Liverpool Road and the Ordsall Curve.

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Until we see the detailed plans for the junction I fail to see any point in commenting on the existing listed structures in the area.

The new connection could branch off left after Deansgate and climb over the existing layout before joining the line into Salford station on the north side thus keeping the MOSI connection. It's all guess work until the details are revealed.

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

I agree and await with interest the detailed plans. The previous post was more just extra information for those interested in the site generally. Been a learning curve myself looking into the history of the site.

Regards
Duncan

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

To update this thread there was an article, link below, on manchester victoria. Looking at a 2014 completion date it would seem likely public consultation on this and the curve will be at some point this year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-13161843

Regards
Duncan

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

plans now on public show and on the internet on network rail site. cuts though MOSI railway as thought. this will mean the end of railway ops at MOSI, as most of the railway crews have said that they will pack it in if this happens.

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Plans to be found here:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/north/Ordsall-Chord.aspx



Duncan

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Interesting... I remember 20 odd years ago that Salford Crescent and the chord to Deansgate would be the end for Liverpool Road Musuem, and some even suggested the closure of Manchester Victoria !

The science museum hasn't exactly been the hub of steam activity over the years and never made use of it's mainline connection, nor capitalise of the Original Station beyond a museum.
I'm sure after the construction is finished the museum will still have the intact historic building / warehouses and a shorter demonstration line, than it has now, but that would be not much different to what it had and used before.

If mainline steam were visiting every week, and it had a regular historic operation from Liverpool Rd to say.. Liverpool (something I sure would have been viable).. then it could argue that it was losing something... What has used the mainline connection this century ? (48151/70018 in 2008, Tornado in 2009 ?).. last I remember was 48151/44932 in the late 1980's early 1990s... even it's once a decade mega gala had D7076 etc arrive by road.

I don't want to knock the museum, it's a great experience, but it is really a museum with a short demonstration ride, not a mainline steam centre or preserved railway, its only loss will be something it never really used, I don't see how it will be impacted and will remain a great technical transport museum.

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

John - don't you ever accuse me of being controversial. This is the first passenger railway station in the world - albeit that some directors want to diminish that aspect of history. It has been connected to the national network for one hundred and eighty years - and the conveyance for Liverpool Road specifically retains the main line connection. But now because some lazy thinking consultant wants to provide a half baked solution to a problem that doesn't need this answer, we are all supposed to roll over and have our collective tummies tickled.

The best answer to the Piccadilly throat problem is to fill in the void where the Ancoats branch ran with a new embankment, put new bridges over Ashton Old Road and Blind Lane and then you have connected Rochdale and Ashton to Piccadilly, and Piccadilly to Victoria via Eastlands. Build platforms A-D on the north side of Piccadilly train shed and use Mayfield by extending from its western elevation into a new junction alongside the MacDonald hotel at the west end of 13/14 and you get four new platform faces. You have also removed most of the need for movements from Ardwick right across Piccadilly station throat with this design.

The problem with this suggestion is that it isn't sexy enough for the "big shiny new" fraternity - but it does tick all the boxes, puts a real strategic transport hub into place, doesn't destroy the unity of using Piccadilly as the main station for Manchester, (and protects the Warrington Central traffic) and is therefore far more passenger friendly.

Anyone who wants to knock this alternative over is quite welcome to try - but please - address all the issues when you do, as I have have done

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Mayfield...
but it's a very very long distance from Piccadilly concourse.. not very practical for connecting passengers.

That said... if a new Manchester Airport service direct from Mayfield (with airline check in & baggage checkin) facilities were created, logically this would make sense to use Mayfield as an Airport express service, thus allowing a partial reduction in through manchester to manchester airport services... as the convenience alone would divert people to it.

A more practical common sense solution (but not financially practical) would be breaking through platform 1 of Oxford Road and building a viaduct above whitworth street to the car park side of Manchester Piccadilly...and do away with the ramp to the station.

But to keep a mainline connection to a train station which has only had 1 trainload of passengers since 1980, no matter how historic seems pointless. The station will be protected, the museum still has a running line and the museum will hardly notice any difference, apart from maybe 1 sack less of coal in the monthly bill. Visitors won't see any difference.

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Losing a virtually unused mainline connection to a museum recreating an entirely different era to modern-day mainline steam, and with no plans to use it in the future, hardly seems the greatest loss in the world - it certainly isnt a good enough reason not to proceed with the new chord.

Chris

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

No further than across London Victoria - ever heard of travelators?

Ralph - This idea is - as already mentioned - twenty years old and is lazy railway think If a consultant were asked to take a strategic view instead of merely how to reduce movements crossing Piccadilly throat I'm sure a different answer would have emerged - and again - public expenditure - the bill for this is an amazing £553m!

Utterly unjustifiable when there is a better, cheaper option that produces more transport choices. Two spans and one embankment links Picc and Vic and the Calder Valley. The area between the facade of Mayfield and the Oxford Road lines is open land. The site of potential platforms A-D is at rail level and on Network Rail land - that's why it is so bxxxxin obvious to anyone except an engineering consultant with one eye on the tender bids

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Does this plan mean that all the TPE trains that currently run in and out of the main platforms at Piccadilly will use platforms 13 & 14? The line between Piccadilly and Castlefield Junction is already congested. I cannot see how it will cope with extra traffic.

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

I think the perceived benefit is not having transpenines crossing across the full front of Piccadilly station to get from one side to the other, and to open up some platforms at Piccadilly for manchester airport services which reverse.

But agreed those platforms at Piccadilly are very busy now, I think some transpeninnes from Liverpool and other local services are planned to be rediverted back to Victoria, as you would now be able to connect passengers at Victoria, not just Piccadilly for south Manchester.

Maybe an interesting alternative could be routing via Victoria, Ashton moss, Denton, stockport, and putting in a curve at Gatley from the Stockport Altrincham line, onto the Styal line ? Some stuff from the peak district could then reverse at Stockport and make connections for Manchester, whilst other some north peninne services could skip manchester altogether... Problem here is not everyone wants to go to the airport... But many do!, hence Victoria to Piccadilly makes sense, and doesn't really affect journey times.

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Yes - that is the fatal Achilles Heel of this flawed plan. The target of the plan is focussed on removing the movements that cross from Ardwick to 13/14, but intead it means that everything that turns back in the train shed will now run into 13/14 and that not all Manchester to Liverpool traffic will go viaWarrington - so that town loses out too. The other alternative is Victoria turnbacks meaning cross town and not cross platform connections!

It shouldn't be this easy to see thorugh schemes - but when they are as poorly thought out as this........................................

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

TBird, whilst I agree with many of your thoughts I have to say that returning the Liverpool-Scarboroughs to the route across the moss and straight through to Stalybridge will reduce the journey time from Liverpool to Leeds and beyond by at least 15 minutes. Also the present Liverpool-Manchester Airport service travels across the moss and is quicker than the two services between Lime Street and Piccadilly that go via Warrington.

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Might be a tight curve, but it would lose it's historical context.. It would be a connection to victoria, not the Liverpool line.
But why bother if it's not being used now ?
This plan could always see Salford return to prominence, but also equally could be it's demise.. Does anything / anyone use this station any more ?

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Ah the old "its faster" line - by driving straight past the customers, or making them walk or tram right across Manchester. What is the point of Liverpool South Parkway and Warrington Central, if Network Rail and the DfT are going to start planning them out of inter regional services. Thank goodness I worked for a railway where there was joined up thinking! The Windsor Link / Hazel Grove chord / The Airport Link all built against the tide of traditional thinking and opening up new markets.

I'm not sure its anywhere near fifteen minutes either. We aren't talking about horse to steam here, this is no quantum leap - its minutes, and its journey choices and conveninece that matter in the marketplace, not operator convenience.

I have lifetime first class free travel - yet I have put 18,000 miles on the Jag this year - because rail doesn't always do what I want, when I want, and where I want; and sometimes when it does, it makes inter modal change so difficult and expensive that I ignore rail anyway. If I knew that I could drive to say - Stalybridge - after 07.15 and find a vacant parking space I would do - but after 07.15 that's it - you've had it. Meanwhile only three miles way five acres goes begging at Guide Bridge because of a lack of strategic will at NR/TfGM/ etc.

It is this internalised thinking that works against the railway so much that drives over 95% of the market onto the roads - it needs to stop.

BTW Ralph - as had already been said - no curve within tolerance would fit

 

Re: Liverpool Road and the Budget

Spurred on by threads on NP I popped in to visit Crewe and the MOSI where there was supposed to be a consultation display. I wouldn't rush out of your way as there is nothing not on the net and 3 ladies, with nothing to say.

Me "I had hoped to see something more, like a model of the route"

Her " Well its early days, it was only announced in the budget in March and so all we know is that it needs to be a viaduct and it needs to be roughly there". Wow, no S*** Sherlock.


I would not say all is gloom. 1.3.2 of the NR s42 consultation pack refers to the chord crossing the line to Liverpool Road "at grade". Although the sentance is not well written there is hope.

The map on Page 7 highlights land that may be purchased but also environmentally impacted or able to seek compensation. The fact the running lines at Liverpool Road are highlighted but not the intervening yard or buildings suggests to me nothing more than that if the link were severed, compensation might be due.

The Museum is very busy and it must be said the running of steam trains is nothing more than incidental Indeed the need to fence off lines is perhaps an inconvenience.