Platform 15 and 16 project at Manchester Piccadilly.

[HSTEd]

That would mean every Liverpool-Leeds train would cross on the flat at Ardwick and we're back to square one!

That would depend on how many Liverpool-Leeds trains there would be in such a scheme, and simplification of the Piccadilly throat from withdrawal of the majority of the terminating platforms would make room for a flyover of one is required

 

[jonesy3001]

The evening news have now got a petition going about the extra platforms for piccadilly and oxford rd, bit pointless like has nothing will happen, the link is at the bottom of the page.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...-petition-north-delays-cancellations-14745479

 

[Bantamzen]

There's a section about the platforms (because of Piccadilly) on the MEN website saying that the paperwork still needs signing for the work to be done, but i dont think they will get built while failing grayling is transport secretary.
Link to article here;
https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...s/nine-reasons-should-angry-northern-14743563

There does seem to be a recurring theme in that article, plans for improvements sat in a Minister's in-tray....

 

[furnessvale]

There does seem to be a recurring theme in that article, plans for improvements sat in a Minister's in-tray....

That in itself is an improvement on the days of BR when the BRB was instructed NOT to submit plans so that the minister could claim, hand on heart, that his in tray was empty.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Excellent reporting from the MEN, genuinely impressed.

 

[randyrippley]

That in itself is an improvement on the days of BR when the BRB was instructed NOT to submit plans so that the minister could claim, hand on heart, that his in tray was empty.

I heard a rumour that there were two trays for a while.
One labelled "In action"
The other labelled "Inaction"
Guess which one was full...

 

[jonesy3001]

I heard a rumour that there were two trays for a while.
One labelled "In action"
The other labelled "Inaction"
Guess which one was full...

i thought they were labelled "in london"
"not in london"

 

[Senex]

i thought they were labelled "in london"
"not in london"

I'd just amend those to "In and for London" and "Other" to make sure that schemes such as the splendid job at Reading are included. Isn't Scotland lucky that transport is devolved?

 

[ajdunlop]

I'm not so sure. Grayling could do with a big announcement to deflect attention from his lack of handling of the ongoing Northern fiasco.

Like Heathrow 3rd Runway?

 

[snowball]

Like Heathrow 3rd Runway?

I doubt Grayling took much pleasure from making that announcement. See this jokey account of it by John Crace in the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/05/chris-grayling-heathrow-announcement-commons

Grayling's big Heathrow announcement fails to take off
John Crace
The transport secretary was forced to the dispatch box again for yet another bashing

First trains, now planes. After Monday’s humiliating mauling over the train timetables, Chris Grayling must have been hoping for a bit of recovery time. A chance to lie on his therapist’s couch and free-associate in a doomed search for his self esteem. Instead he was back in the Commons to make yet another statement he would have rather avoided. This time on the government’s decision to give the go-ahead for Heathrow’s third runway.

“The time for action is now,” said a visibly fragile Grayling. This wasn’t actually true. The time for action had been 10 years ago when the government had first decided to expand London’s airport capacity, but previous transport ministers had had the wit to recognise the issue was a poisoned chalice and had successfully managed to kick it into the long grass. Not so Grayling. They don’t call him Failing Grayling for nothing, so it was somehow inevitable that the buck would stop with him.

Grayling cowered at the dispatch box, as if fearful of another punishment beating, as he outlined his proposals. Everything was going to be fine – don’t hit me, don’t hit me – no one was going to be inconvenienced at all – don’t hit me, don’t hit me – the new planes would make so little noise and cause such little pollution that you wouldn’t even know they were taking off or landing. Largely because they wouldn’t be, as the runway wouldn’t be built. At least not for 10 years. Or longer if he had anything to do with it. Sometimes incompetence has its uses. Don’t hit me, don’t hit me.

Unable to resist a sitting duck, the shadow transport secretary, Andy McDonald, immediately stood up and started hitting him. Repeatedly. He wasn’t going to grace the occasion with a detailed response because Grayling was so clearly out of his depth and no one could trust a word he said. McDonald had a point. Immediately the nervous tic that had afflicted Failing Grayling throughout his train wreck the previous day restarted. It was the most visible sign of intelligent life in the transport minister throughout the session.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

"Eeee, just think what us could do with £14.3bn!"

"£14.3bn? We were lucky to get £1.2bn for Northern Hub"

"£1.2bn? Luxury! We've had to make do with buses built on coal wagon frames with new seat covers and an LED sign from a kebab shop for the last few years"

"Seats? Seats? We don't get seats, just a close-up view of someone's sweaty armpit while we listen to the superfluous conductor (who takes up valuable standing room) work out which excuse to use next"

"Conductor? On a cattle train? you have it easy my lad. We have to run behind a track trolley being pushed by two modern apprentices and a redundant banker on a retraining placement"

 

[GRALISTAIR]

And washtt Ballast cleeen wit tung

 

[LOL The Irony]

https://twitter.com/SarahNobleLD/status/1014185658435416064

I've just received a response to my Freedom of Information request regarding Manchester Piccadilly Platform 15 and 16. It confirms Chris Grayling has been sitting on making the final decision to put spades in the ground for nearly two and a half years.

 

[HSTEd]

Well thats because he is not going to approve it... and never will

 

[jonesy3001]

i dont think it'll happen, they'll build up hope, then when its come to a decision it'll be a disappointing one.

 

[Chester1]

From the TP electrification thread:

Key Manchester junctions:
Ordsall Lane - good scheme, complex design, grade separation possible
Water Street - no room to do anything except 4-track the OLW viaduct to avoid it
Castlefield - good scheme, multiple solutions, not necessarily grade separated
Ardwick - good scheme, big bridge to get grade separation (requires P15 and 16 at Picc.)
Edgeley - good scheme, big bridge to get grade separation (requires further remodelling of Stockport)

Are any of these plans better value for money than Piccadilly 15 & 16?

I am intrigued by what the Castlefield Junction options are! If big money becomes available before the area gets too built up I would like to see the area redeveloped. I guess the grade seperation options would use the Metrolink viaduct and switch Metrolink to the old viaduct, which I imagine would cost a small fortune to restore? I remember you saying that you think Deansgate station should be closed, which makes sense considering its proximity to Oxford Road and capacity constraints. Demolishing it would also provide more space to rebuild the junction too. An interchange station at Cornbrook would limit the loss of Deansgate Station. Once the rail infrastructure was rebuilt any spare land would be worth a small fortune considering the skyscrappers being built nearby.

 

[LOL The Irony]

From the TP electrification thread:



Are any of these plans better value for money than Piccadilly 15 & 16?

I am intrigued by what the Castlefield Junction options are! If big money becomes available before the area gets too built up I would like to see the area redeveloped. I guess the grade seperation options would use the Metrolink viaduct and switch Metrolink to the old viaduct, which I imagine would cost a small fortune to restore? I remember you saying that you think Deansgate station should be closed, which makes sense considering its proximity to Oxford Road and capacity constraints. Demolishing it would also provide more space to rebuild the junction too. An interchange station at Cornbrook would limit the loss of Deansgate Station. Once the rail infrastructure was rebuilt any spare land would be worth a small fortune considering the skyscrappers being built nearby.

That sounds like more effort than it's worth. Just 4 track from Piccadilly and split it at Castlefield. Although, we should just let the engineer's sort it out.

 

[Chester1]

That sounds like more effort than it's worth. Just 4 track from Piccadilly and split it at Castlefield. Although, we should just let the engineer's sort it out.

There is no chance of any more 4 tracking between Piccadilly and Deansgate stations than currently proposed for platforms 15 and 16. There are high rise buildings on both sides of the viaduct now.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

There is no chance of any more 4 tracking between Piccadilly and Deansgate stations than currently proposed for platforms 15 and 16. There are high rise buildings on both sides of the viaduct now.

Who said the other two had to go alongside?

 

[mr_jrt]

I mean, those high-rise buildings don't prevent widening the viaduct, they just make it dramatically less likely...

 

[edwin_m]

Who said the other two had to go alongside?

I was involved with a study circa 2000 where someone suggested double-decking the viaduct, one deck for each direction I think. Not sure how they planned to untangle it at Castlefield Junction, nor how it would have played with the listed building at Oxford Road.

 

[AndrewE]

Who said the other two had to go alongside?

Quite. Given the wishes for grade-separation at either end I wondered whether an "El" [evated] type double track line with platforms could be supported somehow above the existing viaduct. I can't see it being possible to put new lines underground. Of course which lines you chose to run up to the elevated section locks your service pattern for ever though...

 

[Joseph_Locke]

I was involved with a study circa 2000 where someone suggested double-decking the viaduct, one deck for each direction I think. Not sure how they planned to untangle it at Deansgate Junction, nor how it would have played with the listed building at Oxford Road.

Do you mean Castlefield Juncton? Only the southern canopies would be affected at Oxford Road, and you wouldn't need all the existing platforms anyway, three would do. I (and J Locke senior) suggested it, in 2000, but the upper deck went to the CLCs and the lower to Ordsall Lane (then), Water Street (now).

Quite. Given the wishes for grade-separation at either end I wondered whether an "El" [evated] type double track line with platforms could be supported somehow above the existing viaduct. I can't see it being possible to put new lines underground. Of course which lines you chose to run up to the elevated section locks your service pattern for ever though...

You just decide at London Road Junction instead. A few crossover pairs for perturbation management and off you go.

 

[edwin_m]

Do you mean Castlefield Juncton? Only the southern canopies would be affected at Oxford Road, and you wouldn't need all the existing platforms anyway, three would do. I (and J Locke senior) suggested it, in 2000, but the upper deck went to the CLCs and the lower to Ordsall Lane (then), Water Street (now).

Yes, it really does my head in that Deansgate Junction is nowehere near Deansgate.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Yes, it really does my head in that Deansgate Junction is nowehere near Deansgate.

Deansgate Junction is next to Deansgate signalbox in Timperley, whereas Castlefield Junction is next to Knott Mill station in Castlefield - not confusing at all!

 

[edwin_m]

Deansgate Junction is next to Deansgate signalbox in Timperley, whereas Castlefield Junction is next to Knott Mill station in Castlefield - not confusing at all!

It's not good for Navigation (Road).

 

[Altfish]

It's not good for Navigation (Road).

Navigation Road signal box was knocked down a good while back.

 

[Chester1]

Do you mean Castlefield Juncton? Only the southern canopies would be affected at Oxford Road, and you wouldn't need all the existing platforms anyway, three would do. I (and J Locke senior) suggested it, in 2000, but the upper deck went to the CLCs and the lower to Ordsall Lane (then), Water Street (now).

How much would double decking the viaduct cost? It sounds incredibly expensive, wouldn't it make more financial sense to tunnel between Piccadilly and Victoria?

 

[Esker-pades]

"Eeee, just think what us could do with £14.3bn!"

"£14.3bn? We were lucky to get £1.2bn for Northern Hub"

"£1.2bn? Luxury! We've had to make do with buses built on coal wagon frames with new seat covers and an LED sign from a kebab shop for the last few years"

"Seats? Seats? We don't get seats, just a close-up view of someone's sweaty armpit while we listen to the superfluous conductor (who takes up valuable standing room) work out which excuse to use next"

"Conductor? On a cattle train? you have it easy my lad. We have to run behind a track trolley being pushed by two modern apprentices and a redundant banker on a retraining placement"

In Scotland they have to make do with a sheep attached to a motorised wheelie bin.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

How much would double decking the viaduct cost? It sounds incredibly expensive, wouldn't it make more financial sense to tunnel between Piccadilly and Victoria?

That wouldn't help relieve the issues between Castlefield and London Road Junctions caused by trains from Windermere, Barrow, Blackpool, Southport, Kirby, Liverpool and Traffod Park all converging.

Also, do you honestly think that such a tunnel would cheaper that building some portal frames over the existing viaduct? Even at 1 in 50 (which is pretty steep) on the East you'd have to start tunnelling near Thorpes Bridge to get under Victoria, the Irk and the Irwell. From the West you're better off, but probably out towards Eccles to get under the moat and back up. Then miss Guardian and come back up well south of Ardwick (which is above you on a viaduct still) ... that'd all need to be twin bore as well due to the length.