• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Manchester Oxford Road Development

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,515
Location
Somewhere, not in London
As promised from the HS2 thread.

Metrolink viaducts are much cheaper and easyer to construct than Heavy Rail ones. And Oxford road is currently missed off the map. And with how one sides the Metrolink network is becoming, with so much running through Cornbrook, and not that much through Victoria, Oxford Roads former bays would provide a handy place to terminate some metrolink services in the CC. I'll take this further in another thread.

As some background, I don't think the platforms at Oxford Road are long enough, nor do I think that there is going to be enough track capacity in Manchester to cope with the Metrolink Expansion, even with the 2CC scheme. So, what I would be proposing in slightly more detail.


When the new platforms are built over Fairfeild St at Piccadilly, there will be an opertunity to build a turnback siding between the slow lines (where it will not affect the services entering or leaving the platforms to the South East).

I beleive that this could be used for the CLC line services that currently terminate at Oxford Road.

Alternativly, place 4 additional platforms over Fairfeild St, using the two central platforms for services terminating from Oxford Road, not only the CLC line services, but perhaps select Manchester - Scotland services or some from the Bolton direction.

Either way, either of these provisions should realisticly provide space for 4tph to terminate from OR in Piccadilly without causing issues.

Therefore:

Extend platforms 1 and 4 at Oxford Road to 8 car Length, and change track layout slightly so that they can call here on entry, with a 4 car service on 2 & 3 without disruping entry or exit, there is space, just, I hope, there should be.

Platform 4 would cut off the existing platform 5, and old 6, as services will no longer need to terminate here from Deansgate and will instead do so at Piccadilly, or in platforms 2 & 3 in times of congestion, this would be OK.

Now, onto the Metrolink, some of you may have read a recent proposal for a Tram/Train for the Alt'ham line, and there would be spare space for two platforms at Oxford Road, and anything potentially (in future) 10tph on each route through Cornbrook, now oviously this would need Cornbrook and the Metrolink lines over the Viaduct to become 4 track, but this again, is easilly do-able. Cornbrook would need to be re-built into a staggered two island platform station, as this is how the lines enter the station.

Deansgate G-Mex would recive some treatment aswell, but this time, the islands would be paired by route. Oviously with a crossover or so on either side. Preferably with a grade seperated overbridge on the viaduct prior to the station to avoid too many conficts.

Now, the northern most pair would continue down onto the overbridge, and into St Peter's Square, as normal, the CC routes, IMO, will have a limit of 20tph/route.

So upto 40tph will be the upper limit for reliable connections across Manchester.

Now. Lets say all possible routes are built from Cornbrook...

So...

Eccles
Media City
Alt'ham
Stockport via East Didsbury
Port Salford
Airport via Wythenshawe

Now, to fit this in with 40tph the maximum, only two routes can have a healthy, tram line 10tph, these being East Disbury and Alt'ham.

Now suppose there is to be more lines, to Walkden, Leigh, anywhere, there would be no space for these, and TfGM will not want to reduce service, the same if one of the other routes needs more services.

The 2nd island at Deansgate G-Mex would extend from the Eastern end of the viaduct, on a new bridge over the road, and then onto a semi open viaduct, down paralell to the Railway Viaduct, and into the space formally used by Platforms 5 and 6 at Oxford Road.

Now, the barriers at Oxford Road could easilly be set to accept Metrolink card stock, it would provide an excelent and much faster link to Piccadilly and the Oxford Road corridor, via the Oxford Road bus stops.

It would also have a theoretical capacity of up to 20tph, maybe more if a third platform where built on the extened viaduct.

Now, back to my Tram-Train proposals.

I would be looking to run these additional, 200 seat, 4 carrage, 1500hp (Diesel) generator under two carrages (or some other tech developed by PPM), tram/trains into Oxford Road. This would have several benifits.

1) They would run almost exclusivly on segrigated inferstucture, so could potentially be longer than the current limit of 4 cars of tram lenth, possibly a bit longer carrages, and more seating, better designed for Mid Cheshire Line commuters, the unit would primeraly be a train.
2) Longer units would also be able to have controlled discharge toilets, nessesarry.
3) Platforms on the route wouldn't need that much lengthening, the platforms are already reasonably long.

I'll cut the benifits and look at an example timetable.

This will be initally designed for maximum connectivity and simplicity.

5tph Bury - Alt'ham via CC2
5tph Bury - Piccadilly via CC1
5tph Rochdale - Piccadilly via CC1
5tph Oldham - Eccles via CC2
5tph Ashton U Lyne - East Didsbury CC1
5tph Ashton U Lyne - Stockport CC2
5tph Port Salford - Victoria CC1
5tph Media City UK - Victoria CC2
5tph Oxford Road - Airport
3tph Oxford Road - Alt'ham - Chester via Mid Cheshire
2tph Oxford Road - Alt'ham

This would give two types of stock two platforms at Oxford Road with 7tph of Tram stock, and 3tph of TramTrain stock. There would be a link for tram-trains to access the normal running lines at Oxford Road, but these would not be frequently used.

There is also scope, if additional platforms or an additional ramp is provided to either terminate more trams at Oxford Road, or runing them through the station, and down Oxford Road it'self, extended down Wilmslow Road to Fallowfeild.

Especially with 4 track and 4 platforms at both Deansgate and Cornbrook, and if the Tram Train could work, and I think Parry Pepole Movers may be the pepole to make it work, the Mid Cheshire line can get into Manchester 10mins quicker, and have a step increase in services. There would also be then the ability for the standard sizes of unit around Greater Manchester to move onto 4 / 8 car units, rather than 3 / 6, as 4 seems to be the standard nowerdays.

Oh and PS, these tram trains would have retention toilets, I would consider adding 'emptying pits' at Oxford Road, but this would be an untried peice of Tech.

I would also be looking at a re-opening of the line through Middlewitch (I know I proberbly spelled it wrong) to Sandbatch. With the remaining 2tph sent this way as 'tram train'. If this technology works, it would be wholey possible to also run onto the East Lancs Railway for services from round there to be through services again, but these would need to terminate at Victoria.

And I've just noticed a secondary that could come in handy, send the Media City UK trams to Oxford Road, connecting the dots...

In case I missed anything, heres the full post from t'other thread

One thing I am hoping for is that there will be a decision on what will be happening at Manchester, at the inital state of construction, so that building will start on the Manchester HS2 station at the inital stage.

It will be connected into the conventional network between Rugley and Ardwick (Assuming the use of the Mayfeild Insustrial Site as the HS2 station). And the platforms built at Mayfeild would be to the EU Standard, possibly with some additional standard platforms to take some strain off of Piccadilly.

This would allow for minimal level of disruption to the Piccadilly throught, rather than extending the existing platforms at Piccadilly. It would mean that services on the HS2 route, using CC stock would need to cross the slow lines when entering or leaving the station. But it would mean that 400m services would be able to run on Day1 into Manchester, and free up terminal platform space that is desprately needed.

If the linespeed on the slows between Slade Lane and Piccadilly where improved it would mitigate some of the effects of crossing the slows, and would only be for 3 or 4tph, with all of the way from Ardwick to Slade Lane to change sides it would be enough IMO.

It would also provide a good face for HS2 in Manchester, with somthing shiney and new to look at, some Mancunians are known to like shiney things.

I would also intergrate this with a new walkway from the far south side of the inside of the Piccadilly Concourse, down to Platforms 13 - 16 and the new HS Station, with new drop off points on Fairfeild St. I'd also be having pasive or active provision for platforms 17 and 18...

Before I get so far off topic it's rediculous, for anyone who doesn't know my vision of Piccadilly.

3 Additional platforms on the North Side
4 Additional platforms over Fairfeild St or 2 Platforms over Fairfeild St with a reversing siding to the South East in the centre of the slow lines.
The Mayfeild site would be used for the HS2 terminal station in Manchester, with provision for a link over towards Ardwick on a viaduct for services onwards over the Pennines, or looping round onto other routes, if large enough, provision for a link through the HS2 station, roughly paralell with the A57M/A635M Mancunican Way out toward the Chat Moss Alignment, although this link would also be provided at Manchester West Parkway.

So we'd end up with

2 Platforms to the North East of the main shed. 1 & 2
12 Platforms in the current shed. 3 - 14
6 Platforms through to Oxford Road and over Fairfeild Street. 15 - 20
8 Platforms on the Mayfeild Ind. Site for HS2, at appropriate guage. 21 - 28
2 Metrolink platforms in the undercroft.

30 platforms at Piccadilly

I'd also change Oxford Road, until 4 track across Manchester arrives, that I dowbt it ever will, I would have a minor re-alignment and extention of the platforms, if 6 platforms or a good enough turnback was provided at Piccadilly, nothing would terminate at Oxford Road any more, Platform 5 and the space of Platform 6 would be completly superflous, and disconnected from the network. This would allow platforms 1 and 8 to be extended to 8 * 23m length.

Really off topic now, but what the hey....

I would look at using the space of Platforms 5 & 6 for somthing though. Metrolink.

Metrolink viaducts are much cheaper and easyer to construct than Heavy Rail ones. And Oxford road is currently missed off the map. And with how one sides the Metrolink network is becoming, with so much running through Cornbrook, and not that much through Victoria, Oxford Roads former bays would provide a handy place to terminate some metrolink services in the CC. I'll take this further in another thread.

Final PS: I wouldn't scrap the heavy rail service allong the route, meerly make it clear that it will only ever be 1tph. And that you can get to Piccadilly faster via the new 'tram trains' and put in place a passenger survay to see how many pepole actually use the service then from the Mid Cheshire beyond stockport, if none, new bay or turnback at Stockport and it can either terminate there, or get sent off as an hourly service to Guide Bridge / Victoria via Denton.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Invincibles

Member
Joined
12 Jul 2009
Messages
511
Location
Suzhou, Jiangsu, China
I do find some of these proposals interesting, it seems like some people would put a platform anywhere.

In London they have Thameslink and soon will have crossrail where trains serve every station and can be pathed very close to each other. This does not seem to be met with anything like the problems that a similar thing in Manchester would induce.

I would simply make the Victoria - Deansgate - Manchester Oxford Road - Manchester Piccadilly corridor like the Thameslink core. All trains call at all stations and as such can be pathed easily behind each other. Some trains would terminate at the central island of Manchester Oxford Road (probably just platform 3) and then 2 and 4 can be used for through trains (extended as appropriate). It seems to me that a lot more can be achieved in the south east than is attempted in Manchester. Even assuming that the result is 18 paths per hour then you have:

Manchester Airport - Warrington - Liverpool: 2
Manchester Airport - Salford - Preston: 3
Manchester Airport - Eccles - Liverpool: 2
Manchester Airport - Eccles - Warrington: 2
Manchester Airport - Salford - Wigan/Southport: 1
Manchester Airport - Ordsall - Victoria - TPE: 4

With an additional:

Manchester Oxford Road - Liverpool: 2

Which is 14 trains per hour using 13 and 14 at Piccadilly and as far as I can tell that must be possible given there will be 24 scheduled through the Thameslink core.

Squeezing 2 trains per hour extra out of Oxford Road platform 3 must be possible.

I know the effect is to slow down journey times between Manchester and Scotland but as most of these trains will run with EMUs and modern stock there should not be too much penalty from the extra station(s) called at. If necessary the diesel trains can still not serve Deansgate to make up for their worse acceleration. I guess the effect is to add 5 minutes at most to the journey time which could be made up elsewhere on the routes and if not would still leave the train competitive.

By the time you add in the trains from Victoria to Liverpool/Wigan/Blackpool/Clitheroe there would still be a good service on every other line and as long as Victoria was used for through services I see no reason why this could not be achieved easily. Running through Victoria would be:

Liverpool - Victoria - Huddersfield TPE: 1
Liverpool - Victoria - Stalybridge* EMU: 2 (needs electrification)
Wigan - Victoria - Leeds via Rochdale: 1
Wigan - Victoria - Rochdale: 1
Preston - Victoria - Leeds via Rochdale: 1
Preston - Victoria - Huddersfield: 1
Clitheroe - Blackburn - Victoria - Rose Hill: 1 (via Guide Bridge)

With a bit more electrification there is room to push a couple more through to places like Hadfield and South Manchester.

With a bit more money I would reopen the curve at Ardwick and run most trains from Preston/Wigan to Manchester Piccadilly platforms -1, 0 and 1 using the Ardwick curve. This would mean potentially changing my suggested push throughs of trains at Victoria but would mean it was not necessary to have anything from Salford Crescent to Deansgate. I would seriously consider a metrolink line from Salford Crescent to meet the 2cc.

If it could be arranged that trains from Piccadilly 13/14 went via Warrington Central or Chat Moss then it would be no more difficult than the Thameslink core.

Trains from Piccadilly -1,0,1 would go through Victoria and Salford Crescent so not clashing (assuming that the ordsall chord is grade separated).

Passengers from Bolton for Manchester Oxford Road would lose out, but the potential for extra capacity with much less crossing is quite huge and a simple shuttle link on its own viaduct would make changes not too cumbersome.

*** The problem I can see is that there is no services from Bolton to Manchester Airport any more, this is a bit of a problem. Maybe 2 trains an hour can be allowed to cross from Salford Crescent onto the "core" without too many problems.

Sorry this has been a bit of a rambling post but it makes sense in my mind.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,179
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
Whilst the immediate two postings have been akin to a railway wish list to end all wish lists for Manchester Oxford Road station, I would warn against any platform extensions and ask anyone to remember the reason why the station, when reconstructed, has so much wooden infrastructure.

The ground upon the foundations is not a secure base for any heavy extra infrastructural works. The river Medlock flowing nearby has some tenuous link to the actual soft nature of the area in question. Is there anyone out there on the forum with detailed knowledge of the geological problems underneath the existing station?
 

Invincibles

Member
Joined
12 Jul 2009
Messages
511
Location
Suzhou, Jiangsu, China
Whilst the immediate two postings have been akin to a railway wish list to end all wish lists for Manchester Oxford Road station, I would warn against any platform extensions and ask anyone to remember the reason why the station, when reconstructed, has so much wooden infrastructure.

The ground upon the foundations is not a secure base for any heavy extra infrastructural works. The river Medlock flowing nearby has some tenuous link to the actual soft nature of the area in question. Is there anyone out there on the forum with detailed knowledge of the geological problems underneath the existing station?

My suggestion does not involve any altering of Oxford Road station. Indeed I have proposed reducing the number of normally used platforms.

Would there be reasons for not having so many trains through on platforms 4 and 2? I assume that there is no difference from having 1 or 2 more services using the lines as the Northern Hub already increases the number of trains going that way.

Indeed my only proposal was the re-opening of the Ardwick curve and some short pieces of electrification to allow all services through Salford Crescent to route via Victoria to Piccadilly or elsewhere as appropriate.

Adding Metrolink to Oxford Road does not make sense to me, admittedly I have not been to Oxford Road station for a few months but I can not visualise how anything else would fit.
 

button_boxer

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
1,271
I wonder how much of the capacity restriction at Piccadilly platforms 13/14 is down to the fact that anything through there other than to or from the airport has to cross the throat and thus has to fit around traffic in and out of the terminal platforms?
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,734
So these aren't actual plans, but just enthusiasts' proposals and ideas? In which case, should they be in this section?
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,179
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
My suggestion does not involve any altering of Oxford Road station. Indeed I have proposed reducing the number of normally used platforms.

Adding Metrolink to Oxford Road does not make sense to me, admittedly I have not been to Oxford Road station for a few months but I can not visualise how anything else would fit.

It was not your posting, but the OP who referred to platform extensions, and as such, it was those proposals (not yours) to which I referred.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,515
Location
Somewhere, not in London
I wonder how much of the capacity restriction at Piccadilly platforms 13/14 is down to the fact that anything through there other than to or from the airport has to cross the throat and thus has to fit around traffic in and out of the terminal platforms?

Anything on the Slows dear...

It's made worse by all of the crossing movments from services terminating from the south, or worse, coming all the way over from Ardwick to Pt. 14.

Theres plenty that uses 13/14 that is non-airport and vice versa..

Through 13/14 you've got

Manchester - Llandudno
Manchester Airport - Lancaster - Scotland / Lakes
Manchester Airport - Blackpool North
Manchester Airport - Southport
Manchester Airport - Chat Moss - Liverpool L St
(Buxton) - Hazel Grove - Preston - (Blackpool North)
Scarbrough - Liverpool L St
Norwich - Liverpool L St

And from the main shed to the airport:

Newcastle - Manchester Airport (Usually Pt.3)
Middlesbrough - Manchester Airport (Usually Pt. 7/8)
Cleethorpes - Manchester Airport (Usually Pt. 10 - 12)
Manchester - Manchester Airport (8 - 12)
Manchester - Manchester Airport - Wilmslow - (Crewe) (8 - 12)

So these aren't actual plans, but just enthusiasts' proposals and ideas? In which case, should they be in this section?

Like every thread that uses conjecturive language yes.

Whilst the immediate two postings have been akin to a railway wish list to end all wish lists for Manchester Oxford Road station, I would warn against any platform extensions and ask anyone to remember the reason why the station, when reconstructed, has so much wooden infrastructure.

The ground upon the foundations is not a secure base for any heavy extra infrastructural works. The river Medlock flowing nearby has some tenuous link to the actual soft nature of the area in question. Is there anyone out there on the forum with detailed knowledge of the geological problems underneath the existing station?

If wood is to be favoured then due to bad foundations, why not extend the platforms as wooden ones, and look at underpining the station and viaduct as much as possible. Or possibly Steel platforms similar to the semi-modular ones on the Styal Branch?

I do find some of these proposals interesting, it seems like some people would put a platform anywhere.

In London they have Thameslink and soon will have crossrail where trains serve every station and can be pathed very close to each other. This does not seem to be met with anything like the problems that a similar thing in Manchester would induce.

Squeezing 2 trains per hour extra out of Oxford Road platform 3 must be possible.

The problem is, the Thameslink core doesn't have at-grade junctions, and the core is much larger, with homogenous rolling stock.

Manchester has issues at 10tph because of the signalling system for starters, and a fair few other things that mess up the works, such as the need to be able to path a pacer in with a 323 and a 185, and two freight paths, and 2tph terminating at Oxford Road.

I know the effect is to slow down journey times between Manchester and Scotland but as most of these trains will run with EMUs and modern stock there should not be too much penalty from the extra station(s) called at. If necessary the diesel trains can still not serve Deansgate to make up for their worse acceleration. I guess the effect is to add 5 minutes at most to the journey time which could be made up elsewhere on the routes and if not would still leave the train competitive.
*SNIP*

With a bit more electrification there is room to push a couple more through to places like Hadfield and South Manchester.

With a bit more money I would reopen the curve at Ardwick and run most trains from Preston/Wigan to Manchester Piccadilly platforms -1, 0 and 1 using the Ardwick curve. This would mean potentially changing my suggested push throughs of trains at Victoria but would mean it was not necessary to have anything from Salford Crescent to Deansgate. I would seriously consider a metrolink line from Salford Crescent to meet the 2cc.

If it could be arranged that trains from Piccadilly 13/14 went via Warrington Central or Chat Moss then it would be no more difficult than the Thameslink core.

Trains from Piccadilly -1,0,1 would go through Victoria and Salford Crescent so not clashing (assuming that the ordsall chord is grade separated).

*SNIP*

This I do like, but as you say below, about a market for passengers from BON to MIA, this is a pretty big market from Horwich, Lostock, Bolton and Salford Crescent, you'd be supprised how full them services leave Piccadilly.

Now, I would cut them, but not by much.

I would still advocate platform extentions at Oxford Road though, or if not, we're going to be having to use SDO in the peaks.

I'd say the theoretical maximum through the corridor is 12 or maybe 14tph, just because of the flat junctions.

A big change that could be made would be a westward link to Trafford Park from the WCML, but it would need a bridge over the M62 if it where a link to the Chat Moss.

Still, not heard anything bad about 'tram platforms' at Ox Road intergrated with a tram-train on the Mid Cheshire...
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,734
Like every thread that uses conjecturive language yes.
I don't mean to be a killjoy and like a proposal as much as anyone, but I don't think the thread title - which is what entices people, is conjecturive in the slightest:
'Manchester Oxford Road Development'

sounds pretty definitive, which is why I clicked. Maybe you should caveat it in future with something like 'my proposal' or 'idea', 'suggestion', or even 'my little fantasy' etc...
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,179
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
If wood is to be favoured then due to bad foundations, why not extend the platforms as wooden ones, and look at underpining the station and viaduct as much as possible. Or possibly Steel platforms similar to the semi-modular ones on the Styal Branch?

It is the platform length expansion that you propose that worries me, in addition to the earlier land stability point that I had made. The only way would be towards Deansgate and this would compromise the existing track approaches from Deansgate to Oxford Road and I wonder how the widening of the viaduct to allow for the proposed platform extension would affect the road at Whitworth Street, notwithstanding the businesses that currently trade from the arches underneath the viaduct.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,515
Location
Somewhere, not in London
OK, a bit more detail on the platform extentions by means of google maps to come...

Done: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=208537899835423960920.0004a6b655d9c30d585fd

The main through platforms would become 1 and 4, and 2 and 3 would be used for both shorter services and/or CLC line terminating services.

1 & 4 would be able to fit 8 car units
2 & 3 would be able to fit 4 car units

5 & 6 would become metrolink platforms, each 100m long, able to fit 3 trams in each.

Platform 2 would be cut down to allow the track to be slewed over to the north and platform 1 be extended to the East upto 8*23m long.

All extentions on this diagram would be on the current trackbed.

The Interlocking I'm paving over for platform 1 would be moved onto the end of Platform 6.

If tram-trains were to be used, then I would consider a connection onto the heavy rail routes.

The track layout would allow services from Deansgate to terminate on 2&3 out of the way of other servcies, so the provision of services on the CLC could be increased with less effect on other timetabled services, aswell as early termination of other services if needed.

As platform 3 would still be long enough for 6 car units, it could be used as a peak flow additional platform.

Edit: At a push if the signals where far enough back, you might even be able to fit a pendo on Pt 1 and 4 (9 car)...

Liverpool L St via Manchester Piccadilly anyone?

As for the businesses, it would be a semi-open viaduct, with the footpath underneith on the southern side, businesses would continue as normal.

Steel supported with a concrete slab upper platform.
 
Last edited:

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
34,179
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
So these aren't actual plans, but just enthusiasts' proposals and ideas? In which case, should they be in this section?

I totally agree with what you have said here, as would many more serious minded of us on the forum.

I have since made a posting warning of the actual situations of ground stability that exist, which would have to be faced by any Civil Engineering organization, to try to bring some sense of reality into the matter.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,515
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Well, if the works where conducted entirely (as diagramed) on the existing viaducts, this would greatly mitigate the problems with the extentions of platforms 1 and 4 initally.

As for the Metrolink platforms, if they where steel supported open base viaduct with concrete bases, they could easilly drive concrete piles deep enough to hit somthing solid.
 

Invincibles

Member
Joined
12 Jul 2009
Messages
511
Location
Suzhou, Jiangsu, China
Well if it is possible to get 10tph through then there is nothing to worry about?

I am really confused about why Metrolink needs to go to Oxford Road, even more so why it would run to platforms 5 and 6.

A simple core arrangement with just 2 at grade junctions would be similar to Thameslink (which has one at Blackfriars and a grade seperated at St Pancras) and handle far fewer trains. As others have said the current arrangement sees many different units, the future would be just 350, 185 and one other as all trains would be using Chat Moss, Warrington Central or the TPE lines East via Victoria.

The freight would have to route a different way, admittedly, unless off peak paths are possible.

As many trains operating on the section are 2 car or 3 car then the ability of 2 3 and 4 to go to 7 car is enough I think. If there is going to be an extension of trains then that would mean the end of Oxford Road and Deansgate calls for the longer trains. A long way into the future though that.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,515
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Well if it is possible to get 10tph through then there is nothing to worry about?

10tph is fine yes, but it's nothing near what thameslink can get by using homogenous stock and no freight, and that is somthing this viaduct will not see for a long time.

I am really confused about why Metrolink needs to go to Oxford Road, even more so why it would run to platforms 5 and 6.

The idea of this is to couter the massivly lop sided nature of the metrolink, with 3 routes on one side of Cornbrook and 6 on the other, just trying to even it out a bit by providing a 2nd place for trams to go from Cornbrook (or 3rd with 2CC), and a better connection to piccadilly if T/T happened on the alty line.

If every line down from Cornbrook needs 10tph, where in the world would there be room for 60tph, per direction, through Central Manchester?

20tph/route sits much more comfortably

A simple core arrangement with just 2 at grade junctions would be similar to Thameslink (which has one at Blackfriars and a grade seperated at St Pancras) and handle far fewer trains. As others have said the current arrangement sees many different units, the future would be just 350, 185 and one other as all trains would be using Chat Moss, Warrington Central or the TPE lines East via Victoria.

It's not 2 at grade junctions...

If you work round the loop, these junctions will be 1 or less signal away from it.

Piccadilly Station Junctions
Oxford Road Pt.5 (If still open)
Castlefeild Junctions
Castlefeild Loop Junctions
Ordstall Lane Junction
Deal St Junction
Victoria East Junction
Philips Park Junctions
Ashburys Junction

And theres a fair few lines that would join and leave the 'loop'

Namely, if we call Victoria East to Piccadilly the 'loop' then...

The CLC lines will leave and need 3tph + freight
The Chat Moss Lines will take 2tph from Piccadilly
The Windsor Link will proberbly still have 3tph to take too.

That would be if the Chat Moss - Victoria line is grade seperated at Ordstall Lane Jcn so wouldn't affect it.

The freight would have to route a different way, admittedly, unless off peak paths are possible.

As many trains operating on the section are 2 car or 3 car then the ability of 2 3 and 4 to go to 7 car is enough I think. If there is going to be an extension of trains then that would mean the end of Oxford Road and Deansgate calls for the longer trains. A long way into the future though that.

Freight only realisticly has one way to go currently, via Liverpool, the other would would be re-building a line from Glazebrook to Keynton, but then Electrc traction into Trafford Park would have to finish, unless you patch up the CLC aswell.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
*************************************

Errrr, whatnow?
 

Invincibles

Member
Joined
12 Jul 2009
Messages
511
Location
Suzhou, Jiangsu, China
If you simplify things, as they will be post hub then all services run to the airport and similarly all but one airport train runs to Oxford Road (I would also axe Airport - Cleethorpes) as the stops have to be made by services through the core to avoid the effect of an all stations.

In a perfect world trains would then serve either:

Liverpool via Warrington
Chat Moss
Victoria

Which requires two junctions. If absolutely necessary then Windsor link could have one train and add the 3rd junction.

Trains via Salford Crescent have to merge with trains from Chat Moss and Ordsall Chord (2 junctions again) to enter Victoria.

If 10tph can be achieved with Bolton served by 2 or more trains then great, but I think that we should be looking at Bolton trains being more regular and all using Manchester Victoria (and then Piccadilly via Ardwick)

There seems no need to add more platforms, or anything else to Oxford Road, or actually Piccadilly (but of course 15/16 would improve flexibility) if North Wales trains push through to the airport.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,515
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Well, if everything comes from the airport and slow lines, rather than fast lines or other lines then.

What I can see happening (and would personally hope for slightly) is the major route through Oxford Road would become the CLC.

And that we would end up with 4tph on the CLC, 2tph on the Chat Moss, 2tph up the Windsor Link and 4tph to Victoria.

In an ideal world, it would be a clockface timetable on a 15minute cycle.

ie. Every 15 mins, 1 to the CLC, 1 to Ordstall Lane and 1 to Victoria. Would work better on a half hourly where a CLC slow follows a CLC fast out of Oxford Road Pt. 2 or 3 (with some new tracks so they can turn round in the platform without blocking the route.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top