YACS: Yet Another Castlefield Solution?

[fishwomp]

Looking at historic maps of Manchester, and overlaying with Google Maps, there are interesting artefacts:

1. Immediately south of Ardwick station - the area around the viaduct on the Stockport lines used to be railway land: Tracks went under the arches. It's currently just a container depot (non-rail) - easy to move - on the east. The west side of the viaduct is a car park and one old office block.

Had a dive-under existed 2 years ago there, all those workings from Guide Bridge could've accessed Castlefield line Westbound with no conflicts at the station throat (halving the impact). Today few services would benefit - although it doesn't look expensive, not sure after the timetable rewrites that this is necessary now. Just interesting to throw in the melting pot.

2. Adjacent to platform 1 at Manchester Pic, is Network Rail owned staff car-park and a portakabin-like set of Network Rail small buildings - ample room for 2 new platforms, if not 3..

If this were restored, fewer workings would be terminating back-to-back in the terminal platforms (you often have to have the "front train", "back train" issue) - with the back train delayed leaving if the front train is late.

3. Immediately north of Ardwick, is the other side of the triangle that joins up with the line from Ashburys and goes to Philip's Park triangular junction into the Victoria-Stalybridge line. The viaduct looks mostly intact bar a missing bridge span.

With 2+3 restored - you could run Bolton services into Victoria, then do 6 miles in 10 minutes from Victoria to Piccadilly new platform, completely self-contained. Sure, it misses Oxford Road, but would that matter - if knock on effect was much better reliability, and both important stations get served. Or, you could use Miles Platting's other side, to run Calder Valley services straight into Pic.

 

[Mollman]

Some interesting suggestions, however the land to the east of Piccadilly (point 2) is where HS2 are planning to build their station. If that were not the case then it would probably be worth new platforms there for Ashburys bound services - this could then allow the current East lines to be used by Fast services, the Fast lines to be used by slow services and the Slow lines by services to and from Castlefield. Some changes further south and you might get six lines (Fast, Slow, Style).

 

[faltskog36abba]

Looking at historic maps of Manchester, and overlaying with Google Maps, there are interesting artefacts:

1. Immediately south of Ardwick station - the area around the viaduct on the Stockport lines used to be railway land: Tracks went under the arches. It's currently just a container depot (non-rail) - easy to move - on the east. The west side of the viaduct is a car park and one old office block.

Had a dive-under existed 2 years ago there, all those workings from Guide Bridge could've accessed Castlefield line Westbound with no conflicts at the station throat (halving the impact). Today few services would benefit - although it doesn't look expensive, not sure after the timetable rewrites that this is necessary now. Just interesting to throw in the melting pot.

2. Adjacent to platform 1 at Manchester Pic, is Network Rail owned staff car-park and a portakabin-like set of Network Rail small buildings - ample room for 2 new platforms, if not 3..

If this were restored, fewer workings would be terminating back-to-back in the terminal platforms (you often have to have the "front train", "back train" issue) - with the back train delayed leaving if the front train is late.

3. Immediately north of Ardwick, is the other side of the triangle that joins up with the line from Ashburys and goes to Philip's Park triangular junction into the Victoria-Stalybridge line. The viaduct looks mostly intact bar a missing bridge span.

With 2+3 restored - you could run Bolton services into Victoria, then do 6 miles in 10 minutes from Victoria to Piccadilly new platform, completely self-contained. Sure, it misses Oxford Road, but would that matter - if knock on effect was much better reliability, and both important stations get served. Or, you could use Miles Platting's other side, to run Calder Valley services straight into Pic.

When you say Bolton services-I presume you mean from places like-Barrow, Windermere, Blackpool?. If this is so how would those extra trains fit in Victoria with only 4 through lines?, A good idea though.

 

[tetudo boy]

I like these ideas, but I would also contribute to the immense problems west of Manchester Piccadilly station.
I'd say I would build two (or four depending on the amount of capacity) new through platforms at Manchester Piccadilly above Fairfield street, and two (or four, as explained, however, there could be no space, so we'll stick with two for the time being) new tracks from Manchester Piccadilly to somewhere north of the Ordsall chord.
Looking geographically, there is about just enough space for two platforms to be installed just above Fairfield street.
These would greatly improve the capacity on the line between Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Victoria.