Valley Lines electrification project...or not as may now be the case

[Rational Plan]

Yes, but that just shows what boosting service intensities can do.
That is not an example of Light rail triumphing over the heavy rail dinosaur.

For a case in point just look at the Overground network - especially GOBLIN.

There is no way the current service intensity could be run by conventional stock as a simple shuttle. The tram also provides better penetration of Croydon town centre and cross town links. Trams can easily be 50m long.

 

[HSTEd]

There is no way the current service intensity could be run by conventional stock as a simple shuttle. The tram also provides better penetration of Croydon town centre and cross town links. Trams can easily be 50m long.

When trams get to that length you start to run into serious problems in street running, for example it becomes hard to find places you can put 50m long tram platforms in the middle of the street - especially with the high floor trams required here which would require enormous structures like those in the centre of Manchester.
They do not help the central city ambience.

Additionally you start to annoy drivers when your tram stops in a position that easily blocks an entire junction for several minutes.
And you could have easily maintained such high intensities over the British Rail line if it had been given a complete reconstruction on par with that put into action as part of the conversion process.

And 57m of tram (which is what 2 M5000s can muster) is hardly a match for 80m+ of PEP stock.

 

[47802]

Slightly off topic, but many of the coaches involved in the derailment near Tiefencastel in Switzerland were 30-40 years old, judging by the photographs I've seen, yet still look modern, and feel modern to travel on. Even the RABDe 12/12 EMUs (built in the late 1960s, all withdrawn by 2008) were serviceable after a heavy refurbishment in the mid 1990s.

Cascading older units for newly-electrified lines isn't without precedent - when the West Yorkshire electrification project was completed in 1994 304s were cascaded to operate services there. Whether WAG will fund the purchase of new EMUs is a moot point.

Yes and the 304 were retired from West Yorkshire at roughly the same age that the 313's will be available for cascading, its ok cascading stock providing there is some reasonable life left in them.

As for the Island Line I'm not even sure I should even dignify it with a response really, you can hardly compare the Island line with an intensive commuter service of a major Welsh City.

The probable correct solution would be to free up more 319's by ordering 110/125mph commuter trains for GW as was supposedly being considered at one point, although I think a potential light rail scheme does have some merit, but clearly there are potential + and - to such a scheme.

 

[HSTEd]

319s would have a fun time in the valleys..... they only have 4 powered axles.
Even if you slice them to three cars they will still struggle.

315s have 8 and are optimised for this sort of thing. And A-stock managed a 51 year life span in service which would put the PEP withdrawal date somewhere in the late 2020s.

EDIT:
Slightly off topic - have there been any proposals to four track the bridge immediately north of Queen Street? As I understand it there is a fourth through platform going in which would enable the lines north of the station to be disentangled.
Although I suppose if you are going to do that you might as well double track the Bay branch line and run Coryton/Rhymney trains down there to terminate.

 

[ac6000cw]

Although I suppose if you are going to do that you might as well double track the Bay branch line and run Coryton/Rhymney trains down there to terminate.

I have a recollection that it used to happen years ago ?

(I think the formation is double track width anyway - it used to be a freight route to the docks).

 

[tom1649]

Cascading older units for newly-electrified lines isn't without precedent - when the West Yorkshire electrification project was completed in 1994 304s were cascaded to operate services there. Whether WAG will fund the purchase of new EMUs is a moot point.

It was Class 308s that were cascaded to West Yorkshire, not that there's a huge difference.

Surely better to have the electrification and put up with old trains for a bit, than to have nothing at all. We can't always have everything we want straight away.

 

[47802]

319s would have a fun time in the valleys..... they only have 4 powered axles.
Even if you slice them to three cars they will still struggle.

315s have 8 and are optimised for this sort of thing. And A-stock managed a 51 year life span in service which would put the PEP withdrawal date somewhere in the late 2020s.

EDIT:
Slightly off topic - have there been any proposals to four track the bridge immediately north of Queen Street? As I understand it there is a fourth through platform going in which would enable the lines north of the station to be disentangled.
Although I suppose if you are going to do that you might as well double track the Bay branch line and run Coryton/Rhymney trains down there to terminate.

I'm sure they would manage and hopefully those that make the decisions wont share your obsession with PEP's, and just because the A stock managed 50 years doesn't mean it should become standard practice, TFL push towards standard fleets for surface and tube stock, means that while ok some might last beyond 40 years, many trains will be a lot less than that.

 

[HSTEd]

I'm sure they would manage and hopefully those that make the decisions wont share your obsession with PEP's.

I am not obsessed with PEPs.

I am obsessed with not squandering public money.
Not sure how 100mph multiple units with only one vehicle in four motored are really suitable to the Valley Lines at all.

Whereas 75mph multiple units with two vehicles in four motored sound much more suitable.

 

[ac6000cw]

I am not obsessed with PEPs.

I am obsessed with not squandering public money.
Not sure how 100mph multiple units with only one vehicle in four motored are really suitable to the Valley Lines at all.

Whereas 75mph multiple units with two vehicles in four motored sound much more suitable.

I agree - while everyone would prefer to have new rolling stock, public money is always limited, so of the trains that might be available to cascade the 313/315s seem to be the best fit for the service patterns and operating conditions of the Valley lines.

It's mostly service frequency that generates the 'sparks effect' so two cheap trains are better than one expensive one from that point of view. After a few years hopefully improved passenger loadings (= more farebox revenue) should make a better financial case for new trains.

 

[47802]

I am not obsessed with PEPs.

I am obsessed with not squandering public money.
Not sure how 100mph multiple units with only one vehicle in four motored are really suitable to the Valley Lines at all.

Whereas 75mph multiple units with two vehicles in four motored sound much more suitable.

I don't regard as not wanting 40 year old trains as a waste of public money, and if we want people to travel on public transport, that in my book means a modern transport system with modern trains or trams that that are fit for the 21st century, and not the practices of the 20th century.

 

[HSTEd]

I don't regard as not wanting 40 year old trains as a waste of public money, and if we want people to travel on public transport, that in my book means a modern transport system with modern trains or trams that that are fit for the 21st century, and not the practices of the 20th century.

The only ways to get people on public transport are to make it cheap and convenient.

It is not clear how slashing the number of services on the route to allow for more modern trains and thus putting up the cost per seat/square metre of standing space is going to achieve either aim.
SO far the practices of the 21st Century seem to be "throw money at everything to increase the amount of shiny"

 

[47802]

Do new trains increase passenger numbers?
Do new Buses increase passenger numbers?
Do new trams increase passenger numbers?

I imagine the answer to the above is Yes

Also where have frequencies been reduced recently as a result of introducing new trains?

 

[tom1649]

I'd much rather have functional public transport that everyone can afford to use. Just because rolling stock is old doesn't mean that it cannot be reliable, comfortable, or accessible.

It may seem inconceivable to some, but the introduction of Class 308s (which replaced newer Pacers and Sprinters) in West Yorkshire helped increase patronage on those newly electrified lines, as they were actually superior in many ways to the newer stock they replaced.

 

[Busaholic]

When trams get to that length you start to run into serious problems in street running, for example it becomes hard to find places you can put 50m long tram platforms in the middle of the street - especially with the high floor trams required here which would require enormous structures like those in the centre of Manchester.
They do not help the central city ambience.

Additionally you start to annoy drivers when your tram stops in a position that easily blocks an entire junction for several minutes.
And you could have easily maintained such high intensities over the British Rail line if it had been given a complete reconstruction on par with that put into action as part of the conversion process.

And 57m of tram (which is what 2 M5000s can muster) is hardly a match for 80m+ of PEP stock.

I can only really comment on the Croydon situation at first hand, but the blocking of road traffic by trams virtually never happens and, if it does, there's usually been an accident and cars etc are all at a standstill anyway. The tram stops in Croydon town centre, which are all on a one-way loop, are hardly noticeable,if anything, and I've been asked 'where can I get the tram?' by someone within a few yards of one! I am far from anti-train, but in the case of Wimbledon-Croydon you could have increased the service by train to the maximum feasible (probably every 15 minutes,even with the extra track) and you wouldn't have got many extra takers for the service, except perhaps schoolkids, because the average shopper wouldn't have been aware of the service.

 

[CdBrux]

Do new trains increase passenger numbers?
Do new Buses increase passenger numbers?
Do new trams increase passenger numbers?

I imagine the answer to the above is Yes

But at what cost?

I prefer to think of it like this: "Do better trains increase passenger numbers"

Maybe, just maybe, to only 90% of the level of brand spanking new trains would (so the remaining 10%, if given a 'blind' comparison*, would need to define they would not travel on decently refurbished stock vs brand new stock) but for only let's say 33% of the cost then to spend the extra 67% cost just to gain those final 10% of passengers I do not believe to be worth it.


* This reminds me of all these stories you hear about blind wine tastings when even good experts can often prefer moderately priced wines over much more expensive ones from known 'brands'.

 

[WatcherZero]

Do new trains increase passenger numbers?
Do new Buses increase passenger numbers?
Do new trams increase passenger numbers?

I imagine the answer to the above is Yes

Also where have frequencies been reduced recently as a result of introducing new trains?

I think the evidence is new buses (even FTR type) by themselves do not increase passenger numbers, only when paired with significant infrastructure improvements as well, for the other two the answer is probably yes.

 

[21C101]

I think the evidence is new buses (even FTR type) by themselves do not increase passenger numbers, only when paired with significant infrastructure improvements as well, for the other two the answer is probably yes.

Indeed but properly refurbished 313s will be to all intents and purposes new trains, with vastly improved comfort and acceleration/speed up the valley gradients compared with 142/3s. They operate quite happily from Liverpool to Southport which is much the same length as the longest valley line branches.

The important thing is to get the wires well under construction before the next major recession hits and the treasury gets cold feet.

 

[47802]

Indeed but properly refurbished 313s will be to all intents and purposes new trains, with vastly improved comfort and acceleration/speed up the valley gradients compared with 142/3s. They operate quite happily from Liverpool to Southport which is much the same length as the longest valley line branches. #

.

Really I must have an eyesight problem then

 

[ac6000cw]

Indeed but properly refurbished 313s will be to all intents and purposes new trains, with vastly improved comfort and acceleration/speed up the valley gradients compared with 142/3s. They operate quite happily from Liverpool to Southport which is much the same length as the longest valley line branches.

Actually it's 507/508s that run on Merseyrail , but 313s run Moorgate-Stevenage which is about the same distance as Cardiff-Rhymney (for example), and of course the slightly younger 315s will become available later on.

The important thing is to get the wires well under construction before the next major recession hits and the treasury gets cold feet.

Exactly....

 

[Bald Rick]

There is, of course, a third way...

Limit the wiring to parts of the valleys network that see more than 2 tph in the standard off peak hour, (saving well over 100km of route wiring), and buy a new fleet of battery trains with the change (which would be considerable).

With two exceptions none of the routes would have more than 20km off the wire - well within the capability of the current technology. The only awkward bit is how much of the Ebbw Vale and Vale of Glamorgan routes to wire to provide a small enough gap for the battery trains to be viable.

And if the trains run out of juice, they can just roll back down the Valley!

(This is only a thought, and I have no idea if it is being considered. There is a separate thread re battery trains, so please leave debate / argument for that general concept over there).

 

[adrock1976]

Do new trains increase passenger numbers?
Do new Buses increase passenger numbers?
Do new trams increase passenger numbers?

I imagine the answer to the above is Yes

Also where have frequencies been reduced recently as a result of introducing new trains?

My bold.

A station that springs to mind that has had its service frequency cut is Motherwell (Intercity services) when all of the original 390 Pendolino fleet was introduced. When Virgin introduced its Very High Frequency timetable in 2008, there are hardly any intercity services that call there now heading to Carlisle/NW/Birmingham/London.

Motherwell station serves most of the Lanarkshire area. Intercity passengers from neighbouring Hamilton/Bellshill/Wishaw despite being in close proximity to Motherwell, are faced with the crazy situation of having to travel into Glasgow Central, only to double back along the route they started from, and pass through Motherwell station non-stop.

In peace

Adam

 

[NotATrainspott]

It's fascinating to see how some people are so averse to the idea of getting PEP stock while some other people on other threads, who may not have posted on this one, are so vehemently anti-new-stock for the GWML/ECML that they would prefer to fit pantographs to the HST power cars and keep them going until 2035.

 

[anthony263]

I do think one problem with the PEP's is the age of them although with a good refurb like Southern have done and generally how good the condition of the body is along with a good paint job them these units could be fit for at least 10 years service.

As for wiring only the parts of the Valley lines with at least 2tph off peak that sounds good until you realise the majority of the valley lines network has this, the only reason why Rhymney and the Valeof Glamorgan lines dont is tha lack of rolling stock etc and previously limitations of infrastructure.

Maesteg and Ebbw Vale should have 2tph once the passing loops etc are constructed/upgraded and rolling stock is available. The WG have suggested a station at Miskin which is close to the M4 jct 34 so a good place to install and park and ride hub with at least 4tph calling if the Pontyclun - Beddau line is re-opened.

 

[Bald Rick]

As for wiring only the parts of the Valley lines with at least 2tph off peak that sounds good until you realise the majority of the valley lines network has this

I said more than 2tph

 

[HSTEd]

You could feasibly push to 4tph as the standard for the branches if you could eliminate the bottleneck on the bridge north of Queen street, and double the line to Cardiff Bay.

 

[deltic08]

There is, of course, a third way...

Limit the wiring to parts of the valleys network that see more than 2 tph in the standard off peak hour, (saving well over 100km of route wiring), and buy a new fleet of battery trains with the change (which would be considerable).

With two exceptions none of the routes would have more than 20km off the wire - well within the capability of the current technology. The only awkward bit is how much of the Ebbw Vale and Vale of Glamorgan routes to wire to provide a small enough gap for the battery trains to be viable.

And if the trains run out of juice, they can just roll back down the Valley!

(This is only a thought, and I have no idea if it is being considered. There is a separate thread re battery trains, so please leave debate / argument for that general concept over there).

You are just giving the DfT and WG ammunition to cut costs and mess up a sensible project. Is battery operated technology more unreliable and more costly in leasing costs than second hand refurbed 315s?

 

[47802]

My bold.

A station that springs to mind that has had its service frequency cut is Motherwell (Intercity services) when all of the original 390 Pendolino fleet was introduced. When Virgin introduced its Very High Frequency timetable in 2008, there are hardly any intercity services that call there now heading to Carlisle/NW/Birmingham/London.

Motherwell station serves most of the Lanarkshire area. Intercity passengers from neighbouring Hamilton/Bellshill/Wishaw despite being in close proximity to Motherwell, are faced with the crazy situation of having to travel into Glasgow Central, only to double back along the route they started from, and pass through Motherwell station non-stop.

In peace

Adam

I don't think that's really relevant more like a commercial decision from Virgin or a decision from Daft.

Back to valleys as I have said before I am not against cascading existing stock however if we take the norm of around a 40 year lifespan for electric stock then the PEP stock will have reached that age before cascade.

Now possibly you can keep them running for another 10 years but what state will they be in when cascaded and how much is it going to cost? and above all else they will need to be reliable because poor reliability above all else will drive passengers away.

I accept that PEP's may well be a likely solution for the valley's initially, but strikes me as been less than ideal, it will be interesting to see how idea that yes the Valley lines will be electrified but the trains will be older than the ones they replace will go down. At least the 319's going to Northern are roughly of a similar age.

 

[headshot119]

If the incoming rolling stock is refurbished to a high standard, will the age of it matter considering the state of some of the rolling stock used on the Valleys network?

 

[NSEFAN]

Back to valleys as I have said before I am not against cascading existing stock however if we take the norm of around a 40 year lifespan for electric stock then the PEP stock will have reached that age before cascade.

Now possibly you can keep them running for another 10 years but what state will they be in when cascaded and how much is it going to cost? and above all else they will need to be reliable because poor reliability above all else will drive passengers away.

I accept that PEP's may well be a likely solution for the valley's initially, but strikes me as been less than ideal, it will be interesting to see how idea that yes the Valley lines will be electrified but the trains will be older than the ones they replace will go down.

Again, age isn't necessarily a problem, hence my earlier comment about the 1938 stock which still works because it is maintained. The only reason to replace rolling stock is because either it is no longer fit for purpose (like Pacers) or is starting to become uneconomic to maintain (i.e. if corrosion is starting to become a real problem). AFAIK the PEP units are old but aren't suffering from major terminal conditions yet, but I'm happy to be corrected on that.

As has been said, recycling older trains increases the BCR for the electrification. What should therefore happen is the service will improve, attracting more custom and hence providing a good case for new trains.

 

[HSTEd]

315s are only three years older than the first sprinters.