South Wales 'Metro' updates

[Del1977]

But doesn't all of that require works on existing platforms and stations? In some cases work that would be pretty substantial! Maybe I am just cynical, but are we really going to get substantial investment in platforms and stations that in recent years have basically been either abandoned or cheaped out on? (e.g. - The local station to me when I grew up used to have a pretty good solid brick building shelter, a few years ago that was replaced with a rubbish plastic shelter that has gaps between the walls and roof so you still get wet and cold even under it - while not specifically about access, I find it hard to believe that significant money will be invested in stations where the more recent trend has been to spend as little as possible on them). Especially if, as at least one person in favour of light rail in this thread has claimed, the main aim is to cut costs!

Well I'd like to think that WAG's SW Metro plan - irrespective of the mode of locomotion chosen - includes some money for station upgrades. I'm not talking necessarily about lifts at every station - which I think really would be vandalised! - but some platform works, branding, ticket machines, improved shelters, etc.

 

[gareth950]

Well I'd like to think that WAG's SW Metro plan - irrespective of the mode of locomotion chosen - includes some money for station upgrades. I'm not talking necessarily about lifts at every station - which I think really would be vandalised! - but some platform works, branding, ticket machines, improved shelters, etc.

'Metro' branding and new shelters have already appeared at Radyr and Llandaf stations. The backwards bunny rabbits will look fantastic on the trams, tram-trains, trains, hybrid spaceships, or whatever turns up.

 

[ABB125]

Personally I think that the only kind of LR conversion acceptable would be something similar to the Tyne & Wear Metro, with electrification carried out at the cheapest voltage/type of current (perhaps 1500V AC?). This would have the benefits of:
-Electrification
-Continued through operation
-Lighter, more efficient trains, but not trams
Of course, the whole network would have to electrified, not just the "core valley lines"

 

[Gareth Marston]

And maybe those "outsiders" are trying to impose a transport system that has been specifically designed for THEIR area onto a totally different geographical, social and economic area. You only have to look at some of the comments made here that show people haven't even looked at a map of the area to see why there have been the responses there have.
(EG- there are no residential areas south of Cardiff City Centre!!)

But I do wonder whether there might have been some different responses if the colour of the controlling party in the Senedd was different!

At least Graham when the Welsh Government claim to be world leaders on this it will be legitimate, as no one else on the planet is proposing destroying a pre existing across city urban mass transit link!

 

[Gareth Marston]

For evidence of how Carwyn Jones' Welsh Govt deals with anyone from within it's ranks who questions the supreme leaders' authority or calls for scrutiny of government policy, look no further than how Jenny Rathbone was 'ruthlessly dealt with' in October 2015 when she spoke out against the M4 relief road:

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/sacked-labour-committee-chair-jenny-10253700

Sacked Labour committee chair Jenny Rathbone attacks 'unhealthy culture' at the top of Welsh Government

A Labour AM sacked by Carwyn Jones as a committee chair has launched an attack on the “unhealthy culture” at the top of the Welsh Government, saying anyone who criticises its decisions from within the party group is “ruthlessly dealt with”.

Cardiff Central AM Jenny Rathbone spoke out against the spending of millions of pounds on a controversial M4 relief road route around Newport she believes will never go ahead.

In response, the First Minister sacked her as chair of the committee monitoring the spending of EU aid money in Wales.

'Disappointed no debate has taken place'

Ms Rathbone issued a statement saying: “Following my intervention on the issue of the M4 relief road in the media last week, the First Minister has dismissed me from the role of chair of the All Wales European Programme Monitoring Committee, for speaking out publicly.

“In the Labour group meeting on Tuesday, I reiterated my call for a debate within the group on this massive spending commitment. I am disappointed that no such debate has yet taken place and there is no commitment by the First Minister to allow this to take place at some future date. I remain confident that my views are shared by the majority of Labour AMs, even if they are not encouraged to express them.

“The events of the last 24 hours have confirmed in my mind there is an unhealthy culture at the top of the Welsh Government which does not allow for rigorous debate and reflection on the best use of public funds. Independent thought is not tolerated by AMs and if someone does step out of line, they are ruthlessly dealt with. This is not a good way to make difficult decisions.”

A spokesman for the Welsh Conservatives said: “We all saw the celebrations in North Korea over the weekend. Little did we know we have our very own Kim Jong Un, here in Wales. The First Minister has serious questions to answer over Jenny Rathbone’s claims about the culture at the heart of Welsh Government. Clearly the First Minister is being very poorly advised.”

Plaid Cymru AM Simon Thomas said: “Jenny Rathbone has today shone a light on the way the Welsh Government operates. We already knew this was a government that tried to avoid scrutiny where possible but the Labour AM’s account of top-down decision-making suggests that this is a government that hides from scrutiny and debate.

A senior Welsh Labour source said: “Sadly this has been a long time in coming. Jenny has exhibited limited understanding of how to raise issues with Labour colleagues, and by claiming to speak for others in criticising the Welsh Labour Government, she’s badly let down her colleagues in the Labour Group of AMs.

“It is simply wrong to suggest there’s been no discussion of the M4 in Labour Group, but even so, Jenny has never once tried to raise it as a topic for discussion with the Chair, or the Minister. Hopefully, she will reflect on this and find a better way of debating important issues in the future.” - (Know your place Jenny!)

Also yesterday in the Assembly chamber there was an explosive exchange between Carwyn Jones and Plaid's Adam Price, and Price can be heard shouting "What is this, Putin's Russia? Goodness gracious me".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-42887133

I have not posted this to open discussion on the M4, this is not the place. I am highlighting the deeply ingrained culture within this Welsh Govt under Carwyn Jones to avoid any scrutiny of policy, even from within, and how anyone daring to question Jones' authority is dealt with.
It explains a lot about this franchise award process.

The old Rail Passenger council set up with public members who were prepared to scrutinise and criticise was destroyed to quell dissent. Most of us were far too Independent for New Labours liking. I seem to recall the Stategic Rail Authorities then Director of Communication screaming that he was going to decimate and silence any criticism of SRA decisions!

 

[NotATrainspott]

Well as a commuter from Merthyr Tydfil to Cadoxton daily, and to Bridgend from Cadoxton if I go to Porthcawl to see my old man (vai a bus from Bridgend) - this Light Rail bull would cripple me! Change at Queen Street, for anothet to Central, then another to Cadoxton? Also, I buy a weekly Merthyr to Bridgend as it is the best value for money for me for my trips to Bridgend etc. This would CRIPPLE my cheaper commute and make the daily one hell! Incredible that these Light Rail converts do not understand how it IMPACTS on users! This really would be tantamount to a Beeching con too! Efficient HR trains (which the current are far from it), preferably electrified is what suits ALL locals who want to keep through trains. What about the summertime commutes to Barry Island? They generate great income and people north of Cardiff will think twice - would be easier to go to Porthcawl!

You're straw-manning. You think I'm advocating a system which would be so riddled with inefficiencies that the Welsh Government could never fund it, the DfT would never allow it, the transport operator part of the SWM consortium wouldn't want to touch with a bargepole and would actually cost more money to build than a sensible idea.

Yes of course Metrolink is popular, but that might be something to do with it being the only show in town. What would have stopped the same things being achieved if, instead of ripping up HR, the Picc-Vic project had gone ahead, and the existing electric lines had been modernised as necessary ? At least it would not have required the same lines being rebuilt twice within 40 years, which you now seem to consider necessary.

The only thing that made any difference between an HR solution being considered suitable at one point in history, and a LR solution being implemented, was central government cost-cutting. If things were properly funded in this country, we would not have to constantly adopt sub-optimal solutions, then pretend that they're the best thing since sliced bread to make ourselves feel better about them.

Am I talking about 'ripping the lines up'? No. I'm talking about platform extensions and a new set of points. When extra capacity is needed, you build a new underground line between Queens Road and Trafford depots. None of the original conversion works are wasted. The street running section in the city centre stays and becomes dedicated to the lines which require street running - Trafford, Eccles, Airport etc. Another clear example of straw-manning.

That's only if you sack all the existing Heavy Rail drivers and employ new staff at much lower rates. I repeat no Labour politician (and probably most Tory ones) will want to touch that with a barge pole. The reality is because you fail to take into account how the real world works the magic efficiencies you proclaim simply will not exist. You've been called out on staff costs big time. An LRT system with the existing HR drivers TUPE'd over plus additional drivers on different t&c to meet the frequency requirements will cost more £ - there will be no magic efficiency saving.

And these drivers now move more people than before, for less money. The LR services will not have guards. The same wage bill for drivers at existing rates will stretch to more passenger capacity while other costs go low. Over the coming years and decades, natural attrition will get rid of higher-paid drivers. The finances for a scheme do not end when it gets built. If you're planning a network, you're thinking about costs for several generations ahead. After 30-40 years, there can be no HR drivers left and the wage will be what it should be.

So the fact that in reality there will be increased staff costs is fairly trivial?
So the fact that the LRT sytem proposed will be split in central Cardiff destroying current cross city direct journeys and constraining operating frequency is fairly trivial?

Are these problems trivial? No. Is the solution to these problems trivial? Yes.

From http://gov.wales/newsroom/transport/2017/59297378/?lang=en

This a very much a Governmental fudge. Carwyn and Ken do not want to be seen to be making people lose their jobs - so no compulsory redundancies. No doubt a voluntary scheme maybe implemented.

That is a fudge, and exactly what I said would happen. Heavy rail Metro services will retain guards, because they would be at most a rebranding of existing Wales and Borders services. The alternative to traditional guard operation is DOO, but DOO really requires new trains, and new heavy rail trains aren't coming. All new LR-based Metro trains will run without any safety-critical second person on board. If a second person is present, it will be a revenue collection/protection role. Not only would wages be lower, but the revenue they could collect or protect will be far higher than a traditional guard.

Its big on how we've listened to people who want second members of staff onboard, we respect the disabled dig how cool we are etc yet the promise is for only Heavy rail Metro services. So "Core Valley Lines" can be an exception presumably the 10% that didn't want a second member of staff live their. If your disabled in the Valleys your not quite as important as someone disabled from Colwyn Bay. I wonder if Age Cymru and Disability Wales share this view?
Yet the rest of the franchise will have more staff not less presumably jobs will be found for Valleys Conductors who don't take voluntary redundancy. We can then shout look at the saved staff costs on Core Valley Lines whilst increasing them on the rest of the franchise!

You're coming up with some pretty absurd ideas now. Light rail vehicles essentially universally provide step-free access. Using tram-trains actually makes accessibility even easier, because you don't need to grade-separate passengers and trains. Where today you might only have an old, inaccessible footbridge to access the platform, tram technology means you can trivially install a fully accessible level crossing. All HR accessibility options remain open, but on top of that you have everything LR can provide. It's a massive win for all people with accessibility needs for far less money than HR. It really could be possible to deliver 100% step-free access across the network for the same cost as making a small handful of HR stations. And, it massively reduces the costs of redoubling and reopenings. New and rebuilt/redoubled stations cannot be inaccessible, making them far, far more expensive but without increasing revenue.

 

[Gareth Marston]

You're coming up with some pretty absurd ideas now. Light rail vehicles essentially universally provide step-free access. Using tram-trains actually makes accessibility even easier, because you don't need to grade-separate passengers and trains. Where today you might only have an old, inaccessible footbridge to access the platform, tram technology means you can trivially install a fully accessible level crossing. All HR accessibility options remain open, but on top of that you have everything LR can provide. It's a massive win for all people with accessibility needs for far less money than HR. It really could be possible to deliver 100% step-free access across the network for the same cost as making a small handful of HR stations. And, it massively reduces the costs of redoubling and reopenings. New and rebuilt/redoubled stations cannot be inaccessible, making them far, far more expensive but without increasing revenue.

So the 90% of respondents to the Welsh Governments official consultation on the new franchise who were clear they wanted a second staff member were all wrong? No one has ever said what do you think of DOO and step free access? There's been no asking of this question or even raising it which is part of the problem which is what is really absurd.

 

[NotATrainspott]

So the 90% of respondents to the Welsh Governments official consultation on the new franchise who were clear they wanted a second staff member were all wrong? No one has ever said what do you think of DOO and step free access? There's been no asking of this question or even raising it which is part of the problem which is what is really absurd.

There's a fine art to handling consultations. Are 90% of people wrong? No. Should the government always do exactly what the majority of a tiny minority who take part in these things want? No.

Consultations are useful for fine detail rather than broad-brush public opinion. The latter is easy to get, via polling and the 'general feel' of public opinion. If there is broad opposition to what the Welsh Government have planned, then the 'footsoldiers' of the Labour party are going to start hearing about it on doorsteps, in newspaper columns and on social media. Interest groups find it easy to submit large volumes of consultation responses and skew simple numerical results in their favour. Simple tick-box question and pre-filled form responses are easy, but don't really mean much. The consultation responses that really matter are ones which individual people and other entities have taken time and effort to make, and where there would be real effects if their issues are not addressed.

HS2 provides some pretty good examples. All those Stop HS2 form letters that were submitted by the thousands didn't get anything to change. The individual households, businesses, interest groups etc which pointed out pressing but fixable issues tended to get what they wanted. Plans now include road enhancements to minimise construction impact on traffic and residential areas, and the line has been tweaked up and down, left and right in places to minimise local impact.

 

[gareth950]

Maybe the 'Outsiders' have experience of other urban transport systems elsewhere and see some of the potential benefits. It's also possible they could be more objective - whether for or against the proposals.

On a more fundamental level, surely making local politicians accountable for local transport is a good thing? Isn't that what many cities / city regions etc. actually want?

If the WA makes the wrong decisions, then won't they be accountable for the mistakes? For example, if Khan massively botched up London Underground, there'd be lots of votes lost, as public transport is one of his key responsibilities.

If there are no consequences politically for failures by politicians in Wales then the system isn't working.

As I've pointed out already many times, there will be no political consequences. The system is not working. See my previous posts.

And maybe those "outsiders" are trying to impose a transport system that has been specifically designed for THEIR area onto a totally different geographical, social and economic area. You only have to look at some of the comments made here that show people haven't even looked at a map of the area to see why there have been the responses there have.
(EG- there are no residential areas south of Cardiff City Centre!!)

But I do wonder whether there might have been some different responses if the colour of the controlling party in the Senedd was different!

I could not agree more.

You're straw-manning. You think I'm advocating a system which would be so riddled with inefficiencies that the Welsh Government could never fund it, the DfT would never allow it, the transport operator part of the SWM consortium wouldn't want to touch with a bargepole and would actually cost more money to build than a sensible idea.

No, what the Markdvdman was saying were completely valid concerns and you're outright dismissal of those concerns shows you're complete blind faith in an idea that is in no way suitable for the area it is being proposed in, and total ignorance of the potential problems and concerns of people whose daily lives are going to be negatively effected.

And these drivers now move more people than before, for less money. The LR services will not have guards. The same wage bill for drivers at existing rates will stretch to more passenger capacity while other costs go low. Over the coming years and decades, natural attrition will get rid of higher-paid drivers. The finances for a scheme do not end when it gets built. If you're planning a network, you're thinking about costs for several generations ahead. After 30-40 years, there can be no HR drivers left and the wage will be what it should be.

That is a fudge, and exactly what I said would happen. Heavy rail Metro services will retain guards, because they would be at most a rebranding of existing Wales and Borders services. The alternative to traditional guard operation is DOO, but DOO really requires new trains, and new heavy rail trains aren't coming. All new LR-based Metro trains will run without any safety-critical second person on board. If a second person is present, it will be a revenue collection/protection role. Not only would wages be lower, but the revenue they could collect or protect will be far higher than a traditional guard.

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

You're coming up with some pretty absurd ideas now. Light rail vehicles essentially universally provide step-free access. Using tram-trains actually makes accessibility even easier, because you don't need to grade-separate passengers and trains. Where today you might only have an old, inaccessible footbridge to access the platform, tram technology means you can trivially install a fully accessible level crossing. All HR accessibility options remain open, but on top of that you have everything LR can provide. It's a massive win for all people with accessibility needs for far less money than HR. It really could be possible to deliver 100% step-free access across the network for the same cost as making a small handful of HR stations. And, it massively reduces the costs of redoubling and reopenings. New and rebuilt/redoubled stations cannot be inaccessible, making them far, far more expensive but without increasing revenue.

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?

 

[gareth950]

So the 90% of respondents to the Welsh Governments official consultation on the new franchise who were clear they wanted a second staff member were all wrong? No one has ever said what do you think of DOO and step free access? There's been no asking of this question or even raising it which is part of the problem which is what is really absurd.

No one has ever been asked if they want the Valleys converted to light rail. The only hint of that in the consultation was 'Do you think that freight trains should be allowed to continue to run on the Valleys, or should the railway be given over completely to passenger services to allow more services to run in future?' Not a leading question then.

There's a fine art to handling consultations. Are 90% of people wrong? No. Should the government always do exactly what the majority of a tiny minority who take part in these things want? No.

Consultations are useful for fine detail rather than broad-brush public opinion. The latter is easy to get, via polling and the 'general feel' of public opinion. If there is broad opposition to what the Welsh Government have planned, then the 'footsoldiers' of the Labour party are going to start hearing about it on doorsteps, in newspaper columns and on social media. Interest groups find it easy to submit large volumes of consultation responses and skew simple numerical results in their favour. Simple tick-box question and pre-filled form responses are easy, but don't really mean much. The consultation responses that really matter are ones which individual people and other entities have taken time and effort to make, and where there would be real effects if their issues are not addressed.

HS2 provides some pretty good examples. All those Stop HS2 form letters that were submitted by the thousands didn't get anything to change. The individual households, businesses, interest groups etc which pointed out pressing but fixable issues tended to get what they wanted. Plans now include road enhancements to minimise construction impact on traffic and residential areas, and the line has been tweaked up and down, left and right in places to minimise local impact.

The Welsh Govt's consultation was a tick box exercise. How can the 'footsoldiers' hear about anything on the doorstep or in the papers when WG are refusing to make anything public until after the 15 year contract is signed and unbreakable?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So the 90% of respondents to the Welsh Governments official consultation on the new franchise who were clear they wanted a second staff member were all wrong? No one has ever said what do you think of DOO and step free access? There's been no asking of this question or even raising it which is part of the problem which is what is really absurd.

Passengers do not care about DOO in and of itself.

They care whether there is another person there (not what their role is, but that they are there, in the passenger compartment, all the time). I suspect the vast majority would prefer it to be a conductor they can see selling fares all the time (and allowing them to pay on board) than a non-revenue guard opening and closing the doors and going ding ding. People do not care what might happen in the event of an incredibly rare accident any more than they want a second member of staff on the bus in case there is a (far more likely) accident there.

I would therefore contend that "DOO" with conductors would be most popular. Revenue-only conductors are way cheaper than guards. And if on a rare occasion the tram had to run without a conductor, they'd all be glad of the free ride.

However, I suspect it is likely that it will be proper DOO, with fares paid by TVM like they are on most UK tram systems.

 

[Del1977]

And maybe those "outsiders" are trying to impose a transport system that has been specifically designed for THEIR area onto a totally different geographical, social and economic area.

The franchise process is being managed by the Welsh Assembly. The idea that the ideas posted on a rail forum are influencing or imposing a transport system on 'your' area is the stuff of conspiracy theories.

You only have to look at some of the comments made here that show people haven't even looked at a map of the area to see why there have been the responses there have.
(EG- there are no residential areas south of Cardiff City Centre!!)

But I do wonder whether there might have been some different responses if the colour of the controlling party in the Senedd was different!

1. If you draw a circle 20 miles radius around Cardiff Central, 10 times more people live north of it than south of it. No one is saying there are no residential areas south of Cardiff Central, just that many more people live north of it.

2. I think Welsh Labour's plan for the SW Metro project is on the right track. And I have never voted for Labour. But I would equally think it was the right idea if it were proposed by the Tories or Plaid Cymru.

 

[Gareth Marston]

2. I think Welsh Labour's plan for the SW Metro project is on the right track. And I have never voted for Labour. But I would equally think it was the right idea if it were proposed by the Tories or Plaid Cymru.

Given that 55% of the current Cardiff Suburban network are not covered by "Core Valley Lines" and the TfW/ Mott Macdonald documents have seemingly kicked any improvements on them into the long grass to concentrate on "core valley lines" how can you say the - and note what I have highlighted -South Wales Metro be on the right track?

There are 10 Unitary Authorities in South East Wales these were all to be covered by the "South Wales Metro" concept promoted by Prof Mark Berry. This involved using existing heavy rail formations (c60%), new formations (c20%) and bus rapid transit (c20%) linking up all the population centers and major employment sites in SE Wales with services at greater frequencies. The existing heavy rail networks coverage of the entire region is patchy. What has become entirely clear from TfW is that the "South Wales Metro" is not being implemented instead we have:

• A Light Rail Conversion of existing heavy rail lines north of Cardiff Queen St.
• The other pre existing heavy rail services will largely stay as they are at lower current day frequencies.
• None of the extensions are included.
• The BRT element is unclear.

"Core Valley Lines" only covers the existing services from Cardiff to Rhondda Cynon Taff, Merthyr and the Rhymney Valley part of Caerphilly. 3.5 out of 10
Bridgend, Vale of Glamorgan, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Sirhowy Valley part of Caerphilly, Torfaen and Monmouthshire essentially will get a re branded 150/2 running on exciting frequencies - if they have a heavy rail service already. 6.5 out of 10.

A South Wales Metro it is not.

 

[rftorf]

There is another reason that the Metro appears to concentrate north of Cardiff - funding. WG are hoping to use ERDF EU funding (whilst they still can) and that is concentrated in the "Convergence" areas North of Cardiff "The Core Valley Lines" in the counties of RCT, Caerphilly, Merthyr Tydfil. (Blaenau Gwent and Bridgend also qualify). EU funding is very limited in Cardiff, Vale of Glamorgan and Newport.

 

[Del1977]

Given that 55% of the current Cardiff Suburban network are not covered by "Core Valley Lines" and the TfW/ Mott Macdonald documents have seemingly kicked any improvements on them into the long grass to concentrate on "core valley lines" how can you say the - and note what I have highlighted -South Wales Metro be on the right track?

There are 10 Unitary Authorities in South East Wales these were all to be covered by the "South Wales Metro" concept promoted by Prof Mark Berry. This involved using existing heavy rail formations (c60%), new formations (c20%) and bus rapid transit (c20%) linking up all the population centers and major employment sites in SE Wales with services at greater frequencies. The existing heavy rail networks coverage of the entire region is patchy. What has become entirely clear from TfW is that the "South Wales Metro" is not being implemented instead we have:

• A Light Rail Conversion of existing heavy rail lines north of Cardiff Queen St.
• The other pre existing heavy rail services will largely stay as they are at lower current day frequencies.
• None of the extensions are included.
• The BRT element is unclear.

"Core Valley Lines" only covers the existing services from Cardiff to Rhondda Cynon Taff, Merthyr and the Rhymney Valley part of Caerphilly. 3.5 out of 10
Bridgend, Vale of Glamorgan, Newport, Blaenau Gwent, Sirhowy Valley part of Caerphilly, Torfaen and Monmouthshire essentially will get a re branded 150/2 running on exciting frequencies - if they have a heavy rail service already. 6.5 out of 10.

A South Wales Metro it is not.

The Valley Lines are Rhymney/MAT/Coryton to Barry Island and Penarth/ Bay. Runs along the SWML line to Ebbw Vale and Maesteg aren't. If they don't serve Cardiff Queen Street, it isn't the Valley Lines.

No project looking at transport in a region would be able to implement everything on Day 1. Metrolink, T&W Metro etc have had additions over time.

I think they are on the right track as:

1. They are considering a system more suited to an urban region. 20 stops in 20 miles is not a rural line. There are tube stations further apart than the distance between many Valley Lines stops.
2. LR infrastructure costs and therefore future costs of expansion should be lower. I think operational costs will be lower as guards will/should be axed.
3. They are building on an existing spine of lines. These are being repurposed and will more easily permit future additions.
4. Electrification and light vehicles will improve journey times from the furthest reaches. Internal design of the units can be specified as deemed appropriate.


Funding, project delivery etc - all risks to implementation, and I don't think they've got everything right, e.g. I would prefer the LR to include Barry & Penarth, but light rail is the way to go.

 

[gareth950]

There is another reason that the Metro appears to concentrate north of Cardiff - funding. WG are hoping to use ERDF EU funding (whilst they still can) and that is concentrated in the "Convergence" areas North of Cardiff "The Core Valley Lines" in the counties of RCT, Caerphilly, Merthyr Tydfil. (Blaenau Gwent and Bridgend also qualify). EU funding is very limited in Cardiff, Vale of Glamorgan and Newport.

That is not a valid reason to chop up an existing well functioning, efficient cross city rail network.

 

[rftorf]

That is not a valid reason to chop up an existing well functioning, efficient cross city rail network.

I totally agree, however as someone who's worked on a number of multiple funded programmes, if that's where the money is then that's where they will do the work.

 

[gareth950]

I totally agree, however as someone who's worked on a number of multiple funded programmes, if that's where the money is then that's where they will do the work.

A prime example of supposed intervention doing more harm than good. It would be better for the funding to be withdrawn entirely.

 

[rftorf]

A prime example of supposed intervention doing more harm than good. It would be better for the funding to be withdrawn entirely.

To be fair a lot of good has come out of the money, most of the recent station improvements (accessibility etc) have used EU funding, as has the Heads of the Valleys road improvements and of course the line to Ebbw Vale.

 

[Llanigraham]

The Valley Lines are Rhymney/MAT/Coryton to Barry Island and Penarth/ Bay. Runs along the SWML line to Ebbw Vale and Maesteg aren't. If they don't serve Cardiff Queen Street, it isn't the Valley Lines.

MAT?
You seem to have forgotten about the largest and probably most important Valleys in the Region!

 

[gareth950]

To be fair a lot of good has come out of the money, most of the recent station improvements (accessibility etc) have used EU funding, as has the Heads of the Valleys road improvements and of course the line to Ebbw Vale.

Yes but the Core VL plans will do more harm than good, splitting up the current network and clearly favouring one part of it over another. There are just as pressing issues with traffic congestion and an urgent need for improved rail links in Barry, Penarth and the Vale, as well as Maesteg and Ebbw Vale.
Vale residents are already starting to get wind of this and are voicing objections. I suspect this is why it's all being kept secret then announced once it's all unbreakable. Welsh Govt know it's not going to be popular in the areas left with 1980s DMUs and that will lose their cross city links.

 

[Dai Corner]

Talkîng of the Ebbw Vale line, this article appeared in the South Wales Argus website today
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/ne...d_creating_jobs/?ref=mr&lp=15#comments-anchor

AN INDEPENDENT report has found that the re-opening of the Ebbw Vale railway line has been highly successful in increasing access to the jobs market and cutting greenhouse gases.

Peter Brett Associates, in partnership with Beaufort Research and Loxley Consultancy, has evaluated the European Regional Development Fund-funded Valleys Rail Strengthening (VRS) Project.

The VRS, principally a Welsh Government initiative, intended to support enhanced services on key rail corridors – most notably Ebbw Vale – linking the Valleys with Cardiff.

The total project cost was £22,674,978, including £8,478,945 European Regional Development Fund grant monies and ran from April 1, 2008 to April 30, 2011.

Ken Skates AM, the cabinet secretary for the economy and transport, said: “I was very pleased to note this report found that our funding to re-open the Ebbw Vale line has provided a significant boost to the economy of Ebbw Vale.

“The report justifies the significant investment that has been made by Welsh Government in the area over many years and provides an important example of how devolution has positively shaped the local community and its economy.

“The report concludes that this is exactly the type of project which should be developed under the Metro concept and a best practice example of where targeted government investment n infrastructure can support wider economic development and regeneration.

“No transport project is undertaken for its own sake – it is always a means to enabling and facilitating a wider package of policy initiatives through improving access to markets.

“The strong peak in rail passenger growth across south-east Wales would have been unlikely without the introduction of better service.

“As set out last week, we want a transport network that prioritises people and businesses – a truly resilient and modern system for the benefit of the people of Wales.”

The evaluation considered the new services on the re-opened Ebbw Vale Line in February 2008 between Ebbw Vale Parkway and Cardiff Central.

The review also looked into the provision of additional rolling stock to provide strengthened services at peak times on the Merthyr Tydfil to Aberdare, Bridgend to Barry Island, Treherbert to Cardiff Central and Rhymney to Cardiff Central lines.

The line was re-opened in order to reduce the level of car usage – particularly single occupancy commuting – improve access to employment opportunities and key services and reduce harmful greenhouse gas emission levels on roads by providing enhanced rail services during peak travel times.

The main findings of the report found the VRS delivered a 19 per cent increase in capacity on the network and travel-to-work by rail grew by 300 per cent in the Ebbw Vale – Rogerstone corridor between the 2001 and 2011 census periods.

The project removed around 14 million road kilometres per year, improved air quality while generating around £1million of gross economic benefits per annum.

It also helped to transform access to the job market and allowed for housing developments in the areas of Ebbw Vale and Rogerstone.

I must admit I'd never heard of the term 'VRS' before.

 

[rftorf]

I personally think that they should try to capitalise on what's already be done. Concentrate on electrification to Swansea, including via Barry and Maesteg and procure some new BMU such as the Stadler Class 755 for Greater Anglia to replace the 142s and 143s.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Talkîng of the Ebbw Vale line, this article appeared in the South Wales Argus website today
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/ne...d_creating_jobs/?ref=mr&lp=15#comments-anchor



I must admit I'd never heard of the VRS before.

Right folks apparently the 6 ScotRail 150's that transferred to Wales in 2005 and were announced in the SRA Press Release when Arriva won the franchise and all assumed were part of the franchise agreement have turned out to be funded by European money from the 2007 to 2013 funding round in a scheme no one has heard of till now!

http://gov.wales/docs/caecd/research/2018/180125-valleys-rail-strengthening-en.pdf

Its probably an accounting slight of hand to help draw down money or use up a funding pot.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The Valley Lines are Rhymney/MAT/Coryton to Barry Island and Penarth/ Bay. Runs along the SWML line to Ebbw Vale and Maesteg aren't. If they don't serve Cardiff Queen Street, it isn't the Valley Lines.

No project looking at transport in a region would be able to implement everything on Day 1. Metrolink, T&W Metro etc have had additions over time.

I think they are on the right track as:

1. They are considering a system more suited to an urban region. 20 stops in 20 miles is not a rural line. There are tube stations further apart than the distance between many Valley Lines stops.
2. LR infrastructure costs and therefore future costs of expansion should be lower. I think operational costs will be lower as guards will/should be axed.
3. They are building on an existing spine of lines. These are being repurposed and will more easily permit future additions.
4. Electrification and light vehicles will improve journey times from the furthest reaches. Internal design of the units can be specified as deemed appropriate.


Funding, project delivery etc - all risks to implementation, and I don't think they've got everything right, e.g. I would prefer the LR to include Barry & Penarth, but light rail is the way to go.

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...

Wales will have no European Money soon, Westminster has given South Wales rail investment money now its turn will not come again for a long time from central funds especially with HS2 being built and pressure to do schemes that link to it which of course go nowhere near South Wales. The current devolved Government has an open cheque on dualling the A465 heads of the valleys road and wants one on an M4 Relief Road.

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 Light Rail enthusiast's on here seem to have blind faith in the magic funding fairy waiving her wand so that expansion after expansion follows on. Can they provide any evidence that funding for the forthcoming stages will happen?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes but the Core VL plans will do more harm than good

Much as I support integrated networks, that is frankly false.

* Upgrading some of it is better than upgrading none of it
* Most people are travelling to Cardiff, not beyond.

 

[gareth950]

Much as I support integrated networks, that is frankly false.

* Upgrading some of it is better than upgrading none of it
* Most people are travelling to Cardiff, not beyond.

I use the network on a daily basis and I can assure you that it is not false.

'Cardiff' does not just mean Cardiff Central. It includes the major employment and education centres around Queen Street and Cathays as well. Commuters from Penarth, the Vale, Barry and the City line will all lose their current direct trains to these stations.

 

[Del1977]

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...

Wales will have no European Money soon, Westminster has given South Wales rail investment money now its turn will not come again for a long time from central funds especially with HS2 being built and pressure to do schemes that link to it which of course go nowhere near South Wales. The current devolved Government has an open cheque on dualling the A465 heads of the valleys road and wants one on an M4 Relief Road.

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 Light Rail enthusiast's on here seem to have blind faith in the magic funding fairy waiving her wand so that expansion after expansion follows on. Can they provide any evidence that funding for the forthcoming stages will happen?

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.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I use the network on a daily basis and I can assure you that it is not false.

'Cardiff' does not just mean Cardiff Central. It includes the major employment and education centres around Queen Street and Cathays as well. Commuters from Penarth, the Vale, Barry and the City line will all lose their current direct trains to these stations.

My observations are that only around half the folk on trains arriving from the Vale get off at Central. Central is the name of the railway station not a descriptor of where the station is in relation to Cardiff's Employment opportunity's, main shopping, University & Government buildings etc

 

[Bletchleyite]

I use the network on a daily basis and I can assure you that it is not false.

'Cardiff' does not just mean Cardiff Central. It includes the major employment and education centres around Queen Street and Cathays as well. Commuters from Penarth, the Vale, Barry and the City line will all lose their current direct trains to these stations.

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.