Platform 15 and 16 project at Manchester Piccadilly.

[Bletchleyite]

not have to board trains for onward connections in scrum-like conditions with luggage

That needs solving generally - it is not only airport passengers who are adversely affected by it. Three DMUs released by not extending the terminating TPE services from the east to the Airport would be a good start at trying to address it.

 

[B&I]

A significant number of TPE services throughout their network are heavily overcrowded at all times of day. It'd be easier to say which are *not*.

In particular, morning Liverpool-Manchester services (and vice versa in the evening) and westbound evening peak trains from Leeds. Also seen full trains leaving Newcastle in the evening peak - had to stand from Newcastle to Huddersfield last time I took one

 

[B&I]

Major carriers choose to serve Manchester *because* it's so well-connected to virtually the entire north of England.

Imagine if other airports were as well-connected. Maybe there'd be scope for more even distribution of services

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Imagine if other airports were as well-connected. Maybe there'd be scope for more even distribution of services

We are discussing matters of actual reality, not of comparitive aspiration.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That needs solving generally - it is not only airport passengers who are adversely affected by it. Three DMUs released by not extending the terminating TPE services from the east to the Airport would be a good start at trying to address it.

Why do you wish Manchester airport bound travellers who have travelled from the Newcastle and the Middlesbrough areas to find themselves a matter of a few miles away from their destination, then being forced to decamp with all their children and associated luggage and have to then work their way across a station to another shuttle train in order to complete their journey to the airport.

This has all the makings of another Grayling "Harrying of the North",

 

[Bantamzen]

That needs solving generally - it is not only airport passengers who are adversely affected by it. Three DMUs released by not extending the terminating TPE services from the east to the Airport would be a good start at trying to address it.

And I agree, the new 802s which will start to replace some if not all airport runs will go some way towards solving that. But airport passengers, especially long haul ones are far more likely to have heavy luggage that needs space, and are far more likely to be put off using trains at all if a) There isn't enough space for them & b) If changes are difficult, and numerous.

As I said in my previous post, passengers using TPEs (for example) to and from the airport aren't likely to end their journey at one of the stations on the direct route. It is more likely that they will make a least one change, an possibly a change of mode as well along their journey. So as a relatively new rail connection, it makes little sense in either scaling back the airport services or creating a shuttle service that would make the route less attractive & of course longer. London has put up with similar this is true, but frankly Heathrow needs better connectivity especially with the planned new runway. Just because it has been true of the capital in the past, does not necessarily make it true for Manchester or indeed any other airport that might one day find itself connected in some way to the rail network.

 

[driver_m]

Why do you wish Manchester airport bound travellers who have travelled from the Newcastle and the Middlesbrough areas to find themselves a matter of a few miles away from their destination, then being forced to decamp with all their children and associated luggage and have to then work their way across a station to another shuttle train in order to complete their journey to the airport.

This has all the makings of another Grayling "Harrying of the North",

Paul, he's like a stuck record on the subject, doesn't live here, yet is deciding for us what's best. It'd be like me or you saying what's best for around Strathclyde or Kent.

 

[B&I]

Bantamzen, the conflict at the Piccadilly throat, between Guide Bridge-Oxford Rd and terminating trains could have been (and partially was) resolved without the Ordsall Chord, by sending Liverpool TPEs to Victoria. What other problems was the Chord meant to solve which weren't airport-related ?

Yes, the priority given to serving the airport is not the only problem facing rail in the north, and yes, if decades of underinvestment had not happened we would not have this problem (though I suspect if the 70s plans had gone through miat airport passengers would be changing to some sort of metro service in downtown Manchester to reach the airport). However, as things are the airport is undoubtedly a subatantial spanner in the works.

One solution, perhaps as an alternative to extra Piccadilly platforms, would be the western airport link. The most obvious benefit of this would be that the Mid-Cheshire line service could be combined with stoppers to the airport from central Manchester. However, in addition the western link could be used for services to the airport from north Wales, Liverpool, Blackpool and Glasgow / Edinburgh. The north Wales and Liverpool trains could continue via the Styal line to terminate at the low numbered Piccadilly platforms. The Blackpool and Scotland trains (which would also connect Preston, Wigan and Warrington Bank Quay to the airport) could use the airport line as a loop, with trains which reach the airport via the western link heading back north via the Styal line and platforms 13 & 14, and trains which call first at platforms 13 & 14 continuing north by the western link.

In addition to removing some of the pressure on platforms 13 & 14, and a variety of other incidental benefits (connecting other lines to the field-west-of-the-airport HS2 station, enabling direct airport services from places like Runcorn, Chester, and Northwich) this would allow us to observe how many people actually use airport-bound trains to reach the airport, as opposed to central Manchester.

 

[Killingworth]

Why, for example, is there no Airport-Stockport service ?

But there is, an hourly TPE on the South Pennine route. It's also a fairly easy drive from Stockport to the airport, especially now the South Manchester relief road is almost complete.

 

[Bantamzen]

As has been pointed out frequently before, the conflict at the Piccadilly throat between trains heading betweeb platfirms 13 & 14 and Guide Bridge, and everything else, could be, and largely was, solved without the Ordsall Chord by diverting Liverpool TPE services through Victoria. The TPE 'airport reversal' problem only arose from the desire to send so many trains to the airport. So what non-airport related problems was the Chord meant to solve ?

Yes, the priority given to serving the airport is not the only problem facing rail in the north, and yes, if decades of underinvestment had not happened we would not have this problem (though I suspect if the 70s plans had gone through miat airport passengers would be changing to some sort of metro service in downtown Manchester to reach the airport). However, as things are the airport is undoubtedly a aubatantial spanner in the works.

One solution, perhaps as an alternative to extra Piccadilly platforms, would be the western airport link. The most obvious benefit of this would be that the Mid-Cheshire line service could be combined with stoppers to the airport from central Manchester. However, in addition the western link could be used for services to the airport from north Wales, Liverpool, Blackpool and Glasgow / Edinburgh. The north Wales and Liverpool trains could continue via the Styal line to terminate at the low numbered Piccadilly platforms. The Blackpool and Scotland trains (which would also connect Preston, Wigan and Warrington Bank Quay to the airport) could use the airport line as a loop, with trains which reach the airport via the western link heading back north via the Styal line and platforms 13 & 14, and trains which call first at platforms 13 & 14 continuing north by the western link.

In addition to removing some of the pressure on platforms 13 & 14, this would allow us to observe how many people actually use airport-bound trains to reach the airport, as opposed to central Manchester.

Whilst I totally agree with the Western Link, I'm unclear as to how this would help define numbers heading towards the airport? Given that most services terminate there, it is more or less a given that passengers heading there plan to use or work at it surely? And the growth in passenger entrances / exits since 2013/14 is surely evidence that as connectivity has improved, demand has increased. Plus all of this is before Manchester expand their operations further, with improvements such as US security pre-clearances, larger terminals and facilities, more long haul flights & more gates to allow more flights overall. All these will mean more demand to get to the airport, and with very limited road options from parts of the North, particularly from the far side of the Pennines, rail has to be seen as a expanding option, not contracting.

 

[edwin_m]

There is a powerful disincentive if getting there imvolves a long, expensive and convoluted journey into central Manchester first. Why, for example, is there no Airport-Stockport service ?

The Airport-Cleethorpes calls at Stockport, but I doubt may people use it between those two stations. It runs via Piccadilly but there is no other route available.

 

[AndrewE]

But there is, an hourly TPE on the South Pennine route. It's also a fairly easy drive from Stockport to the airport, especially now the South Manchester relief road is almost complete.

There is also a half-hourly non-stop bus service that takes 20 mins compared with the train's 34!

 

[Puffing Devil]

Curious to know why terminating the Cleethorpes service at Picadilly would save a DMU as the route from Stockport to Cleethorpes is not electrified?

I do like the idea of making some of the TPE services stoppers between Piccadilly and the Airport. This would give local service with a small extension to journey times.

 

[Chester1]

There is also a half-hourly non-stop bus service that takes 20 mins compared with the train's 34!

The Skylink serves the bus station and A6 stops so is more convenient for many people, especially airport employees. Its also better for most people near Buxton line stations heading to or from the airport.

 

[AndrewE]

The Skylink serves the bus station and A6 stops so is more convenient for many people, especially airport employees. Its also better for most people near Buxton line stations heading to or from the airport.

From what I can see the skylink is the set of elevated walkways from the railway station and its bus stops to the terminals. Do you mean the 199 bus that I am talking about? If so, the bus people don't name it on their timetable (that I could see.)

 

[B&I]

We are discussing matters of actual reality, not of comparitive aspiration.

So we're not allowed to discuss how the current reality has xome about, and how it may change in future ? Must add that to the (long) list of 'things that must not be discussed on railforums.co.uk'

 

[B&I]

But there is, an hourly TPE on the South Pennine route. It's also a fairly easy drive from Stockport to the airport, especially now the South Manchester relief road is almost complete.

You're quite right. I hadn't thought about that because my brain didn't register a service which requires goinf into Piccadilly and out again as a sensible connection

 

[B&I]

Whilst I totally agree with the Western Link, I'm unclear as to how this would help define numbers heading towards the airport? Given that most services terminate there, it is more or less a given that passengers heading there plan to use or work at it surely? And the growth in passenger entrances / exits since 2013/14 is surely evidence that as connectivity has improved, demand has increased. Plus all of this is before Manchester expand their operations further, with improvements such as US security pre-clearances, larger terminals and facilities, more long haul flights & more gates to allow more flights overall. All these will mean more demand to get to the airport, and with very limited road options from parts of the North, particularly from the far side of the Pennines, rail has to be seen as a expanding option, not contracting.

Because, if Liverpool and north Wales have direct services to the airport distinct from their services ro.Manchester, and the other places I mentioned have services which either go to central Manchester first or the airport first, there will be distinct, measurable passenger flows to the airport, as opposed to, to central Manchester and the airport.

Btw an alternative to boundless growth at Manchester Airport is a slump in numbers if Brexit leads to economic disaster and / or a substantial reduction in travel to and from Britain.

 

[AndrewE]

You're quite right. I hadn't thought about that because my brain didn't register a service which requires goinf into Piccadilly and out again as a sensible connection

It's not a sensible connection - for travel between the airport and Stockport, & it's not meant to be. It's a very useful extension of an existing long-distance service to save people changing trains, like the services from the north-east... although they might be the best option for passengers from (say) Stalybridge if they stopped there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Imagine if other airports were as well-connected. Maybe there'd be scope for more even distribution of services

The main ones essentially are, other than possibly Heathrow, though that is well connected to London at least, which is by far its main traffic generator.

The secondary ones which have got very big very quickly on low-cost - the likes of Liverpool - have done so so quickly public transport couldn't catch up. I think Merseyrail will go to Liverpool Airport at some point in the medium term, possibly instead of Hunts Cross or possibly alternating with half hourly to each (or even, if more stock can be afforded, by extending the Ormskirks or Kirkbys through). Others may get similar upgrades - Luton is soon to get a "people mover" to the station rather than the inadequate shuttle bus, for instance.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why do you wish Manchester airport bound travellers who have travelled from the Newcastle and the Middlesbrough areas to find themselves a matter of a few miles away from their destination, then being forced to decamp with all their children and associated luggage and have to then work their way across a station to another shuttle train in order to complete their journey to the airport.

Because, as I said, there are more important uses for the rolling stock and paths. Most air travel is very discretionary, most other local rail use is not, or not so much. The latter must surely take priority.

As for luggage, it really isn't a problem. As I said they will need to pull it along the elevated tunnels to the terminals, which is far further than P1-P12 at Picc. People who have mobility issues such that that is a real problem (rather than a minor inconvenience) will take a taxi anyway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Paul, he's like a stuck record on the subject, doesn't live here, yet is deciding for us what's best. It'd be like me or you saying what's best for around Strathclyde or Kent.

I grew up in the North West, I know its rail network and demands on it very well and often use it to visit family and travel while up there. Far, far better than I know something like Greater Anglia, Southeastern or anything else in the SE that doesn't involve the WCML.

 

[Bletchleyite]

From what I can see the skylink is the set of elevated walkways from the railway station and its bus stops to the terminals. Do you mean the 199 bus that I am talking about? If so, the bus people don't name it on their timetable (that I could see.)

It's called (or was in Trent days; High Peak are less up on the branding thing) the Skyline 199 - it's supposed to rhyme, Skylink doesn't

Skyline 199 bus

 

[Bletchleyite]

Curious to know why terminating the Cleethorpes service at Picadilly would save a DMU as the route from Stockport to Cleethorpes is not electrified?

One DMU, which is required to run to the Airport and back. Without the run to the Airport and back one fewer DMU would be required for the service as a whole.

As there appear to be three hourly TPE services going to the Airport, and it's about an hour round trip, that's three DMUs overall.

 

[Altfish]

It had all gone pear-shaped on platforms 13/14 this morning. Everything 'delayed', TPE, EMT, Northern, the lot.
Platform overcrowded with people being asked to 'move down'...but they couldn't read the dot matrix signs if they did. There is currently no waiting room and no seating on these platforms. I waited for my Newcastle train then bailed out to platform 1 and caught a Hull train to Leeds - but I only did that because I knew the railways. There was no one telling the ordinary passenger.
The problem with 13/14 was highlighted though, if one train is delayed it is the knock on effect with the following trains which are waiting for a platform. The only train on time was the Trafford Park to Soton freight.

 

[Puffing Devil]

One DMU, which is required to run to the Airport and back. Without the run to the Airport and back one fewer DMU would be required for the service as a whole.

As there appear to be three hourly TPE services going to the Airport, and it's about an hour round trip, that's three DMUs overall.

Got it. Unfortunately, I suspect many of the pax on this service are airport users and the lack of a connection makes the service attractive.

 

[Bantamzen]

Btw an alternative to boundless growth at Manchester Airport is a slump in numbers if Brexit leads to economic disaster and / or a substantial reduction in travel to and from Britain.

We can't make infrastructural decisions based on something as speculative as this. We'd never get anything built on that basis (although it is starting to feel that way).

I grew up in the North West, I know its rail network and demands on it very well and often use it to visit family and travel while up there. Far, far better than I know something like Greater Anglia, Southeastern or anything else in the SE that doesn't involve the WCML.

But you seem to be ignoring the growing demands of the airport, and by proxy the infrastructure that feeds it. I know from experience, and many others will back me up, Manchester Airport is getting busier because more people are using it. In the last two full years both passenger numbers & flights grew by nearly 10%. And because of the growing route options, the market & feeding area is growing. It is not unusual for people from the North East to travel to Manchester for onward flights, and we are not just talking about bucket & spade routes either. So the TOCs have noted this growth and acted accordingly. The "well it used to be like....." argument isn't relevant in the light of both growing demand, ever increasing mobility, and demand for more destinations. Its not 'Shirley Valentine' anymore were a trip to Greece was seen as unusual and exotic!!

Because, as I said, there are more important uses for the rolling stock and paths. Most air travel is very discretionary, most other local rail use is not, or not so much. The latter must surely take priority.

So what local demand is being suppressed by airport services, save the Styal line which gets at least 2 stoppers an hour?

As for luggage, it really isn't a problem. As I said they will need to pull it along the elevated tunnels to the terminals, which is far further than P1-P12 at Picc. People who have mobility issues such that that is a real problem (rather than a minor inconvenience) will take a taxi anyway.

I disagree, I know myself as a seasoned traveller for both personal & business reasons that when planning trips I tend to balk at the idea of multiple stops when travelling with anything other than hand luggage, and avoid them whenever possible. if I were flying to the US from, say Harrogate, I'd note the two changes needed, and with potentially long walks at both Leeds & Manchester, so I'd also be looking at the price of a taxi or airport transfer service. However if there was just one change, it might be more palatable.

The trouble with sites like this is that people can forget that "normals" or non-enthusiasts don't see stations in the same light, and might like to save themselves as much effort as possible especially where they might have long walks pre & post security at the airport. Plus changes at major stations inevitably add at least 10 minutes per change, often more, under normal circumstances, even more with luggage and of course increases the risk of late or missed connections. All these add up in people's minds. I know a few years ago planning a 3 week trip to the US flying out from Heathrow I looked at the option of going via train, but the early flight time plus the hassle of getting two 23Kg bags through the LU / Heathrow Connect (the Express was just way too expensive!) to T5 & then to the Thistle where where we stayed overnight for a 09:45 flight to LA. Instead we opted for a BA shuttle down from LBA, then straight out of T5 and onto the pods straight to the hotel. Far easier, and far less hassle & stress.

 

[notlob.divad]

Given the anecdotal evidence people are giving about through traffic to the airport; It is a wonder TPE bother serving Central Manchester at all. Sounds to me like it would be more economical running all trains directly to the Airport thus making the majority of their passenger's journeys quicker. Then the handful of people who want Manchester city centre and are less likely to be carrying large luggage can change at the airport to catch a shuttle back into Picadilly.

 

[cle]

Because, as I said, there are more important uses for the rolling stock and paths. Most air travel is very discretionary, most other local rail use is not, or not so much. The latter must surely take priority.

As for luggage, it really isn't a problem. As I said they will need to pull it along the elevated tunnels to the terminals, which is far further than P1-P12 at Picc. People who have mobility issues such that that is a real problem (rather than a minor inconvenience) will take a taxi anyway.

This is the real crux. People flying from Manchester Airport 1-3 times a year for leisure are not a priority and not who we should fret about. They are too disparately located to establish patterns and most will live in suburbs rather than a walk from Newcastle or Middlesbrough stations anyway, using the given examples.

Connecting the northern cities and boosting rail commuting within GM (which is pitiful) is the priority here. As well as say 2-3 stoppers per hour, every MAN train should stop once before the airport, which seems a reasonable balance especially without the penalty of the Piccadilly reversals these days.

Ideally there could be some utilisation of the HS2 tunnel (with connectivity into the ‘classic’ airport station) to divert some of the more express services like to the NE or Scotland. And via Heald Green could become an intensive metro service - which, full circle, would 100% necessitate P15 and 16.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Got it. Unfortunately, I suspect many of the pax on this service are airport users and the lack of a connection makes the service attractive.

I'm sure it does. I'm sure services from Manchester to Liverpool (say) would also be more attractive were they all run as 6-car sets to avoid the overcrowding problem. With the present limited resources, it seems to make most sense to target the resources at the biggest need. The new stock may change that, but my *suspicion* is that they will end up full from significant suppressed demand and that if they aren't all extended to 6 or even 7-car the problem will just continue.

So what local demand is being suppressed by airport services, save the Styal line which gets at least 2 stoppers an hour?

Other overcrowded TPE services, on which three Class 185s allowing three diagrams to be doubled up would be of great benefit.

I disagree, I know myself as a seasoned traveller for both personal & business reasons that when planning trips I tend to balk at the idea of multiple stops when travelling with anything other than hand luggage, and avoid them whenever possible. if I were flying to the US from, say Harrogate, I'd note the two changes needed, and with potentially long walks at both Leeds & Manchester, so I'd also be looking at the price of a taxi or airport transfer service. However if there was just one change, it might be more palatable.

I do see your point. But I'm afraid I maintain that it is simply a poor use of a limited resource when compared to strengthening other services which are often severely overcrowded.

This is the real crux. People flying from Manchester Airport 1-3 times a year for leisure are not a priority and not who we should fret about. They are too disparately located to establish patterns and most will live in suburbs rather than a walk from Newcastle or Middlesbrough stations anyway, using the given examples.

Connecting the northern cities and boosting rail commuting within GM (which is pitiful) is the priority here. As well as say 2-3 stoppers per hour, every MAN train should stop once before the airport, which seems a reasonable balance especially without the penalty of the Piccadilly reversals these days.

Ideally there could be some utilisation of the HS2 tunnel (with connectivity into the ‘classic’ airport station) to divert some of the more express services like to the NE or Scotland. And via Heald Green could become an intensive metro service - which, full circle, would 100% necessitate P15 and 16.

Yes, this.