I agree with what Greenback says. Ideal, small self contained network with lots of stops. Since there are no spare electrics available they would probably have to be new, but the diesels could be easily cascaded elsewhere. It's obvious really.
-
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!
Electrify the cardiff valley lines
- Thread starter anthony263
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Assuming that Thameslink's rolling stock order goes ahead as planned (and that's by no means certain) then the 319s are destined for commuter routes in the Oxford and Reading area and the North West (assuming that piece of electrification goes ahead).
However I should point out that I agree with others that the Valley Lines should be electrified as others have said its obvious!
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
Would that not also apply to the local lines in and around Norwich as well?
All that would be nice to do at the same time is ensure a infill project between Ely to Norwich/Ipswich, Peterborough to Ely and Cambridge to Ipswich and practically all of East Anglia would be wired up,
robert2000
Member
the wrexham to chester bus is every 12 minutes, not 15. It is more reliable than the train.
Would that not also apply to the local lines in and around Norwich as well?
All that would be nice to do at the same time is ensure a infill project between Ely to Norwich/Ipswich, Peterborough to Ely and Cambridge to Ipswich and practically all of East Anglia would be wired up,
Good idea, but I'm not sure there is quite enough traffic. The Felixstowe Freightliners could switch over to electric operation easily enough (many of them are electric-hauled anyway) but the problem is XC/EMT. You would still have two diesel-worked lines protruding into the area, which would negate part of the gains, meaning that Ely-Norwich would be electrified for the benefit of one hourly passenger service. However, if you wait until the MML is done, it would be practical to do the entire Norwich-Liverpool route, and Birmingham-Stansted. However, I think that the Valley Lines are a higher priority, just behind the Thames Valley and the Glasgow fill-ins and ahead of the West Riding, Manchester fill-ins and Merseyrail extensions. Do the urban and suburban routes first, fill the gaps in later.
Scotrail84
On Moderation
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 2,977
This wont happen anytime soon. Britains skint. Also heard that the EGIP has been put back aswell due to lack of funds. Not sure if its true though
tbtc
Veteran Member
There are some hourly sections on the Valley lines though,aren't there?
No electrification is "perfect" in that it will always leave some diesel workings under the wires.
My criteria would be to work out what the most efficient one would be (DMU miles saved per mile of new wires). Edinburgh Park to Glasgow Queen Street will be pretty efficient, but then there's the dilemma of Dunblane services. And if you wire to Dunblane then what about Alloa? And what about Cumbernauld? Or...
The Valley lines are pretty self contained, but then do you go to Maesteg and Newport? But if you do then that leaves the Swansea HSTs running under the wires for a fair way...
Infills like Manchester/ Liverpool/ Blackpool make sense. Self contained routes like Manchester - Rose Hill/ Chinley (ignore the bi-hourly pacer to Sheffield) make sense. But the GWML doesn't make good business sense to me
krus_aragon
Established Member
No, Maesteg/Ebbw wouldn't be worth doing before the GWML/SWML as a whole was switched on. The lines that radiate from Queen Street would: the old Valley Lines franchise, or everything in ATW's timetable No. 5.
tom1649
Member
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 989
It was reported in the last 'Rail' magazine that EGIP is definitely going ahead. Thank goodness for that.
The 1960s approach was to do as much as possible in one block, which I think makes more sense. The idea was to switch entire systems over in one go, directly from steam in several cases, so you would not need separate pools of diesel and electric stock running in the same area. Apart from a few short branches, the Great Eastern scheme took a short stub (Liverpool Street-Shenfield) and turned it into a system going out to Clacton, Southend and Bishop's Stortford. These were not necessarily the suburban boundaries (Clacton had loco-hauled expresses before this) but they worked out the passenger flows and considered that they could produce the maximum gain by doing this. Missing out the Sudbury branch was probably a mistake, but it probably wasn't seen as cost-effective. With 1980s thinking, London-Norwich would have been done, and anything else would have been seen as a bonus, which is actually less cost-effective, because electrification pays off for intensive-use suburban services rather than occasional expresses. I don't have any figures, but that seems most likely to be the case.
In Scotland, the answer is to look at the diagrams. Start with the intensive-use suburban services, so Dunblane is on the list. Alloa diagrams probably link in with Dunblane diagrams, so they are on the list. The Cumbernauld line gives both an alternative route and an opportunity to link in with the North Clyde and West Coast systems, so that is on the list as well. Finally, the link through Falkirk Grahamston would make a useful diversionary route, if nothing else. Going on to Perth and Dundee depends on whether they can wire up the Fife Circle (meaning the Forth and Tay bridges). If that is possible, Aberdeen and Dyce would be on the list as well. I don't think that the Highland will ever have enough traffic for it to be cost-effective, so wiring there would only be about eliminating diesel traction for good.
I know nothing about Valley Lines diagrams or traffic flows, but electrification is about changing the stock on diagrams rather than replacing DMUs. If anyone knows the diagrams better, please come up with something similar for Wales.
I think this makes sense as well. For the Valleys you would need first to see the GWML main line electrified as far as Swansea. With a team and infrastructure in place the work would then continue onto the valleys lines and GWML diversionary routes. This would deliver the economies of scales and reduce overall unit costs for the entire scheme. NR reached the same conclusion I believe - certainly for the GWML main line in that it would not be cost effective to do that route in stages as a large portion of the overall cost is in the set up and commissioning of the "electrification team, suppliers, contractors, etc" – you really don’t want to do this more than once!. Once such a capability is established, it really makes sense to keep it and continue the electrification programme - perhaps to deliver a 10 year plan to wire up all the main intercity, urban and infill routes throughout the UK?? I would certainly prefer to see ££ directed at this objective before we embark on HS2....
Someone asked about passenger numbers and the justification for valleys electrification. Well according to ORR Cardiff Central and Cardiff Queen St handled over 11M and 2.5M passengers respectively in 2008/2009. A large portion of this is due to the “valleys” network. I think these figures make Cardiff Central alone the 10th largest UK station outside London and significantly larger than Bristol Temple Meads (8.7M), Sheffield (8.2M), Newcastle (8.1M), Nottingham (6.7M), Norwich(4.2M), etc; although not up to the ~20M per year of a Manchester, Birmingham, Edinburgh, etc it is still substantial nonetheless. With a major upgrade of the valleys lines network it is likely that the numbers will increase even more.
Last edited:
Would that not also apply to the local lines in and around Norwich as well?
All that would be nice to do at the same time is ensure a infill project between Ely to Norwich/Ipswich, Peterborough to Ely and Cambridge to Ipswich and practically all of East Anglia would be wired up,
Yes, I certainly think it's better to electrify a network than odd lines here and there. I don't know whether the branch lines would justify the cost at the moment as it's a mainly rural area though so I think in that respect Cardiff Valley has the edge.
12CSVT
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 2,611
The valley lines form some important commuter routes. Why shouldn't they be electrified ? And passenger numbers on some lines justify 3 or 4 coach trains instead of the usual 2 car 142 or 150 unit
MCR247
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 10,291
The valley lines should be done with the rest of wales and the GWML. On their own it just means services become less flexible
merlodlliw
Established Member
krus_aragon
Established Member
Not any more. It's closer to a 60/40 split between 14x and 150s these days.
This is a popular misunderstanding. Whist the WAG have responsibility for the ATW Franchise, they do not have powers or funding related to the core rail infrastructure. The DfT in London manage England and Wales as a single entity and prepare a HLOS for NR on that basis as Transport Scotland do for Scotland. This is one of the issues for rail in Wales as this method appears to systemically underfund Wales. NR have admitted that, at best, less than £1Bn is allocated to Welsh infrastructure as part of CP4. This out of a total of £34Bn - so less than 3% (Vs 5% of the population). This probably represents a "high water mark” due to the Cardiff and Newport signalling and Cardiff Central/Queen St capacity upgrades. Whilst the Ebbw Vale Line and Vale of Glamorgan Lines were re-opened, these scheme were funded in the main by WAG. However, as there in no allocation for rail infrastructure in the block grant WAG receives from Westminster, this money had to be taken away from funds hypothecated for areas such as health and education – so in effect we in Wales are paying twice. Since 2005 Scotland has had full powers and funding (an extra £380M pa was transferred to its block grant from Westminster) and is now planning to spend £600M per year until 2014.
Furthermore, over the last twenty five years in England and Scotland, there have been major upgrades of both the East Coast Main Line (including electrification) and West Coast Main Line, new tube lines, numerous urban tram systems, HS1, Crossrail, major station refurbishments, etc. On the other hand, Wales has “0” miles of electrified rail, no trams, the oldest and most inappropriate rolling stock on the Valley Lines, undercapitalised stations, etc. Furthermore, the now in doubt GWML electrification programme would only return Cardiff-London and Bristol-London journey times to those we enjoyed in the 1970s when the HST was introduced. Wales has suffered a long term underinvested in its rail infrastructure; a shortfall that is certainly into the £Bns by now. In fact, since the opening of the Severn Tunnel in the century before last the only major rail upgrade in Wales was the introduction of the 125 High Speed Train in the 1970s – albeit none of the track in Wales, even today, enables it to run at 125mph.
merlodlliw
Established Member
While I accept a lot of your argument, The Ebbw line was Euro objective one funding administered by WAG & Wefo, however the Saltney/Wrexham double track is Wag money, correct me if I am wrong in thinking that.
Yes, I think there is some Euro money in the pot. As far as I am aware this has to be matched funded though - and this portion still comes out of the WAG block grant. I think its shame, even with the poor DfT/NR settlment, that more of the Eurpean money WAG secured, was not directed at transport infrastructure projects.
merlodlliw
Established Member
But the match funding element(funny money in the trade) does not always have to be found in cash, I agree a lot of euro funding as been squandered on projects of little or no value to Wales, just to keep the politicians happy, a lot of missed opportunities that matter have been lost in my opinion.
tbtc
Veteran Member
By those figures Wales sounds hard done by, but the same is true of much of England (outside the Greater London area).
We have Pacers up here, we the Midland Mainline with its 1970s HSTs and slow running, we can play the "underinvested" game too, sadly.
In recent years Wales has had the Ebbw Vale reopening and the Cardiff Airport reopening (when was the last one in the north of England? The Robin Hood line through Mansfield is really the East Midlands), plus the money being thrown at the Cambrian lines at the moment...
Wales is hard done by in terms of funding, but we have managed to do a lot with the money we do get. Many of the original passenger reopenings were driven by local authorities but the WAG now takes the lead instead.
As usual, when there is less money to be used, it is essential to spend it in the wisest possible way. The Valleys electrification would benefit a large number of people, but whether this is the most appropriate use of the funds in Wales I couldn't say - that's why we elect people to decide for us!
One thing I do know, is that some of the money in Wales has not been spent appropriately, just like everywhere else!
As usual, when there is less money to be used, it is essential to spend it in the wisest possible way. The Valleys electrification would benefit a large number of people, but whether this is the most appropriate use of the funds in Wales I couldn't say - that's why we elect people to decide for us!
One thing I do know, is that some of the money in Wales has not been spent appropriately, just like everywhere else!
Greenback & tbtc
I agree with you both. I think the key issue is that much of the funding available for rail investment in the UK over the last 20 years has been directed at London and the SE. Clearly Scotland with full devolution of rail powers and funding is doing better now, as would Wales if it also secured full devolution of rail powers and funding. I think there is an issue in England, as schemes like the Northern Hub, upgrades around Bristol, etc are desperately needed. However the current governance and control of rail in the UK does not lend itself to a radical change. The lack of rail investment outside the SE England has also been picked up by many groups including the Westminster Transport Select Committee, The Northern Way, The Centre for Cities, etc. As Eddington reported in 2006 the UK needs transport investment in all its major urban centres to address current and expected access and capacity issues. We really have to question the need to embark on a >£20Bn HS2 programme when there is so much than can be done across the major nodes on the UK rail network for far less than that.
I agree with you both. I think the key issue is that much of the funding available for rail investment in the UK over the last 20 years has been directed at London and the SE. Clearly Scotland with full devolution of rail powers and funding is doing better now, as would Wales if it also secured full devolution of rail powers and funding. I think there is an issue in England, as schemes like the Northern Hub, upgrades around Bristol, etc are desperately needed. However the current governance and control of rail in the UK does not lend itself to a radical change. The lack of rail investment outside the SE England has also been picked up by many groups including the Westminster Transport Select Committee, The Northern Way, The Centre for Cities, etc. As Eddington reported in 2006 the UK needs transport investment in all its major urban centres to address current and expected access and capacity issues. We really have to question the need to embark on a >£20Bn HS2 programme when there is so much than can be done across the major nodes on the UK rail network for far less than that.
You speak a lot of sense Solaris. I don't think HS2 is an appropriate use of resources at present, but that is really a seperate topic!
We also need to look at where money has been wasted in England, Wales and Scotland. WAGair is a good example in Wales, and one can point to many road improvement schemes as well.
We also need to look at where money has been wasted in England, Wales and Scotland. WAGair is a good example in Wales, and one can point to many road improvement schemes as well.
Last reopening in the North? Putting aside WYPTE stations (or tram systems in Manc and Sheff) and thinking about actual lines, nothing very major springs to mind - just a few infills, like Brighouse, Wakefield to Pontefract, and before that Clitheroe, Copy Pit.
Drsatan
Established Member
Don't forget the reconstruction of Leeds station, the electrification of Leeds-Doncaster, Leeds to Bradford and Skipton, the introduction of class 333s, service improvements on the Settle and Carlisle line etc.
While in the SW, the only post-privatisation trains in use are the 220s/221s, no lines have been reopened (the DfT decided long ago not to fund the reopening of the Portishead branch), very few infrastructure enhancement works have taken place, and services through Bristol Temple Meads are still heavily overcrowded during the rush hour.
So look who's got the raw deal here....
Yeah the North West, the North East, East Yorkshire. All using mostly pre-privatisation stock and all suffering from peak time overcrowding. Its folly to suggest that its awful in one area and all sunshine and happiness in another. Its bad just about everywhere.
Correct Ainsworth74. I don;t think the DfT civil servants like or understand the regions of the UK. They only seem to be concerned with London and the South East, and have no interest in places like Manchester or Leeds, where they probably think the inhabitants all wear cloth caps and breed whippets.
It is pointless bickering over which region is worse off. The WAG wants to improve the Valleys routes from Cardiff by electrifying them. I support that, as it's easy to see the beenfits in terms of lower running costs, better journey times, and higher capacity. Perhaps England needs regional assemblies after all?!
It is pointless bickering over which region is worse off. The WAG wants to improve the Valleys routes from Cardiff by electrifying them. I support that, as it's easy to see the beenfits in terms of lower running costs, better journey times, and higher capacity. Perhaps England needs regional assemblies after all?!
tbtc
Veteran Member
None of these were reopenings though
I'm sorry if my post at lunchtime sounded "anti Welsh" btw; am just trying to show that most places outside Scotland/ Greater London are suffering.
merlodlliw
Established Member
An awful lot of dosh as been spent on Newport station for a Golf Match, I pass through on the ex CDF 1720, hoping & praying its a 175 and not a miss mash of 158s & 150s.
Anyhow the bad point of WAG is the Minister OF Wales Transport Ieuan Wyn Jones A.M for Anglesey is locked in a fantasy of Wagair & Wagexpress which
only assists his constituency and no one will bring him to task.
In my opinion having seen Cheshire next door hived into two Counties at god knows what expense, I would suggest dump the English Assembly idea.
BTW TBTC, no offence is ever taken by us on this site, at least I can still laugh at myself unlike a few in Cardiff |Bay
Anyhow the bad point of WAG is the Minister OF Wales Transport Ieuan Wyn Jones A.M for Anglesey is locked in a fantasy of Wagair & Wagexpress which
only assists his constituency and no one will bring him to task.
In my opinion having seen Cheshire next door hived into two Counties at god knows what expense, I would suggest dump the English Assembly idea.
BTW TBTC, no offence is ever taken by us on this site, at least I can still laugh at myself unlike a few in Cardiff |Bay
Last edited:
- Status