• 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!

Wales & Borders Franchise Consultation

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
Hopefully some pointers in Abeilios winning West Midlands bid.

  • New stock with fleet size increasing on all routes.
  • Incremental improvements on Sunday, early & late trains
  • A few lines tidied up to more frequent services i.e Marston Vale, BHM to SHR extra, BHM to Stratford on Avon via Dorridge.

No Big Bang build on whats there already.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
Further thoughts none of the recent Abeilio winning bids have included anything with stations such as things like m to go, reopening booking offices / an or longer hours. (we have PIS screens already).

They do seem keen on new train orders. One can dream as we haven't seen anything but 158's on the Cambrian since 2003.

It has been confirmed now with the West Midlands announcement that there's more competition between Shrewsbury and the West Midlands as expected in addition to Northern Connect between Chester and Manchester. Any bidder worth their salt is going to have to look to grow the Manchester to Cardiff route.
 

Philip

On Moderation
Joined
27 May 2007
Messages
3,734
Location
Manchester
Further thoughts none of the recent Abeilio winning bids have included anything with stations such as things like m to go, reopening booking offices / an or longer hours. (we have PIS screens already).

They do seem keen on new train orders. One can dream as we haven't seen anything but 158's on the Cambrian since 2003.

It has been confirmed now with the West Midlands announcement that there's more competition between Shrewsbury and the West Midlands as expected in addition to Northern Connect between Chester and Manchester. Any bidder worth their salt is going to have to look to grow the Manchester to Cardiff route.

Problem is there is also the view that the Manchester to Cardiff route is already well served and doesn't really need newer or longer trains than what is already there.
 

Envoy

Established Member
Joined
29 Aug 2014
Messages
3,154
Problem is there is also the view that the Manchester to Cardiff route is already well served and doesn't really need newer or longer trains than what is already there.

Well, I saw a 2 car Coradia arrive at Cardiff Central from Manchester at around 10.50am yesterday absolutely rammed with people standing. It was also pretty full when it left for Carmarthen.

The Marches route could get more passengers if it had direct trains going to Scotland via the west coast route - with reasonable fares. As things stand, the fares are far too high unless you split the ticket at Crewe - which a lot of people don’t know about. Even with changing at Crewe, the new operator should be forced to combine their fare for The Marches line with Virgin fares from Crewe northwards.
 

PR1Berske

Established Member
Joined
27 Jul 2010
Messages
3,025
Well, I saw a 2 car Coradia arrive at Cardiff Central from Manchester at around 10.50am yesterday absolutely rammed with people standing. It was also pretty full when it left for Carmarthen.

The Marches route could get more passengers if it had direct trains going to Scotland via the west coast route - with reasonable fares. As things stand, the fares are far too high unless you split the ticket at Crewe - which a lot of people don’t know about. Even with changing at Crewe, the new operator should be forced to combine their fare for The Marches line with Virgin fares from Crewe northwards.

As ever the issue is with Virgin. Can they be trusted to allow other operators on WCML north of Crewe?
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Hopefully some pointers in Abeilios winning West Midlands bid.

  • New stock with fleet size increasing on all routes.
  • Incremental improvements on Sunday, early & late trains
  • A few lines tidied up to more frequent services i.e Marston Vale, BHM to SHR extra, BHM to Stratford on Avon via Dorridge.

No Big Bang build on whats there already.

The biggest things in there:
1. The number of new diesel trains being ordered.
2. Ordering a new fleet of EMUs for cross-city rather than taking on additional 323s.
3. Ordering a new fleet of EMUs for WCML services rather than taking on the off-lease 360s.

The 323s could be a decent fleet of trains for Cardiff if they can sort out electrification and get the routes cleared for 23m stock. The general view in the North West seems to be they are vastly better than 319s.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,937
Location
Mold, Clwyd
As ever the issue is with Virgin. Can they be trusted to allow other operators on WCML north of Crewe?

Nothing to do with Virgin now (not since 2012).
The ORR determines access rights and NR determines the paths.
DfT is not interested in diluting the West Coast franchise revenue, whoever is operating it.
In any case it's all being competed for next year along with HS2 initial services, and we know the pre-qualifiers.

Any through Marches trains onto the WCML would need bi-modes.
The WG seems keener to have services to Yorkshire than to Scotland, but neither seem very high on their priorities.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,736
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Further thoughts none of the recent Abeilio winning bids have included anything with stations such as things like m to go, reopening booking offices / an or longer hours. (we have PIS screens already).

So does the entire LM network including the little stations.

I think they are proposing to replace many if not all of these with the newer design used on ScotRail that provide a lot more information than the 3-line LED ones.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,736
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The 323s could be a decent fleet of trains for Cardiff if they can sort out electrification and get the routes cleared for 23m stock. The general view in the North West seems to be they are vastly better than 319s.

Indeed they are. They have excellent acceleration and were the first generation of EMUs to have a "modern look" to them. And 3-car sets (possibly doubled up where needed) would probably be a perfect size for the Valley Lines.

I now definitely think 25kV and all the Class 323s is the correct answer for the Valleys.
 

ABB125

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2016
Messages
4,346
Location
University of Birmingham
Indeed they are. They have excellent acceleration and were the first generation of EMUs to have a "modern look" to them. And 3-car sets (possibly doubled up where needed) would probably be a perfect size for the Valley Lines.

I now definitely think 25kV and all the Class 323s is the correct answer for the Valleys.

I also agree totally with that-fast acceleration, longer trains etc. Unfortunately, I suspect that it will be too difficult (ie: expensive/too logical) to do in this day and age.
 

Bwlch y Groes

Member
Joined
22 Jul 2017
Messages
210
The 323s would be ideal and entirely logical. But the Welsh government will be demanding new rolling stock and I suspect the winning bidder will probably want new as well. Based on recent murmurings and announcements, I think we'll see trams in the Valleys and perfectly good trains on the scrapheap
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,861
Indeed they are. They have excellent acceleration and were the first generation of EMUs to have a "modern look" to them. And 3-car sets (possibly doubled up where needed) would probably be a perfect size for the Valley Lines.

I now definitely think 25kV and all the Class 323s is the correct answer for the Valleys.
Do the class 323s have selective door openning; because the platform lengths on the ValleyLines are not designed for 23m vehicles (which are in any case not currently cleared on parts of the valleys network). Also, unless the platforms at Gilfach Fargoed are lengthened considerably, trains on the Rhymney line need to be gangwayed throughout. Apart from Gilfach Fargoed, platforms on Penarth-QueenSt.-Rhymney/Treherbert routes are 124m, so 3-car units (with unit-end gangways) would indeed be a perfect size but with 20m vehicles rather than 23m. Merthyr/Aberdare/BarryIsland/Bridgend/Maesteg/Ebbw platforms are around 4-car length (again, for 20m vehicles, 4x23m wouldn't quite fit at some stations). I wonder if another TOC could lengthen some Electrostars using a coach out of 379s, leaving 3-car 379s for the Valleys?
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
A 323 currently has more seats than a pair of ATW 150s, despite being around 9m shorter in length. A pair of 150s having the 2 x redundant cabs and the extra space between the cabs and the passenger area means there's a lot of wasted space, so I would imagine you could refit the 323s with 2+2 seating and the capacity would still be comparable to that of a pair of ATW 150s.
 

gareth950

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2013
Messages
1,009
Do the class 323s have selective door openning; because the platform lengths on the ValleyLines are not designed for 23m vehicles (which are in any case not currently cleared on parts of the valleys network). Also, unless the platforms at Gilfach Fargoed are lengthened considerably, trains on the Rhymney line need to be gangwayed throughout. Apart from Gilfach Fargoed, platforms on Penarth-QueenSt.-Rhymney/Treherbert routes are 124m, so 3-car units (with unit-end gangways) would indeed be a perfect size but with 20m vehicles rather than 23m. Merthyr/Aberdare/BarryIsland/Bridgend/Maesteg/Ebbw platforms are around 4-car length (again, for 20m vehicles, 4x23m wouldn't quite fit at some stations). I wonder if another TOC could lengthen some Electrostars using a coach out of 379s, leaving 3-car 379s for the Valleys?

Unless I've misread this post, where do you have the idea from that units on the Rhymney line have to be gangwayed? Doubled up Pacers are the most common units you will see on this line. Obviously if you need to get off at Gilfach Fargoed you just make sure you're in the front 2 carriages.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,861
where do you have the idea from that units on the Rhymney line have to be gangwayed?
From my opinion that franchise agreements should specify that trains are planned so that, no matter which coach any passenger boards, they will be able to alight at any subsequent station listed as a calling point for that service on the timetable (even if they have to walk along the train to do so, as long as they don't have to step off the train to do that). This also means portion working would only be allowed with gangwayed units.

Doubled up Pacers are the most common units you will see on this line. Obviously if you need to get off at Gilfach Fargoed you just make sure you're in the front 2 carriages.
I must confess I've never been on that line, but I had assumed a double Pacer would stop with the front of the train beyond the platform, so that the rearmost door of the front unit and the frontmost door of the rear unit are both platformed (although that would probably require two guards; I'm assuming Pacers don't have SDO). I doubt the platform is long enough to do that with stock with a suburban door arangement.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,937
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Why all this talk about EMUs for the Valleys?
It will be 5 years at least before any wires are strung up.
Just look at the other schemes in progress - GWR ran their first EMU out of Paddington nearly 8 years after the scheme was authorised.
Unless it is a bog-standard NR scheme (which is unlikely), there will also be a lot of wrangling over ownership and management of the project before they start, and they aren't even at square 1 yet.
The fate of 323s will decided long before the Valleys need them.
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
Why all this talk about EMUs for the Valleys?
It will be 5 years at least before any wires are strung up.
Just look at the other schemes in progress - GWR ran their first EMU out of Paddington nearly 8 years after the scheme was authorised.
Unless it is a bog-standard NR scheme (which is unlikely), there will also be a lot of wrangling over ownership and management of the project before they start, and they aren't even at square 1 yet.
The fate of 323s will decided long before the Valleys need them.

Well spoken, my friend. Speculation is fine but in the present climate so many projects slip in time and which, such as GWR Electrification which is having such an effect of unit cascading, the plan can change and keep changing.
 
Joined
5 Aug 2011
Messages
791
Why all this talk about EMUs for the Valleys?
It will be 5 years at least before any wires are strung up.
Just look at the other schemes in progress - GWR ran their first EMU out of Paddington nearly 8 years after the scheme was authorised.
Unless it is a bog-standard NR scheme (which is unlikely), there will also be a lot of wrangling over ownership and management of the project before they start, and they aren't even at square 1 yet.
The fate of 323s will decided long before the Valleys need them.

Would it be possible to shut down the valley lines one at a time for an extended blockade like at Waterloo to put up the wires and masts, or would there need to be more track work at the same time which would make doing it all in one go take too much time?

Anybody know what GRIP stage the valleys scheme is at?
 

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
Would it be possible to shut down the valley lines one at a time for an extended blockade like at Waterloo to put up the wires and masts, or would there need to be more track work at the same time which would make doing it all in one go take too much time?

Anybody know what GRIP stage the valleys scheme is at?

The geography of the Valleys Lines lends itself quite well to a phased closure programme that will only maybe effect 10% of the passengers St best until you get to a final stages.

bay branch, city line, coryton branch, Pensrth branch, Bsrry to Barry Island, Pontypridd to Treherbert, Abercynon to Aberdare, Abercynon to Merthyr, Bargoed to Rhymney are all easy to phase with bus replacements. You can probably wire Central to Queen St at same time as Bay branch with trains terninating at Queen St/ Central.

Radyr to Queen St via Llandaff could be done with trains diverting via City line.
Radyr to Abercynon is largely on a four track formation with two lines and can be done around trains running to a large degree. The actual co plate system closure to finish off maybe short.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
Why all this talk about EMUs for the Valleys?
It will be 5 years at least before any wires are strung up.

The way things are looking at the moment the only possible way of W&B getting Pacer replacements by the 2019 deadline is by sticking diesel engines on off-lease vehicles which were built for electrified routes, whether that's D stock, 319s, 323s, 321s or 365s.
 

gareth950

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2013
Messages
1,009
Anybody know what GRIP stage the valleys scheme is at?

I don't think it's at any stage. Once the Welsh Govt started complaining that they wanted control and ownership of the 'Core' valley lines as they could do a better job of the project than Network Rail, the plan was then erased from NR's list of projects.

It's also worth bearing in mind that what the Welsh Govt is calling the 'Core' valley lines leaves out most of the network that currently operates under the 'Valley lines' umbrella at ATW.
So the Penarth, Barry, Barry - Bridgend, Ebbw Vale, Maesteg, City line (Cardiff - Radyr via Fairwater) and Cardiff - Bridgend (via the mainline) routes are all left out of any infrastructure upgrades or electrification proposals under the Welsh Govt's plans for the 'Core' valley lines.

The 'Core' valley lines only include the lines from Cardiff to Treherbert, Aberdare, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney.

The original 2012 HLOS proposals were to heavy rail electrify all the routes I mentioned above currently operating under the 'valley lines' umbrella in SE Wales. Obviously much has changed since then, but that is still the most sensible and future proofed solution, that could then take advantage of the glut of EMUs that would be available to the franchise in the early 2020s.
 
Last edited:

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
4,442
The way things are looking at the moment the only possible way of W&B getting Pacer replacements by the 2019 deadline is by sticking diesel engines on off-lease vehicles which were built for electrified routes, whether that's D stock, 319s, 323s, 321s or 365s.

There are 30+ 319s that are currently off lease and there are two orders to convert 319s to 769s. It seems obvious that any further EMU to bi mode conversions of Porterbrook trains will be 319s. Why would they start converting another class? 323s are faster and offer a similar capacity. If Porterbrook run out of off lease 319s then it would make more sense for them to offer Northern a swap than convert another class which may or may not produce a decent bi mode. 319s are more suitable for W&B.
 

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
I don't think it's at any stage. Once the Welsh Govt started complaining that they wanted control and ownership of the 'Core' valley lines as they could do a better job of the project than Network Rail, the plan was then erased from NR's list of projects.

It's also worth bearing in mind that what the Welsh Govt is calling the 'Core' valley lines leaves out most of the network that currently operates under the 'Valley lines' umbrella at ATW.
So the Penarth, Barry, Barry - Bridgend, Ebbw Vale, Maesteg, City line (Cardiff - Radyr via Fairwater) and Cardiff - Bridgend (via the mainline) routes are all left out of any infrastructure upgrades or electrification proposals under the Welsh Govt's plans for the 'Core' valley lines.

The 'Core' valley lines only include the lines from Cardiff to Treherbert, Aberdare, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney.

The original 2012 HLOS proposals were to heavy rail electrify all the routes I mentioned above currently operating under the 'valley lines' umbrella in SE Wales. Obviously much has changed since then, but that is still the most sensible and future proofed solution, that could then take advantage of the glut of EMUs that would be available to the franchise in the early 2020s.

Ironically there's been a bit of a revolving door for personnel between Network Rail Wales and Welsh Government's Rail Unit. This we don't trust Network Rail does smack of the previous Ministers (Edwina Hart) getting on her hobby horse.
 

gareth950

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2013
Messages
1,009
The finger pointing continues...........

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/damning-leaked-letter-reveals-huge-13472362

'Damning' leaked letter reveals the huge obstacles to delivering Wales' rail revolution

A dispute between the Welsh and UK Governments is putting the new franchise in jeopardy

A dispute between the governments in Cardiff Bay and Westminster risks throwing into jeopardy plans to bring in a new rail operator in Wales next year, we have learned.

WalesOnline has obtained a letter from UK Transport Secretary Chris Grayling blaming civil servants in Cardiff for failing to address major issues needed to move forward with the new franchise, whose operator would be responsible for implementing key parts of the Welsh Government’s ambitious vision for rail services in Wales.

New rolling stock, electrification of the Valleys and North Wales lines, a South and North Wales Metro and widespread structural improvements are all priorities for the next 10 years under the next Wales and Borders franchise.

The Welsh Government has already put back its plan to formally launch its search for a new operator by six weeks from this Friday, August 18, to September 26.

It has warned that further delays to the franchise, which does not include mainline high-speed services, could cost “tens of millions of pounds”.

Yet the major unresolved issues detailed in Mr Grayling’s letter, which he says make the “scale of the challenge” clear, raise questions over whether the new date is achievable.

Mr Grayling’s letter is a response to Welsh Economy and Infrastructure Cabinet Secretary Ken Skates who blamed the UK Government when he revealed the six-week delay in June.

In the letter (reproduced in full below), Mr Grayling refuses to go along with the Welsh Government’s request to allow it to issue the final documents needed before the the bidding operators can submit their proposals.

He writes: “I recognise your concerns regarding the timings of the tender process. But I hope you understand that I cannot cut corners on the level of information or assurance required... to do so would present significant risk to Network Rail, taxpayers and most importantly the passengers served by the Wales and Borders franchise.”

He refuses to accept Mr Skates’ claim that the holding of the General Election was to blame for the delay and says his officials warned Welsh civil servants on May 26 that the major issues still to be agreed meant their planned timeframe was unachieavable.

He cites seven areas that are still unresolved, including:

A finalised written document setting out how the transfer of ownership of the Core Valleys Lines has not been received, and the Welsh Government and Network Rail are in dispute over the plans;

Welsh and UK civil servants have not agreed a protocol over how the Welsh Government will exercise powers over English railways stations served by the Wales and Borders franchise;

The Welsh Government is asking for an extra £1bn over the course of the franchise for which Mr Grayling says “I see no basis”;

There remains a dispute over payments [the letter does not make clear the nature of the payments].

The letter also refers to other issues that remain to be agreed including a “funding and outputs principles document” and an agreement on how Welsh Ministers will undertake their “operator of last resort” responsibilities”.

The £1bn requested by the Welsh Government is understood relates to an annual rebate of £67m given by current franchise holder, Arriva Trains Wales, to the DfT.

The Welsh Government believes it will not be able to claim the rebate but says it will be responsible for maintaining the infrastructure so should receive it.

The proposal includes elements that are proving controversial including the change of ownership of the Valleys Lines infrastructure.

The RMT union has claimed that the transfer of ownership is simply a £5bn privatisation, which it has described as appalling.

And Mr Grayling’s letter makes clear that Network Rail and the Welsh Government have not agreed who will be responsible if something goes wrong.

Mr Grayling concludes his letter by saying: “I will ensure my officials continue to do everything they can to support the process and enable the necessary agreements to be concluded as quickly as possible to ensure we deliver a satisfactory arrangement for passengers.”

When approached for comment a Welsh Government spokesman said: “We are disappointed with the line of argument pursued in the letter, particularly since we have been focusing on resolving the outstanding issues in discussions between the UK and Welsh Governments.

“Aside from a number of inaccuracies in the issues presented, we feel that the position the Secretary of State has taken on rail funding in Wales misrepresents a complex devolution position. This is precisely the reason that we were seeking to de-couple the issues of funding and progressing with the franchise procurement.

“Linking the funding issue to the administrative process may be appear to be an expedient way for the Department for Transport to resolve a financial issue it has brought upon itself, however, this approach jeopardises the Welsh Government’s ability to award a replacement for the current Wales & Borders franchise, which if unresolved this will be a major issue for rail users across Wales and the Borders.

"Being willing to subject people to the prospect of continued overcrowding and poor quality rolling stock to resolve a budgetary issue of their own making is no way for the UK Government to behave.

“Our focus now must be to work together to resolve these issues but frankly this whole issue is a direct result of the UK Government’s failure to deliver upon its 2014 promise to devolve rail franchising powers to Wales by the start of 2017.

"This cavalier attitude to devolution comes on top of the Department for Transport’s decision to walk away from its commitment to electrify the line between Cardiff and Swansea.

"Taken together, these examples underline the need for a radically new and lasting settlement where Wales can determine its own railway future without being held hostage to broken promise after broken promise from the UK Government."

The Welsh Conservative shadow Economy and Transport Secretary Russell George said: “This letter is damning and appears to suggest that the Welsh Government hasn’t fulfilled its role.

“Sadly, it’s the commuters which are going to pay the price and they will be extremely worried about that.

“The UK Government has provided a long list of incomplete and unfulfilled tasks, and we must now look to the Welsh Government for its response.

“It is vital that a project of this importance and scale is done properly.

“Cutting corners at this point would be an unacceptable risk to Network Rail and the taxpayers who depend on the rail network in Wales.”

Chris Grayling's letter is reproduced in full at the end of the article, so it's worth clicking the link.

Also being reported by the BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-40911647
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,937
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Damning indeed.
It will take quite a while to resolve all those issues, which are all process and finance related rather than anything to do with running trains.
Until the governments trust each other, it's going to be a tricky time.
If Cardiff Bay thought they would get an easy ride they were very much mistaken.
Grayling essentially wants to control the services in England, and the wider shape and cost (ie subsidy) of the franchise.
There are limits to what he will allow the WG to do without his approval.
How about a 1-year Direct Award to ATW to kick the ball down the road?
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,615
Am I right in thinking that the Network Rail Wales Route is one of the smallest already? Presumably without the 'Core Valleys' network it will become even more problematically small?
 

gareth950

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2013
Messages
1,009
Damning indeed.
Until the governments trust each other, it's going to be a tricky time.

I very much doubt that current Labour Welsh Govt and Conservative Westminster Govt will ever trust each other, on anything. Which is a shame, as you got the feeling under the previous, pre-June 2016 Conservative govt with Patrick Mcloughlin as transport secretary, that trust between the two govts was starting to be gained.

LNW-GW Joint said:
If Cardiff Bay thought they would get an easy ride they were very much mistaken.
Grayling essentially wants to control the services in England, and the wider shape and cost (ie subsidy) of the franchise.

Which must be very frustrating for the Welsh Govt, as it was agreed by the DfT
last October that the cross border English services were staying in the franchise, no problem.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top