Possible South Wales Metro Tram Extensions?

[positron]

I think mainline to Bridgend and/or doing ebbw vale would be good, that + pantographs on the 231s would enable cutting diesel usage.

I doubt we'll see any in-fills on the CVL though, perhaps as bridges become end of life a few PESs might get activated.

Though anything that's not owned by WG shouldn't be funded by WG, and the UK government seem utterly disinterested.

I also think realistically North Wales mainline electrification even if just partial to Llandudno initially should probably take priority over anything else in Wales.

 

[John R]

"Funded by Welsh Government"
and what devolved budgets would WG take money out of to pay for an electrification scheme that is Westminster's responsibility?
Would health, education or local government see its budget cut?

For as long as NR in Wales is DfT's responsibility, it's Westminster's responsibility to fund rail infrastructure upgrades and projects in Wales. Which is why nothing gets funded aside from essential renewals.

The Core Valley Lines are different. The CVL are not just devolved, full ownership was transferred to Welsh Government with the associated funding to maintain it.

I seem to recall the Welsh Govt has funded some of the Ebbw Vale line in the past.

But I agree that any investment in rail, whether on the CVL or not, needs to be considered in the context of other demands on the overall WG budget.

 

[Cardiff123]

I seem to recall the Welsh Govt has funded some of the Ebbw Vale line in the past.

But I agree that any investment in rail, whether on the CVL or not, needs to be considered in the context of other demands on the overall WG budget.

Yes, that was in 2008 for the original Ebbw Vale line re-opening, as even back then, the then UK Labour government were refusing to fund it, even though it was DfT/NR's responsibility to do so. So Welsh Government had to take funds out of other devolved budgets and from local councils to fund the re-opening.

 

[Smwrff]

I suggest that TfW should electrify lines to Penarth and Barry (recognising that these lines are owned and operated by NR - at least for now). VoG should then continue as diesel until NR stump up the cash to electrify SWML to Swansea.

 

[John R]

Yes, that was in 2008 for the original Ebbw Vale line re-opening, as even back then, the then UK Labour government were refusing to fund it, even though it was DfT/NR's responsibility to do so. So Welsh Government had to take funds out of other devolved budgets and from local councils to fund the re-opening.

And also the much more recent redoubling. And I recall the redoubling of the Wrexham to Chester line.

So lots of precedents of the WG deciding to fund infrastructure projects away from the CVL.

 

[Cardiff123]

I suggest that TfW should electrify lines to Penarth and Barry (recognising that these lines are owned and operated by NR - at least for now). VoG should then continue as diesel until NR stump up the cash to electrify SWML to Swansea.

Agreed that as a minimum, the lines from Cardiff to Penarth, Barry Island and Bridgend via Barry should be electrified, along with a passing loop on the Penarth branch. But this is the DfT's responsibility to fund, not Welsh Government's out of budgets from other devolved areas.

This just underlines that Welsh Government needs the same funding arrangement for Network Rail in Wales that exists for NR in Scotland. The setting up of GBR would've been a perfect time to address this, but yet again UK Govt are completely disinterested.

 

[Smwrff]

Agreed that as a minimum, the lines from Cardiff to Penarth, Barry Island and Bridgend via Barry should be electrified, along with a passing loop on the Penarth branch. But this is the DfT's responsibility to fund, not Welsh Government's out of budgets from other devolved areas.

This just underlines that Welsh Government needs the same funding arrangement for Network Rail in Wales that exists for NR in Scotland. The setting up of GBR would've been a perfect time to address this, but yet again UK Govt are completely disinterested.

The 4 tph to Barry and 4 tph to Penarth justifies electrification. The 1tph onward journey to Bridgend doesnt.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Dec 2025 ==

The 4 tph to Barry and 4 tph to Penarth justifies electrification. The 1tph onward journey to Bridgend doesnt.

But I agree what you say about funding.

 

[John R]

Before rushing ahead and electrifying the Penarth, Barry and Vale lines, how much can currently be done on the 756 batteries, given the unit will have been under the wires until just north of Queen St. Maybe all that is needed is a short stretch between Cogan and Barry?

 

[Smwrff]

Is your concern the visual impact? In which case electrifying from Cardiff West junction to Cogan might be more acceptable and also helps Penarth branch.

 

[John R]

Is your concern the visual impact? In which case electrifying from Cardiff West junction to Cogan might be more acceptable and also helps Penarth branch.

Not at all. Just that if the 756s can run the routes on battery I would have thought both the environmental and financial business cases would be pretty low in comparison to doing some routes where there would be a much more tangible benefit.

 

[positron]

I think that Penarth to Cardiff west for the trams to run to makes sense. If they do ever run them there that is.

 

[anthony263]

They need to wire to Penarth at least and from ewenny to Bridgend platform 1a

 

[John R]

They need to wire to Penarth at least and from ewenny to Bridgend platform 1a

Why wire Penarth if the 756s can run services there and back on battery? What is the benefit to anyone?

 

[CapitalStar378]

Why wire Penarth if the 756s can run services there and back on battery? What is the benefit to anyone?

I think the medium term plan is for the 398s to run to Penarth, not sure what their battery range is.

 

[John R]

I think the medium term plan is for the 398s to run to Penarth, not sure what their battery range is.

Where do you get that idea from? Is this anything more concrete than social media speculation?

 

[geoffk]

Is an extension north from Coryton towards Velindre Hospital and the M4 a firm proposal or is it speculative? There's an earlier thread here from 2023, now closed. Although this won't be a tram-train line initially perhaps it might be converted in the future.

I believe that any street-running of tram-trains has to be on battery as the ORR won't sanction operation with 25kV OHL. Is that correct?

 

[CapitalStar378]

Where do you get that idea from? Is this anything more concrete than social media speculation?

Yes, I've seen it on Mark Barry's Metro plan and have read it elsewhere. Don't have any other references if anyone can assist.

 

[John R]

Yes, I've seen it on Mark Barry's Metro plan and have read it elsewhere. Don't have any other references if anyone can assist.

Thank you. I’m guessing that, unless his plan reflects the Welsh Govt position, it could be one of his that he has produced over the years which include a lot of his “wouldn’t this be a good idea” thoughts.

The time to electrify the Penarth branch will be when there is a definite funded plan to introduce 398s to it, which will include any infrastructure changes necessary. Until then it’s really not necessary if batteries do the job for now.

 

[Smwrff]

There are no current plans to run the 398s to Penarth but there are various proposals floating around to integrate Penarth with Crossrail and/or Coryton/Circle line.

 

[anthony263]

Where do you get that idea from? Is this anything more concrete than social media speculation?

Theres been suggested to run the crossrail services to Penarth instead of rebuilding the line from fairwater up to creigiau

 

[John R]

Theres been suggested to run the crossrail services to Penarth instead of rebuilding the line from fairwater up to creigiau

“There’s been suggested” doesn’t exactly provide the definite source that I was looking for, as opposed to social media speculation.

 

[tigermonstera]

When Cardiff Council were putting out the Crossrail tender in 2024, a map was included that showed the council's future metro aspirations:

Cardiff Crossrail to Penarth by 2028 (via ramp, OLE to Penarth and incorporate Coryton line services)

Out-of-date timescales aside, having Penarth services use the Crossrail ramp would necessitate 398s.
(Link; Item 60, Appendix B)

 

[Daniel Boone]

When Cardiff Council were putting out the Crossrail tender in 2024, a map was included that showed the council's future metro aspirations:

Out-of-date timescales aside, having Penarth services use the Crossrail ramp would necessitate 398s.
(Link; Item 60, Appendix B)

Presumably, given the lower battery capacity of the 398s (compared to the 756s) it would require the erection of OLE at intervals along the route (or the route entirely).

 

[positron]

Presumably, given the lower battery capacity of the 398s (compared to the 756s) it would require the erection of OLE at intervals along the route (or the route entirely).

They've got a enough to get from north of Cathays to beyond Ninian park. Not sure how far that is, but I suspect it will mean they'll need wires from probably Grangetown down to Penarth.

I think in terms of tram applications, putting them on Coryton to Penarth (a short inner city service) is a better use of resources, then the 756s can be used elsewhere. Especially because the council at least have aspirations for a cogan platform on the penarth line as well as a new station at the Gasworks. With that kind of station interval (especially when gaps between Queen Street and heath are filled with at least crwys road), trams make a lot of sense.

Possibly the 756s can run a service utilising the freight line from Ystrad up to Nelson and Trelewis, after all the metro is supposed to be about better connecting the valleys.

Iirc the tram depot itself is said to have plenty of spare capacity, especially if you can provide some extra stabling elsewhere like Treherbert already has.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I believe that any street-running of tram-trains has to be on battery as the ORR won't sanction operation with 25kV OHL. Is that correct?

The Sheffield to Rotherham tram trains operate partly on the Sheffield Supertram street running network, which is electrified at 750V DC.

The South Wales Metro tram trains are from the same family of rolling stock (Stadler/Vossloh Citylink) I think, so it's not impossible for tram trains to use OHLE on the street (as long as it is 750V DC and not 25KV AC).

 

[anthony263]

Sort out Cardiff West junction along with a loop on the Coryton and Penarth branches would help solve a lot of issues on the valley lines network.

Staff ive spoken too have said the 756s do seem to have better range on batteries than what even stadler originally said they would. Its been suggested that they could probably get to Bridgend on the VOG and back to Cardiff on just the batteries

 

[EveningStarr]

They've got a enough to get from north of Cathays to beyond Ninian park. Not sure how far that is, but I suspect it will mean they'll need wires from probably Grangetown down to Penarth.

I think in terms of tram applications, putting them on Coryton to Penarth (a short inner city service) is a better use of resources, then the 756s can be used elsewhere. Especially because the council at least have aspirations for a cogan platform on the penarth line as well as a new station at the Gasworks. With that kind of station interval (especially when gaps between Queen Street and heath are filled with at least crwys road), trams make a lot of sense.

Possibly the 756s can run a service utilising the freight line from Ystrad up to Nelson and Trelewis, after all the metro is supposed to be about better connecting the valleys.

Iirc the tram depot itself is said to have plenty of spare capacity, especially if you can provide some extra stabling elsewhere like Treherbert already has.

Yes please, this is what I would do!

With the right infrastructure, 398s could work Hirwaun-Cardiff Bay and onwards to Splott and Cardiff East/Parkway, since these are the routes where the tram capabilities are needed. The current 'super loop' diagrams could swap out Aberdare for Treherbert, using the higher-capacity, toileted 756s for Merthyr and Treherbert.

Could also then run the extra 2tph from Coryton down to the Bay using 398s. I presume the reason for not putting trams on the COY>PEN>CPH diagrams is due to lack of OLE from Heath Jn down to Penarth and back, so they could only work this diagram if that line is electrified.

If keeping the 756/0s though, get a few more and extend the Caerphilly leg up to Bedlinog (2tph) on the old heavy-rail Cwmbargoed line, thus upping Ystrad Mynach to 6tph and not increasing the congestion in Cardiff.

There was mention in post #23 of this thread about the potential use of tram-trains on Caerphilly to Newport via Machen, a line I would very much line to reopen, so if 398s are what it takes, that's fine by me, although obviously a 756 is much more ideal.

Another route that could reopen more easily with tram-trains is Caerphilly to Senghennydd, which the Newport diagrams could run through to. This would mean Senghennydd passengers would have to change at Caerphilly for Cardiff, in order to keep the current 6tph from CPH to Cardiff, so as not to clog things up too much. So that would be a Senghennydd-Caerphilly-Machen-Newport route - that would be lovely please!

 

[Smwrff]

Sort out Cardiff West junction along with a loop on the Coryton and Penarth branches would help solve a lot of issues on the valley lines network.

Staff ive spoken too have said the 756s do seem to have better range on batteries than what even stadler originally said they would. Its been suggested that they could probably get to Bridgend on the VOG and back to Cardiff on just the batteries

I think the 756s have a stated battery range of 80km - doable but it would be tight to run to Bridgend and back on VoG - especially in winter (lower battery performance) and as the batteries age.

 

[anthony263]

I think the 756s have a stated battery range of 80km - doable but it would be tight to run to Bridgend and back on VoG - especially in winter (lower battery performance) and as the batteries age.

Another reason why I suggested wiring the VOG to Penarth but also Llantwit Major or ewenny to Bridgend

 

[Tomos y Tanc]

Another reason why I suggested wiring the VOG to Penarth but also Llantwit Major or ewenny to Bridgend

Much as it might make operational sense, I think that electrifying any part of the VoG while ignoring the SWML west of Cardiff would be politically impossible for NR/GBR.