"The North Of England Is Getting A Rough Deal" discussion

[northwichcat]

Just for the benefit of those forumites who arent aware of what Metrolink is...its a light rail system which has its roots in the conversion of 2 heavy rail lines from the BR days which were life expired. Its proven very successful and has expanded at a fair rate of knots over the years, its played a big part in the success of Manchester.

There are now more tram stops than rail stations in the area.....and a lot of the stops are actually on main roads. Its a brilliant way of getting around the area using public transport, and is still expanding. It may well take on some more of the current heavy rail lines into Manchester - ie convert from heavy to light rail.

What relevance does that have to this thread? I was making a genuinely valid point about Intercity passengers losing passengers if connecting local services go and you make a stupid comment and then start banging on about your must loved yellow trams. Posts about light rail are supposed to go in to this forum: http://www.railforums.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=49 This one is for discussing heavy rail, something you seem unable to do without bringing up Metrolink every 2 minutes.

 

[Moonshot]

What relevance does that have to this thread? I was making a genuinely valid point about Intercity passengers losing passengers if connecting local services go and you make a stupid comment and then start banging on about your must loved yellow trams. Posts about light rail are supposed to go in to this forum: http://www.railforums.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=49 This one is for discussing heavy rail, something you seem unable to do without bringing up Metrolink every 2 minutes.

Well the title of this thread is " the North of England is getting a Rough Deal ".......and Trams have been mentioned a few times on here already. Its a valid point as it does prove that somewhere in the North of England is getting investment. Sheffield has them as well, and also Edinburgh.

As I said, they are a brilliant way of getting around.....I often use them to connect into Manchester Piccadilly if I m heading south or to the airport

 

[northwichcat]

Indeed it does go wrong sometimes, just like the rail network does.......

And if you hadn't selectively read my earlier post you'll see I explained that both go wrong and why when Metrolink goes wrong it causes much bigger problems for holders of Advance rail tickets.

 

[Moonshot]

I ve not selectively read anything.....I ve simply pointed out what Metrolink is , which came about on the back of your comment about if Northern didnt run trains etc.....

Now as I have said , trams occassionally go wrong, but then so do Northern Rail trains. What i dont see however, is Inter City services collapsing when local services ( be it bus tram or train ) have operating issues.

Now going back to the point of this thread which is about The North of England getting a rough deal......isnt it true that some significant investment has been made , and is continuing to be made in Light Rail networks in places like Manchester and Sheffield? If so, is it right that we in the North moan about lack of investment in what is considered to be the traditional heavy rail network ( which isnt strictly true judging by what I see every day )when we have a very effiecient and viable alternative appearing before our very eyes in the form of a Light Rail Network ?

 

[AM9]

If the salaries in London were the same as the rest of the country, then nobody would be able to afford (or want to pay) £330k for a one bed ex council flat. Then the price would drop, and probably a lot of people everywhere (including London) would end up a lot happier. It's an ever self perpetuating cycle that will end up in tears one day.

So without a smiley in place, I must assume that you really think this should be done. How would you make salaries in London the same as the rest of the country?
Then, with every body working locally, many on this forum would be thrown out of their rail jobs.

 

[muddythefish]

I travelled from Manchester to Whalley tonight on a decrepit old unit that bounced along on mostly badly-maintained unelectrified single track riddled with weeds. Said unit leaves a city of 600,000 people and travels through a town of 250,000 and another of 150,000.

It wouldn't happen down south.

Still, it's not all bad. Manchester has trams, so the north shouldn't complain.

 

[tbtc]

You could say the Whitby-Middlesbrough service is dreadful but there are at least some direct trains between the two but try getting from Warrington to Tatton Park (one of the most popular tourist attractions in the UK) by public transport - bus to Altrincham, train to Knutsford, followed by long walk.

So there's not a direct link from a town to a stately home over ten miles away? And that's evidence of how rough things are up here?

Those from London will be reading this thread as an updated middle class version of the Four Yorkshiremen sketch! Ee lad, we had to traipse to reach t'flower show.

Well Newcastle is getting a lot of investment as well with a £8.6m station redevelopment, new IEP trains and likely a half-hourly electric service to/from Liverpool. So if you want to focus only on the main cities in the North then the North East is doing just as well as the North West

In infrastructure terms, Newcastle is seeing no electrification within seventy five miles planned any time soon, no light rail upgrades in the past decade, no additional local trains (although I think they got one extra 142 as part of the cascade of DMUs a couple of years ago?.

Manchester has recently seen/is seeing electrification of the main unelectrified corridors (to Leeds/York, to Bolton/Preston/Blackpool, to Wigan, to Liverpool) plus dozens of extra electric trains to run on them, dozens of new trams, many tram extensions, new infrastructure like the Ordsall Chord, other infrastructure upgrades in the "commuter zone" (like at Todmorden or loops in the Hope Valley)...

...yet the complaints on this forum are always from those in/around Manchester.

All the routes into Manchester/Liverpool/Leeds/Sheffield need electrifying and modern rolling stock

In an ideal world.

But most of the corridors into Liverpool/Manchester will be electrified in the next few years - whilst London still sees unelectrified lines and old trains.

Who's going to pay for your gold-plated vision?

It's the most criticised public transport system on social media, with the criticism coming from the people who use it

Maybe that says more about the cheery attitude of Mancunians?

Passenger numbers show that its becoming more popular

The last T68 has recently been withdrawn. West Midlands Metro are in the process of replacing their newer T69s so the Metrolink trams have lasted as long as any other second generation trams in the UK, even though they are being withdrawn early based on life expectancy of trams in European countries.

Yup - a whole new fleet of trams for Manchester.

Tyne & Wear still has the same thirty year old units running on it as it's always had (first ones built before Thatcher came to power) - nothing newer than 1981.

Sheffield still has its original trams, all over twenty years old now - no extensions built.

But, Manchester is hard done by...

The money which might be spent on new trains evaporates in subsidy every day on Northern and other regional TOC areas without a viable revenue stream.
There are some basic rules of economics that are inescapable.
It's all about short uneconomic trains running on an over-complex network, taking low fares over short distances (relative to intercity and south east services).
It's no better in most of Scotland, Wales or the south-west.

Yes - something that keeps going over people's heads on here

Merseyrail carries hundreds of thousands of passengers every day and Merseyrail are rated highly in Passenger Focus surveys while Metrolink rate poorly in Passenger Focus surveys

As below , Passenger Focus Survey .....

83 percent of Metrolink passengers were satisfied with their journey overall. This was significantly higher than the same measure achieved on the National Rail Passenger – Survey (76%) and significantly lower than the Bus Passenger Survey in the Transport for Greater Manchester area (86%)

Selective quoting there, 83% is the lowest score given in the tram survey and 15% of Metrolink suffer delays compare to the average of 10%. In the Liverpool area passengers have 93% satisfaction with Merseyrail so what's the big deal about this tram system?

Passenger Focus also found 47% of Metrolink users thought Metrolink is either very poor value for money or poor value for money, while 48% of users thinks it provides either very good or good value for money. So, roughly for every Metrolink user who's happy with what they pay there is one unsatisfied Metrolink user.

Yes what I think of it's irrelevant but so is your constant overselling of the system.

People who pay the full market price for their travel are less satisfied with "value for money" than people who use a heavily subsidised train service?

It seems that a few selective areas of modernisation are being used to justify the North West as 'getting a good deal'

Plenty areas of modernisation, Peter.

• Electrification of Manchester - Leeds - York
• Electrification of Manchester - Bolton - Wigan/ Preston - Blackpool
• Electrification of Manchester - Chat Moss - Warrington/ Liverpool
• Electrification of Liverpool - Wigan - Preston - Blackpool
• Electrification of the Windermere branch
• Electrification of Liverpool - Warrington
• Various tram extensions around Manchester
• A whole new fleet of trams (whilst the Tyne & Wear and Sheffield systems are still running their original fleet with no new ones built)
• The Orsdall Chord
• The Todmorden Chord
• Various other improvements as part of the "Manchester" Hub

That's around a dozen schemes that some other places would love to dismiss as "a few selective areas of modernisation".

Take Bolton for example. As already pointed out, it is not dissimilar in size and population from the main NE towns, but at 3.5 million, has 50% more passengers than Middlesbrough and Sunderland put together. Despite this, the town is served by mainly pacers and other 2 coach DMUs with a few 3 car TPE services. Stand on the huge platforms and one gets a feeling of gross underinvestment, as people cram themselves desperately onto these crappy trains.

Bolton gets around eight trains an hour to central Manchester (plus a similar number in the opposite direction split between Southport, Blackpool, Clitheroe etc) - Sunderland gets one train an hour in each direction (either a 142 or a 156) - plus a handful of GC 180s.

No wonder Bolton gets such a good deal.

Move to Stockport and a station with slightly fewer passengers than Bolton, and you have nice shiny Pendolinos every 20 minutes, Cross Country trains to Birmingham and beyond every half hour, and around 9 other mainly fast and comfortable commuter trains every hour.

Yes - Stockport has always had longer/ faster trains as it's on the route to Birmingham/ London - there are always going to be some stations that get a better service because they happen to be on a main line to somewhere else.

Currently Altrincham, Greater Manchester is the most expensive to buy a property outside London & The South East with an average price of £2,227 per m² ahead of Edinburgh (£2,214)

You were complaining about "selective quoting" earlier - now you are comparing the average property price in a relatively affluent town of around 40,000 (if you trust the Wiki figure) with the average property price in a city around ten times the size.

There are some expensive properties in Edinburgh, but then there's Muirhouse/ Niddrie etc that take the average down. Hardly a fair comparison.

it appears the plan is to run the lines with cast off rolling stock from somewhere considered more important

We should have a Forum drinking game for when such comments are (re)mentioned

London's a lot more dependent on public transport than other parts of the country, people have to use it however much it costs

...which is why transport spending there is so essential - there are no alternatives

An Altrincham to London Advance starts at £14. If the Northern Rail service is delayed and you miss the booked Virgin service you can travel on the next train and you may get rail travel vouchers as compensation

What percentage of Metrolink passengers at Altrincham are headed to London though? Selective quoting?

 

[Peter Lanky]

So without a smiley in place, I must assume that you really think this should be done. How would you make salaries in London the same as the rest of the country?
Then, with every body working locally, many on this forum would be thrown out of their rail jobs.

I've no idea how it should be done; however if somebody gives me a six figure salary to make me really clever, I'm sure I can come up with a solution.

The rail jobs wouldn't be at risk because all those people working locally would have plenty of spare time and money they didn't have before while wasting their time commuting, to use the railways for leisure. I'm still seeing a win all round situation here.

 

[Starmill]

...which is why transport spending there is so essential - there are no alternatives

There is no alternative anywhere. Transport is necessary in all cities. Driving should never be a viable alternative to public transport in urban areas.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What percentage of Metrolink passengers at Altrincham are headed to London though? Selective quoting?

Irrelevant. Anyone starting their journey at a Metrolink station who wishes to travel to a long distance destination gets a raw deal because of the terrible integration between modes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Indeed it does go wrong sometimes, just like the rail network does.......

So why can't safeguards be put in place like there are if your tram is delayed and you miss a booked train just like there are if a connecting train is late? Because there just isn't the integration between modes and wholly inadequate through-ticketing.

I'll further add that despite the fact that some of the vehicles are quite literally still at 0 miles (although some have been in service for 5 years now), Metrolink's rolling stock is of vastly mediocre quality.

 

[Moonshot]

There is no alternative anywhere. Transport is necessary in all cities. Driving should never be a viable alternative to public transport in urban areas.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Irrelevant. Anyone starting their journey at a Metrolink station who wishes to travel to a long distance destination gets a raw deal because of the terrible integration between modes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So why can't safeguards be put in place like there are if your tram is delayed and you miss a booked train just like there are if a connecting train is late? Because there just isn't the integration between modes and wholly inadequate through-ticketing.

I'll further add that despite the fact that some of the vehicles are quite literally still at 0 miles (although some have been in service for 5 years now), Metrolink's rolling stock is of vastly mediocre quality.

The terrible integration being what exactly ? Mediocre quality compared to a pacer ?

 

[Bantamzen]

When you have to pay £330k for a one bed ex-Council flat in the North as you do in many areas of London then perhaps you will get London-size wages. Perhaps the premium payments made by London and Southern TOCS should be spent solely in the South - see how long Northern lasts then. Wanting summat for nowt - the Northern way!

And herein lies the heart of the problem. Why is it that some crappy one-bed, ex-Council flat goes for over 10x the national average wage? It's because pretty much all the most attractive employment is in that area, so London has developed it's own hyper-inflation. So why has this happened, because too many people & too many jobs are being shoehorned into too small of a space. It's been my argument all along, it's time for the government to invest elsewhere to try to encourage business out of London and into the rest of the country to take off some of the strain.

Of course it won't be easy as business in general seems highly reluctant to move, but this isn't necessarily down to purely business reasons. There's an almost crack-like addiction to operating out of London, usually justified because that's where the best people are. But of course this just isn't true. Much like an addict, business is ignoring a simple fact. Many of the people don't actually come from London at all, they hail from right across the nation. So in order to attract them in they have to offer higher wages, which in turn leads to higher demand on housing, goods & services & results in the mirco-inflation zone we see today. And worse still business doesn't want to acknowledge the downside of it's addiction, the real cost. On top of inflated wages, how much money is lost every year because of delays & disruptions to the infrastructure in & around London? And how many of those disruptions occur because the system is at straining point in the first place? I'll wager that if you were able to calculate the real cost per London based business, it would scare the pants of them. It seems that over the decades every new infrastructure upgrade, be it road or rail has just encouraged more usage & any spare capacity gobbled up. How much longer do we keep chucking money at the place in order to try to resolve a problem that just keeps getting worse?

So developing the rail infrastructure away from London is the right thing to do in a bigger ball game of trying to rebalance the economy. Many might balk at the idea of moving at least some of their business out of the capital, but if a more efficient, integrated transport network was available elsewhere that could more efficiently transport it's workers to their place of employment then this might attract some away. Yes, investment is starting to happen here in the North, and we welcome it. But it's just a starting point, there's a lot more needed before this region becomes more attractive to business. Many of the main arteries between the towns & cities here are still relatively slow (Trans Pennine routes for example) and even the proposed upgrades aren't fully going to resolve them. So this should just be a beginning of a long term strategy to refocus business development away from the South East and into the North, the Midlands, South West, Wales & Scotland / NI should they stay long term in the control of Westminster. I'm going to be controversial now & say that once Crossrail, and maybe Crossrail 2 have been funded then that's your lot London. No more tunnels for you guys, it's time to move the investment away elsewhere.

 

[Peter Lanky]

Bantamzen. My thoughts exactly, and those of many, many others who have thought the entire problem through.

There is nothing makes my blood boil more than seeing some smug, suited 'city' worker telling the world how London generates most of the wealth of the country as if every 6 figure salary earner is a born and bred Cockney.

As soon as these myths are dispelled, the sooner we can move to a position where work is based roughly where the population lives (or used to live before much of it was sucked into the M25 zone), and all these complex travel schemes can be scrapped because they wont be needed any more.

 

[Clip]

Bantamzen. My thoughts exactly, and those of many, many others who have thought the entire problem through.

There is nothing makes my blood boil more than seeing some smug, suited 'city' worker telling the world how London generates most of the wealth of the country as if every 6 figure salary earner is a born and bred Cockney.

As soon as these myths are dispelled, the sooner we can move to a position where work is based roughly where the population lives (or used to live before much of it was sucked into the M25 zone), and all these complex travel schemes can be scrapped because they wont be needed any more.

You're saying its a myth so can you back up that claim with facts and figures please as I only believe what the evening standard tells me

 

[Moonshot]

Bantamzen. My thoughts exactly, and those of many, many others who have thought the entire problem through.

There is nothing makes my blood boil more than seeing some smug, suited 'city' worker telling the world how London generates most of the wealth of the country as if every 6 figure salary earner is a born and bred Cockney.

As soon as these myths are dispelled, the sooner we can move to a position where work is based roughly where the population lives (or used to live before much of it was sucked into the M25 zone), and all these complex travel schemes can be scrapped because they wont be needed any more.

I m not sure what problem you are refering to? The London area has a population of 8 million, and when I was watching the programme on Crossrail earlier on this week, its expected to grow by another 1 million, which is a reason why Crossrail is being built in the first place.

 

[Hadders]

And herein lies the heart of the problem. Why is it that some crappy one-bed, ex-Council flat goes for over 10x the national average wage? It's because pretty much all the most attractive employment is in that area, so London has developed it's own hyper-inflation. So why has this happened, because too many people & too many jobs are being shoehorned into too small of a space. It's been my argument all along, it's time for the government to invest elsewhere to try to encourage business out of London and into the rest of the country to take off some of the strain.

Of course it won't be easy as business in general seems highly reluctant to move, but this isn't necessarily down to purely business reasons. There's an almost crack-like addiction to operating out of London, usually justified because that's where the best people are. But of course this just isn't true. Much like an addict, business is ignoring a simple fact. Many of the people don't actually come from London at all, they hail from right across the nation. So in order to attract them in they have to offer higher wages, which in turn leads to higher demand on housing, goods & services & results in the mirco-inflation zone we see today. And worse still business doesn't want to acknowledge the downside of it's addiction, the real cost. On top of inflated wages, how much money is lost every year because of delays & disruptions to the infrastructure in & around London? And how many of those disruptions occur because the system is at straining point in the first place? I'll wager that if you were able to calculate the real cost per London based business, it would scare the pants of them. It seems that over the decades every new infrastructure upgrade, be it road or rail has just encouraged more usage & any spare capacity gobbled up. How much longer do we keep chucking money at the place in order to try to resolve a problem that just keeps getting worse?

So developing the rail infrastructure away from London is the right thing to do in a bigger ball game of trying to rebalance the economy. Many might balk at the idea of moving at least some of their business out of the capital, but if a more efficient, integrated transport network was available elsewhere that could more efficiently transport it's workers to their place of employment then this might attract some away. Yes, investment is starting to happen here in the North, and we welcome it. But it's just a starting point, there's a lot more needed before this region becomes more attractive to business. Many of the main arteries between the towns & cities here are still relatively slow (Trans Pennine routes for example) and even the proposed upgrades aren't fully going to resolve them. So this should just be a beginning of a long term strategy to refocus business development away from the South East and into the North, the Midlands, South West, Wales & Scotland / NI should they stay long term in the control of Westminster. I'm going to be controversial now & say that once Crossrail, and maybe Crossrail 2 have been funded then that's your lot London. No more tunnels for you guys, it's time to move the investment away elsewhere.

This is great in principle but the UK doesn't exist in isolation. Business won't just move from London to the north, it'll end up going to Paris, Berlin, Brussels, New York, Hong Kong, Delhi, Beijing etc.

This means the UK as whole loses out, not just one area of it.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Plenty areas of modernisation, Peter.

• The Todmorden Chord
  

I suppose it can be viewed as something as a local tourist attraction, but in the words of the old saying...."Reet gud ter look at, but now't in way of trains to run over it"

 

[Moonshot]

I suppose it can be viewed as something as a local tourist attraction, but in the words of the old saying...."Reet gud ter look at, but now't in way of trains to run over it"

Which wont be an issue for much longer......in the meantime it provides a turnback facility for Northern Services from Todmorden.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

You're saying its a myth so can you back up that claim with facts and figures please as I only believe what the Evening Standard tells me

Now then, young rapscallion, that statement seems to be straight out of the same mould as that used by my bête noir (who shall remain nameless) on the "Ukraine....where will it end" thread who is implacable in his total belief in what "Russia Today" says, rather than what the BBC says...:roll:

By the way, who owns "The Evening Standard" these days ?

 

[Clip]

Now then, young rapscallion, that statement seems to be straight out of the same mould as that used by my bête noir (who shall remain nameless) on the "Ukraine....where will it end" thread who is implacable in his total belief in what "Russia Today" says, rather than what the BBC says...:roll:

By the way, who owns "The Evening Standard" these days ?

Some russian exile dude, though I wasn't being serious.

Oh and the BBC isn't exactly the bastion of factual news reporting it was when it first started out. Been listening to the world service as usual and their reporting of the Gaza conflict is very one sided which is odd.


Anyway let's not derail the thread with that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Which wont be an issue for much longer......in the meantime it provides a turnback facility for Northern Services from Todmorden.

I can hear the ringing cries of joy from the prospective rail passengers in Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley Manchester Road, December still being months away, at being made aware of this fact as the Todmorden Chord was to "invigorate the area of East Lancashire" in the proposal that was successful in winning the bid monies...not to provide a source of solace to a town that has flitted between the delights of Yorkshire and Lancashire in its time.

Transdev and its highly successful X43 "Lancashire Witch" service, with even more new fleet additions (brand new ones...not 30 year old Southern cast-offs, may I add), are toasting the Northern Rail debacle in question on a daily basis...

 

[Moonshot]

I can hear the ringing cries of joy from the prospective rail passengers in Blackburn, Accrington and Burnley Manchester Road, December still being months away, at being made aware of this fact as the Todmorden Chord was to "invigorate the area of East Lancashire" in the proposal that was successful in winning the bid monies...not to provide a source of solace to a town that has flitted between the delights of Yorkshire and Lancashire in its time.

Transdev and its highly successful X43 "Lancashire Witch" service, with even more new fleet additions (brand new ones...not 30 year old Southern cast-offs, may I add), are toasting the Northern Rail debacle in question on a daily basis...

A point which we have discussed before......

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

A point which we have discussed before......

But still as valid as ever, when used against certain protestations.

 

[ainsworth74]

We should have a Forum drinking game for when such comments are (re)mentioned

This suggests that there isn't one and I'm not already playing...

 

[northwichcat]

What percentage of Metrolink passengers at Altrincham are headed to London though? Selective quoting?

That was in response to moonshot who said Metrolink's a suitable alternative to heavy rail. The same potential problem would apply for any Advance ticket available from Altrincham if you connected using Metrolink not just Advance tickets to London. I said London because of the greater availability of Advance tickets compared to other destinations.

So there's not a direct link from a town to a stately home over ten miles away? And that's evidence of how rough things are up here?

You've read the comment out-of-context. Moonshot was claiming the North East has it bad in comparison to the North West. I was saying that an alternative view of the limited Middlesbrough-Whitby is that there is a direct service between the two when Whitby's only a small town. If Whitby wasn't a tourist hot spot people wouldn't care about having a link to a very small town over 20 miles away. In comparison, one of the busiest tourist attractions in the North of England doesn't have good transport links to large settlements nearby.

 

[Moonshot]

That was in response to moonshot who said Metrolink's a suitable alternative to heavy rail. The same potential problem would apply for any Advance ticket available from Altrincham if you connected using Metrolink not just Advance tickets to London. I said London because of the greater availability of Advance tickets compared to other destinations.

But it is a suitable alternative to heavy rail....as has been proven. It does exactly the same job, ie gets passengers from A to B. Im sure the residents of Knutsford would appreciate a once every 12 minute service into Manchester if the Tram was ever extended from Altrincham to Knutsford etc....

 

[Oswyntail]

..... Business won't just move from London to the north, it'll end up going to Paris, Berlin, Brussels, New York, Hong Kong, Delhi, Beijing etc......

And this is the usual scare story used in London to justify London!
Business leaders are not stupid. They will locate where it is most economical for their business to locate. In an era of faster travel and better communications, being close to the customer is of less importance than it used to be. Cost of facilities and access to quality staff at a good price are equally likely to be drivers. However, this does depend on having access to the "faster travel and better communications", and the staff being available at the right price. It is the latter aspect that is likely to damage London in the medium term, with the localised hyper-inflation pushing up staff costs to unsustainable levels. So the question is really whether to make it easier for staff to travel to London, or to improve the infrastructure outside London. A sensible government would embrace both.
The threat is not that business will leave for Paris, Berlin, Brussels etc. It is that it will leave for Rheims, Erfurt, Mons

 

[northwichcat]

But it is a suitable alternative to heavy rail....as has been proven. It does exactly the same job, ie gets passengers from A to B. Im sure the residents of Knutsford would appreciate a once every 12 minute service into Manchester if the Tram was ever extended from Altrincham to Knutsford etc....

That idea is effectively dead in the water now: http://www.agma.gov.uk/cms_media/files/capital_projects_and_policy_agenda_papers_8_11_13.pdf

However, the option for building a new heavy rail line between Mobberley and Manchester Airport is still a potential CP6 scheme and the plans for HS2 strengthens the business case for it. If it's built Knutsford-Manchester Piccadilly would be possible in 30 minutes, whereas a tram-train from Knutsford to central Manchester would take around 45 minutes, so even with a less frequent service the new heavy rail line is the best option.

 

[Moonshot]

That idea is effectively dead in the water now: http://www.agma.gov.uk/cms_media/files/capital_projects_and_policy_agenda_papers_8_11_13.pdf

However, the option for building a new heavy rail line between Mobberley and Manchester Airport is still a potential CP6 scheme and the plans for HS2 strengthens the business case for it. If it's built Knutsford-Manchester Piccadilly would be possible in 30 minutes, whereas a tram-train from Knutsford to central Manchester would take around 45 minutes, so even with a less frequent service the new heavy rail line is the best option.

Do you think residents of Knutsford would welcome a once every 12 minute service by Tram if that was put on the table ? Simple yes or no .

 

[muddythefish]

This is great in principle but the UK doesn't exist in isolation. Business won't just move from London to the north, it'll end up going to Paris, Berlin, Brussels, New York, Hong Kong, Delhi, Beijing etc.

Why should it ?

 

[northwichcat]

In infrastructure terms, Newcastle is seeing no electrification within seventy five miles planned any time soon, no light rail upgrades in the past decade, no additional local trains (although I think they got one extra 142 as part of the cascade of DMUs a couple of years ago?.

Manchester has recently seen/is seeing electrification of the main unelectrified corridors (to Leeds/York, to Bolton/Preston/Blackpool, to Wigan, to Liverpool) plus dozens of extra electric trains to run on them, dozens of new trams, many tram extensions, new infrastructure like the Ordsall Chord, other infrastructure upgrades in the "commuter zone" (like at Todmorden or loops in the Hope Valley)...

...yet the complaints on this forum are always from those in/around Manchester.

Oh so because Newcastle is already electrified, the millions of pounds of investment it will be getting doesn't count.

There are plenty of local routes in/around Manchester which aren't going to see any significant improvements in the forseeable future e.g. the Liverpool-Warrington-Manchester line

You were complaining about "selective quoting" earlier - now you are comparing the average property price in a relatively affluent town of around 40,000 (if you trust the Wiki figure) with the average property price in a city around ten times the size.

Perhaps you'd like to contact The Times which published the figures and only gave the top 10 and bottom 10 and then the top 4 outside Greater London and ask them for the rest of the figures? I can't quote figures which are just sat in some reporter's Excel spreadsheet.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Do you think residents of Knutsford would welcome a once every 12 minute service by Tram if that was put on the table ? Simple yes or no .

Why don't you look at the link I just posted? That option was never on the table. The option was for a tram-train every 20 minutes to Knutsford as part as of a project costing £160m, which has been dismissed as poor value for money. It's pointless even discussing a 12 minute frequency when a 20 minute frequency has been dismissed.

Anyway I think the answer is no if they were offered 5 tram trains per hour or 3tph to Manchester on a new line taking 30 minutes. The 15 minutes saved in journey time would more than make up for less services and some people being further from their final destination.