Wales & Borders Franchise Consultation

[berneyarms]

That the public won't understand the ITT as it 'will be written in such complex, arcane contractual language' as it involves the contract to upgrade and run the Metro infrastructure as well and is not a straightforward DfT style franchise. This was the reason given to the Assembly Infrastructure committee a few months ago.

Welsh Labour under Carwyn Jones still very much operate in the New Labour way of controlling the information that they want in the public domain about major projects.

Well that should be a separate element.

The service levels should be a matter for public debate.

 

[northwichcat]

The service levels should be a matter for public debate.

Agreed. The TPE ITT told us the required service levels (e.g. new Liverpool to Scotland service) and the options which bidders could choose to include (e.g. North TPE to Edinburgh and serving Crewe.) No reason why the same shouldn't be done for W&B. I'd be particularly interested in whether they want to change the service provision level for Manchester/North Wales to South Wales or whether there's any plans to include Liverpool in the franchise and if so where Liverpool services will/could run to.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Here's the first of those selective 'good news' press releases I mentioned last night.
Most of the article is waffle, but the key points are:
...
Obviously the key point from this is the commitment to 'a safety critical conductor (guard) on all trains and services', which should head off a dispute with the RMT, although it's not explicitly clear if this will extend to services on the 'Core Valley lines' if converted to light rail/trams.

Yes, let's satisfy the union demands first, before the passengers and business plans.
That will lead to a high cost/subsidy profile, with consequent limits on what services can be afforded.
No wonder the DfT is still arguing about devolution of the franchise letting process.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Agreed. The TPE ITT told us the required service levels (e.g. new Liverpool to Scotland service) and the options which bidders could choose to include (e.g. North TPE to Edinburgh and serving Crewe.) No reason why the same shouldn't be done for W&B. I'd be particularly interested in whether they want to change the service provision level for Manchester/North Wales to South Wales or whether there's any plans to include Liverpool in the franchise and if so where Liverpool services will/could run to.

Well your not alone.

 

[Gareth Marston]

That the public won't understand the ITT as it 'will be written in such complex, arcane contractual language' as it involves the contract to upgrade and run the Metro infrastructure as well and is not a straightforward DfT style franchise. This was the reason given to the Assembly Infrastructure committee a few months ago.

Welsh Labour under Carwyn Jones still very much operate in the New Labour way of controlling the information that they want in the public domain about major projects.

The public want detail and to engage in the process theirs a huge amount of disquiet about the current franchise as we all know. Being told like a Stalinist state everything is perfect and world class is not on.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Statement from WG: http://gov.wales/newsroom/transport/2017/59296926/?lang=en
Tenders due in on 21 December.

by Ken Skates, Economy Secretary:
"Detailed discussions with all four of the shortlisted potential operators have only served to reinforce our optimism that the next service will see big improvements.
I look forward to seeing how the detailed tenders tackle our ambitious requirements for the next 15 years before making a decision on the successful operator in early 2018.

“We intend to create a rail service that benefits the whole of Wales, communities along the border and in England. One with passengers at it’s heart and today’s announcement is another important step towards that".

 

[Gareth Marston]

Statement from WG: http://gov.wales/newsroom/transport/2017/59296926/?lang=en
Tenders due in on 21 December.

More zero detail Jam tomorrow proclamations!

 

[Chester1]

Here's the first of those selective 'good news' press releases I mentioned last night.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-41436083

Most of the article is waffle, but the key points are:



Obviously the key point from this is the commitment to 'a safety critical conductor (guard) on all trains and services', which should head off a dispute with the RMT, although it's not explicitly clear if this will extend to services on the 'Core Valley lines' if converted to light rail/trams.

It clearly won't extend to trams. None in the UK require a safety critical second person to run. Light rail conversion would significantly increase the numbers of drivers required if the system were built for 30-60m trams. The promise over guards on trains is not a big deal unless a fleet of new trains or further 769s are ordered. Currently only the 769s will be able to opperate under DOO and there will only be 5 of them. As things stand, its a very easy promise for the Welsh Government to make. If anything it indicates that either light rail conversion or use of older trains for the Valleys Lines is planned in the ITT.

 

[northwichcat]

It clearly won't extend to trams. None in the UK require a safety critical second person to run.

Sheffield and Blackpool trams have a second member of staff on board for revenue and customer service duties. Wasn't part of the reason for the tram-train trial being operated by Sheffield Supertram instead of Northern (as originally intended) because the RMT kicked up a fuss about guards?

 

[craigybagel]

It clearly won't extend to trams. None in the UK require a safety critical second person to run. Light rail conversion would significantly increase the numbers of drivers required if the system were built for 30-60m trams. The promise over guards on trains is not a big deal unless a fleet of new trains or further 769s are ordered. Currently only the 769s will be able to opperate under DOO and there will only be 5 of them. As things stand, its a very easy promise for the Welsh Government to make. If anything it indicates that either light rail conversion or use of older trains for the Valleys Lines is planned in the ITT.

The 769s won't be able to run as DOO without some modifications anyway - you need a lot of platform infrastructure to do that and the current standards for DOO are to make the train compliant, not the stations (so cameras and monitors on the train, rather than monitors on the platform ends as the 319s used when they were DOO on Thameslink).

If it does mean the end of suggestions for light rail on the Valleys (which may not be the case as Jcollins rightly points out) that's certainly no bad thing. It's a long way to Rhymney on a tram! An electrified heavy rail service is much more appropriate in my opinion, especially as it will retain compatibility with the rest of the network which can't be turned into light rail (the lines to Barry and Penarth).

 

[Gareth Marston]

Yes, let's satisfy the union demands first, before the passengers and business plans.
That will lead to a high cost/subsidy profile, with consequent limits on what services can be afforded.
No wonder the DfT is still arguing about devolution of the franchise letting process.

You mean all the stakeholders don't you ? The consultation responses were overwhelming in favor of more on board and station staff.

The railways high costs are not caused by staff at lower pay grades. The franchise system is itself highly inefficient as well as rocketing infrastructure costs.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The 769s won't be able to run as DOO without some modifications anyway - you need a lot of platform infrastructure to do that and the current standards for DOO are to make the train compliant, not the stations (so cameras and monitors on the train, rather than monitors on the platform ends as the 319s used when they were DOO on Thameslink).

If it does mean the end of suggestions for light rail on the Valleys (which may not be the case as Jcollins rightly points out) that's certainly no bad thing. It's a long way to Rhymney on a tram! An electrified heavy rail service is much more appropriate in my opinion, especially as it will retain compatibility with the rest of the network which can't be turned into light rail (the lines to Barry and Penarth).

and Maesteg, Treherbert, Aberdare, Merthyr Tydfil, Ebbw Vale etc....

There all 25-30 miles from downtown Cardiff, compare with Manchester Metro and Altringham and Bury are just 8 miles from downtown Manchester. Light rail is a short distance creature the Heads of the Valleys towns are medium distance.Basic Geography/ understanding of how systems work.

 

[Rhydgaled]

It's a long way to Rhymney on a tram! An electrified heavy rail service is much more appropriate in my opinion, especially as it will retain compatibility with the rest of the network which can't be turned into light rail (the lines to Barry and Penarth).

Agreed 100%. As well as toiletless stock with fewer seats (more standing) being unsuitable for the long runs to the heads of the valleys, I can forsee platform capacity issues at CDF if the Bridgend, Barry and Penarth services have to terminate there with one or two platforms given over to terminating light-rail services from the north.

and Maesteg, Treherbert, Aberdare, Merthyr Tydfil, Ebbw Vale etc....

Yep, all too far for trams. Also we need Cardiff-Bridgend electrification (scrapped as part of the Swansea scheme) for Maesteg or send them via Barry, or use class 769s. Mind you, Cardiff-Bridgend needs some serious head scratching, it is rather slow (taking a rather indirect route rather than approximately as the crow flies) and lacking in capacity for a mix of fast trains, high-frequency Metro services and freight, so maybe it is better to do some serious upgrades to the track layout before electrifying it.

 

[gareth950]

Agreed 100%. As well as toiletless stock with fewer seats (more standing) being unsuitable for the long runs to the heads of the valleys, I can forsee platform capacity issues at CDF if the Bridgend, Barry and Penarth services have to terminate there with one or two platforms given over to terminating light-rail services from the north.

Yep, all too far for trams. Also we need Cardiff-Bridgend electrification (scrapped as part of the Swansea scheme) for Maesteg or send them via Barry, or use class 769s. Mind you, Cardiff-Bridgend needs some serious head scratching, it is rather slow (taking a rather indirect route rather than approximately as the crow flies) and lacking in capacity for a mix of fast trains, high-frequency Metro services and freight, so maybe it is better to do some serious upgrades to the track layout before electrifying it.

The whole of the potential Metro area needs serious track infrastructure upgrades. The flexibility that CASR has given to Cardiff Central is great but that only scratches the surface of what is needed. Double tracking single line sections of the valley lines and adding at least one more track span over Newport Rd bridge are desperately needed to improve frequency and capacity (although the farce with double tracking sections of the Ebbw Vale line is not encouraging).

Ironically, one of the first statements released by Welsh Govt with what their 'expectations' were of the bidders stated that 'passengers should have to stand for no longer than 15-20 mins on commuter services into Cardiff.' How that will be achieved with trams that will reduce seating capacity has not been explained. What is needed is more frequent, longer trains with more seating capacity. Not more frequent, shorter trams with less seating capacity.

 

[gareth950]

Some details of the Welsh Govt's draft budget for 2018-19 and 2019-20 have been announced.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/new-210m-budget-deal-been-13697432.amp
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-41441727 (Ad-free version)

Predictably there's cash for bypasses and road bridge schemes, but nothing concrete for rail or public transport. There's

"a continued commitment to possible extensions to the South Wales Metro including Maerdy and Rhondda Fach".

"The deal includes £2m in 2019-20 to remove tolls from the Cleddau Bridge in Pembrokeshire and £3m to look at a third Menai bridge crossing split over the two years.

There is also £15m to improve north and south road links on the A487 and A470."

"They agree to fund a strategic outline case for the Swansea Bay and Western Valleys Metro proposal and the Welsh Government says it will look into the next steps for the Rhondda Tunnel."

So plenty of cash announced for bypasses, road and road bridge schemes, but just vague, un-costed commitments to look into "possible" public transport improvements. Nothing changes.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

So plenty of cash announced for bypasses, road and road bridge schemes, but just vague, un-costed commitments to look into "possible" public transport improvements. Nothing changes.

While the WG doesn't have full funds for rail, you would have expected to see something about Valleys electrification in there if they have any plans to do that.
That's given the deal that the UK government would pay £125m (half of the original estimate).
Even if it is buried in the franchise/metro ITT you would still expect the funds to be identified.
The BBC item when David Cameron agreed the package says:

The UK government will fund the upgrade of the Swansea-London mainline by 2018, and will pay almost half an estimated £500m to electrify the Valley lines.
The Welsh government expects to meet its share from cost savings and increased revenue.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-30128378

So the Welsh funding is apparently "virtual" money, not hard cash.

 

[Rhydgaled]

"a continued commitment to possible extensions to the South Wales Metro including Maerdy and Rhondda Fach".

That sounds a bit left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing to me, since Maerdy isn't on the map of the Metro while others which are (eg. Blackwood) aren't mentioned in this budget announcement.

 

[Gareth Marston]

That sounds a bit left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing to me, since Maerdy isn't on the map of the Metro while others which are (eg. Blackwood) aren't mentioned in this budget announcement.

The AM for the Rhondda is one Leanne Wood Leader of Plaid. No doubt Maerdy/Rhondda Fach is now "included" in Metro.

 

[Dai Corner]

The AM for the Rhondda is one Leanne Wood Leader of Plaid. No doubt Maerdy/Rhondda Fach is now "included" in Metro.

Where "included in the Metro" means a line on the map when it's next revised and perhaps eventually a bus to/from Porth in dedicated livery in addition to the five or six an hour which already run commercially.:roll:

 

[Gareth Marston]

The whole of the potential Metro area needs serious track infrastructure upgrades. The flexibility that CASR has given to Cardiff Central is great but that only scratches the surface of what is needed. Double tracking single line sections of the valley lines and adding at least one more track span over Newport Rd bridge are desperately needed to improve frequency and capacity (although the farce with double tracking sections of the Ebbw Vale line is not encouraging).

Ironically, one of the first statements released by Welsh Govt with what their 'expectations' were of the bidders stated that 'passengers should have to stand for no longer than 15-20 mins on commuter services into Cardiff.' How that will be achieved with trams that will reduce seating capacity has not been explained. What is needed is more frequent, longer trains with more seating capacity. Not more frequent, shorter trams with less seating capacity.

The seating capacity on a Tram like the M5000's on the Manchester Metrolink is c60 per 2 car set. Take Merthyr Tydfil all the talk has been of 4 tph for the Metro to the head so the valleys towns, so in the off peak 4 x 60 = 240 seats. Which is the seating capacity of a 2 car 150 and a 2 car Pacer arriving at the current frequency of 2 tph. Now 4 tph from Treorchy, Aberdare and Merthyr is 12 tph south of Pontypridd. That's 720 seats an hour at 5 minute headways. So its on a par with existing off peak capacity where there isn't a problem.

Come the 769's on Valley Lines everything in the peak hours will be 4 car shortly. That's 1440 seats in peak hours from Pontypridd to Cardiff without factoring in any extra shuttles south of Pontypridd which is where the problem is now with overcrowding. So to equal the existing seating capacity you would need to run 24 x 2 car trams per hour! and That's just to equal existing seat numbers not to stop anyone standing over 15 to 20 minutes or cater for any growth.

Does the Welsh Government have a clue how many trams they would need to meet their pledge and run 4tph to the heads?

 

[gareth950]

Buried deep in the draft Welsh budget announcement on Tuesday was this about rail:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-41473033

"There were some smaller announcements among the bigger items, which included:

• £50m over three years to develop a new railway station and park and ride facility in Llanwern, Newport
• Funding ear-marked in reserves to buy new rolling stock for the new Wales and Borders franchise"

That was it.

 

[daikilo]

Interesting that the WG wants to buy rolling stock themselves rather than have the new TOC lease it from a ROSCO as most do, not that 50m will buy much!

 

[Gareth Marston]

Interesting that the WG wants to buy rolling stock themselves rather than have the new TOC lease it from a ROSCO as most do, not that 50m will buy much!

That's about 38/40 vehicles (heavy rail).

The lease costs of new DMU/BiMode are apparently favorable on a like for like replacement basis for the 175's - according to one bidder who might have happened to have already ordered new stock for another franchise from a manufacturer who might have a plant in South Wales soon.

 

[JetStream]

It doesn't say that there's going to be £50m in stock - it just says buying some.

 

[daikilo]

Indeed, oops, must look interesting to have an unquantified entry in a budget!

 

[gareth950]

"Funding ear-marked in reserves to buy new rolling stock for the new Wales and Borders franchise"

So in other words, they've put some money (we don't know how much) under the mattress just in case the new franchise needs new trains. More cloak and dagger nonsense.

I can't think of a government procurement process that is going to affect the daily lives of ordinary people so much, that has ever been cloaked in so much secrecy and so lacking in transparency. Ever.

Ironically anyone who visits the Senedd in Cardiff Bay can get a tour of the place with a guide telling you that it was built with so much glass to represent complete transparency in government and the governing process in Wales.

 

[IanXC]

Is anyone aware of any statistics on the relative sizes of the Network Rail routes? If the Metro does end up being a separate infrastructure provider, then I do wonder whether the remaining Wales Route will be of a viable size!

 

[gareth950]

Wales' trains face 'impossible' disability targets by 2020 - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-41558616

It could be "impossible" for 70% of Wales and Border trains to meet new disability regulations by 2020, a report has warned.

The assembly's petitions committee calls the timescale for meeting the target "extremely daunting".

Cabinet Secretary Ken Skates said all passenger needs would be "fully addressed" in a new rail franchise.

Current franchise holder Arriva Trains Wales said work to modify its trains had already begun....

This doesn't tell us anything we don't already know. Ken Skates still insisting when the new franchise takes over it will be a land of milk and honey, while giving away nothing.

I haven't got time to copy and paste the whole article, but you get the picture by now.

 

[PHILIPE]

Wales' trains face 'impossible' disability targets by 2020 - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-41558616

This doesn't tell us anything we don't already know. Ken Skates still insisting when the new franchise takes over it will be a land of milk and honey, while giving away nothing.

I haven't got time to copy and paste the whole article, but you get the picture by now.

Without going into the blame game, PRM Mods should have been started long ago. It's not as though nobody was aware of it.

 

[daikilo]

Without going into the blame game, PRM Mods should have been started long ago. It's not as though nobody was aware of it.

What I find intriguing is how Skayes can make the statements he is making unless either 1) the current franchise is extended by say a year with funding allowing any trains that will stay to be modified ahead of the new franchise 2) a new franchisee has made a commitment which will not actually be achievable.