Should there be a new terminal in Liverpool?

[Mutant Lemming]

What about the disused LOR tunnel and station at Dingle? How much of a climb is it up from the CLC line at Brunswick? A possible terminus for trains from Kirkby or Ormskirk. But this thread is really about accommodating long-distance services.

I would say it is a fair old climb...….

http://www.train-photos.net/picture/show/16502/Dingle-Tunnel

At 7:08 shows a train entering the tunnel......

 

[Chester1]

Some interesting comments and suggestions - but there are problems & consequences if some of the suggestions were implemented.

So - just my opinions.

1. Lime Street site (at surface level) is almost impossible to enlarge to take full length HS2 trains. It will only be able to accept shorter length "classic compatible trains". An 11 coach Pendolino is about the longest train it will ever be able to accept.

2. Central High Level was too short to accept even something like a 9 coach Pendolino.

3. Exchange site is still largely useable (if you spend enough money), but any new line would almost immediately need a long tunnel to exit from the city central region. The frequency of local services on the Southport, Ormskirk or Kirkby lines is such that none of them will ever be suitable for fast, long-distance trains. 4-tracking as far as Ormskirk or Kirkby would also be very difficult & expensive.

So - if full length HS2 trains are ever to come to Liverpool, a completely new station - probably underground - is almost the only solution.

Station capacity. Yes, given enough money, Wapping Tunnel might be reinstated as part of a link from Edge Hill to Central Low Level. But, diverting locals away from Lime Street would lose connectivity with the long distance services to London, Birmingham, etc. - and I suggest that would be very unpopular.

And what would be the benefits for existing passengers - they would get less attractive trains with, probably, fewer seats than a Class 319 or 323 - and then be faced with the already overcrowded Central station. On a simple route network, a single island platform could cope with more trains per hour. But the "City Lines" network is anything but simple. Unlike much of the current Merseyrail Electrics lines, the City lines have complex interactions with other routes. Trying to push many of these extra City Lines trains into Central would wreck punctuality / timekeeping. Widening the tunnel at Central would be hideously expensive, and the entrance / booking hall area would also need to be enlarged. Continue to Moorfields, and you have long walks and 2 long escalators before you reach the exit - in a part of the city that does not seem very welcoming at night.

And what is the demand for linking services across Liverpool city centre ? The most popular destinations would probably be Chester & Birkenhead - but you would still have to change, at Central rather than Lime Street. Next - Southport, but that already crosses the city to/from South Parkway/Hunts Cross. And I doubt that there is much demand for City Lines passengers to travel to/from the Ormskirk /Kirkby lines (except once a year on Grand National Day)

So - a complex problem - with no easily affordable solutions - and a danger of making things worse, not better....

I suggested recently in another thread that the best HS2 solution for Liverpool would be a HS2/NPR spur to Liverpool South Parkway, with 2tph to London, 2tph to Birmingham and 4tph to Manchester via Manchester Airport. If a Edgehill to Central link was built then trains should terminate there to prevent delays being transferred to Northern and Wirral line services. Maybe 4tph Wigan, 2tph Warrington Bank Quay, 2tph Crewe (to replace LNWR stops lost by introducing a HS2 Liverpool-Birmingham service).

 

[Bevan Price]

Thinking of ways to improve access to the wider City Region:

How about electrification from Crewe to Chester allowing an hourly HS2 service there.

As potential dual-voltage stock is introduced on Merseyrail this would let you replace third rail with overhead wires from Chester to Hooton and you could have a large Park and Ride station for the Wirral directly accessed from the M53, with hourly fast HS2 services to London and connecting Merseyrail services for Ellesmere Port and Birkenhead.

Crewe to Chester electrification is a good idea, but I think that "they" consider it could be very expensive, due to the large number of bridges would need to be rebuilt.

But I don't see any advantage in changing Chester to Hooton from 3rd rail to overhead wiring. With HS2 omitting even large cities such as Coventry, I doubt that they would even consider sending trains to anywhere as small as Hooton. Even Chester would be lucky to get anything other than "classic-line compatible" trains.

 

[edwin_m]

1. Lime Street site (at surface level) is almost impossible to enlarge to take full length HS2 trains. It will only be able to accept shorter length "classic compatible trains". An 11 coach Pendolino is about the longest train it will ever be able to accept.

Both the classic compatibles and the captive sets that were originally going to be ordered would be 200m long, significantly shorter than a Pendolino, so could fit in Lime Street but not when coupled in pairs. Might then be a new tunnel out to Edge Hill but two of the tracks as far as South Parkway could be made available without too much difficulty, and a HS2/NPR route via Warrington would probably jump off from somewhere near there.

3. Exchange site is still largely useable (if you spend enough money), but any new line would almost immediately need a long tunnel to exit from the city central region. The frequency of local services on the Southport, Ormskirk or Kirkby lines is such that none of them will ever be suitable for fast, long-distance trains. 4-tracking as far as Ormskirk or Kirkby would also be very difficult & expensive.

From my admittedly dim recollection I think most of the former four-tracking out to Walton Junction is still there. It wouldn't allow HS2 speeds and it's not the most direct route out of Liverpool but I wonder if it has some potential.

 

[8H]

Thinking of ways to improve access to the wider City Region:

How about electrification from Crewe to Chester allowing an hourly HS2 service there.

As potential dual-voltage stock is introduced on Merseyrail this would let you replace third rail with overhead wires from Chester to Hooton and you could have a large Park and Ride station for the Wirral directly accessed from the M53, with hourly fast HS2 services to London and connecting Merseyrail services for Ellesmere Port and Birkenhead.

I’ m genuinely open to options on “city region” suggestions, especially a solution to the Wirral through services post 1967 deficit which will also give Liverpool a benefit of quicker trains to Chester and North Wales. Wouldn’t rule this one out. Hooton itself may be small but there are about 500 thousand people on the geographical Wirral peninsular, doesn’t need to be HS2 either

 

[urbophile]

Both the classic compatibles and the captive sets that were originally going to be ordered would be 200m long, significantly shorter than a Pendolino, so could fit in Lime Street but not when coupled in pairs. Might then be a new tunnel out to Edge Hill but two of the tracks as far as South Parkway could be made available without too much difficulty, and a HS2/NPR route via Warrington would probably jump off from somewhere near there.


From my admittedly dim recollection I think most of the former four-tracking out to Walton Junction is still there. It wouldn't allow HS2 speeds and it's not the most direct route out of Liverpool but I wonder if it has some potential.

Understatement of the year! It's heading in precisely the opposite direction if the idea is to serve London. And where would you go after Walton?

 

[driver_m]

No different passengers arriving in Birkenhead instead of Slime Street to passengers arriving in Paddington instead of Euston.You have also ignored the probably quicker overall journey times to central Liverpool from Wales and other areas despite changing to underground. Paddington to Birkenhead trains were pretty nippy between Chester and Birkenhead compared to todays crawling journey. Also fail to see why the large population of Wirral rail users present and potential have to cross the water to go anywhere long distance by train in perpetuity.

No different to anyone in Southport or St Helens who also have to travel to Lime St to go long distance. And seeing as your username is the same code as Birkenhead Mollington St depot, I detect just a slight hint of bias towards the Wirral!! North Wales will still have a greater call on extending the Chester services that dont already go there than the Wirral IMO. Easier to implement and far less disruptive to existing trains . Merseyrail should look at getting semi fasts on its tracks if it doesn't want to lose business to the new service via Runcorn, even if it's only hourly, as it will be a far more pleasant journey with similar end to end times.

 

[8H]

No different to anyone in Southport or St Helens who also have to travel to Lime St to go long distance. And seeing as your username is the same code as Birkenhead Mollington St depot, I detect just a slight hint of bias towards the Wirral!! North Wales will still have a greater call on extending the Chester services that dont already go there than the Wirral IMO. Easier to implement and far less disruptive to existing trains . Merseyrail should look at getting semi fasts on its tracks if it doesn't want to lose business to the new service via Runcorn, even if it's only hourly, as it will be a far more pleasant journey with similar end to end times.

Bias? certainly! However it is also a reasoned argument. If you want modal shift, then giving fast inter urban services is a must. Halton Curve as I have said before on here is a real plus but it is ultimately just another trundling route into N Wales via Chester. I also find the notion difficult to swallow that Southport and St Helens can have poor service too because the only thing that matters is direct long distance or inter urban routes into the centre of Liverpool. In addition 4 tracking to Hooton gives passengers from central Liverpool faster trips to what we used see described as “Hooton, Chester, and Western Lines”. If you want to get people out of cars you have to offer real competition. Giving Wirral inter urban routes back helps the city region as a whole.

 

[B&I]

Understatement of the year! It's heading in precisely the opposite direction if the idea is to serve London. And where would you go after Walton?

You'd have to re-open the CLC tunnel to the Walton triangle rjen find some way through or under all the housing that's there now. Can't help.but feel a tunnel to open land around Bowring Park would be simpler, as well as more direct

 

[B&I]

Some interesting comments and suggestions - but there are problems & consequences if some of the suggestions were implemented.

So - just my opinions.

1. Lime Street site (at surface level) is almost impossible to enlarge to take full length HS2 trains. It will only be able to accept shorter length "classic compatible trains". An 11 coach Pendolino is about the longest train it will ever be able to accept.

2. Central High Level was too short to accept even something like a 9 coach Pendolino.

3. Exchange site is still largely useable (if you spend enough money), but any new line would almost immediately need a long tunnel to exit from the city central region. The frequency of local services on the Southport, Ormskirk or Kirkby lines is such that none of them will ever be suitable for fast, long-distance trains. 4-tracking as far as Ormskirk or Kirkby would also be very difficult & expensive.

So - if full length HS2 trains are ever to come to Liverpool, a completely new station - probably underground - is almost the only solution.

Station capacity. Yes, given enough money, Wapping Tunnel might be reinstated as part of a link from Edge Hill to Central Low Level. But, diverting locals away from Lime Street would lose connectivity with the long distance services to London, Birmingham, etc. - and I suggest that would be very unpopular.

And what would be the benefits for existing passengers - they would get less attractive trains with, probably, fewer seats than a Class 319 or 323 - and then be faced with the already overcrowded Central station. On a simple route network, a single island platform could cope with more trains per hour. But the "City Lines" network is anything but simple. Unlike much of the current Merseyrail Electrics lines, the City lines have complex interactions with other routes. Trying to push many of these extra City Lines trains into Central would wreck punctuality / timekeeping. Widening the tunnel at Central would be hideously expensive, and the entrance / booking hall area would also need to be enlarged. Continue to Moorfields, and you have long walks and 2 long escalators before you reach the exit - in a part of the city that does not seem very welcoming at night.

And what is the demand for linking services across Liverpool city centre ? The most popular destinations would probably be Chester & Birkenhead - but you would still have to change, at Central rather than Lime Street. Next - Southport, but that already crosses the city to/from South Parkway/Hunts Cross. And I doubt that there is much demand for City Lines passengers to travel to/from the Ormskirk /Kirkby lines (except once a year on Grand National Day)

So - a complex problem - with no easily affordable solutions - and a danger of making things worse, not better....

If nothing is done to relieve Lime Street high level, Liverpool is going to be completely stuck for evermore with its poor current selection of long-distance services.

The problems you set out do not require a new terminus, necessarily (and in any case the most obvious site, at Exchange, is about to disappear under a new office development).

What is needed is a combination of diversion of local services, with a high speed line (anathema is that apparently is to many on this forum) carrying the bulk of long-distance services. Broadly what Chester1 suggested, though I think you'd need a high speed tunnel to Edge Hill (assuming that's where the local trains would join the Wapping and / or Victoria tunnels to go underground).

If, for example, you confine most long-distance services to a bew tunnel leading east of the city (linking to a line to Warrington and all points east and south), and to the fast lines on the WCML to Edge Hill (for services via the Halton Curve), this just leaves trains towards Blackpool and Glasgow on local lines (perhaps they could eventually be placed on the by-pass line and routed north via a spur east of Huyton, or some link to the WCML further east). The local lines east of Lime St could then become full Merseyrail extensions which could be kept segregated from other operations except at their extremities (as happens now). A few residual regional services from Lime Street high level (eg semi-fasts to.Manchester via Chat Moss and the CLC) could easily fit around this, particularly if there was the odd bit of capacity enhancement on the local lines.

As Central Station needs to be rebuilt to handle its present passenger numbers anyway, enhanced usage in future can be taken into account in that, including some sort of fixed.link to Lime Street. The unpleasantness of the area round Moorfields is beyond the power of the railways to fix, but a comprehensive development of some of the mosr idiotically underused city centre land in Britain should.include a new and more user-friendly statoon.

A further issue which would need to be addressed would be freight. Unfortunately.some pillock(s) allowed the most obviously re-openable route to the docks, from Wigan via the North Mersey Branch, to be built over. Some.solution must however be possible to remove the need for trains to the docks to plough through the main approaches to the city for passenger trains.

Sorry to the Wirralians, btw, but given how much of a struggle it is to secure any improvement to rail services for the entire city region, there seems little prospect of restoring Birkenhead to the long distance network. Perhaps the better solution, until.such time as capacity needs are ao great that a revived Woodside becomes a necessity, is to restore 4 tracking from Rock Ferry to Hooton and introduce.a semi-fast to get people to main line termini at Lime Street and Chester faster.

 

[AndrewE]

So - just my opinions.

But, diverting locals away from Lime Street would lose connectivity with the long distance services to London, Birmingham, etc. - and I suggest that would be very unpopular.

I would say at least some journeys would be improved as Southport trains do not serve Lime St currently: there's either 2 changes or a walk between Central or Moorfields and Lime St.

And what would be the benefits for existing passengers ...faced with the already overcrowded Central station. On a simple route network, a single island platform could cope with more trains per hour. But the "City Lines" network is anything but simple. Unlike much of the current Merseyrail Electrics lines, the City lines have complex interactions with other routes.

Not very complex, really. And as the Kirkby and Ormskirk trains terminate in Central and have to do some ECS shunts to get out of the way (or it looks like that on RTT) then running through to Warrington or somewhere would improve some journeys and reduce the platform loading at Central.

I would say it is a fair old climb...….

Probably no worse than you get for other flying junctions built to be used only by EMU services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not very complex, really. And as the Kirkby and Ormskirk trains terminate in Central and have to do some ECS shunts to get out of the way (or it looks like that on RTT) then running through to Warrington or somewhere would improve some journeys and reduce the platform loading at Central.

They used to turn in the platforms but more recently the reversing siding has indeed returned to use. Making these through services would improve the capacity of the station for train services substantially, but not for passengers - it's already full and direly needs opening out and rebuilding to 2 island platforms[1], and I'd say is not suitable for any additional services unless this is done.

[1] A LU Northern Line-style rebuild to two wide side platforms (by extending the present one back over the outer track and adding a new tunnel with a new track and platform for the southbound) would also work, but if you're doing it you might as well do it properly and go for two wide islands.

 

[8H]

Sorry to the Wirralians, btw, but given how much of a struggle it is to secure any improvement to rail services for the entire city region, there seems little prospect of restoring Birkenhead to the long distance network. Perhaps the better solution, until.such time as capacity needs are ao great that a revived Woodside becomes a necessity, is to restore 4 tracking from Rock Ferry to Hooton and introduce.a semi-fast to get people to main line termini at Lime Street and Chester faster.

No apologies necessary ! Think that this basic essential gives the service speeds to the mainline railheads to the South, Chester and Crewe, that is required instead of what we have presently.

 

[driver_m]

Bias? certainly! However it is also a reasoned argument. If you want modal shift, then giving fast inter urban services is a must. Halton Curve as I have said before on here is a real plus but it is ultimately just another trundling route into N Wales via Chester. I also find the notion difficult to swallow that Southport and St Helens can have poor service too because the only thing that matters is direct long distance or inter urban routes into the centre of Liverpool. In addition 4 tracking to Hooton gives passengers from central Liverpool faster trips to what we used see described as “Hooton, Chester, and Western Lines”. If you want to get people out of cars you have to offer real competition. Giving Wirral inter urban routes back helps the city region as a whole.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the extra services and I do agree with your thinking.. More work for me for a start! but until we get proper control of our own infrastructure, instead of needing to get the begging bowl to London out it's a pipe dream.

I've long said that the single best thing we could do in this country is 4 track Wolves-Coventry as it would massively open up national Cross Country opportunities for Liverpool to get South Coast and SW services, as well as reintroducing them from the rest of the North West and largely negate the need for HS2 into Birmingham, and massively increase the local services to something like the cross city service over there. But we can't even do that sort of no-brainer scheme. The lack of long term improvement planning in this country is so infuriating.

 

[B&I]

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the extra services and I do agree with your thinking.. More work for me for a start! but until we get proper control of our own infrastructure, instead of needing to get the begging bowl to London out it's a pipe dream.

I've long said that the single best thing we could do in this country is 4 track Wolves-Coventry as it would massively open up national Cross Country opportunities for Liverpool to get South Coast and SW services, as well as reintroducing them from the rest of the North West and largely negate the need for HS2 into Birmingham, and massively increase the local services to something like the cross city service over there. But we can't even do that sort of no-brainer scheme. The lack of long term improvement planning in this country is so infuriating.

Is a simple 4 tracking possible ? I can think of parts of the Stour Valley Line which I've seen while.walking in the Black Country, where it didn't look like there was space for.more than 2 tracks

 

[AndrewE]

They used to turn in the platforms but more recently the reversing siding has indeed returned to use. Making these through services would improve the capacity of the station for train services substantially, but not for passengers - it's already full and direly needs opening out and rebuilding to 2 island platforms[1], and I'd say is not suitable for any additional services unless this is done.

Surely if all 3 services feeding in from north Liverpool ran through (and to more destinations than now) then a lot of passengers would not need to alight at all, or could change trains at stations a bit earlier or later. I would say that this, with running longer trains all day, could give a much bigger throughput for the station while reducing platform use.
The importance/value/usefulness of a station or junction on the network isn't measured very well by counting people coming through the ticket barriers, let alone buying tickets there. Even platform footfall is a reflection of how well (or poorly) the train service has been planned as much as it's down to "importance" of the junction.

 

[driver_m]

Is a simple 4 tracking possible ? I can think of parts of the Stour Valley Line which I've seen while.walking in the Black Country, where it didn't look like there was space for.more than 2 tracks

No, it's far from simple. But certainly there was an aborted effort to try and 4 track cov-new at in the Railtrack era. There are footbridges and some sections prepared for it, but never implemented.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely if all 3 services feeding in from north Liverpool ran through (and to more destinations than now) then a lot of passengers would not need to alight at all, or could change trains at stations a bit earlier or later. I would say that this, with running longer trains all day, could give a much bigger throughput for the station while reducing platform use.

Liverpool isn't like that. The vast majority of demand is to/from Liverpool City Centre, for which Liverpool Central is the best located station on the Northern Line. Therefore, adding more services will make the platforms more congested. It isn't like Thameslink where primary demand is connectional or more spread out.

Running Ormskirk and Kirkby services through will increase line capacity substantially, however they will pack the platforms out far worse for two reasons - one that there will be more people using the station, two that some of them won't be sitting on a train waiting to start there, they will all be on the platform.

Central needs two islands (or at least a LU style makeover to give it two very wide side platforms, or at a push a widening of the present island by at least 12') almost as much as (but for different reasons than) Manchester Piccadilly needs platforms 15/16, and certainly before any additional services are added.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Sorry to the Wirralians, btw, but given how much of a struggle it is to secure any improvement to rail services for the entire city region, there seems little prospect of restoring Birkenhead to the long distance network. Perhaps the better solution, until.such time as capacity needs are ao great that a revived Woodside becomes a necessity, is to restore 4 tracking from Rock Ferry to Hooton and introduce.a semi-fast to get people to main line termini at Lime Street and Chester faster.

It's the very struggle for funds that makes a rebuilt Woodside more of an option. The route is almost ready for work without the need for very expensive CPOs for land (as you would have at Central and Exchange or an expanded Lime Street ), very expensive tunnelling, very expensive re-aligning. Three or four tracking and re-opening the tunnel to Woodside and a new station would be about your main expenses.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Central would not require CPOs to get a second island in, just a lot of digging. There's barely anything on top of it, and what is on top of it is mostly owned by the railway in some form i.e. the station, a run-down shopping arcade[1] and a couple of Network Rail buildings. The footprint of the original High Level station is still pretty much available. This is the advantage you get of being in a city where land values are quite low - were it London there'd already be something substantial on top.

[1] May not be owned by the railway, but so run-down that I doubt it would cost much to buy it.

 

[notlob.divad]

[1] May not be owned by the railway, but so run-down that I doubt it would cost much to buy it.

Owned by the council who recently bought it, so no CPO required.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Owned by the council who recently bought it, so no CPO required.

Even easier, then.

There'd be a lot of digging to do so it wouldn't be cheap, but it wouldn't be prohibitively expensive either. Probably falls into a similar cost bracket as something like Picc P15/16.

What would be really nice would be to open it out with a high overall roof to give it the feel of something like Earls Court LUL, or perhaps a deal could be struck with a shopping centre operator to put a new one on top if they'd pay most of the cost of it and give you something like a mini new-New-St. The former would be nicer but the latter might be more affordable.

 

[notlob.divad]

perhaps a deal could be struck with a shopping centre operator to put a new one on top if they'd pay most of the cost of it and give you something like a mini new-New-St.

You mean something like this:
https://www.insidermedia.com/insider/northwest/circus-plans-unveiled-following-lewiss-acquisition

 

[Bletchleyite]

You mean something like this:
https://www.insidermedia.com/insider/northwest/circus-plans-unveiled-following-lewiss-acquisition

That would appear to describe exactly what is required. Good to see it actually happening!

 

[Mutant Lemming]

What about one like this ?

 

[Chester1]

It's the very struggle for funds that makes a rebuilt Woodside more of an option. The route is almost ready for work without the need for very expensive CPOs for land (as you would have at Central and Exchange or an expanded Lime Street ), very expensive tunnelling, very expensive re-aligning. Three or four tracking and re-opening the tunnel to Woodside and a new station would be about your main expenses.

Reopening Woodside is a classic idea based on wanting to restore the past not find the best solution for today. Closing Woodside, Exchange, Central Higher Level, building the loop and link and extending the third rail network vastly improved local connectivity. Its a shame that neither of the proposals to connect the city line to Central where built. Depending on cost, either Edge Hill - Lime Street lower level - Central or direct to Central with 2 extra platforms would free up enough space at Lime Street for extra long distance services. There would be no need for any local services into Lime Street high level apart from CLC stoppers. The Wirral line works fine and would be complicated by adding long distance services and / or a terminal. Hamilton Square serves the area well and allows trains to also serve to James Street, Moorfields, Lime Street and Central. Rebuilding Woodside would serve stations between Rock Ferry and Chester only, all of which have a good service to connect with long distance services at Liverpool and Chester. The West Kirby and New Brighton branches would have no connection to Woodside. Should demand grow further then there is definitely a case for 4 tracking some sections to allow express Merseyrail services between Liverpool and Chester. The new stock would cut journey times in the near future.

 

[Bevan Price]

1. Birkenhead Woodside reopened would serve no useful purpose. There are few local inhabitants who are not better served by other stations in Birkenhead; the adjacent bus station is a pale shadow of what it used to be; and most important, the once frequent Woodside to Liverpool commuter ferry is now just an hourly service mainly for tourists. One main purpose of Woodside station was to attract Liverpool passengers to use GWR routes to the south & west.

2. Ideas about diverting City Line passengers from Lime Street to Central seem more related to operating convenience than to what passengers actually want. Far more people would be inconvenienced by loss of long distance connectivity at Lime St., than the relatively small number likely to want to travel between City & Northern line destinations. (Southport area passengers for London (and northern parts of WCML) probably travel via Wigan, where Wallgate & North Western are very close)

3. We are getting into the world of fantasy / speculative ideas / dreamland, but wherever a new Liverpool terminal is built, any new fast line will require a very long tunnel - at least 5 to 7 miles - to exit the city - unless thousands of houses are sacrificed (with expensive compulsory purchase & legal battles.)

4. Someone suggested restoring 4 tracking all the way from Huyton & Edge Hill, but only mentioned the roads around Broad Green. Don't forget that Wavertree Technology Park station is an additional obstruction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What about one like this ?

It's amazing how rough and dirty stations used to be, isn't it?

 

[a_c_skinner]

At least you could park...

Edge Hill for the long distance trains, local lines used like the tube in London for onward journeys.

 

[Bletchleyite]

2. Ideas about diverting City Line passengers from Lime Street to Central seem more related to operating convenience than to what passengers actually want. Far more people would be inconvenienced by loss of long distance connectivity at Lime St., than the relatively small number likely to want to travel between City & Northern line destinations. (Southport area passengers for London (and northern parts of WCML) probably travel via Wigan, where Wallgate & North Western are very close)

As a former resident of an area served by the Northern Line, I don't agree at all. Most people want to go to Liverpool Central (well, central Liverpool ), and of those who connect onwards to London, Manchester etc people are generally happy to take the walk from Lime St to Central above ground which barely takes 10 minutes (or use the Loop, but it only saves any time if you use the lifts at both ends). Personally, I'd take the Merseyrail Electrics "service package" over anything any of the City Lines get - it really is very popular and well-regarded these days.