South Wales 'Metro' updates

[Gareth Marston]

The journey times are shorter at roughly 25-45 minutes to Liverpool city centre vs upto an hour to Cardiff city centre.

a fact that is constantly ignored by some in these debates Treherbert/Aberdare/Merthyr/Rhymney are c 55 minutes from Queen St compare to Chester being under 40 from Lime St.

 

[takno]

Amersham -> Aldgate

Epping -> Oxford Circus

No toilets. London commuters appear to manage.

And come to think of it - there's plenty of bus trips that are as long as a train trip from Merthyr Tydfil to Cardiff Central.

There are also plenty of customers who avoid making those bus and tube trips specifically because they can't be sure they will manage. You might as well say it isn't worth running any trains for journeys under, say, 8 miles because an able-bodied person should be able to walk that.

 

[Del1977]

That's a fair point. But any toilets that are there aren't open for the entire time that the lines are operating. I know from personal experience.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Genuine question - how many of the intermediate stations on those journeys have toilets if you must need to use one? For Merthyr to Cardiff Central there are off the top of my head, 3 stations with only one of them actually being during the main journey (the stations are Pontypridd, Cardiff Queen Street and Cardiff Central).

.

Only Pontypridd.

 

[Del1977]

a fact that is constantly ignored by some in these debates Treherbert/Aberdare/Merthyr/Rhymney are c 55 minutes from Queen St compare to Chester being under 40 from Lime St.

I've just pointed out similar length journeys from Amersham or Epping which do not have toilets onboard the train. Or what about the various London Overground services?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are very few toilets at stations on LU.

 

[WelshBluebird]

There are very few toilets at stations on LU.

Very few? Really? TfL seem to disagree!
Looks like plently of options if travelling from say Amersham or Epping!
If anything, the outer reaches of both lines look like the best served of the network for toilets!

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/toilets-map.pdf

 

[Del1977]

But as I've already pointed out - they are *not* all open for the entire duration the service is operating.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Well it's factored in to the future decision only to the extent that new signalling may not be required in a HR project plan.

So let's take:

Project 1: HR electrification: New / cascaded rolling stock, utilise existing signalling / platforms, but need overhead electrification.

Project 2: LR: New rollings stock, rip-out and install new signalling, LR overhead electrification.

If Project 2 is less than Project 1, the fact that project 1 can reuse the existing signalling isn't relevant.


Obviously - the decision isn't just on money. Other factors such as extensions, or comfort, toilets on trains, capacity etc. will form part of the overall decision.

Politics as well Del1977 as myself and others have been pointing out the Welsh Government seem happy to sever a pre existing cross city link so as to create "Core Valley Lines" which they can have control over rather than DfT/London. It's part of Carwyn Jones Welsh Labours agenda to gain powers for the Assembly (Welsh Labour politicians). Also there is a imperative to have something shiny and new because of how Valleys politicians perceive the Valleys have been treated. So its never about pure transport/cost decisions.

 

[WelshBluebird]

But as I've already pointed out - they are *not* all open for the entire duration the service is operating.

But they are on option for the majority of the time the service is operating (I am ignoring night tube because that is a different beast altogether).

It is pretty simple:

• Currently the valley lines have toilets on the trains, and hardly any stations that have toilets (toilets that are "not open for the entire duration the service is operating").
• On LU, while there are no toilets on the trains, there are many options at stations if required (that granted are not open all the time either).
• With a light rail solution without toilets on the trains, the valley lines will get the worst of both worlds. No toilets anywhere pretty much (apart from a couple of stations).

Do I think it is huge issue that could not be got around? Of course not. Putting toilets in more stations would help. Or I am sure you could have a tram train solution that does have toilets. And even if there is no work around, it isn't the worst part of the proposed plans.

But it is a point to raise to show that unless we are careful, unless we hold those in power to account, unless we are skeptical of what is being proposed, then the valleys will end up with a worse public transport system than what we currently have (which is already not great).

 

[Del1977]

Agree with that Gareth. The whole purpose of devolution is a never ending power grab.

 

[Del1977]

But they are on option for the majority of the time the service is operating (I am ignoring night tube because that is a different beast altogether).

It is pretty simple:

• Currently the valley lines have toilets on the trains, and hardly any stations that have toilets (toilets that are "not open for the entire duration the service is operating").
• On LU, while there are no toilets on the trains, there are many options at stations if required (that granted are not open all the time either).
• With a light rail solution without toilets on the trains, the valley lines will get the worst of both worlds. No toilets anywhere pretty much (apart from a couple of stations).

Do I think it is huge issue that could not be got around? Of course not. Putting toilets in more stations would help. Or I am sure you could have a tram train solution that does have toilets. And even if there is no work around, it isn't the worst part of the proposed plans.

But it is a point to raise to show that unless we are careful, the valleys will end up with a worse public transport system than what we currently have (which is already not great).

Asides from cutting the service frequencies in half, I genuinely don't see how practically anything could be worse than the current service on the Valley Lines network. Of course - the real shocker here, isn't about toilets, trams, or anything else.

It's that the WAG has issued a tender in total secrecy with not one single interested party, be they rail users, voters, businesses having any idea what it is they've tendered.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I genuinely don't see how practically anything could be worse than the current service on the Valley Lines network

Well apart from the cutting of existing journeys forcing people to change when currently they don't, the very real possibility of losing through ticketing, the toilet situation (which again is not a big issue, but clearly no toilets is worse than having toilets!) etc!

Of course - the real shocker here, isn't about toilets, trams, or anything else.

It's that the WAG has issued a tender in total secrecy with not one single interested party, be they rail users, voters, businesses having any idea what it is they've tendered

Though that I can't disagree with at all!

 

[Gareth Marston]

That's a different matter entirely, and down to the decisions of the current franchisee, the DfT and the Welsh Assembly.

The light rail / heavy rail / electrification / diesels debate as to which would best serve South Wales' future public transportation needs is separate to poor decisions made in the past, simply as we cannot go back and revisit past decisions.

The only relevant question is what will deliver the best results for South Wales users in the future.

Well its not "core valley lines" International best practice shows that cross city lines are the best way forward for urban mass transit indeed we've just done Crossrail in London and are talking Crossrail 2.

 

[B&I]

Politics as well Del1977 as myself and others have been pointing out the Welsh Government seem happy to sever a pre existing cross city link so as to create "Core Valley Lines" which they can have control over rather than DfT/London. It's part of Carwyn Jones Welsh Labours agenda to gain powers for the Assembly (Welsh Labour politicians). Also there is a imperative to have something shiny and new because of how Valleys politicians perceive the Valleys have been treated. So its never about pure transport/cost decisions.

It's not an excuse for the way Cardiff are behaving, but they're not the only politicians on this island who have prioritised political turf wars over the best way of running the railway system

 

[Gareth Marston]

It's not an excuse for the way Cardiff are behaving, but they're not the only politicians on this island who have prioritised political turf wars over the best way of running the railway system

Indeed the Welsh Government/DFT and Grayling are a large part of the problem. If we had a railway run by rail professionals to a budget we'd be a lot better off.

 

[Envoy]

Perhaps those who advocate having tram-trains on the streets off Cardiff instead of the present rail service should ponder what has happened today in Cardiff?

The A4232 Ely link road was closed and traffic is queuing across the city

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/live-updates-accident-involving-car-14197609

 

[gareth950]

Politics as well Del1977 as myself and others have been pointing out the Welsh Government seem happy to sever a pre existing cross city link so as to create "Core Valley Lines" which they can have control over rather than DfT/London. It's part of Carwyn Jones Welsh Labours agenda to gain powers for the Assembly (Welsh Labour politicians). Also there is a imperative to have something shiny and new because of how Valleys politicians perceive the Valleys have been treated. So its never about pure transport/cost decisions.

Totally agree. The 'Core Valley lines' didn't exist as a concept before the ideas for the 'Metro' came along. Why is Rhymney - Cardiff any more important than Ebbw Vale - Newport / Cardiff? Or Barry - Cardiff?

If Welsh Govt was serious about creating a true Metro system for the SE Wales region, it would be working with NR and DfT to get as much of what is currently classed as the 'Valley lines' network by ATW upgraded and electrified.
When the then Welsh transport minister, Edwina Hart, went to DfT to ask for Network Rail in Wales to be fully devolved to Welsh Govt back in 2014 she was met with a very firm NO. Cue tantrum from Carwyn Jones and Hart about how THEY wanted control over THEIR infrastructure as they could do a better job of it.
So WG obssess over the only bit of infrastructure they could realistically break off and control - the newly invented 'Core Valley lines'

And then we come to where we are now. Work on installing extra loops and doubling sections of the Ebbw Vale line has completely stalled mid project. NR have literally been told by Welsh Govt to down tools while WG 'reviews costs'. Meanwhile work on dualling the A465 Heads of the Valleys road is continuing whilst costs sky rocket. No progress on getting Ebbw Vale linked to Newport, which locals are crying out for.
No improvements planned for Barry, Penarth, Bridgend, Maesteg, the City line or Ebbw Vale services.

Instead of sitting down with DfT to work out what could be done to upgrade the network in SE Wales with NR still in control, not just on the Core VL, WG had a tantrum, demanded IT be given the powers, and everything else abandoned.
Electrification in South Wales beyond wires reaching Cardiff Central has been completely wiped from NR's plans, when originally following on from the completion CASR, NR intended to start wiring the Valleys.
That's not just down to Grayling at the DfT.

Asides from cutting the service frequencies in half, I genuinely don't see how practically anything could be worse than the current service on the Valley Lines network. Of course - the real shocker here, isn't about toilets, trams, or anything else.

It's that the WAG has issued a tender in total secrecy with not one single interested party, be they rail users, voters, businesses having any idea what it is they've tendered.

Agreed on the last point. On the first point on what could be worse - the light rail proposals from TfW / WG are exactly what could be a lot worse. Take that from someone who commutes through Cardiff on local rail services every day and so knows that how the network operates now - seamlessly through Cardiff from the Valleys to the Vale with no on-street interaction, is exactly how it should stay.

Perhaps those who advocate having tram-trains on the streets off Cardiff instead of the present rail service should ponder what has happened today in Cardiff?


http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/live-updates-accident-involving-car-14197609

Traffic in Cardiff today was gridlocked on ALL roads in and out of the city. With the main artery into the city shut (the A4232) due to a major 5 car RTC traffic was bumper to bumper and at a total standstill. The Cardiff Bus network was paralysed. The severe delays started at 2pm and didn't fully clear for 7 hours until 9pm!
I wasn't aware of any problems until I got off the train at Cogan and saw no traffic moving anywhere. Why? Because I'd travelled through Cardiff on the train from Cathays and had no interaction with the streets below the railway, that were in chaos.
What would've these marvellous on street trams in the city centre done in this situation? Floated above the chaos?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Ironically the Cardiff Suburban services are one the best places to do heavy rail electrification and prove that NR/ORR/DfT have learnt their lessons.

• You don't need to do any re-signaling CASR has done it for you.
• You don't need to do any associated infrastructure work at the same time CASR has done it for you.
• You certainly don't need to drive the masts half way to Australia and pretend that they have to be built to High Speed Line standards.
• You know where everything is buried CASR has done it for you.
• Apart from the Coryton branch and Caerphilly station theirs not too many bridges to worry about overhead clearances about.

 

[HowardGWR]

^^^ Are these views being given full airtime in the SWales news media?

 

[MarkyT]

Ironically the Cardiff Suburban services are one the best places to do heavy rail electrification and prove that NR/ORR/DfT have learnt their lessons.

• You don't need to do any re-signaling CASR has done it for you.
• You don't need to do any associated infrastructure work at the same time CASR has done it for you.
• You certainly don't need to drive the masts half way to Australia and pretend that they have to be built to High Speed Line standards.
• You know where everything is buried CASR has done it for you.
• Apart from the Coryton branch and Caerphilly station theirs not too many bridges to worry about overhead clearances about.

I'd like to know if all this resignalling work will be compatible with DC overhead electrification of the network at 750V, just as it was designed to be for 25kV AC. My hunch is it probably IS largely compatible, as many modern track circuit types are designed to be 'dual immune', and as axle counters are inherently, due to their lack of electrical commonality with the traction return through the running rails. If the existing signalling IS compatible that suggests Phase 1 could be a rolling programme of DC electrification of all the existing infrastructure, while diesel services continue to run, that once finished could allow the LR derived high floor trams-train to start running immediately on the existing network, with service enhancements as desired and practical according to fleet size using the additional facilities you have described. Using DC electrification might avoid many of the clearance issues that AC has raised elsewhere. The problem with the loaded term 'LR conversion' is it could mean anything from low floor street running to simply using LR-derived vehicles on a conventional heavy rail network (with or without interrunning with other HR vehicles).

 

[Solaris]

Fyi....given major civils required on valleys for HR 25Kv electrification (and numerous victorian bridge issues) the costs (and disruption), I suggest, have become (as per GWML) become prohibitive and have prob blown the business case out of the water. LR 750V DC electrification is much less intrusive, requires lower clearances and is less costly & disruptive..
CASR in operational terms is prob limited to 15tph through core & Cardiff West is major constraint....4tph and extensions to the network become very difficult if not impossible on that basis in HR terms. As has been shared LR (depending on vehicle length and specification) can deliver far more capacity more affordably and at a lower opex per passenger than HR (so lower subsidies)...and is more easily extendible......

 

[MarkyT]

Fyi....given major civils required on valleys for HR 25Kv electrification (and numerous victorian bridge issues) the costs (and disruption), I suggest, have become (as per GWML) become prohibitive and have prob blown the business case out of the water. LR 750V DC electrification is much less intrusive, requires lower clearances and is less costly & disruptive..
CASR in operational terms is prob limited to 15tph through core & Cardiff West is major constraint....4tph and extensions to the network become very difficult if not impossible on that basis in HR terms. As has been shared LR (depending on vehicle length and specification) can deliver far more capacity more affordably and at a lower opex per passenger than HR (so lower subsidies)...and is more easily extendible......

Permissive working of loaded passenger trains using 'call on' aspects in platforms was once routine in heavy rail applications, and I believe was once a feature of Cardiff Central operations. A following passenger train, rather than having to wait at the protecting signal, sometimes many hundreds of metres out from the station, could proceed into the platform as the previous one is leaving the other end. UK heavy rail phased this out years ago on safety grounds, and it is specifically banned in new installations, but high capacity metros today use cab signalling to allow a modern equivalent. There's an intriguing possibility that the better braking capabilities of LR derived rolling stock might allow the reintroduction of such a practice in platforms at critical capacity bottlenecks such as in the Cardiff core without cab signalling. Thameslink are planning to achieve 24 tph through their London core on heavy rail which includes a flat junction south of Blackfriars, and that's with 12 car trains, more than twice as long as anything a valleys operator is ever likely to run. To do this they have overlaid a cab signalling and ATO system based on ETCS on top of pre-existing conventional colour light signalling, and this, critically, allows a modern equivalent of the type of the permissive operation I described, where the next train in can start entering the platform while the previous one is still leaving. LR-derived vehicles, with their better braking capability, might offer another cost effective way of reintroducing this feature of operations in Cardiff without all the expense of a full cab signalling system, just addition of tram aspects at existing signals. Without any further extensive resignalling, this method might allow capacity of the Cardiff core through the critical station platform areas to be raised significantly beyond the 16tph limit.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Fyi....given major civils required on valleys for HR 25Kv electrification (and numerous victorian bridge issues) the costs (and disruption), I suggest, have become (as per GWML) become prohibitive and have prob blown the business case out of the water. LR 750V DC electrification is much less intrusive, requires lower clearances and is less costly & disruptive..
CASR in operational terms is prob limited to 15tph through core & Cardiff West is major constraint....4tph and extensions to the network become very difficult if not impossible on that basis in HR terms. As has been shared LR (depending on vehicle length and specification) can deliver far more capacity more affordably and at a lower opex per passenger than HR (so lower subsidies)...and is more easily extendible......

So ripping out the newly installed CASR signalling and installing new signalling to allow for tram operation, re doubling most of the single track sections in the valleys for higher frequency services and remodeling Cardiff Central so that DMU's can terminate from Penarth/Radyr/Barry and trams can terminate having come down form Queen St are not "major civils" then?

I'm sure remodeling Central will be costly and disruptive........you can blow as many smoke bubbles as you like about your enthusiasm for light rail but it all falls apart in the real world because TfW are proposing severing a cross city service at Central. Terminal platforms have less capacity than through ones because of having to turn around units and run them across the paths of incoming services. Your automatically negate the big advantage point of light rail by it not being cross city. Turning around in the city centre is a huge capacity constraint in fact I doubt whether the DMU services to Radyr/Penarth and the Vale will be able to match CASR's 12 tph peak frequency.

How can you find the capacity for extensions if your constrained by the city center turnarounds? You lose around about a third of the potential capacity by doing this so your LRT system is operating with one hand tied behind its back from the get go. This point has been repeatedly put to LRT fans who refuse to answer it,because the truth is it will delver fewer seats than HR using CASR.

 

[Del1977]

Okay - let's bank all this about drawbacks of a Light Rail conversion.

Open questions to people who think LR conversion has too many drawbacks to be contemplated:

What would be your solutions to areas not currently served by the HR Valley Lines? Where would you like to see extensions? What sort of services would you like to see? Where would these be routed / terminate? What mode of transport should be used?

 

[gareth950]

^^^ Are these views being given full airtime in the SWales news media?

The South Wales media are giving no airtime to any such views at all. All that is being reported is any positively spun, good news press releases from Ken Skates or TfW.
It's a scandal. Not only do TfW think they have the right to conduct the whole process in top secret, the press aren't reporting on the money that has already been spent on CASR capacity and heavy engineering enhancements that are ready to use now.
And anyway, the description 'South Wales Media' implies that there is media plurality in Wales. There most definitely is not.
The Welsh media consists of BBC Wales, Wales Online and it's associated newspapers of the South Wales Echo and the Western Mail, and various micro, independent local newspapers. There is no scrutiny of Welsh Govt in Wales.

 

[Parallel]

What would be your solutions to areas not currently served by the HR Valley Lines? Where would you like to see extensions? What sort of services would you like to see? Where would these be routed / terminate? What mode of transport should be used?

I think East Cardiff is lacking in stations and services. I don't know the area all that well but a service between Cardiff Queen Street and Cardiff Gate (as a Parkway station) could be good, with potential tram stops in the Adamsdown, Rumney, Llanrumney, Pontprennau areas and Cardiff Gate, adjacent to the M4. Like I said, I don't know much about the geography of the area but it would give visitors to Cardiff from the East an excellent 'park and ride' facility to central Cardiff, as well as potentially faster commuting opportunities to the city centre from the other areas.

 

[gareth950]

I think East Cardiff is lacking in stations and services. I don't know the area all that well but a service between Cardiff Queen Street and Cardiff Gate (as a Parkway station) could be good, with potential tram stops in the Adamsdown, Rumney, Llanrumney, Pontprennau areas and Cardiff Gate, adjacent to the M4. Like I said, I don't know much about the geography of the area but it would give visitors to Cardiff from the East an excellent 'park and ride' facility to central Cardiff, as well as potentially faster commuting opportunities to the city centre from the other areas.

Surely you mean any such tram lines operating to / from Central station? I assume this would be a stand alone light rail line as well, not interacting with any existing HR workings? The only HR working heading east is the mainline which runs behind Newport Rd to Rumney.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Okay - let's bank all this about drawbacks of a Light Rail conversion.

Open questions to people who think LR conversion has too many drawbacks to be contemplated:

What would be your solutions to areas not currently served by the HR Valley Lines? Where would you like to see extensions? What sort of services would you like to see? Where would these be routed / terminate? What mode of transport should be used?

Lets be clear I'm not rabidly against Light Rail per se just the cretinous way the Welsh Government seem to want to implement it by severing the pre existing cross city links and constraining what the Light Rail system can do because they value gaining powers more greatly than serving the best needs of the Welsh economy and people.

You ideally convert the entire Cardiff Valleys routes to Light Rail including Penarth,City Line and Vale so that you can have cross city links and the frequencies that allow for extensions or failing that then you convert what you have now to electrified heavy rail and develop the extensions as Light Rail. Converting the Coryton branch, Bay branch, City line to Light rail and then providing extensions to North West suburbs off the City line and Cardiff Gate to the east should be possible to share tracks with the heavy rail services through central Cardiff.

 

[Solaris]

A lot of very capable and experienced people have explored all these questions in a great deal of detail over a number of years... I suspect each of the bidders will have spend >£ms reach over the last 2 years and WG themselves will and have invested significantly in developing these proposals over the last five years

To present this as a political stich up is naïve, wrong and verges on ranting.

What will be procured - and that process is still ongoing - will be in the best interest of the vast majority of passengers and taxpayers and will I suspect the have the support of DfT, NR and WG...and be based upon a sound engineering assessment of all options, schemes, proposals based on very demanding outputs with an eye to the future (esp demand over the next 15-20 years and the need for modal shift and more SD) - all without being constrained by past services, modes, infrastructure or investments but applying as much of that as is possible/practical (They are in a/c terms now sunk costs). Major changes cant all be delivered in "one go" or without some short -ve term impacts. I applaud the ambition.

I'll get my coat....