wouldn't want to revisit it now, but it might deliver a better route at lower cost - eg going west of Stafford rather than east.

I think the main problem with going west of Stafford would be if or where you could cross Cannock Chase.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,694
Location
Nottingham
Given that the section in question (the northern end of Phase 1) has already gone through consultation and is in the Hybrid Bill, it is possible Handsacre can be deleted as the HS2-HS1 link is being. However I can't see any section being moved now as the amended bits would be back to square one and introduce several years more delay. This is exactly the opposite of what is intended.
 

Altnabreac

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2013
Messages
2,425
Location
Salt & Vinegar
Philip Elliott has an interesting point on the other thread about capacity between Crewe and Manchester.

If the Lichfield junction is removed then is it possible for all 3 Manchester - London services to be routed via Crewe and HS2?

There are already 3 northern stoppers and an ATW service each hour on this route so I'd think it would be tricky to path 2 additional fast services?

Assuming we need at least one legacy WCML Manchester - Stoke - Euston service as well this requires pathing an extra service between Manchester and Stockport which I understood was basically full?

So your options are probably either to keep the Lichfield junction for 1-2tph which come via Stoke or in Phase 1 only run a 2tph London - Manchester service over HS2 with the third train per hour staying on the WCML and serving Stoke.

This might be seen as a downgraded service by some? I wonder if Lichfield might be kept after all?
 
Last edited:

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,348
You would could just not run all 3 of the high speed trains via Stockport, there is the Styal Line if necessary.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,717
It is a very valid point and I suspect one that has not been fully thought through. Chucking a load more fast trains between Crewe and Wilmslow/Cheadle is not an easy task.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Stoke Council today saying they will spend £1m lobbying despite the setback and if they are unsucessful they may try the courts. They seem to think their future is as a London commuter station and screw everyone else.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,669
Stoke Council today saying they will spend £1m lobbying despite the setback and if they are unsucessful they may try the courts. They seem to think their future is as a London commuter station and screw everyone else.

What exactly do they want? Surely the commuters will drive to Manc Airport station that makes far more sense?
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,717
They would be better off lobbying for faster and better connections to Crewe and elsewhere or to keep the Handsacre link and direct services using that. The time loss would be minimal as it is 13-14 minutes from Colwich to Stoke now.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,455
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
About 30 miles in the wrong direction. Unlikely I think.

If you go northwards on the M6 from junction 16, I assure you that you will eventually reach the M56 (from which Manchester Airport is accessed, which was the original point of the posting that I had originally responded to).....If you go southwards from junction 16 you will be heading towards Birmingham.

Were you thinking of Liverpool John Lennon Airport when you made your query ?
 
Last edited:
Joined
5 Aug 2011
Messages
791
They would be better off lobbying for faster and better connections to Crewe and elsewhere or to keep the Handsacre link and direct services using that. The time loss would be minimal as it is 13-14 minutes from Colwich to Stoke now.

Personally I don't think the link will get built

Midland link line may be dropped if HS2 extension is brought forward

Residents who fear plans for an HS2 rail link track and major junction near Lichfield may have been thrown a lifeline.

The reprieve came after the Government backed proposals to bring forward by six years the planned extension to Crewe of the high-speed rail link.

Previously, the plan was to end the new line north of Birmingham near Lichfield, in Staffordshire, and construct a link with the existing West Coast Main Line.

The move, which would see the first trains running on the Birmingham-Crewe section by 2027, was a key recommendation of a report by HS2 Ltd chair Sir David Higgins.

This link would have made a huge impact for an extended period – there was originally a 12-year gap between Phase 1 construction finishing and Phase 2 opening to passengers.

But the proposed change means the link with the West Coast Main Line is likely to be moved to Crewe, meaning much less work is required in Staffordshire.

Lichfield MP Michael Fabricant said he hoped the change would reduce the line’s impact on his constituency.

He said: “This might make a huge difference in Lichfield. At present Phase 1 ends in the Lichfield constituency and Phase 2 begins.

“This necessitates an additional new railway line joining the end of Phase 1 ‘temporarily’ to the West Coast Mainline with a major junction north of the city of Lichfield.

“It is possible that this might not be necessary if the line is now to be built straight to Crewe. I am seeking to clarify this with the Department for Transport and what other changes might be made to the HS2 route in the constituency.”

An HS2 spokesman said fuller details of the changed plans, including what they mean for Lichfield, would be published in the autumn.

Chancellor George Osborne said he “welcomes and supports” the idea to shorten the development time in the Higgins report and had asked HS2 Ltd to draw up firm proposals.

Business leaders welcomed plans to speed up the construction of a planned high speed rail line to the north of England – while environmental campaigners warned the project could damage Birmingham’s wildlife habitats and rob the region of green belt land.

Birmingham Chamber of Commerce and Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership both welcomed the announcement that phase one of the high speed line known as HS2, previously due to run from London to Birmingham, will be extended to Crewe by 2027.

The proposal was backed by George Osborne, the Chancellor, after it was drawn up by HS2 Ltd chair Sir David Higgins.

And Sir David also recommended that phase 2 of the line, continuing to Manchester in the North West and from Birmingham to Leeds in the North East, could be finished by the end of 2030 – three years earlier than planned.

Jerry Blackett, chief executive of Greater Birmingham Chambers of Commerce, said: “The plan to build through to Crewe as part of the Phase 1 London to Birmingham work looks very sensible. Importantly, this will reduce the environmental impact of the build for Lichfield and the surrounding area – something that has been a worry for our businesses in that part of the region. So this is very good news.

“The wider region will also benefit from the released capacity and we urgently need HS2 and Network Rail to move soon to full and comprehensive consultation on the best use of the spare capacity that will be created once the new line has been built.”

Andrew Cleaves, Greater Birmingham and Solihull Board Director with responsibility for transport, said: “We are encouraged by David Higgins’ commitment to accelerating the delivery of HS2 so that the UK benefit from the investment even sooner.”

Mary Creagh MP, Labour’s Shadow Transport Secretary, responding to David Higgins’ report into HS2, said: “We welcome David Higgins’ important report and his strong focus on the steps the Government needs to take to get High Speed 2 back on track and ensure value for money.

“For too long David Cameron’s Government has been mismanaging this project, which is why we raised concerns last year.

“We support HS2 because of the capacity constraints too many commuters on our railways face and will vote to support the Hybrid Bill at Second Reading when the Government finally brings it to Parliament. As always we will continue to hold the Government to account for keeping costs down on the project as the Bill progresses because there can be no blank cheque.”

http://www.birminghampost.co.uk/news/local-news/midland-link-line-dropped-hs2-6857346
 
Last edited:

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,694
Location
Nottingham
If you go northwards on the M6 from junction 16, I assure you that you will eventually reach the M56 (from which Manchester Airport is accessed, which was the original point of the posting that I had originally responded to).....If you go southwards from junction 16 you will be heading towards Birmingham.

Were you thinking of Liverpool John Lennon Airport when you made your query ?

No, I was commenting on the likelihood of passengers from Stoke railheading via Manchester Airport as suggested by an earlier post. Anyone with an ultimate destination southwards would be driving 30 miles the wrong way and anyone ultimately going northwards wouldn't be railheading at Manchester Airport (or not via HS2 anyway). Weren't you suggesting a driving route for them to access Manchester Airport?
 

dysonsphere

Member
Joined
22 Jan 2013
Messages
518
Single tracks can be doubled you know?

I am fully aware of that, but it has being single for a long time now. As has being mentioned before where would you put the station, the stoke station has no room to expand and is inconvient for most locals anyway. The other suggested site on the old steelworks is even more remote from anywhere.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,694
Location
Nottingham
I am fully aware of that, but it has being single for a long time now. As has being mentioned before where would you put the station, the stoke station has no room to expand and is inconvient for most locals anyway. The other suggested site on the old steelworks is even more remote from anywhere.

The single line section between Alsager and Crewe was singled at the time of the Crewe remodelling in the mid-80s. As far as I know the former double track formation is intact so the track could be put back but it would need some signalling changes and a means of connecting it to the layout at Crewe. The signalling at Crewe can't have much life left in it and with increased passenger traffic, diversionary use and the possibility of more freight taking this route I would be rather surprised if double track wasn't reinstated, even if the station stays as it is now.

Perhaps more difficult is that the southern curve from this route towards Stafford was taken out at the same time and its course appears to be blocked by part of the LNWR depot. This curve would presumably be needed if Crewe station was relocated further south.
 
Last edited:

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
9,216
Any station built on Basford Hall would need a new alignment for the Alsager line.

AIUI the suggestion is a new line from Stowford (the last bridge before Crewe), running west roughly parallel to the A500 then swinging north into the new station at Basford.

Whether it's practical is another matter!

It looks a heck of a sharp curve into the station!
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Head of Stoke council has just approved tenders worth £240,000 for consultants to push the Stoke route, its put aside £1m for the lobbying effort.

Personally im annoyed at this decision for two reasons.
1. The Stoke route the council is proposing is terrible.
2. Its pretty obvious that Crewe is the prefered hub and an impossible to overturn momentum is building behind it, trying to change the Governments mind reminds me of the myth of Sisyphus.
 

Baxenden Bank

Established Member
Joined
23 Oct 2013
Messages
4,750
Head of Stoke council has just approved tenders worth £240,000 for consultants to push the Stoke route, its put aside £1m for the lobbying effort.

Personally im annoyed at this decision for two reasons.
1. The Stoke route the council is proposing is terrible.
2. Its pretty obvious that Crewe is the prefered hub and an impossible to overturn momentum is building behind it, trying to change the Governments mind reminds me of the myth of Sisyphus.

Perhaps not as annoyed as I am? For a council slashing services left, right and centre due to 'government cuts' and yet, all of a sudden, £1m can be found. Smoke and mirrors accounting. Yes, I know there is an argument that £1m is an 'investment' if it generates a change in the HS2 route and the benefits that would (possibly) generate for Stoke.

However, the time for lobbying was in the early stages of the HS2 route development. A route near to Stoke is referred to in the HS2 paperwork, but it was passed over in favour of Crewe. The officers and members at Stoke were asleep on the job and missed their big chance. Now they are desperate to appear to be playing an active part in the debate before they get sacked in the elections next May?

The boat now departing Port Vale is the last one. Please turn out the lights in Stoke-on-Trent.

The route to Crewe is, I suggest, more logical for interchange / onward connections and will be easier to build with fewer properties blighted or demolished.
 

po8crg

Member
Joined
6 Feb 2014
Messages
559
What they should be lobbying for now is a realistic ambition of a good connection to Crewe, or jointly with Stafford for a Stafford junction to replace the (to be) scrapped one at Lichfield and a Stafford-Stoke classic service joining at Stafford.

Given the sorts of other places that are talking about getting classic services (Chester, Blackpool, Hull), Stafford-Stoke seems like an entirely reasonable bid.
 

Altnabreac

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2013
Messages
2,425
Location
Salt & Vinegar
What they should be lobbying for now is a realistic ambition of a good connection to Crewe, or jointly with Stafford for a Stafford junction to replace the (to be) scrapped one at Lichfield and a Stafford-Stoke classic service joining at Stafford.

Given the sorts of other places that are talking about getting classic services (Chester, Blackpool, Hull), Stafford-Stoke seems like an entirely reasonable bid.

I still think they need to be lobbying for the Lichfield junction not to be scrapped.

1tph CC service Manchester - Stockport - Macclesfield - Stoke - London seems to me like it would have a reasonable business case especially if the 2tph Heathrow paths become available for extra services.

If you built some 400m platforms at Rugeley TV you could combine it with a 1tph Chester - Crewe - Stafford service. (could also combine at Birmingham Interchange but may be operationally better to combine trains before entering HS network).
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,348
I don't think Macclesfield and Stoke alone is going to be able to justify one of the CC paths.

Stockport is sure to lose a huge proportion of its traffic to the Manchester Airport station that will capture a large fraction of its catchment area - especially if that proposed Stockport tram line goes ahead, could then rig a triangle junction and run Stockport-Airport trams.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,455
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
Stockport is sure to lose a huge proportion of its traffic to the Manchester Airport station that will capture a large fraction of its catchment area - especially if that proposed Stockport tram line goes ahead, could then rig a triangle junction and run Stockport-Airport trams.

Would the matter of the proposed Baguley railway station reopening on the Stockport to Altrincham section of the mid-Cheshire line which is said to offer a link to the Manchester Metrolink Airport line currently well on in progress be a possible interchange facility ?

The matter of the Manchester Metrolink extension from the current terminal point of East Didsbury into the Stockport area is one that does not appear to feature highly amongst the list of TfGM future line extensions at the present point of time.
 

Emyr

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2014
Messages
656
Would the matter of the proposed Baguley railway station reopening on the Stockport to Altrincham section of the mid-Cheshire line which is said to offer a link to the Manchester Metrolink Airport line currently well on in progress be a possible interchange facility ?

The matter of the Manchester Metrolink extension from the current terminal point of East Didsbury into the Stockport area is one that does not appear to feature highly amongst the list of TfGM future line extensions at the present point of time.

A Gatley station at the crossing of the Mid-Cheshire and the N-S Airport line make more sense to me, but I wasn't involved in planning the Metrolink route.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,455
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
A Gatley station at the crossing of the Mid-Cheshire and the N-S Airport line make more sense to me, but I wasn't involved in planning the Metrolink route.

Where exactly is the site that you propose above. Can you be more explicit as to its exact location and if there will be much in the way of difficult infrastructural works involved ? In that case, what do propose will happen to the existing Gatley station on the Styal line ?

Are you aware of the Baguley station location to which I alluded in my earlier posting and its proximity to the Manchester Metrolink Airport extension line ?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top