Theoretically useful extensions to regional train services

[Whistler40145]

"Are there any regional train services that could be extended or combined to provide a longer and thus more important rail service? Many probably come to mind, however one that sticks out is extending the North Downs service to Brighton. This would not only provide a better service from Redhill to Brighton, but also to large centres such as Guildford and Reading. Something that obviously can't happen due to capacity constraints south of Gatwick."

The OP's one assumes diesel stock can run on third rail (it can) and therefore could be extended in an ideal world. In your one, however, the thing that is missing is an obvious sensible rolling stock plan associated.

Would extending the North Downs service to Brighton attract more passengers than extending it to Eastbourne via Lewes?

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Would extending the North Downs service to Brighton attract more passengers than extending it to Eastbourne via Lewes?

Well undoubtedly. The major population centre in that part of the world is Brighton, and that in turn has connectivity along both East and West Coastway. The main flows must be Thames Valley and West Midlands to East and West Sussex, as well as to Kent.

As the new world (January) sees solely Tonbridge to Redhill shuttles, does that not offer an opportunity to run those trains through to/from Ashford in order that you can have a one-change connection at Redhill from centres such as Reading and Guildford to Ashford?

 

[daodao]

It would be nice if more of the long distance Manchester services that terminate in Piccadilly continued on to Manchester Airport.

NO.

Manchester Airport should be served by Northern Rail only, with a frequent local stopping service to Piccadilly every 15 minutes, 1 tph to Crewe and a fast service every 15 minutes extending via the MSJ&A Castlefield line to destinations in NW England and possibly the West Riding via Rochdale. A lot of the problems in the Manchester area, in particular the MSJ&A Castlefield line, are caused by long distance trains with poor timekeeping messing up the paths on this congested line. The Cleethorpes service should terminate at Piccadilly with a bus connection from Stockport to the Airport.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

NO.

Manchester Airport should be served by Northern Rail only, with a frequent local stopping service to Piccadilly every 15 minutes, 1 tph to Crewe and a fast service every 15 minutes extending via the MSJ&A Castlefield line to destinations in NW England and possibly the West Riding via Rochdale. A lot of the problems in the Manchester area, in particular the MSJ&A Castlefield line, are caused by long distance trains with poor timekeeping messing up the paths on this congested line. The Cleethorpes service should terminate at Piccadilly with a bus connection from Stockport to the Airport.

I think I have to agree with this. If we want to be really sensible, we need a west-end bay at Victoria and a 15-minutely shuttle from Victoria (hub for TransPennine / Northern in that part of the world) to the Airport, along with a half-hourly service from Liverpool via Earlestown and a half-hourly service from Bolton and Salford Crescent. This would be relatively easy to put in and would give all of the necessary connectivity. Agreed re: fast buses from Stockport to Airport as well for the Cleethorpes and Sheffield-line folk.

 

[Whistler40145]

NO.

Manchester Airport should be served by Northern Rail only, with a frequent local stopping service to Piccadilly every 15 minutes, 1 tph to Crewe and a fast service every 15 minutes extending via the MSJ&A Castlefield line to destinations in NW England and possibly the West Riding via Rochdale. A lot of the problems in the Manchester area, in particular the MSJ&A Castlefield line, are caused by long distance trains with poor timekeeping messing up the paths on this congested line. The Cleethorpes service should terminate at Piccadilly with a bus connection from Stockport to the Airport.

What's the point of having an Airport railway station served by one TOC, passengers would simply see it as the biggest joke of all time

 

[daodao]

What's the point of having an Airport railway station served by one TOC, passengers would simply see it as the biggest joke of all time

Manchester is a regional airport and its railway station only needs to be served by the local regional TOC, namely Northern Rail.

 

[Whistler40145]

With regards to the current Manchester Piccadilly to Cardiff Central service, is it a service requirement to call at Stockport and Wilmslow or could several services be diverted to call at Manchester Airport?

Manchester is a regional airport and its railway station only needs to be served by the local regional TOC, namely Northern Rail.

That's a decision made by railway officials, not us

 

[johnnychips]

Manchester is a regional airport and its railway station only needs to be served by the local regional TOC, namely Northern Rail.

I must have dreamed the two flights I took to Hong Kong then!

I agree it would make sense to terminate the Cleethorpes trains at Piccadilly even though it would inconvenience me. But I really can’t see a problem with trains to Glasgow, Liverpool and perhaps one tph to Leeds via the Ordsall chord.

 

[Whistler40145]

I've flown to USA several times over the years from Manchester Airport, the description made it sound very much like a military Airport

 

[Energy]

Manchester is a regional airport and its railway station only needs to be served by the local regional TOC, namely Northern Rail.

Manchester is definitely not regional, Teesside airport and you might have a point.

 

[daodao]

Manchester is definitely not regional, Teesside airport and you might have a point.

Ringway is a regional airport for NW England and also serves the West Riding, given the poor airport provision there.

 

[A0]

What's the point of having an Airport railway station served by one TOC, passengers would simply see it as the biggest joke of all time

Well, it's not that dissimilar to the situation at Heathrow which only has direct services to Paddington - and that's a *far* more important airport than Manchester.

 

[30907]

I didn't think it was a Covid cut...

I was assuming you were referring to the current 50% timetable, as that has some cuts east of Skipton.

PS just remembered that there were random cuts for the Leeds P0 work, sorry.

 

[XAM2175]

What's the point of having an Airport railway station served by one TOC, passengers would simply see it as the biggest joke of all time

It's odd because I've never thought of the service to Hong Kong Airport - operated solely by MTR - as being a joke. Or Amsterdam (NS only), or Geneva (SBB only), or Zurich (also SBB only), or Munich (DB only), or Hamburg (DB only), or Sydney (Sydney Trains only), or Brisbane (QR only).

It's generally accepted practice in a lot of the world that an airport rail link can be a consistently frequent and punctual link to a suitable interchange point with the wider rail network. Mixing all sorts of services with various different frequencies and stopping patterns into a capacity-limited corridor doesn't really achieve that.

If you want to offer such a spread of services the approach taken by Frankfurt-am-Main is much more sensible - there are two separate through-tracked stations, one for the S-Bahn and regional services, and one for high-speed long-distance trains.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Manchester Airport would be better served by regular trains either all stops or a mix of stops and some fast. The current timetable, along with that miserable randomised calling pattern that arises for the ‘fast’ trains to add capacity to intermediate stations whilst offering little journey opportunities for people wanting short hops is helping nobody!

 

[Whistler40145]

Manchester Airport is very much an International Airport

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Manchester is a regional airport the principal international airport for pretty much everywhere North of Brum and its railway station only needs to be served by the local regional TOC, namely Northern Rail.

Fixed that for you, though I do agree with the idea that a frequent shuttle from Piccadilly would be a better strategy than having to make sure that services from multiple diverse origins arrive in Manchester at the right time to form part of what should be an S-Bahn service. After all, Heathrow manages with a service to Paddington and that's it. Even with Crossrail it won't have anything from outside Greater London.

 

[daodao]

Fixed that for you, though I do agree with the idea that a frequent shuttle from Piccadilly would be a better strategy than having to make sure that services from multiple diverse origins arrive in Manchester at the right time to form part of what should be an S-Bahn service. After all, Heathrow manages with a service to Paddington and that's it. Even with Crossrail it won't have anything from outside Greater London.

@ 61653 HTAFC

Pretty much everywhere North of Brum is the North of England. I accept that Ringway is the principal regional airport for most of this region (NE England excepted), but this area is extensively served by the regional train operator Northern Rail, so adequate rail services to it can be provided by this single TOC. Medium-distance fast services, e.g. to Blackpool via Preston, can be promoted under the Northern Connect brand.

 

[tetudo boy]

I think I have to agree with this. If we want to be really sensible, we need a west-end bay at Victoria and a 15-minutely shuttle from Victoria (hub for TransPennine / Northern in that part of the world) to the Airport, along with a half-hourly service from Liverpool via Earlestown and a half-hourly service from Bolton and Salford Crescent. This would be relatively easy to put in and would give all of the necessary connectivity. Agreed re: fast buses from Stockport to Airport as well for the Cleethorpes and Sheffield-line folk.

I agree with the shuttle, but how would the Manchester Airport to Glasgow/Edinburgh terminate at Manchester? I'd try it without creating any more platforms at Piccadilly. Something like creating a new link line between Victoria and Piccadilly, but east of Manchester so that the service can access the terminus platforms.

Besides, removing 4 TPE services wouldn't hurt the through platforms, wouldn't it?

 

[E100]

Tyne Valley services to Chester-le-Street and Durham.

Obviously, there's a host of practical reasons why this wouldn't actually happen.

 

[daodao]

I agree with the shuttle, but how would the Manchester Airport to Glasgow/Edinburgh terminate at Manchester? I'd try it without creating any more platforms at Piccadilly. Something like creating a new link line between Victoria and Piccadilly, but east of Manchester so that the service can access the terminus platforms.

Besides, removing 4 TPE services wouldn't hurt the through platforms, wouldn't it

The Scotch and North Welsh services to Manchester should terminate at Victoria, with 1 or 2 sidings built just east of Victoria so that they don't block the through platforms during the layover period.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I agree with the shuttle, but how would the Manchester Airport to Glasgow/Edinburgh terminate at Manchester? I'd try it without creating any more platforms at Piccadilly. Something like creating a new link line between Victoria and Piccadilly, but east of Manchester so that the service can access the terminus platforms.

Besides, removing 4 TPE services wouldn't hurt the through platforms, wouldn't it?

It would go to Victoria...

The Scotch and North Welsh services to Manchester should terminate at Victoria, with 1 or 2 sidings built just east of Victoria so that they don't block the through platforms during the layover period.

The old alignment next to Red Bank could have two sidings (off 5 and 6), and then you can build a reversing siding outside Vic between the tracks in and out of 3/4, and a west end bay for the Airport shuttle.

 

[Killingworth]

It's inevitable that extension of services to Manchester Airport and the Castlefield issue have to be brought in. f
Together they illustrate why a good idea falls down on operational practicality.

I'd suggest extending an hourly Northern stopping service into Sheffield from the north through to Hope for all the Peak District walkers. Many come from west and south Yorkshire.

No chance. Nowhere to hold a train at Hope. No paths up the Hope or Sheaf valleys either. One day maybe when tracks are doubled at Dore it might be possible to run an occasional train to Earles Sidings and back. But it would still suffer from long route delay syndrome.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fixed that for you, though I do agree with the idea that a frequent shuttle from Piccadilly would be a better strategy than having to make sure that services from multiple diverse origins arrive in Manchester at the right time to form part of what should be an S-Bahn service. After all, Heathrow manages with a service to Paddington and that's it. Even with Crossrail it won't have anything from outside Greater London.

If we could find anything to do with all those trains that use it as a terminus of convenience I would agree. Give it a dedicated platform at Picc (11 would be perfect for ease of interchange from 13/14), 4 or 6tph of modern EMUs with extra luggage space (I think some 323s have extra racks, perhaps use those?), all call all stations making the intermediates actually useful as well.

A first step would be to have those TPEs that reverse in Picc terminate there instead. That's just a waste of a unit.

 

[Ianno87]

"Are there any regional train services that could be extended or combined to provide a longer and thus more important rail service? Many probably come to mind, however one that sticks out is extending the North Downs service to Brighton. This would not only provide a better service from Redhill to Brighton, but also to large centres such as Guildford and Reading. Something that obviously can't happen due to capacity constraints south of Gatwick."

The OP's one assumes diesel stock can run on third rail (it can) and therefore could be extended in an ideal world. In your one, however, the thing that is missing is an obvious sensible rolling stock plan associated.

Bi-modes. As GA already use (just more of them)

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Bi-modes. As GA already use (just more of them)

At which point surely they should go into Liverpool Street?

If we could find anything to do with all those trains that use it as a terminus of convenience I would agree. Give it a dedicated platform at Picc (11 would be perfect for ease of interchange from 13/14), 4 or 6tph of modern EMUs with extra luggage space (I think some 323s have extra racks, perhaps use those?), all call all stations making the intermediates actually useful as well.

A first step would be to have those TPEs that reverse in Picc terminate there instead. That's just a waste of a unit.

No, you wouldn’t want them terminating at Piccadilly. You would want and expect them to operate at least to Victoria, as a quarter-hourly stopping service. This would make journeys from not only the Airport to City (and vice versa) very helpful, but also open up Victoria and beyond to south Manchester.

Terminating platforms should be used for almost all stuff from the Stockport direction, save potentially for a half-hourly Inter-Regional from Sheffield to Liverpool via Warrington (one Nottingham, one Cleethorpes), and a half-hourly EMU from either the Macclesfield, Wilmslow or Hazel Grove area to somewhere like Bolton or Liverpool via Newton le Willows.

Overlaying a quarter-hourly fast service from the Airport to Piccadilly and Oxford Road, that in turn would produce a half-hourly service to Liverpool via Newton le Willows and a half-hourly service towards Bolton (probably 6/331 to Blackpool).

It’s relatively easy, then you just terminate long-distance stuff at Victoria.

 

[Ianno87]

At which point surely they should go into Liverpool Street?

No because that offers no advantage to Norwich passengers compared to the existing route.

King's Cross gives a direct West End / HS1 / Euston area link. It's already possible today (changing at Ely) in about 2 hours, compared to ~100 minutes to Liverpool Street then 10-15 minutes on the tube.

 

[daodao]

No, you wouldn’t want them terminating at Piccadilly. You would want and expect them to operate at least to Victoria, as a quarter-hourly stopping service. This would make journeys from not only the Airport to City (and vice versa) very helpful, but also open up Victoria and beyond to south Manchester.

Terminating platforms should be used for almost all stuff from the Stockport direction, save potentially for a half-hourly Inter-Regional from Sheffield to Liverpool via Warrington (one Nottingham, one Cleethorpes), and a half-hourly EMU from either the Macclesfield, Wilmslow or Hazel Grove area to somewhere like Bolton or Liverpool via Newton le Willows.

Overlaying a quarter-hourly fast service from the Airport to Piccadilly and Oxford Road, that in turn would produce a half-hourly service to Liverpool via Newton le Willows and a half-hourly service towards Bolton (probably 6/331 to Blackpool).

It’s relatively easy, then you just terminate long-distance stuff at Victoria.

In essence, I agree.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It’s relatively easy, then you just terminate long-distance stuff at Victoria.

True, but Victoria presently doesn't have the west-facing terminal capacity to do that. So you'd either need to rebuild the whole thing (which I'm in favour of) or, if you accept a bit of a 13/14 style walk to the concourse, to build 3 or 4 west facing terminal platforms abutting the Arena building, for which there is room (it can be clearly seen on a Google aerial view). I'm not sure, however, that any of those options would be cheaper than constructing 15/16 and the Oxford Road work, though, in which case I start to think that doing that would be better. You could even do a "super 15/16" and fit a couple of west facing terminal platforms in between 13/14 and the main trainshed - that all just depends on how big a deck you want to build.

 

[tbtc]

I'd vote for anyone who made services in north west England more reliable by splitting the routes around Piccadilly so that all Airport services were all Castlefield services and vice versa - i.e. make the Airport - Castlefield operationally independent of the "main shed" services (other than freight, which we can't really do much with) - that would be huge improvement (Sheffield would lose its through trains to Liverpool/ Manchester Airport but that's a price I'm happy to pay for more reliable services)

One extension that I was slightly surprised not to see was a thorough service from Yorkshire to Skegness - EMT were good at allocating stock to meet demand (HSTs to Lincoln market in December, seven coach 222s to Liverpool for the horse racing, HSTs from Nottingham to Skeggy in the summer) but they never used the Neville Hill HSTs for Skegness services

One other Lincolnshire link would be some kind of service from the Skegness branch to either the ECML at Peterborough or to Lincoln (I'm generally not fussed about "county towns" but there's no denying that Lincoln is the big draw in the area)

extending the North Downs service to Brighton. This would not only provide a better service from Redhill to Brighton, but also to large centres such as Guildford and Reading. Something that obviously can't happen due to capacity constraints south of Gatwick.

That sounds s good idea on paper - I don't subscribe to the "Brighton must be back on the XC map with through services to Liverpool" debates on here but Brighton did have direct Reading services via Kensington Olympia (XC) and Botley (SWT) - Reading is a significant place in its own right as well as being a hub for a wide range of services (towards Bristol, Birmingham etc) - so some way of providing a through train from Brighton to Reading sounds like something desirable in the long term.

Extending the Doncaster-Scunthorpe stopper to run through to Cleethorpes in order to give Grimsby and Cleethorpes a second train an hour to the ECML.

YES!

Simple, practical, beneficial, fairly cheap too.

The Grimsby/Cleethorpes threads on here are full of grand ambitions for regular London services, a significant increase in the number of trains via Brigg etc, but people don't seem interested in something as useful as doubling the frequency from Grimsby to Scunthorpe and the ECML at Donny.

Now that the Doncaster - Scunthorpe service has been separated from the old Scunthorpe - Sheffield - Lincoln - Sheffield - Adwick - Sheffield - Scunthorpe diagrams, it should be easier to path a Doncaster - Cleethorpes service co-ordinated with the Manchester Airport service to give a reasonably spaced two trains per hour through Scunthorpe.

Manchester Airport is very much an International Airport

If, by that, you mean "it is an airport with international services" then the same could be said of many airports, but we don't cripple services in the region by trying to provide direct services to everywhere - e.g.there's no suggestion that Cardiff Airport has to have direct trains from all over Wales... there's no suggestion that Birmingham Airport has to have direct trains from all over the Midlands (it happens to be on the Coventry corridor, so gets the trains that would stop there anyway)... Merseyrail don't feel the need to extend some services from Kirkby/ Ormskirk/ Birkenhead to John Lennon Airport... Newcastle and Edinburgh airports have international flights but rely on the Metro/Tram instead of trying to provide through trains from everywhere in a hundred mile radius...

Similarly, the Manchester Metrolink and Tyne'n'Wear Metro stick to just one service to the Airport branch, rather then trying to provide through links from every other branch on the network (anyone from Bury/ Rochdale/ Ashton etc can change in central Manchester)

Sometimes its easy to serve an Airport since it lies on a busy line (e.g. Luton, Gatwick, Birmingham, Southampton), but the complications of Manchester mean it's on a branch that makes it more complicated to serve (effectively meaning one extra unit required to provide an hourly extension).

Tyne Valley services to Chester-le-Street and Durham.

Obviously, there's a host of practical reasons why this wouldn't actually happen.

Some kind of through service from Darlington/ Durham to the Metro Centre sounds a good idea (if paths, stock etc)

The Scotch and North Welsh services to Manchester should terminate at Victoria, with 1 or 2 sidings built just east of Victoria so that they don't block the through platforms during the layover period.

No need for new sidings, just dump the train five minutes away in Newton Heath - staff can have their PNB there