CLC Trafford Park to Warrington - Metrolink?

[Bletchleyite]

Is still begs the question...
Why?

Just do it properly and electrify the route.

@cle has given an excellent explanation of the benefits.

 

[JonathanH]

It doesn't do that, as you would probably want a residual half hourly Lime St to South Parkway/Hunts Cross local EMU service, unless you planned on closing Mossley Hill and West Allerton.

There are other trains on the Runcorn to Liverpool corridor which could pick up the Mossley Hill and West Allerton stops. Long ago, I have alighted and boarded 350s at Mossley Hill.

However, there are platforms at South Parkway suitable for a dedicated shuttle from Lime Street if it was deemed appropriate

 

[Gathursty]

It doesn't do that, as you would probably want a residual half hourly Lime St to South Parkway/Hunts Cross local EMU service, unless you planned on closing Mossley Hill and West Allerton.

It is a good idea, though, and the other benefits are certainly strong.

No, you would ask Transport for Wales and LNWR to divvy up the calls at Mossley Hill and West Allerton between them on their services through the stations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, you would ask Transport for Wales and LNWR to divvy up the calls at Mossley Hill and West Allerton between them on their services through the stations.

I'm not sure it is appropriate to be using long distance services to do "Merseyrail" calls within Liverpool. It's a silly idea in Manchester and it would be a silly idea here, too.

Perhaps if Merseyrail was going to Warrington, such a service could in the long term serve Gateacre? It would cause fewer conflicts than the present setup.

 

[daodao]

I'm not sure it is appropriate to be using long distance services to do "Merseyrail" calls within Liverpool. It's a silly idea in Manchester and it would be a silly idea here, too.

Perhaps if Merseyrail was going to Warrington, such a service could in the long term serve Gateacre? It would cause fewer conflicts than the present setup.

I agree with your first statement.

Merseyrail could easily be extended from Hunt's Cross to Gateacre, which was the original intention when this section closed in 1972. Unlike Warrington, it is entirely within Merseyside.

The CLC line should be retained a second major through route from Liverpool to Manchester for the foreseeable future; it is not reasonable to change this arrangement unless in the long-term an additional high speed line is built between the 2 cities.

The Warrington to Manchester section can't be converted to Metrolink until/unless additional capacity or an additional route is provided between Cornbrook and the city centre. It would be much better to convert lines east of Piccadilly to Metrolink in the medium term as additional city centre capacity would not be needed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Warrington to Manchester section can't be converted to Metrolink until/unless additional capacity or an additional route is provided between Cornbrook and the city centre. It would be much better to convert lines east of Piccadilly to Metrolink in the medium term as additional city centre capacity would not be needed.

As in just convert them to put the wires up, but otherwise leave them the same as in terminating in the main trainshed? To convert to Metrolink otherwise requires you to convert something the other side too, though I think there's scope for one reversing "standard" 5 tram per hour service at Vic's spare platform.

 

[daodao]

As in just convert them to put the wires up, but otherwise leave them the same as in terminating in the main trainshed? To convert to Metrolink otherwise requires you to convert something the other side too, though I think there's scope for one reversing "standard" 5 tram per hour service at Vic's spare platform.

A street level line would be needed from Ashburys to the eastern end of the Metrolink Piccadilly underground station, and the services could be joined with the Bury and Altrincham services that currently terminate there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A street level line would be needed from Ashburys to the eastern end of the Metrolink Piccadilly underground station, and the services could be joined with the Bury and Altrincham services that currently terminate there.

Do those not now run through to Ashton, or is that only half of them? If the latter I guess that does create another 5 tram per hour conversion as being possible on that side (perhaps Rose Hill *or* Hadfield but not both?)

 

[daodao]

Do those not now run through to Ashton, or is that only half of them? If the latter I guess that does create another 5 tram per hour conversion as being possible on that side (perhaps Rose Hill *or* Hadfield but not both?)

10 tph terminate at Piccadilly (5 from Bury, 5 from Altrincham, both all day). The Ashton services run to Eccles/Media city.

 

[Bletchleyite]

10 tph terminate at Piccadilly (5 from Bury, 5 from Altrincham, both all day). The Ashton services run to Eccles/Media city.

Ah. Plenty of capacity to add on Hadfield and Rose Hill, then (can't think of anything else on that side).

 

[Fokx]

As in just convert them to put the wires up, but otherwise leave them the same as in terminating in the main trainshed? To convert to Metrolink otherwise requires you to convert something the other side too, though I think there's scope for one reversing "standard" 5 tram per hour service at Vic's spare platform.

Victoria doesn’t have a spare platform, it’s used for the Airport turn arounds of which the every 12 minute tram sits for around 8 minutes. There is no spare capacity at Victoria tram stop, and the situation won’t be helped by the Crumpsall to Trafford Line also calling here

 

[geordieblue]

If (big if) you converted the CLC to Metrolink, the only thing on the viaduct between Trafford Park and (nearly) Deansgate-Castlefield would be freight. I don't think a new street level route would necessarily be needed - relocation of Trafford Park (something that arguably needs doing anyway) would provide Metrolink with four fully segregated tracks to Deansgate.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If (big if) you converted the CLC to Metrolink, the only thing on the viaduct between Trafford Park and (nearly) Deansgate-Castlefield would be freight. I don't think a new street level route would necessarily be needed - relocation of Trafford Park (something that arguably needs doing anyway) would provide Metrolink with four fully segregated tracks to Deansgate.

Around Cornbrook the Metrolink tracks run very near the heavy rail ones, wouldn't be unduly hard to have a junction there. I recall there being a height difference but trams are reasonably good at gradients.

 

[edwin_m]

If (big if) you converted the CLC to Metrolink, the only thing on the viaduct between Trafford Park and (nearly) Deansgate-Castlefield would be freight. I don't think a new street level route would necessarily be needed - relocation of Trafford Park (something that arguably needs doing anyway) would provide Metrolink with four fully segregated tracks to Deansgate.

It would need a new section of viaduct to bypass the section east of Castlefield Junction which would still be used by heavy rail, and to connect with Metrolink either upwards to somewhere near Deansgate-Castlefield station, or downwards to street level to connect at the SW end of St Peters Square. This would be extremely difficult in proximity to the other viaducts, river and canal. A street-level route between Cornbrook and the same area would also be difficult, with the extra obstacle of crossing the Mancunian Way.

Engineering-wise, if there was no need for a through heavy rail link the easiest connection would be west of Cornbrook, but as mentioned there would be capacity issues on the double track thence to St Peters Square.

 

[cle]

Is still begs the question...
Why?

Just do it properly and electrify the route.

With 4tph? Metrolink would be at least 6tph, and faster for all the local stations. Merseyrail would be at least 4tph for all stations too.

It doesn't do that, as you would probably want a residual half hourly Lime St to South Parkway/Hunts Cross local EMU service, unless you planned on closing Mossley Hill and West Allerton.

It is a good idea, though, and the other benefits are certainly strong.

Ahh yes. Perhaps there would be additional paths out of Lime St, for example enabling a 2tph local service to Crewe - or adding some skip stop fun into (potentially increasing anyway) Halton and B'ham services, and increasing a single frequency, perhaps.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Metrolink would I expect be 5tph (every 12 minutes) as that's the standard for a branch.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Is still begs the question...
Why?

Just do it properly and electrify the route.

Yes thank you!

 

[Nym]

The solution to funding issues in not electrifying lines is not to fund it in a different way.
Metros and Trams shouldn't be going out of the county lines, at least not by far.

 

[Llandudno]

Metrolink would I expect be 5tph (every 12 minutes) as that's the standard for a branch.

Yes, the connections at Warrington Central would be interesting a 12 minute Metrolink frequency ‘connecting’ with a 15 minute Merseyrail one!

All purely academic as Metrolink will never reach Warrington.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, the connections at Warrington Central would be interesting a 12 minute Metrolink frequency ‘connecting’ with a 15 minute Merseyrail one!

It probably wouldn't matter all that much because both services are frequent, so while the connection times wouldn't be consistent over the hour, they could be no more than a 15 minute wait (westbound) or no more than 12 (eastbound).

All purely academic as Metrolink will never reach Warrington.

I'd not rule it out.

 

[Llandudno]

It probably wouldn't matter all that much because both services are frequent, so while the connection times wouldn't be consistent over the hour, they could be no more than a 15 minute wait (westbound) or no more than 12 (eastbound).



I'd not rule it out.

There would be some confusion and frustration on the platform though as passengers see the doors close on their ‘connecting’ train/tram. The public wouldn’t understand the logic of two different frequencies and may put staff in the firing line!
Not great evening and Sundays if Merseyrail is only operating every 30 minutes though.

There are occasionally issues at Chester whereby north Wales coast trains arrive at Chester just as the doors are closing on the Liverpool bound Merseyrail train departing from the adjoining platform.
More of an issue evening and Sundays when Merseyrail are operating a 30 minute headway.

 

[randyrippley]

Might be an opportunity to get the WCML platforms reopened at Carnforth!

Along with Metrolink platforms at Lancaster University

 

[Bletchleyite]

Along with Metrolink platforms at Lancaster University

In all seriousness I'd say there's a pretty good case for loops and WCML platforms at Lancaster Uni (served by Northern and perhaps also TPE). A very large proportion of the demand at the "Hbf" is students and there is a lot of development (student and non) going on there at the moment.

Perhaps not Metrolink though

There are occasionally issues at Chester whereby north Wales coast trains arrive at Chester just as the doors are closing on the Liverpool bound Merseyrail train departing from the adjoining platform.

Of course, that is resolved by the guard using their eyes and not closing doors in peoples' faces (and by the Chester line being operated on the leaf fall timetable all year and not the ridiculously tight one it presently operates).

 

[miami]

If you were going to put metrolink to that area of Manchester, surely the better solution would be to extend from Port Salford down to Irlam via Barton Moss and North Irlam, maybe reaching the station, but you'll end up with a very long end-to-end journey to either destination. Deansgate to Trafford Centre alone is 30 minutes.

The all-stops train currently runs Oxford Road to Urmston in 12 minutes, and 35 from MCO to Warrington (30 Birchwood)

Fastest train from Oxford Road is 20 to Warrington (17 to Birchwood)

If you want a high frequency, build a 3rd platform at either Irlam or Flixton (in the existing carparks) and run 4tph EMU from Oxford Road bay platform to Irlam leaving just after existing fast train (Picadilly)-Oxford Road-Irlam-Birchwood-Padgate-Warrington.


I don't think nearly doubling journey time from Birchwood and Warrington to Manchester would be popular, even with doubling frequency.

 

[randyrippley]

In all seriousness I'd say there's a pretty good case for loops and WCML platforms at Lancaster Uni (served by Northern and perhaps also TPE). A very large proportion of the demand at the "Hbf" is students and there is a lot of development (student and non) going on there at the moment.

Perhaps not Metrolink though

The Oubeck loops are already in an ideal location opposite the University main drive.

 

[Ianno87]

The Oubeck loops are already in an ideal location opposite the University main drive.

Except quite slow with approach controls etc. And with freight trains in them sometimes...

 

[Whistler40145]

Is still begs the question...
Why?

Just do it properly and electrify the route.

Exactly, if for any reason the line via Runcorn to Weaver Junction was closed, this would be an alternative diversion route, especially for Freightliners

 

[edwin_m]

Except quite slow with approach controls etc. And with freight trains in them sometimes...

Is Oubeck used much these days, with new much longer loops between there and Preston?

Then again, a train stopping there and being overtaken would have to wait 5min or so.

 

[The Planner]

Is Oubeck used much these days, with new much longer loops between there and Preston?

Then again, a train stopping there and being overtaken would have to wait 5min or so.

Oubeck are short, about 450m so no Intermodals in them. Like you say, a train goes in, next passes it 4 mins later, the stopper can probably only go 3 minutes after the second knowing it is still pulling away from it.

 

[Ianno87]

Oubeck are short, about 450m so no Intermodals in them. Like you say, a train goes in, next passes it 4 mins later, the stopper can probably only go 3 minutes after the second knowing it is still pulling away from it.

Plus, assuming the overtaking train is then stopping at Lancaster, you'd then have to queue for the platform (being only one in the Down direction).

So an overtaken train would effectively have to sit for 8 minutes (3 headway before + 2 minute Lancaster dwell + 3 minute Lancaster reoccupation)