Ordsall Chord

[northwichcat]

In what recent Network Rail RUS was this project last discussed in terms of a preferred route ?

Connecting local communities - North West urban 2009 page 27

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...utePlans/2009/Route 20 - North West Urban.pdf

The creation of the third platform has meant that the
capacity at Manchester airport will become constrained by the layover of the trains and congestion at the throat. In the future it is anticipated that extending the line underneath the airport towards Northwich will be required in order to enable the airport station to handle greatly increased traffic. This will allow for both future rail growth and the potential for new journey opportunities. However, this is not expected to be required before CP6 or later.

CP6 between 2019 and 2024.

which would also not require extra pathways through the central Manchester rail core.

Doing that would require a reversal at Manchester Airport which does still restrict capacity.

 

[Greybeard33]

Before its demise, did the Strategic Rail Authority ever make comment in the early part of this century with regard to the link to the mid-Cheshire line. In what recent Network Rail RUS was this project last discussed in terms of a preferred route ? You make mention of Cheshire County Council in your posting, but there are now Cheshire West and Cheshire East separate entities. Do they both see the matter with the same eyes, as the mid-Cheshire line traverses the areas of both these newly-established County Councils?

You do say that Network Rail see the advantage of that route, but conversely, did they at the same time make note of the south-facing junction on the Styal line in terms of affording access to Manchester Airport railway station from the south, which would also not require extra pathways through the central Manchester rail core.

Page 27 of http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/RoutePlans/2009/Route%2020%20-%20North%20West%20Urban.pdf states that

The creation of the third platform has meant that the
capacity at Manchester airport will become
constrained by the layover of the trains and
congestion at the throat. In the future it is
anticipated that extending the line underneath the
airport towards Northwich will be required in order
to enable the airport station to handle greatly
increased traffic. This will allow for both future rail
growth and the potential for new journey
opportunities. However, this is not expected to be
required before CP6 or later.

 

[dggar]

Completely off the wall idea here:-

Is the any merit in making the fast lines between Slade lane junction and Stockport Bi directional?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Doing that would require a reversal at Manchester Airport which does still restrict capacity.

I totally fail to see how a service from "the South" which uses the south-facing junction from the Styal line, that runs Crewe-Wilmslow-Styal-Manchester Airport as a terminal ending route, would require a reversal. (There are drivers' cabs at either end the class 185 units, which are used on every current Class 185-run First TPE service that ends its journey at Manchester Airport railway station that run from Cleethorpes, Newcastle, Middlesbrough, Windermere and Blackpool). It was this particular terminally-ending service only and no other, obviating the need to pass through the Manchester rail core, that my posting was making reference to.

Have you possibly been comparing other routes that may have been mentioned in passing in previously-mentioned posting discussions ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Page 27 of http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/RoutePlans/2009/Route%2020%20-%20North%20West%20Urban.pdf states that

That document makes reference to the third and recently constructed platform at Manchester Airport. However, has not a fourth platform been a point of inclusivity in a set of more recent documentations and I wonder if that extra platform has made the previous reference in the link somewhat out-of-date in its reference. Should this proposed fourth platform be built, in what CP is this likely to fall?

I now accept the proposal to construct a link to the mid-Cheshire line is indeed still current from the information provided, as I had assumed that the Strategic Rail Authority had seen this as something to occur in the very long distance of time.

 

[northwichcat]

I totally fail to see how a service from "the South" which uses the south-facing junction from the Styal line, that runs Crewe-Wilmslow-Styal-Manchester Airport as a terminal ending route, would require a reversal.

I thought you were referring to extending existing services beyond the Airport in the Crewe direction, which would require the driver getting out and changing ends and then the train leaving on the same track as it entered on, which is usually referred to as a reversal.

If you're talking about extra terminating services with the existing infrastructure how many more can you add in before the platforms and tracks leaving the station start getting obstructed too much?

Also with the services not continuing to Manchester itself how popular will they be? It didn't work that well when Central Trains tried running an East Midlands to Manchester Airport service which didn't continue to Manchester.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I thought you were referring to extending existing services beyond the Airport in the Crewe direction, which would require the driver getting out and changing ends and then the train leaving on the same track as it entered on, which is usually referred to as a reversal.

If you're talking about extra terminating services with the existing infrastructure how many more can you add in before the platforms and tracks leaving the station start getting obstructed too much?

Also with the services not continuing to Manchester itself how popular will they be? It didn't work that well when Central Trains tried running an East Midlands to Manchester Airport service which didn't continue to Manchester.

Before putting this debate to bed, once and for all, I will state:-

1) .. My original mention of this route was solely made in comparison with another "from the South" route-proposal, accessing Manchester Airport via the mid-Cheshire line which would require a new rail connectional line being constructed to achieve that ambition. As you say, a previously used route on the line you describe was not successful, which then made me wonder if any alternative route would meet with the same fate.

2) .. With regard to your comment about capacity at Manchester Airport railway station, I would assume the fourth platform, as and when built, would go some way to addressing that particular query.

 

[Holly]

... I now accept the proposal to construct a link to the mid-Cheshire line is indeed still current from the information provided, as I had assumed that the Strategic Rail Authority had seen this as something to occur in the very long distance of time.

What I have not seen (perhaps it belongs in some other thread), is any discussion of whether HS2 plans for Manchester Airport will make a through line (from Heald Green to Knutsford via the airport) easier or harder. More expensive or less expensive.

Since they could be sharing some of the same corridor of land. Less expensive due to shared construction costs or more expensive due to a need to cross over each other.

 

[Greybeard33]

That document makes reference to the third and recently constructed platform at Manchester Airport. However, has not a fourth platform been a point of inclusivity in a set of more recent documentations and I wonder if that extra platform has made the previous reference in the link somewhat out-of-date in its reference. Should this proposed fourth platform be built, in what CP is this likely to fall?

I now accept the proposal to construct a link to the mid-Cheshire line is indeed still current from the information provided, as I had assumed that the Strategic Rail Authority had seen this as something to occur in the very long distance of time.

You make a valid point that the more recent Network Rail documents "Manchester Hub Rail Study" (2010) and "Northern RUS" (2011) did not discuss the western link from the airport and proposed the fourth platform to address capacity constraints. However, they make clear this platform is required to enable longer trains to operate existing services, not to increase service frequency - it does not alleviate the constraint of congestion at the station throat mentioned in the Strategic Route Plan document.

The fourth platform, for which I understand the Government announced its support in July 2012, is a CP5 project with completion planned by 2018, so is nearer term than the proposed western link.

 

[northwichcat]

What I have not seen (perhaps it belongs in some other thread), is any discussion of whether HS2 plans for Manchester Airport will make a through line (from Heald Green to Knutsford via the airport) easier or harder. More expensive or less expensive.

From what I understand HS2 serving Manchester Airport is an option for consideration, not a must-have like a central Manchester HS2 station.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You make a valid point that the more recent Network Rail documents "Manchester Hub Rail Study" (2010) and "Northern RUS" (2011) did not discuss the western link from the airport and proposed the fourth platform to address capacity constraints.

AFAIK both those documents are more short term plans concentrated over the next control period. A North West RUS for the 2009-2014 CP dismissed ideas that have become recommended proposals in the Northern Hub documents. One such idea was diverting Llandudno services to Manchester Victoria.

 

[snail]

With regard to your comment about capacity at Manchester Airport railway station, I would assume the fourth platform, as and when built, would go some way to addressing that particular query.

The fourth platform is needed to avoid doubling up trains and for services using the Ordsall Chord.

Converting it to a through platform may not be impossible as there is a tunnel under the station concourse designed to allow Metrolink to loop around past Wythenshawe Hospital.

 

[Greybeard33]

What I have not seen (perhaps it belongs in some other thread), is any discussion of whether HS2 plans for Manchester Airport will make a through line (from Heald Green to Knutsford via the airport) easier or harder. More expensive or less expensive.

Since they could be sharing some of the same corridor of land. Less expensive due to shared construction costs or more expensive due to a need to cross over each other.

The western link would involve tunnelling under the airport apron and cargo centre, so I doubt that an additional requirement for grade separation from HS2 would have a significant effect on the overall cost!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What I have not seen (perhaps it belongs in some other thread), is any discussion of whether HS2 plans for Manchester Airport will make a through line (from Heald Green to Knutsford via the airport) easier or harder.

Do not forget also, when land utilisation requirements are made, that approval has now been a step nearer for the SEMMS project, which currently has a choice of two routes from the A555 at Handforth to Manchester Airport. Both routes will pass very near to both the north and the south facing junctions of the Styal line en route to the airport linking to Ringway Road. Then there is also the final section of the Manchester Metrolink extension from Shadow Moss Road to Manchester Arport. Those are two more factors to be taken into account in land requirements for anything else.

 

[northwichcat]

Seems the proposed route is causing criticism from some parties

Ministers have been asked to step in over fears a new £85m bridge will sever the world’s oldest train station from the rail network. Bosses at Network Rail are consulting on plans to build the new bridge over the River Irwell in Castlefield to link Victoria and Piccadilly stations for the first time.

The so-called ‘Ordsall Chord’ is part of a £530m plan to improve the rail network around Manchester, known as the Northern Hub, which experts say would create 23,000 jobs and stimulate £4.2bn in economic benefits.

But there are fears it could mean that steam trains will no longer be able to access the former Liverpool Road station, which forms part of the Museum of Science and Industry (MOSI). That in turn could hit the museum’s funding.

Keith Whitmore, former chairman of the Transport for Greater Manchester Committee, has called on rail minister Norman Baker to intervene.

He said: “I’ve made it quite clear that a solution needs to be found to this. Common sense needs to prevail.

“This project is very important to the region, but it needs to be done in a way that benefits everybody and considers the heritage of the area.

“This is the oldest passenger railway station in the world and it’s going to look ridiculous for a modern railway to compromise its history in this way.”

A spokeswoman for MOSI said it supported the Northern Hub project but would be objecting to Network Rail’s proposed alignment of the bridge.

She said: “It will have a severe impact on MOSI’s visitors, its historic site, its day-to-day railway operations, its volunteers, its routine revenue generating activity, and its fund-raising ability.”

Network Rail’s plans will go before a planning inspector.

Manchester council’s executive has passed a report recommending supporting construction of the Ordsall Chord.

A spokesman for Network Rail said: “We continue to work very hard to minimise the impact we are having on the rich heritage in the area. We have amended the proposed alignment of the chord to minimise impact on the Grade I-listed structure.”

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereve...d-cut-access-to-former-liverpool-road-station

 

[snail]

I know the proposals affect the turnback siding but how many steam trains visit the museum from off the main network?

 

[PR1Berske]

I would laugh very hard upon hearing that the scheme has to be put back into the funding cauldron because of the need to preserve steam trains

Take that, Manchester, you can't have it your own way all the time.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I know the proposals affect the turnback siding but how many steam trains visit the museum from off the main network?

Is the next stage of the proposals review to be held in March 2013, which will give some time for objections to be discussed ?

 

[Chris125]

I know the proposals affect the turnback siding but how many steam trains visit the museum from off the main network?

Very, very few. Tornado visited with the Royal Train recently and i think there's been the occasional light engine for display/stabling but it's hardly a regular occurrence. Alas it's a pretty simple choice is between compromising the historic bridge or a demonstration line and barely used mainline connection, and there's only going to be one winner though i can understand why the museum are taking the stance they are.

Chris

 

[158809]

IIRC part of the rails on the MoSI point connection have been removed for well over a year anyway.

 

[JohnCarlson]

I know the proposals affect the turnback siding but how many steam trains visit the museum from off the main network?

I initially thought the new chord could just cross the museums tracks on the flat as as presumably locos are not visiting every fifteen minutes so things could be arranged so that they arrived and departed well outside of peak times.


However earlier this year I stood at the end of the museums site and it looked as if the problem was that part of the presumably very old brick built formation would have to be demolished to get a completely flat crossing in. It might be this that is causing the issue. The illustration I have seen looks like they are fudging the issue. Building across the tracks so nothing needs demolition but so low that even a set of wheels on the museums tracks couldn't get under the new chord.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What I have not seen (perhaps it belongs in some other thread), is any discussion of whether HS2 plans for Manchester Airport will make a through line (from Heald Green to Knutsford via the airport) easier or harder. More expensive or less expensive. Since they could be sharing some of the same corridor of land. Less expensive due to shared construction costs or more expensive due to a need to cross over each other.

My good lady wife would like to add a comment upon any proposed land requirements for anything that is needed to access Manchester Airport, from the Knutsford/Mobberley direction, by reminding all on this forum of the tremendous uproar that was caused by residents of both settlements vigourously against the land that would be lost in the Bollin Valley by the need for the second runway at Manchester Airport. Certain characters such as "Swampy" came to the fore and a tree-top village in endangered woodland, connected by rope walkways, became an established settlement.

What would be endangered by a new construction to Manchester Airport from that general direction. Would any National Trust land be involved ?

 

[Holly]

My good lady wife would like to add a comment upon any proposed land requirements for anything that is needed to access Manchester Airport, from the Knutsford/Mobberley direction, by reminding all on this forum of the tremendous uproar that was caused by residents of both settlements vigourously against the land that would be lost in the Bollin Valley by the need for the second runway at Manchester Airport. Certain characters such as "Swampy" came to the fore and a tree-top village in endangered woodland, connected by rope walkways, became an established settlement. ...

A good illustration as to why new railway rights of way are invariably pursuant to an Act of Parliament. Nothing new under the sun where railways are concerned. Don't scare the horses.

 

[northwichcat]

My good lady wife would like to add a comment upon any proposed land requirements for anything that is needed to access Manchester Airport, from the Knutsford/Mobberley direction, by reminding all on this forum of the tremendous uproar that was caused by residents of both settlements vigourously against the land that would be lost in the Bollin Valley by the need for the second runway at Manchester Airport. Certain characters such as "Swampy" came to the fore and a tree-top village in endangered woodland, connected by rope walkways, became an established settlement.

What would be endangered by a new construction to Manchester Airport from that general direction. Would any National Trust land be involved ?

You have to remember the pollution effects from aircraft are much higher than those from high speed trains.

With Runway 2 it involved knocking down and rebuilding listed buildings in the Styal area, building on the home of endangered giant crested newts and aircraft flying much lower over the populated areas of Stockport, Wythenshawe and Knutsford.

The strange thing about the Manchester Airport expansion was it was originally to allow more British Airways flights. BA then announced it was withdrawing international flights from Manchester so airlines like Flybe, Jet2, Ryanair and EasyJet took over the vacant slots who cater for different markets to BA.

 

[Greybeard33]

Do not forget also, when land utilisation requirements are made, that approval has now been a step nearer for the SEMMS project, which currently has a choice of two routes from the A555 at Handforth to Manchester Airport. Both routes will pass very near to both the north and the south facing junctions of the Styal line en route to the airport linking to Ringway Road. Then there is also the final section of the Manchester Metrolink extension from Shadow Moss Road to Manchester Arport. Those are two more factors to be taken into account in land requirements for anything else.

The projects you refer to above all involve land to the east of the station, so have no effect on the western link.

There was a proposal, since shelved, for Metrolink to continue in a western loop past Wythenshawe hospital and, as snail mentioned, some provision has been made at the station for a tunnel for this. If a HS2 station is built at Davenport Green, this Metrolink loop might be resurrected to connect with it, but would not conflict with the heavy rail western link since they go in different directions.

AFAIK, the plans for the fourth heavy rail platform and Metrolink platform are compatible with each other and do not preclude either future extension to the west.

 

[high camera]

Thought readers may be interested in these elevated mast photographs taken this morning from 2 positions adjacent to the existing arches.

I believe these photos are unique and therefore I request that my copyright is respected, please seek my permission if you wish to use any of the images. High res versions are available.

Note the gantries recently erected for the electrification project.

http://highcamera.smugmug.com/Architecture/Ordsall-Curve-location/27589496_2nsFrh

 

[PR1Berske]

Wow

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Thought readers may be interested in these elevated mast photographs taken this morning from 2 positions adjacent to the existing arches.

My congratulations to you, especially with regard to those covering the Liverpool Road station trackwork, which may be new to some forum members from locations far removed from there.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If a HS2 station is built at Davenport Green, this Metrolink loop might be resurrected to connect with it, but would not conflict with the heavy rail western link since they go in different directions.

Thank you for this clarification, which has put my mind at rest with regard to this specific matter.

 

[lancastrian]

Thought readers may be interested in these elevated mast photographs taken this morning from 2 positions adjacent to the existing arches.

I believe these photos are unique and therefore I request that my copyright is respected, please seek my permission if you wish to use any of the images. High res versions are available.

Note the gantries recently erected for the electrification project.

http://highcamera.smugmug.com/Architecture/Ordsall-Curve-location/27589496_2nsFrh

Excellent set of pictures, nice to see that the continuing erecting of the overhead is steadily ongoing.

 

[snowball]

Full Ordsall Chord plans now on Network Rail website for the final round of consultation.

http://www.ordsallchord.co.uk/

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Full Ordsall Chord plans now on Network Rail website for the final round of consultation.

http://www.ordsallchord.co.uk/

An interesting note states that the proposed alignment for the Ordsall Chord now avoids the Grade 1 listed Stephenson's Bridge. However, it is now confirmed that the rail link to MOSI will have to severed.

Will there be a series of mini-exhibitions on the documentation in this final round of the consultation process as there were in 2012?

 

[snowball]

"We are also holding consultation events across Manchester and Salford, where you will be able to talk to members of our project team about our proposals. You can visit us on:

8th & 9th May – Castlefield Hotel, Liverpool Road, Manchester: 12.00 – 20.00
10th & 11th May – Creative Media Centre, Chapel Street, Salford: 12.00 – 20.00"