Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Passed by Ty Glag station and wondered what progress has been made over two weeks. The answer is I don't think they have even started. The were a few white bags on pallets where the extension will go, but I think they have been there for some time.
If this was my local station I would be rather angry that the closure does not coincide with the actual work!
Somebody asked earlier how this project could possibly take six months, I think we have our answer.
I think the main issue is the new trains don't fit on the platform without blocking the crossing (or being very close to it) so the only way to bring the new trains in now is to close the station and the crossing until it's been rebuilt so the platform goes a little further up the line.
Given it's proximity to Birchgrove it's not as big an issue as say Ynyswen station on the Treherbert line.
I can't see Butetown happening until the May 2026 timetable change personally. It can't work until the branch has gone to line of sight operation and I don't see the training on the 398's being done by December.
A small point on the dwell time for the Flirts; I would suspect that a door going out of use because the motor fails which in all likelihood wouldn't stop the train continuing in service is viewed differently than a gap filler motor failing when extended and leaving the train out of gauge.
Surely the answer to the dwell time issue is to move to driver open guard close to cut down on the extra time the local door takes. I acknowledge that this might be difficult with the RMT but other operators have been doing this for years with no controversy i.e. Avanti and Cross-country.
There was some fun at Pontypridd today that caused chaos on the valley lines. Officially an issue with a train, but overheard a guard saying a pantograph had hit the platform roof - though that sounds pretty dramatic and odd to me! Did take a while to recover mind you so maybe it was!
There was some fun at Pontypridd today that caused chaos on the valley lines. Officially an issue with a train, but overheard a guard saying a pantograph had hit the platform roof - though that sounds pretty dramatic and odd to me! Did take a while to recover mind you so maybe it was!
I think the main issue is the new trains don't fit on the platform without blocking the crossing (or being very close to it) so the only way to bring the new trains in now is to close the station and the crossing until it's been rebuilt so the platform goes a little further up the line.
If the issue was just blocking the crossing them presumably they could close the crossing without also closing the station - though the station wouldn't then be much use for people on the wrong side of the track.
But I think that's irrelevent because n any case you would need selective door opening to call there with the current platform length and presumably that could be set up so the train stopped with the excess length on the opposite side of the crossing (i.e. where the platform extension will be).
In any case, yes, the station has presumably closed now because the trains can't call, not because they have already started work, but TfW have chosen to present it not quite like that.
It's unfortunate that they didn't have the resources to extend the platform before the 756s came in.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
A small point on the dwell time for the Flirts; I would suspect that a door going out of use because the motor fails which in all likelihood wouldn't stop the train continuing in service is viewed differently than a gap filler motor failing when extended and leaving the train out of gauge.
Good point - assuming that there is a method of closing and securing a door if it fails when it isn't fully closed.
I'm surprised just how quickly they auto-close. And it's also unfortunate that they've chosen to make it very hard to distinguish between auto-closing and the doors being closed for departure.
When a door auto-closes the button flashes red, but then goes green again once it's closed. Seems a bit unncessary given that not only is there a gigantic red light warning that the doors are closing, but also the fact that they are closing is quite a good indication of what they're doing.
Theyre supposed to have a failsafe system such that the panto automatically lowers if the wires disappear, the arm raises realises there's still no wire and then auto drops. So I'm suspect that it could happen at ponty given the dustance to wires.
Theyre supposed to have a failsafe system such that the panto automatically lowers if the wires disappear, the arm raises realises there's still no wire and then auto drops. So I'm suspect that it could happen at ponty given the dustance to wires.
Presumably it depends on whether this is an entirely separate mechanism to the regular way of lowering it or not.
Otherwise a fault which means it fails to lower when commanded could prevent it from lowering both when instructed to do so by a transponder and but also when it detects that it's run out of wire.
While having quite so many points at which pantographs need to go down and up must be unique in the UK, there are previously existing routes where the change from overhead wire to third rail takes place on the fly, I think.
I’m pretty sure that’s a mistake. Bargoed isn’t getting any wires, and there’s no feed anywhere nearby. Here’s the most recently-published electrification diagram, which came out last month.
Attachments
OLE Section Diagram TRAN01-PSP-ZZ-CVL-DDR-Y-EP-000003-S1-P04.pdf
That's interesting, the previous iteration of that map had bargoed as a catenary free section. Seems they've added quite a bit more wiring to the Rhymney line, Hengoed also originally had a larger cat free section.
Edit: ah yeah that does contradict the more detailed looking one above.
I had actually discovered all the OLE section diagrams knocking about online and wondered if there was a reason behind the including or not including of that substation. My guess is it would have been a normal Track Sectioning Site for the principle reason of increasing overall voltages (since any substation parallels all track sections). But then they clearly found out it wasn't needed. Interestingly this array of switches does sort of provide the sectioning ability of a TSS since both the Up and Down lines an be connected to each other.
I wonder if there's some sort of rule or convention about how long you can go without the need to power a line "reversewards" from a point further away.
For example, if there's a fault with the OLE on the Down line between Hengoed and Llandabrach, you can still power both lines between Bargoed and Hengeod drawing from the Up line feed. This is allowed by these switches between both lines and there isn't another one like it until you get to Heath Street junction.
In any case, removing a substation from the plan is a decently big change considering all the others came true.
I had a quick ride on the Cardiff Bay train today to see how things are progressing. At Cardiff Bay station the contractors were spreading hardcore in the circulating space at the end of the platforms. It's also possible to see the services being run to the site of the new staff building - there's a water pipe and some electrical cable conduit.
Further up the line at Butetown, the new retaining wall and lift tower base are clear to see, and the steel reinforcement grid on the top of the embankment has had concrete poured around it.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
A couple more construction updates: the worksite at Cathays has been cleared away, so that must have just been ground investigations.
Today there was vegetation clearance going on near the Cart Road cycle underpass on the Cardiff Bay line (near the Salvation Army building) and there was also something that looked like a corer or piling rig being used next to the new concrete-block wall just south of the bridge.
Delays and cancellation on the Coryton line seem to be again getting worse, this after TfW acknowledged that performance was poor and were putting in measures to try and address it.
Delays and cancellation on the Coryton line seem to be again getting worse, this after TfW acknowledged that performance was poor and were putting in measures to try and address it.
Just checked that huge ORR Spreadsheet and filtered it for stations in the UK with the most cancellations last month.
Same 3 are now back in after a few months out.
Theyre supposed to have a failsafe system such that the panto automatically lowers if the wires disappear, the arm raises realises there's still no wire and then auto drops. So I'm suspect that it could happen at ponty given the dustance to wires.
Having the pantograph hit the station roof has occurred several times at Blackfriars, where the distance from the end of the wires in City Thameslink to the next overhead obstruction (the office building spanning the track at the norty end of Blackfriars station) is not long enough for the auto drop to kick in.
I notice that class 700s, and maybe other AC units too, have a bright light shining onto the pantograph well - I have assumed there is a camnera trained on the panto so the driver can check its position, and the light is to make it visible at night
The Cardiff Bay line “improvements” can’t happen until the signalling is transferred to Taff Well SCC which isn’t happening until at least Dec 26 if not into 27.
I notice that class 700s, and maybe other AC units too, have a bright light shining onto the pantograph well - I have assumed there is a camnera trained on the panto so the driver can check its position, and the light is to make it visible at night
I also used Cardiff Bay recently. I must say this scheme has extremely confused me on what it is meant to achieve. It seems to have ended up as the worst of both worlds with light vs heavy rail.
The distance between stations is incredibly short. The "we are now arriving at Queen Street" announcement went off when we were at Butetown. I'm struggling to understand what purpose is meant to serve (especially with hindsight of central station having new tram platforms).
The OHLE seems complete overkill. I assume required since it is 25kV but surely the on street sections aren't going to have 25kV on these kind of gantries? So it's going to require rolling stock changes anyway?
The platforms are incredibly wide (why?) at Cardiff Bay but not enough seats so people were sitting on the ground - hopefully they add more benches when it's complete!
The OHLE seems complete overkill. I assume required since it is 25kV but surely the on street sections aren't going to have 25kV on these kind of gantries? So it's going to require rolling stock changes anyway?
The platforms are incredibly wide (why?) at Cardiff Bay but not enough seats so people were sitting on the ground - hopefully they add more benches when it's complete!
The on-street sections are planned to be unwired, as the 398s already have batteries in order to enable discontinuous electrification. They also have provision for on-the-spot charging if this is needed in future.
As for the platform width, I believe that is to help the station safely deal with event day crowds when the new arena is finished. For the benches, the planning documents don't show any more than are already on the platform, although the outdoor concourse should also have a few.
The on-street sections are planned to be unwired, as the 398s already have batteries in order to enable discontinuous electrification. They also have provision for on-the-spot charging if this is needed in future.
As for the platform width, I believe that is to help the station safely deal with event day crowds when the new arena is finished. For the benches, the planning documents don't show any more than are already on the platform, although the outdoor concourse should also have a few.
Fair enough on the width (though 2 sets of benches iirc seems somewhat small for the space!). I guess the project makes a bit more sense as a arena shuttle.
Even on a sunny Sunday there was less than a bus full of people using it when I got on, so it seemed almost comically oversized.
I guess I just think the really positive part of the project is the further extensions down, but they seem to (in my cynical eyes) decided to add Butetown and "gold plate" quite a lot of this infrastructure. Gives me mini (nano?) HS2 vibes they are doing all this expensive work on this part when really what's needed is the on street running section to make it much more useful, and we will get to the end of this and it's went so over budget that they can't do it.
I guess I just think the really positive part of the project is the further extensions down, but they seem to (in my cynical eyes) decided to add Butetown and "gold plate" quite a lot of this infrastructure. Gives me mini (nano?) HS2 vibes they are doing all this expensive work on this part when really what's needed is the on street running section to make it much more useful, and we will get to the end of this and it's went so over budget that they can't do it.
In theory, the budget for the first on-street section (Crossrail Phase 1a) should be separate from the current bay line works (Bay Line Transformation). The £100 million in Crossrail funding was awarded to Cardiff Council, who themselves awarded Graham a design and build contract. I don't believe the council are directly involved in funding the Bay Line Transformation, so the two funding streams should be somewhat separate.
Given that most recent date given for the metro's final service pattern is 2027, and the current date for the Crossrail's completion 2028, the two might not end up being too far apart.
I'm not meaning to Cardiff central - I mean past Cardiff bay and around. That has the potential to be properly transformative if a lot of high density housing can be built there (with mostly car free developments enabled by the tram), and then round to underserved locations. Even the central link is of questionable value imo without the further extensions. It's about a 1km walk currently.
The other factor in the width is exactly because of that extension. They needed to have the track far enough over to be able to extend it further. At which point making the platform wide just makes sense.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
