Liverpool Road and the Ordsall Curve.

Could I ask where you got the 2.7 million passenger figure from please.

 

Just done a list of the present services from Piccadilly to the Airport between 09.00 am and 10.00 am on a weekday. There are actually 8 services per hour, not 9 or 10 as I have previously stated.
09.02 from Liverpool Platform 13
09.06 from Cleethorpes Platform 11
09.14 from Piccadilly Platform 12 (stopper to Airport)
09.24 from Newcastle Platform 4
09.36 from Barrow Platform 13
09.46 from Piccadilly Platform 12 (stopper to Crewe)
09.54 from Middlesboro' Platform 8
09.59 from Blackpool Platform 13
Given that the correct tracks for the Cleethorpes service in and out of Piccadilly will be sorted out in the Stockport area, there are only the Newcastle and Middlesboro' services that are giving conflicting track problems in Piccadilly Station throat, not forgetting the Liverpool-Scarboroughs, of course. Under the general Hub plans, the Liverpool-Scarboroughs will be travelling from Liverpool, across Chat Moss, direct to Victoria station and onwards to Leeds. So they are eliminated from the Piccadilly problem. This leaves two trains per hour either way that are having to do conflicting movents at Piccadilly throat. It appears that the Ordsall chord is being constructed to accomodate the movement of two trains per hour either way. Am I right or wrong in my assumptions? If that is so then the construction of the chord cannot be justified. Money should be spent on additional pointwork at Slade Lane Junction to sort the problem there, before the four trains get anywhere near Piccadilly.
One thing that does surprise me is that there are no North Wales services to and from the Airport.
Just checked, there is an hourly service from Piccadilly to Llandudno. Shouldn't this be extended to the Airport?

 

It appears you're looking at the Ordsall Chord in the context of today's service patterns and not those proposed for the Northern Hub, which will see direct services to the airport from the Calder Valley for example.

I'm no expert on the precise service level's but i believe the Chord is expected to see at least 4tph, allowing new through service's to the airport which at the same time provide a Victoria-Oxford Road-Piccadilly-Airport service connecting all major stations in Manchester.

Btw the 2.7m is an ORR figure via the station's wiki page.

Chris

 

What is the point of that when Metrolink will be providing the same service? Utter nonsense.

 

Victoria, Piccadilly and the Airport might end up connected by tram but a faster and higher capacity heavy rail service will always be more attractive to passengers, especially if they're travelling from outside the city, unfamiliar with the tram network, carrying luggage or need to change to another heavy rail service.

The tram service is and will continue to be very useful but trams like buses are better suited to shorter local journey's within Manchester - with Victoria gaining in importance under the Northern Hub proposals a Metrolink connection with Piccadilly and the airport just isn't sufficient, indeed a service via Oxford Road (and perhaps Salford Central if extra platforms are funded) will actually help address some of the tram congestion that's likely.

Chris

 

Whilst the main diversion of traffic will see the Newcastle and Middlesbrough TPE services diverted via the chord there is also the extension of Calder Valley services to Manchester Piccadilly with the potential further extension to the airport for a selected number of services. I could even envisage local services such as Rose Hill and Marple being extended to Rochdale and - once electrification is complete - a recast of local services to co-ordinate tram and railway services whilst separating EMU and DMU services to maximise mileage and cross-system interchange.

Don't forget also the new Calder Valley input from Blackburn and Burnley that will be generated from the restoration of the Todmorden Curve which is currently under construction with land clearance being the current task.

Whilst not in the same league I would offer the example of TfL and its creation of an outer London suburban circuit by creating / combining links as a guide to traffic potential if the necessary links can be created; in this scenario the Ordsall curve could well be one such link.

 

Some of the possible changes to services around Manchester can be found in the HLOS Illustrative Options document, though its important to bear in mind that they are "not what will happen...It is likely the rail industry will produce a more detailed and efficient solution, and in this context the illustrative option can be viewed as the simple answer that should be bettered"

Chris

 

Unfortunately, you cannot put a quart into a pint pot. The pint pot, in this case, being the two tracks from Castlefield to Piccadilly. Please, no comments about putting four tracks in.That would cost the earth and would upset an awful lot of Mancunians.
At the present time, the people who travel into Manchester every day by train would like to see some money spent on rolling stock to improve the quality of their journies. The railway companies are treating them like cattle, not people. Not really true, because there would be some regulation on the number of cattle that could travel in a cattle wagon.

 

There's no need for 4 tracking, in the short term sufficient extra capacity can be gained with two more through platforms at Piccadilly and modifying those at Oxford Road so there are two platforms for each direction of travel, allowing services to be routed into one platform while the other is still occupied by a stationary or departing train.

Of course, and just in the last few days we've seen confirmation that an extra 40 vehicles is being tagged onto an existing order and another made for 116 vehicles (with an option for 256) to guarantee there are enough electric trains available for the North West - some of these new trains are themselves expected to be used on TransPennine services when the wires are up.

Chris

 

156 vehicles, I assume that's individual coaches. There is (or was) 96 2 car 142's.. That's 192 vehicles, being replaced by those 156...

 

It's a lot more complicated than that i'm afraid, these are to ensure that the delay's to the Thameslink order don't prevent units being cascaded in time for the new electric service's in the North West. Spare DMU's will almost certainly be used to strengthen existing service's so the Pacer's will be with us for a while yet.

The major cascade's will come when the 1200 vehicles for Thameslink and 600 for Crossrail are in service, releasing a sizeable quantity of units with further order's expected.

Chris

 

192 vehicles at 15m = 2880m of passenger coach. 156 vehicles at 23m = 3588m of passenger coach, which is a 25% increase. Where is the problem?

 

I can't see anything that would be upsetting about four tracking. Assuming the bridges over the canal etc are listed, why could the broadening of these be finished in identical style, using identical materials? There do not look to be any other listed buildings in the way and the line is already supported in 'elevated NY' style east of Deansgate.

Would be interested to hear of factors I've missed.

 

In several places the 2-track line is squeezed within feet of (not insignificant) buildings on both sides, I don't think it would be the additional two tracks that would upset people, it would be the number of buildings and parallel roads lost between Piccadilly and Deansgate. If the resistance to HS2 is anything to go by (which to the untrained eye seems to take a relatively unobtrusive route considering its a new railway) the uproar to central Manchester would be unacceptable.

I think the Metrolink managed to build the entire city centre route and only had to demolish one building in the Shude Hill area, and there were still protesters!

 

Before Grouping, the MSJ&A was jointly owned by the LNW and GC and the GC was constantly badgering the LNW to agree to the quadrupling of the line between London Road and the junction. The LNW was having non of it and for good reason too. Those reasons are still valid and are basically those set out in 'M59137''s post above. Eventually the GC (in its earlier form of the MSL) gave up and produced alternative routes to get to Liverpool and mid-Lancashire which by-passed the centre of Manchester. These alternatives were good for freight to and from Liverpool but the present traffic is very much passenger and need to service the financial district of Manchester which is centred near to Victoria as well as north west Lancashire.

I would doubt if there will ever be a good case to demolish a good part of Manchester to quadruple the MSJ&A.

Regards

 

The MSJA was never really involved in passenger services to and from Liverpool, except for the sparse service via Warrington Bank Quay (Low Level). With regards to the freight routes to and from Liverpool these have all closed, except for the short length from Ditton Junction, past Fiddlers Ferry power station, to Warrington (Arpley). To move freight to and from Liverpool docks the line from Liverpool to Manchester, via Earlstown, has to be used. The line from the docks joins the main line at Olive Mount Junction, close to Broadgreen station. To go south the trains travel on the Manchester line as far as Earlstown and to go north, they go to Huyton Junction . Now, as you know, the Liverpool to Manchester line
, via Earlstown is now being electrified as part of the Northern Hub project. This is being done to greatly improve journey times for passenger trains from Liverpool to Manchester and beyond. Also mentioned in the Hub project was the possibilityof reopening the old GC line from Glazebrook West Junction, with a westbound connection being made to the Manchester to Liverpool line, via Earlestown, close to where the GC line crossed it. This is being done to get the container traffic generated by Trafford Park away from the Castlefield Junction to Slade Lane Junction line in Manchester. I don't now if any of you are aware, but a new deep water dock is to be built in Liverpool docks. When this is completed, the number of container trains coming to and from Liverpool docks will greatly increase. This has not been taken into account in the Hub project because it was not known about. So part of the Hub project is already out of date, virtually before construction has started. Work on re-quadrupling the line between Roby and Huyton Junction has already started. This is being done to ease the passage of passenger trains to Huyton Junction. In view of what will be a huge increase in freight on the route between between Liverpool and Manchester Victoria and beyond some thought must be given to more loops or four tracking on this route between Liverpool and Leeds. This is all needed because of the short sightedness of closing and building on many freight routes in the 1980s.

 

Could you specify the buildings needing demolition? I can't see any (admittedly I am depending on SV but have wandered down the various streets next to the section concerned).

If you don't know the actual names if you were to say 'those on xxx Street or something like that. Many thanks anyway for reading these remote musings.

Std Tank's info was very interesting. I begin to get the idea that we need two railway systems, one for goods and one for pax!!.

 

No problem, the three I had in mind were:

• Just to the east of Oxford Road station (immediately to the east of the bridge over Oxford Street), the line goes between the Palace Theatre and a big square white building (which is trapezium shaped from the air)
• Between Picc & Oxford Rd, west of where the line crosses Sackville Street, the line squeezes between a multi story car park and an apartment block.
• Deansgate station itself is so hemmed in that the surrounding buildings to the north and south wouldn't survive 4 tracking.

There is also the loss of some parallel roads (such as Altrincham Street) or car parks etc, which look nice and open from the air but in reality is urban space that the university/other landowners would probably kick up a fuss over!

 

What about the end of the Hotel at the western end of platforms 13 & 14 at Piccadilly. I doubt that you can get two new platforms and trackwork in between the hotel and the present viaduct.