South Wales 'Metro' updates

[Del1977]

Cardiff city centre is compact. Like the fact that you can't park right next to your office, you can't necessarily get a train/tram there either.

Public transport cannot provide direct services from everywhere to everywhere.

Of course - if on the other hand - it's more important to get a station stop very close to your place of work, then on-street running could deliver this better than the current fixed locations...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course - if on the other hand - it's more important to get a station stop very close to your place of work, then on-street running could deliver this better than the current fixed locations...

Indeed. A tram may well switch round the people who gain and lose, but overall I think it would be a gain over what is there now.

I would of course prefer a 25kV electric S-Bahn based around 3 and 6-car EMUs (basically a Merseyrail copy) - but that is likely not to be affordable. Merseyrail is a financial basket case, with massively high subsidy. The tram systems by and large are not, are almost as good in most ways, and have their own unique advantages too.

 

[gareth950]

Cardiff city centre is compact. Like the fact that you can't park right next to your office, you can't necessarily get a train/tram there either.

Public transport cannot provide direct services from everywhere to everywhere.

But currently they do now and have done for decades.

Of course - if on the other hand - it's more important to get a station stop very close to your place of work, then on-street running could deliver this better than the current fixed locations...

Whilst I'm trying my best to keep this debate polite and respectful, it's getting very difficult to keep repeating the same statements over and over. Cardiff is changing rapidly. Unless you close off Cardiff city centre to cars, there's no room for trams. A congestion charge idea was floated several years ago and was met with strong opposition and got flatly rejected. On-street running in Cardiff massively increasing journey times, or segregated HR running resulting in journey times of a few minutes? Cathays - Queen St takes 1 minute!
Central, Queen St and Cathays are all within walking distance of the employment and education centres they serve.

 

[Gareth Marston]

You're right that in contrast to your position, I have a relatively optimistic view. For one thing, I believe it is possible to raise a lot of the funds locally - with political will. I don't buy the idea that further improvements rely on waiting for handouts from Westminster/the EU or some other source.


On the cross city link, I do agree that I would prefer through running to Penarth and Barry Island, however I think describing it as 'destroyed' isn't quite right. I don't believe that the track is proposed to be lifted.

And I do have a lot of doubts - but could be persuaded by some data - that there are so many current journeys that start north of Cardiff Queen Street and finish south of Grangetown.

The vast majority of journeys made are to and from Cardiff City Centre or changing for mainline destinations at Cardiff Central. A change at Cardiff Central for passengers travelling on to Penarth or Barry shouldn't be a gamestopper.

At the moment, anyone travelling from the Rhymney Line would have to change to get a train to Barry Island, and conversely, people travelling from the MTA lines would need to change to get a train to Penarth. And of course, the same for those making the reverse journey. People making those journeys appear to manage okay.

But like I said - I'm open to being persuaded by data.

A quick geography lesson is needed here there are 3 stations in the centre of Cardiff not just one. Central, Queen St and Cathays. So depending on where your going one of three is maybe the most convenient and that doesn't necessarily mean Central just because its called Central doesn't mean its in the epcicentre of everything furthermore if your going to the Bay you have to change trains at Queen St. This is why were so against cutting cross city links its not just journeys like from Merthyr to Barry but the Vale to Queen St, Vale to Cathays, Vale to the Bay that will be heavily disrupted. My observations over the years are that only around half the folk arriving from the Vale get off at Central.

The rail geography of central Cardiff is somewhat unique for UK regional city's in that there are 3 station on the same line serving the city center. I'm struggling to think of that being replicated elsewhere in the UK - most have just one or if they have more there on different lines.

 

[Del1977]

But currently they do now.

Whilst I'm trying my best to keep this debate polite and respectful, it's getting very difficult to keep repeating the same statements over and over. Cardiff is changing rapidly. Unless you close off Cardiff city centre to cars, there's no room for trams. A congestion charge idea was floated several years ago and got flatly rejected. On-street running in Cardiff massively increasing journey times, or segregated HR running resulting in journey times of a few minutes? Cathays - Queen St takes 1 minute!
Central, Queen St and Cathays are all within walking distance of the employment and education centres they serve.

I think it's a matter - as I stated many threads ago - of winners and losers. The only important measure is that there are many more winners from the changes than losers.

You've cited the importance of stations close to places of work. I've pointed out that on-street running could lead to more stops closer to places of work. Any system will have positives and negatives.

A quick geography lesson is needed here there are 3 stations in the centre of Cardiff not just one. Central, Queen St and Cathays. So depending on where your going one of three is maybe the most convenient and that doesn't necessarily mean Central just because its called Central doesn't mean its in the epcicentre of everything furthermore if your going to the Bay you have to change trains at Queen St. This is why were so against cutting cross city links its not just journeys like from Merthyr to Barry but the Vale to Queen St, Vale to Cathays, Vale to the Bay that will be heavily disrupted. My observations over the years are that only around half the folk arriving from the Vale get off at Central.

And I keep saying - I grew up in the South Wales Valleys and commuted to Cardiff via the Valley Lines for a year (as well as having made countless leisure journeys while living there for over twenty years). I know the layout of central Cardiff. I know where the university is, the crown courts, city hall, county hall, the stadium, the castle, the shops, the office blocks, the pubs etc. etc. I don't need to look at a map of Cardiff city centre to know where things are or to understand which of the three stations is closest to wherever someone would want to go.

Why is it you cannot appreciate that some journeys may be worse, but some may be better? The Vale to the Bay could be easier, for example, if you could change at Cardiff Central to a tram to your destination, instead of having to get a train through to Cardiff Queen Street, change trains and then come back on yourself, as is the case now.

I'm perfectly happy to accept that if a passenger is currently going from say Dinas Powys to Queen Street every day and if in future had to change at Cardiff Central to complete their journey, that that would be a worse journey experience for that user. But I keep saying - the goal is to have more winners than losers in the overall scheme - not to focus on individual journeys.


But the opponents of light rail appear to hold the position that *everyone* will be a loser.

 

[Envoy]

A direct bus service operate between Penarth & Cardiff Bay - but only hourly.https://www.natgroup.co.uk/sites/www.natgroup.co.uk/files/89A 89B_0.pdf

Anyone arriving now from the Vale at Cardiff Central could, if they so desired, catch a number 6 Cardiff Bus (every 10 minutes) from the south side of the station to the Bay via Lloyd George Avenue. Is that so much more inconvenient than having a tram? The main problem is that they would have to purchase a bus ticket due to the lack of through ticketing between the local rail network and the buses - something that surely Transport for Wales should have sorted out?

 

[Del1977]

Lots of these journeys are possible by bus, and integrated ticketing should be the goal. You'd hope that they have ambitions to specify bus routes in the same way as they are operated in London too.

 

[rftorf]

You're right that in contrast to your position, I have a relatively optimistic view. For one thing, I believe it is possible to raise a lot of the funds locally - with political will. I don't buy the idea that further improvements rely on waiting for handouts from Westminster/the EU or some other source.

I've been involved in putting funding packages together for a number of public sector schemes and indeed had an input into the initial planning for the Cardiff Capital City Deal and I'm afraid an awful lot of the schemes need EU money to fund them, don't forget all of these plans were drawn up and funding planned before Brexit.

 

[Del1977]

Right. But there's no reason why people in South Wales can't pay more on their council tax, or pay a congestion charge, or pay higher fares etc. to cover the costs. Money can be raised if there's a political will, and, if the public support paying for this stuff.

 

[Llanigraham]

You're right that in contrast to your position, I have a relatively optimistic view. For one thing, I believe it is possible to raise a lot of the funds locally - with political will. I don't buy the idea that further improvements rely on waiting for handouts from Westminster/the EU or some other source.

I'd love to know where you think these funds are going to come from?

At the moment, anyone travelling from the Rhymney Line would have to change to get a train to Barry Island, and conversely, people travelling from the MTA lines would need to change to get a train to Penarth. And of course, the same for those making the reverse journey. People making those journeys appear to manage okay.

But like I said - I'm open to being persuaded by data.

Last thread it was MAT, now it's MTA.
Would you please stop using acronyms, or at least explain them first.

 

[Llanigraham]

Of course - if on the other hand - it's more important to get a station stop very close to your place of work, then on-street running could deliver this better than the current fixed locations...

And that suggests (again) that you have no idea of the physical situation in Cardiff City Centre!
Have you ever been to Cardiff?

 

[Llanigraham]

The rail geography of central Cardiff is somewhat unique for UK regional city's in that there are 3 station on the same line serving the city center. I'm struggling to think of that being replicated elsewhere in the UK - most have just one or if they have more there on different lines.

Quite! In fact I would go further and suggest that the whole geography of Cardiff is quite different to most other cities in the UK, but it appears that there are some on here who cannot accept that. They really need to look at a map!

 

[WelshBluebird]

Lots of these journeys are possible by bus, and integrated ticketing should be the goal. You'd hope that they have ambitions to specify bus routes in the same way as they are operated in London too.

Good luck telling people who can currently get trains (either a single train, or two trains with an easy connection) to work that they will now have to get a train and then a bus!

 

[HowardGWR]

Tell me, is there not room for at least one extra station between Llandaf and Cathays (say at Western Avenue) and between Heath and Queen St (say at Wedal Rd)? Both are long stretches through highly built up areas.

 

[gareth950]

Right. But there's no reason why people in South Wales can't pay more on their council tax, or pay a congestion charge, or pay higher fares etc. to cover the costs. Money can be raised if there's a political will, and, if the public support paying for this stuff.

Welsh Labour and Welsh Govt are dead against raising taxes due to Wales' under funding from the Barnett formula.
A Congestion charge was rejected.
Why should anyone outside the 'Core Valleys' pay higher fares to lose direct trains beyond Central, and have an inferior service provided by 1980s DMUs?

And that suggests (again) that you have no idea of the physical situation in Cardiff City Centre!
Have you ever been to Cardiff?

Quite! In fact I would go further and suggest that the whole geography of Cardiff is quite different to most other cities in the UK, but it appears that there are some on here who cannot accept that. They really need to look at a map!

I have been trying to point this out, it seems my posts are selectively being ignored.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Of course - if on the other hand - it's more important to get a station stop very close to your place of work, then on-street running could deliver this better than the current fixed locations...

Which streets are you digging up and causing months if not years of disruption at much added extra cost?

This sort of approach reminds me of one of the more dumber quotes from the Vietnam war when a senior American officer said ( of the Vietnamise) " we're bombing them to save them".

 

[Gareth Marston]

A direct bus service operate between Penarth & Cardiff Bay - but only hourly.https://www.natgroup.co.uk/sites/www.natgroup.co.uk/files/89A 89B_0.pdf

Anyone arriving now from the Vale at Cardiff Central could, if they so desired, catch a number 6 Cardiff Bus (every 10 minutes) from the south side of the station to the Bay via Lloyd George Avenue. Is that so much more inconvenient than having a tram? The main problem is that they would have to purchase a bus ticket due to the lack of through ticketing between the local rail network and the buses - something that surely Transport for Wales should have sorted out?

By the time you've got out of central station and walked across to the bus stop outside the BritishGas office block and not choked on the smokers fumes that hang out there you've got to Queen St and are nearly on your way to the Bay. You don't get wet either like you do walking across the south entrance car park at Central.

 

[Del1977]

I'd love to know where you think these funds are going to come from?



Last thread it was MAT, now it's MTA.
Would you please stop using acronyms, or at least explain them first.

For the benefit of those who don't know anything about the Valley Lines, as otherwise they could deduce it, my use of any combination of MAT refers to the three routes ending at Merthyr, Aberdare or Treherbert.

 

[Del1977]

Which streets are you digging up and causing months if not years of disruption at much added extra cost?

This sort of approach reminds me of one of the more dumber quotes from the Vietnam war when a senior American officer said ( of the Vietnamise) " we're bombing them to save them".

Large scale construction projects always involve disruption. If the goal is to avoid any form of disruption, there'd be no road or rail infrastructure projects at all, as you well know.

 

[NotATrainspott]

You seem quite certain about all this. Unless you work for TfW, these comments are just assumptions.

What's so controversial about natural attrition? LR staff will get paid less. People do not work forever. If all existing drivers keep their pay, then over 30-40 years the average pay per staff member will go down. I really cannot see how this is that difficult a concept to grasp. If HR is retained, wages will either stay static, or increase. More money, for the same or less amount of transportation.

So a level crossing for a wheelchair user who gets stuck on the track with a 15000 tonne fully loaded freight train hurtling towards them?

Now you're just being obtuse. Freight on the network would be relatively limited. Level crossings will only be permitted on lines not kept cleared for HR, which will be most of them.

It really all depends on how you believe that future funding and intent will pan out.

The sunny LRT enthusiast view is that it will all role outwards and onwards in a virtuous continuous cycle of expansion and improvements. Concerns about losing cross city links can be dismissed as only being temporary until the next stage is done which will be along soon.

However the reality is that in the UK funding doesn't happen in a continuous stream its stop start. Manchester Metrolink took 20 years before its big bang expansion occurred, The Nottingham Express Transit took 10 years before its next phase, Midland Metro still runs in a sraight line between two points in Birmingham and Wolverhampton after 20 years. Tyne & Wear Metro is still running (just) with its original rolling stock from the 1970's...

Why didn't we see expansion? Because these were largely new lines. There's a fairly large funding difference between building a 'speculative' new line and taking one off of HR and running it instead. The choice available to government was to spend millions on a new tram line plus services, or essentially do nothing. For the South Wales Metro, the choice will be LR or keeping an HR service. There's no option to 'do nothing'. The 'do nothing' option is really an option with little upfront cost but significant ongoing costs, while the alternative is significant upfront cost but little ongoing costs. Now that tram-train technology is a commodity, it'll be even easier than before to sort out conversions.

I have absolutely no confidence that once we destroy the cross city link and invest in 3.5 UA's north of Cardiff that any more money will be forthcoming...perhaps to well into the 2030's......leaving an atrophied version of the 1980's DMU suburban railway for most of South Wales.

The alternative is that all of the Valleys will remain a 1980's DMU suburban railway. The idea of a consistently 4-6 car railway run by modern DMUs or EMUs is an economic fantasy.

Good luck telling people who can currently get trains (either a single train, or two trains with an easy connection) to work that they will now have to get a train and then a bus!

What about the people for whom the HR Valley Lines service doesn't currently work? It's fantastically easy to point out small numbers of people who might lose out from an idea. It's much harder to see all of the people who aren't currently well served, and who could benefit from the changes.

It is deeply frustrating to see posters make points and claims based on the idea that LR and HR are non-overlapping magisteria and never the twain shall meet. That's simply not credible today looking at real-world networks comparable to South Wales. Seriously, look at RandstadRail in the Netherlands. It has everything from buses to high-floor metros, and everything in between. The fact that some of their vehicles are fitted with track brakes and indicators doesn't mean they are not used on grade-separated tracks in urban areas.[/QUOTE]

 

[Llanigraham]

For the benefit of those who don't know anything about the Valley Lines, as otherwise they could deduce it, my use of any combination of MAT refers to the three routes ending at Merthyr, Aberdare or Treherbert.

Never heard them called that, and is certainly NOT the name used by Network Rail or any other official body. And yes I do know the Valley lines, thank you.

And I note that you still have not answered various questions raised by Gareth Marston or myself.

 

[gareth950]

The vast majority of journeys made are to and from Cardiff City Centre or changing for mainline destinations at Cardiff Central. A change at Cardiff Central for passengers travelling on to Penarth or Barry shouldn't be a gamestopper.

At the moment, anyone travelling from the Rhymney Line would have to change to get a train to Barry Island, and conversely, people travelling from the MTA lines would need to change to get a train to Penarth. And of course, the same for those making the reverse journey. People making those journeys appear to manage okay.

It's a case of getting off one train, standing in place on the platform, and waiting for the next train to come along 3 mins later.

It's not a case of going through barriers, exiting the station, walking to a tram stop, getting wet, winding through the traffic in Cardiff and getting to your destination up to 30 minutes later than you would now.

The alternative is that all of the Valleys will remain a 1980's DMU suburban railway. The idea of a consistently 4-6 car railway run by modern DMUs or EMUs is an economic fantasy.

That's the reality for the vast majority of the 'Metro' area network that's not included in the magical Core VL.

If 4 - 6 car trains were 'an economic fantasy' hundreds of millions would not have been ploughed into CASR for significant HR frequency enhancements and platform lengthening for 6 car HR trains across the Valleys. The only reason CASR has not been used to it's full capacity yet is thanks to Prof Mark Barry's Metro report that came out in 2013, once CASR had started, helped along by his brother's heavily biased reporting in the Echo and Wales Online, claiming LR would act like a magic wand and solve all the economic problems of the Valleys, which has been widely criticised. Before that WG and NR were committed to delivering HR enhancements on the Valleys and in the Vale through CASR.

What about the people for whom the HR Valley Lines service doesn't currently work? It's fantastically easy to point out small numbers of people who might lose out from an idea. It's much harder to see all of the people who aren't currently well served, and who could benefit from the changes.

It is deeply frustrating to see posters make points and claims based on the idea that LR and HR are non-overlapping magisteria and never the twain shall meet. That's simply not credible today looking at real-world networks comparable to South Wales. Seriously, look at RandstadRail in the Netherlands. It has everything from buses to high-floor metros, and everything in between. The fact that some of their vehicles are fitted with track brakes and indicators doesn't mean they are not used on grade-separated tracks in urban areas.

You live in a very utopian world. Please tell us where you've located the source of endless sums of capital infrastructure funding.
Those of us living in reality know that once the initial 'blue' or 'phase 2' stages of LR conversion of current HR routes go ahead and inevitable over-run and go over-budget, that will be it. We've explained WG's track record on rail infrastructure and the farce of Ebbw Vale many times. They can't even double that and have abandoned it half way through, leaving the part completed track and sleepers in place at the side of the railway.

There's no chance of any extensions happening before the next franchise is let in 2033.

When WG's capital infrastructure spend is literally blown to pieces by Carwyn's M4 relief road before he departs, there will be nothing left for any infrastructure for decades (although I'm sure some blank cheques will be found for more road projects from under the desk). Hence why even the Welsh Conservatives are now saying they may not support the relief road. It's widely expected to reach £2bn.

 

[Del1977]

It's a case of getting off one train, standing in place on the platform, and waiting for the next train to come along 3 mins later.

When WG's capital infrastructure spend is literally blown to pieces by Carwyn's M4 relief road before he departs, there will be nothing left for any infrastructure for decades (although I'm sure some blank cheques will be found for more road projects from under the desk). Hence why even the Welsh Conservatives are now saying they may not support the relief road. It's widely expected to reach £2bn.

One of the arguments put forward against Light Rail has been that no money is available, and that future extensions of the system are unrealistic. But then £2bn for a road project with blank cheques is possible...

There's a lack of any real news to discuss, so I'll look in again once there's actually something new to talk about.

 

[NotATrainspott]

It's a case of getting off one train, standing in place on the platform, and waiting for the next train to come along 3 mins later.

It's not a case of going through barriers, exiting the station, walking to a tram stop, getting wet, winding through the traffic in Cardiff and getting to your destination up to 30 minutes later than you would now.

An idea wholly predicated on the idea that there's an inseparable barrier between LR and HR, and that train operations cannot pass across infrastructure owner/controller boundaries.

100m train-trams cannot run on the streets of Cardiff. They can get away with level crossings, but they cannot drive along city centre streets. The only practical way of adding brand new LR-dedicated platforms to Cardiff Central would be to do street running. If 100m sets can't run in the streets, and are going to run, then they're going to use the existing platforms. The doubled sets will act like slightly narrower versions of the Merseyrail 777s.

That's the reality for the vast majority of the 'Metro' area network that's not included in the magical Core VL.

Option 1: Some passenger services around Cardiff are handed over to a LR operator. A few remaining services which depend slightly more on sharing the mainline are kept essentially as-is.
Option 2: All trains are kept essentially as-is.

These are the options available. Not going ahead with the LR work isn't magically going to improve the case for work on the lines that aren't covered. Because non-conversion means higher operational costs, the firm likelihood is that the remaining HR services would actually be worse without LR conversion.

If 4 - 6 car trains were 'an economic fantasy' hundreds of millions would not have been ploughed into CASR for significant HR frequency enhancements and platform lengthening for 6 car HR trains across the Valleys. The only reason CASR has not been used to it's full capacity yet is thanks to Prof Mark Barry's Metro report that came out in 2013, once CASR had started, helped along by his brother's heavily biased reporting in the Echo and Wales Online, claiming LR would act like a magic wand and solve all the economic problems of the Valleys, which has been widely criticised. Before that WG and NR were committed to delivering HR enhancements on the Valleys and in the Vale through CASR.

I asked you how much of CASR spend consisted of renewals, and how much was the actual improvements. There is absolutely no point banging on about CASR if the expenditure was unavoidable. Unless significant amounts of money were spent deliberately and only so that certain HR-only improvements were possible, there's nothing to talk about.

You know why the South Wales Metro idea is so appealing to Cardiff Bay? Because they know the transport system in South Wales isn't currently good enough, and that HR is simply technologically and economically unsuited for the region. This isn't Lyle Lanley and a Monorail. There's nothing about the South Wales Metro which would make the people of the Randstad feel uncomfortable.

You live in a very utopian world. Please tell us where you've located the source of endless sums of capital infrastructure funding.
Those of us living in reality know that once the initial 'blue' or 'phase 2' stages of LR conversion of current HR routes go ahead and inevitable over-run and go over-budget, that will be it. We've explained WG's track record on rail infrastructure and the farce of Ebbw Vale many times. They can't even double that and have abandoned it half way through, leaving the part completed track and sleepers in place at the side of the railway.

There's no chance of any extensions happening before the next franchise is let in 2033.

When WG's capital infrastructure spend is literally blown to pieces by Carwyn's M4 relief road before he departs, there will be nothing left for any infrastructure for decades (although I'm sure some blank cheques will be found for more road projects from under the desk). Hence why even the Welsh Conservatives are now saying they may not support the relief road. It's widely expected to reach £2bn.

Governments have essentially unlimited ability to borrow money as capital. The problem lies in current expenditure, as borrowing to fund day-to-day spending on public services presents more problems. Why do governments have so much money available to plough into shiny new super-hospitals and council buildings, rather than the 'cheap' option of just refurbishing existing ones? Because that high upfront capital cost is justified by the operational savings later on. The savings are the return on investment for that initial capital. If there are lot of savings to be made, the return on investment is high. When ROI is high enough, it is economically more prudent for the government to borrow money now to take advantage of those savings.

It's not an ideological thing, it's something that is clear as day on spreadsheets and in budgets at all levels of government spending. The reason the bond markets worry about stereotypical left-wing governments is not the act of borrowing per se, but that this borrowing will not be financially prudent and will damage the economy and/or the government's ability to pay it back. The bond markets love it when governments borrow to efficiently build clear-cut good investments like new bridges, since they perceive it as actually improving the government's ability to pay loans back. The problematic thing for governments is that there's lots of spending opportunities which might be politically convenient, or even necessary, which don't result in the financial situation improving. Lots of shiny things various politicians or voters might like don't actually have a good financial case to back them.

The first 'extensions' of the LR system would be taking over existing HR services. If nothing is done, these services will continue running, and continuing to lose money. If the LR savings are more than the interest and opportunity costs of additional borrowing for the conversion/enabling works, then it will happen. The Treasury would do the sums and find out that it's simply a better idea to spend more money now than it would be to spend money every year indefinitely. For as long as LR provides good enough savings and efficiencies, that will be the case.

 

[Dai Corner]

One of the arguments put forward against Light Rail has been that no money is available, and that future extensions of the system are unrealistic. But then £2bn for a road project with blank cheques is possible...

There's a lack of any real news to discuss, so I'll look in again once there's actually something new to talk about.

There is supposedly £725M available; £325M for Valley Lines electrification programme (note the absence of the word 'core') and a further £400M for the 'wider South East Wales Metro scheme'

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...e/508268/Cardiff_Capital_Region_City_Deal.pdf

South East Wales Metro

1. A key priority, which the City Deal Investment Fund will support, is the delivery of the South East Wales Metro. The scheme has the potential to provide a significantly improved public transport system that will transform the way people travel around the region.
   
   
2. GiventheimportanceoftheMetrototheUKGovernment,WelshGovernmentand Cardiff Capital Region, a proportion of the Investment Fund will be pre-allocated to the delivery of this scheme. This pre-allocation focuses on both phases of the wider Metro scheme. These are:
   
    The delivery of the Valley Lines Electrification programme. This City Deal re- confirms the continued shared ambition of both Government’s and the Cardiff Capital Region to deliver this element of the wider Metro scheme. £325 million of the £1.2 billion Investment Fund has already been committed to the delivery of this scheme (£125 million from the UK Government, £94 million from the Welsh Government and £106 million from the European Regional Development Fund).
   
    The delivery of the wider South East Wales Metro scheme. The Welsh Government will pre-allocate over £400m further funding from the Investment Fund to deliver the wider ambitions around the Metro scheme, which is the subject of ongoing design work. As part of this City Deal the Welsh Government commits to involving the Cardiff Capital Region in the co-design of the wider Metro scheme and in the procurement of a delivery organisation.
   

 

[Bletchleyite]

An idea wholly predicated on the idea that there's an inseparable barrier between LR and HR, and that train operations cannot pass across infrastructure owner/controller boundaries.

100m train-trams cannot run on the streets of Cardiff. They can get away with level crossings, but they cannot drive along city centre streets. The only practical way of adding brand new LR-dedicated platforms to Cardiff Central would be to do street running. If 100m sets can't run in the streets, and are going to run, then they're going to use the existing platforms. The doubled sets will act like slightly narrower versions of the Merseyrail 777s.

Would you potentially be able to do something like the narrow gauge Swiss lines do, involving very limited street running (basically a very long level crossing without barriers) and a separate forecourt station?

Example at Brig:

(I think the Swiss narrow gauge lines hold quite a few lessons for the way UK tram-train type services could work)

 

[gareth950]

An idea wholly predicated on the idea that there's an inseparable barrier between LR and HR, and that train operations cannot pass across infrastructure owner/controller boundaries.

100m train-trams cannot run on the streets of Cardiff. They can get away with level crossings, but they cannot drive along city centre streets. The only practical way of adding brand new LR-dedicated platforms to Cardiff Central would be to do street running. If 100m sets can't run in the streets, and are going to run, then they're going to use the existing platforms. The doubled sets will act like slightly narrower versions of the Merseyrail 777s.

I'm basing my predictions on what we know - which is the maps and reports released on the TfW website. These maps and reports clearly indicate LR conversion north of Queen St. HR diesel for Barry, the Vale and everywhere else. And a plan to make commuting from Penarth even more difficult than it is now by forcing the Penarth line onto the streets of Grangetown.

You cannot assume that there will be 100m doubled up tram-trains chosen by looking at a planning application for a 'rolling stock' depot. These might be standard trams. They might be tram-trains. Or more unlikely, they could be trains.
http://gov.wales/docs/det/publications/170922-rail-services-of-the-future-brochure-en.pdf That brochure outlining the Welsh Govt's vague 'vision' for rail services in Wales and the Metro again emphasises improvements north of Queen Street (not Central), which suggests the network will be split.
Most of your post is based on what you think would be the ideal thing to happen - Metro services beyond the Core VL being tram-train. From what has been released into the public domain so far, there's no indication of that happening. All the indications point to the Core VL going over to trams, split off from everything else, with HR diesel elsewhere.

Until anything else is confirmed, this is what we have to assume is planned.

 

[MarkyT]

I think the Swiss narrow gauge lines hold quite a few lessons for the way UK tram-train type services could work

Or the similar standard gauge Seetal Railway:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seetal_railway_line

As to freight remaining on certain parts of the Valley network, personally I can't see it being politically acceptable to forcibly shut down the private sector opencast mining operations involved early (while recognising they have a limited realistic life), or transfer their remaining traffic wholesale to road haulage. More frequent 'lighter' rail operations may limit further the times such services may be able to operate I accept, but any kind of freight operation retained in off peak hours suggests the ability to interrun with whatever form of 'light rail cars' being proposed. If such light vehicles will be able to interrun with such heavy freight trains on Valleys branches, then that suggests the same trains could plausibly run alongside HR freight and passenger services on other route sections remaining under NR control, such as on parts of the VoG route, with DC electrification provided T&W Sunderland style.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The rail geography of central Cardiff is somewhat unique for UK regional city's in that there are 3 station on the same line serving the city center. I'm struggling to think of that being replicated elsewhere in the UK - most have just one or if they have more there on different lines.

Manchester is the other obvious one (if you're talking comparable DMU railways), and the Merseyrail Link line (Northern Line). The layout is classic S-Bahn and you'll find it in Germany all over the place.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Manchester is the other obvious one (if you're talking comparable DMU railways), and the Merseyrail Link line (Northern Line). The layout is classic S-Bahn and you'll find it in Germany all over the place.

Solutions are always bespoke the Main line stations in Manchester serve the Northern periphery (Salford Central, Victoria) and Southern periphery (Deansgate, OXford Rd, Piccadily). Getting Metrolink running across the city center by street meant that passengers could better access the center of Manchester.
In Liverpool the solution was to go underground to do the same replacing termini stations. in both instances the core theme is cross city running as this is the most efficient use of rolling stock and gets frequencies up. In Liverpool the Wirral line goes round in a loop to "mimic" cross city and prevent termini turnarounds.

In Cardiff the current Valley Lines already access the core of the city centre in a number of places. Grangetown, Ninian Park, Central, Queen St, Cathays. Nowhere in Cardiff city centre is more than a 10 minute walk from one of these stations. They already efficiently run cross city.

Large scale construction projects always involve disruption. If the goal is to avoid any form of disruption, there'd be no road or rail infrastructure projects at all, as you well know.

So what purpose does digging up the streets in the centre of Cardiff for on street running actually serve?
It cant be to provide better access as HR already ticks that box.
It cant be to create a cross city link as it already exists.