South Wales 'Metro' updates

[gareth950]

My own view is that the Valley Lines network should be left alone as it is, so as to provide the cross city links.

If trams are going to be brought back to Cardiff, I would have them running from Coryton to Cardiff Bay. As well as extending from both ends to penetrate more of the Bay area and north west/west of Coryton where there are no heavy rail links, this would be more useful for people to leave cars at home and use public transport.

The reason why I have suggested only converting Coryton to Cardiff bay is that when I travelled on the Valley Lines network during the summer in 2016 and 2017, and although this appears to be an unscientific observation, the present Coryton - Radyr via Ninian Park trains seems to be the first to be cancelled whenever there is major disruption on the Valley Lines network. Although in fairness, the single track section between Heath and Coryton does not help, even though there is space to relay the track that got lifted years ago.

An improved service pattern for the Valley Lines network could be:

Treherbert - Ninian Park via Cathays - every 30 minutes, continuing to Pontypridd via Fairwater
Aberdare - Barry Island every 30 minutes via Cathays
Merthyr Tydfil - Bridgend/Pen-y-Bont every 30 minutes via Cathays and Rhoose
Barry Island - Barry Town every 30 minutes (to connect with trains to and from Bridgend. Perhaps run during July and August?)
Penarth - Bargoed every 30 minutes
Penarth - Rhymney every 30 minutes
Coryton - Radyr via Ninian Park every 30 minutes*
Pontypridd - Caerffili via Ninian Park every 30 minutes
Maesteg - Caerffili via Ninian Park every 30 minutes
Ebbw Vale Town - Cardiff Central every 30 minutes
Ebbw Vale Town - Abergavenny via Newport (Gwent) every 60 minutes
Ebbw Vale Town - Gloucester or Cheltenham Spa via Newport (Gwent) every 60 minutes

*If not converted to tram operation. Perhaps reinstating the double track from Heath - Coryton would help make the timetable robust?

This would provide a combined frequency over common sections of route as follows:
Abercynon - Barry Town via Cathays every 15 minutes
Pontypridd - Radyr every 7-8 minutes
Cardiff Central - Caerffili every 7-8 minutes
Penarth - Bargoed every 15 minutes
Radyr - Heath (either level) via Ninian Park every 15 minutes
Ninian Park - Cardiff Queen Street 6 trains per hour
Ebbw Vale Town - Pye Corner every 15 minutes

The above would provide 16 trains per hour between Cardiff Central and Queen Street.

That kind of service proposal could be put in place next week with enough trains, thanks to CASR.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Let's examine Welsh Govt's record on rail in Wales.

1) Ebbw Vale - a half job was done on re-opening 10 years ago. Ebbw Vale is the most deprived of all the Valley areas and has the lowest percentage of car ownership in Wales. It should have been double track all the way from re-opening. The budget was slashed and it was singled, even though WG were warned that demand would be high and it would be much more expensive to go back and re-double in future when the line was in use. Advice ignored, we're now paying the price for that. Ebbw Vale trains are desperately overcrowded and the current doubling project has stalled. Direct trains to Newport are repeatedly called for but not forthcoming despite being promised 10 years ago.

2) The 2020 PRM deadline - 75% of Wales' fleet is not compliant. WG ignored advice in 2013 from Porterbrook to draw up an immediate plan to start converting trains in time - the response was always "we will be dealing with it in the new franchise award" Last summer the penny dropped that was leaving it too late - 5 X 769s ordered to let some 150s & 158s go away - the 769s are now late - Wales faces a crisis on 1/1/2020.

3) WG agreed to and ordered CASR but didn't order the extra trains needed to take advantage of the extra capacity unlocked when completed. Changed their mind about CASR half way through the project - now looks like they didn't want it anyway. Money spent on CASR and successfully delivered by NR regardless.

4) Obsessions with Cardiff - Holyhead services that don't match where the real demand for travel is.

5) Obsession with breaking up one of the most efficient local heavy rail networks in the UK for political gain in their Valleys 'heartlands', ignoring the damage that will be done to the network that will be left.

6) The first govt in the UK to conduct the award of a new rail franchise and Metro contract in total secrecy, not even releasing the ITT. Bidders are muzzled from speaking to the public or releasing press statements - not even allowed to speak to the public at 'consultation' events.

we can add-

• The strange decision to reopen Fishguard Town and increase the trains to Fireguard Harbour to 7 a day announced just before an election. Is rural Pembrokeshire a rail priority?
• Buggering up the tt through Shropshire (Craven Arms and Church Stretton) so as to run an extra train on the Heart of Wales line with a timetable so poor its decreased usage in central Wales.
• Installing extra passing lops on the Cambrian (2011) and then not providing any rolling stock to use them. Then announcing extra trains introduced in 2015 but using existing resources. (same problem afflicts 7 & 8)
• In similar vain reinstating double track through the then Transport Minsters constituency (Swansea to Llanelli) but putting no extra trains on apart from more call at Gowerton the Ministers local station.
• Doing a partial job of re doubling Wrexham to Chester supposedly for quicker and more frequent Cardiff to Holyhead trains that are not needed and then not running any extra trains over it.

 

[Gareth Marston]

So I was correct. You believe they value more power over a better local rail network. If you genuinely believe that, then I think the Valley Lines project should be the least of your concerns.

I worked for them for 10.5 years and i'm well positioned to speak on the subject.....

 

[Del1977]

I worked for them for 10.5 years and i'm well positioned to speak on the subject.....

Which doesn't change anything about my observation that if you genuinely believe they value power over improving transport for Wales, then the Valley Lines should be the least of your (the people of Wales') concerns. Because presumably this would apply to anything else they control or have desires to control.

 

[NotATrainspott]

With respect, whilst I admire you're boundless optimism and ambition, I think you're getting far too carried away.
In reality that will not happen. We're talking about South Wales, not the economic powerhouse of Europe, or even the UK.
When the car crash of Brexit happens (and unfortunately it still looks like it will) where will the magic money tree come from?
Esp if £1.5 - £2 billion of the WG's capital infrastructure budget is blown on a few miles of mega motorway south of Newport. There will be nothing left to spend on infrastructure in Wales for decades.

For the umpteenth time, the point of this tram-train light rail conversion is to cut operational costs. In a sense, light rail conversion is a modern version of Sprinterisation, or even the introduction of Pacers, but with the promise of actually improving many passenger journeys. A certain amount of upfront investment means you can get rid of the 150s (with their mainline staffing costs). All of the Welsh rail network loses money. If a light rail project costing £100m means it'll lose £10m less a year, it pays itself back in 10 years. That's what can and will drive a project like this above all else.

But Welsh Govt is not going to get control of the whole of this 'small network' centred around Cardiff - the 'Core VL' is not the whole network - it's 4 lines that have been drawn up as a nice politically easy separation.

The whole network would include the Barry, Penarth, Vale of Glamorgan, Ebbw Vale, City line and Maesteg, which WG are not going to get control of.

WG want to split up this 'small network' around Cardiff. Sever vital cross city heavy rail links. Create a small isolated tram network that will be split from the rest of the network and is never likely to get beyond any initial stages.

This is not pessismism, it's realism. It' the realities and messiness of Welsh devolution. If you want a prime example of a line that has been promised great things that hasn't delivered look no further than Ebbw Vale, where WG have instructed NR to down tools and abandon a vital dualling project mid-completion. Whilst the dualling of the A465 HoV road continues on regadless of spiralling costs.
That's where the political priorities lie regarding transport infrastructure in Wales.

The DfT want to cut the subsidy to the Wales and Border franchise. Regardless of their views on devolution, the fact that they'll be able to slowly hand over loss-making lines and cease responsibility for them is something they want. They have demonstrated this time and time again, with Metrolink and the Tyne and Wear Metro. The original idea for the Sheffield tram-train was to take over Barnsley services because of their high subsidy.

Even if TfW only runs services on the 'core Valley lines' network, they'll be first in line for taking on any and all other 150-operated lines in and around Cardiff.

There is more chance of TfN replacing Metrolink with 20 seat turboprop Gloucester Old Spot sows than there is of it supporting re-conversion to heavy rail. It is obsessed with trams, to the extent of spending its life on the look9ut for more bottlenecks it can create on the heavy rail network by singling lines to allow trams through.

Even if it wasn't, imagine central government's response if Manchester asked for the money to convert LR back to HR. 'You chose light rail, that's your lot.'

And even if central and local government were in favour, why spend the money changing everything over twice ? I have heard some fun arguments in support of universal light rail mania in my time, but the notion of converting HR to LR so it can be converted back to HR is one of the better ones.

I don't mean heavy rail in the sense of completely undoing Metrolink. Before long, there simply won't be enough capacity on the Metrolink network for the people who need to move around. If additional street-running lines across Manchester city centre aren't possible, then the only real option is to build new grade-separated ones. These new lines wouldn't be heavy rail, but they wouldn't be street running Metrolink. They would be something in between, most likely akin to the DLR with longer trains and UTO.

Also, there's significant interest in Manchester in the tram-train concept to address exactly that single-line issue. With tram-trains there's no need to turn a twin-track railway into two separate single line sections for each system.

That kind of service proposal could be put in place next week with enough trains, thanks to CASR.

Except that it won't, because infrastructure capability is only one part of what you need to get a service. All those additional trains would cost the Welsh Government another X million pounds a year to run and clearly they haven't yet been able to justify that spending. Spending that £X million on seats for commuters means not spending it on health or education. It's not the cost of buying the trains upfront, but the cost of running and staffing them indefinitely. Over the lifetime of a train the upfront capital is only a fraction of the overall cost.

 

[Bwlch y Groes]

we can add-

• The strange decision to reopen Fishguard Town and increase the trains to Fireguard Harbour to 7 a day announced just before an election. Is rural Pembrokeshire a rail priority?
• Buggering up the tt through Shropshire (Craven Arms and Church Stretton) so as to run an extra train on the Heart of Wales line with a timetable so poor its decreased usage in central Wales.
• Installing extra passing lops on the Cambrian (2011) and then not providing any rolling stock to use them. Then announcing extra trains introduced in 2015 but using existing resources. (same problem afflicts 7 & 8)
• In similar vain reinstating double track through the then Transport Minsters constituency (Swansea to Llanelli) but putting no extra trains on apart from more call at Gowerton the Ministers local station.
• Doing a partial job of re doubling Wrexham to Chester supposedly for quicker and more frequent Cardiff to Holyhead trains that are not needed and then not running any extra trains over it.

Thing is, in principle these were all good ideas. I mean obviously they were done for nakedly political reasons but redoubling and extra stations aren't bad things. It's just that the WG clearly did it really badly - showing off the shiny new infrastructure without the extra trains. Doing it on the cheap as usual. And you can add Halton Curve to this too, of course

You're right, the same principle will undoubtedly is being applied in the Valleys - new things, but only the cheapest new things possible, just enough to sustain political capital but not enough to actually improve things

For the umpteenth time, the point of this tram-train light rail conversion is to cut operational costs.

Yes, we know - the whole point of our argument is that that's a terrible idea. You pay your money, you get your choices. The fact that they're cutting corners to save money IS the problem

There's a difference between investing to do something and investing to improve something. This is investing to do something, because they "can't afford" - or rather they don't want to afford - to invest in genuine improvement. They're holding their hands up to say "we don't have enough money to do what you really want us to do, so here's this triangulated compromise", and it's a totally hideous idea.

The reason for those lower operational costs are less staff and worse trains. Obviously it's going to be a cost saving if you strip out what people want. Why not go the whole hog, close it all down and just stick people on the buses? That would cut operational costs massively. It'd be a really stupid, terrible idea, though. And it's not too different from what they're planning to do here

If you want to do it properly, to get a high quality, efficient usable public transport system, you've got to spend more money. Every city in Europe with a good public transport system shows that you have to have significant investment and a clear plan, not half-and-half compromise and austerity politics. That's always going to be a recipe for disaster, without exception

And for all that doing it on the cheap saves money on the surface in the short term, the point the Gareths are making is that it doesn't save money in the long term. Having a terrible public transport system is a net cost to the economy of South Wales and having a relatively bespoke system makes it harder to keep reinvesting to extend and renew later on. Heavy rail electrification comes with a cost up front but in the long term it's far more sustainable. You're being fooled by the baseline figures just as much as the politicians if you don't see that

 

[Gareth Marston]

Which doesn't change anything about my observation that if you genuinely believe they value power over improving transport for Wales, then the Valley Lines should be the least of your (the people of Wales') concerns. Because presumably this would apply to anything else they control or have desires to control.

Being able to hive off core valley lines has given them a fairly unique opportunity to implement what they've wanted. Most of the time it's just been Carwyn sounding like a stuck record and not really interfered with day to day or long term planning of anything, however because this has turned into low hanging fruit they've got over excited about the prospect and its obscured rational thought.

 

[Gareth Marston]

For the umpteenth time, the point of this tram-train light rail conversion is to cut operational costs. In a sense, light rail conversion is a modern version of Sprinterisation, or even the introduction of Pacers, but with the promise of actually improving many passenger journeys. A certain amount of upfront investment means you can get rid of the 150s (with their mainline staffing costs). All of the Welsh rail network loses money. If a light rail project costing £100m means it'll lose £10m less a year, it pays itself back in 10 years. That's what can and will drive a project like this above all else.



The DfT want to cut the subsidy to the Wales and Border franchise. Regardless of their views on devolution, the fact that they'll be able to slowly hand over loss-making lines and cease responsibility for them is something they want. They have demonstrated this time and time again, with Metrolink and the Tyne and Wear Metro. The original idea for the Sheffield tram-train was to take over Barnsley services because of their high subsidy.

Even if TfW only runs services on the 'core Valley lines' network, they'll be first in line for taking on any and all other 150-operated lines in and around Cardiff.



I don't mean heavy rail in the sense of completely undoing Metrolink. Before long, there simply won't be enough capacity on the Metrolink network for the people who need to move around. If additional street-running lines across Manchester city centre aren't possible, then the only real option is to build new grade-separated ones. These new lines wouldn't be heavy rail, but they wouldn't be street running Metrolink. They would be something in between, most likely akin to the DLR with longer trains and UTO.

Also, there's significant interest in Manchester in the tram-train concept to address exactly that single-line issue. With tram-trains there's no need to turn a twin-track railway into two separate single line sections for each system.



Except that it won't, because infrastructure capability is only one part of what you need to get a service. All those additional trains would cost the Welsh Government another X million pounds a year to run and clearly they haven't yet been able to justify that spending. Spending that £X million on seats for commuters means not spending it on health or education. It's not the cost of buying the trains upfront, but the cost of running and staffing them indefinitely. Over the lifetime of a train the upfront capital is only a fraction of the overall cost.

Given that over half of Cardiffs suburban services will remain 150 operated and the Welsh Government has promised to keep Guards on all services I'm intrigued how spending £600 million on light rail will produce savings?

 

[gareth950]

For the umpteenth time, the point of this tram-train light rail conversion is to cut operational costs. In a sense, light rail conversion is a modern version of Sprinterisation, or even the introduction of Pacers, but with the promise of actually improving many passenger journeys. A certain amount of upfront investment means you can get rid of the 150s (with their mainline staffing costs). All of the Welsh rail network loses money. If a light rail project costing £100m means it'll lose £10m less a year, it pays itself back in 10 years. That's what can and will drive a project like this above all else.

Do you think this will get past the unions? DOO on the Valleys and drivers being de-skilled and having their pay substantially cut? WG are desperate to avoid any strike action in Wales, hence the guard on every train promise.
The only way the unions would agree without a fuss is for all pay and conditions of all guards and drivers currently on the Valleys to be fully protected for the length of the 15 year franchise.

The DfT want to cut the subsidy to the Wales and Border franchise. Regardless of their views on devolution, the fact that they'll be able to slowly hand over loss-making lines and cease responsibility for them is something they want. They have demonstrated this time and time again, with Metrolink and the Tyne and Wear Metro. The original idea for the Sheffield tram-train was to take over Barnsley services because of their high subsidy.

Even if TfW only runs services on the 'core Valley lines' network, they'll be first in line for taking on any and all other 150-operated lines in and around Cardiff.

Chris Grayling denied any responsibility for transfer of NR to WG as he said 'there was no political appetite for it'.
Once this franchise is let the talk of any rail investement in Wales will cease for another 14 years.

Except that it won't, because infrastructure capability is only one part of what you need to get a service. All those additional trains would cost the Welsh Government another X million pounds a year to run and clearly they haven't yet been able to justify that spending. Spending that £X million on seats for commuters means not spending it on health or education. It's not the cost of buying the trains upfront, but the cost of running and staffing them indefinitely. Over the lifetime of a train the upfront capital is only a fraction of the overall cost.

What WG won't justify is spending on public transport full stop. Obviously they had plans to introduce more services otherwise CASR would never have happened. Road building took priority.

I am still yet to hear a solution to the splitting up of a cross-city network that only functions operationally so well because it operates cross city and as few services as possible terminate in Cardiff Central. This doesnt just apply to Valleys services, it applies to mainline services as well. Cardiff Central is not a station fit for mass termination and turn around of services.
With no electrification south of Queen St planned, please let me know how this will be solved.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Yes, we know - the whole point of our argument is that that's a terrible idea. You pay your money, you get your choices. The fact that they're cutting corners to save money IS the problem

There's a difference between investing to do something and investing to improve something. This is investing to do something, because they "can't afford" - or rather they don't want to afford - to invest in genuine improvement. They're holding their hands up to say "we don't have enough money to do what you really want us to do, so here's this triangulated compromise", and it's a totally hideous idea.

The reason for those lower operational costs are less staff and worse trains. Obviously it's going to be a cost saving if you strip out what people want. Why not go the whole hog, close it all down and just stick people on the buses? That would cut operational costs massively. It'd be a really stupid, terrible idea, though. And it's not too different from what they're planning to do here

If you want to do it properly, to get a high quality, efficient usable public transport system, you've got to spend more money. Every city in Europe with a good public transport system shows that you have to have significant investment and a clear plan, not half-and-half compromise and austerity politics. That's always going to be a recipe for disaster, without exception

And for all that doing it on the cheap saves money on the surface in the short term, the point the Gareths are making is that it doesn't save money in the long term. Having a terrible public transport system is a net cost to the economy of South Wales and having a relatively bespoke system makes it harder to keep reinvesting to extend and renew later on. Heavy rail electrification comes with a cost up front but in the long term it's far more sustainable. You're being fooled by the baseline figures just as much as the politicians if you don't see that

Desiring more efficient public transport spending is a totally orthogonal issue to how much a government wants to prioritise public transport.

Wasting money on inefficient service provision simply for the sake of keeping spending high is not good for anyone. If you make public transport more effective, then with the same amount of subsidy you can deliver even more. If you want to increase funding, your extra money goes even further than before. If the Valley Lines cost 2/3rds as much to run while delivering 90% of the benefit, you could make back that lost benefit plus more while still saving money compared to today. If you really can't think of any actual investment to spend that on, you can lower fares instead.

Go and actually look at high-quality European transport systems before you say it's just about being on the cheap. Urban regions comparable to South Wales use light rail technology to provide the best possible transport for the lowest possible price. There is absolutely nothing unusual about the ideas for light rail in South Wales from the perspective of a public-transport friendly area on the Continent. Religious belief in heavy rail above all else doesn't help people with the task that urban and regional transportation systems are ultimately trying to solve: allowing people to go to as many places as quickly and cheaply as is reasonably possible.

Do you think this will get past the unions? DOO on the Valleys and drivers being de-skilled and having their pay substantially cut? WG are desperate to avoid any strike action in Wales, hence the guard on every train promise.
The only way the unions would agree without a fuss is for all pay and conditions of all guards and drivers currently on the Valleys to be fully protected for the length of the 15 year franchise.

Honestly I cannot see promises of guards being kept on the Valley Lines being kept at all. If there's one thing the Welsh Government are going to need to be secretive about, it's that there's no way existing staffing arrangements can ever be kept. There's absolutely no way that anyone can justify guard operation on a light railway. If the vehicles are legally permitted to drive through a pedestrianised city square, then it is absurd to argue they would be unsafe to operate without a guard performing duties. A second member of staff on board may well happen - since Edinburgh justifies a permanent ticket inspector on 40m vehicles I think a 100m doubled set makes the case pretty compelling - but it is not a safety-critical role.

There'll probably be a deal where existing guards aren't going to be made totally redundant or have their pay cut. But, the cost savings will apply into the future as new recruits won't be inheriting the same pay and conditions.

Chris Grayling denied any responsibility for transfer of NR to WG as he said 'there was no political appetite for it'.
Once this franchise is let the talk of any rail investement in Wales will cease for another 14 years.

Does NR need to be devolved? No. The concept here would be tram-trains/train-trams which would run on NR infrastructure. NR are perfectly capable of handling a mixed network situation. In London there are London Underground services running on NR tracks and National Rail services running on LUL tracks.

The justification for devolution is cost savings. If the Vale of Glamorgan stopping services aren't transferred to TfW, then the DfT is going to have to worry about and pay for them instead. They don't like the status quo of high subsidy. Even if Chris Grayling doesn't like devolution and doesn't like handing power over to a Labour government, he dislikes pouring taxpayer's money down a public transport drain even more.

What WG won't justify is spending on public transport full stop. Obviously they had plans to introduce more services otherwise CASR would never have happened. Road building took priority.

I am still yet to hear a solution to the splitting up of a cross-city network that only functions operationally so well because it operates cross city and as few services as possible terminate in Cardiff Central. This doesnt just apply to Valleys services, it applies to mainline services as well. Cardiff Central is not a station fit for mass termination and turn around of services.
With no electrification south of Queen St planned, please let me know how this will be solved.

Cross-city services are crucial when you've got rail networks balanced either side of an urban area. In Cardiff, there's no urban areas to the south of the city centre. All that's there is the Bristol channel. East-west links aren't going to go away. The amount of extra 750V DC wiring needed to get Barry Island and Penarth served by LR trains running on NR metals is a small fraction of the total needed for the rest of the Valleys, but would preserve essentially all cross-city connections already in existence.

And once again, the bidders for the Valley Lines consist of infrastructure and operations companies. The operator will push for a network design which will be cheap and efficient for them to run. Breaking through running arbitrarily is only going to mean higher costs for them, when the solution is really rather simple.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do you think this will get past the unions?

It doesn't need to.

On one of the other DOO threads it has been pointed out that industrial action would not be legal, because ATW does not plan to introduce DOO, so there is no complaint against ATW, therefore there cannot be a strike against them, and the new LR operation will employ staff from scratch who will never have driven in any form other than DOO, therefore there is no case to strike against them either.

That might actually be one reason why they prefer it over bringing in the 319s and running those DOO. That poster also suggested it is the reason that there has never been any strike action over Metrolink conversions.

 

[Llanigraham]

Cross-city services are crucial when you've got rail networks balanced either side of an urban area. In Cardiff, there's no urban areas to the south of the city centre. All that's there is the Bristol channel. East-west links aren't going to go away. The amount of extra 750V DC wiring needed to get Barry Island and Penarth served by LR trains running on NR metals is a small fraction of the total needed for the rest of the Valleys, but would preserve essentially all cross-city connections already in existence.

Can I suggest you need to look at a map again!
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4681058,-3.1748839,15z?hl=en
And that map is just the area south of Central Station.

 

[gareth950]

It doesn't need to.

On one of the other DOO threads it has been pointed out that industrial action would not be legal, because ATW does not plan to introduce DOO, so there is no complaint against ATW, therefore there cannot be a strike against them, and the new LR operation will employ staff from scratch who will never have driven in any form other than DOO, therefore there is no case to strike against them either.

That might actually be one reason why they prefer it over bringing in the 319s and running those DOO. That poster also suggested it is the reason that there has never been any strike action over Metrolink conversions.

So if LR appears on the Valleys, the day before it does all of the Valley lines guards will effectively be sacked?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So if LR appears on the Valleys, the day before it does all of the Valley lines guards will effectively be sacked?

There would be redundancies because ATW would cease operating those services and therefore have a reduced requirement for guard headcount.

But as this would not be ATW's fault or decision, the scope for industrial action about that is basically nil. And I don't believe TUPE would apply, though I might be wrong.

 

[WelshBluebird]

For the umpteenth time, the point of this tram-train light rail conversion is to cut operational costs.

At least people are being honest now. We know the point is to cut costs. It has nothing to do with providing a better transport network for the people of South Wales. Is not the a problem to you?

Cross-city services are crucial when you've got rail networks balanced either side of an urban area. In Cardiff, there's no urban areas to the south of the city centre.

Errr surely one massive reason why cross city services are crucial is because it avoids services having to terminate at a busy city centre station thus taking up valuable platform space? Nothing to do with having large urban areas south of Cardiff city centre, more just making sure services aren't limited by having to wait for a platform space to be clear.

 

[NotATrainspott]

At least people are being honest now. We know the point is to cut costs. It has nothing to do with providing a better transport network for the people of South Wales. Is not the a problem to you?

Can we provide a better public transport service for the people of South Wales while remaining hamstrung by heavy rail? If heavy rail is kept, there are no improvements on the horizon. The business case for 25kV AC electrification has suffered too much to be viable. The heavy rail future of the Valley Lines is do-minimum, with expensive diesel trains being used sparingly and passengers still receiving a bad service. The idea that a wonderful 4-6 car heavy rail network is just around the corner if it weren't for that dastardly Ken Skates with his tram obsession is a nonsense.

The only way we can ever hope to provide a better service is if we can improve the efficiency of what we've got. If we can deliver the same benefit for a fraction of the cost, it can release day-to-day funding for other improvements. If we want to keep day-to-day funding the same, then the higher efficiency means we can go well beyond what's possible today, or with any heavy rail improvement ideas.

In the current political and economic mood, the idea of reducing costs will take precedence over expanding the network. Does that mean the network can't be expanded in future? Absolutely not. With higher efficiency, the network will be far more promising for development than it is today. It might not all happen instantaneously, but transport planning can't assume instantaneous changes anyway. LR conversion is necessarily going to be a rolling process and extra work is going to have to be added onto the end of the work queue regardless of whether it's planned today or in a few years. The easiest way to get funding is to design phases of work, with earlier schemes confirming the business case for later ones.

Errr surely one massive reason why cross city services are crucial is because it avoids services having to terminate at a busy city centre station thus taking up valuable platform space? Nothing to do with having large urban areas south of Cardiff city centre, more just making sure services aren't limited by having to wait for a platform space to be clear.

And yet, cross-city services can be maintained with only a few extra kilometres of 750V DC wiring. A single final Valley branch is about as long as Cardiff to Barry. All that's needed to retain the full set of through running is a small fraction more wiring at 750V DC, and in return the network stays as efficient as possible. Do the tracks to Barry Island need to be handed over to the South Wales Metro consortium? No. NR will happily permit 750V DC electrification of their tracks, just as they allow LUL and T&W electrification. When they've got no plans to wire up the Vale of Glamorgan line, there's no harm done putting up 750V DC instead of nothing at all.

 

[gareth950]

Cross-city services are crucial when you've got rail networks balanced either side of an urban area. In Cardiff, there's no urban areas to the south of the city centre. All that's there is the Bristol channel. East-west links aren't going to go away. The amount of extra 750V DC wiring needed to get Barry Island and Penarth served by LR trains running on NR metals is a small fraction of the total needed for the rest of the Valleys, but would preserve essentially all cross-city connections already in existence.

And once again, the bidders for the Valley Lines consist of infrastructure and operations companies. The operator will push for a network design which will be cheap and efficient for them to run. Breaking through running arbitrarily is only going to mean higher costs for them, when the solution is really rather simple.

As I've said before, the current network runs west to north. To the west of Cardiff you have the largest urban settlements outside of Cardiff in South Wales of Barry and Penarth with smaller commuter villages in between. There is huge untapped potential on the Bridgend - Llantwit Major - Rhoose - Barry - Dinas Powys - Cogan - Cardiff line. Traffic through Dinas Powys is at breaking point with locals calling for a by-pass when what is really needed is 4 - 6 car trains up to 6tph in the peak to get people out of their cars.
You cannot have 10tph from Barry, Penarth and the Vale all terminating in Central without chaos.

No matter how sensible it seems, TfW or the new ODP are not getting control of these lines. Grayling thinks hybrid trains are the solution to electrification and is on record as saying he expects to see it's use in the Cardiff and Valleys areas. He will not authorise NR to electrify these lines.

Upgrading the entire network is a sensible idea. Hiving off the Core VL as its politically convenient is not.

If DfT were solely in control of the award of this new franchise and /or the Valley lines, do you think we'd even be having these discussions? Valley lines electrification would have been canned last Summer when Cardiff - Swansea was axed and we'd be getting new DMUs and that would be the end if it. Maybe DOO DMUs but still.

I'm not in favour of that at all.

But it seems this thread is now going round in circles between people who actually live in Wales and in the areas affected by the Core VL proposals and know what damage will be done to the current network if they go ahead, and people who live in England, who are comparing the Core VL proposals to schemes in large urban centres in England that are not in anyway comparable, won't be affected by any irrerversible damage that will be done to the network, and are maybe looking forward to having a trip to South Wales to have a ride on shiny new tram-trains. Sorry if i'm being cynical but you just are not getting points being made on here about how the current cross-city network runs daily and the constrains in Cardiff Central and the city centre road network, which is full with no room for on-street trams. Cardiff is a compact city with buildings taking up every inch of space around roads and railways.
I pass through the city every single day. I know what the constrains of the road and rail network are. I live here.

I can't see discussion going anywhere on here now until we learn of any concrete information. Wild speculation will continue for another 4 months though, I don't doubt that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A question for the locals in the thread - would you have been happy with (prefer?) an order of 3-car 23m DMUs such as the CAF ones on order for Northern, but no other service changes other than a bit of peak tweaking to recognise that there could be no multiple working with that length of train? That would be viable, I reckon, and is an approach that seems to have done fine to upgrade the Snow Hill lines out of Birmingham.

 

[gareth950]

The idea that a wonderful 4-6 car heavy rail network is just around the corner if it weren't for that dastardly Ken Skates with his tram obsession is a nonsense.

It's not just around the corner, it's here now. The upgrades have been paid for and implemented. The signalling is ready. The platforms are ready. The infrastructure in Queen St and Central is ready. We just need the politicians to order the trains.

 

[B&I]

I don't mean heavy rail in the sense of completely undoing Metrolink. Before long, there simply won't be enough capacity on the Metrolink network for the people who need to move around. If additional street-running lines across Manchester city centre aren't possible, then the only real option is to build new grade-separated ones. These new lines wouldn't be heavy rail, but they wouldn't be street running Metrolink. They would be something in between, most likely akin to the DLR with longer trains and UTO.

Also, there's significant interest in Manchester in the tram-train concept to address exactly that single-line issue. With tram-trains there's no need to turn a twin-track railway into two separate single line sections for each system.

Forgive me if I don't quite see the attraction of ripping up 2 electric suburban railways, blocking both in the process to any use for through services (for which one of them was still vital at the time), then putting in some sort of pseudo-heavy rail solution 40+ years later. What is the advantage of some sort of DLR clone over the Metrolink?

The Manchester region, like south Wales, should be allowed to aspire to the world-class public transport seen in most other western European countries, not fobbed off with some low capacity, low quality rubbish because British governments fetishise not spending money. There is a place for light rail, but it is not generally providing an inadequate substitute for heavy rail on heavy rail alignments.

And before you mention Karlsruhe, it's not exactly comparable size-wise to either Manchester or Cardiff. It's also conspicuous in being one of the very few cities anywhere to run light rail vehicles on heavy rail tracks (although at least its scheme doesn't bar those heavy rail tracks to heavy rail vehicles). If converting everything to light rail is such an obviously good idea, why have so few countries done it?

 

[daodao]

It's not just around the corner, it's here now. The upgrades have been paid for and implemented. The signalling is ready. The platforms are ready. The infrastructure in Queen St and Central is ready. We just need the politicians to order the trains.

The Valley Lines network (excluding the separate lines to Maesteg and Ebbw Vale) needs to be kept as an integrated system, running on the existing lines through central Cardiff (Queen St and Central stations) to Barry/Penarth (and Radyr via Danescourt).

Street running trams in Cardiff are out of the question; there is no separate space for them and they would have to mingle with ordinary traffic. But this doesn't preclude DC overhead electrification on the existing infrastructure with light rail trains similar to those on the Tyne and Wear Metro system, which use NR metals to reach Sunderland and are able to run alongside heavy rail trains on this section. A similar arrangement could work between Cardiff Central and Barry Town. The vehicles would need adequate capacity/length to cope with passenger demand on the busiest lines.

 

[MarkyT]

There are tram-train services running in many cities, in Europe and beyond, and many proposed. The Wikipedia page on the subject is probably a little out of date:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram-train. In UK I would include the T&W metro as a related case. Authorities faced similar challenges running the light metro vehicles on the heavy rail Sunderland line, shared with other traffic including freight. The metrocars derived from standard German tramcars, with wider bodies but without all the road legal light clusters and skirts over the running gear as there was no roadside tramway operation involved. It is noticeable that some modern HR vehicles like Stadler Flirts are getting lighter and sharing some similar features and equipment with LR vehicles, particularly articulation, mixed and low floor configuration. I see this as a gradual process of convergence, with some LR vehicles getting 'heavier' in order to be able to interrun safely with other HR traffic as tram trains.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Thing is, in principle these were all good ideas. I mean obviously they were done for nakedly political reasons but redoubling and extra stations aren't bad things. It's just that the WG clearly did it really badly - showing off the shiny new infrastructure without the extra trains. Doing it on the cheap as usual. And you can add Halton Curve to this too, of course

Yes its the Good, the Bad and the Ugly ironically I live and work on one of the more successful interventions the Cambrian Mainline however we still haven't got the hourly service that was promised by the then Finance Minister in 2001......

 

[Gareth Marston]

Honestly I cannot see promises of guards being kept on the Valley Lines being kept at all. If there's one thing the Welsh Government are going to need to be secretive about, it's that there's no way existing staffing arrangements can ever be kept. There's absolutely no way that anyone can justify guard operation on a light railway. If the vehicles are legally permitted to drive through a pedestrianised city square, then it is absurd to argue they would be unsafe to operate without a guard performing duties. A second member of staff on board may well happen - since Edinburgh justifies a permanent ticket inspector on 40m vehicles I think a 100m doubled set makes the case pretty compelling - but it is not a safety-critical role.

There'll probably be a deal where existing guards aren't going to be made totally redundant or have their pay cut. But, the cost savings will apply into the future as new recruits won't be inheriting the same pay and conditions.

The reality is it will cost more to staff an LRT system than the current one because the Labour administration will not want to be seen anywhere near a decision that sacks well paid workers and reemploys them at cheaper rates. Metrolink managed it back in the early 90's as the pay differential then was not great and BR could absorb those wanting to stay through natural wastage and they were far fewer in number than those potentiality effected in South Wales. The TfW LRT system will be today's wages plus.

 

[Gareth Marston]

A question for the locals in the thread - would you have been happy with (prefer?) an order of 3-car 23m DMUs such as the CAF ones on order for Northern, but no other service changes other than a bit of peak tweaking to recognise that there could be no multiple working with that length of train? That would be viable, I reckon, and is an approach that seems to have done fine to upgrade the Snow Hill lines out of Birmingham.

CASR has delivered extra capacity already as has been said elsewhere it just needs the trains to run on it. Lets face it a modern DMU fleet is a step change from Pacer/150 and preferable to a bodge up involving leaving 60% of the services as 150's and deeply flawed Light Rail Conversion for the rest. Its also the cheapest option 50 x 3 car sets will cost around £180 million.

 

[gareth950]

There would be redundancies because ATW would cease operating those services and therefore have a reduced requirement for guard headcount.

But as this would not be ATW's fault or decision, the scope for industrial action about that is basically nil. And I don't believe TUPE would apply, though I might be wrong.

Absolutely nothing to do with ATW or the current franchise. But strike action on the valleys could be launched on the first day of the new franchise against the new operator. WG would move heaven and earth to avoid that. Not the kind of transformation Skates wants.

 

[Dai Corner]

The reality is it will cost more to staff an LRT system than the current one because the Labour administration will not want to be seen anywhere near a decision that sacks well paid workers and reemploys them at cheaper rates. Metrolink managed it back in the early 90's as the pay differential then was not great and BR could absorb those wanting to stay through natural wastage and they were far fewer in number than those potentiality effected in South Wales. The TfW LRT system will be today's wages plus.

Carwyn has already promised to protect jobs, pay and Ts&Cs and more frequent services will require more staff, of course. Providing work for construction and railway workers is no doubt an important consideration too.

 

[gareth950]

Carwyn has already promised to protect jobs, pay and Ts&Cs and more frequent services will require more staff, of course. Providing work for construction and railway workers is no doubt an important consideration too.

And lowering staff costs, along with rising fares, are the two easiest ways to deal with the rising cost of those nasty subsidies...........

 

[B&I]

The Valley Lines network (excluding the separate lines to Maesteg and Ebbw Vale) needs to be kept as an integrated system, running on the existing lines through central Cardiff (Queen St and Central stations) to Barry/Penarth (and Radyr via Danescourt).

Street running trams in Cardiff are out of the question; there is no separate space for them and they would have to mingle with ordinary traffic. But this doesn't preclude DC overhead electrification on the existing infrastructure with light rail trains similar to those on the Tyne and Wear Metro system, which use NR metals to reach Sunderland and are able to run alongside heavy rail trains on this section. A similar arrangement could work between Cardiff Central and Barry Town. The vehicles would need adequate capacity/length to cope with passenger demand on the busiest lines.

Wouldn't they also need to be 25 kv AC capable to work through Cardiff Central and its surrounds? And even if there may be a case for 750 v DC on losing speed branches without through routes, would it not be sensible to wire the VoG line at 25 kv AC so it can provide an electric diversionary route when Swansea is eventually wired? Not insurmountable obstacles, if high capacity tram trains could be found to meet the network's needs otherwise, but factors that will need to be considered.

 

[B&I]

There are tram-train services running in many cities, in Europe and beyond, and many proposed. The Wikipedia page on the subject is probably a little out of date:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tram-train. In UK I would include the T&W metro as a related case. Authorities faced similar challenges running the light metro vehicles on the heavy rail Sunderland line, shared with other traffic including freight. The metrocars derived from standard German tramcars, with wider bodies but without all the road legal light clusters and skirts over the running gear as there was no roadside tramway operation involved. It is noticeable that some modern HR vehicles like Stadler Flirts are getting lighter and sharing some similar features and equipment with LR vehicles, particularly articulation, mixed and low floor configuration. I see this as a gradual process of convergence, with some LR vehicles getting 'heavier' in order to be able to interrun safely with other HR traffic as tram trains.

I see the advantages of a Sunderland type operation in South Wales, and many other parts of Britain, because it involves relatively fast vehicles with a lot of potential capacity (constrained only by specified platform lengths in the Metro tunnels), which are lighter and, I assume, cheaper than conventional EMUs.

Where I have a problem is with downgrading the whole system to the standardnd capacity of street trams, taking lines out.of commission for interworking with heavy rail in the process. That to me is the huge mistake made in Manchester, all because central government wouldn't pay for the city centre tunnel which would have seemed entirely normal in a comparable German city. The implications of this for Metrolink capacity (and for mid-Cheshire commuters) are now all too apparent. South Wales should not make the same mistake.

Incidentally, if the money can ever be found to open new light rail lines as extensions of the existing Valley Lines, there's no need to downgrade the former to accommodate the latter. Tram-trains could join the existing Lines, using the Karlsruhe rather than the Manchester model, assuming there would be capacity, and assuming that the Rotherham farrago ever reaches some sort of conclusion.