Merseyrail Expansion

[eldomtom2]

There's even less DC overhead stock available in the market than there is 3rd rail, so the costs would be grossly disproportional to sticking to much more standardised technology used everywhere else.

DC overhead is used all over the world - there are seven 750V DC overhead systems in the UK! Overhead DC equipment is just as standard as third rail DC equipment.

 

[emoaconr]

I am currently very much out of touch with the subject of this thread. The last news that I heard about the proposed station for Skelmersdale was that it received an official negative response. Yet a reading of some recent postings made upon this thread talk about it as if new life had been infused into the project and logically, based upon that reasoning, the required finance had also been promised.

What exactly is the officially recognised position on this matter.

LCC/WLBC have published an aspirational long-term redevelopment plan for the town, which includes a station in its fourth stage. Nothing costed or imminent expected.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

LCC have published an aspirational long-term redevelopment plan for the town, which includes a station in its fourth stage. Nothing costed or imminent expected.

Thank you for this information.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Massively costly and will change nothing as most of it is perception. I take it you've never lived in a New Town?


You'd need serious levels of on the ground policing to have people happy to walk to/from Glenburn in the dark. Free taxis to Maghull North would probably cost less.

It would be a Parkway station in any meaningful sense.

I've spent a lot of time in another new town (Bracknell), I don't think it's completely impossible to improve those paths to a decent standard.
If there was an issue with vulnerable groups using the paths later on, a free circular bus around Skem estates timed to meet trains in the early mornings and evenings would be sensible.

No Merseyrail station except Liverpool Central is even remotely near capacity. Merseyrail is seriously underused (both passengers and train movements) compared to what it was built for.

That may change if the population of Skem and half of Maghull descend on it in future. It's best to plan for more.

 

[biggerisbetter]

- only issue is that you may need to use a single 777 on that route as the bay is only long enough for 1 777 without extension further towards the station building).

Given that the extension of Merseyrail services to the north facing bay at Wigan Wallgate seems a reasonable possibility over the next couple of decades it surprised me to see that a staff building is being built at the end of the bay which would make its extension to accommodate 8-car trains much more costly. Seems to me short-sighted but perhaps there is never likely to be need for 8-car services on this line although given that it would become the quickest high frequency route from Wigan to Central Liverpool it doesn’t seem beyond the realms of possibility that longer services might be needed.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Oct 2024 ==

No Merseyrail station except Liverpool Central is even remotely near capacity. Merseyrail is seriously underused (both passengers and train movements) compared to what it was built for.

Out of interest, do you happen to know the capacity of the Wirral Line city centre loop in terms of trains per hour? I have looked for this but can’t seem to find it.

Even in the very long distance future I can’t envisage a situation where you would need more than 20tph on this (4tph on each branch plus Borderlands, as I say very distant future) but have wondered if the loop could accommodate this number?

 

[AlastairFraser]

Given that the extension of Merseyrail services to the north facing bay at Wigan Wallgate seems a reasonable possibility over the next couple of decades it surprised me to see that a staff building is being built at the end of the bay which would make its extension to accommodate 8-car trains much more costly. Seems to me short-sighted but perhaps there is never likely to be need for 8-car services on this line although given that it would become the quickest high frequency route from Wigan to Central Liverpool it doesn’t seem beyond the realms of possibility that longer services might be needed.

Are they building one there? That is irritating, but I suppose one 777 twice per hour would do to start with (with longer trains charging on layovers on other platforms if pathing could squeeze it in.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Out of interest, do you happen to know the capacity of the Wirral Line city centre loop in terms of trains per hour? I have looked for this but can’t seem to find it.

Even in the very long distance future I can’t envisage a situation where you would need more than 20tph on this (4tph on each branch plus Borderlands, as I say very distant future) but have wondered if the loop could accommodate this number?

I seem to recall it was built for 30tph but that the present signalling can't quite meet that. Getting to 20 should I expect be possible.

The Northern Line has plenty of train capacity too. Reversals at Liverpool Central are a bottleneck (as is passenger capacity, which is harder to fix but not impossible if you dug it out to be more like St Pancras Low Level with wide side platforms) but if the Wapping Tunnel happened that would remove the reversals and so make it no different to any other two platform station.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Are they building one there?

A decently sized structure has appeared there over recent weeks.
I given the current busyness of the service between Wigan and Headbolt Lane, I think 4 carriages will be enough (and a lot more than the 2* it currently gets).
I do see how it could become a problem by Liverpool, but I don't think there are enough 777s to run every diagram with 2.


* Trains are booked as 4 carriages, but the back two have to be locked out after Pemberton due to short platforms since the 15X don't have SDO.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Since this is a Speculative Discussion thread, could I ask the reverse question to the thread title and ask which parts of the Merseyrail network could be taken over by Transport for Wales and by Northern Trains.

 

[Topological]

Since this is a Speculative Discussion thread, could I ask the reverse question to the thread title and ask which parts of the Merseyrail network could be taken over by Transport for Wales and by Northern Trains.

An interesting question. Working clockwise...

Southport makes sense as Merseyrail since it is a terminus distinct from any Northern services. Northern services that terminate at Southport would need to reverse to use what is now Merseyrail, meaning inefficient journeys amongst anywhere the change would bring connection to.

Ormskirk could see extensions of Northern services, but it would not be far before the passenger volumes to Liverpool would be better suited to Merseyrail. On the Ormskirk line, extending Merseyrail seems the more likely future direction.

Headbolt Lane has already seen Northern cut back so it is unlikely there would be a reversal

Hunts Cross strikes me as an odd terminus and does seem to involve avoidable interaction between Merseyrail and Northern. However, I do not know if the Merseyrail service could be cut back to Liverpool South Parkway (and maybe pushed on elsewhere) with Northern having more trains serving Hunts Cross. Electrification of the CLC would allow Northern to add capacity so it is not a completely lost cause to limit Merseyrail. IF development fills in the gap between Widnes and Halewood, a new station and more Northern EMUs would have a further case.

Ellesmere Port/Chester could each be changed. Sending Merseyrail to just 1 of these would increase frequency for the victor. I would assume that means Chester getting more Merseyrail. In such cases Hooton to Ellesmere Port would go over to Northern. However, that would need more trains to Warrington/Runcorn and I do not see either route being electrified. The result would be less efficient, even if the extra connectivity from Ellesmere Port Eastwards might help some users.

Neither West Kirby or New Brighton have other services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Since this is a Speculative Discussion thread, could I ask the reverse question to the thread title and ask which parts of the Merseyrail network could be taken over by Transport for Wales and by Northern Trains.

None of it, unless you meant to incorporate the Merseyrail network as it is into a wider Regional Railways North West type operation instead of it being a standalone operation.

More likely is that it takes over infrastructure and ticketing and secedes entirely from the National Rail network, becoming something more like Metrolink in structure.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Oct 2024 ==

Hunts Cross strikes me as an odd terminus and does seem to involve avoidable interaction between Merseyrail and Northern. However, I do not know if the Merseyrail service could be cut back to Liverpool South Parkway (and maybe pushed on elsewhere) with Northern having more trains serving Hunts Cross. Electrification of the CLC would allow Northern to add capacity so it is not a completely lost cause to limit Merseyrail. IF development fills in the gap between Widnes and Halewood, a new station and more Northern EMUs would have a further case.

OK, maybe that bit. But I see it as more likely that we will, post Northern Powerhouse Rail, end up with "Merseyrail meets Metrolink" at Warrington Central and Northern in fact withdrawing from Hunts Cross, with Mossley Hill and West Allerton each getting a stop on half the Birmingham services, or possibly even long term a Liverpool Airport shuttle service which could be fairly easily extended out from South Parkway's slow lines along what are currently roads.

 

[mr_jrt]

DC overhead is used all over the world - there are seven 750V DC overhead systems in the UK! Overhead DC equipment is just as standard as third rail DC equipment.

Uh huh. And how many of those systems are powering a train rather than a tram? The only one vaguely approaching suitability is the 1500VDC system used by the T&W Metro, and that's powering light rail metrocar rolling stock that's basically a tram in all but name. Thus any rolling stock designed to work with it is going to be bespoke for the UK, and priced accordingly. Yes, it's the same for all UK rolling stock, but at least when you have the economies of scale from using national standards it gets the price down somewhat as you might just be able to order something that already exists.

Merseyrail is a heavy rail service and should be using the agreed standards for NR - i.e. 25kV AC.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Uh huh. And how many of those systems are powering a train rather than a tram? The only one vaguely approaching suitability is the 1500VDC system used by the T&W Metro, and that's powering light rail metrocar rolling stock that's basically a tram in all but name.

You mean "that is from exactly the same Stadler platform as Merseyrail's"?

The 555s and 777s are basically the same thing in a different shaped body. Merseyrail isn't really a classic heavy railway any more, and the line has blurred between trains and trams. I'd be unsurprised to see it removed entirely from the National Rail network in terms of infrastructure and fares in the coming years, creating a structure more like Metrolink.

That doesn't mean 25kV doesn't make sense for extensions, it probably does as most extensions are likely to involve shared running with other 25kV electrified lines, e.g. if Preston is brought in then it needs to run on the WCML for a few miles at the north end. Though conversion of the network to any form of OHLE is likely to be very expensive and completely pointless. If exposed third rail were ever to be totally banned, then switching to the near enough standard shielded bottom contact system used throughout Germany and on the DLR is probably the way to do it, as that would remove the massive costs of enlarging bridges and tunnels that would be necessary for a 25kV conversion.

 

[Blackpool boy]

More likely is that it takes over infrastructure and ticketing and secedes entirely from the National Rail network, becoming something more like Metrolink in structure.

I see where you are coming from with that but its hard to ever imagine it happening now - Would they really earn enough in teh farebox to provide enough money for upgrades and so on and so forth and what do you do at Chester?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I see where you are coming from with that but its hard to ever imagine it happening now - Would they really earn enough in teh farebox to provide enough money for upgrades

No, and Metrolink doesn't either. Funding is obtained by the City Region from a different set of pots to Network Rail.

and so on and so forth and what do you do at Chester?

Have an agreement to run onto Network Rail metals, just as the Tyne and Wear Metro does to Sunderland and (in reverse) Chiltern Railways does on London Underground metals.

 

[Meerkat]

I think West Lancs Council's regeneration plans avoid a lot of the issues you mentioned, and Merseyrail is a network with probably one of the lowest rate of cancellations in the North West. But we could see what happened if we just extended 2tph to Wigan first and then built a case for further extensions that way.

If you have the tentatively planned Skem branch then it would be the terminus for Merseyrail and Northern, no Merseyrail extension to Wigan.

 

[frodshamfella]

An interesting question. Working clockwise...

Southport makes sense as Merseyrail since it is a terminus distinct from any Northern services. Northern services that terminate at Southport would need to reverse to use what is now Merseyrail, meaning inefficient journeys amongst anywhere the change would bring connection to.

Ormskirk could see extensions of Northern services, but it would not be far before the passenger volumes to Liverpool would be better suited to Merseyrail. On the Ormskirk line, extending Merseyrail seems the more likely future direction.

Headbolt Lane has already seen Northern cut back so it is unlikely there would be a reversal

Hunts Cross strikes me as an odd terminus and does seem to involve avoidable interaction between Merseyrail and Northern. However, I do not know if the Merseyrail service could be cut back to Liverpool South Parkway (and maybe pushed on elsewhere) with Northern having more trains serving Hunts Cross. Electrification of the CLC would allow Northern to add capacity so it is not a completely lost cause to limit Merseyrail. IF development fills in the gap between Widnes and Halewood, a new station and more Northern EMUs would have a further case.

Ellesmere Port/Chester could each be changed. Sending Merseyrail to just 1 of these would increase frequency for the victor. I would assume that means Chester getting more Merseyrail. In such cases Hooton to Ellesmere Port would go over to Northern. However, that would need more trains to Warrington/Runcorn and I do not see either route being electrified. The result would be less efficient, even if the extra connectivity from Ellesmere Port Eastwards might help some users.

Neither West Kirby or New Brighton have other services.

a better terminus than Hunts Cross would be Widnes ( within LCR ) or even Warrington. Of course the terminus was meant to be Gateacre anyway not Hunts Cross. There there is the need of some sort of improvement for transport to the airport. A Merseyrail extension there with a station for Speke would be the best thing, a tram situation is being discussed by the Metro Mayor at present .

 

[Bletchleyite]

a better terminus than Hunts Cross would be Widnes ( within LCR ) or even Warrington. Of course the terminus was meant to be Gateacre anyway not Hunts Cross. There there is the need of some sort of improvement for transport to the airport. A Merseyrail extension there with a station for Speke would be the best thing, a tram situation is being discussed by the Metro Mayor at present .

By far the easiest way to do an airport connection would be to take it off the almost-disused WCML slow lines after South Parkway and run a 4tph 25kV Northern EMU shuttle to the airport, picking up the Edge Hill, Mossley Hill and West Allerton calls from some other services and (as you say) including a new station at Speke. This would be much easier to do than connecting it to the present Northern Line because of the lay of the land and the fact that it could easily run down a repurposed dual carriageway that is already there, with the road traffic diverted. If the Wapping Tunnel Northern Line connection was ever built, you'd join it up to the Ormskirk services then (specifically the Ormskirks because it would require fewer 25kV fitted units than Southport, and because if Preston was done you'd want 25kV units at the other end too).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Merseyrail isn't really a classic heavy railway any more.

As one who has used the rail service between Liverpool city centre and Southport many times over the last 65 years, I would argue that particular line still serves its role as a heavy-rail service in the same way it once did when under the umbrella area coverage of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway in connecting the settlements along that coastline.

What exactly do you mean by a "classic heavy railway"?

 

[Bletchleyite]

a better terminus than Hunts Cross would be Widnes ( within LCR ) or even Warrington. Of course the terminus was meant to be Gateacre anyway not Hunts Cross. There there is the need of some sort of improvement for transport to the airport. A Merseyrail extension there with a station for Speke would be the best thing, a tram situation is being discussed by the Metro Mayor at present .

Warrington (with removal of through services) is the only one that makes any sense of the options there. The CLC's punctuality is dire, largely because of the Norwich and TPE services. It would destroy Merseyrail to run through into that mess unless you were strict in cancelling the service at Hunts Cross and setting it back to the 15 minutes later if it was more than a couple of minutes late, Swiss style. If you only went to Widnes you would need to keep the DMUs.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Oct 2024 ==

As one who has used the rail service between Liverpool city centre and Southport many times over the last 65 years, I would argue that particular line still serves its role as a heavy-rail service in the same way it once did when under the umbrella area coverage of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway in connecting the settlements along that coastline.

What exactly do you mean by a "classic heavy railway"?

What I mean is that there's basically no practical difference between Merseyrail and the T&W Metro other than historical constructs. They are both using the same types of vehicle now, or will be doing soon. There is now a massive overlap between the concepts of light and heavy rail.

 

[Meerkat]

By far the easiest way to do an airport connection would be to take it off the almost-disused WCML slow lines after South Parkway and run a 4tph 25kV Northern EMU shuttle to the airport, picking up the Edge Hill, Mossley Hill and West Allerton calls from some other services and (as you say) including a new station at Speke. This would be much easier to do than connecting it to the present Northern Line because of the lay of the land and the fact that it could easily run down a repurposed dual carriageway that is already there, with the road traffic diverted. If the Wapping Tunnel Northern Line connection was ever built, you'd join it up to the Ormskirk services then (specifically the Ormskirks because it would require fewer 25kV fitted units than Southport, and because if Preston was done you'd want 25kV units at the other end too).

Heavy rail wouldn’t go round those corners would it, and where would the road go - it’s a local road as well as the airport approach.
I would have thought tram-train was the only possibility, serving the retail and business parks on the way

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There is the need of some sort of improvement for transport to the airport. A Merseyrail extension there with a station for Speke would be the best thing, a tram situation is being discussed by the Metro Mayor at present .

People such as the Metro Mayor have more say in deciding matters than people on an internet chat site.

 

[Blackpool boy]

No, and Metrolink doesn't either. Funding is obtained by the City Region from a different set of pots to Network Rail.



Have an agreement to run onto Network Rail metals, just as the Tyne and Wear Metro does to Sunderland and (in reverse) Chiltern Railways does on London Underground metals.

So not as you first claimed then when you said it should secede from the national rail network

 

[Bletchleyite]

Heavy rail wouldn’t go round those corners would it, and where would the road go - it’s a local road as well as the airport approach.

What corners? There's plenty of space there to do it with railway style curves, though you might need to demolish the odd industrial unit this sort of thing comes very cheap. Alternative road provision is similarly relatively easy and cheap in the scheme of things.

I would have thought tram-train was the only possibility, serving the retail and business parks on the way

Tram-train (still using the WCML slows) does have some things going for it, such as the ability to run through more of Speke which would be strongly regenerative, and it would be much cheaper. The downside is that it would be stuck as a Lime St service forever unless Merseytram was to make a reappearance, because if it's going to go to Ormskirk/Southport/Headbolt the only thing it can realistically be is Class 777 for the foreseeable. An interesting question is what's more likely - Merseytram or the Wapping Tunnel? Quite possibly the former. It could also run along the central reservations of the dual carriageways, keeping the roads in place and making the work much cheaper.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Oct 2024 ==

So not as you first claimed then when you said it should secede from the national rail network

I didn't say it should, I said I think it will, and I still think it will. There have been a lot of noises along those lines by the Metro Mayor and others, and a lot of support for local (public) ownership and control.

By secede, I mean that the dedicated infrastructure would move from Network Rail to the City Region's control and through ticketing would cease. Not that it would turn back at Hooton - through running is entirely possible by agreement, just like the Tyne and Wear Metro does.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What I mean is that there's basically no practical difference between Merseyrail and the T&W Metro other than historical constructs. They are both using the same types of vehicle now, or will be doing soon. There is now a massive overlap between the concepts of light and heavy rail.

In terms of actual unit weight and construction details, are you referring to these similarities at this moment in time? Do you not see much in the way of difference?

 

[Bletchleyite]

In terms of actual unit weight and construction details, are you referring to these similarities at this moment in time? Do you not see much in the way of difference?

The units are both of the Stadler METRO platform. I've not looked at weights etc, but they will be similar, as will be construction.

There's so much overlap now that the terms "light rail" and "heavy rail" are close to meaningless. Probably better to talk of Network Rail and non-Network Rail.

 

[Meerkat]

What corners? There's plenty of space there to do it with railway style curves, though you might need to demolish the odd industrial unit this sort of thing comes very cheap. Alternative road provision is similarly relatively easy and cheap in the scheme of things.

Speke Hall Avenue - do they build new heavy railway with corners like that, going to get pretty noisy!
And you have to get to Speke Hall avenue first.
You are going to demolish a lot if you need heavy rail, and a new road, and access roads And bridges.
Tram train means it can serve the area better, have cheaper, more DLR style viaducts where needed, and need fewer bridges.
Couldn’t Stadler build you a tram train that could go where a 777 can go, with as much commonality with a 777 as possible. What would be different - skirts, more flexible ’gangways’?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Couldn’t Stadler build you a tram train that could go where a 777 can go, with as much commonality with a 777 as possible. What would be different - skirts, more flexible ’gangways’?

I'm sure they could, but then if Wapping happened you would need it to be able to go to Ormskirk and possibly Preston too, and then you'd have to use those on Ormskirks and wouldn't be able to swap them in like you can with a single fleet. Might be better as part of a tramway project - there's still that almost 60 degree angle of Liverpool that's stuck with only buses and which Merseytram was intended to address.

 

[eldomtom2]

Uh huh. And how many of those systems are powering a train rather than a tram? The only one vaguely approaching suitability is the 1500VDC system used by the T&W Metro, and that's powering light rail metrocar rolling stock that's basically a tram in all but name. Thus any rolling stock designed to work with it is going to be bespoke for the UK, and priced accordingly. Yes, it's the same for all UK rolling stock, but at least when you have the economies of scale from using national standards it gets the price down somewhat as you might just be able to order something that already exists.

In terms of lines that are definitely on the heavy rail side of things that use 750V DC overhead, worldwide you have Line A on the Mexico City Metro, the M5 line on the Istanbul Metro, various sections of the Rotterdam Metro, and several Japanese lines. As for a DC pantograph being bespoke, the Class 777s are part of the Stadler METRO family, which also includes the new T&W Metro units. I don't see it being an issue - if you have a design that can have pantographs equipped and can run on DC power, then you have a design that can run on overhead DC power.
And of course if 1500V DC gets involved then you have a massive amount of heavy rail overhead DC systems worldwide.

 

[AlastairFraser]

A decently sized structure has appeared there over recent weeks.
I given the current busyness of the service between Wigan and Headbolt Lane, I think 4 carriages will be enough (and a lot more than the 2* it currently gets).
I do see how it could become a problem by Liverpool, but I don't think there are enough 777s to run every diagram with 2.


* Trains are booked as 4 carriages, but the back two have to be locked out after Pemberton due to short platforms since the 15X don't have SDO.

I agree that 4 would be fine - thanks for highlighting that some stations would probably need small platform extensions to avoid unnecessary SDO use too (Rainford looks like it needs another 25m, 20m for the eastbound platform at Upholland, 20m each for the platforms at Orrell, Pemberton looks long enough AFAIK).

I'm sure 2tph of the Kirkby/Wigan service using a single 777 won't be an issue for the meantime.

If you have the tentatively planned Skem branch then it would be the terminus for Merseyrail and Northern, no Merseyrail extension to Wigan.

Why on earth would you waste money on a Northern service to Skem?
Building an additional spur of track and 2 more junctions for a town where the travel flow into Merseyside is dominant over all other destinations seems nuts.

By far the most sensible solution is to run Merseyrail 2tph to Skem and 2tph to Wigan.

For the very little traffic that would head east of Wigan from the new Skem/Wigan Merseyrail line, a simple interchange would be available at Wallgate, or for the few Skem passengers that would be heading east from Rainford on a regular basis, a quick change would be available at Rainford.