Cumbrian stations platform extensions

[snowball]

I think this i the thread in which platform lengthening in Cumbria has been discussed previously.

Now a press release:

Multi-million pound platform extensions for passengers in Cumbria

More than £9.5m is being invested to extend platforms at five railway stations in Cumbria to make way for longer trains.

www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk

More than £9.5m is being invested to extend platforms at five railway stations in Cumbria to make way for longer trains.

Network Rail has already started work at Oxenholme, with Staveley, Kents Bank, Dalton and Ulverston stations to follow over the next three months.

Once complete, the scenic route between Manchester and Cumbria will be ready for longer trains - providing more seats for passengers visiting the iconic Lake District and South Cumbria.

Simon Daly, sponsor at Network Rail, said: “This work, and Northern’s planned roll out of longer trains, is crucial to increasing capacity on rail services between Cumbria, Lancashire and Greater Manchester.
“Rail travel is one of the greenest forms of transport in the UK. We want to encourage people to travel by rail – whether they’re going to work, visiting friends, or going on holiday to these fantastic destinations.”

Chris Jackson, regional director for Northern, said: “We welcome the commencement of these works and the improvement to the customer experience they will bring for passengers using our services to explore the Lake District. It is always important to invest in rail infrastructure to ensure we can keep the region moving, getting people from where they are to where they want to be.”

Though most of the work will not be disruptive to passengers, some railway closures will be needed for the platform extensions to take place.

The line between Ulverston and Barrow in Furness will shut from 8-16 October 2022.

Kents Bank station will be closed for one weekend on 17-18 September, while no trains will serve Staveley station on Sunday 2 or Sunday 23 October.

During the railway closures passengers will be kept on the move by rail replacement bus services.

 

[Agent_Squash]

I think this i the thread in which platform lengthening in Cumbria has been discussed previously.

Now a press release:

Multi-million pound platform extensions for passengers in Cumbria

More than £9.5m is being invested to extend platforms at five railway stations in Cumbria to make way for longer trains.

www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk

Ulverston seems to have been added into the scope of this project now, which is good - as a principle station on the line it really shouldn’t need SDO.

 

[ScottGallagher]

I've not heard of SDO at Ulverston , but certainly at Dalton where the Barrow platform is/was low for a 185 or 195 without the hump. Presumably this might be sorted out as well while the line is closed

 

[adamedwards]

Staverley will be interesting to do given how high up on the embankment it is. It also needs much easier access than the current almost ladder staircase which is hopeless for anyone with bags, buggies or bikes. Are there more details on specific station plans anywhere?

 

[Agent_Squash]

I've not heard of SDO at Ulverston , but certainly at Dalton where the Barrow platform is/was low for a 185 or 195 without the hump. Presumably this might be sorted out as well while the line is closed

Ulverston would need SDO when the 6 car 195s are introduced - should've been clearer!

Will Windermere actually fit 6x195?

 

[Some guy]

Ulverston would need SDO when the 6 car 195s are introduced - should've been clearer!

Will Windermere actually fit 6x195?

It’s most likely going to be 2 car 195s joined together like used with the Leeds to Chester service.

 

[SouthernR]

Using Google Earth, Windermere shows a 72m 3-car (185?) present, with a further 66m empty platform.

 

[Agent_Squash]

It’s most likely going to be 2 car 195s joined together like used with the Leeds to Chester service.

Makes sense. Did think they wanted 6 car for the Bolton corridor (and Cumbria just happens to benefit)

 

[507020]

Makes sense. Did think they wanted 6 car for the Bolton corridor (and Cumbria just happens to benefit)

Bolton has serious issues when less than 6 cars are used (see a 2 car Southport service immediately after 6 car Blackpool North was cancelled) but 3 car Windermere services I’ve used tend to be equally crush loaded when leaving Preston. It’s not a case of 6 car 195s being sent to Cumbria for the sake of Bolton, they really could do with the extra capacity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, I have noticed them getting increasingly busy at Preston. Yes, you can to some extent shove people onto the 6 car Blackpools using Advances, but people will generally not use those for airport trips and day trips to Manchester even if they are cheaper, the journey is too short and people want flexibility.

It would of course help if TPE could be bothered to operate their full service. The north WCML was basically only Avanti today, for example, and even some of that was missing.

 

[ScottGallagher]

Will the Ulverston platform extension on the Barrow platform really just be bringing back the pretty overgrown bit at the southern end into use?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Will the Ulverston platform extension on the Barrow platform really just be bringing back the pretty overgrown bit at the southern end into use?

One assumes so. I don't think it's pretty, it is dilapidated and like the whole station (and Grange too) reeks of 1990s neglect. Planters could be added to make it look nice.

 

[ScottGallagher]

I always thought Grange was quite well kept when I pass through certainly more so than Ulverston. Maybe I'm too distracted by the scenery!

 

[Agent_Squash]

I always thought Grange was quite well kept when I pass through certainly more so than Ulverston. Maybe I'm too distracted by the scenery!

Ulverston has been neglected since TPE years. It's got the potential to be such a nice station but has just been left to decay.

The only new thing has been the upgraded PIS and TVM.

Will the Ulverston platform extension on the Barrow platform really just be bringing back the pretty overgrown bit at the southern end into use?

Surely if it's an 'extension' it needs to be done to modern standards e.g. tactile paving etc? It would probably be easier to move everything onto the middle island, but then you'd lose step free access towards Barrow without a rebuild.

 

[Pinus contorta]

I see there is a 6 car running on one of the Barrow to Manchester Airport services all day today.

 

[Some guy]

I see there is a 6 car running on one of the Barrow to Manchester Airport services all day today.

The rear set will be locked out of used it’s normally the case the stick the rear set on the train to get it to Manchester depot

 

[thenorthern]

At Ulverston the overgrown part on Platform 3 (the island platform) has a ramp down then a ramp up between the used and unused parts.

If the unused part of Platform 3 was to return to use I assume that they would need to remove the ramps as mid way platform ramps are a not allowed nowadays.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At Ulverston the overgrown part on Platform 3 (the island platform) has a ramp down then a ramp up between the used and unused parts.

If the unused part of Platform 3 was to return to use I assume that they would need to remove the ramps as mid way platform ramps are a not allowed nowadays.

This used to be a barrow crossing with passenger access (I have used it myself) but I think it is very rarely if at all used these days, only permitted with staff assistance if at all. So I am sure they will be happy to cover it over and taxi wheelchair users to Grange or Dalton instead.

 

[ScottGallagher]

This used to be a barrow crossing with passenger access (I have used it myself) but I think it is very rarely if at all used these days, only permitted with staff assistance if at all. So I am sure they will be happy to cover it over and taxi wheelchair users to Grange or Dalton instead.

I believe it can only be used when booked in advance. Perhaps they will find a way to keep the ramp in situ until they can find a way to shoehorn lifts in.

Funny enough that reminded me of the Barrow crossing at Barrow (far end of plat 1) many years ago long before the lifts, perhaps late 80s. Remember using that.

 

[audigex]

Ulverston would need SDO when the 6 car 195s are introduced - should've been clearer!

Will Windermere actually fit 6x195?

Is Barrow expected to be getting a 6-car service? I guess it's simpler than the 2tph clockface timetable service that the line probably should have, but it could make sense on peak services

Still, passenger numbers would likely increase pretty dramatically if the service was improved to be reliable and useful, rather than just making the 1tph "take a guess when the next train will be" service longer. Local sentiment is very much that the train service is unreliable because of a combination of

- It's only hourly, so if one train is cancelled that's a big delay
- ... And hourly is a bit **** anyway. Often I have the choice of arriving at my destination either 50 minutes early or 10 minutes late
- No clockface timetable, so you can't just turn up and know there will be a train
- Barrow always seems to be the first service cancelled during disruption

Between those things, it doesn't feel like a very useful service - you can't just remember a single xx:05 time to turn up, the times are rarely convenient for whatever you actually want to do, if there's a problem you're massively delayed, and you're first on the chopping block

Oh and the fact the rail replacement bus winds its way through half the bloody lake district doesn't help - sometimes on busy services they'll run trains direct to Ulverston and Barrow, but other times you spend nearly 2 hours visiting every 3rd house in south Cumbria

Most people round here just default to the car because of that perception that the train service is unreliable. If there were trains at xx:00 and xx:30 (or whatever) then suddenly that becomes much more attractive - you can pretty much turn up and go, and if one diagram is cancelled then the other will be operating so you're not horrifically disrupted (an hour delay feels significantly worse than 30 minutes), and you have much more flexibility on actually using the service

Even if 2tph is impossible south of Preston due to lack of paths, bring back the TPE-style semi-fast services to Manchester hourly and slot in an all stations to Preston (or Lancaster, if necessary) in between

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is Barrow expected to be getting a 6-car service?

Yes. The reason is because these trains will run via Chorley which would (and already is, even with the slower run via Wigan) cause severe overcrowding between Manchester and Preston. The Blackpools are 6-car (currently 6.331 but possibly 6.323 in future) and so it needs to be the same as those.

 

[audigex]

Ah okay, so it's going back to the old TPE routing via Bolton, rather than the detour via Wigan?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ah okay, so it's going back to the old TPE routing via Bolton, rather than the detour via Wigan?

Yep. We will be back to the mid-2000s situation of no Wigan fasts and platform 1 at Wigan NW being basically out of use.

 

[Pinus contorta]

These things seem to come and go in cycles. It doesn't seem that long ago that they were busy telling us the service would be diverted away from WGN to avoid overcrowding. The commuters from Wigan were all using a fast service to Manchester stations, so the train company claimed.

 

[LWB]

Would a six car service mean any changes to the CS’s at Barrow?

 

[themiller]

Would a six car service mean any changes to the CS’s at Barrow?

There’s loads of room there. When the 37s were top and tailing the coaches before the dbsos were sorted out, they were sometimes stabled in the carriage sidings.

 

[12C]

Would a six car service mean any changes to the CS’s at Barrow?

There’s currently a new, larger fuel point under construction in anticipation of extra units. Also sidings 9, 10 and 11 have been returned to use for the first time since the 1980s to provide extra stabling capacity.

There’s loads of room there. When the 37s were top and tailing the coaches before the dbsos were sorted out, they were sometimes stabled in the carriage sidings.

You’d be surprised how busy it gets down there overnight!

 

[Pinus contorta]

Oh its a new fuel point. I wondered what was going on.

Went past the overbridge near the CS when they were on strike last month and it was busy with units parked up but there was still room for more.

 

[12C]

Oh its a new fuel point. I wondered what was going on.

Went past the overbridge near the CS when they were on strike last month and it was busy with units parked up but there was still room for more.

I’m not sure what time you walked past but it’s busiest between 1 and 4am, particularly at weekends. There is physically room for more as they’re quite long stabling roads but the issue is difficulty in carrying out shunt moves once all sidings are occupied to get units in the right position for the morning, especially with the relatively small number of staff based there.

 

[King Lazy]

I concur. Before the 2016 franchise change on a daily basis there would a minimum 4 TPE units for the 0435, 0532, 0615 and 0648 departures. There were also Northern units for the ECS to Millom, the ECS to Morecambe and the first 2 trains up the coast at 0600 and 0650 making a minimum of 8 units for 7 roads.

There sidings were clearly long enough to take additional trains but the units would then need to be stabled in the correct order.

The arrivals of the LHCS being 6 then later 5 vehicles added a little more requirement for the units to be stabled in the correct order.

Bringing in more 6-car units will do similar.

During the day the sidings get little use as units run through or return the way they came.

Another operational issue is that the Driver Operators only sign within the sidings and not onto the main line. So shunt moves to arrange trains in the correct order can only be made via the neck to the North. To use the station requires a Driver who signs the sidings and the route through Barrow.