This blogger is sure that for those who are in favour of the railways and their development none of us is against investing money into the railways, whether the investment be in tracks, signalling, maintenance and servicing, stations and other buildings new rolling stock and even personnel. However, we should become critical when we perceive that any such investment is wrongly directed and explained , or worse when the objective is to fulfill an undeclared agenda. This we call manipulation. It is wrong and can very well be self defeating and counterproductive.
Such is the case with recent proposals to new connections from Birmingham to Liverpool (L/P) and Manchester (M/C), and more alarmingly a new Liverpool to Manchester Railway (LMR) proposed by the governments of both major cities together with Warrington, Cheshire East and Cheshire West. They smack quite blatantly of trying to construct the High Speed 2 (HS2) line, or something like it under another guise. The proposals were laid out in the three following documents, amongst others...............
1)- "Mayors detail proposal for new Midlands – Manchester railway to replace HS2",
The New Civil Engineer, 16 Sep, 2024.
https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/mayors-and-civil-engineers-call-for-conventional-rail-link-in-place-of-hs2-phase-2-16-09-2024/
2)-"Laying the tracks to growth: Liverpool-Manchester Railway plan could unlock £90bn economic boost",
14 May 2025
https://www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.uk/news/laying-the-tracks-to-growth-liverpool-manchester-railway-plan-could-unlock-90bn-economic-boost
3)- "Connecting the North West to drive
national prosperity",
Our prospectus for a modern Liverpool-Manchester
Railway — backbone of the Northern Arc
May 2025
It has been said that this solution to the existing and proposed routes along the Mersey Valley is the best on offer. However, this blogger considers that minds have to become concentrated and focused again on what each main city (L/P and M/C) together with the region (Warrington and Cheshire) can do and what they need.
Not so many years ago Liverpool was demanding an HS connection to HS2 (or the WCML). That demand seems to have disappeared.The present fastest time from Crewe to L/P is 38 mins. This is the route along the WCML to branch off at Weaver Junct. and continue through Runcorn (with a short stop), then to cross the Mersey through Widnes to take the WCML branch up to Edge Hill and west into L/P Lime St. Upgrading that route,as suggested, including eliminating changeovers on the level could reduce that time by some minutes.
A reduction in time has been offered by the HS or Fast alternatives into the city centre.But it should be pointed out that, the difference in time is minimal at a tremendous cost, both economically and environmentally. The LMR proposed by the Mayors of the cities does not show a connection to the WCML other than the existing route through Runcorn. This suggests that the idea has been dropped for being unviable,or is there a different agenda in which it is included?
My thoughts on the question of Crewe to Manchester connections and showing how the ideas put forward for HS2 are totally wrong, are in my article of 6 June 2023 titled.....
"The Crewe to Manchester fast railway link, and the WCML."
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/3486312385431657708/6413608419826119603
The three L/P to M/C lines plus the new tunnel from M/C Airport to Piccadilly Station (Royal blue) and the Crewe to M/C existing line through Wilmslow (purple).
A): Chat Moss Line:(red) The most northerly line which is the original railway line from 1830 from L/P Lime St. through Earlestown to M/C Victoria. This line is for both passengers and freight. Passengers have the possibility of (some) local traffic (stopping trains) but not much potential. There is greater demand for intercity services between the two cities as well as services to Leeds, Hull, York, Scarborough and Newcastle. There is good potential for freight traffic with a chord at Wavertree to take trains to the Bootle and Seaforth Docks beside the Mersey Estuary.
This line has been electrified and joined up to the WCML through St.Helens, from Liverpool, while through Bolton, from Manchester. This, together with other upgrades along the route, has been finished for a few years now.The fastest time from L/P Lime St. to M/C Victoria is now 34 mins. with most running at 36 or 37 mins. with 2 stops. To Piccadilly we reach in 50mins. plus.
There are not many stations along the line so the demand for commuter traffic is restricted . Perhaps 2tph(maximum) would be enough to satisfy such a demand (outside rush hours).The long distance traffic from across the Pennines could be sufficient for fast trains to/from Liverpool at 2tph. Other trains (2tph?)could be semi-fast to M/C Piccadilly and on to M/C Airport.
B): CLC lines (Cheshire Lines Committee): (Maroon)The line originally went from L/P Central (High Level) though Warrington Central to M/C Central but the termini in the two cities have been substituted by Lime St. and Piccadilly respectively. The potential is for a greater increase in passenger traffic for local stopping trains.Long distance trains would be for Sheffield, Cleethorpes, East Midlands and Norwich, with Stansted Airport as another possibility.Freight trains would only reduce speeds, the number of train paths and the travelling capacity, so it is better they go elsewhere.
A new station in L/P is necessary for any increase in traffic,which could be situated on the site of the original L/P Central High Level Station. This would be entered by a tunnel from Liverpool Parkway. Also we need a solution to the bottleneck of the Castlefield Corridor on the entry to M/C Piccadilly, with the addition of two more through platforms.
After the introduction in 1960 of the (then) "new" diesel service between L/P and M/C to replace the steam train services the times were improved tremendously. I remember travelling frequently between Warrington and Manchester, non-stop, in 20 mins. Warrington to Liverpool was slightly longer. That time has since been extended since the Central stations have been replaced, L/P Central High Level by Lime St. while Manchester Central by Piccadilly. The distance is also longer and we have bottlenecks on the line from Liverpool South into Lime St., and in Manchester in the Castlefield Corridor into Piccadilly.Thus the journey now takes longer than the 50mins.of before.
C): Fiddlers Ferry Line:(pale blue) For want of a better name I will call the third line by this name since its last task was to provide a route for the coal carrying trains from the South Yorkshire coalfields to the Power station of that name which closed in 2020.
The line runs from Warrington Bank Quay along the Mersey past the closed power station and through Widnes to join the WCML extension from Runcorn towards Liverpool. Trains can run from there to Lime St. or freight can continue along the line to Garston Docks in South L/P. From Latchford Locks on the Manchester Ship Canal to Bank Quay station the line is unused so has become over-grown with thick brambles and brush. The bridge over the canal is in a completely rotten state so would need rebuilding.South of the canal the rail line has been torn up to turn it into the "Pennine Trail"(for hikers), so no longer exists. Any line towards Manchester would have to be newly built on the same line or a new one.
Before looking at this line in detail there is one basic question to be asked. Why would Merseysiders want to travel to M/C Airport? They want to travel to M/C City but only long distance passengers would want to go to the airport. For short and medium distance destinations Liverpool has its own airport which offers a good service and is much handier. Even Warrington has or had its own GBP2 X5 bus service to M/C Airport (until Greater M/C Transport put a stop to it). Much more important to Merseysiders is a fast train service to M/C Victoria or Piccadilly. From there they can transfer easily on to another service to a new destination. The airport line (LMR) is superfluous.
This is now the offering by the Mayors of Manchester and Liverpool - the LMR. At present the plan is totally inedequate. The line westwards from Warrington Bank Quay is sinuous. It would not be able to support high speeds and the possibility of reconstruction into a straighter line is very limited. The line could provide access to Garston Docks and access to Liverpool Lime St. along the present WCML line. However, we come across the same problem as before. The capacity of Lime St. is very limited. Even if we take out the CLC services we do not gain much for other expansion of services.
Eastwards from Warrington Bank Quay we have the line(but not the track) as far as Latchford Locks on the Manchester Ship Canal(MSC). The bridge over the canal needs to be rebuilt completely.( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHr2umGhV
(Latchford Viaduct, Manchester Ship Canal and the Latchford Locks) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rl6XmmVcfVo
From there the line of the old Warrington to Stockport Railway exists, but is now known as the TransPennine Trail. This line could be used as far as Lymm. From here a new line could be built travelling northeastwards to run parallel to the MSC. then run east of Partington and Carrington. From there one branch turns right to join the Stockport line towards Timperley. The main branch would continue in a northeasterly direction underground to join the CLC line after Humphrey Park and before Trafford Park. From there it gains access to the Industrial park to provide freight traffic with another line to L/P. The passenger trains would continue along the Castlefield Corridor into Piccadilly Station.
There are problems at both ends of the line. The Castlefield Corridor is a bottleneck limiting capacity into Piccadilly and onwards. We see two possible solutions. 1) would be to widen the tracks to four along this corridor. At Oxford Rd. Station there are four tracks in the station but that is all. Some of the area is free of construction so four tracking would not be a problem. However, that is not the case for the whole line. Up to four buildings might have to be (partly)demolished. 2) would be to use the B6469 road to build an overhead two tracked corridor to supplement the present one. This would run from just before Deansgate station at Ordsall Chord, along but above the road to Fairfield Street, then run next to Piccadilly station to enter two new through platforms next to the existing platforms 13 & 14. After that the trains can continue to the airport or to other destinations further afield. The technicians would have to decide which of the two solutions is possible and better.
At the Liverpool end of the line we have a problem of entry into the City from Liverpool South Parkway. It is easier, and cheaper to maintain L/P Sth. Parkway as the connecting station for the airport. The trains (both CLC and Fiddlers Ferry line) would have to enter a tunnel in a northwesterly direction where it would join the MerseyRail Northern line into L/P Central station. The Northern Line dives under to the Low Level station while the CLC could recuperate its old route into a "new Liverpool Central (High Level) station. The original site is occupied by modern commerce. However, this should be no problem because incentives can be offered for those same commerces to occupy the same area above the "new" station. From the Parkway station the track in the tunnel should be three (for safety reasons) while the last part entering into Central station where it runs by the Northern line is under 500 meters. This "new" L/P Central (High Level) station will be able to take all the CLC services together with some Fiddlers Fery line services. This means that up to 8 platforms would be needed.
D): The HS2 tunnel M/C Airport to Piccadilly: This tunnel was in the original plans of HS2 to M/C. It has been included in other plans and forms part of the LMR proposal. This blogger has also included the idea in my plans for a reorganisation of HS2 tracks to M/C Piccadilly.The fundamental difference is that in my plans the airport station changes from being a terminus with turnback as being the only option for trains, to become a through station - entering one side and leaving the other. None of the other proposals has offered this possibility - a major flaw!!.The new line though M/C Airport (dark blue) exits to the west in a tunnel,to then turn north (to travel under and/or near "Princess Road", and eventually emerge just after Ardwick station and then run into the new platforms on the northern side of M/C Piccadilly Station.The new line which emerges from the newly reconstructed through station at M/C airport to travel in a tunnel to the entrance to M/C Piccadilly Station totals 15.3kms.
This blogger has said incessantly that the major trunk routes across the country be they "Fast" or "High Speed" lines, must all be fourtracked(at least) to ensure separation of local stopping trains and freight from express trains. So it should be for the WCML too.
E): WCML extension to Manchester (purple) from Crewe via Holmes Chapel and Wilmslow to M/C Piccadilly needs to be four-tracked along almost all its length. But it is possible and there is sufficient room. The total works come to 49.1kms.
F): WCML to Scotland: This is the line (light blue) running from Crewe through Warrington to Wigan, and on to Scotland. It has parts which are four tracked and others of three and two tracks. The parts which need to be four tracked and upgraded total 26.5kms. while the remaining part, 28.2kms., needs very little work done on it. Thus the cost is greatly reduced while there is no more environmental destruction involved in the construction, as is the case with a new line.
Both E) and F) are explained in my article of 6 June 2023. As you can see in this article,now, under the sections dealing with The Cheshire Connector and the Northern Arc. The Mayors of L/P and M/C introduce the Cheshire Connector which goes from Crewe to MILLINGTON (!! ??) The original document said the line was going to HIGH LEGH. Either there is an infantile attempt to confuse people, or the respective people in charge have no idea where the line is heading.What we can say is that there is a Farm southwest of Altrincham and SW of the crossover of the M56 and the A556 called Millington Hall Farm. However, it is not in High Legh which is a village about 2.5kms. further southwest from there.
Why was the end of the line destined to such an out of the way place? It so happens that the closed,rejected and forgotten Golbourne link, begins northwards from there. Therefore, it is obvious to conclude that the HS2 link to Golbourne is alive and kicking in some minds. The powers that be are trying to reintroduce the link ignoring all the reasons why it was rejected in the first place.
i) Where do passengers from Scotland and the north change trains in order to get to Chester and North Wales? At Warrington Bank Quay, otherwise the alternative is to continue to Crewe which increases the time and distance travelled.
ii) Where do passengers for the north and Scotland catch trains from Warrington?
iii) If you take the trains to where the passengers are then you offer a larger potential number of interested clients and a more beneficial service than the inverse. If the trains stop at e.g. Oxenholme and Wigan then you cannot ignore a 211.000 population for rail traffic to Wigan, Lancaster, Penrith, Carlisle and Scotland, and southwards as well.
iv) Cheshire forms part of the Green belt in the North West so that no more reckless and destructive building destroys the environment. Both the Cheshire Connector and the Golbourne link are such unnecessary, environmentally, detremental developments. It has been shown that alternatives do exist.
v)Historically, the Warrington to Newton railway was the second passenger line to be constructed in the UK, after the L/P to M/C line in 1830. It thus became the first section of the WCML to be constructed, before forming part of the Grand Junction railway(forerunner of the London North Western Railway).Is the idea to ignore history and push this part of the WCML to one side? If so, shame on them!
So, investment is most welcome in improvement of lines and services in the Mersey Valley, together with the WCML. We expect that to take place. However, both the Cheshire Connector and the Liverpool to Manchester line (LMR) are totally inadequate and should be scrapped immediately. They are whoefully lacking in every respect. Take some of these ideas on board and give us something that is acceptable, reasonable and costworthy. Improvement, please.
