Platform 15 and 16 project at Manchester Piccadilly.

[Welshman]

As a regular user I hate to say this but the worst use of capacity along the Piccadilly-Castlefield corridor is ATW. Their trains are often only two coaches and a maximum of four. They also waste time and space by staying in Mayfield sidings for about 50 minutes at a time. They would be better running through Victoria to terminate at Rochdale or Stalybridge. It would mean both express services from Chester would run to Victoria not Piccadilly but it would allow for a longer train to use the corridor.

ATW do not run 2 and 3-car trains by choice! That is all they have, and I am sure they would prefer to operate longer trains than have a crush on almost every service east of Chester - even in the middle of the day.

Not many now sojourn in the Mayfield loop, as the return extension to the Airport is just managed in the time available. As to being diverted through Victoria, the extension to the Airport has been a long time in coming, and I'm sure more attractive. Somehow, Bangor to Stalybridge or Llandudno to Rochdale doesn't have the same appeal.

 

[edwin_m]

Given that during the course of the current franchise the standard off-peak service will see no less than 7tph between Wigan and Manchester I do not think there is any possibility of just 3tph being in any way acceptable! And I also doubt that tram-trains would be acceptable for that length of journey either. Lack of bicycle space and toilet being the main issues. And what about services west of Wigan?

The tram-trains in Karlsruhe do journeys of about 120km. Admittedly not many passengers will do the whole journey but even half of it is longer than Wigan-Manchester. Some of them did have toilets as well as bars, but both were closed quite soon after introduction.

No reason why they couldn't be provided with bicycle spaces too, or people in need of either facility could be directed to the other routes.

A couple of problems with this. Firstly the bays can only just about accept a 4x20m unit so no scope for doubling up. Secondly northbound trains have to cross the WCML to reach the bays; a few years ago Springs Branch Jn was remodelled with an independent line from there to North Western allowing Liverpool trains to terminate in Platform 6 without any conflict with the WCML. Serving Wigan via Chat Moss only makes sense, under normal circumstances, when those trains are running to/from somewhere further north. If such services are going to bring still further trains on to that part of the WCML then additional tracks between North Western and Balshaw Lane Jn will be a pre-requisite.

I'm not talking about extra trains, I'm talking about the Manchester-Wigan via Chat Moss already committed to replace the TPE on that route, so one fewer train per hour through Balshaw Lane than today. And surely the bays are no more inaccessible than side bays anywhere else?

 

[Greybeard33]

I was suggesting Metrolink conversion from the junction north of Salford Crescent (exclusive) to Crow Nest, with the vehicles running as tram-trains only for the short distance between there and Wigan. The link at Salford would probably be easier if the existing connection isn't needed, as a ramp could be built in its place for the tram-trains to fly over the Bolton line north of the station.

There is a daily freight that runs to Knowsley via Atherton from the Wilton Energy from Waste plant on Teeside, passing through Atherton at about 1400. See for example http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/H20506/2017/08/24/advanced. This is a long term contract and I doubt that a path for this train could be found via Bolton or on the WCML at this time of day, in order that the Atherton line could be converted into a tramway.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

The tram-trains in Karlsruhe do journeys of about 120km. Admittedly not many passengers will do the whole journey but even half of it is longer than Wigan-Manchester. Some of them did have toilets as well as bars, but both were closed quite soon after introduction.

No reason why they couldn't be provided with bicycle spaces too, or people in need of either facility could be directed to the other routes.

So passengers in the Wigan area should accept a lower standard of service as part of a grand plan. Given that various stations will soon be losing their direct services to Piccadilly (apart from a couple of peak-hour trains) and all their services to the Airport I do not think you could sell them any further downgrades.

I'm not talking about extra trains, I'm talking about the Manchester-Wigan via Chat Moss already committed to replace the TPE on that route, so one fewer train per hour through Balshaw Lane than today. And surely the bays are no more inaccessible than side bays anywhere else?

Still sticking to the idea of just 3tph from Wigan to Manchester? Not acceptable. Or if you want extras via Chat Moss to the bays you just add another avoidable pathing problem to the WCML timetable.

If the reality is that extra capacity is required to and through Manchester then a way will have to be found to provide it. Telling passengers that their journeys should be more awkward or less comfortable as a result of an upgrade is surely not the way forward. We should not be repeating the mistake made with Metrolink conversion of the Sale line damaging access to Manchester from the Mid-Cheshire line. Indeed arguably the issue of capacity along the Castlefield corridor should have been dealt with then: let's it get right this time!

 

[daodao]

So passengers in the Wigan area should accept a lower standard of service as part of a grand plan. Given that various stations will soon be losing their direct services to Piccadilly (apart from a couple of peak-hour trains) and all their services to the Airport I do not think you could sell them any further downgrades.



Still sticking to the idea of just 3tph from Wigan to Manchester? Not acceptable. Or if you want extras via Chat Moss to the bays you just add another avoidable pathing problem to the WCML timetable.

If the reality is that extra capacity is required to and through Manchester then a way will have to be found to provide it. Telling passengers that their journeys should be more awkward or less comfortable as a result of an upgrade is surely not the way forward. We should not be repeating the mistake made with Metrolink conversion of the Sale line damaging access to Manchester from the Mid-Cheshire line. Indeed arguably the issue of capacity along the Castlefield corridor should have been dealt with then: let's it get right this time!

What will the capacity of the Bolton-M/c line be post modernisation/electrification? If it is at least 10 tph, it should be able to accommodate 4 tph towards Wigan as well as 4 tph towards Preston and 2 tph towards Blackburn. I am assuming that no trains from M/c are planned to terminate at Bolton - please correct me if this is wrong.

 

[Chester1]

ATW do not run 2 and 3-car trains by choice! That is all they have, and I am sure they would prefer to operate longer trains than have a crush on almost every service east of Chester - even in the middle of the day.

Not many now sojourn in the Mayfield loop, as the return extension to the Airport is just managed in the time available. As to being diverted through Victoria, the extension to the Airport has been a long time in coming, and I'm sure more attractive. Somehow, Bangor to Stalybridge or Llandudno to Rochdale doesn't have the same appeal.

The airport paths have only been granted temporarily. There will always be a miss match between demand east and west of Chester. This is why the Northern Connect service from Chester to Leeds was neccessary but the problem will then increase when Holyhead-Cardiff goes hourly and again if any services run through the Halton Curve and along the coast. 3 cars will be fine for west of Chester but will become inadequate east of Chester. In the long term the target should be for 4-9 coach trains between Castlefield and Piccadilly.

What are the cost estimates for Tram Trains to Wigan combined with a tunnel under Manchester city centre? Must be multiples of rebuilding Oxford Road and building P15/16.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The airport paths have only been granted temporarily. There will always be a miss match between demand east and west of Chester. This is why the Northern Connect service from Chester to Leeds was neccessary but the problem will then increase when Holyhead-Cardiff goes hourly and again if any services run through the Halton Curve and along the coast. 3 cars will be fine for west of Chester but will become inadequate east of Chester.

Then rather than cramming in more short trains, portion work. This is already done in the UK - Southern seem to be the ones who use it to best effect.

I'm not convinced 3 will be adequate on the Coast for very long, anyway.

 

[jayah]

Then rather than cramming in more short trains, portion work. This is already done in the UK - Southern seem to be the ones who use it to best effect.

I'm not convinced 3 will be adequate on the Coast for very long, anyway.

Quite right. All these massive infrastructure projects to cure a non-existant crowding problem.

Manchester should be a minimum 4/8 car railway with portion working to provide through services at the extremities. Ordering a new fleet of 2/3 car units is crazy.

Lots of cabs, lots of drivers, lots of cost.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

What will the capacity of the Bolton-M/c line be post modernisation/electrification? If it is at least 10 tph, it should be able to accommodate 4 tph towards Wigan as well as 4 tph towards Preston and 2 tph towards Blackburn. I am assuming that no trains from M/c are planned to terminate at Bolton - please correct me if this is wrong.

The problem in the short term is the mix of slower diesels with faster electrics between Bolton and Manchester remembering that there is also the need to serve the intermediate stations as well. It seems that there is a reluctance to have more than 2tph diesels which will both be Blackburn line services with Wigan via Westhoughton eventually being electrified but a very obvious candidate for 769s until then. These trains are intended to be terminated using the bays at North Western station as there is no plan yet for electrifying through Wallgate which itself needs to overcome the clearance issue of the bridge there. The connection between the Hindley lines and North Western being single track imposes a timetable limitation as well as a performance risk for the 4tph service from Wallgate to the Atherton line. The overall service levels look about right to me but how to deal with any further passenger growth, especially on the Atherton line, could very quickly cause further headaches.

Meaning that:

Then rather than cramming in more short trains, portion work. This is already done in the UK - Southern seem to be the ones who use it to best effect.

I'm not convinced 3 will be adequate on the Coast for very long, anyway.

... could have some merit. It depends what method of working is adopted. If the portions then work separate routes going forward it needs the timetables to be carefully designed which could be an issue if there is any single line working involved. So Manchester-Bolton-Wigan could divide for Southport and Kirkby and with the time for a round trip from Wigan being roughly the same on each route a timetable would not not be difficult to design apart from the need to account for the single line between Rainford and Kirkby. If one portion is simply a strengthening unit for part of the route than there needs to be a siding arrangement of some sort to accommodate the extra unit between workings. The third alternative is portions continuing as separate fast and slow services which also creates certain timetabling challenges; this method could well be appropriate along the North Wales Coast.

But the issue of platform lengths will remain. One difference between the North and the South is that during past rationalisations many northern stations had their platforms cut back in some way, something which seems to have been less prevalent in the South. Sooner or later that nettle will also have to be grasped.

 

[scrapy]

So passengers in the Wigan area should accept a lower standard of service as part of a grand plan. Given that various stations will soon be losing their direct services to Piccadilly (apart from a couple of peak-hour trains) and all their services to the Airport I do not think you could sell them any further downgrades.



Still sticking to the idea of just 3tph from Wigan to Manchester? Not acceptable. Or if you want extras via Chat Moss to the bays you just add another avoidable pathing problem to the WCML timetable.

Post May 18 Wigan will have 7 trains per hour to Manchester

3 from North Western (2 via Bolton and 1 via Chat Moss)
4 from Wallgate via Atherton (2 most stops, 2 semi fast)

There will also be 1 extra hourly train on a Sunday via Atherton making 4tph to Manchester.

 

[fowler9]

I wouldn't be surprised to see it cancelled. AFAIK it is currently going through the "test" for value for money.

That test being "Is it in London? No. It's cancelled".

 

[Chester1]

Quite right. All these massive infrastructure projects to cure a non-existant crowding problem.

Manchester should be a minimum 4/8 car railway with portion working to provide through services at the extremities. Ordering a new fleet of 2/3 car units is crazy.

Lots of cabs, lots of drivers, lots of cost.

8 car units would need a lot of platform lengthenings, most notably Oxford Road needing to be rebuilt which would require either Deansgate closure or P15/16, which takes us back to square one... The maximum standard size through Piccadilly-Castlefield that could be introduced at reasonable cost would probably be 4x20m to 6x23m. That would still require some infrastructure works at smaller stations.

 

[158756]

Manchester should be a minimum 4/8 car railway with portion working to provide through services at the extremities. Ordering a new fleet of 2/3 car units is crazy.

Lots of cabs, lots of drivers, lots of cost.

2/3 car is what demand justifies though, with doubling up at peak times on commuter routes, so unless you're going to join everything together at Stockport or Bolton (and thus greatly reduce service at some of the busiest stations, whilst still needing most of the staff) it would cost even more to carry around eight carriages with passengers few enough for three.

 

[northwichcat]

4.1 Alongside statements made on the 20 July the Secretary of State
reaffirmed that he has asked Network Rail to understand if digital
technology can be used to deliver the much needed increase in capacity
at Piccadilly Station.

4.2 As we know the Transport and Works Act Order for new platforms 15 and
16 at Piccadilly were submitted for consideration almost two years ago and
we are yet to hear a conclusion from the process.

4.3 As part of the original Northern Hub proposal, significant infrastructure
investment was committed that would see two additional platforms built at
the station alongside enhancements made to the rail routes across the
north.

4.4 We are very concerned about the ongoing uncertainty associated with the
scheme and what the recent announcements indicate, this central
Manchester rail corridor is the busiest in Greater Manchester and a key
route for services across the north.

4.5 Piccadilly’s platforms 13 and 14 are congested today and passengers often
suffer delays due to overcrowding.

4.6 We must ensure that Piccadilly Station is sufficiently futureproofed, not just
for today’s passengers but a future generation where HS2 and Northern
Powerhouse services convene.

4.7 We will actively work with Government and Network Rail to ensure that
future solutions and developments deliver increased opportunity to operate
more and longer trains, providing greater customer capacity and regional
connectivity.

https://www.greatermanchester-ca.go...16/transport_for_greater_manchester_committee

 

[Killingworth]

Chickens are now coming home to roost as the increased congestion on both the tracks and Platforms 13 and 14 through Piccadilly is exporting delays around the country. If anything goes wrong there the potential for chaos is far too great.

It's not just a Manchester, or even North-West issue. The reverbations are extending as far as Scotland, Wales, Norwich, Newcastle and Bournemouth. The present mess may just make the DfT and our political leaders realise a decision on 15 and 16 is long overdue. Getting it all built may take a decade even after approval, so chaos will reign for quite some time yet.

 

[Sceptre]

It's fine, the Transpennine route becoming a "digital railway" will clearly solve most of the problems, with bi-modes solving the rest.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Chickens are now coming home to roost as the increased congestion on both the tracks and Platforms 13 and 14 through Piccadilly is exporting delays around the country. If anything goes wrong there the potential for chaos is far too great.

It's not just a Manchester, or even North-West issue. The reverbations are extending as far as Scotland, Wales, Norwich, Newcastle and Bournemouth. The present mess may just make the DfT and our political leaders realise a decision on 15 and 16 is long overdue. Getting it all built may take a decade even after approval, so chaos will reign for quite some time yet.

Although there's no denying that problems on the stretch west of Piccadilly can indeed reverberate over a wide area the existence, or not, of platforms 15/16 would actually make little difference. Most of the congestion is arising due to trains arriving in Manchester being due for a change of driver but none being available due to a shortage of such people, predominantly at Northern. This leads to trains effectively being abandoned in the platform. In fact to reduce the impact of such occurrences it has long been the practice to avoid crew changeovers at Piccadilly and they take place at Oxford Road where there is at least the possibility of other trains overtaking one which has become "stranded". Until such time as two get stuck at the same time. Which has been happening recently!

The problem is much worse across the city at Victoria but the re-routing of some TPE trains via the Ordsall chord means problems there can impact Piccadilly rather more easily than before. Until such time as Northern gets on top of its staffing issues it really isn't possible to say that the new timetable is unworkable. The size of the staff shortage means almost any timetable would lack resilience.

 

[Killingworth]

It's fine, the Transpennine route becoming a "digital railway" will clearly solve most of the problems, with bi-modes solving the rest.

Of course, the East Midlands Liverpool-Norwich is likely to be remapped to TP so overloaded 2 coach 158s will at least become over loaded 3 coach 185s, magic.

A train that should have 4 coaches to Nottingham has difficulty with 2. Arriving at Oxford Road it will be besieged, leavers struggling to get off as more try to pile on. The human pressure adds up to delays, then compounded at Piccadilly when once again passengers pushing to get out meet others pushing to get in. Recent joiners from Oxford Road may have to get out, then back in again. The late arriving train stays longer than booked and leaves even later having left perhaps 50-100 passengers for the next TP service.

At Stockport the process starts again and many with booked seats stand all the 40 miles from Manchester to Dore & Totley.

Digital will help, but longer and less frequent trains might help more, at least until we get more tracks to keep the trains out of each others' way!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree with @Killingworth's post. What they seem to be trying to do is to replicate the Thameslink core, but without ATO, without wide doors and accessible interiors, without the high capacity, and without the uniformity.

It should be obvious that that will never work.

 

[Altfish]

It's fine, the Transpennine route becoming a "digital railway" will clearly solve most of the problems, with bi-modes solving the rest.

And flying pigs will fill in any gaps.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Although there's no denying that problems on the stretch west of Piccadilly can indeed reverberate over a wide area the existence, or not, of platforms 15/16 would actually make little difference. Most of the congestion is arising due to trains arriving in Manchester being due for a change of driver but none being available due to a shortage of such people, predominantly at Northern. This leads to trains effectively being abandoned in the platform. In fact to reduce the impact of such occurrences it has long been the practice to avoid crew changeovers at Piccadilly and they take place at Oxford Road where there is at least the possibility of other trains overtaking one which has become "stranded". Until such time as two get stuck at the same time. Which has been happening recently!

The problem is much worse across the city at Victoria but the re-routing of some TPE trains via the Ordsall chord means problems there can impact Piccadilly rather more easily than before. Until such time as Northern gets on top of its staffing issues it really isn't possible to say that the new timetable is unworkable. The size of the staff shortage means almost any timetable would lack resilience.

This.

But we can at least hope the chaos makes something happen.

 

[jayah]

2/3 car is what demand justifies though, with doubling up at peak times on commuter routes, so unless you're going to join everything together at Stockport or Bolton (and thus greatly reduce service at some of the busiest stations, whilst still needing most of the staff) it would cost even more to carry around eight carriages with passengers few enough for three.

If that is actually true and I very much doubt 120 seats in/out of Leeds/Manchester/Liverpool etc....off-peak it is, then there should be fewer trains. You cannot bang the congestion drum while maxing out the track capacity with tiny trains that barely move the load of a double deck bus.

 

[edwin_m]

If that is actually true and I very much doubt 120 seats in/out of Leeds/Manchester/Liverpool etc....off-peak it is, then there should be fewer trains. You cannot bang the congestion drum while maxing out the track capacity with tiny trains that barely move the load of a double deck bus.

Most of the routes are no more than half-hourly off-peak, and going down to an hourly service wouldn't be sensible. Also in the North the peak service isn't much more than the off-peak - mostly just a few tweaks to get an extra train in the busiest period which often results in a big gap a bit later or contra-peak.

 

[jayah]

Most of the routes are no more than half-hourly off-peak, and going down to an hourly service wouldn't be sensible. Also in the North the peak service isn't much more than the off-peak - mostly just a few tweaks to get an extra train in the busiest period which often results in a big gap a bit later or contra-peak.

Well perhaps they need to look at joining and splitting trains then. Running a maxed out 13/14 for 16 hours a day if the trains are carrying 100 passengers is daft, if that is actually what happens. Given how crowded TPE is, I suspect what is actually needed is an end to 2/3 car trains even off peak.

 

[Ianno87]

Of course, the East Midlands Liverpool-Norwich is likely to be remapped to TP so overloaded 2 coach 158s will at least become over loaded 3 coach 185s, magic.

A train that should have 4 coaches to Nottingham has difficulty with 2. Arriving at Oxford Road it will be besieged, leavers struggling to get off as more try to pile on. The human pressure adds up to delays, then compounded at Piccadilly when once again passengers pushing to get out meet others pushing to get in. Recent joiners from Oxford Road may have to get out, then back in again. The late arriving train stays longer than booked and leaves even later having left perhaps 50-100 passengers for the next TP service.

At Stockport the process starts again and many with booked seats stand all the 40 miles from Manchester to Dore & Totley.

Digital will help, but longer and less frequent trains might help more, at least until we get more tracks to keep the trains out of each others' way!

I thought Liverpool-Norwich were nearly all 4 cars on the Liverpool-Nottingham leg these days?

 

[TheGarner]

I thought Liverpool-Norwich were nearly all 4 cars on the Liverpool-Nottingham leg these days?

They are typically - Some times they will show up with 2 but most of the time it's 4 cars for EMT. Well it is at the times I travel.

 

[Altfish]

They are typically - Some times they will show up with 2 but most of the time it's 4 cars for EMT. Well it is at the times I travel.

Yes, they are 4-car to Nottingham then they split for the journey to Norwich.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well perhaps they need to look at joining and splitting trains then. Running a maxed out 13/14 for 16 hours a day if the trains are carrying 100 passengers is daft, if that is actually what happens. Given how crowded TPE is, I suspect what is actually needed is an end to 2/3 car trains even off peak.

I can't see any case for operating any 2-car train over the Castlefield line whatsoever. 2-car trains are for branch lines. If there's only demand for 2 cars (other than late evening and similar) portion-work or operate quality planned connections.

I'll give TPE an exception on their 3-car trains because demand (including suppressed demand) will easily fill 5 - just wait and see when they get them. I'm still betting the 5-car trains will all end up 6 or 7-car by the franchise end if it can be afforded - and if it can't they'll be just as rammed as the 185s are now.

 

[Altfish]

I'll give TPE an exception on their 3-car trains because demand (including suppressed demand) will easily fill 5 - just wait and see when they get them. I'm still betting the 5-car trains will all end up 6 or 7-car by the franchise end if it can be afforded - and if it can't they'll be just as rammed as the 185s are now.

Because we're up north they will probably add a Pacer onto the back.

 

[dggar]

Of course, the East Midlands Liverpool-Norwich is likely to be remapped to TP so overloaded 2 coach 158s will at least become over loaded 3 coach 185s, magic.

A train that should have 4 coaches to Nottingham has difficulty with 2. Arriving at Oxford Road it will be besieged, leavers struggling to get off as more try to pile on. The human pressure adds up to delays, then compounded at Piccadilly when once again passengers pushing to get out meet others pushing to get in. Recent joiners from Oxford Road may have to get out, then back in again. The late arriving train stays longer than booked and leaves even later having left perhaps 50-100 passengers for the next TP service.

At Stockport the process starts again and many with booked seats stand all the 40 miles from Manchester to Dore & Totley.

Digital will help, but longer and less frequent trains might help more, at least until we get more tracks to keep the trains out of each others' way!

When did you last see an EMT train at Oxford road with just 2 coaches during normal working hours?