Should Blackpool lose TPex...

[L+Y]

A vague thought, that probably wouldn't work due to pathing constraints or whatever, but hey, I thought I'd set it down.

A couple of years back, when the line through St. Helens was blockaded for whatever reason, Northern ran a temporary hourly service from Blackpool to Ormskirk. The train ran non-stop Blackpool to Preston, before running all stops along the Ormskirk branch, in the process giving the line perhaps its best ever level of local service.

I wonder, should Blackpool lose it's Transpennine service temporarily due to electrification delays and 170 problems, could running something like this act as partial compensation? For Blackpool travellers, there'd be an hourly fast service to Preston to connect there to fast trains, and for passengers on the Ormskirk line there'd be a hugely improved level of service provision that has been called for for years.

Like I say, probably pie-in-the-sky thinking, but it was just a bit of a "mental doodle!" Any thoughts?

EDIT, this is probably in the wrong sub-forum.

 

[northwichcat]

It wouldn't make any sense to do that as Preston-Blackpool will be electrified before the Bolton line so you wouldn't free up any DMUs by cutting up the Airport-Blackpool service.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It wouldn't make any sense to do that as Preston-Blackpool will be electrified before the Bolton line so you wouldn't free up any DMUs by cutting up the Airport-Blackpool service.

No, Blackpool is later than Bolton now (2017) according to reports.
It would allow Liverpool-Wigan-Preston to go electric earlier.
But I don't think the Ormskirk single line sections can support an hourly clockface service.
While there is certainly traffic across Preston on the current Liverpool trains, my observations suggest there is a big exodus there, replaced by another lot.
Liverpool-Blackpool is not the dominant flow.

 

[northwichcat]

No, Blackpool is later than Bolton now (2017) according to reports.

There's been a lot of reports regarding electrification delays and no official confirmation. The scheduled dates are still:
Blackpool-Preston May 2016
Manchester-Bolton-Preston December 2016
Manchester-Stalybridge May 2017

A lot can happen between now and then. Work may be months behind schedule now but it may be weeks behind when it gets closer to the time.

It would allow Liverpool-Wigan-Preston to go electric earlier.

According to a post in another thread Merseytravel have confirmed Blackpool-Liverpool will remain as a through diesel service until the entire route is electrified.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There's been a lot of reports regarding electrification delays and no official confirmation. The scheduled dates are still:
Blackpool-Preston May 2016

It's not electrification delay, it's resignalling and remodelling at Blackpool.
Proposed for winter 2017.

 

[martynbristow]

No, Blackpool is later than Bolton now (2017) according to reports.
It would allow Liverpool-Wigan-Preston to go electric earlier.
But I don't think the Ormskirk single line sections can support an hourly clockface service.
While there is certainly traffic across Preston on the current Liverpool trains, my observations suggest there is a big exodus there, replaced by another lot.
Liverpool-Blackpool is not the dominant flow.

Erm is there not a passing look fitted at Rufford
I know it isn't used and you would need to improve that but I thought they out something in years back
It would give you a slight edge because you would improve your times at Preston.
Years ago there was something beyond Preston during the day i think

 

[northwichcat]

It's not electrification delay, it's resignalling and remodelling at Blackpool.
Proposed for winter 2017.

So why would that affect switching existing services to electric, if service patterns and frequency aren't revised?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

So why would that affect switching existing services to electric, if service patterns and frequency aren't revised?

Options.
If freeing up DMUs is so important, it can be done by juggling services.
If Liverpool-Blackpool services were split temporarily at Preston it would get more DMUs on other routes.
The PTEs can't complain of overcrowding if they veto changes to help solve it.

 

[northwichcat]

Options.
If freeing up DMUs is so important, it can be done by juggling services.
If Liverpool-Blackpool services were split temporarily at Preston it would get more DMUs on other routes.
The PTEs can't complain of overcrowding if they veto changes to help solve it.

That doesn't answer the question which you quoted. Why does a delayed re-signalling project mean electric trains can't operate on a line? (The 319s are shorter than some DMU formations which have run in and out of Blackpool recently - the longest I know of being a 6 car 185.)

Realistically the number of changes to routes made need to be limited, you can't just change routes every 12 months because it may release a couple of DMUs a little earlier. Yes the DMU shortage is an issue but DafT seem to think electrification will solve everything - it won't - electrification will only solve part of the problem, if it was to solve the whole problem it needed to have started in CP3. The solution which needs to be done alongside electrification is to produce new bi-mode trains, which can operate on both overheads and non-electrified section and yet again DafT have started on solutions too late.

I don't really see the point of this thread now. The idea proposed in the original post isn't a solution to the class 170/3s going to Chiltern in Spring 2015 as Blackpool won't be wired by then and the idea about cutting up Liverpool-Blackpool services has been done to death in other threads, with no official body even considering it as a viable option. It's as likely to happen as North TPE services temporarily being cut at Leeds.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

That doesn't answer the question which you quoted. Why does a delayed re-signalling project mean electric trains can't operate on a line?

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...l-investment-in-Blackpool-continues-2112.aspx

As a result of this additional investment, the Blackpool line work programme has been rescheduled, with the main works starting in mid-December 2016 and lasting approximately three months, avoiding the key holiday period for the resort

 

[northwichcat]

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...l-investment-in-Blackpool-continues-2112.aspx

So what that seems to say is they'll be one 3 month closure of the line in to Blackpool North so that the final electrification can be done concurrently with other infrastructure work, which is proposed to start in December 2016 to not clash with the popular visitor months.

That suggests to me that electric services could be introduced in the December 2016 timetable change with a replacement bus service on the final leg in and out of Blackpool until March 2017 when the work is scheduled to be complete, meaning the line's re-opened by April 2017 when the school Easter holidays will occur.

 

[martynbristow]

So what that seems to say is they'll be one 3 month closure of the line in to Blackpool North so that the final electrification can be done concurrently with other infrastructure work, which is proposed to start in December 2016 to not clash with the popular visitor months.

That suggests to me that electric services could be introduced in the December 2016 timetable change with a replacement bus service on the final leg in and out of Blackpool until March 2017 when the work is scheduled to be complete, meaning the line's re-opened by April 2017 when the school Easter holidays will occur.

3 Months!
Thats a bit excessive isn't it.
Can anyone shed any light on WHY it can't be done quicker or with some form of degraded working.
I have no business up there so i doesn't bother me but if I did I'd be disgusted if I found they wanted to strand me for 3 months :/

 

[Philip]

So what that seems to say is they'll be one 3 month closure of the line in to Blackpool North so that the final electrification can be done concurrently with other infrastructure work, which is proposed to start in December 2016 to not clash with the popular visitor months.

That suggests to me that electric services could be introduced in the December 2016 timetable change with a replacement bus service on the final leg in and out of Blackpool until March 2017 when the work is scheduled to be complete, meaning the line's re-opened by April 2017 when the school Easter holidays will occur.

No it's fairly likely that 185s will still be working to Preston/Blackpool come 2017

 

[northwichcat]

No it's fairly likely that 185s will still be working to Preston/Blackpool come 2017

Well DfT want to move the Airport-Blackpool route to Northern in early 2016, so if Preston-Blackpool closes for engineering work in December 2016 and when it re-opens Airport-Blackpool will be 100% electric I think it'll likely be EMU, subject to unit availability.

The HLOS was based on 185s being released in December 2016 to provide an additional Piccadilly-Selby service.

 

[Llama]

3 Months!
Thats a bit excessive isn't it.
Can anyone shed any light on WHY it can't be done quicker or with some form of degraded working.
I have no business up there so i doesn't bother me but if I did I'd be disgusted if I found they wanted to strand me for 3 months :/

Kirkham is being completely remodelled, Blackpool North is being completely remodelled including the carriage sidings and reconstruction of all platforms, the whole line is being resignalled with the closure of the manual boxes, Carleton MCB crossing will probably be converted to MCB-OD operation and the whole lot is being electrified. Not bad for three months really when you consider that just electrifying 26 miles or so of the Chat Moss line will have meant nearly three years of overnight closures by the time it is up and running.

 

[ValleyLines142]

No I like 185s on Blackpool services!

 

[martynbristow]

Kirkham is being completely remodelled, Blackpool North is being completely remodelled including the carriage sidings and reconstruction of all platforms, the whole line is being resignalled with the closure of the manual boxes, Carleton MCB crossing will probably be converted to MCB-OD operation and the whole lot is being electrified. Not bad for three months really when you consider that just electrifying 26 miles or so of the Chat Moss line will have meant nearly three years of overnight closures by the time it is up and running.

Ok well not too bad then, although a lot of work hopefully all needed.
3 months of a bus service would push a fair few commuters away from trains to be good.

The Chat Moss electrification had taken forever but then when I had to wait for the overnight rail replacements it was hardly a 'hive' of activity. However recently things are flying up in the Liverpool-Manchester works

 

[northwichcat]

No I like 185s on Blackpool services!

185s could possibly go on to Blackpool-Yorkshire services but the days of 185s running Airport-Blackpool services are limited and that's nothing new.

 

[D6975]

Blackpool N closed for 3 months.
Is there a case for sticking a passing loop in somewhere on the South line to enable 2 TPH? Temporary relief plus long term benefits too?
Or will the work at Kirkham mean that the South service is temp withdrawn as well?

 

[Llama]

Original plan was to shut the lot, then when Fylde Jn - Kirkham Nth Jn was handed back that would enable Souths to run, while the main focus of the engineering then shifted to Kirkham to BPN. Think original timescales mooted were the whole lot to be shut for five months, but Souths able to run after three months or so.

 

[samj]

Blackpool N closed for 3 months.
Is there a case for sticking a passing loop in somewhere on the South line to enable 2 TPH? Temporary relief plus long term benefits too?
Or will the work at Kirkham mean that the South service is temp withdrawn as well?

I wonder if services could terminate at Poulton Le Fylde and then reverse?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Original plan was to shut the lot, then when Fylde Jn - Kirkham Nth Jn was handed back that would enable Souths to run, while the main focus of the engineering then shifted to Kirkham to BPN. Think original timescales mooted were the whole lot to be shut for five months, but Souths able to run after three months or so.

Would the existing single track formation where this exists in the line to Blackpool South be something that would cause very severe operational service patterns for relocated services, such as that to York, Liverpool and Manchester Airport, should engineering works cause the closure of the line from Kirkham and Wesham to Blackpool North ?

 

[edwin_m]

Would the existing single track formation where this exists in the line to Blackpool South be something that would cause very severe operational service patterns for relocated services, such as that to York, Liverpool and Manchester Airport, should engineering works cause the closure of the line from Kirkham and Wesham to Blackpool North ?

You can't run more than one train an hour to Blackpool South because it's a long siding with a travel time from Kirkham of just under 30min. I'm not sure whether intermediate platform lengths would allow the normal service to be strengthened or replaced by one from, for example, Manchester.

 

[Class 170101]

So what that seems to say is they'll be one 3 month closure of the line in to Blackpool North so that the final electrification can be done concurrently with other infrastructure work, which is proposed to start in December 2016 to not clash with the popular visitor months.

That suggests to me that electric services could be introduced in the December 2016 timetable change with a replacement bus service on the final leg in and out of Blackpool until March 2017 when the work is scheduled to be complete, meaning the line's re-opened by April 2017 when the school Easter holidays will occur.

I doubt you will see electric services on a planned basis until May 2017. It gives NR another 4 - 6 weeks approximately if things go worse than expected.

 

[Philip]

185s could possibly go on to Blackpool-Yorkshire services but the days of 185s running Airport-Blackpool services are limited and that's nothing new.

It's more likely that any 185s released from Airport-Blackpool will form a new service to Barrow from Manchester as nothing less than 100mph+ units would be acceptable on the WCML stretch. That is why class 175s replaced the Sprinters all those years ago. Class 158s will remain on Blackpool to York and on Hull/Selby services (assuming TPE get them).

 

[158756]

It's more likely that any 185s released from Airport-Blackpool will form a new service to Barrow from Manchester as nothing less than 100mph+ units would be acceptable on the WCML stretch. That is why class 175s replaced the Sprinters all those years ago. Class 158s will remain on Blackpool to York and on Hull/Selby services (assuming TPE get them).

Is there demand(or paths) for a more frequent service from Barrow to Manchester? There is of course the possibility that the existing services be cut at Lancaster. I would have thought that 185s would be prefered to 158s on North TPE to Hull once enough are available- higher top speed, 1/3 2/3 doors, do those big engines give them any better acceleration?

 

[Philip]

Is there demand(or paths) for a more frequent service from Barrow to Manchester? There is of course the possibility that the existing services be cut at Lancaster. I would have thought that 185s would be prefered to 158s on North TPE to Hull once enough are available- higher top speed, 1/3 2/3 doors, do those big engines give them any better acceleration?

185s are limited to lower speeds on the Hull route, that's why a few TPE 158s were initially kept on the route despite TPE having the full 185 fleet available. Ideally we'll go back to the situation that was until 2007 when there were two semi-fast/fast services per hour between Manchester and Preston, with the Scotland service being an intercity extra.

 

[northwichcat]

as nothing less than 100mph+ units would be acceptable on the WCML stretch.

Really? Northern are allowed to use a 156 on this service: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y71822/2014/09/19/advanced

That is why class 175s replaced the Sprinters all those years ago.

Is that a fact or just speculation? FNW had life expired local trains (101s) and regional trains (loco-hauled) and ordered new regional trains (175s) to replace both. They weren't exactly likely to put the 175s on the old 101 diagrams (which were mainly Marple services) while leaving Sprinters running some of the longest services they'd operated.

 

[Philip]

Really? Northern are allowed to use a 156 on this service: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y71822/2014/09/19/advanced




Is that a fact or just speculation? FNW had life expired local trains (101s) and regional trains (loco-hauled) and ordered new regional trains (175s) to replace both. They weren't exactly likely to put the 175s on the old 101 diagrams (which were mainly Marple services) while leaving Sprinters running some of the longest services they'd operated.

Fairly sure I read it on the North Wales Coast Railway website which tends to be very accurate. In fact initially FNW 158s replaced Sprinters on Barrow and Windermere services because of the faster top speed 90 over 75, but this only lasted a year or so before 175s were required to work the services because of 100mph running. When unreliability caused 175 shortages they prioritised the North West routes over the North Wales routes for 175 traction, because of the required DMU speed for that stretch of the mainline.

 

[northwichcat]

Ideally we'll go back to the situation that was until 2007 when there were two semi-fast/fast services per hour between Manchester and Preston, with the Scotland service being an intercity extra.

May 2007 timetable you had:
* 2 hourly Piccadilly to Scotland (non-stop Bolton-Preston)
* Hourly Buxton to Blackpool (all stops Bolton-Preston)
* Hourly Manchester Airport to Blackpool (selected stops Bolton-Preston)
* Hourly Manchester Airport to Cumbria (selected stops Bolton-Preston)

Now you have:
* Hourly Airport to Scotland (express but via Wigan)
* Hourly Manchester Victoria to Blackpool (all stops Bolton-Preston)
* Hourly Manchester Airport to Blackpool (selected stops Bolton-Preston)
* Hourly Hazel Grove to Preston (selected stops Bolton-Preston)

So there's more trains between Manchester and Preston then there were and also more fast trains between the two cities. The differences are:
* Bolton has one less train every 2 hours but Wigan has an additional hourly service.
* The service that forms the all-stops between Bolton and Preston originates from Victoria instead of Piccadilly.