If you could make just one infrastructure improvement in Manchester…

[Howardh]

Yes, Victoria is a disgrace. The thread doesn't allow us to knock it down, sadly, but it would help to make it a proper concourse more like that of Piccadilly. I'm not sure of the importance of lots of stuff "railside", plenty of stations don't, you're just expected to pass the gateline twice when changing (which isn't bad as it means more e-ticket scans) but what's there is very, very poor. One good option would be getting rid of the Arena bridge entirely with the Arena entered only from outside, which would free up some space. Another would be adding a mezzanine concourse over the bay platforms with level access to the footbridge which has been done at a number of stations quite effectively.

The overbridge concourse could easily be extended if the money was there, certainly eastbound towards the second over-bridge, and retail outlets provided there, rather than on the platforms where there's little room.

The problem with the barriers is at peak times when really busy, and pax trying to get through simply for the shops/toilets are merely adding to that queue, more so if their ticket (ie a System 1 paper) has to be checked. Twice, out and return!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The overbridge concourse could easily be extended if the money was there, certainly eastbound towards the second over-bridge, and retail outlets provided there, rather than on the platforms where there's little room.

The problem with the barriers is at peak times when really busy, and pax trying to get through simply for the shops/toilets are merely adding to that queue, more so if their ticket (ie a System 1 paper) has to be checked. Twice, out and return!

One thing you could do is to make the present gateline exit only, and have an entry-only gateline of a similar size on a mezzanine. Potentially even with another footbridge, making them both one way, with the new one being for exit from the platforms and having up escalators.

 

[telstarbox]

Castlefield was absolutely fine in the pre 1997 timetable. The things that broke it were the 1998 frequency increases and the removal of permissive working (you very often had three two car trains boarding together if things went awry).

The CLC wasn't, but that was because of the Liverpool to Norwich's terrible punctuality, and the loop at Glazebrook would have solved that.

I have a big problem with the idea of prioritising Ordsall, which should never have been built, over established services onto Castlefield, when TPE could run into the Picc main trainshed but North West services can't and must otherwise be relegated to the out of the way dump that is Victoria. The requirement for an airport service via Ordsall is the tail wagging the dog.

(I would withdraw some of this objection if Vic was rebuilt into something resembling a modern intercity station, but that's out of scope of this thread).

The best thing to do with Ordsall for now would be to accept it was a serious error and turn it into an urban park.

Presumably it makes sense for some of the Liverpool / Blackpool / Preston services into Piccadilly to carry on to the Airport, as they can't easily turn back to the west? I agree that it makes less sense for the east-facing services to reverse in and out across the Piccadilly approaches.
If you had a clockface 15 minute service from Liverpool - Manchester Piccadilly - Manchester Airport, it would be one change from the whole of Merseyrail and you could even close Liverpool Airport for redevelopment

 

[Howardh]

Presumably it makes sense for some of the Liverpool / Blackpool / Preston services into Piccadilly to carry on to the Airport, as they can't easily turn back to the west? I agree that it makes less sense for the east-facing services to reverse in and out across the Piccadilly approaches.
If you had a clockface 15 minute service from Liverpool - Manchester Piccadilly - Manchester Airport, it would be one change from the whole of Merseyrail and you could even close Liverpool Airport for redevelopment

Liverpool's airport...any plans for rail or metro/tram connection? That's where Manchester wins unless you are very local to Liverpool. Top-of-head thinking, if/when HS2 is built linking with Manchester Airport (will it? From the north??), then is it possible/likely to connect the already existing lines from Liverpool to HS2 (eg near Golborne) using slower trains so there's a direct Liverpool/MIA service avoiding Piccadilly altogether?

So as the topic suggests, could a direct line to there from Liverpool reduce congestion and the need for services along the Castlefield Corridor, maybe reducing the trains by a couple per hour trying to get to and through 13/14, splitting those needing the airport from those needing the city and eastbound?? So the infrastructure wouldn't be built inside Manchester (centre) but would improve things there?

HS2 aside, I would absolutely make a new line from, say, Birchwood and under T1/3 to the current station, or even a new station @Devenport Greenwood and link to the terminals by moving walkway.

 

[daodao]

Presumably it makes sense for some of the Liverpool / Blackpool / Preston services into Piccadilly to carry on to the Airport, as they can't easily turn back to the west? I agree that it makes less sense for the east-facing services to reverse in and out across the Piccadilly approaches.
If you had a clockface 15 minute service from Liverpool - Manchester Piccadilly - Manchester Airport, it would be one change from the whole of Merseyrail and you could even close Liverpool Airport for redevelopment

Manchester Ringway Airport is now rated anecdotally and objectively one of the worst large airports in the world.

On satisfaction ratings, AIRHELP SCORE 2022 classes it as position 146 out of 151 airports surveyed.

Best Airport Rankings Worldwide + Airport Ratings | AirHelp Score | AirHelp

Global Airport Rankings for 2023 from AirHelp with each airport rated based on on-time performance, quality of service, and passenger sentiment factors.

www.airhelp.com

AIRLINEQUALITY gives it a score of 2/10.

Airport Customer Review Ratings - SKYTRAX

Check out Airport scores based on the aggregate ratings from their Customer Reviews that include cleanliness, waiting times, shopping, restaurants, cafes

www.airlinequality.com

It would therefore be desirable to discourage its use, and for those outside Greater Manchester to consider using their local airport instead.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you had a clockface 15 minute service from Liverpool - Manchester Piccadilly - Manchester Airport, it would be one change from the whole of Merseyrail

I've certainly proposed that as a post-NPR, post electrification CLC service - it wouldn't be 15 minute clockface throughout as that would be too slow stopping everywhere, but it could be half stopping one side of Warrington and half stopping the other (all stopping at major stations i.e. South Parkway, Widnes, Warrington W, Warrington C, Birchwood and Urmston), giving a consistent journey time for the end to end service. And decide what to do with Glazebrook - new ecovillage and foot/cycle bridge to west Irlam or closure, it's valueless as it is.

and you could even close Liverpool Airport for redevelopment

If you've used Manchester Airport recently you'll realise that would require major redevelopment - it couldn't cope with the passenger load reliably, it can't cope now.

Manchester Ringway Airport is now rated anecdotally and objectively one of the worst large airports in the world.

And from recent experience I totally agree. It can't cope with the passenger volumes - to perform as well as other airports it needs passenger loading to roughly halve, I reckon.

 

[snowball]

Top-of-head thinking, if/when HS2 is built linking with Manchester Airport (will it? From the north??), then is it possible/likely to connect the already existing lines from Liverpool to HS2 (eg near Golborne) using slower trains so there's a direct Liverpool/MIA service avoiding Piccadilly altogether?

Under current official HS2/NPR plans, there will be no link between Manchester airport HS2 station and Bolton/Wigan/Preston/Scotland, and there would continue to be none even if the Golborne link were to be resurrected.

The airport HS2 station will link to London, Birmingham, and later Warrington BQ, Liverpool, Leeds, York, Newcastle (the last three via reversal at Piccadilly High Speed).

 

[Howardh]

Under current official HS2/NPR plans, there will be no link between Manchester airport HS2 station and Bolton/Wigan/Preston/Scotland.

The airport HS2 station will link to London, Birmingham, and later Warrington BQ, Liverpool, Leeds, York, Newcastle (the last three via reversal at Piccadilly High Speed).

Yeah, it's the latter point I was referring to, the chance to get pax directly from Liverpool and the north to the airport but avoiding the centre of Manchester. If you can directly link from Liverpool then surely that would also entail a direct link from Glasgow as it's the same new line? However that's away from the thread, my point being even if there was no HS2, it's possible to connect the airport to Liverpool via a new line from (say )Burtonwood thus relieveing the pressure on manchester by taking trains away that would go through 13/14.

Looking at a map it's actually quite feasable but a new station would have to be built NW of the airport unless either a long loop around the airport was used, or a tunnel built making it dar more expensive. Liverpool Airport might not be so enthusiastic!

Edit; might be cheaper to use the old Cadishead/Timperley line, curve onto the current Altrincham/Knutsford line, then a new line from near Ashley to the airport.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yeah, it's the latter point I was referring to, the chance to get pax directly from Liverpool and the north to the airport but avoiding the centre of Manchester.

This is simply unnecessary. Changing at Manchester Piccadilly is not a major effort.

There is one thing, and one alone, that would seriously increase volumes of passengers to and from Manchester Airport by rail - a 24 hour rail service throughout the North. As it's a base for low cost airlines, the vast majority of capacity is very early (departure) or very late (arrival), and the North's rail system doesn't provide for that at all, bar a very thin TPE service on one route if that even still runs.

You need to be able to arrive at the airport by 0430-0500 or thereabouts, and depart it around 0000-0100, or it's just pointless.

 

[snowball]

If you can directly link from Liverpool then surely that would also entail a direct link from Glasgow as it's the same new line?

Since the Golborne link was dropped, unless and until it is reinstated or replaced by some as yet unknown alternative, trains between Glasgow and any part of HS2 would be confined to the existing WCML north of Crewe.

NPR is planned to cross under the WCML at Warrington BQ but I have not heard of any plans for a curve there. It's a built-up area.

Before the Golborne link was dropped, the London-Glasgow and Liverpool-Manchester routes would have crossed near Lymm, but with only the SW and SE curves existing.

 

[Howardh]

Since the Golborne link was dropped, unless and until it is reinstated or replaced by some as yet unknown alternative, trains between Glasgow and any part of HS2 would be confined to the existing WCML north of Crewe.

NPR is planned to cross under the WCML at Warrington BQ but I have not heard of any plans for a curve there. It's a built-up area.

Before the Golborne link was dropped, the London-Glasgow and Liverpool-Manchester routes would have crossed near Lymm, but with only the SW and SE curves existing.

I wasn't aware it had been dropped, if it's a cost cutting matter then for the sake of a few bob more, it should be re-instated so pax from the north can get to the airport! Half-A-Job Britain!!

Although when HS2 is completed, I suppose those wishing to use connecting flights to Heathrow from Manchester will simply go direct by rail to Heathrow, if the price is right.

Agree with @Bletchleyite suggestion of more trains through the night, it's awful (and expensive) trying to get to the airport from Bolton for a 7am flight, especially when you have to be there around 5am. It's possible by bus, just, looking at current timetables, but involves changing in Manchester. I hope that the new Beeline solves that, but I'm not holding my beer.

 

[snowball]

I wasn't aware it had been dropped, if it's a cost cutting matter then for the sake of a few bob more, it should be re-instated so pax from the north can get to the airport! Half-A-Job Britain!!

It's not to save money, it was objections from some Tory MPs when Boris Johnson needed their votes to survive a bit longer as PM. There was a thread about it:

Shapps "promised to scrap HS2 Golborne spur"

The Guardian website is claiming that Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, has privately promised to drop the Golborne spur. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/06/senior-tory-graham-brady-grant-shapps-privately-assured-hs2-branch-scrapped Exclusive: Assurances offered to Graham...

www.railforums.co.uk

It was only a rumour when the thread began but it later became an announcement.

 

[daodao]

It's not to save money, it was objections from some Tory MPs when Boris Johnson needed their votes to survive a bit longer as PM.

The Golborne spur would have run through Sir Graham Brady's constituency, in particular a rural area north of the River Bollin in the Bowdon/Dunham/Warburton ward.

 

[javelin]

Unless I've missed something, there were never any plans for services from the North/Scotland using the Golborne Link to approach Manchester Airport/Piccadilly.

Thanks to the way the tunnel was designed I doubt there'd be much in the way of spare capacity over and above the HS2/NPR commitments to achieve this.

 

[Northumbriana]

For now, yes. Once electrification reaches Stalybridge, 2tph EMU Staly to Airport could be added. As these would be self contained and would have good recovery time, they could be actively managed to slot in nicely even with delays and not to clog things up. No long distance services should use Ordsall.

Self contained? Does that mean it would have the two tracks from the Ordsall curve to Stalybridge to itself? I've taken self contained to mean dedicated tracks with zero sharing with any other services.

Castlefield could end up with something like 2tph from Stalybridge, 4tph from Blackpool/Southport via Salford Crescent and 6th from the CLC line?

I've certainly proposed that as a post-NPR, post electrification CLC service - it wouldn't be 15 minute clockface throughout as that would be too slow stopping everywhere, but it could be half stopping one side of Warrington and half stopping the other (all stopping at major stations i.e. South Parkway, Widnes, Warrington W, Warrington C, Birchwood and Urmston), giving a consistent journey time for the end to end service. And decide what to do with Glazebrook - new ecovillage and foot/cycle bridge to west Irlam or closure, it's valueless as it is.



If you've used Manchester Airport recently you'll realise that would require major redevelopment - it couldn't cope with the passenger load reliably, it can't cope now.



And from recent experience I totally agree. It can't cope with the passenger volumes - to perform as well as other airports it needs passenger loading to roughly halve, I reckon.

Maybe they should build a new joint Liverpool & Manchester Airport and close down John Lennon and Ringway? It could be built on the core HS2 line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Self contained? Does that mean it would have the two tracks from the Ordsall curve to Stalybridge to itself?

Clearly not, because of the minor (!) matter of the main TransPennine Express service.

I just meant that it would be its own diagrams with no interworking with anything else and plenty of layover at both ends, so it could be inserted and removed as necessary to fit around other services being late, on a basis designed to avoid adverse impact on Castlefield or TPE.

 

[HSTEd]

Thanks to the way the tunnel was designed I doubt there'd be much in the way of spare capacity over and above the HS2/NPR commitments to achieve this.

Simple envelope calculations tend to indicate that the tunnel would be able to support 14tph or more in each direction, and ultimately, if another access shaft was to be added later it is unlikely to cost anything like as much as would be required for any significant new length of trackwork.

There is even a place to break into the tunnel system every few hundred metres without going into the running tunnels.... (The cross passages)

 

[xotGD]

All I ask for is an exit from Oxford Road in the direction of Castlefield.

Would save me a good few minutes walking.

 

[Howardh]

All I ask for is an exit from Oxford Road in the direction of Castlefield.

Would save me a good few minutes walking.

Can you go down the steps, turn right past the pub and right again down the street?

 

[Greybeard33]

Simple envelope calculations tend to indicate that the tunnel would be able to support 14tph or more in each direction, and ultimately, if another access shaft was to be added later it is unlikely to cost anything like as much as would be required for any significant new length of trackwork.

There is even a place to break into the tunnel system every few hundred metres without going into the running tunnels.... (The cross passages)

It is in the public domain that HS2 Ltd has stated the maximum capacity of the Manchester tunnel, as designed, is 14tph. The IRP envisaged 10tph, 3tph Euston + 1tph growth path, 2tph Birmingham and 4tph NPR Liverpool. There is also a possible option of routing 2tph Sheffield - Liverpool services this way, instead of via Stockport and the CLC line. Furthermore, there might be a need for ECS paths to/from the Crewe rolling stock depot, to step up/down between 200m and 400m long formations.

 

[HSTEd]

It is in the public domain that HS2 Ltd has stated the maximum capacity of the Manchester tunnel, as designed, is 14tph. The IRP envisaged 10tph, 3tph Euston + 1tph growth path, 2tph Birmingham and 4tph NPR Liverpool. There is also a possible option of routing 2tph Sheffield - Liverpool services this way, instead of via Stockport and the CLC line. Furthermore, there might be a need for ECS paths to/from the Crewe rolling stock depot, to step up/down between 200m and 400m long formations.

Where would Liverpool-Sheffield trains go east of Manchester Piccadilly HS? I don't see a sensible route to Sheffield without a lot more spending.

As for ECS paths.... the TOCs might want them, but I can't see that they actually need them.

They might want to play games with fine tuning capacity, but that is likely to serve the public interest far less than using those paths for actual in-service trains.

Myself I'd go:

4tph Liverpool-Leeds-beyond
6tph London-Manchester-Leeds-beyond
2tph Birmingham-Manchester-Leeds-beyond

And hold two paths in reserve

 

[daodao]

Myself I'd go:

4tph Liverpool-Leeds-beyond
6tph London-Manchester-Leeds-beyond
2tph Birmingham-Manchester-Leeds-beyond

Your proposal envisages 12 tph from Manchester to Leeds, which would necessitate a completely new separate high speed line for the whole route between these 2 cities, including a new station at Leeds or a massive extension to the existing one there. I thought that the current vision for NPR had been downgraded to use some of the existing lines, which have slower stopping passenger and freight traffic, so your wish is at best in the dim and distant future.

 

[Greybeard33]

Where would Liverpool-Sheffield trains go east of Manchester Piccadilly HS? I don't see a sensible route to Sheffield without a lot more spending.

After leaving Piccadilly, the NPR Piccadilly - Marsden route would initially join the existing Ardwick - Ashburys alignment before diving underground. A junction at Ashburys would enable 2tph Liverpool - Sheffield NPR trains to be routed via Reddish North, Marple and the Hope Valley line (electrification and upgrade required). This is discussed in the IRP as an "alternative considered", although not funded as part of "core NPR".

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

This is simply unnecessary. Changing at Manchester Piccadilly is not a major effort.

There is one thing, and one alone, that would seriously increase volumes of passengers to and from Manchester Airport by rail - a 24 hour rail service throughout the North. As it's a base for low cost airlines, the vast majority of capacity is very early (departure) or very late (arrival), and the North's rail system doesn't provide for that at all, bar a very thin TPE service on one route if that even still runs.

You need to be able to arrive at the airport by 0430-0500 or thereabouts, and depart it around 0000-0100, or it's just pointless.

Another one of your (in)famous generalisations. Lo-co's standard M.O. is to send based aircraft out within a couple of hours of an airport opening for departures and then keeping them busy for 14-16 hours so of course last arrivals are late. But those aircraft (or their equivalents from other bases) will typically return to Manchester two or even three times during the day and those daytime flights are also filled up as much as possible. And most long-haul routes turning round in Manchester do so at more sociable times of day. Yes 24/7 rail service would be handy though in practice might be of more use to airport employees than passengers and wouldn't suddenly add many thousands of extra rail passengers to the airport. Quite frankly your assertion that Manchester's flight capacity is skewed almost entirely to the extremes of the day is just plain wrong. As are your endless demands that its rail connection be restricted to a shuttle to/from the city centre "because that's good enough for London so..."

Yes it makes for a timetable planning conundrum but if the railway isn't trying to meet the expressed needs of passengers (and stakeholders) then we might as well shut the whole lot down.