Wales & Borders Franchise Consultation

[Gareth Marston]

My friends at Machy say that an hourly is quite possible, on their side, but the problem would be with the units

I.e not enough of them that can be dedicated to Cambrian at moment.

 

[jamess]

The current tt works well on a daily basis, your talking about bolting 3/4 extra trains each way on to it in the same pattern. There's about 12 minutes turnaround in Aberystwyth in the working tt. Any less such as squeezing in a stop at Bow St will destroy any margin.

Of course singallying failures at Wolverhampton and Tresspassers on the line at International import delays which are hard to recover from. That's were your extra passing places are needed.

SO are you saying that the loop at Westbury would be a good contingency but not required if all ran like clockwork?

 

[jamess]

I remember him in FNW days!

Yes and I'm sure he made a few balls ups there, too!

 

[Gareth Marston]

SO are you saying that the loop at Westbury would be a good contingency but not required if all ran like clockwork?

I think its far to say we've had more problems with train cancellations on the Cambrian than poor punctuality since the extra trains were introduced. The 12 trains a day tt works with the current infrastructure in as far as delays are not imported from the West Midlands and the units get there 12 minute turnaround at Aberystwyth. The 10 minute or so waits at Shrewsbury in both directions are not every passengers favorite but help with the punctuality. Westbound ATW services are often one signal block behind the LM stopper by the time they get to Wellington.

However we've not tried 15/16 trains a day over it to know how it will pan out in practice. The 19 miles from Welshpool to Sutton Bridge Junction is the longest single track section on the Cambrian. It seems the obvious "weak link".

 

[PHILIPE]

I think its far to say we've had more problems with train cancellations on the Cambrian than poor punctuality since the extra trains were introduced. The 12 trains a day tt works with the current infrastructure in as far as delays are not imported from the West Midlands and the units get there 12 minute turnaround at Aberystwyth. The 10 minute or so waits at Shrewsbury in both directions are not every passengers favorite but help with the punctuality. Westbound ATW services are often one signal block behind the LM stopper by the time they get to Wellington.

However we've not tried 15/16 trains a day over it to know how it will pan out in practice. The 19 miles from Welshpool to Sutton Bridge Junction is the longest single track section on the Cambrian. It seems the obvious "weak link".

The additional trains have stretched the 158 fleet to a stage which leaves little room for responding to any problems. Quite frequently, units are having to be changed over at Shrewsbury thus disturbing passengers due to 150s working in from Holyhead and having to be changed on the way back from Birmingham to the Cambrian as a result of a shortage of serviceable 158s.

 

[Dai Corner]

The additional trains have stretched the 158 fleet to a stage which leaves little room for responding to any problems. Quite frequently, units are having to be changed over at Shrewsbury thus disturbing passengers due to 150s working in from Holyhead and having to be changed on the way back from Birmingham to the Cambrian as a result of a shortage of serviceable 158s.

Would Cambrian passengers trade changing at Shrewsbury or Wolverhampton for more frequent and reliable services? What proportion are travelling to Birmingham and beyond?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The extra West Midlands (LM) Birmingham-Shrewsbury train is going to change the timetable too.
No W&B stoppers on Sunday either (BHM-SHR).

 

[Gareth Marston]

Would Cambrian passengers trade changing at Shrewsbury or Wolverhampton for more frequent and reliable services? What proportion are travelling to Birmingham and beyond?

Overall close on 50% of those arriving Shrewsbury travel beyond it eastwards from the Cambrian the pattern does vary train to train and time of year. c500,000 journeys per annum your looking at. No one will thank you for terminating all Cambrian trains at Shrewsbury!

 

[Gareth Marston]

The additional trains have stretched the 158 fleet to a stage which leaves little room for responding to any problems. Quite frequently, units are having to be changed over at Shrewsbury thus disturbing passengers due to 150s working in from Holyhead and having to be changed on the way back from Birmingham to the Cambrian as a result of a shortage of serviceable 158s.

The ideal outcome is that all ATW's current 158 fleet get concentrated on the ex CT lines come the new franchise.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Here's a spreadsheet with all the DMU's that are coming off lease and the franchises that are still to be let as you can see there approximately 612 DMU carriages (of which the 60 Pacers at ATW will go for scrap), 121 are coming off lease.

You can have an approximate 25% increase in carriages per franchsie with the off lease stuff assuming Pacers in Wales get replaced by LRT or EMU's and he 153's stay in service.

Enjoy

BUT, what if the 153s don't stay in service? We've had Northern and Great Western relet recently, with both aiming to do away with 153s. That suggests that convertion back into 155s is not cheap and TOCs are avoiding it. Also, the 185s aren't due off-lease until March 2020, too late to save making existing stock TSI-PRM compliant. As far as I've been able to make out, the sum total of DMUs actually due off-lease by 2020 that aren't Pacers or 153s is 39 units (25 Turbostars and 14 156s). These total 91 vehicles, and ATW, EMT and LM between them have 102 units of classes 142-153 (171 vehicles, I think). Something has to give (I hope that will be the UK Government and what that what they will give are TSI-PRM derrogations to allow the 185 cascade and ValleyLines electrification to happen). There is not enough work for all 36 150s on the W&B franchise after ValleyLines electrification, because a higher-standard of unit is needed on most of the other routes (I'm even starting to think that even the ValleyLines might need trains comfortable enough for journeys over an hour, because Aberdare to Barry (for example) would be longer than that).

Upto 31/12/2019 6 sets of loco hauled mark IIIs could provide sufficient extra stock as an interim solution. Plenty of ECML GWML mark IIIs will have no home and the rosco could offer a very cheap short lease before scrapping them in 2020. W&B bidders have the option of trying to agree a lease of extra 158s with the Rosco.

I doubt the ROSCOs could offer a cheap lease on mrk3s actually. Well; the passenger vehicles would be fine but DVTs would be a problem because the spare ones are currently only compatible with electric locos (how much does the ARR mod cost and how long a lease is required to recover that investment?) I suppose you could top-and-tail like Anglia's mark 2s, or run them on Holyhead to Holyhead services via Crewe, Bescot Stadium, Birmingham New Street Aston, Bescot Stadium and Crewe, running round at Holyhead.

All 158s at other TOCs are presumably already leased beyond 2020, except perhaps EMT's but the DfT will probably order WAG to put a clause in the W&B ITT that the EMT 158s cannot be used. That means the mark 3s would have to stay beyond 2020, or be replaced by a new fleet of mark 5s (or mark 4s if enough can be cascaded in time).

Single 185 units should be enough for most Manchester-North Wales services, doubling up a couple of peak time extras shouldn't be too much of an issue. The frequent stopping pattern of these services would also suit the 185 layout and the fast acceleration.

Personally, if the 185s came to Wales I would suggest putting some on the Cardiff to Cheltenham service, and others perhaps on the Llandudnos since they are stoppers (north Wales fast services need proper regional express stock).

Agree in principle but magic bi modes courageously ordered by civil servants in face of expert opinion will save the day ( if the engines don't blow up trying to keep to HST schedules!).

Theirs some application for bi modes and battery trains for that bit beyond the wires but they aren't the magic solution that Daft hope they are. Watch out for the pollution ruling in April - this could change things again.

After having my grandmother complain about diesel fumes on board various trains over the past weekend I'm thinking we need electrification to be considered as a health & saftey intervention; to save it from those who have been frightened away by the cost overruns on the GWML electrification. To keep it affordable though I think there should be a fixed anual budget for electrification, rather than "we will wire line X by 202X" etc. What is needed is a long-term commitment to that fixed budget every year.

As for bi-mode, I think DfT aimed at the wrong market. Intercity trains, due to their need-for-speed, are presumably thirstier than slower regional units so IC routes should be high on the priority list for wires. Thus, it is the regional long-distance services, which spend some time on IC routes but also run into less densely-populated areas (like Pembrokeshire and the Cambrian lines) which most need bi-mode; yet we haven't got a bi-mode regional express train option. Hell, there isn't even a regional express design in any mode; reference SWT going for a retractioning of the 5-WES units whereas suburban routes get new trains. Somebody needs to produce something like a bi-mode 175 with Unit-Rnd Gangways (UEGs).

From the Roscos perspective W&B must be very appealing with a 14 year franchise, it can refurbish and lease old DMUs until they are overdue to be sent to the scrapyard

That's what I'm afraid of. Specifically, I'm afraid we will be stuck with the 150s for the duration of the franchise; the lack of legroom means they are unsuitable for journeys over 1hr.

185s have very low capacity compared with 175s.

185: 154 Std, 15 1st, total 169
175 2-car: 136 Std
175 3-car: can't find a figure but the centre car is more than 64, so at least 200, probably about 210

One of the franchise agreement documents on the UK government website gives capacities of 121 seats for a 2-car 175 and 189 for the 3-car units.

They would need to be *at least* 4-car. (For North Wales route reforming them to 2s and 4s would make a lot of sense, allowing 2, 4 and 6 to be formed - and you could do clever things like portion working Liverpool to North Wales via the Halton Curve with 4 from Manchester and 2 from Liverpool).

No portion working 185s please (or 175s, or anything else without UEGs); it just isn't in the best interests of passengers. Hell, if you were really serious about running the railway in the interests of passengers nothing without UEGs would ever even run in multiple, but given some cheapskates have built short units without them I guess you have to allow multiple working (but make sure there's a member of staff to assist passengers in each unit).

At 130 seats, that sounds like a class 150. By that rationale, two extra 150s are going to be overnighting at Rhymney sidings for the first two services of the day, getting back to Cardiff before 08:00. 104 seats from Treherbert at 06:47 suggests an extra pacer tagged on the back. Similarly 208 seats will be two pacers.

The document I refered to above gives 150s as 116 seats and Pacers as 106 seats.

 

[squizzler]

Logically it's an easy next step but WG obsession with road construction means that the rail budget will be squeezed. A partial Metro lite with an hourly Cardiff to Holyhead flagship service with everything else as is now is still something that could be served up.

I wish you were wrong but have to agree. As long as our transport department still regard the principality as a giant Scalextric set we will continue to fall behind. It is very sad.

 

[jamess]

I think its far to say we've had more problems with train cancellations on the Cambrian than poor punctuality since the extra trains were introduced. The 12 trains a day tt works with the current infrastructure in as far as delays are not imported from the West Midlands and the units get there 12 minute turnaround at Aberystwyth. The 10 minute or so waits at Shrewsbury in both directions are not every passengers favorite but help with the punctuality. Westbound ATW services are often one signal block behind the LM stopper by the time they get to Wellington.

However we've not tried 15/16 trains a day over it to know how it will pan out in practice. The 19 miles from Welshpool to Sutton Bridge Junction is the longest single track section on the Cambrian. It seems the obvious "weak link".

Yes, it would make sense to try the 15/16 trains a day and see how it works...

How will the pathing be affected on the Salop-Wolves stretch when the LM service goes to two an hour?

 

[PHILIPE]

Yes, it would make sense to try the 15/16 trains a day and see how it works...

How will the pathing be affected on the Salop-Wolves stretch when the LM service goes to two an hour?

The pathing would be OK. There's only one train an hour and no single line stretches

 

[gareth950]

It seems the Welsh Govt is beginning to wake up to the fact it has a looming DMU crisis on it's hands and can't leave it for the next franchisee to it sort. This article has appeared on transportxtra.com. I won't post the whole article as it's a subscription website but you get the idea......

https://www.transportxtra.com/publi...067/help-us-solve-train-crisis-wales-asks-dft

Help us solve train crisis, Wales asks DfT

31 March 2017

The Welsh Government has called on the DfT to help solve a potential looming rolling stock crisis on the Welsh rail network.

A large proportion of the train fleet used on the Wales and Borders franchise is non-compliant with new rolling stock accessibility rules that become mandatory on 1 January 2020 – PRM-TSI (Persons of Reduced Mobility Technical Specification for Interoperability).

Arriva Trains Wales (ATW) and the Welsh Government’s Transport for Wales company are in discussions with rolling stock leasing company Porterbrook over a £10m modifications programme for 72 Class 150/2 Sprinter units that are leased to ATW. The diesel trains are 30 years old but are likely to be needed from January 2020 until the next Wales & Borders franchise is able to introduce new trains.

Porterbrook told a National Assembly for Wales inquiry this week: “Such conversion work would be a substantial commercial risk to Porterbrook at this stage as the conversion is only financially viable if the trains go on lease for a time that is sufficient to recoup the circa £10m investment from incremental lease rentals beyond the PRM-TSI compliant date.”

Porterbrook also leases to ATW 22 Class 143 Pacer trains for use on local services around Cardiff and three Class 153 railcars. The company has no intention of investing in PRM-TSI compliance for these fleets.

In a letter sent this month to the House of Commons Welsh Affairs Committee, Welsh cabinet secretary for economy and infrastructure Ken Skates warns of possible problems ahead. “The combination of a no-growth franchise contract, delays and de-scoping of the [UK Government’s] electrification programme, and our position in the franchise schedule now makes it very difficult to rely on a market-led response to upcoming [PRM-TSI] compliance pressures. I consider that urgent action needs to be taken in conjunction with the DfT to ensure that the next Wales and Borders franchise is not left behind and discussions will continue on that basis.”

Will DfT be sympathetic? Welsh Govt was told in 2013 that it needed to make immediate plans for 2020 fleet compliance but chose to do nothing.

At the end of the article Porterbrook are quoted as suggesting bi-mode 319s are a better option to 'fill the gap' in Wales than converting 150s for PRM-TSI compliance.

 

[notlob.divad]

At the end of the article Porterbrook are quoted as suggesting bi-mode 319s are a better option to 'fill the gap' in Wales than converting 150s for PRM-TSI compliance.

This ^^ is what I think will happen.

For me the Valley Lines seem comparable to the Lancashire Triangle where the 319s are to be / being used. If wires had been completed to the original schedule, I think there is no doubt 319s would have been running on the valleys.

If the 319 flex is successful, then I can see a fleet of these going through the 2020 mods and having generator rafts fitted. Then as and when the lines are wired, rafts can be removed from the fleet. How that sits with freeing up DMUs for the rest of Wales I am not sure.

I could also see 319 flexs running Liverpool-Runcorn-Chester and potentially Wrexham - Bidston/Liverpool. This would fit in with the stopping services in and out of Liverpool being run by 319s, and potentially being rolled into an expanded next Merseyrail franchise in 2028

 

[Gareth Marston]

The pathing would be OK. There's only one train an hour and no single line stretches

We don't know if there another all stations service or will run semi fast yet. No doubt this is what the 170's freed up from Cannock wiring are earmarked for. Ideally another semi fast 30 mins earlier/later than ATW with possibly the stopper terminating at Wellington?

 

[Gareth Marston]

It seems the Welsh Govt is beginning to wake up to the fact it has a looming DMU crisis on it's hands and can't leave it for the next franchisee to it sort. This article has appeared on transportxtra.com. I won't post the whole article as it's a subscription website but you get the idea......

https://www.transportxtra.com/publi...067/help-us-solve-train-crisis-wales-asks-dft



Will DfT be sympathetic? Welsh Govt was told in 2013 that it needed to make immediate plans for 2020 fleet compliance but chose to do nothing.

At the end of the article Porterbrook are quoted as suggesting bi-mode 319s are a better option to 'fill the gap' in Wales than converting 150s for PRM-TSI compliance.

One thing is certain more effort will be put into denying its Cardiff's fault than has been into sorting out the problems to stop it happening

 

[Rhydgaled]

If the 3;19 flex is successful, then I can see a fleet of these going through the 2020 mods and having generator rafts fitted. Then as and when the lines are wired, rafts can be removed from the fleet. How that sits with freeing up DMUs for the rest of Wales I am not sure.

I could also see 319 flexs running Liverpool-Runcorn-Chester and potentially Wrexham - Bidston/Liverpool. This would fit in with the stopping services in and out of Liverpool being run by 319s, and potentially being rolled into an expanded next Merseyrail franchise in 2028

I think the 319 Flex would certainly be a better option than 150s, but I still think a derrogation for the 150s until EMUs can replace them, with bi-mode 319s replacing the Pacers by 2019, is the best option. Once the wires are up on the ValleyLines, the 319s can move out to things like a Cardiff-Hereford stopper; provided the interior spec is outer-suburban (with decent legroom and a few tables) rather than inner-suburban as the 150s are. Your suggestion of running Wrexham services through to Bidston is another interesting idea for using the 319's potential tri-mode capability.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

We don't know if there another all stations service or will run semi fast yet. No doubt this is what the 170's freed up from Cannock wiring are earmarked for. Ideally another semi fast 30 mins earlier/later than ATW with possibly the stopper terminating at Wellington?

When I was instructive in getting the Chase Line wiring put through (pre 2012) - the plan was for the displaced diesels to strengthen overcrowded workings within the West Midlands (not for additional Salop services - good though that idea is) ....

These units have been "claimed" all over ! - perhaps the bidders have some cunning plans for the new franchise.

 

[anthony263]

I agree that the 319's or possible the D Trains would be good to replace the pacers on the Valley Lines with the class 150's being allowed to continue operating beyond 2020 until electrification is completed.

 

[Rhydgaled]

When I was instructive in getting the Chase Line wiring put through (pre 2012) - the plan was for the displaced diesels to strengthen overcrowded workings within the West Midlands (not for additional Salop services - good though that idea is) ....

These units have been "claimed" all over ! - perhaps the bidders have some cunning plans for the new franchise.

If I've read the ITT correctly, the West Midlands franchise will need a cunning plan for their diesel fleet.

A quote fromthe ITT:

To that end, only the following rolling stock may be proposed by Bidders for inclusion within the West Midlands franchise Train Fleet:

a) the rolling stock that is comprised within the West Midlands franchise Train Fleet at the date of issuing this ITT, except for the Class 150 units that are due to be cascaded to the Northern franchise before the start date;
b) the six Class 153 units that are due to be cascaded from the Great Western franchise to the West Midlands franchise at about the same time as the Class 150 units referred to in (a) above are cascaded out to Northern;
c) AC or dual voltage electric multiple units, any locomotives, driving van trailers and coaching stock of any class that are leased by a Relevant Operator other than the current West Midlands and InterCity West Coast franchisees at the date of issuing this ITT and that either:

i) They are demonstrably surplus to the requirements of that Relevant Operator:

A) because new rolling stock is being procured to replace them and the introduction of that rolling stock and hence the transfer is not dependent on the completion of any electrification scheme; or
B) because other rolling stock is due to be cascaded in to the donor franchise to replace it and the transfer of that cascaded rolling stock is not dependent on the completion of any electrification scheme; or
C) because the Bidder proposes to release suitable alternative replacement stock from the West Midlands franchise that could be used by the donor franchise; or​

ii) They will not be demonstrably surplus to the requirements of that
donor franchise, but the Bidder can demonstrate that it will be feasible for that franchise to secure alternative rolling stock in sufficient time to enable that operator to maintain the operation of its train services to at least current standards.
iii) Alternative rolling stock under subsection 5.6.15(c)(i) or 5.6.15(c)(ii) above must be capable of delivering comparable or better operational performance characteristics, and of achieving comparable or better levels of passenger satisfaction with the quality of rolling stock, than the stock it would replace within the donor franchise. For these purposes the Bidder must demonstrate that it has allowed an appropriate lead time for any modifications that may be needed to the alternative rolling stock to enable it to meet the stated operational and quality requirements, for the training of drivers by the donor franchisee, and a reasonable contingency margin;​

d) Any rolling stock that is not leased or operated at the date of issuing this ITT by any Relevant Operator;
e) Any other existing rolling stock that the Department may advise confidentially to Bidders; and
f) Any new build rolling stock that the Bidder commits to procure​

That seems to ban bidders from increasing the West Midlands DMU fleet except through new builds, unless the DfT 'confidentially advises' bidders that they will be allowed to use a certain DMU fleet.

If similar requirements are put in the W&B franchise ITT I cannot see any way bidders for W&B could propose additional 158s unless they are not required by W&B until about 2022 (since in that case it might be feasible for the franchise the 158s are taken from to procure new trains).

 

[gareth950]

Deleted

 

[Chester1]

If I've read the ITT correctly, the West Midlands franchise will need a cunning plan for their diesel fleet.

A quote fromthe ITT:
That seems to ban bidders from increasing the West Midlands DMU fleet except through new builds, unless the DfT 'confidentially advises' bidders that they will be allowed to use a certain DMU fleet.

If similar requirements are put in the W&B franchise ITT I cannot see any way bidders for W&B could propose additional 158s unless they are not required by W&B until about 2022 (since in that case it might be feasible for the franchise the 158s are taken from to procure new trains).

I am not sure about that. Part C ii reads to me that its OK to nick another TOCs trains if there are sufficient suitable alternative trains for them. If W&B ITT has this clause then they could argue that the 185s that TPE have decided are surpless to requirements are a suitable replacements for the east midlands franchise after minor modifications e.g. removing first class. This would especially apply if it were confirmed in time that Liverpool to Nottingham was being transferred to TPE. I am sure the Rosco would love to sign a lesse for extra 158s to be used by the Wales and Borders franchise from 2019 to 2033.

 

[Philip]

Going back to the issue of service patterns, for North Wales and Marches, I'd say something like this is appropriate and realistic (incorporating the WAG demands):

Hourly Cardiff to Holyhead: all stops Newport to Chester via Wrexham, then semi-fast to Llandudno Junction (missing out Shotton, Flint, Prestatyn and Abergele) and finally all stops (allowing request) to Holyhead.

Hourly Manchester to Holyhead: same calling pattern as now to Llandudno Junction (perhaps with an option to drop Shotton and Abergele, at least on off-peak trains); then fast to Holyhead calling only at Bangor. Peak extra to Chester continues, with perhaps a couple of Holyhead/Llandudno portion workings in morning and evening peaks, as is the case now.

Hourly Liverpool to Llandudno via Halton Curve: calling all stops from Runcorn to Llandudno. Option for a couple of trains a day to continue fast to Bangor and Holyhead, ideally 'boat trains'.

Hourly Liverpool to Wrexham: fast between Runcorn and Chester.

No Gerald, Virgin service remains as it is. Birmingham services (and hopefully 158s) can also be solely dedicated to the Cambrian Line. The hourly Cardiff to Holyhead being all stops to Shrewsbury would allow for a faster Cardiff to Manchester service, by missing stops between Newport and Shrewsbury. North of Shrewsbury will probably stay the same unless the stopper becomes hourly, but if the Manchester can miss out Cwmbran, Leominster, Craven Arms and Church Stretton, then that would certainly speed things up somewhat.

Finally, if there is an available path, I'd look at extending the Chester to Crewe shuttle to Birmingham, via Stafford, with upgraded rolling stock, regardless of which TOC runs the service. This would provide quicker connections between Birmingham and North Wales than at present.

 

[The Planner]

You won't get much extra between Wolves and New St without problems.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If W&B ITT has this clause

I'm not sure the W&B franchise has an ITT in the sense described.
It seems to be much more for the bidders to come up with broad "solutions" rather than be prescriptive in any way.
A 15-year term also gives the bidders a lot more scope in the longer term.
Doesn't help the short term much, granted.
The WG could also do a TfL/Merseyrail and buy new trains themselves.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Going back to the issue of service patterns, for North Wales and Marches, I'd say something like this is appropriate and realistic (incorporating the WAG demands):

Hourly Cardiff to Holyhead: all stops Newport to Chester via Wrexham, then semi-fast to Llandudno Junction (missing out Shotton, Flint, Prestatyn and Abergele) and finally all stops (allowing request) to Holyhead.

Hourly Manchester to Holyhead: same calling pattern as now to Llandudno Junction (perhaps with an option to drop Shotton and Abergele, at least on off-peak trains); then fast to Holyhead calling only at Bangor. Peak extra to Chester continues, with perhaps a couple of Holyhead/Llandudno portion workings in morning and evening peaks, as is the case now.

Hourly Liverpool to Llandudno via Halton Curve: calling all stops from Runcorn to Llandudno. Option for a couple of trains a day to continue fast to Bangor and Holyhead, ideally 'boat trains'.

Hourly Liverpool to Wrexham: fast between Runcorn and Chester.

No Gerald, Virgin service remains as it is. Birmingham services (and hopefully 158s) can also be solely dedicated to the Cambrian Line. The hourly Cardiff to Holyhead being all stops to Shrewsbury would allow for a faster Cardiff to Manchester service, by missing stops between Newport and Shrewsbury. North of Shrewsbury will probably stay the same unless the stopper becomes hourly, but if the Manchester can miss out Cwmbran, Leominster, Craven Arms and Church Stretton, then that would certainly speed things up somewhat.

Finally, if there is an available path, I'd look at extending the Chester to Crewe shuttle to Birmingham, via Stafford, with upgraded rolling stock, regardless of which TOC runs the service. This would provide quicker connections between Birmingham and North Wales than at present.

No chance with that Leominster, Ludlow, Craven Arms, Church Stretton, Gobowen, Ruabon, Chirk and Wrexham not surprisingly want to have trains to Birmingham/Manchester.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I'm not sure the W&B franchise has an ITT in the sense described.
It seems to be much more for the bidders to come up with broad "solutions" rather than be prescriptive in any way.
A 15-year term also gives the bidders a lot more scope in the longer term.
Doesn't help the short term much, granted.
The WG could also do a TfL/Merseyrail and buy new trains themselves.

The ITT should be out in May apparently. Once the bidders have put in their suggestions apparently Transport for Wales will cherry pick the best bits from all 4 proposals and then issue the ITT.

 

[Gareth Marston]

You won't get much extra between Wolves and New St without problems.

Still paying the price for London Midland Regions deliberate destruction of the well used and frequent service ex GWR mainline through the Black Country and CENTRO's short sighted decsion to build the Midland Metro instead of reinstating heavy rail from Snow Hill to Wolverhampton.

 

[Envoy]

Regarding Craven Arms: a northbound Marches needs to stop at CA prior to the arrival of a southbound Heart of Wales service. A southbound Marches service needs to stop at CA to pick up passengers who have come off the Heart of Wales. That being so, these need to be the ‘best fit’ service on The Marches - whether it be Holyhead or Manchester trains.

I think it would be highly desirable to have Caerleon station re-built as this is an important place for commuters into Newport & Cardiff as well as tourist potential the other way to the Roman sites. Clearly, the long distance express services cannot stop at Caerleon. Perhaps a local stopper going as far north as Abergavenny is the answer - with a bay platform created? That being so, this could also serve Cwmbran with passengers from the town heading northward using the stopper to Abergavenny before transferring to the express services. The stopper could also call at Pontypool & New Inn - which at present has relatively few trains calling. A more direct road link is needed here into a car park. With that in place, perhaps the residents if Usk could be persuaded to use it for commuting?