Manchester Victoria modernisation

[Nym]

Yeah, but re-opening exchange with a moving walkway down platform THREE would be nice...

Esp combined with the Grade Sep plan so that Chat Moss approach stoppers can terminate thee without crossing movments.

 

[lancastrian]

You two stop dreaming, I can see the drool from here, your speaking common sense for crying out loud

Well I certainly try to speak common sense, but sadly I am sure that almost all politicans have their common sense surgically removed before they are allowed to actually stand for parlement.

But as for drooling, sadly not, but I do find this forum a wonderful place to see if my ideas and opinions have any validity.

 

[Nym]

If you're on about re-opening Exchange, yes, it's a damn good idea, but there are two things that I could see it being re-opened for, either; to provide west facing bays for the victoria complex with a nice new entrance, call it a seperate station possibly, or make vc one large one with two entrances to encompass both sides of the river.

Or push all services through to Stalybridge, Rochdale and Ashburys and then have the space used for, dare I mention it, HS2?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If you're on about re-opening Exchange, yes, it's a damn good idea, but there are two things that I could see it being re-opened for, either; to provide west facing bays for the victoria complex with a nice new entrance, call it a seperate station possibly, or make vc one large one with two entrances to encompass both sides of the river.

Or push all services through to Stalybridge, Rochdale and Ashburys and then have the space used for, dare I mention it, HS2?

Does anyone know who actually is the current owner of the site of the former Manchester Exchange station?

 

[Nym]

Sitting there is an NCP Car Park and a Network Rail Depot, so I can make a wild guess as to Network Rail?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=208537899835423960920.0004a1c23ef51da402b8f

 

[Blindtraveler]

Question from someone who doesnt know any better. If all these 'common sense' improvements at man vic were made, how could these be used to channel traffic away from man pic' one of my major gripes about it is the often lengthy approach to the station on through services. Am I right theres only 2 through platforms? Can work be done to create any more? thanks

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Question from someone who doesnt know any better. If all these 'common sense' improvements at man vic were made, how could these be used to channel traffic away from man pic' one of my major gripes about it is the often lengthy approach to the station on through services. Am I right theres only 2 through platforms? Can work be done to create any more? thanks

If we're talking Picc, there's two through, at Vic there's four. At Picc, there's no room eastwards, but west it could be done by expanding the viaduct, though it would be very costly. Vic, as has been said, has some room under the car park allegedly, but there is no room southwards. Both could do with extra though.

 

[Nym]

There's four. And not without demolishing the MEN arena.

 

[strange6]

Question from someone who doesnt know any better. If all these 'common sense' improvements at man vic were made, how could these be used to channel traffic away from man pic' one of my major gripes about it is the often lengthy approach to the station on through services. Am I right theres only 2 through platforms? Can work be done to create any more? thanks

Yes, you're correct about 2 through platforms and because of the local geography, I very much doubt you could create any more

 

[Nym]

Piccadilly can, and under the northern hub plans, will have two more through platforms, there are also options for four tracking to castlefeild junction, but the're all expensive. The new platforms will be built over Fairfeild Street, would be nice of there is a siding on the south east approach to these for Llandudno and CLC services that terminate at Oxford Road to turn around in a 'centre siding' using somthing like the goods loop, removing crossing movments at Oxford Road, and potentially then be able to lengthen platforms 1 and 4 to 8x23m, but that would cut off platform 5&6, hence the idea of needing a centre-road turning siding at Piccadilly to turn round these CLC terminators.

 

[bluenoxid]

Most of these common sense additions would allow for more trains to move into Manchester rather than make it easier for existing services. I believe the hope of Northern Hub is that it takes some of the TPE services away from the congested Guide Bridge to Piccadilly corridor.

If I had the choice, the current proposals of Ordsall Curve and extra platforms would be supplemented by additional platforms at Man Vic, a new island at Salford Crescent, additional electrification to Stalybridge, Ashburys, Rose Hill Marple and Mill Hill. Terminate as many services as possible away from Man Vic. Shift the existing Calder Valley service so that they terminate at Salford Central (preventing them from crossing the now very busy eastern throat of Victoria). Reopen the disused platforms at Salford Central. Open platform 3 and 4 at Ashburys with options to work through to Hadfield and the destinations on the newly electrified network. To prevent disasterous service perturbations a new terminating platform created at Gorton, with perturbations in the other direction contained in P1 and P2 at Victoria.

Finally, reopening what I would call the Ardwick curve to allow services like Hazel Grove - Preston and the ATW North Wales service to park themselves in the right side of the station.

I will be surprised if Rochdale does not become the first route for tram train in Manchester. It sits perfectly on the tram system to allow trams and trains to share the same line. 3 main line trains per hour can then run "fast" (one is an extension of an existing service to Wigan???) through an improved frequency of local tram services.

I would not say that my ideas are common sense, but good solutions to rail patronage increases that would be ideal with funding.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Piccadilly can, and under the northern hub plans, will have two more through platforms, there are also options for four tracking to castlefeild junction, but the're all expensive. The new platforms will be built over Fairfeild Street, would be nice of there is a siding on the south east approach to these for Llandudno and CLC services that terminate at Oxford Road to turn around in a 'centre siding' using somthing like the goods loop, removing crossing movments at Oxford Road, and potentially then be able to lengthen platforms 1 and 4 to 8x23m, but that would cut off platform 5&6, hence the idea of needing a centre-road turning siding at Piccadilly to turn round these CLC terminators.

any idea of timescales for this? seams a pitty these plans had not been dreamed up in the early 2000s during pic redevelopment.

 

[Nym]

All very schetchy, but on network rail's website http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/6472.aspx

it came up with two options, one was the castlefeild curve, the other involved a flyover at ardwick and mayfeild.

 

[Blindtraveler]

thanks

 

[lancastrian]

If you're on about re-opening Exchange, yes, it's a damn good idea, but there are two things that I could see it being re-opened for, either; to provide west facing bays for the victoria complex with a nice new entrance, call it a seperate station possibly, or make vc one large one with two entrances to encompass both sides of the river.

Or push all services through to Stalybridge, Rochdale and Ashburys and then have the space used for, dare I mention it, HS2?

Yes, I certainly was on about the reopening of Exchange Station. Certainly the bay platforms. Exchange used to have both approaches from Manchester & Salford, so I am sure that these could be reused. To me, it is yet again how much short sighted many of the supposed improvements (rationalisation).

When I passed the site, on the way into Victoria the other week, it seemed to me that at least 3 bay platfoms, long enough for 8x23m car trains to be built. It is impossible now, thanks to the MEN Arena, to increase the number of through platforms, so to block any of them as the electric services will be terminating at Victoria, make the provision of bay platforms to be esential, at least to me.

It would make the most sense to do, is to provide not only the bay platforms, but to electrify through all the 4 through platforms at the same time, so that any extention of the electric services to Rochdale & Stalybridge, or even over the pennines to Leeds, Bradford & York.

Continues to dream about a common sense rail policy:roll:

 

[Invincibles]

A really stupid question:

If they are removing the old roof then why not squeeze a third bay between platform 2 and 3. As 1 and 2 is an island it would surely be natural to make 3 into an island making use of its south face. This has not been done now because of the roof structure as far as I can tell. Looking at the images it should be very possible?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Piccadilly can, and under the northern hub plans, will have two more through platforms, there are also options for four tracking to castlefeild junction, but the're all expensive. The new platforms will be built over Fairfeild Street, would be nice of there is a siding on the south east approach to these for Llandudno and CLC services that terminate at Oxford Road to turn around in a 'centre siding' using somthing like the goods loop, removing crossing movments at Oxford Road, and potentially then be able to lengthen platforms 1 and 4 to 8x23m, but that would cut off platform 5&6, hence the idea of needing a centre-road turning siding at Piccadilly to turn round these CLC terminators.

CASTLEFIELD....not Castlefeild

FAIRFIELD........not Fairfeild

However, your analysis is much better than your spelling!!!!

 

[Nym]

A really stupid question:

If they are removing the old roof then why not squeeze a third bay between platform 2 and 3. As 1 and 2 is an island it would surely be natural to make 3 into an island making use of its south face. This has not been done now because of the roof structure as far as I can tell. Looking at the images it should be very possible?

yes, very possible, but it would mean closing the current platform 2 while they make the platform 2a platform face up.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

yes, very possible, but it would mean closing the current platform 2 while they make the platform 2a platform face up.

.....And they spent all their pocket money upgrading platforms 1 and 2 in 2010!!!

 

[Invincibles]

You would not need to do anything to 1 and 2 just close 2 while the points were put in and work was done on the new 2a?

Anyway, I do not suppose they will do it, it just seemed like an opportunity to do it when the roof structure being built will cause closures anyway.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Most of these common sense additions would allow for more trains to move into Manchester rather than make it easier for existing services. I believe the hope of Northern Hub is that it takes some of the TPE services away from the congested Guide Bridge to Piccadilly corridor.

If I had the choice, the current proposals of Ordsall Curve and extra platforms would be supplemented by additional platforms at Man Vic, a new island at Salford Crescent, additional electrification to Stalybridge, Ashburys, Rose Hill Marple and Mill Hill. Terminate as many services as possible away from Man Vic. Shift the existing Calder Valley service so that they terminate at Salford Central (preventing them from crossing the now very busy eastern throat of Victoria). Reopen the disused platforms at Salford Central. Open platform 3 and 4 at Ashburys with options to work through to Hadfield and the destinations on the newly electrified network. To prevent disasterous service perturbations a new terminating platform created at Gorton, with perturbations in the other direction contained in P1 and P2 at Victoria.

Finally, reopening what I would call the Ardwick curve to allow services like Hazel Grove - Preston and the ATW North Wales service to park themselves in the right side of the station.

I will be surprised if Rochdale does not become the first route for tram train in Manchester. It sits perfectly on the tram system to allow trams and trains to share the same line. 3 main line trains per hour can then run "fast" (one is an extension of an existing service to Wigan???) through an improved frequency of local tram services.

I would not say that my ideas are common sense, but good solutions to rail patronage increases that would be ideal with funding.

Just to prove that I do read all the comments made, I picked up on your plan to electrify to Marple (Rose Hill) station. Take this a stage further. Why not re-open the line from there to Macclesfield (also electrified) where it would connect with a major line? There are some commuter areas that would gain from station re-opening on that stretch of proposed line.

However, I worry about your idea about Mill Hill. I passed through there at the weekend and it is situated between Cherry Tree and Blackburn. Did you propose electrifying the Preston - Blackburn - Colne route?

 

[bluenoxid]

Oh ****. Wrong station.

I meant New Mills Central (although I do take on board the idea of rolling to Chinley if it was reasonably easy to add on).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Oh ****. Wrong station.

I meant New Mills Central (although I do take on board the idea of rolling to Chinley if it was reasonably easy to add on).

Well, we all have our off days....me, more than most, with the onset of old age.

I still like your Preston - Mill Hill - Blackburn - Colne electrified route. It is about time that this part of North Lancashire got rail travel designed for the 21st century.

 

[lancastrian]

Well, we all have our off days....me, more than most, with the onset of old age.

I still like your Preston - Mill Hill - Blackburn - Colne electrified route. It is about time that this part of North Lancashire got rail travel designed for the 21st century.

If they are going to do this, then they really do need to reinstate the double track from Gannow Junction through to Colne. Re-open or rebuild all the closed platforms from Burnley barracks to Colne. Then they need to reopen the line through to Skipton, with stations at Foulridge, Earby & Thornton in Craven. Also in need to be electrified from Preston right through to Skipton.

As this will be the first trans-pennine route to be fully electrified at that point, hopefully it will give a good kick up the backside of our supposed elected representatives to get the Calder Valley, Stanedge and Hope Valley routes done as well. If all this where within 50 miles of London, they would have been done by now.

 

[bluenoxid]

Sorry Lancastrian, the Skipton to Colne line won't be calling at Earby because it will be bypassing it to get over the A56 :roll:

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Sorry Lancastrian, the Skipton to Colne line won't be calling at Earby because it will be bypassing it to get over the A56 :roll:

Still, Lancastrian had a good point in electrifying the line from Preston through to Skipton. It would also be very useful if closures occurred on the WCML between Preston and Carlisle, giving a diversionary route via the Settle to Carlisle line even if it needed a change of traction power for part of the route.

Mind you, Blackburn station would then have TWO Yorkshire-bound services passing through it, acting as a North Lancashire hub station.

 

[lancastrian]

Sorry Lancastrian, the Skipton to Colne line won't be calling at Earby because it will be bypassing it to get over the A56 :roll:

Earby Parkway!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Seriously though a new Earby Station could be built to the south of Earby, just off Colne Road, as you enter earby itself. As the line passes by the site of the former Earby station, it could go into a covered way that would take it under the A56 about where it used to cross by the level crossing, then it would rise out of the covered way along the old route. this would save the extra costs of diverting the line around Earby, allow Earby to have a station. Plus it would be much easier to do a incline down & up either side of the covered way, with retaining walls, it would not take up that much more space than it used to.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Earby Parkway!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Seriously though a new Earby Station could be built to the south of Earby, just off Colne Road, as you enter earby itself. As the line passes by the site of the former Earby station, it could go into a covered way that would take it under the A56 about where it used to cross by the level crossing, then it would rise out of the covered way along the old route. this would save the extra costs of diverting the line around Earby, allow Earby to have a station. Plus it would be much easier to do a incline down & up either side of the covered way, with retaining walls, it would not take up that much more space than it used to.

If money was no object, whilst talking of this line, how about re-opening the former Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway link line through Padiham.

 

[bluenoxid]

Still, Lancastrian had a good point in electrifying the line from Preston through to Skipton. It would also be very useful if closures occurred on the WCML between Preston and Carlisle, giving a diversionary route via the Settle to Carlisle line even if it needed a change of traction power for part of the route.

Mind you, Blackburn station would then have TWO Yorkshire-bound services passing through it, acting as a North Lancashire hub station.

What point? Trains end up in a congested three platform railway station trying to get a diesel locomotive attached to the rear. Might as well put the diesel loco on at Preston where there is space to do it.

Earby Parkway!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Seriously though a new Earby Station could be built to the south of Earby, just off Colne Road, as you enter earby itself. As the line passes by the site of the former Earby station, it could go into a covered way that would take it under the A56 about where it used to cross by the level crossing, then it would rise out of the covered way along the old route. this would save the extra costs of diverting the line around Earby, allow Earby to have a station. Plus it would be much easier to do a incline down & up either side of the covered way, with retaining walls, it would not take up that much more space than it used to.

Quite a lot of money for a tunnel Lancastrian

 

[WatcherZero]

I think this thread went the tiniest bit offtopic....