Merseyrail Expansion

[L+Y]

Just for fun- how would you rank the most to least sensible options for expanding the Merseyrail network?

Taking into account political desirability, cost of reinstatement, possible revenue streams, regeneration benefits, and of course general connectivity. Here's my basic list: and I may be missing something obvious!

1. Ellesmere Port to Helsby.
2. Bidston to Wrexham.
3. Hunts Cross to Warrington Central, possibly tied with...
4. Headbolt Lane to Wigan Wallgate
5. Bootle to Aintree via the North Mersey Branch.
6. Moorfields to Edge Hill via Crown Street, and then on to Bootle via Spellow.
7. Hunts Cross to Gateacre (or beyond?)
8. Ormskirk to Preston (though with Ormskirk to Burscough Junction possibly rated higher)
9. Southport to Wigan Wallgate

 

[HSTEd]

From the perspective of operational simplification on the national scale, I'm not sure its possible to come up with a better extension than Ellesmere Port to Helsby or Headbolt Lane to Wigan Wallgate.

Both would allow vestigial branch line services to be eliminated, and neither would require substantial interactions between Merseyrail and the rest of the network at the new termini.

 

[mangyiscute]

I see that there are tracks that run alongside the Mersey to the south of Widnes into Warrington, and pass apparently right under Warrington Bank Quay - could there be any way of sending the Hunts Cross services that route instead? I have no idea if this line is even operational tho.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I would say Hunts Cross to Warrington Central is the most sensible. Followed by Bootle to Aintree and finally Moorfields to Edge Hill because at least that is in Merseyside.

I have no idea where Gateacre is but all the others I would rate as the same, not sensible in the slightest.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd like to see Ormskirk to Burscough Bridge via a new station at Mill Dam Lane (proposed in the 70s but very much needed now due to massive new housing development), with the Ormskirk-Preston service becoming a Southport-Preston one (which would take the calls at the small stations to allow the Manchester services to be sped up). Merseyrail seem more interested in going to Preston but the character of that line changes hugely north of Burscough to a very quiet rural branch, whereas Burscough is increasingly a de-facto Liverpool suburb - indeed before long it will probably be a mini conurbation with Ormskirk.

Another option providing the same connectivity would be a new Tamworth like interchange and Parkway station where the lines cross in Burscough replacing the existing two (the land does exist), but I'm less fond of that idea.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

They need to break that loop and either run a new tunnel up through North East Liverpool or connect Merseyrail onto the exiting line through Wavertree.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They need to break that loop and either run a new tunnel up through North East Liverpool or connect Merseyrail onto the exiting line through Wavertree.

The north east gap is probably easiest filled by reinstating Merseytram.

 

[HST43257]

I see that there are tracks that run alongside the Mersey to the south of Widnes into Warrington, and pass apparently right under Warrington Bank Quay - could there be any way of sending the Hunts Cross services that route instead? I have no idea if this line is even operational tho.

Many would rather see this route become part of HS2/NPR infrastructure linking to Crewe and Manchester.

If that did happen one day far into the future, I’d suggest Merseyrail extend to Warrington Central, and Metrolink trams also extending there joining near Deansgate or Cornbrook? Fast services to Manchester/Airport/Sheffield would be on NPR, but the intermediate stations (eg Urmston or Halewood) would have a high frequency service to their closer cities with frequent connections at WAC to the other side.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Many would rather see this route become part of HS2/NPR infrastructure linking to Crewe and Manchester.

If that did happen one day far into the future, I’d suggest Merseyrail extend to Warrington Central, and Metrolink trams also extending there joining near Deansgate or Cornbrook? Fast services to Manchester/Airport/Sheffield would be on NPR, but the intermediate stations (eg Urmston or Halewood) would have a high frequency service to their closer cities with frequent connections at WAC to the other side.

This makes a lot of sense, but it does require Fiddlers Ferry NPR to not result in a significant service downgrade for Warrington.

 

[L+Y]

I'd like to see Ormskirk to Burscough Bridge via a new station at Mill Dam Lane (proposed in the 70s but very much needed now due to massive new housing development), with the Ormskirk-Preston service becoming a Southport-Preston one (which would take the calls at the small stations to allow the Manchester services to be sped up). Merseyrail seem more interested in going to Preston but the character of that line changes hugely north of Burscough to a very quiet rural branch, whereas Burscough is increasingly a de-facto Liverpool suburb - indeed before long it will probably be a mini conurbation with Ormskirk.

Another option providing the same connectivity would be a new Tamworth like interchange and Parkway station where the lines cross in Burscough replacing the existing two (the land does exist), but I'm less fond of that idea.

Ormskirk - Preston is my local line, and I have a lot of personal sympathy with the idea of a Burscough extension and Curves revival. I put it low on my ranking due to its distance outside the City Region: despite the fact that both Croston and even moreso a new station at Midge Hall/near Farington Moss could I suspect give decent traffic levels with a 2tph service.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

4. Headbolt Lane to Wigan Wallgate

9. Southport to Wigan Wallgate

There’s something to be said for these being done together so that (barring the waste trains) everything west of Wallgate is Merseyrail, giving the benefits of a closed system. Although to do that would lose the through Southport to Manchester service which I can imagine facing some resistance.

 

[HST43257]

This makes a lot of sense, but it does require Fiddlers Ferry NPR to not result in a significant service downgrade for Warrington.

I mean I personally think in the unlikely event that it did happen it’d get nearly everything. Widnes South mentioned would replace Runcorn (just other side of river) if required. 6-8tph to Liverpool, 4-6tph to Man/Man Air, 2-4tph to Leeds, 2tph to London.

2tph Lpool to London calling Widnes South(?), Warrington BQ LL, Crewe, London
2tph Lpool to Newcastle/Edinburgh/Glasgow calling Warrington BQ (maybe), Man Air, Man Pic, Leeds, onwards
2tph Lpool to Hull calling Warrington BQ, Man Air, Man Pic, Hudds/Brad, Leeds, onwards
2tph Lpool to Hope Valley calling Warrington BQ, Man Air, Man Pic, Stockport(?), Shef, onwards

 

[urbophile]

The Wapping tunnel should be a priority re-opening. This would give the scope for improving the service between Edge Hill and South Parkway to Merseyrail standards, especially if it was linked with an extension to Speke and the airport. I don't think extensions much beyond the LCR (eg to Wigan or Preston) would work without co-operation with neighbouring regions, and regional services would not be well-served by metro type rolling stock.
Burscough sounds like a sensible compromise; Rainford and Skelmersdale would have been.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ormskirk - Preston is my local line, and I have a lot of personal sympathy with the idea of a Burscough extension and Curves revival. I put it low on my ranking due to its distance outside the City Region: despite the fact that both Croston and even moreso a new station at Midge Hall/near Farington Moss could I suspect give decent traffic levels with a 2tph service.

The single line is a constraint, but I wonder if you could path an hourly Preston to Croston shuttle alongside an hourly Preston to Southport without doubling anything?

I suppose though if you did want to do 2tph then Merseyrail to Preston may work better, but in that case I'd like to see a new "West Lancashire Parkway" at the interchange. One option would be to do Merseyrail's 4tph split between Preston and Southport, but I'm not sure that does as much for connectivity as the Curves idea and does mean Merseyrail running alongside unpunctual Castlefield services.

 

[8A Rail]

1. Ellesmere Port to Helsby.
2. Bidston to Wrexham.
3. Hunts Cross to Gateacre (or beyond?)
4. Ormskirk to Preston
5. Headbolt Lane to Wigan Wallgate

From the suggestions in the initial post, the above are the only ones are worth consideration and in that probable order too. Mainly because they all extend from the end of existing lines in one form or another and with the exception of one, the lines are already there.

The one I think is the most interesting is the Hunts Cross extension to initially Gateacre. As and when the ex CLC line is re-signalled which it will do eventually, therefore eliminating the Hunts Cross Signal Control building, then installing a single line to Gateacre will become relatively straight forward as it will not interfere with the existing mainline as it will be laid on the former four line trackbed. Also there is an excellent catchment area for people in and around that area too as you also have nearby Netherley as well. There is much potential and probably be cost effective too, in some ways I would choose that as my number one option.

 

[Arkeeos]

Extending all the dead ends to proper terminuses, especially now that the new rolling stock can be fitted with pantographs.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

There’s something to be said for these being done together so that (barring the waste trains) everything west of Wallgate is Merseyrail, giving the benefits of a closed system. Although to do that would lose the through Southport to Manchester service which I can imagine facing some resistance.

This is a huge understatement! Plenty of people commute from Burscough Bridge, Parbold, Appley Bridge and Gathurst to Manchester: they would gain absolutely nothing from an enforced change in Wigan and losing through operation would lead to many of them driving to a Manchester-connected railhead instead. The loss of through services to Southport from the Atherton line would also drive what day-tripper traffic exists away from the railway.

As for the Kirkby route a similar argument exists regarding commuting from Orrell and Pemberton to Manchester as well as student traffic to Orrell from stations along the Atherton line. A Merseyrail extension might be worthwhile to Upholland or Orrell but definitely no further.

I don't expect the crayonistas on this thread to concede these points as having any value. To them I say carry on crayoning; real world transport professionals won't be swayed by such activity in any case.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

This is a huge understatement! Plenty of people commute from Burscough Bridge, Parbold, Appley Bridge and Gathurst to Manchester: they would gain absolutely nothing from an enforced change in Wigan and losing through operation would lead to many of them driving to a Manchester-connected railhead instead. The loss of through services to Southport from the Atherton line would also drive what day-tripper traffic exists away from the railway.

As for the Kirkby route a similar argument exists regarding commuting from Orrell and Pemberton to Manchester as well as student traffic to Orrell from stations along the Atherton line. A Merseyrail extension might be worthwhile to Upholland or Orrell but definitely no further.

I don't expect the crayonistas on this thread to concede these points as having any value. To them I say carry on crayoning; real world transport professionals won't be swayed by such activity in any case.

I should perhaps have said

Although to do that would lose the through Southport to Manchester service which I <diplomatic> can imagine facing some resistance .</diplomatic>

 

[Basil Jet]

West Kirby to Prestatyn!

 

[HSTEd]

As for the Kirkby route a similar argument exists regarding commuting from Orrell and Pemberton to Manchester as well as student traffic to Orrell from stations along the Atherton line. A Merseyrail extension might be worthwhile to Upholland or Orrell but definitely no further.

I don't expect the crayonistas on this thread to concede these points as having any value. To them I say carry on crayoning; real world transport professionals won't be swayed by such activity in any case.

Pemberton and Orrel are both rather low usage stations compared to those found on the Merseyrail system, even before coronavirus Pemberton managed only ~70,000 whilst Orrel about ~95,000. Neither station has recovered to its pre-coronavirus values.

If those stations were on Merseyrail they would be amongst the quietest on the system. Which is not surprising considering the comparatively poor service that they receive.
The 2021-22 Origin-Destination matrix is from the highly reduced demand period of coronavirus, but it is also the most up to date available.
For Pemberton, 28 destination stations had a hundred journeys or more, but the top fifteen correspond to an enormous fraction of the total journeys.

1. Manchester Piccadilly (3653)
2. Wigan Wallgate (3164)
3. Wigan North Western (1718)
4. Liverpool Lime Street (1187)
5. Manchester Victoria (1175)
6. Liverpool Central (987)
7. Kirkby (Merseyside) (964)
8. Salford Central (760)
9. Manchester Oxford Road (751)
10. Salford Crescent (647)
11. Upholland (427)
12. Rainford (382)
13. Hindley (304)
14. Moorfields (276)
15. Daisy Hill (265)

Wigan stations, Upholland, Rainford and Kirkby (at this time) are on the branch, so the only impact of moving the terminus would be an effective increase in frequency. They are a major traffic source, with 6655 journeys.

7555 journeys are listed as being to the Manchester Stations or to Daisy Hill/Hindley (I think the split is a function of the Manchester Stations Group more than anything).
The Merseyrail journeys (excluding Kirkby) are 2450 journeys total.

So we have an improvement for 2450 + 6655, and a loss of direct trains for 7555 journeys. 9105 vs 7555. Obviously split ticketing will have an impact but both Wigan and Kirkby would benefit from split-ticketing. This station is the most Manchester-centric on the branch, with the other extreme being Rainford, where Manchester Piccadilly is the most popular non-Merseyrail or branch destination at number 6!

Even at Upholland, Manchester Piccadilly is number 3 and Liverpool and Branch destinations dominate.

Sure, imposing a change at Wigan might lose the railway some customers from Manchester stations upset by the change of train. However, the destination split is surprisingly Liverpool focussed at all but one of the stations on the branch. Give the low traffic levels achieved today, I don't think there can be much doubt that extending Merseyrail to Wigan Wallgate and cutting back the Northern service accordingly would result in a major increase in traffic levels.

Railways are bulk public transport systems, and Merseyrail levels of traffic are what we should be aiming for, a 1tph rail branch does not achieve the primary purpose of the railway, to mvoe large numbers of people. Plus cutting the service on the branch from the east end would free a Manchester path for Southport.

EDIT:
It's not even clear to me that 1tph direct is actually better for users than 4tph to Wigan and then 4tph to Manchester from Wallgate and more from North Western

 

[Meerkat]

I am not a local but have never understood the point of Bootle Aintree - is there a real demand or is it a case of ‘trains used to run, we must restore them’?
Helsby seems most logical, but would presumably need a financial deal with the DfT. Need to improve Stanlow station with better paths to where the office park is. Or move it to the road and build a parkway.
Upholland as a Skelmersdale parkway seems a gimme, not so sure about going all the way to Wigan.

Reaching for the crayons I really like the idea of Burscough curve with Liverpool-Burscough and Preston-Southport, but think the political boundaries are a huge problem. Wouldn’t Abbey Lane be better than Mill Dam Lane for a new station - linking into the roundabout on the A-road for a parkway?
Bidston-Shotton, with TfW keeping the Wrexham end (or even rebuilding the curve to give north wales coast stations direct trains to Wrexham)

Have Merseyrail ever fancied extending through Chester to Crewe, for better access to the Wirral?

 

[507021]

Priority needs to be given to increasing Merseyrail coverage within the city region as much as possible before the likes of Preston, Warrington and Wigan, none of which I'm convinced by anyway, are even considered.

- Bidston-Deeside Industrial Park.
- Canada Dock Branch.
- Hunts Cross-Widnes.
- North Mersey Branch.

That said, Ellesmere Port-Helsby (which I also favour) seems far more likely to happen before any of those.

 

[HSTEd]

- Hunts Cross-Widnes

Attempting to extend to Widnes is going to create a very awkward situation for the rest of the railway unless you go all the way to Warrington Central though. It is unlikely that Merseyrail would want (or be able to) share that length of CLC with conventional trains, forcing buffer stops at the end of the Merseyrail line.

You will end up with a dead end Manchester-Widnes line which is operationally very awkward, conversion to Warrington Central only really makes sense if you Metrolink the eastern half of the CLC, and sending the trams all the way to Widnes seems a rather inferior solution to them meeting at Warrington, which is a larger and mroe important urban centre.

Also if the tram ends in Warrington there is always the chance for a short street section from warrington central to bank quay.

 

[507021]

I would say Hunts Cross to Warrington Central is the most sensible. Followed by Bootle to Aintree and finally Moorfields to Edge Hill because at least that is in Merseyside.

I have no idea where Gateacre is but all the others I would rate as the same, not sensible in the slightest.

I respect your opinion, though I'm not sure how extending to Warrington is a sensible extension, but adding west Wirral (part of the Liverpool City Region) to the Merseyrail network isn't sensible. The city region itself should be the priority, surely?

Attempting to extend to Widnes is going to create a very awkward situation for the rest of the railway unless you go all the way to Warrington Central though. It is unlikely that Merseyrail would want (or be able to) share that length of CLC with conventional trains, forcing buffer stops at the end of the Merseyrail line.

You will end up with a dead end Manchester-Widnes line which is operationally very awkward, conversion to Warrington Central only really makes sense if you Metrolink the eastern half of the CLC, and sending the trams all the way to Widnes seems a rather inferior solution to them meeting at Warrington, which is a larger and mroe important urban centre.

Also if the tram ends in Warrington there is always the chance for a short street section from warrington central to bank quay.

It is by far the most awkward extension of those I've suggested, I agree. I'm just not currently convinced with the suggestion of running Merseyrail all the way to Warrington, at least Widnes is actually in the Liverpool City Region. That said, I'd be very surprised if any extensions take place along the CLC route, to be honest.

 

[8A Rail]

Priority needs to be given to increasing Merseyrail coverage within the city region as much as possible before the likes of Preston, Warrington and Wigan, none of which I'm convinced by anyway, are even considered.

- Bidston-Deeside Industrial Park.
- Canada Dock Branch.
- Hunts Cross-Widnes.
- North Mersey Branch.

That said, Ellesmere Port-Helsby (which I also favour) seems far more likely to happen before any of those.

Neither of those highlighted should be considered, sorry. There is no reason for North Mersey Branch unfortunately, it's opportunity for re-instatement of passenger trains was in the 1970's. Since then, there has been no major increase of population in the area the line would serve (i.e not much house building) and some major employers in the area, have long since gone!

As for the Canada Dock Branch (Bootle Branch line to others), it's main function and priority is to serve Liverpool Docks for freight and that should remain I'm afraid. Spare paths even if they amend the signalling, should be for possible freight trains to and from the docks, let alone attempting to gain access to the L&M line.

 

[507021]

Neither of those highlighted should be considered, sorry. There is no reason for North Mersey Branch unfortunately, it's opportunity for re-instatement of passenger trains was in the 1970's. Since then, there has been no major increase of population in the area the line would serve (i.e not much house building) and some major employers in the area, have long since gone!

As for the Canada Dock Branch (Bootle Branch line to others), it's main function and priority is to serve Liverpool Docks for freight and that should remain I'm afraid. Spare paths even if they amend the signalling, should be for possible freight trains to and from the docks, let alone attempting to gain access to the L&M line.

I know the Canada Dock Branch is an important freight route, all I said is I would like to see it and the North Mersey Branch re-opened to passengers. The prospects of one or both happening are miniscule to zero, but that doesn't change my opinion that they'd both be sensible and useful extensions to the Merseyrail network in the right circumstances.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Pemberton and Orrel are both rather low usage stations compared to those found on the Merseyrail system, even before coronavirus Pemberton managed only ~70,000 whilst Orrel about ~95,000. Neither station has recovered to its pre-coronavirus values.

If those stations were on Merseyrail they would be amongst the quietest on the system. Which is not surprising considering the comparatively poor service that they receive.
The 2021-22 Origin-Destination matrix is from the highly reduced demand period of coronavirus, but it is also the most up to date available.
For Pemberton, 28 destination stations had a hundred journeys or more, but the top fifteen correspond to an enormous fraction of the total journeys.

1. Manchester Piccadilly (3653)
2. Wigan Wallgate (3164)
3. Wigan North Western (1718)
4. Liverpool Lime Street (1187)
5. Manchester Victoria (1175)
6. Liverpool Central (987)
7. Kirkby (Merseyside) (964)
8. Salford Central (760)
9. Manchester Oxford Road (751)
10. Salford Crescent (647)
11. Upholland (427)
12. Rainford (382)
13. Hindley (304)
14. Moorfields (276)
15. Daisy Hill (265)

Wigan stations, Upholland, Rainford and Kirkby (at this time) are on the branch, so the only impact of moving the terminus would be an effective increase in frequency. They are a major traffic source, with 6655 journeys.

7555 journeys are listed as being to the Manchester Stations or to Daisy Hill/Hindley (I think the split is a function of the Manchester Stations Group more than anything).
The Merseyrail journeys (excluding Kirkby) are 2450 journeys total.

So we have an improvement for 2450 + 6655, and a loss of direct trains for 7555 journeys. 9105 vs 7555. Obviously split ticketing will have an impact but both Wigan and Kirkby would benefit from split-ticketing. This station is the most Manchester-centric on the branch, with the other extreme being Rainford, where Manchester Piccadilly is the most popular non-Merseyrail or branch destination at number 6!

Even at Upholland, Manchester Piccadilly is number 3 and Liverpool and Branch destinations dominate.

Sure, imposing a change at Wigan might lose the railway some customers from Manchester stations upset by the change of train. However, the destination split is surprisingly Liverpool focussed at all but one of the stations on the branch. Give the low traffic levels achieved today, I don't think there can be much doubt that extending Merseyrail to Wigan Wallgate and cutting back the Northern service accordingly would result in a major increase in traffic levels.

Railways are bulk public transport systems, and Merseyrail levels of traffic are what we should be aiming for, a 1tph rail branch does not achieve the primary purpose of the railway, to mvoe large numbers of people. Plus cutting the service on the branch from the east end would free a Manchester path for Southport.

EDIT:
It's not even clear to me that 1tph direct is actually better for users than 4tph to Wigan and then 4tph to Manchester from Wallgate and more from North Western

This is all very good stuff. BUT the unasked, and therefore unanswered, question is what would passenger numbers be like if Northern's Kirkby line service was better than hourly. Or if a turnback facility at Orrell allowed for an increased frequency just as far as there and/or an evening service, all within TfGM territory. Ultimately there are two issues getting in the way of such a service upgrade, primarily the state of the signalling on the Atherton line but also the ability to be more flexible with pathing through Salford Crescent. I suspect that a service upgrade would be far more beneficial to passengers, both current and potential, from Pemberton and Orrell than having a Merseyrail service. And it might even be possible without the need to expand the train fleet very much.

 

[Howardh]

Curve off at Burscough to the outskirts of Skelmersdale with a new station + P/R would seem to be an obvious extention?

 

[Fawkes Cat]

I'm just not currently convinced with the suggestion of running Merseyrail all the way to Warrington, at least Widnes is actually in the Liverpool City Region. That said, I'd be very surprised if any extensions take place along the CLC route, to be honest.

This is all very good stuff. BUT the unasked, and therefore unanswered, question is what would passenger numbers be like if Northern's Kirkby line service was better than hourly. Or if a turnback facility at Orrell allowed for an increased frequency just as far as there and/or an evening service, all within TfGM territory. Ultimately there are two issues getting in the way of such a service upgrade, primarily the state of the signalling on the Atherton line but also the ability to be more flexible with pathing through Salford Crescent. I suspect that a service upgrade would be far more beneficial to passengers, both current and potential, from Pemberton and Orrell than having a Merseyrail service. And it might even be possible without the need to expand the train fleet very much.

What these comments have in common (and probably many others, no doubt including mine) is that while they may be right politically and/or in terms of passenger flows, they don't take account of railway operating practicalities for things like turning trains and so on.

So if the Hunt's Cross line is to be extended along the CLC, it must be to Warrington. If both the Southport and Kirkby lines are to approach Wigan, then it must be to Wallgate. Because that's what makes operational sense.

 

[Howardh]

If lines were extended to Wigan Wallgate, that and two other stations are within the Greater Manchester ticketing area for Rangers etc, so I hope that we could still use our Ranger tickets on the Merseyrail services in GM such as Bryn and Orrell!