Could a people mover be built to link HS2 with Manchester Airport?

[scrapy]

Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...interchange-with-the-airport-terminal.242853/

Presumably Manchester Airport will need similar with the planned station across the other side of the M56, especially for accessing Terminal 3.

 

[Chester1]

Presumably Manchester Airport will need similar with the planned station across the other side of the M56, especially for accessing Terminal 3.

The station is on the route of the Wythenshawe loop that was originally planned before Metrolink was cut back to the current airport line. The easiest option to connect would be extending the line from the current terminus to HS2 station via terminal 2. Manchester Airport HS2 station is more of a Parkway than serving destinations so a dedicated people mover would be overkill. A short extention of Metrolink would be cheaper.

 

[zwk500]

The station is on the route of the Wythenshawe loop that was originally planned before Metrolink was cut back to the current airport line. The easiest option to connect would be extending the line from the current terminus to HS2 station via terminal 2. Manchester Airport HS2 station is more of a Parkway than serving destinations so a dedicated people mover would be overkill. A short extention of Metrolink would be cheaper.

Given the level of reconstruction required to Metrolink in order to extend it west of the current station I'm not convinced it would be cheaper.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It should probably be noted that these two stations are not primarily airport stations. People don't generally fly from Manchester or Birmingham if travelling from London, least of all if they can be at Heathrow in next to no time via Old Oak. They are located near the airports, but they are primarily Parkway stations, in Birmingham's case replacing International in that role, and in Manchester's case replacing Stockport. Thus, while they do need to be accessible to the airports, that it's a bit more of a faff than at present doesn't really matter.

 

[Chester1]

Given the level of reconstruction required to Metrolink in order to extend it west of the current station I'm not convinced it would be cheaper.

I think there is passive provision in place and the route has not been built on. Luton DART is now up to £300m. That is close the cost of the entire Trafford Park line which is longer and more complex than an extension of Metrolink. TfGM might be interested in completing the original route (past Wythenshawe hospital). Four stops and higher demand is a different situation for Birmingham.

 

[zwk500]

I think there is passive provision in place and the route has not been built on. Luton DART is now up to £300m. That is close the cost of the entire Trafford Park line which is longer and more complex than an extension of Metrolink. TfGM might be interested in completing the original route (past Wythenshawe hospital). Four stops and higher demand is a different situation for Birmingham.

Really? I don't know Manchester at all, but I can't see a route through the Airport that doesn't involve a tunnel on google maps.

 

[snowball]

Really? I don't know Manchester at all, but I can't see a route through the Airport that doesn't involve a tunnel on google maps.

The airport station building is designed with a space in the basement for the Metrolink line to be extended through. After that the line would curve sharply right and a length of (presumably cut and cover) tunnel would be required under the roads in front of the building. Then it would run in cutting alongside the west side of World Way and then alongside the south side of the M56 airport spur. It has been planned for years, since before construction of the Metrolink airport line began. Admittedly the original route was chosen before HS2 was heard of.

The bridge carrying Thorley Lane over the M56 mainline just south of the junction with the airport spur was rebuilt a few years ago because of the condition of the original bridge, and I believe the replacement was designed to allow Metrolink to run on street over the bridge.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Why not just orientate HS2 so that the station is under the airport ?

It could be built in a box below ground.

 

[edwin_m]

It should probably be noted that these two stations are not primarily airport stations. People don't generally fly from Manchester or Birmingham if travelling from London, least of all if they can be at Heathrow in next to no time via Old Oak. They are located near the airports, but they are primarily Parkway stations, in Birmingham's case replacing International in that role, and in Manchester's case replacing Stockport. Thus, while they do need to be accessible to the airports, that it's a bit more of a faff than at present doesn't really matter.

I think there is passive provision in place and the route has not been built on. Luton DART is now up to £300m. That is close the cost of the entire Trafford Park line which is longer and more complex than an extension of Metrolink. TfGM might be interested in completing the original route (past Wythenshawe hospital). Four stops and higher demand is a different situation for Birmingham.

Construction of the "Missing Link" on Metrolink helps to provide good public transport access to the new station from a wide area of south Manchester. There have also been various discussions of tram-trains to link to Stockport and elsewhere via a connection to the mid-Cheshire line at Baguley, but I'm not sure if these are being pursued at the moment.

Why not just orientate HS2 so that the station is under the airport ?

It could be built in a box below ground.

Because that would involve a lot of extra distance, including extra tunneling under the airport, and the extra cost wouldn't be worth it considering the small number of passengers likely to interchange with the airport itself. It would also complicate park and ride provision, where having a separate site makes it easier to charge less for rail parking than for airport parking.

 

[Meerkat]

the extra cost wouldn't be worth it considering the small number of passengers likely to interchange with the airport itself.

Isn't the plan that the HS2 station would also be NPR, and therefore the way all the Liverpool and northern TPE passengers access the airport?

 

[edwin_m]

Isn't the plan that the HS2 station would also be NPR, and therefore the way all the Liverpool and northern TPE passengers access the airport?

Yes, but it was for HS2 only at the time it was planned, and moving it now would set back both projects by several years.

 

[Meerkat]

Yes, but it was for HS2 only at the time it was planned, and moving it now would set back both projects by several years.

NPR doesn't involve moving the Airport station as far as I understand it - there is a triangular junction to the south between HS2 and the Liverpool line.

 

[edwin_m]

NPR doesn't involve moving the Airport station as far as I understand it - there is a triangular junction to the south between HS2 and the Liverpool line.

Exactly. They run through the station as planned for HS2 (not sure if more platforms were added for NPR), the combined route turns west then NPR continues west towards Liverpool where HS2 turns south again.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Given the level of reconstruction required to Metrolink in order to extend it west of the current station I'm not convinced it would be cheaper.

The tram is already planned to serve additional areas of wythenshaw that aren't already served, as well as the HS2 station and airport city. Changing these plans would be detrimental to thousands of people and would require new cost in the planning of a people mover. TfGM probably won't support such a plan and therefore, load all of the cost onto Manchester Airport Group and HS2 Ltd. It would be a lot cheaper for MAG and HS2 to sponsor say 20 trams than to build a people mover.

Then you get to the issue of having to purchase an entirely new network which will require a new depot and new rolling stock. Trams can use the rest of the vast already existing infrastructure.