Merseyrail service patterns

[Bletchleyite]

Had a bit of a ride on Merseyrail's Boxing Day service today, and one thing I noticed was a number of favourable comments, particularly on the normally painfully slow Southport line, on the operation of express services.

Dropping some stations down to half hourly would not be very popular, and I doubt the PTE would allow it. But when the new stock comes along, with no doubt better acceleration, would it be feasible to operate a fast every 20 minutes interspersed with a slow also every 20 minutes? That might well serve the overall requirement a bit better.

Another option might be on some lines to turn some trains short - could you for instance operate Ormskirk, Aughton Park, Town Green, Maghull then Kirkdale, Sandhills, Moorfields, Central every 20, interspersed with all stations Maghull to Central also every 20?

Any thoughts? The Ormskirk line would probably get limited benefit, but Southport a lot more?

 

[Foxcover]

I'd thought the same thing on the Chester-Liverpool line - another very slow Merseyrail route with four all-stations trains per hour.

As stations north of Hooton have six trains an hour when you count the Ellesmere Port to Liverpool trains, my idea was to make two of the Chesters semi-fast to Liverpool after Hooton, and retime the two remaining Chesters and the two Ellesmere Ports to make a 15 minute service north of Hooton, the same as on the rest of the Merseyrail network.

Every station still gets a train in each direction every 15 mins, but you open up a new fast market between two significant cities - Liverpool and Chester - doing the journey twice an hour in each direction in a little over half the time taken at present. Who needs HS2 with a timetable pen like that!

 

[jamesst]

I can see the advantage of it, journey times and so forth, the biggest problems would be fitting any extra services in in the busy underground sections.
Also from a PTE view Merseytravel are determined to keep the 15minute frequency.
Plus don't forget it's widely expected that when the new stock does arrive there'll be less units than what there are now.

 

[childwallblues]

I can see the advantage of it, journey times and so forth, the biggest problems would be fitting any extra services in in the busy underground sections.
Also from a PTE view Merseytravel are determined to keep the 15minute frequency.
Plus don't forget it's widely expected that when the new stock does arrive there'll be less units than what there are now.

I have read somewhere that the plan is to order 52 units to replace the 59 currently used.

 

[Bungle965]

The service can be at times painfully slow, im sure if a semi fast train was introduced then it would be well used. I know people who live in Merseyside who would like to use the train but do not because of the journey time and the fact that it takes so long!
Sam

 

[razor89]

I have read somewhere that the plan is to order 52 units to replace the 59 currently used.

If this turns out to be the case, and considering that the current requirement of units for a normal morning peak is 50, and allowing for one spare unit for the northern and Wirral lines, then the only capacity improvements will come from the presumably increased standing room inside the units.

In terms of changes to the service pattern, personally I think the only way semi fasts would be an improvement is if they could run in addition to the current 15 minute stopping services. A service every 15 minutes I would say is just about a "turn up and go" service, but any drop in frequency would, I believe, lead to a drop in passenger numbers. Unfortunately additional services are not going to be possible either if only 52 units are ordered, however it would have been very difficult to implement anyway due to pathing issues at Liverpool Central and Sandhills flat junction on the Northern line, and around the loop on the Wirral line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Liverpool Central turnbacks are what eats Northern Line paths (they could I suppose start using the reversing siding again instead). Other than that it isn't full. As for the Loop, it already has semifasts (well, it misses out Capenhurst) on the Chester line, while the others are probably too short for any real benefit. Though I believe the Loop was originally signalled for 30tph, which it is nowhere near at the present 14tph (I have a feeling capacity is now lower, however).

 

[jamesst]

Liverpool Central turnbacks are what eats Northern Line paths (they could I suppose start using the reversing siding again instead). Other than that it isn't full. As for the Loop, it already has semifasts (well, it misses out Capenhurst) on the Chester line, while the others are probably too short for any real benefit. Though I believe the Loop was originally signalled for 30tph, which it is nowhere near at the present 14tph (I have a feeling capacity is now lower, however).

Originally signalled yes,far lower now though due to modern signalling regulations. 20tph would be your Max and that's at a push

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Originally signalled yes,far lower now though due to modern signalling regulations. 20tph would be your Max and that's at a push

There's 2tph gaps off-peak in the Hooton direction, not used by the 2tph Ellesmere Port services.
A second terminating platform at Chester would be useful too, to provide 15 minute layovers.
Trains have to be very punctual there not to inject delays round the system.
The crew only normally have time to swap ends, and sometimes will skip stops to catch up.

 

[razor89]

There's 2tph gaps off-peak in the Hooton direction, not used by the 2tph Ellesmere Port services.
A second terminating platform at Chester would be useful too, to provide 15 minute layovers.
Trains have to be very punctual there not to inject delays round the system.
The crew only normally have time to swap ends, and sometimes will skip stops to catch up.

If Merseyrail were given a second platform at Chester, and if more than 52 new units are ordered then 2tph semi fast services between Chester and Liverpool could work. Looking at the timetable I think if a semi fast were to depart 2 minutes prior to a stopping service, it could catch up to run 2 minutes behind the preceding stopping service by Hamilton Square. They could then go one after another round the loop with the stopper becoming the semi fast and vice versa for the trip back to Chester. It would reduce the journey time from Chester-Liverpool Central from 45 mins to 33 mins.

 

[Camden]

With new proper metro rolling stock and vastly superior acceleration and braking abilities, plus more efficient boarding, on lines lines like these it's easy to imagine 45 minutes being cut to under 40 minutes anyway.

All those complaining about a four trains an hour service that takes 45 minutes would soon be replaced and then some by those complaining about a four trains an hour service being reduced to just two, which is the net effect for most travellers. The above shows how complicated and hard to understand the service pattern would end up. The existing system works really well and serves everyone.

 

[razor89]

With new proper metro rolling stock and vastly superior acceleration and braking abilities, plus more efficient boarding, on lines lines like these it's easy to imagine 45 minutes being cut to under 40 minutes anyway.

I have to say I'm not entirely convinced by this. The current stock are fairly quick off the mark as it is so any acceleration improvements are likely to be above 30-40mph which, given the nature of the Merseyrail network, is unlikely to have much of an effect. I agree that new stock is likely to have more advanced braking systems but I'm worried that could be negated by defensive driving policies.

All those complaining about a four trains an hour service that takes 45 minutes would soon be replaced and then some by those complaining about a four trains an hour service being reduced to just two, which is the net effect for most travellers. The above shows how complicated and hard to understand the service pattern would end up. The existing system works really well and serves everyone.

Not sure if you were responding to my post but I was talking about 4tph stopping services AND 2tph semi fast Chester-Liverpool. I agree though that we should be reluctant to change the current system as it's easy to understand and well used as it is.

 

[73001]

I've always thought the Chester and Southport services were pretty good (although Southport always seems so much further even though it's a similar journey time). The AA Route Finder gives a driving time of 39 minutes for Liverpool to Chester so you gain nothing from driving yourself really. If the new trains have better acceleration then I think keeping that regular service pattern is more beneficial than adding in additional services. Things such as better seating/heating/cooling and doors that are controlled by passengers leaving rather than opening at every stop will make the journeys much more enjoyable.
I live in the Merseyrail area and friends who go away to work in other cities always comment on how easy it is to use our 'turn up and go' railway here.

 

[Camden]

I have to say I'm not entirely convinced by this. The current stock are fairly quick off the mark as it is so any acceleration improvements are likely to be above 30-40mph which, given the nature of the Merseyrail network, is unlikely to have much of an effect. I agree that new stock is likely to have more advanced braking systems but I'm worried that could be negated by defensive driving policies.

Compared to a tube train, they seem pretty sluggish in both respects.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Compared to a tube train, they seem pretty sluggish in both respects.

Even compared to a Desiro driven hard. And that's with a 110mph top speed.

 

[jamesst]

Even compared to a Desiro driven hard. And that's with a 110mph top speed.

You'd be pretty sluggish after 40 years of non stop work too!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oi, I'm not 40 yet! (I near enough share a date of birth with them, and indeed grew up with them )

Something with very high acceleration and all axles powered like the Hamburg U-Bahn vehicles would shave minutes off the stopping runs.

 

[urbophile]

I travelled to Chester yesterday on a train that was running between 5 and 10 minutes late from Liverpool Central. They announced that it would run non-stop between Birkenhead Central and Hooton (then as scheduled missing out Capenhurst). Obviously there must have been some disgruntled passengers en route, but for us making the through journey it was a very pleasant experience. It does seem a very short-sighted decision to cut down on the number of new trains (have they been ordered yet?), but would it be feasible to keep a number of the old ones as backup?
In view of the debate on the other thread about the Halton curve and the lack of fast services between Liverpool and Chester, the solution of running an extra two trains an hour semi-fast seems a good one.
I remember when the Wirral line loop was first opened they were running a very frequent service around it (almost LU frequencies) but that was soon dropped because of the lack of demand. There is obviously spare capacity though and since then demand has increased many fold.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Oh, and wouldn't the Northern line congestion caused by the turn round of Ormskirk and Kirkby trains at Central be eased by running at least some of them through to Hunts Cross (or probably South Parkway, to avoid causing more problems with the junction at HX.)?

 

[bramling]

I travelled to Chester yesterday on a train that was running between 5 and 10 minutes late from Liverpool Central. They announced that it would run non-stop between Birkenhead Central and Hooton (then as scheduled missing out Capenhurst). Obviously there must have been some disgruntled passengers en route, but for us making the through journey it was a very pleasant experience. It does seem a very short-sighted decision to cut down on the number of new trains (have they been ordered yet?), but would it be feasible to keep a number of the old ones as backup?
In view of the debate on the other thread about the Halton curve and the lack of fast services between Liverpool and Chester, the solution of running an extra two trains an hour semi-fast seems a good one.
I remember when the Wirral line loop was first opened they were running a very frequent service around it (almost LU frequencies) but that was soon dropped because of the lack of demand. There is obviously spare capacity though and since then demand has increased many fold.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Oh, and wouldn't the Northern line congestion caused by the turn round of Ormskirk and Kirkby trains at Central be eased by running at least some of them through to Hunts Cross (or probably South Parkway, to avoid causing more problems with the junction at HX.)?

It's an awkward one, as the reversing siding at Liverpool Central line would struggle to turn 8tph - especially as they would have to fit in with the Southport line. There doesn't really seem to be the demand for more trains south of Liverpool Central, and whilst you could extend some trains to a turnback facility, this means more train miles, which doesn't fit with a reduced fleet size. I wonder if there's room for another central siding somewhere between Liverpool Central and Brunswick?

It does seem ridiculous that any reduction in fleet size is being considered. The current fleet is stretched, and I wouldn't think increased availability from a modern fleet would make up for any reduction. The trouble is that this fleet replacement is being pursued for political reasons, and the business case / funding is only barely viable, at best.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's an awkward one, as the reversing siding at Liverpool Central line would struggle to turn 8tph

Would it? I'm not sure why it should any more so than the platforms. The unit would only need to be there long enough for the driver to walk the length of it plus a couple of minutes.

 

[Camden]

South of Liverpool Central varies in terms of passenger numbers. When a four trains an hour is maintained, it doesn't fare too badly, but in reality ending at Hunts Cross isn't ideal, so there isn't the same pulls for as long as the line remains unfinished.

As for demand for more trains, the factor there is actually throughput for Liverpool Central and efficiency of the train lines to add more trains per hour on the Southport and Ormskirk branches, plus being able to extend to Skelmersdale. At the moment trains have to sit on the Liverpool Central platforms waiting to return. I gather a turnback will be built (at Liverpool South Parkway) to enable them to pass straight through, increasing capacity on the lines by eliminating Liverpool Central as a bottleneck. So it looks like it will get more trains per hour anyway.

 

[Ianigsy]

I've thought for a while that the Chester service could be speeded up if the bay at Birkenhead Central could be reinstated and used for a stopping service as far as Hooton a couple of times an hour.

The other thing which can be wasteful of paths through the loop is the number of empty stock movements between various branches which seem to happen in the early evening in particular- perhaps I just notice it more because they're usually happening when I'm waiting for a train at Lime Street between about 7 and 7.30!

 

[childwallblues]

Even compared to a Desiro driven hard. And that's with a 110mph top speed.

You can't compare a Desiro to a 507/508.

 

[razor89]

Would it? I'm not sure why it should any more so than the platforms. The unit would only need to be there long enough for the driver to walk the length of it plus a couple of minutes.

Turning 8 trains per hour in the reverser means a maximum of 7.5 minutes per train. Assuming it takes 2 minutes to shunt in and out and you're left with 3.5 minutes to change ends, which is what they currently get in the platforms. Yes, it is possible but there's no room for any delay whatsoever.

If I had to choose I'd rather have a more frequent service than semi fast trains really. I think it would actually be possible to run a 10 minute service on all Northern Lines whilst still turning Ormskirk and Kirkby services at Liverpool Central. Again though the timings would be tight and delay to any one train would cause significant disruption.

I've thought for a while that the Chester service could be speeded up if the bay at Birkenhead Central could be reinstated and used for a stopping service as far as Hooton a couple of times an hour.

The other thing which can be wasteful of paths through the loop is the number of empty stock movements between various branches which seem to happen in the early evening in particular- perhaps I just notice it more because they're usually happening when I'm waiting for a train at Lime Street between about 7 and 7.30!

Around that time the service level drops from 4 to 2 trains per hour on the Wirral Line so I suspect what you're seeing is ECS moves back to Birkenhead North depot, probably off the Chester and Ellesmere Port lines. There are also ECS moves off the Wirral to Kirkdale depot using the stock interchange line through James Street. They're unavoidable really, unless of course the service level is increased during the evening!

 

[jamesst]

I've thought for a while that the Chester service could be speeded up if the bay at Birkenhead Central could be reinstated and used for a stopping service as far as Hooton a couple of times an hour.

The other thing which can be wasteful of paths through the loop is the number of empty stock movements between various branches which seem to happen in the early evening in particular- perhaps I just notice it more because they're usually happening when I'm waiting for a train at Lime Street between about 7 and 7.30!

There's 2 early evening stock moves though Lime St, one at 1900 (Ellesmere Port to West Kirby, couples with another stock then to Kirkdale) and a 1915 (Chester to New Brighton sidings) as well as a number of units passing between The Wirral and Kirkdale Depot for washing. Not really much that can be done with these as the units need to be cleaned and shunted for there next duty.
I wouldn't be surprised though to see all future Southport line services turn back at Liverpool South Parkway with the Hunts Cross section left to the Manchester trains. It has been mooted and with 10min turn around at LSP would definitely improve punctuality on the Southport line.

 

[urbophile]

I'm sure I have read somewhere that a 10-minute frequency was something to be aimed at on the whole of Merseyrail. Whether this was an official proposal or just a vox pop suggestion, it would be good to see: those five minutes would lessen the irritation of just having missed a train, and it would be more like a turn up and go service.
It seems to me that the longer distance lines like Southport and Chester are the equivalent of the LU Metropolitan line, which as far as I am aware still runs 'non-stop' services at least in rush hour. There are at present a couple of extra trains (from/to Southport) in the morning and evening peaks; are they well-enough used at all stations to mean skipping stops is not an option?
An 'express' service from Southport to the city centre and Parkway could be marketed as an airport link, and be more attractive than the present option.

 

[johnmoly]

I was told by an ex-Merseyrail employee that at one time Merseyrail did run at 20 minute intervals and were not well patronised , when Mark Dowd joined Merseytravel, ( an ex train driver ) he said make them every 15 minutes and you will start to fill the trains, those 5 minutes will make all the difference. He was proved right, although whether this was down to the extra service per hour or would it have happened anyway. I agree with others that to revert to every 20 minutes will have an adverse effect on pax numbers.

 

[bramling]

Would it? I'm not sure why it should any more so than the platforms. The unit would only need to be there long enough for the driver to walk the length of it plus a couple of minutes.

It's tight. Compared to reversing off the platform the train has to run into the siding slowly, and out as well. The driver has to walk through the train which takes longer then the platform. You're also introducing the need to tip out beforehand, which can further introduce the problem of someone not getting off for one reason or another. I suspect the site constraints at Liverpool Central mean the speed issue could be difficult or impossible to resolve.

There are ways of speeding up the process, but one way or another it requires more drivers somewhere in the process.

I'd say 4tph would be the realistic limit.

I don't think even LU achieves 8tph in a single siding. Queen's Park probably comes nearest, but there are 2x sidings there. The only exception is during some engineering works, when extra drivers are provided to either double-end or step-back.

 

[john prytherch]

Southport expresses were tried in the summer of 1976, (and perhaps 1975) before the tunnels and while still running from Liverpool Exchange. The problem was they had a different stopping pattern on weekdays and Sundays. I think one of the four trains per hour was run express; on weekdays it called at only Formby, Ainsdale, Birkdale and Southport. But on Sundays the first stop was Waterloo and the rest were different. The result was much public confusion, and I think the experiment was abandoned before Exchange closed and the trains were diverted to Moorfields and Central in April 1977.

I think the extension to Garston opened in 1978; to Hunts Cross about 1979 or 1980.

John Prytherch.

 

[Philip C]

It's tight. Compared to reversing off the platform the train has to run into the siding slowly, and out as well. The driver has to walk through the train which takes longer then the platform. You're also introducing the need to tip out beforehand, which can further introduce the problem of someone not getting off for one reason or another. I suspect the site constraints at Liverpool Central mean the speed issue could be difficult or impossible to resolve.

There are ways of speeding up the process, but one way or another it requires more drivers somewhere in the process.

I'd say 4tph would be the realistic limit.

I don't think even LU achieves 8tph in a single siding. Queen's Park probably comes nearest, but there are 2x sidings there. The only exception is during some engineering works, when extra drivers are provided to either double-end or step-back.

Or, of course, the 24tph which used to reverse in the single turn-back siding at Liverpool Central LL before the loop was built!