Could The Crewe And Derby Line Become A Much More Important Route?
On the Midlands Connect web site, they have a page, which is entitled Derby-Stoke-Crewe.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Our plans have the potential to increase passenger demand on the corridor by 72%, with faster, more frequent services.
They then give the outline of their plans, which can be summed up as follows.
- Currently, the service is one train per hour (tph) and it takes 79 minutes.
- The service frequency will go to two tph.
- Twenty minutes could be saved on the second service by adjusting calling patterns.
- Improved links at Crewe for High Speed Two. This must have been written before Stafford and Stoke got the High Speed Two service to Macclesfield.
- East Midlands Railway are planning to extend the current Crewe and Derby service to Nottingham.
It seems a safe, and not overly ambitious plan.
These are my thoughts.
The Route
I have flown my virtual helicopter along the route and it appears to be double track all the way, except for a three mile section to the East of Crewe, that British Rail reduced to single track
However, in recent years the A5020 was built under the railway and the new bridge appears to have space for the second track to be restored, as this Google Map shows.
Note.
- The single track appears to be electrified, from the shadows of the gantries at either end of the bridge.
- West Midlands Trains appear to run an electric service between Crewe and Stafford on this route.
- I suspect it’s also used as a diversion route for Avanti West Coast’s Manchester service via Stoke-on-Trent or for train positioning.
Will this route allow High Speed Two trains to run between Stoke-on-Trent and Manchester Piccadilly?
From picture and comments in a rail forum, I suspect that the route could be redoubled fairly easily.
- The electrification runs for about 15.5 miles, between Crewe station and Stoke Junction, which is about half-a-mile on the other side of Stoke-on-Trent station.
- Trains seem to be connected to the electrification for over twenty minutes, so it could be useful for charging a battery train, running between Stoke-n-Trent and Crewe stations.
This Google Map shows Stoke Junction.
Note,
- Stoke-on-Trent station is to the North.
- The electrified railway going due South is the West Coast Main Line to Stone and Stafford stations.
- The line without electrification going off in a more South-Easterly direction is the line to Uttoxeter and Derby.
Following the route between Derby and Crewe, these are my observations.
- There is a level crossing at Blythe Bridge station.
- Most of the bridges over the route are modern, so I suspect will accept electrification.
- The route would appear to have a speed limit of 70 mph, but I would suspect that this could be increased somewhat as it doesn’t look too challenging.
- The route is 51 miles long, so a service that takes the current 79 minutes with nine stops, would average 38.7 mph.
- The proposed time of 59 minutes, would average 51.8 mph
I suspect there could be more to come, as the timetable is probably written for a Class 153 train.
A Crewe And Nottingham Service
The Midlands Connect plan says the service will be the following.
- Two tph
- A slow train in 79 minutes.
- A fast train in 59 minutes.
- East Midlands Railway want to extend services to Nottingham.
It could be a fairly simple easy-to-use timetable.
Fast Trains
Consider.
- Derby and Nottingham are 16 miles apart and fastest trains take between 19-22 minutes between the two cities.
- When it opens, all trains would stop at East Midlands Hub station between Nottingham and Derby.
- East Midlands Railway have a fleet that will include forty Class 170 trains.
- I suspect that these 100 mph trains will be able to run between Crewe and Nottingham including the turnround in under 90 minutes.
This would mean that a fast hourly service would need three trains.
Slow Trains
Consider.
- I wouldn’t be surprised to see the slower services continuing as now and not extending to Nottingham.
- 79 minutes is probably a convenient time, which would give a ninety minute time for each leg between Derby and Crewe, when turnround is included.
- Trains would be more of the Class 170 trains.
This would mean that a slow hourly service would need three trains.
Could Battery Electric Trains Be Used?
Consider.
- I think it is likely that the route between Derby and East Midlands Parkway via East Midlands Hub station, will be electrified, in conjunction with Midland Main Line electrification.
- Between Derby and Long Eaton stations via East Midlands Hub station is just under ten miles and takes ten minutes.
- Nottingham and Crewe is 66 miles of which 25 miles in total could be electrified.
- Derby and Crewe is 51 miles of which 15 miles are electrified.
- The longest section without electrification is between Derby station and Stoke Junction, which is 35.5 miles.
Batteries would be charged in the following places.
- Between Long Eaton and Derby stations.
- During turnround at a fully-electrified Derby station.
- Between Stoke-on-Trent and Crewe stations.
- During turnround at a fully-electrified Crewe station.
That’s a lot better than with an electric car.
In Sparking A Revolution, I quoted this Hitachi-specification for a battery-electric train.
- Range – 55-65 miles
- Performance – 90-100 mph
- Recharge – 10 minutes when static
- Routes – Suburban near electrified lines
- Battery Life – 8-10 years
I can’t see any problem with one of these trains or other battery-electric trains with a similar performance, running between Crewe and Nottingham or Derby via Stoke.
Could Hydrogen-Powered Trains Be Used?
I would suspect so, as the Alsthom Coradia iLint runs a similar route in Germany.
Connections To High Speed Two
Midlands Connect noted the route’s link to High Speed Two at Crewe.
But it also has other links to High Speed Two at Stoke-on-Trent and East Midlands Hub stations.
I suspect some stations like Uttoxeter or Alsager will have a choice of fast routes to London or Scotland.
Could Services Be Extended From Crewe?
In Connecting The Powerhouses, I talked about an article in the June 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, which proposed reopening the Midland Railway route between Derby and Manchester.
Some passengers and commentators fell a direct fast link is needed.
When High Speed Two is completed, the main route into Manchester Piccadilly will be a high speed spur from Crewe via Manchester Airport. Current plans include the following services.
- One tph from London Euston via Old Oak Common and Birmingham Interchange.
- Two tph from London Euston via Old Oak Common
- Two tph from Birmingham Curzon Street
Note.
- All services will call at Manchester Airport.
- It is likely that Northern Powerhouse Rail will add six tph to Manchester Piccadilly from Liverpool via Warrington.
- Some services will extend through Manchester Piccadilly to Bradford, Doncaster, Huddersfield, Hull, Leeds, Newcastle, Sheffield and York.
- High Speed lines will probably have a capacity of up to eighteen tph.
The Birmingham Curzon Street, Liverpool and London Euston services would be eleven tph, so there would be more than enough capacity for an hourly train from Nottingham.
What would the service be like?
- It would be between Nottingham and Manchester Piccadilly stations.
- It could call at East Midlands Hub, Derby, Uttoxeter, Stoke-on-Trent, Kidsgrove, Crewe and Manchester Airport stations.
- It would probably be hourly.
Timings could be as follows.
- Nottingham and Manchester Airport – 87 minutes
- Nottingham and Manchester Piccadilly – 91 minutes
- Derby and Manchester Airport – 67 minutes
- Derby and Manchester Piccadilly – 71 minutes
- Stoke-on-Trent and Manchester Airport – 32 minutes
- Stoke-on-Trent and Manchester Piccadilly – 36 minutes
The trains used on this and other local services that might need to use High Speed Two infrastructure would be performing a similar role as that of the Class 395 trains on High Speed One.
Possibilities must include.
- A classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
- A five-car AT-300 train, like East Midlands Railway’s Class 810 trains.
- An updated Class 395 train.
All trains would need a battery capability with a range of 40 miles.
It should also be noted that in Options For High Speed To Hastings, I worked through the options needed to run high speed commuter services to Hastings.
This was the last sentence in that post.
It’s all about selling trains and a company that had a 140 mph or 225 kph high-speed electric train, that could do perhaps 25 miles or 40 kilometres on batteries, would have a valuable addition to their product range.
A train with a range of 50 miles on battery power, would be suitable for the following routes.
- London St. Pancras and Hastings via Ashford International.
- Manchester Piccadilly and Nottingham via Manchester Airport, Crewe, Derby and East Midlands Hub.
- Manchester Piccadilly and Barrow-in-Furness via Manchester Airport, Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western, Preston and Lancaster.
- Manchester Piccadilly and Chester via Manchester Airport and Crewe.
- Manchester Piccadilly and Shrewsbury via Manchester Airport and Crewe.
Charging might be needed at some of the terminal stations.
High Speed Two To The North West Of England
This map clipped from the High Speed Two web site, shows High Speed Two routes in the North West of England.
Note.
- When shown in orange, High Speed Two will use new tracks.
- When shown in blue, High Speed Two will use existing tracks.
- New stations are shown as large blue dots.
- High Speed Two and the West Coast Main Line appear to share a corridor through Crewe, before dividing near Walley’s Green.
- High Speed Two loops to the East of the West Coast Main Line and rejoins it South of Wigan between Bryn Gates and Abram Brow.
The route will or might serve the following stations in North West England.
Blackpool North
Blackpool North station is not planned to be served by High Speed Two.
But the station has been recently rebuilt.
- It has a number of platforms, that are capable of handling 200 metre long classic-compatible High Speed Two trains.
- The route to High Speed Two at Preston is fully electrified.
- In a couple of years, it will be connected to Blackpool’s expanding tramway.
- Blackpool would welcome High Speed Two with open arms.
Blackpool North would be an ideal extra destination, if more trains were to be split and joined at Crewe.
But whatever happens, I believe that high speed commuter trains will run from Blackpool North.
- Blackpool and Manchester Piccadilly via Preston, Wigan North Western, Warrington Bank Quay and Manchester Airport.
- Blackpool and Derby via Preston, Wigan North Western, Warrington Bank Quay, Crewe and Stoke-on-Trent.
Blackpool North has the platforms and electrification and it will be used.
Carlisle
Carlisle station is a through station on the current Glasgow service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
But two tph will be 400 metre London Euston and Edinburgh/Glasgow trains, so platform lengthening will probably be required.
There will be the following trains.
- Birmingham Curzon Street and Carlisle – I tph – 118 minutes
- London Euston and Carlisle – 2 tph – 154 minutes.
After any necessary platform lengthening, Carlisle will be ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
The High Speed Two web site, says Carlisle will be reached in Phase 2b, but as Edinburgh and Glasgow are part of Phase 1, this must be a mistake.
Crewe
Crewe station is at the bottom of the map, just to the right of centre.
The station gets this introduction on this page of the High Speed Two web site.
HS2 services will call at Crewe, where passengers will be able to access the high speed network heading south. Journey times to London will be cut to under an hour. Macclesfield, Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent will also receive HS2 services, spreading the benefits of better connectivity.
The page also says that between five and seven trains per hour (tph) will call at Crewe.
Lancaster
Lancaster station is a through station on the current Glasgow service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
Lancaster will also be a terminus of 200 metre long classic-compatible High peed Two train from London Euston, so there may need to be refurbishment to handle the larger, if not longer train.
The use of Lancaster as a terminus, would appear to have the following advantages.
- The platform is already there.
- Using Lancaster as a terminal, may reduce the scope of works at Carlisle and Preston.
- The one tph service from London Euston is effectively a High Speed Northern stopper between Lancaster and Crewe, with calls at Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western and Preston stations.
- Lancaster has connections to Barrow-in-Furness, Heysham Port and Morecambe and the scenic Cumbrian Coast and Settle-Carlisle Lines.
- Paces like Barrow-in-Furness. Morecambe and a host of other stations, should save forty-three minutes on journeys to and from London.
I think that Lancaster, is a good place to terminate a service in the North-West of England.
There will be the following trains.
- Birmingham Curzon Street and Lancaster – I tph – 65 minutes
- London Euston and Lancaster – 1 tph – 101 minutes.
After the necessary refurbishment, Lancaster will be ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 2b of the project.
But I do feel that Lancaster could be reached in Phase 1 of the project, if necessary works North of Preston and at Lancaster station were planned as an independent project.
Liverpool Lime Street
Liverpool Lime Street station is at the Western edge of the map, at the end of the Liverpool Branch of the West Coast Main Line.
Liverpool gets this headline and brief description on this page of the High Speed Two web site.
The City Region Wants To Deliver a World Class Transport Network
Its ambitious plans would integrate the existing HS2 route and builds on the Northern Powerhouse Rail proposals for high speed, east-west links directly into Liverpool City Centre.
Liverpool has made a good start to prepare for High Speed Two.
- The Grade II Listed; Lime Street station now has lengthened platforms and an improved layout so that it can handle two 200 metre long High Speed Two trains per hour.
- Merseyrail is taking delivery of a fleet of new Class 777 trains to update their suburban network.
- By the time High Speed Two arrives in the city, the suburban network will be larger.
Liverpool is ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
Macclesfield
Macclesfield station is at the Eastern edge of the map, at the end of its own leg of High Speed Two.
The station was the surprise destination added, during the last iteration of High Speed Two.
- The late, great Brian Redhead, who lived in the town would be very pleased.
- The station was rebuilt in 1960 and has three platforms.
- It is planned to have one tph to London Euston via Stoke-on-Trent, Stafford and Old Oak Common.
- The visualisation on this page of the High Speed Two web site, also shows three platforms, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see a fourth added, as the extra platform would add flexibility.
The second surprise for Macclesfield, is that like Liverpool, it will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
Manchester Airport
Manchester Airport station is the Southern large blue dot at the top of the map.
This page on the High Speed Two web site is rather sparse on information about Manchester Airport station.
I have combined train times given on the web page, with frequencies from an article in the June 2020 Edition of Modern Railways to create this table, which should be valid after the completion of High Speed Two.
- Birmingham Curzon Street and Manchester Airport – 2 tph – 32 minutes
- Birmingham Interchange and Manchester Airport – 1 tph – 29 minutes
- London Euston and Manchester Airport – 3 tph – 63 minutes
- London Old Oak Common and Manchester Airport – 3 tph – 56 minutes
- Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport – 5 tph – 6 minutes
In Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North, I stated that Northern Powerhouse Rail were proposing the following Liverpool and Manchester service.
Manchester Airport station will be reached in Phase 2b of the project.
- Six tph
- Stops at Manchester Airport and Warrington.
- An end-to-end journey time of 26 minutes.
This would do the following.
- Add a Liverpool and Manchester Airport service with a frequency of 6 tph, that will take 20 minutes.
- Add a Warrington Parkway and Manchester Airport service with a frequency of 6 tph that will take around 10 minutes.
- Increase the frequency between Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport to 11 tph. Or more likely 12 tph.
How many cities have an airport connection running every five minutes using trains running at 125 mph?
As these Liverpool and Manchester services would probably start in places like Hull and Newcastle and come via varied routes that included a selection of Bradford, Doncaster Huddersfield, Leeds and Sheffield, all of the North, that lies to the East of the Pennines will be connected to Manchester Piccadilly, Manchester Airport and Liverpool by high speed trains.
Manchester Piccadilly
Manchester Piccadilly station is the Northern large blue dot at the top of the map.
This page on the High Speed Two web site is rather sparse on information about Manchester Piccadilly station.
Using the same data as before I can create a table of services from Manchester Piccadilly station, where I have included Liverpool and Manchester services, that will be run by Northern Powerhouse Rail.
- Birmingham Curzon Street – 2 tph – 40 minutes
- Birmingham Interchange – 1 tph – 37 minutes
- London Euston – 3 tph – 67 minutes
- London Old Oak Common – 3 tph – 60 minutes
- Manchester Airport – 12 tph – 6 minutes
- Liverpool – 6 tph – 26 minutes
Manchester Piccadilly station will be reached in Phase 2b of the project.
Oxenholme Lake District
Oxenholme Lake District station is a through station on the current Glasgow service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
There will be the following trains.
- Birmingham Curzon Street and Oxenholm Lake District – I tph – 79 minutes
- London Euston and Oxenholme Lake District – 115 minutes – Change at Preston
Oxenholme Lake District is ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 2b of the project.
But I do feel that Oxenholme Lake Districtcould be reached in Phase 1 of the project, if necessary works North of Preston and at Lancaster station were planned as an independent project
Penrith North Lakes
Penrith North Lakes station is a through station on the current Glasgow service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
There will be the following trains.
- Birmingham Curzon Street and Penrith North Lakes – I tph – 102 minutes
- London Euston and Penrith North Lakes – 138 minutes – Change at Preston
Penrith North Lakes is ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 2b of the project.
But I do feel that Penrith North Lakes could be reached in Phase 1 of the project, if necessary works North of Preston and at Lancaster station were planned as an independent project
Preston
Preston station is a through station on the current Glasgow service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
But two tph will be 400 metre London Euston and Edinburgh/Glasgow trains, so platform lengthening will probably be required.
There will be the following trains.
- Birmingham Curzon Street and Preston – I tph – 50 minutes
- London Euston and Preston – 3 tph – 78 minutes.
After any necessary platform lengthening, Preston will be ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
Runcorn
Runcorn station is a through station on the Liverpool service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
There will be two tph between London Euston and Runcorn and trains will take 74 minutes.
Runcorn is ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
Stafford
Stafford station is a through station on the Macclesfield service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
There will be one tph between London Euston and Stafford and trains will take 54 minutes.
Sfafford is ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
Stoke
Stoke station is a through station on the Macclesfield service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
There will be one tph between London Euston and Stoke and trains will take 71 minutes.
Stoke is ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
Warrington
Warrington Bank Quay station is a through station on the current Glasgow service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
There will be the following trains.
- Birmingham Curzon Street and Warrington Bank Quay – I tph – 25 minutes
- London Euston and Warrington Bank Quay – 1 tph – 73 minutes.
Warrington Bank Quay is ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
Wigan
Wigan North Western station is a through station on the current Glasgow service and can handle a nine-car Class 390 train which is over 210 metres long, which means they can handle a 200 metre long, classic-compatible High Speed Two train.
There will be the following trains.
- Birmingham Curzon Street and Wigan North Western – I tph – 36 minutes
- London Euston and Wigan North Western – 1 tph – 84 minutes.
Wigan North Western is ready and waiting for High Speed Two and will be reached in Phase 1 of the project.
Splitting And Joining Of High Speed Two Trains
In Existing Stations Where High Speed Two Trains Will Call, I looked at how existing stations will need to be modified to handle the High Speed Two service pattern described in an article, which is entitled HS2 Minister Backs 18 tph Frequency, in the June 2020 Edition of Modern Railways.
The article states that splitting and joining of trains will take place at three stations; Carlisle, Crewe and East Midlands Hub.
To successfully split and join the pairs of 200 metre long High Speed Two trains, the following will be needed.
- 400 metre long platforms, that can handle the pair of trains.
- Excellent signage, so that passengers get into the right train and leave for the right destination.
- Efficient crew methods, so that drivers are in the correct cabs at the right time.
For many years trains at Cambridge and several places South of London have successfully split and joined.
This video shows two Class 395 trains coupling and uncoupling automatically.
It;s impressive and I suspect High Speed Two’s trains will be equally good or even better at this procedure.
Why Is Split And Join Needed For High Speed Two?
According to the Modern Railways article, the full High Speed Two service will be as follows in trains per hour (tph) and trains per two hours (tp2h)
- 1 tph – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street via Old Oak Common (OOC) – 400 metres
- 2 tph – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street via OOC and Birmingham Interchange – 400 metres
- 1 tph – London Euston and Lancaster via OOC, Crewe, Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western and Preston – London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street via OOC, Crewe and Runcorn – 200+200 metres with Split/Join at Crewe
- 1 tph – London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street via OOC, Crewe and Runcorn – 200 metres
- 1 tph – London Euston and Macclesfield via OOC, Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent – 200 metres
- 1 tph – London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via OOC, Birmingham Interchange and Manchester Airport – 400 metres
- 2 tph – London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via OOC and Manchester Airport – 400 metres
- 1 tph – London Euston and Edinburgh Waverley via OOC, Preston, Carlisle and Edinburgh Haymarket – London Euston and Glasgow Central via OOC, Preston and Carlisle – 200 +200 metres with Split/Join at Carlisle
- 1 tph – London Euston and Edinburgh Waverley via OOC, Birmingham Interchange, Preston, Carlisle and Edinburgh Haymarket – London Euston and Glasgow Central via OOC, Preston and Carlisle – 200 +200 metres with Split/Join at Carlisle
- 1 tp2h – Birmingham Curzon Street and Edinburgh Waverley via Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith and Edinburgh Haymarket – 200 metres
- 1 tp2h – Birmingham Curzon Street and Glasgow Central via Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith, Lockerbie and Motherwell – 200 metres
- 2 tph – Birmingham Curzon Street and Manchester Piccadilly via Manchester Airport – 200 metres
- 2 tph – Birmingham Curzon Street and Leeds via East Midlands Hub – 200 metres
- 1 tph – Birmingham Curzon Street and Newcastle via East Midlands Hub, Darlington and Durham – 200 metres
- 1 tph – London Euston and Sheffield via OOC and East Midlands Hub – London Euston and Leeds via OOC and East Midlands Hub – 200 + 200 metres with Split/Join at East Midlands Hub
- 1 tph – London Euston and Leeds via OOC and East Midlands Hub – 400 metres
- 1 tph – London Euston and Leeds via OOC, Birmingham Interchange and East Midlands Hub – 400 metres
- 1 tph – London Euston and Sheffield via OOC, East Midlands Hub and Chesterfield – London Euston and York via OOC and East Midlands Hub – 200 + 200 metres with Split/Join at East Midlands Hub
- 1tph – London Euston and Newcastle via OOC and York – 200 metres
- 1 tph – London Euston and Newcastle via OOC, York and Darlington – 200 metres
Note.
- Trains 10 and 11 share the same path in alternate hours.
- Birmingham Curzon Street is effectively a second Southern terminus.
- Seventeen tph leave London Euston and Old Oak Common for the North, of which eight are 400 metre trains, five are a pair of 200 metre trains and four are 200 metre trains.
As the five pairs of 200 metre trains Split/Join en route, this effectively means, that London Euston is served by twenty-two tph.
It would appear that Split/Join is important, as it allows the same number of train paths between London Euston and the North to support more services.
Could Any Other Trains Be Split And Joined?
I don’t see why not!
There are eight tph going North from London Euston and Old Oak Common, that are 400 metre long trains that don’t Split/Join
- 3 tph – Birmingham Curzon Street
- 2 tph – Leeds
- 3 tph – Manchester Piccadilly
Note.
- Each 400 metre train would appear to have a capacity of around 1,100 passengers.
- Leeds is also served by another 200 metre train from London.
Effectively, this gives the following passenger capacities between London and the three major cities.
- Birmingham – 3,300
- Leeds – 2,750
- Manchester – 3,300
If these capacities have been carefully predicted, performing a Split/Join on these trains might cause a shortage of capacity.
There are four single 200 metre trains, that could be doubled up for their run to the North.
- London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street via OOC, Crewe and Runcorn
- London Euston and Macclesfield via OOC, Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent
- London Euston and Newcastle via OOC and York
- London Euston and Newcastle via OOC, York and Darlington
In theory, these four trains could be doubled to provide extra services.
But there are two problems.
Where Would The Trains Split and Join?
- Train 1 could Split/Join at Crewe.
- Train 2 could Split/Join at Stafford, if the platforms were lengthened to accept a pair of 200 metre trains.
- Trains 3 and 4 would need to stop at East Midlands Hub to Split/Join
It would appear that four extra trains could be run into London Euston, by running all single trains as pairs.
Where Would The Extra Services Terminate?
There are possibilities on the Western leg of High Speed Two.
- An extra train for Liverpool Lime Street
- An extra train for Lancaster
- A direct train for the current Manchester Piccadilly via Wilmslow and Stockport
- A direct train for Blackpool
But the Eastern leg of High Speed Two is more of a problem.
- An extra train for Sheffield
- A direct train for Hull.
Hull could be served via a new junction between High Speed Two and the Hull-Leeds Line to the North-West of Garforth or perhaps by extending a service from Sheffield.
Could Any Services North From Birmingham Curzon Street Be Split And Joined?
These 200 metre services go North from Birmingham Curzon Street station.
- 1 tp2h – Birmingham Curzon Street and Edinburgh Waverley via Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith and Edinburgh Haymarket
- 1 tp2h – Birmingham Curzon Street and Glasgow Central via Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith, Lockerbie and Motherwell
- 2 tph – Birmingham Curzon Street and Manchester Piccadilly via Manchester Airport
- 2 tph – Birmingham Curzon Street and Leeds via East Midlands Hub
- 1 tph – Birmingham Curzon Street and Newcastle via East Midlands Hub, Darlington and Durham.
Note that trains 1 and 2 share the same path in alternate hours.
There may be scope to double up some of these trains, to serve extra destinations in the North from Birmingham Curzon Street.
Conclusion
Split/Join is a powerful tool to increase the number of services without spending a fortune on new infrastructure.
Manchester Piccadilly ‘Super Hub’ Proposed
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Rail Technology Magazine.
This is the introductory sentence.
A Manchester Piccadilly ‘super hub’ has been proposed as part of the High Speed North rail project.
And these two paragraphs lay out the proposed design.
To create the super hub, the report suggests a new tunnel from Ordsall into Manchester Piccadilly from the west, which could connect to High Speed 2 (HS2) and Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR).
Fast trains from Chester and North Wales, Liverpool, Blackpool, Barrow and Glasgow could travel through the super hub with services emerging eastwards and across the Pennines to Leeds/Bradford, Sheffield, Hull, York and Newcastle.
Five years ago, I wrote Whither HS2 And HS3?, which argued for greater integration of the two routes and more tunnelled stations under major cities to build High Speed Two and Northern Powerhouse Rail with less disruption.
Part of that post was deliberately over the top, but it seems that others have been thinking in a similar way.
Last year, I wrote Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North, which was an attempt to add detail to this report on the Transport for the North web site, which is entitled At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail.
The proposed Manchester Piccadilly ‘Super Hub’ fits very well with the Transport for the North report.
- The station, could have entrances and exits were all over Manchester City Centre
- The main platforms could be long East-West through platforms, that would have direct tunnelled approaches from both directions.
- There could also be terminating platforms to take services from North Wales, Blackpool, Barrow and Glasgow.
- According to the Wikipedia entry for High Speed Two, the Western tunnel would be 7.5 miles long and link Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport stations at speeds of up to 142 mph.
- As a High Speed Two size tunnel will be needed on the Eastern approach, if High Speed Two trains eventually use the route, could this tunnel extend for perhaps five miles with speeds of up to 142 mph, to speed up journey times?
- Journey times between Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport stations could be under four minutes.
The Manchester Piccadilly ‘Super Hub’, High Speed Two And Liverpool
This clip of a map from the Transport for the North report shows a schematic of the current and possible rail links in the area.
High Speed Two would appear to come North and split into two routes.
- One continues North to join the existing West Coast Main Line just South of Wigan.
- Another goes through Crewe station.
North of Crewe, the two routes join and then split into three at the Junction labelled 6.
- To Warrington and Liverpool
- To Wigan, Preston and Scotland
- To Manchester Airport and Manchester.
A second Junction labelled 5, allows Northern Powerhouse Rail trains to run Liverpool-Warrington-Manchester Airport-Manchester.
The Transport for the North report, also says the following.
- There could be a new Warrington South Parkway station.
- Six trains per hour (tph) between Liverpool and Manchester via Warrington are planned.
- Journey times will be 26 minutes.
Will a Liverpool and Manchester time of 26 minutes be possible with two stops?
- I estimate Liverpool and Manchester will be a distance of 43 miles.
- As the will be a newly-built railway high speed railway, I suspect it will be at least a 125 mph line between Liverpool and Manchester Airport.
- But it is perfected feasible, that this section could be designed for speeds up to 140 mph or even the High Speed Two speed of 186 mph.
- TransPennine Express‘s current Class 802 trains, can run at up to 140 mph, so could take advantage of the higher speed.
- In addition, the Wikipedia entry for High Speed Two says that trains will use the Manchester Airport to Manchester City Centre tunnel at speeds of up to 142 mph.
Calculating journey times for various average speeds, including the two stops at Warrington South Parkway and Manchester Airport stations gives the following.
- 100 mph – 26 minutes
- 125 mph – 21 minutes
- 140 mph – 18 minutes
If the Liverpool and Manchester Airport section were to be built to High Speed Two standards, I can see a very comfortable Liverpool and Manchester time of under twenty minutes.
The Twenty-First Century will finally get a modern and fast Liverpool and Manchester Railway.
Going East From The Manchester Piccadilly ‘Super Hub’
The principle long-distance destinations to the East of Manchester Piccadilly station use one of two routes.
The Huddersfield Line to Leeds and beyond.
The Hope Valley Line to Sheffield and beyond.
Both routes leave the Manchester Branch of the West Coast Man Line out of Manchester Piccadilly station at Ardwick Junction.
This Google Map shows Ardwick Junction, Ardwick station and the Siemens Train Care Facility.
It would appear that the Eastern portal of the tunnels that lead to the proposed underground platforms of the Manchester Piccadilly ‘Super-Hub’ could emerge in this area.
Note.
- Ardwick station is about a mile from Manchester Piccadilly station.
- The Sheffield and Leeds routes split about a mile to the East of Ardwick station.
- The large site of the Train Care Facility, could surely be used for the tunnel portal.
The Transport for the North report says this about the services to the East from Manchester.
- Sic tph between Manchester and Leeds are planned.
- Four tph between Manchester and Sheffield are planned.
Ten tph through the underground platforms is surely possible, when Crossrail will handle 24 tph with full digital signalling.
A Manchester And Leeds High Speed Line
This clip of a map from the Transport for the North report shows a schematic of the rail links to the East of Manchester.
Two alternative routes are proposed between Manchester and Leeds.
- The black route would be created by upgrading the Huddersfield Line.
- The yellow route would be a new route via Bradford.
The Transport for the North report says this about the Leeds-Manchester service.
- There will be six tph.
- The journey will take 25 minutes.
In Is There Going To Be Full Electrification Between Leeds And Huddersfield?, I detailed Network Rail’s £2.9 billion proposal to upgrade the existing route between Huddersfield and Leeds. This is the black route.
If this project results in the full electrification between Leeds and Hudderfield, the Leeds and Manchester route will have these characteristics.
- It will be about forty-two miles long
- All except the sixteen mile section between Stalybridge and Huddersfield is electrified or is planned to be so.
- Network Rail have published plans to upgrade Huddersfield station.
- The section between Huddersfield and Dewbury will be upgraded to four tracks.
- The approach to the underground platforms at Manchester Piccadilly station could be in a two-mile 100 mph tunnel.
- Twenty-five minutes between Leeds and Manchester will need an average speed of 100 mph.
I don’t think it is unreasonable to assume that with a few other improvements, that the twenty-five minute time between Leeds and Manchester is possible.
New 140 mph Trains Will Be Needed
Consider a Blackpool and Leeds service via Preston, Wigan North Western, Warrington, Manchester Airport, Manchester and Huddersfield.
- It could be a fully-electrified route, if between Stalybridge and Huddersfield were to be electrified.
- Much of the route would be cleared for at least 140 mph running including the West Coast Main Line and the new route between Warrington and Manchester Piccadilly via Manchester Airport.
- Some sections of the route would allow more than 140 mph, but most would be 140 mph or less.
Without doubt, trains capable of running at 140 mph would be needed to make full use of the operating speeds available.
Manchester Piccadilly, Liverpool Lime Street And Some Other Stations Compared
I am doing this exercise to get a handle on the scale of the problem at Platforms 13 and 14 at Manchester Piccadilly station.
In 2018/19, these were some passenger statistics for the two stations and some others.
- Birmingham New Street station handled 47.928 million passengers on its thirteen platforms or 3.62 million per platform per year.
- Brighton station handled 17.385 million passengers on its eight platforms or 2.17 million per platform per year.
- Bristol Temple Meads station handled 11.368 million passengers on its thirteen platforms or 0.87 million per platform per year.
- Cardiff station handled 14.205 million passengers on its eight platforms or 1.78 million per platform per year.
- Chelmsford station handled 8.927 million passengers on two platforms of 4.46 million per platform per year.
- Crewe station handled 3.318 million passengers on its twelve platforms or 0.28 million per platform per year.
- Deansgate station handled 0.458 million passengers on its two platforms or 0.23 million per platform per year.
- Doncaster station handled 3,918 million passengers on its nine platforms or 0.44 million per platform per year.
- East Croydon station handled 24.770 million passengers on its six platforms or 4.12 million per platform per year.
- Exeter St. Davids station handled 2.620 million passengers on its six platforms or 0.44 million per platform per year.
- Gatwick Airport station handled 21.225 million passengers on its seven platforms or 3.03 million per platform per year.
- Leeds station handled 30.839 million passengers on its seventeen train platforms or 1.81 million per platform per year.
- Leicester station handled 5.582 million passengers on its four platforms or 1.40 million per platform per year.
- Liverpool Lime Street station handled 14.221 million passengers on its eleven platforms or 1.29 million per platform per year.
- London Bridge station handled 61.308 million passengers on its fifteen platforms or 4.08 million per platform per year.
- London Fenchurch Street station handled 18.508 million passengers on its four platforms or 4.63 million per platform per year.
- London Paddington station handled 38.18 million passengers on its thirteen platforms or 2,94 million per platform per year.
- Manchester Oxford Road station handled 9.338 million passengers on its five platforms or 1.87 million per platform per year.
- Manchester Piccadilly station handled 30.252 million passengers on its fourteen platforms and two tram platforms or 1.89 million per platform per year.
- Manchester Victoria station handled 8.950 million passengers on its eight platforms or 1.12 million per platform per year.
- Newcastle station handled 8,914 million passengers on its twelve platforms or 0.74 million per platform per year.
- Nottingham station handled 8.005 million passengers on its nine platforms or 0.89 million per platform per year.
- Peterborough station handled 5.060 million passengers on its seven platforms or 0.72 million per platform per year.
- Preston station handled 4.646 million passengers on its nine platforms or 0.52 million per platform per year.
- Reading station handled 17.081 million passengers on its fifteen platforms or 1.14 million per platform per year.
- York station handled 9.991 million passengers on its eleven platforms or 0.90 million per platform per year.
These figures have given rise to a few thoughts.
Brighton
Brighton station is an eight platform terminal station, that handles a lot of passengers, considering that the City doesn’t have any mass transit system and passengers rely on walking, bicycles, buses and private cars for onward travel.
- There are upwards of eight trains per hour (tph) at the station to and from London, all of which can be up to twelve cars.
- The West Coastway and East Coastway Lines have at least six tph in the Off Peak.
- Arriving passengers can walk straight through the wide gate line and out to walking routes and the buses, with leaving passengers walking the other way.
I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that Brighton station is at capacity.
Chelmsford
It is truly remarkable that Chelmsford station is the second busiest station in terms of passengers per platform per year on my list.
- The station has two separate platforms on either side of the tracks.
- Access is via wide stairs and lifts.
- The station appears to handle five tph in both directions in the Off Peak, with up to twice that number in the Peak.
- Most trains calling at the station are between eight and twelve cars.
- Chelmsford station could get even busier in terms of passengers when the new longer Class 720 trains and Class 745 trains are brought into service in the next twelve months, as these trains have higher capacities, than the current trains.
- It is aimed, that the new trains though will have level access between train and platform, at some point in the future.
I very much feel, that Chelmsford shows what can be done at an ordinary two platform station with the application of good simple design.
London Fenchurch Street
London Fenchurch Street is the busiest station on my list.
- The limited number of platforms will increase the number of passengers per platform per year.
- The station has two entrances to each platform.
- Arriving passengers can walk straight through the wide gate line at the main entrance and down escalators to walking routes at street level, with leaving passengers walking the other way.
- Many trains in the Peak are twelve cars.
- Adding extra platforms would be difficult.
It does appear, that work has been done to maximise the station’s capacity.
Crewe, Doncaster, Exeter St. Davids, Newcastle, Peterborough, Preston and York
All these stations are interchange stations on the main lines, that may have been improved, but have not been substantially rebuilt.
They all manage to handle between 0.5 million and 1 million passengers per platform per year.
Leeds
Leeds station has been improved over the last few years.
- There are six through platforms and eleven where trains can terminate.
- After passing through the gate line, passengers are in a concourse from where long distance services to London and the North and local services to Bradford, Harrogate, Ilkley and Skipton can be boarded.
- A new wide bridge with escalators, a lift and steps leads from this concourse across the through lines and platforms to the other side of the station.
- There are lifts and escalators from the bridge to some of the through platforms and the terminating platforms beyond them.
- At the far side of the bridge, a new Southern entrance has been added.
<The bridge works well and shows how a wide bridge over or a wide concourse under the tracks, can improve circulation in a station.
If you compare the bridge at Leeds, with the bridge at Reading, which was designed at around the same time, the Reading one is better in that it is wider and has more escalators, with one up and one down escalator to each pair of platforms.
Was a certain amount of design at Leeds station performed by accountants?
London Bridge
London Bridge station shows what can be done by applying good design in a new or rebuilt station.
- There are nine through and six terminal platforms.
- All platforms can take full-length twelve-car trains.
- There is a massive concourse underneath all fifteen platforms.
- There are lots of escalators and lifts between the concourse and the platforms.
- Steps provide additional and reserve capacity.
- Passengers changing between routes can take an escalator or lift to the concourse and another one to their new route.
- Arriving passengers can walk straight through the wide gate lines and out to walking routes, the Underground and the buses, with leaving passengers walking the other way.
- London Bridge station was designed by Grimshaw Architects
It is a design with a wow factor that works very well.
Reading
Reading station is another good design applied to a rebuilt station.
- There are nine through platforms, three East-facing bay platforms and three West-facing bay platforms.
- All through platforms can take full-length trains.
- All bay platforms are a level walk from the Southernmost through platform and the main entrance gate line to the station.
- There is a massive bridge over all nine through platforms.
- There are lots of escalators and lifts between the bridge and the through platforms.
- Steps provide additional and reserve capacity.
- Passengers changing between routes can take an escalator or lift to the bridge and another one to their new route.
- Arriving passengers can walk straight through the wide gate lines and out to walking routes, the car-parks and the buses, with leaving passengers walking the other way.
- Reading station was designed by Grimshaw architects.
It is a design with a wow factor that works very well.
Redesigning Manchester Piccadilly
Could some of the principles of these stations be applied to rebuilding Manchester Piccadilly station?
There are currently twelve terminal platforms numbered 1-12 in the main part of the station.
- Platforms 1 to 4 are used for services to Marple, New Mills, Rose Hill and Sheffield via the Hope Valley Line, and services on the Glossop Line.
- Platforms 5 to 9 are the longest and used by Avanti West Coast and CrossCountry services.
- Platforms 10 to 12 are shorter than the others and are usually used to accommodate local trains to Crewe and Manchester Airport, plus Mid-Cheshire line, Buxton Line and South Wales services.
The two through platforms 13 and 14 are on the Southern side of the station.
These ideas might be possible.
A Wide Bridge Or Concourse Connecting The Platforms At The London End
Currently, there is a bridge over the platforms 1 to 12 at the London end, but compared to the bridges at Leeds or Reading stations, it is a rather feeble affair.
- It is narrow.
- It doesn’t have any kiosks or shops.
- It is only connected to the platforms by steps.
Could this be replaced by a wide bridge, like say the one at Reading?
It would certainly give advantages if it could!
- Passengers arriving in Manchester Piccadilly needing to change to another service, might find it more convenient to use the bridge, rather than exit on to the main concourse.
- The bridge could be designed as a waiting area, with kiosks, shops, cafes and other facilities.
- The bridge would be connected to all platforms by escalators and lifts.
- Steps would provide additional and reserve capacity.
Note that if you buy a ticket to Manchester stations, that allows you to go to either Manchester Piccadilly, Manchester Oxford Road, Deansgate or Manchester Victoria stations, So a quick route up and down an escalator at the London end of Piccadilly station to Platform 14 would be very convenient.
Access To Platforms 13 And 14
Compared to the wide island platforms at Leeds and Reading, platform 13 and 14 are a bit narrow, but I’m fairly sure, that a good layout for escalators and lifts could be designed, so that access to these two platforms can be improved.
Trains Through Platforms 13 and 14
These must be arranged, so that they are all similar with wide double doors and step-free access between platform and train.
Improvement Along The Castlefield Corridor
Various improvements need to be done on the Castlefield Corridor.
- Deansgate can be improved to provide better access to the Metrolink at Castlefield.
- Manchester Oxford Road station needs a complete rebuilt and a better track layout.
- The Liverpool Lime Street and Manchester Airport service via Warrington and Manchester Oxford Road needs a strong rethink.
It appears that it has already been decided to reduce the number of trains, as I wrote about in Castlefield Corridor Trade-Off Plan For Fewer Trains.
Wide Gate Lines
Passengers arriving at Manchester Piccadilly station in the main part of the station should be able to walk forward to a gate line stretching right across all the platforms.
- The present gate line isn’t continuous.
- There is still a lot of manual checking of tickets.
The current layout can certainly be improved.
Access To Metrolink
I also wonder if better access to the Metrolink could be provided, so that passengers access the Metrolink station from inside the gate line. Now that the Metrolink allows contactless ticketing, this might be easier.
Conclusion
I believe there’s a solution in there somewhere!
Manchester Piccadilly Through Platforms Become ‘A Station Within A Station’
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.
This was the introductory paragraph.
Following what Network Rail describes as ‘a major rethink’, the two through platforms at Manchester Piccadilly which handle up to 14 trains/h are to be managed independently from the rest of the station.
Measures to be taken include.
-
- A dedicated Customer Service team.
- Better customer information screens.
- An improved satellite lounge with lots of facilities.
- Platforms will be fitted with windbreaks.
- Improved train stopping procedures to cut train dwell times.
Network Rail is also going to run a design contest to see if anybody has any other ideas.
I shall be interested to see how this works out.
Could High Speed Two Trains Serve Stoke-on-Trent?
The city of Stoke-on-Trent lobbied hard for High Speed Two to call, but it is going through closer to the West Coast Main Line, which is a few miles to the West.
Current Services
Stoke-on-Trent station is on the Stafford to Manchester branch of the West Coast Main Line.
It is served by two trains per hour (tph) between Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via Milton Keynes Central (1tph), Stoke-on-Trent, Macclesfield (1tph) and Stockport. The fastest journey time is one hour and 24 minutes.
Possible Routes Using High Speed Two
It should be noted that to serve Stafford on the West Coast Main Line, High Speed Two trains will use the West Coast Main Line, rather than High Speed Two between Lichfield and Crewe.
This map clipped from the High Speed Two web site, shows the two routes between Lichfield and Crewe.
Note.
- The straighter route is the new High Speed Two route.
- The bendy route is the West Coast Main Line.
- The two routes split to the North of the city of Lichfield in the South-East corner of the map.
- Stafford can be seen between the two routes.
- Stoke-on-Trent can be seen to the North-East of the routes.
- The new route through Crewe station is shown in orange.
To give an idea of scale, the West Coast Main Line is about forty miles long between the two junctions at Lichfield and Crewe.
Possible Ways High Speed Two Could Serve Stoke-on-Trent Station
There are several ways that High Speed Two trains can serve Stoke-on-Trent station.
London Euston And Stoke-on-Trent Direct
The simplest way is to run a direct service between London Euston and Stoke-on-Trent
- It would use High Speed Two from Euston to Lichfield, where it would take the Trent Valley Line.
- It would proceed to Stoke-on-Trent via Rugeley Trent Valley and Stone.
I estimate that the service would take one hour and two minutes.
The service could either turnback at Stoke-on-Trent or go on to Crewe, Manchester or some other convenient terminus.
Manchester services might even call at Macclesfield and Stockport, as the current services do now!
Times between London and Manchester by various routes could be.
- Current via Stoke-on-Trent, Macclesfield and Stockport – Two hours and seven minutes.
- Planned using High Speed Two – One hour and seven minutes.
- High Speed Two and current route to Manchester – One hour and forty-one minutes
Manchester will get three tph from London and one from Birmingham, so perhaps one of the four services should go via Stoke-in-Trent.
Hitachi Trains For Avanti
The title of this post is the same as that of an article in the January 2020 Edition of Modern Railways.
The Bi-Mode Trains
Some more details of the thirteen bi-mode and ten electric Hitachi AT 300 trains are given.
Engine Size and Batteries
This is an extract from the article.
Hitachi told Modern Railways it was unable to confirm the rating of the diesel engines on the bi-modes, but said these would be replaceable by batteries in future if specified.
I do wonder if my speculation in Will Future Hitachi AT-300 Trains Have MTU Hybrid PowerPacks? is possible.
After all, why do all the hard work to develop a hybrid drive system, when your engine supplier has done it for you?
Would Avanti West Coast need a train that will do 125 mph on diesel?
- The North Wales Coast Line has a maximum line speed of just 90 mph.
- Wikipedia is uncertain of the maximum speed of the Chester and Shrewbury Line, but it is extremely unlikely to be more than 80-90 mph.
The only place, they will be able to run at 125 mph or even higher will be on the West Coast Main Line, where they will be running under electric power from the pantograph.
If I were designing a bi-mode for 90 mph on diesel and 125 mph on electric, I would have batteries on the train for the following purposes.
- Handle regenerative braking.
- Provide hotel power in stations or when stationery.
- Provide an acceleration boost, if required, when running on diesel.
- Provide emergency power, if the wires go down in electric mode.
I’m sure MTU could work out a suitable size of diesel engine and batteries in an MTU PowerPack, that would meet the required performance.
Or maybe a smaller diesel could be used. An LNER Class 800 train has 1680 kW of installed power to maintain 125 mph. But the Great Western Railway versions have 2100 kW or twenty-five percent more, as their routes are more challenging with steeper gradients.
For the less challenging routes at a maximum of 90 mph between Crewe, Chester, Shrewsbury and North Wales, I wonder what level of power is needed.
A very rough estimate based on the speed required could put the power requirement as low as 1200-1500 kW.
As the diesel engines are only electrical generators, it would not effect the ability of the train to do 125 mph between Crewe and London.
There looks to be a virtuous circle at work here.
- Lower maximum speed on diesel means smaller diesel engines.
- Smaller diesel engines means lighter diesel engines and less fuel to carry.
- Less weight to accelerate needs less installed power.
- Less power probably means a more affordable train, that uses less diesel.
It looks to me, that Hitachi have designed a train, that will work Avanti West Coast’s routes efficiently.
The Asymmetric Bi-Mode Train
It looks to me that the bi-mode train that Avanti West Coast are buying has very different performance depending on the power source and signalling
- 90 mph or perhaps up to 100 mph on diesel.
- 125 mph on electric power.with current signalling.
- Up to 140 mph on electric power with in-cab digital signalling.
This compares with the current Class 221 trains, which can do 125 mph on all tracks, with a high enough operating speed.
The new trains’ different performance on diesel and electric power means they could be called asymmetric bi-modes.
Surely, creating an asymmetric bi-mode train, with on-board power; battery, diesel or hydrogen, sized to the route, means less weight, greater efficiency, less cost and in the case of diesel, higher carbon efficiency.
Carbon Emissions
Does the improvement in powertrain efficiency with smaller engines running the train at slower speeds help to explain this statement from the Modern Railways article?
Significant emissions reduction are promised from the elimination of diesel operation on electrified sections as currently seen with the Voyagers, with an expected reduction in CO2 emissions across the franchise of around two-thirds.
That is a large reduction, which is why I feel, that efficiency and batteries must play a part.
Battery-Electric Conversion
In my quote earlier from the Modern Railways article, I said this.
These (the diesel engines) would be replaceable by batteries in future if specified.
In Thoughts On The Next Generation Of Hitachi High Speed Trains, I looked at routes that could be run by a battery-electric version of Hitachi AT-300 trains.
I first estimated how far an AT-300 train could go on batteries.
How far will an AT-300 train go on battery power?
- I don’t think it is unreasonable to be able to have 150 kWh of batteries per car, especially if the train only has one diesel engine, rather than the current three in a five-car train.
- I feel with better aerodynamics and other improvements based on experience with the current trains, that an energy consumption of 2.5 kWh per vehicle mile is possible, as compared to the 3.5 kWh per vehicle mile of the current trains.
Doing the calculation gives a range of sixty miles for an AT-300 train with batteries.
As train efficiency improves and batteries are able to store more energy for a given volume, this range can only get better.
I then said this about routes that will be part of Avanti West Coast’s network.
With a range of sixty miles on batteries, the following is possible.
- Chester, Gobowen, Shrewsbury And Wrexham Central stations could be reached on battery power from the nearest electrification.
- Charging would only be needed at Shrewsbury to ensure a return to Crewe.
Gobowen is probably at the limit of battery range, so was it chosen as a destination for this reason.
The original post was based on trains running faster than the 90 mph that is the maximum possible on the lines without electrification, so my sixty mile battery range could be an underestimate.
These distances should be noted.
- Crewe and Chester – 21 miles
- Chester and Shrewsbury – 42 miles
- Chester and Llandudno – 47 miles
- Chester and Holyhead – 84 miles
Could electrification between Crewe and Chester make it possible for Avanti West Coast’s new trains to go all the way between Chester and Holyhead on battery power in a few years?
I feel that trains with a sixty mile battery range would make operations easier for Avanti West Coast.
Eighty miles would almost get them all the way to Holyhead, where they could recharge!
Rlectrification Between Chester And Crewe
I feel that this twenty-odd miles of electrification could be key to enabling battery-electric trains for the routes to the West of Chester to Shrewsbury, Llandudno and Holyhead.
How difficult would it be to electrify between Chester and Crewe?
- It is not a long distance to electrify.
- There doesn’t appear to be difficult viaducts or cuttings.
- It is electrified at Crewe, so power is not a problem.
- There are no intermediate stations.
But there does seem to be a very large number of bridges. I counted forty-four overbridges and six underbridges. At least some of the bridges are new and appear to have been built with the correct clearance.
Perhaps it would be simpler to develop fast charging for the trains and install it at Chester station.
Conclusion On The Bi-Mode Trains
It appears to me that Avanti West Coast, Hitachi and Rock Rail, who are financing the trains have done a very good job in devising the specification for a fleet of trains that will offer a good service and gradually move towards being able to deliver that service in a carbon-free manner.
- The initial bi-mode trains will give a big improvement in performance and reduction in emission on the current Voyagers, as they will be able to make use of the existing electrification between Crewe and London.
- The trains could be designed for 125 mph on electric power and only 90-100 mph on diesel, as no route requires over 100 mph on diesel. This must save operating costs and reduce carbon emissions.
- They could use MTU Hybrid PowerPacks instead of conventional diesel engines to further reduce emissions and save energy
- It also appears that Hitachi might be able to convert the trains to battery operation in a few years.
- The only new infrastructure would be a few charging stations for the batteries and possible electrification between Chester and Crewe.
I don’t think Avanti West Coast’s ambition of a two-thirds reduction in CO2 is unreasonable and feel it could even be exceeded.
Other Routes For Asymetric Bi-Mode Trains
I like the concept of an asymetric bi-mode train, where the train has the following performance.
- Up to 100 mph on battery, diesel or hydrogen.
- Up to 100 mph on electrified slower-speed lines.
- 125 mph on electrified high-speed lines, with current signalling.
- Up to 140 mph on electrified high-speed lines, with in-cab digital signalling.
I am very sure that Hitachi can now tailor an AT-300 train to a particular company’s needs. Certainly, in the case of Avanti West Coast, this seems to have happened, when Avanti West Coast, Hitachi, Network Rail and Rock Rail had some serious negotiation.
LNER At Leeds
As an example consider the rumoured splitting and joining of trains at Leeds to provide direct services between London and Bradford, Harrogate, Huddersfield, Ilkley, Skipton and other places, that I wrote about in Dancing Azumas At Leeds.
In the related post, I gave some possible destinations.
- Bradford – 13 miles – 25 minutes – Electrified
- Harrogate – 18 miles – 30 minutes
- Huddersfield – 17 miles – 35 minutes
- Hull – 20 miles – 60 minutes
- Ilkley – 16 miles – 26 minutes – Electrified
- Skipton – 26 miles – 43 minutes – Electrified
- York – 25 miles – 30 minutes
Note, that the extended services would have the following characteristics.
They would be run by one five-car train.
- Services to Bradford, Ilkley and Skipton would be electric
- Electrification is planned from Leeds to Huddersfield and York, so these services could be electric in a few years.
- All other services would need independent power; battery, diesel or hydrogen to and from Leeds.
- Two trains would join at Leeds and run fast to London on the electrified line.
- Services would probably have a frequency of six trains per day, which works out at a around a train every two hours and makes London and back very possible in a day.
- They would stop at most intermediate stations to boost services to and from Leeds and give a direct service to and from London.
As there are thirty trains per day between London and Leeds in each direction, there are a lot of possible services that could be provided.
Currently, LNER are only serving Harrogate via Leeds.
- LNER are using either a nine-car train or a pair of five-car trains.
- The trains reverse in Platforms 6 or 8 at Leeds, both of which can handle full-length trains.
- LNER allow for a generous time for the reverse, which would allow the required splitting and joining.
- All trains going to Harrogate are Class 800 bi-mode trains.
Note that the Class 800 trains are capable of 125 mph on diesel, whereas the average speed between Harrogate and Leeds is just 35 mph. Obviously, some of this slow speed is due to the route, but surely a train with a maximum speed of 90-100 mph, with an appropriate total amount of diesel power, would be the following.
- Lighter in weight.
- More efficient.
- Emit less pollution.
- Still capable of high speed on electrified lines.
- Bi-mode and electric versions could run in pairs between Leeds and London.
LNER would probably save on track access charges and diesel fuel.
LNER To Other Places
Could LNER split and join in a similar way to other places?
- Doncaster for Hull and Sheffield
- Edinburgh for Aberdeen and Inverness
- Newark for Lincoln and Nottingham
- York for Middlesbrough and Scarborough.
It should be noted that many of the extended routes are quite short, so I suspect some train diagrams will be arranged, so that trains are only filled up with diesel overnight,
GWR
Great Western Railway are another First Group company and I’m sure some of their routes could benefit, from similar planning to that of Avanti West Coast.
Splitting and joining might take place at Reading, Swindon, Bristol and Swansea.
South Western Railway
South Western Railway will need to replace the three-car Class 159 trains to Exeter, that generally work in pairs with a total number of around 400 seats, in the next few years.
These could be replaced with a fleet of third-rail Hitachi trains of appropriate length.
- Seven cars sating 420 passengers?
- They would remove diesel trains from Waterloo station.
- All South Western Railway Trains running between Waterloo and Basingstoke would be 100 mph trains.
I wonder, if in-cab digital signalling on the route, would increase the capacity? It is sorely needed!
Southeastern
Southeastern need bi-mode trains to run the promised service to Hastings.
- Trains would need a third-rail capability.
- Trains need to be capable of 140 mph for High Speed One.
- Trains need to be able to travel the 25 miles between Ashford International and Ore stations.
- Trains would preferably be battery-electric for working into St. Pancras International station.
Would the trains be made up from six twenty-metre cars, like the Class 395 trains?
The Simple All-Electric Train
The Modern Railways article, also says this about the ten all-electric AT-300 trains for Birmingham, Blackpool and Liverpool services.
The electric trains will be fully reliant on the overhead wire, with no diesel auxiliary engines or batteries.
It strikes me as strange, that Hitachi are throwing out one of their design criteria, which is the ability of the train to rescue itself, when the overhead wires fail.
In Do Class 800/801/802 Trains Use Batteries For Regenerative Braking?, I published this extract from this document on the Hitachi Rail web site.
The system can select the appropriate power source from either the main transformer or the GUs. Also, the size and weight of the system were minimized by designing the power supply converter to be able to work with both power sources. To ensure that the Class 800 and 801 are able to adapt to future changes in operating practices, they both have the same traction system and the rolling stock can be operated as either class by simply adding or removing GUs. On the Class 800, which is intended to run on both electrified and non-electrified track, each traction system has its own GU. On the other hand, the Class 801 is designed only for electrified lines and has one or two GUs depending on the length of the trainset (one GU for trainsets of five to nine cars, two GUs for trainsets of 10 to 12 cars). These GUs supply emergency traction power and auxiliary power in the event of a power outage on the catenary, and as an auxiliary power supply on non-electrified lines where the Class 801 is in service and pulled by a locomotive. This allows the Class 801 to operate on lines it would otherwise not be able to use and provides a backup in the event of a catenary power outage or other problem on the ground systems as well as non-electrified routes in loco-hauled mode.
This is a very comprehensive power system, with a backup in case of power or catenary failure.
So why does it look like Hitachi are throwing that capability out on the trains for Avanti West Coast.
There are several possibilities.
- The reliability of the trains and the overhead wire is such, that the ability of a train to rescue itself is not needed.
- The auxiliary generator has never been used for rescuing the train.
- The West Coast Main Line is well-provided with Thunderbird locomotives for rescuing Pendelinos, as these trains have no auxiliary generator or batteries.
- Removal of the excess weight of the auxiliary engine and batteries, enables the Hitachi AT-300 trains to match the performance of the Pendelinos, when they are using tilt.
Obviously, Hitachi have a lot of train performance statistics, from the what must be around a hundred trains in service.
It looks like Hitachi are creating a lightweight all-electric train, that has the performance or better of a Pendelino, that it achieves without using tilt.
- No tilt means less weight and more interior space.
- No auxiliary generator or batteries means less weight.
- Wikipedia indicates, that Hitachi coaches are around 41 tonnes and Pendelino coaches are perhaps up to ten tonnes heavier.
- Less weight means fast acceleration and deceleration.
- Less weight means less electricity generated under regenerative braking.
- Pendelinos use regenerative braking, through the catenary.
- Will the new Hitachi trains do the same instead of the complex system they now use?
If the train fails and needs to be rescued, it uses the same Thunderbird system, that the Pendelinos use when they fail.
Will The New Hitachi Trains Be Less Costly To Run?
These trains will be lighter in weight than the Pendelinos and will not require the track to allow tilting.
Does this mean, that Avanti West Coast will pay lower track access charges for their new trains?
They should also pay less on a particular trip for the electricity, as the lighter trains will need less electricity to accelerate them to line speed.
Are Avanti West Coast Going To Keep The Fleets Apart?
Under a heading of Only South Of Preston, the Modern Railways article says this.
Unlike the current West Coast fleet, the Hitachi trains will not be able to tilt. Bid Director Caroline Donaldson told Modern Railways this will be compensated for by their improved acceleration and deceleration characteristics and that the operator is also working with Network Rail to look at opportunities to improve the linespeed for non-tilting trains.
The routes on which the Hitachi trains will operate have been chosen with the lack of tilt capability in mind, with this having the greatest impact north of Preston, where only Class 390 Pendelinos, which continue to make use of their tilting capability will be used.
Avanti West Coast have said that the Hitachi trains will run from London to Birmingham, Blackpool and Liverpool.
All of these places are on fully-electrified branches running West from the West Coast Main Line, so it looks like there will be separation.
Will The New Hitachi Trains Be Faster To Birmingham, Blackpool And Liverpool?
Using data from Real Time Trains, I find the following data about the current services.
- Birmingham and Coventry is 19 miles and takes 20 minutes at an average speed of 57 mph
- Blackpool and Preston is 16.5 miles and takes 21 minutes at an average speed of 47 mph
- Liverpool and Runcorn is 3.15 miles and takes 15 minutes at an average speed of 52 mph
All the final legs when approaching the terminus seem to be at similar speeds, so I doubt there are much savings to be made away from the West Coast Main Line.
Most savings will be on the West Coast Main Line, where hopefully modern in-cab digital signalling will allow faster running at up to the design speed of both the Hitachi and Pendelino trains of 140 mph.
As an illustration of what might be possible, London to Liverpool takes two hours and thirteen minutes.
The distance is 203 miles, which means that including stops the average speed is 91.6 mph.
If the average speed could be raised to 100 mph, this would mean a journey time of two hours and two minutes.
As much of the journey between London and Liverpool is spent at 125 mph, which is the limit set by the signalling, raising that to 135 mph could bring substantial benefits.
To achieve the journey in two hours would require an overall average speed of 101.5 mph.
As the proportion of track on which faster speeds, than the current 125 mph increase over the next few years, I can see Hitachi’s lightweight all-electric expresses breaking the two hour barrier between London and Liverpool.
What About The Pendelinos And Digital Signalling?
The January 2020 Edition of Modern Railways also has an article entitled Pendolino Refurb Planned.
These improvements are mentioned.
- Better standard class seats! (Hallelujah!)
- Refreshed First Class.
- Revamped shop.
Nothing is mentioned about any preparation for the installation of the equipment to enable faster running using digital in-cab signalling, when it is installed on the West Coast Main Line.
Surely, the trains will be updated to be ready to use digital signalling, as soon as they can.
Just as the new Hitachi trains will be able to take advantage of the digital signalling, when it is installed, the Pendellinos will be able to as well.
Looking at London and Glasgow, the distance is 400 miles and it takes four hours and thirty minutes.
This is an average speed of 89 mph, which compares well with the 91.6 mph between London and Liverpool.
Raise the average speed to 100 mph with the installation of digital in-cab signalling on the route, that will allow running at over 125 mph for long sections and the journey time will be around four hours.
This is a table of average speeds and journey times.
- 100 mph – four hours
- 105 mph – three hours and forty-eight minutes
- 110 mph – three hours and thirty-eight minutes
- 115 mph – three hours and twenty-eight minutes
- 120 mph – three hours and twenty minutes
- 125 mph – three hours and twelve minutes
- 130 mph – three hours and four minutes
I think that I’m still young enough at 72 to be able to see Pendelinos running regularly between London and Glasgow in three hours twenty minutes.
The paragraph is from the Wikipedia entry for the Advanced Passenger Train.
The APT is acknowledged as a milestone in the development of the current generation of tilting high speed trains. 25 years later on an upgraded infrastructure the Class 390 Pendolinos now match the APT’s scheduled timings. The London to Glasgow route by APT (1980/81 timetable) was 4hrs 10min, the same time as the fastest Pendolino timing (December 2008 timetable). In 2006, on a one off non-stop run for charity, a Pendolino completed the Glasgow to London journey in 3hrs 55min, whereas the APT completed the opposite London to Glasgow journey in 3hrs 52min in 1984.
I think it’s a case of give the Pendelinos the modern digital in-cab signalling they need and let them see what they can do.
It is also possible to give an estimate for a possible time to and from Manchester.
An average speed of 120 mph on the route would deliver a time of under one hour and forty minutes.
Is it possible? I suspect someone is working on it!
Conclusion
I certainly think, that Avanti West Coast, Hitachi and Network Rail, have been seriously thinking how to maximise capacity and speed on the West Coast Main Line.
I also think, that they have an ultimate objective to make Avanti West Coast an operator, that only uses diesel fuel in an emergency.
Rochdale Still Doesn’t Have A Direct Link To Manchester Airport
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Richdale Online.
I recently went to Rochdale to see Ipswich play and what surprised me about the town, was how far it was from my hotel close to Manchester Victoria station.
I went on a tram and it took over an hour and it was also very crowded.
I then walked about a mile to the football ground. Luckily a friendly Rochdale supporter showed me the way.
But is Rochdale’s link to Manchester Airport, any worse than say Walthamstow’s link to Heathrow or Gatwick.
- Rochdale Town Centre to Manchester Airport by train – 1:05
- Rochdale Town Centre to Manchester Airport by tram – 2:02
- Rochdale Station to Manchester Airport by train – 0,:55
- Rochdale to Manchester Airport by taxi- 0:27
- Walthamstow Central to Heathrow Airport by Underground and Heathrow Express – 1:05
- Walthamstow Central to Heathrow Airport by Underground – 1:27
- Walthamstow to Heathrow Airport by taxi – 1:27
- Walthamstow Central to Gatwick Airport by train – 1:22
Note.
- All journeys, except the taxis, need at least one change.
- My lawyer son lives in Walthamstow and always flies from Heathrow.
- He gets there by Underground, with one cross-platform change at Finsbury Park.
- Crossrail won’t help the man on the Walthamstow Underground.
- In Manchester the taxi is quicker, but it isn’t in London.
These are my thoughts.
Mancunians Are More Impatient
Not my view, but the view of a Northern station guy, who has worked on Platforms 13 and 14 at Manchester Piccadilly and busy stations on the London Overground.
He thought that they were sometimes in such a hurry to get on a train, that the train is delayed.
He also said, if you ask Londoners to stand behind the yellow line, they do. Mancunians don’t!
Access To Northern And TransPennine Trains Is Bad
Consider.
- There is often a step up into the train in Manchester.
- Manchester Metrolink is generally step-free into the tram.
- Parts of London Underground/Overground are step-free.
- The new TransPennine trains have pathetic and slow end-door access.
The two train companies have bought fleets of trains that are not fit for purpose.
The Manchester Airport Rail Link Is At Full Capacity
Manchester Airport station, does not have the best rail line from the City Centre.
Wikipedia says this.
Any future additional services to the Airport are in doubt without further infrastructure works; unresolved issues surround the lack of new ‘through’ platforms at Manchester Piccadilly which have been shelved by the government and the Styal Line to Manchester Airport operating at full capacity with little resilience to absorb delays.
The Rochdale Online article blames the stations in Manchester, but the Styal Line is equally to blame.
The Long Term Solution Is High Speed Two
In the 2030s, High Speed Two will solve the problem by using a tunnel between Manchester Airport and the City Centre.
It will also do the following.
- Provide direct access between Manchester Airport and the Midlands, the South and London.
- Provide direct access to Liverpool and Warrington in the West.
- Provide direct access to Huddersfield, Bradford, Leeds, Hull and the North East, in the East.
- All services will probably be at least five trains per hour (tph).
But High Speed Two won’t provide a direct link to Richdale.
Passengers between Rochdale and Manchester Airport will still have to change in the City Centre.
Unless of course, some TransPennine services to Manchester Airport are discontinued, as they can be done by High Speed Two.
This would free up paths to add extra services to Manchester Airport.
An Interim Solution
Not only Rochdale, but other towns and cities across the North like Bradford moan about lack of a direct service to and from Manchester Airport.
So what would I do?
Ban Freight Trains Through The Castlefield Corridor
This may not be possible, but it should be a long term objective.
It will cost money, but it would release capacity through the Castlefield Corridor.
Ban Trains Without Level Access At Stations In The Castlefield Corridor
I know that Northern and TransPennine have just bought a load of new trains, but they make matters worse in the stations through the Castlefield Corridor.
All Trains To The Airport Must Be Eight Cars
This makes sense as it increases the capacity, but use the same number of paths.
- Eight-car Class 379 trains – Stansted Express – 160 metres and 418 passengers
- Five-car Class 802 trains – TransPennine Express – 130 metres and 342 passengers
- Eight-car Class 331 trains – Northern – 190 metres and 568 passengers
It does appear that the new trains are also setting new standards for train length.
ERTMS Signalling Should Be Installed Between Manchester Victoria And Manchester Airport
ERTMS signalling would give more flexibility on the route.
Create A Manchester Airport Express
This has been suggested and would have the following characteristics.
- Running between Manchester Airport and Manchester Victoria via Deansgate, Manchester Oxford Road and Manchester Piccadilly.
- Eight cars
- Airport-style interiors
- Step-free access at all stations.
- Four tph
- Running twenty-four hours a day.
- It would have step-free access to the Metrolink at Manchester Victoria, Deansgate and Manchester Piccadilly.
Ideally it would use dedicated platforms at Manchester Airport and Manchester Victoria. The platform at Victoria would hopefully have cross-platform interchange with services going through the station from East to West.
Reduce TransPennine Services To The Airport
TransPennine Express runs the following hourly services to the Airport
- Cleethorpes via a reverse at Manchester Piccadilly.
- Edinburgh or Glasgow via the Castlefield Corridor
- Middlesborough via the Castlefield Corridor
- Newcastle via the Castlefield Corridor
Why not cut-back either the Newcastle or Middlesborough service to Manchester Victoria and make sure it has good cross-platform access to the Manchester Airport Express?
These services are regularly cut-back anyway due to the congestion.
Demolish Manchester Oxford Road Station And Build A Station That’s Fit For Purpose
Manchester Oxford Road is one of ultimate design crimes on the UK Rail network.
- The new or refurbished station would be step-free.
- Platforms would be able to accept two hundred metre long trains.
- A well-designed bay platform would be provided to turn trains from the North efficiently.
- Up to four tph could probably be turned back.
Network Rail do station and track layout design generally very well and I’m sure that a redesigned Oxford Road station could improve capacity through the Castlefield Corridor.
Improve Deansgate And Manchester Piccadilly Stations
If longer trains are to be run through the Castlefield Corridor, then the platforms at these two stations will need lengthening and passenger access will need to be improved.
Is There A Place For Tram-Trains?
Manchester are keen on using tram-trains to improve the Metrolink network.
This map clipped from Wikipedia shows the layout of the Metrolink in the City Centre.
Note.
- Manchester Piccadilly, Deansgate and Manchester Victoria all have step-free connections to the trains to and from Manchester Airport.
- The new Trafford Line will branch off at Pomona.
I think it is likely, that any new lines run by tram-trains will pass through at least one of the connecting stations.
This will increase the list of places that will have good access with a single change to and from Manchester Airport.
Conclusion
There would appear to be a lot of scope to create a high-capacity link between Manchester and the Airport.
But it does appear that the current timetable leaves little or no room to expand the service.
That is why, I believe a simpler but higher capacity service, based on a Manchester Airport Express could be developed.
Still Going For A Quart In A Pint Pot
The title of this post is the same as that of an artticle in the November 2019 Edition of Modern Railways.
The article describes the problems of running trains through the Castlefield Corridor through Manchester Piccadilly, Manchester Oxford Road and Deansgate stations.
It is a comprehensive article, that gets to the heart of the problem of the route.
It comes to the conclusion, that there is a need for either more infrastructure or less trains, than the current fifteen trains per hour (tph).
Under more infrastructure, the author lists these projects.
- Grade separated junctions at Castlefield and other junctions.
- A centre turnback at Manchester Oxford Road station.
- A West-facing bay platform at Manchester Victoria
- Four through platforms at Manchester Oxford Road and Manchester Piccadilly.
- Improvement at Manchester Airport station.
These points should be noted.
- Options One and Four will be expensive and will probably cause massive disruption during construction for both rail and road traffic.
- The author suspects Option Four would cost almost a billion pounds and would need the grade-separated junctions to get best value.
I shall deal with options Two, Three and Five later.
Trains Through The Castlefield Corridor
Current passenger trains through the Castlefield Corridor are as follows.
- East Midlands Railway – One tph – Liverpool Lime Street and Norwich
- Northern – One tph – Hazel Grove and Blackpool
- Northern – One tph – Liverpool Lime Street and Crewe
- Northern – Two tph – Liverpool Lime Street and Manchester Oxford Road
- Northern – One tph – Manchester Airport and Blackpool
- Northern – One tph – Manchester Airport and Cumbria
- Northern – One tph – Manchester Airport and Liverpool Lime Street
- Northern – One tph – Wigan North Western and Alderly Edge
- Trains for Wales – One tph – Manchester Airport and Llandudno
- TransPennine Express – One tph – Manchester Airport and Middlesbrough
- TransPennine Express – One tph – Manchester Airport and Newcastle
- TransPennine Express – One tph – Manchester Airport and Glasgow Central or Edinburgh
This gives the following totals.
- Eleven tph – Deansgate and Manchester Piccadilly
- Two tph – Deansgate and Manchester Oxford Road
Add in a couple of freight trains and that gives 15 tph, which according to the author is the design limit.
These are frequencies from Manchester Airport.
- There are seven tph between Manchester Airport and Oxford Road via Piccadilly.
- There are three tph between Manchester Airport and Preston via Piccadilly and Oxford Road.
- There are two tph between Manchester Airport and Leeds via Piccadilly, Oxford Road and Victoria.
The author of the article also points out that Bradford is pushing for a direct service to Manchester Airport.
Frequency is important, but so is train length.
- Transpennine Express services will generally be five cars in the future.
- East Midlands Railway, Northern and Trains for Wales services will be between two and four cars.
Nothing too taxing to handle here, although Northern might decide to double trains of eight cars at times.
Comparison Of The Castlefield Corridor And The East London Line
Consider these facts about the Castlefield Corridor
- Four Southern routings; Crewe, Hazel Grove, Stockport and Manchester Airport.
- Five Northern routings; Bolton, Liverpool, Manchester Victoria, Trafford Park and Wigan North Western
- Fifteen tph of which thirteen tph are passenger trains.
- Three stations designed by Topsy, two of which are step-free.
- Not step-free between train and platform.
- Three interchange stations.
- Conventional signalling.
- Fully electrified with 25 KVAC overhead.
- Four train companies, with at least four types of passenger train.
- Bad timekeeping.
- Low customer satisfaction.
For comparison, consider these facts about the East London Line between Shoreditch High Street and Surrey Quays stations.
- Four Southern routings; Clapham Junction, Crystal Palace, New Cross and West Croydon.
- Two Northern routings; Dalston Junction and Highbury & Islington
- Sixteen tph of which all are passenger trains. Soon to be raised to twenty tph.
- Seven stations designed by various architects, two of which are step-free, with Whitechapel to soon make this three step-free.
- Some stations are step-free between train and platform.
- Two interchange stations.
- More bespoke signalling.
- Fully electrified with 750 VDC third rail.
- One train company and one type of passenger train.
- Good timekeeping.
- High customer satisfaction.
The route complexity and frequencies are fairly similar, so what are the big differences?
- Is the East London Line’s signalling better?
- The East london Line doesn’t have freight trains.
- Does one type of train with wide doors and walk-through interiors, work wonders?
- Does London’s step-free between train and platform make a difference?
I think the following actions should be looked at for the Castlefield Corridor.
- Modern digital signalling.
- All Northern services to be run using Class 195 or Class 331 trains, which look the same to passengers, despite one being electric and the other diesel.
- TransPennine Express will be running three different type of train all with single doors, through the Castlefield Corridor. Ways of reducing the number of types must be found.
What idiot decided to buy three incompatible fleets? Surely, an order for a larger number of Hitachi trains would have been better?
My Behaviour In Manchester
I know Manchester’s trams and trains, but I haven’t a clue about the City’s buses, which seem to be reserved for the locals.
I regularly find myself using stations in the Castlefield Corridor and I have developed certain rules.
- Never use Oxford Road, unless you’re lost and end up there by chance. It must be the worst designed modern station in Europe.
- Never use the route unless you’ve already bought the ticket some time before.
- Use Deansgate if possible, as it has a good connection to Manchester Metrolink.
- Give yourself plenty of time to catch a train from platforms 13 and 14 at Piccadilly.
- Make sure you know what platform your train is using at Piccadilly.
I also tend to avoid catching any train from platform 13 or 14 at Piccadilly.
Passenger Problems On Platforms 13 and 14 At Manchester Piccadilly
One of the reasons, I avoid these platforms, is that they are always crowded and at weekends, there seems to be a lot of occasional travellers, often with heavy cases and babies in buggies.
I remember having a chat with a station guy there in a quiet time and it turned out that he’d also worked on platforms on the London Underground.
One point he made was that Londoners get back from the platform edge, when told, but Mancunians are slower to act.
He said trains were often delayed because of passengers struggling to get on.
Could Other Actions Be Taken To Ease The Overcrowding?
These are various ideas suggested in the article or some of my own.
Run Less Trains Through The Castlefield Corridor
This would ease the problem, but it would make it more difficult for passengers to travel where they wanted and needed.
Build A Centre Turnback At Manchester Oxford Road
Consider
- It would mean that trains turning back at Oxford Road, wouldn’t have to cross tracks, entering or leaving the turnback.
- It could probably turn up to four tph.
- It might also help in service recovery.
The author obviously likes this idea and I suspect it is possible, because he mentions it more than once.
Completely Rebuild Manchester Oxford Road Station
Manchester Oxford Road is certainly not fit for purpose.
This is an extract from the Wikipedia entry.
The station, a Grade II listed structure, requires frequent maintenance. In 2004, the station roof was partially refurbished to prevent leaking. In 2011, the platform shelters, seats and toilets were refurbished at a cost of £500,000.[36] In 2013, the station received a £1.8 million renovation to improve access, including lifts and an emergency exit.
In my view, the station needs the following.
- Step-free access.
- Longer platforms.
- Higher capacity platforms.
- Much better signage and maps.
- The turnback described earlier.
No wonder I avoid it like the plague.
A completely rebuilt station with excellent step-free access might encourage more passengers to use the station, rather than the overcrowded Piccadilly.
Improve Deansgate Station
Deansgate station is not bad, but it could be improved to encourage more passengers.
Over the next few years, as the Metroilink expands, It could become a better interchange.
Step-Free Access Between Train And Platform Must Be Achieved
This picture shows access to a new Class 195 train at Manchester Airport.
With new trains, there is no excuse for not having level access, where someone in a wheelchair can just wheel themselves across.
Level access should reduce loading delays, as it eases loading of buggies, wheelchairs and wheeled cases.
If Merseyrail, Greater Anglia and some parts of the London Overground can arrange it, then surely Manchester can?
Nova Problem
The author also talks about possible problems with TransPennine’s new Nova trains, which have single end doors, which could prove inadequate in busy times.
Build A West-Facing Bay Platform At Manchester Victoria Station
The author suggests this could be used to run a frequent shuttle service between Manchester Victoria and Manchester Airport via Deansgate, Oxford Road and Piccadilly.
It might mean that TransPennine services stopped short in Manchester and passengers would change for the Airport.
But it would solve the problems of the capacity in the Castlefield Corridor and platform availability at Manchester Airport
Could Passengers Be Nudged Towards The Metrolink?
I have watched the sheer number of passengers delay trains at Manchester Piccadilly, several times.
Would it ease delays if passengers used the Metrolink to Manchester Airport?
Perhaps, the journey by Metrolink could be made more affordable?
Conclusion
It’s a mess and as the author says in his title, quarts don’t fit into pint pots.
At least though, if High Speed Two is built to link up with Northern Powerhouse Rail and together they run London, Birmingham or Liverpool to Hull via Manchester Airport, Manchester City Centre, Huddersfield, Bradford and Leeds, this would solve the problem of the Castlefield Corridor by bypassing it for long-distance trains.
The Anonymous Widower 