Merseyrail Expansion

[kieron]

A combined fleet could be opperated by morning and evening stock switches in the Liverpool SPW / Hunts Cross area (is the junction from Hunts Cross third rail to the WCML electrified)?

The line apparently has AC wires from the WCML to Hunts Cross West Junction (from looking at aerial photos, this seems to go to just before the Speke Hall Road overbridge), and DC from there to Hunts Cross. So that could work, but the train would have to change over somewhere between Liverpool South Parkway and Hunts Cross. This would naturally be easier if it can change over at speed.

 

[Chester1]

I wouldn't even go that complicated.

To me an obvious one is Hunts Cross to Warrington Central, with electrification of the CLC line (it would benefit massively due to the large number of stations). Then remove the stops from Lime St-Manchester locals.

Wrexham-Bidston (at least as far as Shotton) is another reasonable one.

Both require electrification works which is highly unlikely even if Liverpool City Region Combined Authority get a transport devolution deal, far too many electrification projects are in the pipeline. LCR would not fund electrification past Heswall, or perhaps to a park and ride station in Gayton just within Wirral boundary. Halton is in LCR (its Merseyside + Halton), so potentially they could pay to Widnes. Warrington Council and Cheshire West are highly unlikely to fund any electrification. The Welsh government might, but that is irrelevant if no one funds the Neston section. I agree that Warrington Central would be a great idea though. Most users would prefer services to Central and Moorfields, while removing all stops between Warrington Central and Liverpool South Parkway on Lime Street to Oxford Road stoppers would save several minutes on a very slow service.

The line apparently has AC wires from the WCML to Hunts Cross West Junction (from looking at aerial photos, this seems to go to just before the Speke Hall Road overbridge), and DC from there to Hunts Cross. So that could work, but the train would have to change over somewhere between Liverpool South Parkway and Hunts Cross. This would naturally be easier if it can change over at speed.

I doubt speed would be an issue for twice daily empty rolling stock movements. Merseyrail would need to use its option for 8 extra units and make them dual volt and not just capable of quickly adding pantographs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

removing all stops between Warrington Central and Liverpool South Parkway on Lime Street to Oxford Road stoppers would save several minutes on a very slow service.

Not only that, but wiring the CLC would speed up services at the other end and perhaps allow a less derisory, maybe half-hourly, S-Bahn service for the local stations at the Manchester end too.

The case for wiring the CLC was far, far better than Chat Moss, TBH.

 

[158756]

Not only that, but wiring the CLC would speed up services at the other end and perhaps allow a less derisory, maybe half-hourly, S-Bahn service for the local stations at the Manchester end too.

The case for wiring the CLC was far, far better than Chat Moss, TBH.

That would require funding from Greater Manchester though, and would they be that interested for the costs involved? I can't see Network Rail proposing any more electrification in the North.
Would electrification to Warrington create enough capacity for extra services, or would Merseyrail to Warrington mean cutting existing services at Warrington?

I'm not sure why the CLC would have a better case for electrification than Chat Moss? On current service patterns, the CLC route would only get two electric trains per hour, while Chat Moss gets 4 (Manchester Airport, Victoria, Warrington, TPE) plus three more with the short length to Wigan.

 

[HSTEd]

If it was on Merseyrail the expectation would be that all four Hunts Cross trains would be extended to Warrington Central.
These would take over local services on the line west of Wigan.

With 25kV it would never be worthwhile.
A minimum cost third rail scheme might work but that is out of the question in the current political environment.

 

[kieron]

With 25kV it would never be worthwhile.
A minimum cost third rail scheme might work but that is out of the question in the current political environment.

Is the infrastructure for third rail really that much cheaper than overhead? I worry that a lack of recent third rail projects may make costs somewhat uncertain.

But then, I have no idea how much effect electrification without extra loops would have on capacity.

 

[HSTEd]

Is the infrastructure for third rail really that much cheaper than overhead? I worry that a lack of recent third rail projects may make costs somewhat uncertain.

It is very uncertain - but with the balloning 25kV price then a very low spec third rail solution is almost certain to come out cheaper. But will be scotched because of "safety" arguments using data that ORR does not deign to actually give anyone else.

25kV comes out at £4m/route-km for twin track now.
Its absolutely not viable.

 

[Gareth]

That would require funding from Greater Manchester though, and would they be that interested for the costs involved? I can't see Network Rail proposing any more electrification in the North.
Would electrification to Warrington create enough capacity for extra services, or would Merseyrail to Warrington mean cutting existing services at Warrington

It would depend on the frequency. 2tph extended from Hunts Cross would probably not mean sacrificing through services to Manchester and beyond. 4tph probably would be more problematic. As these Merseyrail services wouldn't use Allerton junction, faster trains could be pathed to catch up to them just as they head towards South Parkway low level. Or in the other direction, passing Hunts Cross just before the outbound Merseyrail service arrives. The tighter you make this though, the more chance of a late train screwing things up.

Rather than Warrington Central, I reckon Birchwood would be better as an eastern terminus. It's in the Warrington council area and I know that one of the reasons fast trains stop there is because Warrington wants a decent service between there and Warrington Central. Also, Birchwood could be expanded much easier than Warrington Central. A third platform could be built to the south. This would be the new westbound through platform. Merseyrail trains could recover and reverse in the middle platform. This way through trains could pass in either direction unaffected. The two current Northern stoppers could go fast between Warrington Central & South Parkway, maybe also stopping at Widnes and perhaps other stations during peaks. The long distance trains such as EMT could also skip Birchwood, as the combination of Merseyrail & Northern could maintain a satisfactory frequency.

Assuming extending the Merseyrail Northern Line to Gateacre never happens, it would be best remodelling Hunts Cross so that the Merseyrail trains use the south side of the station, rather than the north. The current arrangement can't be very efficient. Reinstate the fourth platform and the fourth track from Allerton Junction to somewhere between Hunts Cross and Halewood. Merseyrail would use the south two platforms and mainline services the north two. This would allow the 2tph that don't go on to Warrington to terminate without affecting mainline services. This could also be where the other 2tph that do carry on change over to the OHLE.

Regarding electrification, I don't why electrification of this line wouldn't be worthwhile. I don't foresee it being electrified just to Warrington. The whole thing would surely be done in one go and would be OHLE. As well as Merseyrail, the Northern services to Manchester would go electric, including the future Northern Connect to Manchester Airport. The TPE service to Scarborough is slated to be transferred to the Chat Moss line which leaves only the EMT Norwich service as the only diesel service on the line. It would also allow it to be used a diversionary route for electric services which use the Chat Moss line. Seems a worthwhile proposition to me.

 

[HSTEd]

It would depend on the frequency. 2tph extended from Hunts Cross would probably not mean sacrificing through services to Manchester and beyond. 4tph probably would be more problematic. As these Merseyrail services wouldn't use Allerton junction, faster trains could be pathed to catch up to them just as they head towards South Parkway low level. Or in the other direction, passing Hunts Cross just before the outbound Merseyrail service arrives. The tighter you make this though, the more chance of a late train screwing things up.

The problem is Merseyrail is not a big fan of having their trains interact with others. They currently have their own trainset to play on with only minimal interation with other services.
Running for many miles along a shared line would inevitably cause them problems later.
They certainly won't want to push a route hard.

Regarding electrification, I don't why electrification of this line wouldn't be worthwhile. I don't foresee it being electrified just to Warrington. The whole thing would surely be done in one go and would be OHLE. As well as Merseyrail, the Northern services to Manchester would go electric, including the future Northern Connect to Manchester Airport. The TPE service to Scarborough is slated to be transferred to the Chat Moss line which leaves only the EMT Norwich service as the only diesel service on the line. It would also allow it to be used a diversionary route for electric services which use the Chat Moss line. Seems a worthwhile proposition to me.

The problem is OHLE is going to cost something like £180m.
That is going to be enormously expensive. And a (relative) handful of services would benefit.
The easiest option would be to break all CLC services at Warrington Central and transfer the fast trains to Chat Moss.
Then electrify the section between Hunts Cross and Warrington only.

 

[Gareth]

Pretty sure Merseytravel don't seem that bothered about inter-running. Most of their proposed extensions involve at least some of it. Having a largely isolated system is a big operational advantage and running onto other lines has to take into account the higher risk of operational problems caused by other services. Indeed, I find Merseytravel can be a bit cavalier about it and don't even give too much thought about if these extensions fit in with the nature of the existing network. They rarely address such issues when mentioning such extensions. It's a trade off though and one has to determine whether the benefits outweight to potential disadvantages. Many, otherwise standalone, metro systems around the world have some through-running. The Tyne & Wear metro has the extension to Sunderland, whilst the London Underground shares track with National Rail services in some places, now mostly Overground services. The Seoul Subway has some services which extend onto the Korail national network. They have to change power whilst coasting through a dead section as the subway uses 1500 DC OHLE whilst Korail uses 25kv OHLE. Even the running side is different, with the Subway being right hand running and Korail mostly left hand.

Your idea of third rail to Warrington and splitting the line so there are no through services certainly has its advantages. A 4tph uniform stopping service would certainly be attractive for people in places like Halewood who currently have to make do with only 1tph off peak. They'd probably only get 2tph under my scenario. As well as keeping the network fully standalone, not needing to change power would remove another thing that could potentially go wrong. It would have some big disadvantages though. I'm not sure Warrington would be happy about Central station going from a through station with fast services stopping at it to a sort of Kirkby arrangement with buffer stops. Of course, you could use Bank Quay to compensate for the loss of fast services but its lack of interchange with the CLC would be a headache for those who live in Birchwood and the likes. Fast services would all be on the Chat Moss which for Liverpool would be fine if the capacity is there but there would be no diversionary route (maybe not essential but certainly nice to have). Connectivity between South Parkway and the Manchester area would be compromised too.

I'm not sure about the cost issue with 25kv OHLE. You probably know more about it than I do but I find it surprising that we've gone from a "can do - let's electrify everything" attitude to "it's eye-wateringly, sadistically expensive" in just a handful of years. You could third rail just to Warrington for Merseyrail use only and have through trains continue to be diesel as a half way option (sacrificing Merseyrail frequency) but other trains not being able to use the power would be a missed opportunity and it would be better for 3rd rail to be restricted to dedicated Merseyrail lines.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure why the CLC would have a better case for electrification than Chat Moss? On current service patterns, the CLC route would only get two electric trains per hour, while Chat Moss gets 4 (Manchester Airport, Victoria, Warrington, TPE) plus three more with the short length to Wigan.

Didn't those service patterns come about largely because of the Chat Moss electrification, though?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

When is Merseyrail's existing 3rd rail infrastructure due for "normal" (at end of life) replacement?

 

[73001]

When is Merseyrail's existing 3rd rail infrastructure due for "normal" (at end of life) replacement?

I think it would be hard to set a date... Bits of it have been installed at different times, the stuff in the tunnels is replaced frequently due to corrosion etc and the rest of it doesn't get too much hammer in normal service as they only ever run 3 or 6 cars at relatively low speeds. I would wonder if the cost of 25kv would be quite high (in comparison to keeping 3rd rail) due to the bridges, cuttings, tunnels etc across Merseyrail.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think it would be hard to set a date... Bits of it have been installed at different times, the stuff in the tunnels is replaced frequently due to corrosion etc and the rest of it doesn't get too much hammer in normal service as they only ever run 3 or 6 cars at relatively low speeds. I would wonder if the cost of 25kv would be quite high (in comparison to keeping 3rd rail) due to the bridges, cuttings, tunnels etc across Merseyrail.

Yes, I would expect 25kV to be prohibitively high cost - if traditional third rail were not permitted because of safety, it'd have to be a shielded third-rail used in replacement (such as the side-contact system used for the DLR), not 25kV.

Low voltage OHLE *might* I suppose work if an overhead contact rail was used on tunnel sections as it requires much lower clearances.

 

[Camden]

So... third rail "not allowed", and OHLE now too expensive...

The third rail prohibition is seriously bl**dy stupid, and needs to go in the bin. Ideally along with Network Rail's monopoly on carrying out such work. It would be interesting to see the result of a competitive tender to third rail an extension.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would it be feasible to design a fibreglass surround for the third rail, which together with a possible modification to the shoegear would make it a shielded third rail to reduce or remove most of the risks it poses e.g. to staff?

 

[edwin_m]

Would it be feasible to design a fibreglass surround for the third rail, which together with a possible modification to the shoegear would make it a shielded third rail to reduce or remove most of the risks it poses e.g. to staff?

It is already fitted with wooden or yellow plastic "kick boards" in high risk areas such as depots. These shield the rail at both sides, to a level just above top of rail, so provide protection against tripping against the side of the rail and limited protection against stepping on top of it. I think anything more than that would foul the shoegear which occupies the area directly above top of rail - if it didn't then the kick boards as provided would probably include this enlargement already.

It would be interesting to see whether the extra cost of kick boards over a whole route would be justified by reductions in casualties, or if there are any restrictions on their use (such as maximum train speed).

It's hard to see how the shoegear could be re-designed to allow this protection to extend above the rail, since on most designs the shoe sits on a beam that links below the axle boxes and getting rid of those would involve replacing the bogies with inside-bearing types. Otherwise the shoegear would have to move outwards, so the rail would too, meaning it was incompatible with existing rail and once you go there you might as well move to a DLR-style bottom contact with insulation above and to the sides.

Worth noting however that a bottom contact third rail on the national network would probably foul the gauge, requiring re-building of some platforms and other structures to avoid contact with the shoegear. There is also the risk at level crossings as seen with the accident in Connecticut where a road vehicle collision resulted in the bottom contact rail spearing into the train interior.

 

[Chester1]

Loading gauge issues would stop the loop and link from being converted to overhead power. The rest of the network I am not so sure. West Kirby to Birkenhead North has 3 bridges and I think New Brighton to Birkenhead North is similar. Chester to Hooton would be fairly simple too. With the option of a simple conversion of Stadler trains to dual volt a piece meal approach would be viable. NR is against renewing existing third rail when AC conversion is viable. The chances of them approving new third rail are virtually nil. When was the last time there was an electrification done using third rail? I wouldn't be surprised if it was Merseyrail's expansion in the early 90s.

 

[HSTEd]

With the option of a simple conversion of Stadler trains to dual volt a piece meal approach would be viable. NR is against renewing existing third rail when AC conversion is viable.

Yes but the argument that NR used against third rail extension 'when AC conversion is viable' was based on ludicrously small costings for 25kV equipment that are something like a third of what it turns out it actually costs.
Unless they are going to find many hundreds of millions of pounds to spend on a luxury whilst numerous other schemes are canned for lack of funding I am not seeing it myself.

The chances of them approving new third rail are virtually nil. When was the last time there was an electrification done using third rail? I wouldn't be surprised if it was Merseyrail's expansion in the early 90s.

It appears Ellesmere Port is about tied with Eurostar-related electrification in the vicinity of Redhill in about 1994.
THat is if you exclude shenanigans related to the East London Line.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Is there any difference in infrastructure (sub stations, etc) between normal 3rd rail and protected 3rd rail (like DLR) apart from how the shoe makes contact with the 3rd rail?

 

[HSTEd]

Is there any difference in infrastructure (sub stations, etc) between normal 3rd rail and protected 3rd rail (like DLR) apart from how the shoe makes contact with the 3rd rail?

None that are required.
Remember that third rail has been around long enough and used by enough people that several distinct "practices" developed.
For example how third rail was done on Tyneside and Merseyside was noticeably different to how the Southern did it.
Likewise in America and other such places.

EDIT:
Additionally - has anyone considered electrifying between Wrexham and Chester and providing a Merseyrail service over the newly double-track Shrewsbury Line?
It would probably give faster journey times to liverpool if the trains just reversed at Chester - but it would be operationally more complicated and would expose them to interactions with outside services.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Hybrid third rail emu /battery powered units are a possible solution. They could charge up whilst coming in from the existing extremities. I think the gap from Bidston to Wrexham Central is too great espeicially with Hawarden bank to tackle. However extending the 3rdrail to Heswall may work.

Wigan Wallgate might be possible from Southport/Ormskirk etc as the routes are relatively undemanding.

 

[headshot119]

None that are required.
Remember that third rail has been around long enough and used by enough people that several distinct "practices" developed.
For example how third rail was done on Tyneside and Merseyside was noticeably different to how the Southern did it.
Likewise in America and other such places.

EDIT:
Additionally - has anyone considered electrifying between Wrexham and Chester and providing a Merseyrail service over the newly double-track Shrewsbury Line?
It would probably give faster journey times to liverpool if the trains just reversed at Chester - but it would be operationally more complicated and would expose them to interactions with outside services.

The newly; but not quite yet all the way, not even open till April, Chester to Shrewsbury line is that?

 

[Skie]

The Wapping tunnel being put back into use frequently appears on Merseytravel planning documents. If that does go ahead then it means a short run of new 3rd rail from Central to Edge Hill and then dual power units would be able to service the city line. Merseytravel have always wanted to have the City Line part of the Merseyrail network proper, and that would be a realistic way to do it as it ties the core of the network in without huge costs and allows for gradual expansion as franchise agreements come to an end.

 

[HSTEd]

The newly; but not quite yet all the way, not even open till April, Chester to Shrewsbury line is that?

Well... yes

 

[Old Yard Dog]

One would naturally like to think that the new stock would fuel some of the ( many) expansion projects for Merseyrail. Whilst some, such as the outer-loop and the Burscough curves are more in the realm of pipe-dreams; others such as linking Skelmersdale to the network have solid a solid business case.

I do wonder though if the present franchise holders really have an interest in seeing their boundaries pushed a little further out. They have a neat self-contained system and expansion towards Wigan, Warrington and Wrexham would complicate matters.

As things stand, unless electrification of most, if not all the North-wests suburban network is undertaken there will a loss of quality of service to many users.

Why are the Burscough curves a pipe dream? Extend Merseyrail Electrics to Burscough Bridge and then you can divert the Preston - Ormskirk service to Southport and provide a very useful new link. Its the county boundary which, as usual, gets in the way of logical schemes.

 

[urbophile]

The Wapping tunnel being put back into use frequently appears on Merseytravel planning documents. If that does go ahead then it means a short run of new 3rd rail from Central to Edge Hill and then dual power units would be able to service the city line. Merseytravel have always wanted to have the City Line part of the Merseyrail network proper, and that would be a realistic way to do it as it ties the core of the network in without huge costs and allows for gradual expansion as franchise agreements come to an end.

This should be a priority. The City line has always had an inferior service compared to Merseyrail proper. Apart from the Lime Street-Huyton stretch, which has a similar frequency, no station has anything approaching a Metro style service. The worst served are the intermediate stations on the main line from Edge Hill to LSP. When Merseytram was a possibility/pipe dream, one option was for trams to run over this stretch - on the slow lines of course - as far as a new on-street line from Parkway to John Lennon Airport. Incorporating this into Merseyrail would be a start; extending it to Speke (not just the airport, but to the huge but forgotten housing estate) would be common sense. The Council assured us that the money set aside, and no longer usable, for the tram scheme would be spent on improvements to Merseyrail; since then they have gone quiet.

The Bootle dock branch via Tue Brook has also been mentioned as a priority for re-opening: it would help to regenerate a very run-down area of the city. But again, the authorities have gone quiet.

Also, if Halton is now part of the Liverpool City Region, electrifying the CLC line at least as far as Widnes makes a lot of sense. How feasible would it be to divert WCML trains onto the current slow lines at Edge Hill, and run Manchester via Warrington trains as well as a Metro service to Widnes/Warrington, on what are now the fast lines to Parkway? It would avoid conflicting movements there, and if the Northern line were cut back to terminate at Parkway, there would be no junction problems at Hunts Cross either.

 

[185]

Overheads would be a straightforward conversion if the current voltage was maintained. Manchester Metrolink runs on a similar current using overheads.

 

[daodao]

This should be a priority. The City line has always had an inferior service compared to Merseyrail proper. Apart from the Lime Street-Huyton stretch, which has a similar frequency, no station has anything approaching a Metro style service. The worst served are the intermediate stations on the main line from Edge Hill to LSP. When Merseytram was a possibility/pipe dream, one option was for trams to run over this stretch - on the slow lines of course - as far as a new on-street line from Parkway to John Lennon Airport. Incorporating this into Merseyrail would be a start; extending it to Speke (not just the airport, but to the huge but forgotten housing estate) would be common sense. The Council assured us that the money set aside, and no longer usable, for the tram scheme would be spent on improvements to Merseyrail; since then they have gone quiet.

The Bootle dock branch via Tue Brook has also been mentioned as a priority for re-opening: it would help to regenerate a very run-down area of the city. But again, the authorities have gone quiet.

Also, if Halton is now part of the Liverpool City Region, electrifying the CLC line at least as far as Widnes makes a lot of sense. How feasible would it be to divert WCML trains onto the current slow lines at Edge Hill, and run Manchester via Warrington trains as well as a Metro service to Widnes/Warrington, on what are now the fast lines to Parkway? It would avoid conflicting movements there, and if the Northern line were cut back to terminate at Parkway, there would be no junction problems at Hunts Cross either.

Extending the service from Hunts Cross along the CLC line would interfere with the other services on this line. Merseyrail is an integrated Metro-style franchise and is best kept separate from other services. Some limited extensions seem feasible, in particular:
Hunts Cross - Gateacre (as originally envisaged)
Kirkby - Skelmersdale (new station)
Ormskirk - Burscough Bridge
These short extensions could be 3rd rail, for simplicity. The remainder of the ex L&Y line from Wigan Wallgate to a new station at Skelmersdale would essentially be in Greater Manchester; it could be electrified at 25 kV and linked to the Manchester-Bolton-Wigan route, which is already due to be electrified.

While it would be desirable for local routes out of Lime Street to be enhanced, they are best left with the Northern franchise. The CLC line via Warrington Central should be electrified at 25 kV, given that both ends of it are already electrified at 25 kV. This would facilitate integration with other services, and enable frequency enhancements at some of the lesser stations, as electric trains can stop and start more quickly.

The Borderlands line on the Wirral doesn't serve nearby settlements very well and is not worth investing in.

 

[HSTEd]

While it would be desirable for local routes out of Lime Street to be enhanced, they are best left with the Northern franchise. The CLC line via Warrington Central should be electrified at 25 kV, given that both ends of it are already electrified at 25 kV. This would facilitate integration with other services, and enable frequency enhancements at some of the lesser stations, as electric trains can stop and start more quickly.

Depending on your definition the line via Warrington Central is electrified using third rail at the Liverpool end.
The line is of little use for end-to-end journeys compared to the superior and already electrified Chat Moss route. The long distance trains could be diverted onto Chat Moss and the entire route broken at Warrington.
Merseyrail could run an all shacks service and those desiring a fast train to Liverpool could simply use Bank Quay instead.

The Borderlands line on the Wirral doesn't serve nearby settlements very well and is not worth investing in.

Then why are we haemmorhaging money to keep it open?
Electrification and 2 trains per hour Wrexham, 2 trains per hour Shotton, would seem to maybe give the line a shot at actually being useful.

Ofcourse it depends on how much it costs to electrify.