Should all Scottish TPE services terminate at Manchester Victoria?

[td97]

It could run to/from Victoria instead; there are plenty of other services running between Ringway and Preston/Lancaster/Oxenholme, and I doubt demand to the airport is particularly high from north of there (as both Scottish cities have their own considerably-sized airports) - the primary demand is Manchester to Scotland plus additional WCML capacity.

Killing 2 stones with one bird in the meantime. Reduced congestion through Castlefield enabling longer carriages, and hence more capacity.
Culling the service at Victoria would give the following direct Airport services:

• Bolton: 1tph (BPN-MIA)
• Preston: 1tph (BPN-MIA), 1tph (BIF/WDM-MIA)
• Lancaster: 1tph (BIF/WDM-MIA) once the call is reinstated
• Oxenholme: 1tp3h (WDM-MIA)
• Penrith, Carlisle, Lockerbie, Motherwell, Glasgow, Edinburgh: no longer commuter/tourist stops, and in my view, undeserving of a direct airport service which is detrimental to performance across the network (see below).

The more this comes up, the more I think it is the first service which should be cut back from the Airport. Scottish customers win too, not being constantly delayed by Castlefield congestion.

The main drawback in my opinion is the loss of connectivity at Oxford Road and Piccadilly (especially) with business travellers. But equally opens new opportunities at Victoria/Spinningfields/NOMA which are presently not served and large business hubs.

Looking at today's services so far from OXN to MIA (arrival times at MIA):
WTT 0843 0853 Glasgow Central 1 1M90 TP Terminates here

WTT 0945 Cancel Edinburgh - 1M91 TP Terminates here
WTT 1043 Cancel Glasgow Central - 1M92 TP Terminates here
WTT 1143 Cancel Edinburgh - 1M93 TP Terminates here
WTT 1221 1218 Windermere 3 1U80 NT Terminates here
WTT 1243 1305½ Glasgow Central 1 1M94 TP Terminates here
WTT 1343 Cancel Edinburgh - 1M95 TP Terminates here

The only service to have arrived at the Airport on time (actually 2E) was the Northern 1221 arrival.
TPE's miserable attempt of 2/5 arrivals were 10L and 22L. There's been some trouble on the WCML this afternoon, but the first 5 services were unaffected by that.

It's worth noting that 1M93 (0825 GLC to MCV) and 1S56 (1231 MCV to EDB) are SuO services already using MCV. They make use of the reversing siding to clear the platforms between arrival/departure.
I've averaged the past 12 week's arrival data (SuO) and displayed the % arrivals RT-5L as:
GLC-MCV: 75%
EDB-MIA: 61.6%
GLC-MIA: 78.6%
Scotland-MIA: 68.7%

MCV-EDB:67%
MIA-EDB: 49.4%
MIA-GLC: 76.1%
MIA-Scotland: 65%
(Source: https://www.recenttraintimes.co.uk/)
Clearly, the MCV services have above-average punctuality.

Thoughts...?

Glossary:
TPE/TP: TransPennine Express
NT: Northern
SuO: Sundays only
BPN: Blackpool North
BIF: Barrow in Furness
OXN: Oxenholme Lake District
WDM: Windermere
MIA: Manchester Airport
GLC: Glasgow Central
EDB: Edinburgh
MCV: Manchester Victoria

 

[JonathanH]

Running to Manchester Victoria doesn't really solve anything - you would have to swap something else from Victoria to Piccadilly and the Castlefield corridor to free up a platform at Victoria - where does the unit go once it has arrived? The reversing siding appears to currently be in use by Northern to stable a 319.

The stabling for 397s is on the South side of Manchester so trains at the start and end of the day might have to go to Piccadilly anyway.

 

[yorksrob]

I can remember when the NR strikes were on, I used to travel between Lancaster and Sheffield using the TPE from Scotland. It was actually a pretty good connection at Piccadilly.

 

[Ianno87]

Just strikes me as shoving the problem to Victoria. Only option would be to run it through to turn back at Rochdale/Stalybridge (the former involves less conflicting/crossing moves), but chewing up the turnback platform at the expense of a local service using it. Of course, both would require electrification as well!

And as @yorksrob points out, gives quite a decent connection from Sheffield/Nottingham etc. towards Glasgow.

 

[td97]

where does the unit go once it has arrived? The reversing siding appears to currently be in use by Northern to stable a 319.

Eccles siding also an option

 

[Ianno87]

Eccles siding also an option

That's two extra paths each hour across Ordsall Lane, defeating the point...and assumes a freight doesn't need the loop (nor an out of path passenger working)

 

[mcmad]

You'd be surprised how many people from Scotland travel to Manchester Airport, how many travel by train though?

 

[faltskog36abba]

Just strikes me as shoving the problem to Victoria. Only option would be to run it through to turn back at Rochdale/Stalybridge (the former involves less conflicting/crossing moves), but chewing up the turnback platform at the expense of a local service using it. Of course, both would require electrification as well!

And as @yorksrob points out, gives quite a decent connection from Sheffield/Nottingham etc. towards Glasgow.

Running to Manchester Victoria doesn't really solve anything - you would have to swap something else from Victoria to Piccadilly and the Castlefield corridor to free up a platform at Victoria - where does the unit go once it has arrived? The reversing siding appears to currently be in use by Northern to stable a 319.

The stabling for 397s is on the South side of Manchester so trains at the start and end of the day might have to go to Piccadilly anyway.

I thought there were plans to stable the electric services on the east side of the station layout-319 trains terminating from Preston. Could the Liverpool stoppers go in there too? They are only used in the peaks - That would then free up the west end siding -If electrified.

 

[ChrisC]

I can remember when the NR strikes were on, I used to travel between Lancaster and Sheffield using the TPE from Scotland. It was actually a pretty good connection at Piccadilly.

I’ve often noticed that quite a considerable number of people who get off the EMR Norwich to Liverpool train at Manchester Piccadilly remain on Platform 14 for connections to Preston and beyond. Presumably most of these passengers are from Nottingham, Chesterfield, Sheffield etc.

 

[cle]

I guess which has the greater airport demand - Barrow/Windermere or the Scottish cities?
But if getting to Oxford Road and Piccadilly is the real issue, then it's more difficult to resolve.

And what are we trying to do, remove/replace a Castlefield service or an airport line service (e.g. one could run to Stockport or whatever) ?

 

[JonathanH]

I guess which has the greater airport demand - Barrow/Windermere or the Scottish cities?
But if getting to Oxford Road and Piccadilly is the real issue, then it's more difficult to resolve.

How is this an either / or issue?

The practical issue is how to best deal with running a train from Scotland to Manchester. Victoria isn't really suitable unless the train runs through and the routes at the east end aren't electrified - e.g. you could run Glasgow to Leeds via Manchester Victoria if the whole route was electrified.

Terminating at Piccadilly isn't ideal because of dwell time - going to the Airport is a practical end point that allows a layover with termination at Piccadilly a last resort if the train is late - similar kind of principle to the West Wales to Birmingham trains which used to get cut back at Wolverhampton in late running when they only went to New Street but now go on to International and only get cut back to New Street when there are problems.

 

[158756]

Looking at today's services so far from OXN to MIA (arrival times at MIA):
WTT 0843 0853 Glasgow Central 1 1M90 TP Terminates here

WTT 0945 Cancel Edinburgh - 1M91 TP Terminates here
WTT 1043 Cancel Glasgow Central - 1M92 TP Terminates here
WTT 1143 Cancel Edinburgh - 1M93 TP Terminates here
WTT 1221 1218 Windermere 3 1U80 NT Terminates here
WTT 1243 1305½ Glasgow Central 1 1M94 TP Terminates here
WTT 1343 Cancel Edinburgh - 1M95 TP Terminates here

The only service to have arrived at the Airport on time (actually 2E) was the Northern 1221 arrival.
TPE's miserable attempt of 2/5 arrivals were 10L and 22L. There's been some trouble on the WCML this afternoon, but the first 5 services were unaffected by that.

You may have a good case about unreliability caused by Castlefield problems, but apart from the 0843 arrival all of those TPE trains this morning were delayed by issues a long way from Manchester.

 

[td97]

people who get off the EMR Norwich to Liverpool train at Manchester Piccadilly remain on Platform 14 for connections to Preston and beyond.

And would still be able to with Northern

And what are we trying to do, remove/replace a Castlefield service or an airport line service

The discussion stems from the Class 397 thread where it was proposed to:
Increase carriages on the TPE Scottish services to a length which rules out terminating at MIA, which could provide an opportunity to remove congestion from Castlefield at the same time

You may have a good case about unreliability caused by Castlefield problems, but apart from the 0843 arrival all of those TPE trains this morning were delayed by issues a long way from Manchester.

Even better a reason to remove them from Castlefield.

 

[route101]

I’ve often noticed that quite a considerable number of people who get off the EMR Norwich to Liverpool train at Manchester Piccadilly remain on Platform 14 for connections to Preston and beyond. Presumably most of these passengers are from Nottingham, Chesterfield, Sheffield etc.

Nottingham to Glasgow with a connection at Stockport was handy in the summer..

 

[tpjm]

Not convinced by this plan as there are a good deal of customers who travel down from Carlisle and Lancaster into Manchester Airport. A true intercity offer is what these people deserve - not to have to change at MCV - otherwise they might as well change at Preston and curtail the TPE service there!