Liverpool Waterloo Tunnel Update 10th Feb 2008

[merseywail]

A very interesting debate. The idear of the circle line is a good one, but looking at it historically is doomed to fail. The grand plans of merseyrail in the 60's/70's were for the loop, link, spur. Electric lines to Wigan, Warrington & Chester. North loop via Bootle & west derby, south loop via Belle vale. What happened to these grand plans? The country's financial troubles in the 70's, & a millitant work force, driving up the costs, put paid to most of them. what was built was cut to the bone. such as the escalator at lime st stoping short of the platform to save £100.000. With this global credit crunch and rising costs all round, are we likely to see this the circle line ever built? I have my doubts the proposed Anfield, north mersey re opening or Burscough curves will get of the ground . But you never know , miracle's do happen..

[Waterways]

A very interesting debate. The idear of the circle line is a good one, but looking at it historically is doomed to fail. The grand plans of merseyrail in the 60's/70's were for the loop, link, spur. Electric lines to Wigan, Warrington & Chester. North loop via Bootle & west derby, south loop via Belle vale. What happened to these grand plans? The country's financial troubles in the 70's, & a millitant work force, driving up the costs, put paid to most of them. what was built was cut to the bone. such as the escalator at lime st stoping short of the platform to save £100.000.

You are saying it is doomed to fail because of the incompetence of the people running the city and the negative attitude prevalent in the city.
The city also lost about half its population about that time - the reason why no rail infrastructure was built, or any building of any note whatsoever.

With this global credit crunch and rising costs all round, are we likely to see this the circle line ever built? I have my doubts the proposed Anfield, north mersey re opening or Burscough curves will get of the ground . But you never know , miracle's do happen..

The money is there, it is putting up a good enough case and then the money will come. Key words and phrases like:

• regeneration
• Toxteth
• inner cities
• rapid transit
• underground rail
• seamless rail connectivity
• mini London Tube
• knit the city districts together
• easy access to Europe's fastest expanding airport
• fix existing problems
• project the city forwards
• create a forward progressive image

They focus the mind and grab attention.

The trams were called in by Darling because there was a feeble business case for them - in fact no business case whatsoever. It was a nice to have scheme - let's spend public money while it is there. There isn't a feeble business case to greatly extend a rapid transit underground system at minimal cost. The intangible social benefits are great. An underground system will attract investment to areas far, far more than Mickey Mouse trams ever will. Bus systems attract nothing. Underground rapid transit systems focus the mind, like no other form of public transport.

What you are saying is you doubt anything will be built.

Putting forward a cheap extension to an underground rail system in a city expanding like crazy and attracting masses of outside investment (and future potential with Dubai with LFC, Peel with Shanghai, etc) will:

• Attract investment
• Regenerate areas that have failed to regenerate despite many initiatives and masses of public money poured into them (not to mention current day state benefits paid out - governments want that cut down)
• Focus the mind of those who hold the purse strings.

[Waterways]

Eh?
Nothing wrong with thinking outside the box - but you still have to think about what is practical otherwise your just a dreamer.

There is an element of dreaming in any project as you have to look ahead. An underground rail project which is:

• Largely in place - 80% of it.
• Attract outside investment in the districts it covers
• Will greatly assist in regenerating inner city areas
• Create seamless connectivity of the whole underground
• Easy and cheap to expand further aspects of the underground
• Create many underground stations
• Give a positive city image
• Give an image of a progressive city

Will attract attention to those holding the purse strings.

Any need for rudeness, or is that what you do when the going gets tough

Every project has to have aims and benefits, these could be financially, social, etc. Never lose sight of them. Delving into trivial detail you then lose track of what its all about - like thinking the Burscough Curve is more important. No one has come up any reason whatsoever why this project would not work. Why there would not be benefits to the city. The spin off benefits to the city and area would be enormous.

[andyk]

I will be back on this thread, but only for any serious discussion, not childish name calling and remarks.

With all due respect, this thread as a whole has generated some very interesting input.Perhaps Waterways is a dreamer,but humanity only advances as one man's dream becomes reality.

[merseywail]

The money to build the line is there , but for how much longer ? The money to build the full merseyrail network was also there, but central government pulled the plug, due to the state the country was in at the time, (3 day week, power cuts, run away inflation etc.) we were lucky to get what we did. Manchesters pic/vic underground never got anywere, thats why they are stuck with trams. You are right about the attituide in this city . If this line were to go ahead you can bet there would be ,protests, petitions & public enquiry's. Can you imagine the howls of protest when they say they will have to dig a big hole in the parks, & if a single tree has to go !!! The best chance of building this line is to attract private investment ,no risk to local & national government. But they would want to see a return for there money, & they would also have to do battle with the nimby's

[Waterways]

With all due respect, this thread as a whole has generated some very interesting input.Perhaps Waterways is a dreamer,but humanity only advances as one man's dream becomes reality.

It is a dream based on hard nosed reality. 80% of it is there - I didn't dream that at all.

[Waterways]

The money to build the line is there , but for how much longer ? The money to build the full merseyrail network was also there, but central government pulled the plug, due to the state the country was in at the time, (3 day week, power cuts, run away inflation etc.) we were lucky to get what we did.

Merseywail, that was the early 1970s, times move on. The country is quite rich and look at the advancements in Liverpool over the past 5 years. Have the right meaningful projects and push for it. Projects that will advance the city. Not any project dreamed up to get public money because it is there - the trams come to mind.

Manchesters pic/vic underground never got anywere, thats why they are stuck with trams. You are right about the attituide in this city . If this line were to go ahead you can bet there would be ,protests, petitions & public enquiry's. Can you imagine the howls of protest when they say they wiil have to dig a big hole in the parks, & if a single tree has to go !!! The best chance of building this line is to attract private investment ,no risk to local & national government. But they would want to see a return for there money, & they would also have to do battle with the nimby's

Manchester would have liked an underground, and given their right arms for one, but was forced into trams. Liverpool has an underground largely in place waiting for re-use, yet wants frigging trams!!! Only in Liverpool.

Rapid transport rail systems do not make money in themselves, and never have anywhere in the world. They are a necessary public service. They make money as being the loss leader in promoting the enterprise they serve. The cry in London is why don't large companies in the City pay more towards rapid transport as they are the big gainers.

Digging across a park and leaving it the way it was, if not better, would create no big problems. Demolishing property in Lodge Lane? I can't see any major objections there. Cut and cover up Lodge Lane may have side benefits of new gas water and sewer pipe replacing the old Victorian pipes. Also, boring a tunnel direct instead of cut and cover in soft Liverpool rock may actually be the best and cheapest way of doing it. Then no objections.

Those on the outskirts of Merseyrail may naturally whine about not getting their bit first, however the centre and inner cities is paramount and that must be addressed first. Sort the centre and immediate surrounds and the rest is easy, they will seamlessly mesh in. If the centre prospers so will they.

[Waterways]

I will be back on this thread, but only for any serious discussion, not childish name calling and remarks.

You started it, not me!!

[Waterways]

I have said myself elsewehere that your vision would be great, but it is not realistic.

What do you mean? In principle you agree that the scheme has many benefits to the city at large and moreso to some inner city areas. Read the bullets in my posts. All clear and all positive.

"not realistic"? Do you mean the attitude of the politicians? Vested interest? They would kill ir for spite or that they never thought of it? What?

[robt]

What do you mean? In principle you agree that the scheme has many benefits to the city at large and moreso to some inner city areas. Read the bullets in my posts. All clear and all positive.

"not realistic"? Do you mean the attitude of the politicians? Vested interest? They would kill ir for spite or that they never thought of it? What?

Yes, I agree the scheme would be great, and have all the benefits you have explained - I don't doubt them at all.

[merseywail]

No problems digging across a park ? Have you seen all the letters of protest about the restoration of sefton park, nimby's at it again! Digging a tunnel in liverpools rock can be difficult, dont forget half of the liverpool loop is now under the water table. The builders of the mersey railway in 1886 actually broke out of the rock mid river and into mud and shale .You also can't just dig a tunnel under property without planning consent, (the risk of subsidence, noise etc). If all the problems can be solved it would be a great asset to the city

[Waterways]

Yes, I agree the scheme would be great, and have all the benefits you have explained - I don't doubt them at all.

Well what is not realistic? 80% of it there! What a prompter! What an incentive, what a tempter! That in itself will lead people to look at the whole thing very seriously.

The Chamber of Commerce were asking for ideas on how to use the disused tunnels. They are going to get to know.

[robt]

How about something completely different which would be far cheaper and achieve a similar end result?

From Waterways proposed circular line:


Why not build this, standalone, using the existing tunnels, and the rest at street level (or elevated where necessary), using LIGHT RAIL. (I'm not using the word 'tram's so I don't upset anyone ). Personally, I would make the line run further into the area of where Liverpool Rivers would be where an additional stop could be built in the future. An additional branch could run to the airport eventually, maybe a city centre - airport shuttle.

Also, at the same time, some work would be done at Lime Street to create an additional three or four platforms. There is certainly space - there are redundant tracks between platforms 1 & 2, 3 & 4 and 5 & 6 to start with, before you even get to the disused platform between 6 and 7, and the large gap between 7 and 8. Also, some slight work to the station throat to enable more flexibility.

Why

1) The loop proposed is totally unsuited to heavy rail in terms of the curvature (and possibly gradients).

2) No diesel trains would be allowed to use it (stations in tunnels) - why lose that option? When Northern start to renew their fleet (no time soon - don't get excited!) they will still be ordering diesel trains for this area - this is a fact and already agreed.

3) FAR cheaper than its heavy rail equivilent, if heavy rail could even be constructed after the points about gradients and curvature

4) Expansion - it is far easier (and cheaper) to extend light rail in the future

5) Light rail would DEFINETLY NOT have gauging issues in the disused tunnels - I suspect heavy rail would (see a post earlier in the thread to see that not all track is gauged the same)

6) There is no need to divert local trains away from Lime Street, especially if it had the alterations mentioned above. It may benefit a few commuters in the morning to be able to get off at Moorfields instead, but it would not benefit the majority at all.

Anyone have any thoughts?

[Waterways]

Why not build this, standalone, using the existing tunnels, and the rest at street level (or elevated where necessary), using LIGHT RAIL. (I'm not using the word 'tram's so I don't upset anyone ).

As tunnel is 80% of the Circle Line already, that only makes the Dingle to Edge Hill section overland using light rail. Elevated where it rises into the Dingle tunnel.

Personally, I would make the line run further into the area of where Liverpool Rivers would be where an additional stop could be built in the future. An additional branch could run to the airport eventually, maybe a city centre - airport shuttle.

Liverpool Rivers? The River Jordan went through Princes Park. I doubt that would meet with acceptance. A rapid transit "direct" airport link can be along the Northern Line ans depending on route taken, via Speke using a flyover or via Garston on the foreshore.

Also, at the same time, some work would be done at Lime Street to create an additional three or four platforms. There is certainly space - there are redundant tracks between platforms 1 & 2, 3 & 4 and 5 & 6 to start with, before you even get to the disused platform between 6 and 7, and the large gap between 7 and 8. Also, some slight work to the station throat to enable more flexibility.

That is taking airport connections via main line. Best have Merseyrail do all local traffic.

1) The loop proposed is totally unsuited to heavy rail in terms of the curvature (and possibly gradients).

Heavy rail used it. The curves are tight at the end of tunnels. As at these points there will be stations, that is not real problem as the trains will have to stop anyhow.

2) No diesel trains would be allowed to use it (stations in tunnels) - why lose that option? When Northern start to renew their fleet (no time soon - don't get excited!) they will still be ordering diesel trains for this area - this is a fact and already agreed.

Diesel engines in an electric underground rail system? Why? I can see why they want shunting trains, nothing else.

3) FAR cheaper than its heavy rail equivilent, if heavy rail could even be constructed after the points about gradients and curvature

Heavy rail did and is still using parts of this Circle Line.

4) Expansion - it is far easier (and cheaper) to extend light rail in the future

Laying rails is laying rails, and any extra cost can't be that great.

5) Light rail would DEFINETLY NOT have gauging issues in the disused tunnels - I suspect heavy rail would (see a post earlier in the thread to see that not all track is gauged the same)

Having Merseyrail all the same guage and 3rd rail electrified mean seamless usage and routing.

6) There is no need to divert local trains away from Lime Street, especially if it had the alterations mentioned above. It may benefit a few commuters in the morning to be able to get off at Moorfields instead, but it would not benefit the majority at all.

Lime St already has a Merseyrail station, best keep the local stations doing local traffic.

Best to have a seamless system and keeping it underground in the centre and immediate centre. Then no problems with routes interchangeable rolling stock or whatever. Do it properly

But! making the Circle connection overground with train/trams may be a start, however any heavy rail trains cannot use the Circle, restricting routes.

.

[robt]

As tunnel is 80% of the Circle Line already, that only makes the Dingle to Edge Hill section overland using light rail. Elevated where it rises into the Dingle tunnel.



Liverpool Rivers? The River Jordan went through Princes Park. I doubt that would meet with acceptance. A rapid transit "direct" airport link can be along the Northern Line ans depending on route taken, via Speke using a flyover or via Garston on the foreshore.

I of course meant Liverpool Waters

Yes that would be another way of connecting the airport to the city centre - either will do - but the Northern Line doen't pass through Lime Street, and this would be an advantage.

That is taking airport connections via main line. Best have Merseyrail do all local traffic.

I don't see what relevance that statement has to my post, but why is it 'best have Merseyrail' do it? It doesn't matter who does it, as long as it is done.

Heavy rail used it. The curves are tight at the end of tunnels. As at these points there will be stations, that is not real problem as the trains will have to stop anyhow.

Yes it did use it in the past of course. But it is highly unlike you would get todays 23 meter coaches around it (The existing Merseyrail units are shorter than this). Speed/stations is not relevant to it - it is the overhang that the coaches cause when going round curves. See bottom of post for more.

Diesel engines in an electric underground rail system? Why? I can see why they want shunting trains, nothing else.

Not sure what you mean. Any new trains for the north west area are to be diesel, apart from surburban manchester - therefore, they can not pass through the tunnels at all if they have stations in them. It is a done deal - no changing it I'm afraid.

Laying rails is laying rails, and any extra cost can't be that great.

Wishful thinking I'm afraid. An isolated network is far cheaper to signal than trying to integrate with the rest of the areas signalling for one.

Lime St already has a Merseyrail station, best keep the local stations doing local traffic.

Once again, why? Other than you liking the idea? Why should trains be routed away from Lime Street mainline other than to benefit a handful of commuters?

If it is such a brilliant idea to do this, why don't other cities abandon their mainline interchange stations?

Any stock (existing or new) for Northern can end up anywhere from Newcastle to Cleethorpes, Barrow to Liverpool. The same units do not operate the same line everyday, apart from in certain circumstances eg electrified units on an electrified route. As far as diesel units go, the same TYPE of unit doesn't necessarily operate on the same ROUTE from day to day.

Why would anyone invest in a small unique fleet for Liverpool that had smaller carriages that could not run anywhere else? The government certainly will not. It creates flexibility and maintenance issues.