Idea for a new line to link Manchester Airport with the Mid-Cheshire Line (and possibly Stockport)

[PTR 444]

With the recent discussion on Mid-Cheshire services upon reopening of the Middlewich Line, I was wondering how it might be possible to fit more trains on the stretch from Northwich to Manchester. Then the thought struck me, why not extend the Manchester Airport spur westwards to meet the Mid-Cheshire Line?

The benefits? Well firstly, all Mid-Cheshire Line trains could be routed via Manchester Airport, which would create new direct connections and also relieve paths by combining some services together. For example, the Blackpool - Airports could extend to Chester and Crewe via Northwich, absorbing the existing Mid-Cheshire service. The TfW North Wales - Piccadilly service could also divert via the Mid-Cheshire and this new chord, creating a faster journey between North Wales, Chester and the Airport compared to the existing route via Warrington.

As for the existing stretch of Mid-Cheshire Line between Ashley and Stockport, the bit south of Altrincham could be converted to Metrolink, joining it up with the Airport Line. North of there to Stockport may need to stay open for freight, but could be used for the occasional passenger diversion.

The downside of this proposal is that stations on the Mid-Cheshire will no longer have a direct service to Stockport, although with a few extra pounds you could build another chord to join up the Airport with Stockport (essentially diverting the Mid-Cheshire line via the Airport). The question is where would you put it?

Key to map colours:
Red - New Ashley - Airport link
Yellow - Metrolink Altrincham - Airport extension
Green - Possible ideas for an Airport - Stockport rail link

 

[daodao]

With the recent discussion on Mid-Cheshire services upon reopening of the Middlewich Line, I was wondering how it might be possible to fit more trains on the stretch from Northwich to Manchester. Then the thought struck me, why not extend the Manchester Airport spur westwards to meet the Mid-Cheshire Line?

The benefits? Well firstly, all Mid-Cheshire Line trains could be routed via Manchester Airport, which would create new direct connections and also relieve paths by combining some services together. For example, the Blackpool - Airports could extend to Chester and Crewe via Northwich, absorbing the existing Mid-Cheshire service. The TfW North Wales - Piccadilly service could also divert via the Mid-Cheshire and this new chord, creating a faster journey between North Wales, Chester and the Airport compared to the existing route via Warrington.

As for the existing stretch of Mid-Cheshire Line between Ashley and Stockport, the bit south of Altrincham could be converted to Metrolink, joining it up with the Airport Line. North of there to Stockport may need to stay open for freight, but could be used for the occasional passenger diversion.

The downside of this proposal is that stations on the Mid-Cheshire will no longer have a direct service to Stockport, although with a few extra pounds you could build another chord to join up the Airport with Stockport (essentially diverting the Mid-Cheshire line via the Airport). The question is where would you put it?

Key to map colours:
Red - New Ashley - Airport link
Yellow - Metrolink Altrincham - Airport extension
Green - Possible ideas for an Airport - Stockport rail link

These are crayonista suggestions. The alignment SW of the Airport is proposed to be used for HS2, but avoiding the settlement of Warburton Green to the SE of Hale Barns, which this proposed route cuts across. Some of the land is green belt. As for the links to Stockport, several cut across existing suburban housing.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As for the existing stretch of Mid-Cheshire Line between Ashley and Stockport, the bit south of Altrincham could be converted to Metrolink, joining it up with the Airport Line. North of there to Stockport may need to stay open for freight, but could be used for the occasional passenger diversion.

How do you consider the existing very heavy rail freight services that use the single-track sections when talking of conversion to Metrolink. The waste compaction plant in Newton Heath that was recently rebuilt still has a dedicated heavy-rail only track and the Metrolink station at Newton Heath and Moston is only a single platform station on the single Metrolink line, as trams and heavy freight trains are not allowed to share the same trackwork.

 

[PTR 444]

How do you consider the existing very heavy rail freight services that use the single-track sections when talking of conversion to Metrolink. The waste compaction plant in Newton Heath that was recently rebuilt still has a dedicated heavy-rail only track and the Metrolink station at Newton Heath and Moston is only a single platform station on the single Metrolink line, as trams and heavy freight trains are not allowed to share the same trackwork.

Could run tram-trains on the section south of Altrincham perhaps? Or reduce the heavy rail to single track running between Altrincham and Ashley with the other track converted to light rail.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Hasn't a Mid Cheshire Line -> Manchester Airport heavy rail link been an aspiration dating back to just before rail privatisation in the 1990s?

The proposal appears to have been referred to as the "Manchester Airport Western Link". Presumably mothballed due to the economic pressures of the time.

More here...

Manchester Airport Western Link

www.mcrua.org.uk

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Could run tram-trains on the section south of Altrincham perhaps?

Indeed so, but tram-trains were not specifically mentioned in the original posting on the thread. I do realise that this is a "speculative" thread, but logic decrees a little thought as to the numbers of required tram-trains required and the cost of these as manufacturers would need a certain minimum number of them to be ordered .

Time to pin the metaphorical placard onto the first thread that states "Do not ask for realism, as a refusal often offends"

 

[PTR 444]

These are crayonista suggestions.

Not necessarily if the article linked by @Mcr Warrior above is stating this:

No duplication with HS2

There has been confusion between HS2 and the Western Link with some commentators saying that the HS2 station at Manchester Airport will make the Western Link unnecessary. This is a misunderstanding. HS2 is a north-south railway whereas the Western Link is an east-west one. The places that would benefit from the Western Link are not served by HS2 – they serve different markets. Fortunately, the HS2 proposals do not impede or obstruct the route of the Western Link in any way.

 

[daodao]

Not necessarily if the article linked by @Mcr Warrior above is stating this:

MCRUA (Mid Cheshire Rail Users Association) is merely a rail advocacy group with no official government standing, although it does hold regular meetings with local Northern management to represent the views of local rail users.

 

[Bald Rick]

The airport spur has, rather obviously, the small matter of an airport in the way preventing a westward extension.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The airport spur has, rather obviously, the small matter of an airport in the way preventing a westward extension.

Indeed, little chance of a good portion of any Manchester Airport Western Link being built on the level, which would undoubtedly add to the cost.

 

[snowball]

I'm pretty sure the western link has been an official proposal, not just a piece of crayonism, though relevant official bodies have shown a quite low level of interest in it for quite a number of years now. I think a development plan of either the airport or the local authority included a protected line for it, and some agitation was required to prevent them deleting it. I remember a post by Joseph_Locke several years ago, either on this forum or Skyscrapercity, in which he described its alignment. It would begin by slightly realigning southwards the west ends of the two southernmost platforms at the airport station. It would skirt the south end of the station building and pass under the apron (Joseph_Locke used the phrase "cover and cut", as distinct from the more usual "cut and cover", for the tunnel construction method.) It would remain to the SE side of the HS2 line and would join the Mid-Cheshire line north of Mobberley. It was conceived before HS2 and might need to be diverted NWward from the previously proposed route in order to share the HS2 corridor.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Hasn't a Mid Cheshire Line -> Manchester Airport heavy rail link been an aspiration dating back to just before rail privatisation in the 1990s?

Can you confirm that it was what was called the Office of Rail Regulation (now under a different name) that cancelled that particular project?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Can you confirm that it was what was called the Office of Rail Regulation (now under a different name) that cancelled that particular project?

Unable to advise/confirm on that, but clearly the OP's idea isn't completely new, and also obviously hasn't happened yet.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

On the map, the link coloured green seems to be "belt and braces" in relation to the matter of the A555 road section which now runs from the Hazel Grove area to Manchester Airport, which incurred quite an amount of money to be built. I am somewhat unsure where the green line projection runs in the Stanley Green area on the Cheadle Hulme/Heald Green border area, but a new 850 home development is in process of being constructed in the line area.

 

[Basil Jet]

Some of the land is green belt.

... which stops housing or factories being built on it, but it is no barrier to building railways, or roads, or even motorway service stations.

 

[The Planner]

Considering the amount of HS2 construction trains that would be heading for Ashley if 2b goes ahead, it wouldn't be a good idea.

 

[Jack Hay]

Hasn't a Mid Cheshire Line -> Manchester Airport heavy rail link been an aspiration dating back to just before rail privatisation in the 1990s?

The proposal appears to have been referred to as the "Manchester Airport Western Link". Presumably mothballed due to the economic pressures of the time.

More here...

Manchester Airport Western Link

www.mcrua.org.uk

The MCRUA page referenced does describe the background to the 'Western Link' proposal and the current status as I understand it. The airport is aware of it and the airport's strategic development plan has protected the route across their land so as not to impede the link. The HS2 proposed plans do not get in the way of the Western Link at any point.. The proposal was made as part of the original proposal for Manchester Airport station - the idea was a new through line from Heald Green to Mobberley via the airport, but only the eastern part was built. The case for building the Western Link is probably stronger now than it was in the 1990s because of congestion elsewhere. N. Wales/Chester trains to the Airport would use it, freeing up paths at Castlefield; and if Mid Cheshire trains switched, this would free up paths at Stockport. Existing paths between Piccadilly and the Airport would be used by extending current terminators westwards, so no new paths are needed around Manchester to replace those freed up. That could help the business case considerably.

 

[cle]

Would the current station include through-running or would it need to be rebuilt fully underground - assuming a pair of longer islands?

It's a tough one, because it makes sense in some regards. But demand is so imbalanced on each side.

Where to send trains? There is an awful lot of nothing until you get to Chester - Knutsford and Northwich are larger but still relatively small and either one would need another platform to provide a more intense service. Perhaps this is where Northwich-Middlewich-Sandbach-Crewe becomes vaguely interesting - as you can now get to Manchester properly, not via Stockport (and the Airport link might be handy) - but you may also need to think about Greenbank-WCML options. And yes to Chester/NW.

Hale goes full Metrolink. Between there and Mobberley, freight only (outside of Met hours, if workable), and Ashley station closes.

 

[snowball]

Would the current station include through-running or would it need to be rebuilt fully underground - assuming a pair of longer islands?

See #11 for one version which leaves the station building intact.

Separately there has been talk of lengthening the platforms. I imagine that would be eastward, probably requiring replacement of the small bridge over the line connecting two car parks.

The building design separately incorporates space for westward extension of the Metrolink tracks through the basement of the building.

 

[daodao]

Hale goes full Metrolink. Between there and Mobberley, freight only (outside of Met hours, if workable), and Ashley station closes.

This suggestion would cause the following issues:

• there is too much freight to restrict to it to overnight hours between Altrincham and Hale, unless one track was used for Metrolink and 1 for freight trains; Metrolink even as Tram-Train can't safely be mixed with heavy freight trains on the same tracks
• while Ashley station isn't used much, it would lead to loss of direct public transport links from Altrincham/Hale south to Knutsford and beyond

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Where the Metrolink currently ends at Manchester Airport, is there already an onward tunnel section ready to accept the extension that will call at Wythenshawe Hospital?

 

[snowball]

Where the Metrolink currently ends at Manchester Airport, is there already an onward tunnel section ready to accept the extension that will call at Wythenshawe Hospital?

There's certainly space in the basement of the station for the first few tens of metres of the extension. Johnny de Rivative has claimed on Skyscrapercity that this continues for some distance further as a tunnel under the coach/taxi access roads near the Skylink, and maybe under the roundabout to the north (the extension would be curving sharply to the right) but I'm a bit doubtful about that.

 

[Jack Hay]

See #11 for one version which leaves the station building intact.

Separately there has been talk of lengthening the platforms. I imagine that would be eastward, probably requiring replacement of the small bridge over the line connecting two car parks.

The building design separately incorporates space for westward extension of the Metrolink tracks through the basement of the building.

The existing heavy rail station is correctly aligned for an extension to Mobberley. It was designed that way. This is why there's a slight curve in the platforms. It also means that platform extension, if it's implemented for TPE trains, will be at the buffer stop end.

 

[The Planner]

See #11 for one version which leaves the station building intact.

Separately there has been talk of lengthening the platforms. I imagine that would be eastward, probably requiring replacement of the small bridge over the line connecting two car parks.

The building design separately incorporates space for westward extension of the Metrolink tracks through the basement of the building.

That is correct, there is a scheme to increase the platform lengths, not by a huge amount, but eastwards.

The existing heavy rail station is correctly aligned for an extension to Mobberley. It was designed that way. This is why there's a slight curve in the platforms. It also means that platform extension, if it's implemented for TPE trains, will be at the buffer stop end.

If they go that way, it will be separate to the scheme above.

 

[Greybeard33]

The existing heavy rail station is correctly aligned for an extension to Mobberley. It was designed that way. This is why there's a slight curve in the platforms. It also means that platform extension, if it's implemented for TPE trains, will be at the buffer stop end.

As I recall the previous discussion, alluded to in #11, it is the southernmost platform (the third to be constructed, but now numbered P1) that is suitably aligned to allow the track to be extended westward under the apron to form the western link. That is the reason for the puzzlingly large gap between the P1 and P2 tracks. The original two platforms, now P2 and P3, were designed without regard for future extension.

 

[snowball]

Indeed no realignment of platform 1 is required.

Found a relevant post by Joseph_Locke giving radii of the curves: Skyscrapercity, thread now known as "Metrolink current proposals" (though the post is about heavy rail), post #36588, March 18, 2014:

P2 will begin curving under Outwood Lane on a flat curve (~1000m) and P1 will turn (~500m) off the west end of the current platform . By the time they are under the roundabout *hey presto* they are parallel.

The proposal doesn't seem to have got any nearer happening in 8.5 years!

 

[Greybeard33]

Could run tram-trains on the section south of Altrincham perhaps?

The TfGM Five Year Transport Delivery Plan, published last year, includes a proposal for a light rail tram-train line, northwest of HS2, from the Airport to join the Mid-Cheshire near Ashley. This might be in addition to, or an alternative to, the heavy rail Western Link further southeast:

MAP 3
These are the interventions which need further investigation or development
in order to identify future options and determine feasibility. This work may
identify interventions that could be delivered by 2026, and we will aim to
achieve that wherever possible, but most are longer term projects that would
be delivered in later years.

Subject to funding and business case approval

Our Five Year Transport Delivery Plan

greater manchester transport strategy

tfgm.com

 

[HSTEd]

• there is too much freight to restrict to it to overnight hours between Altrincham and Hale, unless one track was used for Metrolink and 1 for freight trains; Metrolink even as Tram-Train can't safely be mixed with heavy freight trains on the same tracks

Don't tram trains run on a freight line in Sheffield all the time?
Or indeed light rail vehicles on Tyne and Wear Metro run on the same tracks as freight trains all the time?

Modern train protection largely obviates these issues.

 

[Greybeard33]

Don't tram trains run on a freihgt line in Sheffield all the time?
Or indeed light rail vehicles on Tyne and Wear Metro run on the same tracks as freight trains all the time?

Modern train protection largely obviates these issues.

I believe the crashworthiness standard of tram-trains, such as TfGM is proposing to procure as next generation Metrolink vehicles, is insufficient for track sharing with 200km/h passenger trains. But no issue with freight trains.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I believe the crashworthiness standard of tram-trains, such as TfGM is proposing to procure as next generation Metrolink vehicles, is insufficient for track sharing with 200km/h passenger trains. But no issue with freight trains.

Noting some of the stone traffic trains, with very heavy loadings, why would a collision between such a freight train as those and a tram-train not be an issue?

I will always remember the nuclear flask test against a heavy diesel locomotive many years ago, where the wagon-mounted nuclear flask fared far better than the locomotive. Incidentally, was the locomotive a Class 45/Class 46 one?