Western Gateway proposals

[Cdiff]

Western Gateway Partnership have put together its key priority schemes. Few metro plans including the stations on the mainline between Cardiff & Severn Tunnel, extending the Aberdare line to Hirwaun and completing Cardiff Crossrail.

Also included is a new Severn crossing to replace the tunnel.

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/la...tations-and-1-5bn-severn-crossing-28-01-2025/

 

[Smwrff]

Apart from a possible new Severn Rail Bridge - everything else seems to be a collection of already announced schemes.

 

[Dr Day]

Until schemes get confirmed funding to be actually delivered most announcements are simply announcements for further studies, or in this case a wish list.

What is interesting about this one is a clear recognition of the need for cross border schemes, and maybe implying TfW will be a more integral part of GBR than some contributors to this forum seem to be assuming.

But still noticeable an announcement such as this still needs three quotes of support from representatives of three separate organisations. As @Bald Rick pointed out on another thread - one indicator of the success of GBR will be for this to be a single quote.

 

[Dr Hoo]

But still noticeable an announcement such as this still needs three quotes of support from representatives of three separate organisations. As @Bald Rick pointed out on another thread - one indicator of the success of GBR will be for this to be a single quote.

Will GBR officially subsume Cardiff Council and Transport for Wales as well as GWR?

Will only one ‘voice’ (that of GBR itself) be permitted in future?

 

[JonathanH]

Will only one ‘voice’ (that of GBR itself) be permitted in future?

Given that only central government can realistically afford the costs of additional rail provision, it seems that only its agent (ie GBR) should concern itself with future developments.

That would avoid other entities spending money on wish lists, feasibility studies and lobbying for things which are unlikely to be deliverable.

 

[The exile]

Given that only central government can realistically afford the costs of additional rail provision, it seems that only its agent (ie GBR) should concern itself with future developments.

That would avoid other entities spending money on wish lists, feasibility studies and lobbying for things which are unlikely to be deliverable.

Well, other entities will still (need to) come up with wish lists, otherwise nothing will ever happen.

 

[Smwrff]

No - I Expect that GWR will be part of GBR but that TfW will continue largely unchanged

 

[HSTEd]

The Severn Tunnel is, as I understand it, a major souce of trouble for the railway in maintenance terms and has signalling restrictions that make operation a pain.
(Something about restrictions on freight and passenger trains being in the tunnel at once?)

A modern, probably surface crossing, would likely be better for the railway in the long run - if it can get the money in the short term.

 

[The Planner]

The Severn Tunnel is, as I understand it, a major souce of trouble for the railway in maintenance terms and has signalling restrictions that make operation a pain.
(Something about restrictions on freight and passenger trains being in the tunnel at once?)

A modern, probably surface crossing, would likely be better for the railway in the long run - if it can get the money in the short term.

Its not a pain at all to operate. A passenger train is in and out in 4 minutes.

 

[anthony263]

I think there is a long block section through the tunnel and I think the fuel train from West Wales can use the tunnel but no other trains can enter the tunnel until it clears the tunnel.

Tfw pushing for permission to run a service to Bristol TM. I hope they do it would help ease overcrowding on GWRs current 2tph perhaps allow them to be sped up too especially if we got the 2tph stopping services to Bristol TM.

At the moment I could see us getting a 1tph to Bristol TM along with a extra1tph to Gloucester or chepstow

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jan 2025 ==

They even pushing for wiring to Penarth and Barry as well as to Swansea but not the VOG between Barry and Bridgend

 

[Dr Day]

No - I Expect that GWR will be part of GBR but that TfW will continue largely unchanged

How is that going to work when a large chunk of TfWs revenue is earned from passengers travelling to/from and within England, and a fair chunk of capacity within Wales is provided by Avanti, GWR and XC?

If one of the objectives of GBR is to be ‘one railway’ that surely needs to apply whether someone is travelling between Manchester and Hereford or say Manchester and Hertford?

With a parallel regionalisation, I would have expected something more like GBR (Wales), GBR (Midlands), GBR (Scotland) etc.

From a railway and travel pattern perspective it makes more sense for south Wales/Gloucester to be part of GBR (West), mid-Wales/Shrewsbury GBR (Midlands) and North Wales/Crewe/Chester within GBR (North West), but I don’t expect that will happen politically. That doesn’t mean TfW’s services, particularly the many cross-border ones, can’t and shouldn’t be part of GBR though.

 

[Smwrff]

Wales will not be divided among various GBR English regions for very obvious political reasons. There may be a GBR Cymru with shared responsibility with TfW for say Marches line and GWR and WCML services into Wales - but expect TfW to assume more not less responsibility in Wales.

 

[JKF]

It mentions aiming for a travel time of 1hr from London to Bristol, and 30mins Bristol to Cardiff. How could these times be achievable, what sort of realistic upgrades could be done? Perhaps this should be another thread?

I would assume it’d be Parkway for the Bristol-London timings. The line through to Wootten Bassett is fairly modern and straight, could higher speeds be obtained there? Grade separation at Westerleigh Jn?

I think the only realistic chance of hitting this target would be a high speed tunnel out of Paddington to Reading, maybe via Heathrow, similar to the bit of HS1 that gets you out of London in about ten minutes. And that wouldn’t be cheap! I have often though high-speed exits from cities, avoiding all the junctions, clutter and suburban stations would deliver a decent time saving for inter city travellers. Who hasn’t gritted their teeth as you slowly crawl round the bend into Leeds from the south or suffer the pedestrian pace through Guide Bridge etc. going into Manchester Piccadilly?

A replacement Severn Crossing could be built along the top of a Severn Barrage tidal energy scheme, which I think has been suggested before. Some proposals for this have been as far west as Weston Super Mare, but there are large environmental concerns especially the effect on wetlands further upstream, and interference to shipping to the Port of Bristol (which still has proposals for a deep container port at Avonmouth).

Interesting also to see a proposal for a new Pilning station. Perhaps this could be sited closer to the actual town, or if stuck at the mouth of the tunnel could actually replace Severn Beach station and allow closure of that line to passengers beyond Avonmouth.

 

[Smwrff]

The journey time from Reading to Bristol Parkway is only 45 mins. So if Old Oak Common is called London then it is already not far off 60 mins...

I don't think the Weston-Cardiff barrage will ever be built for a range of reasons, but a smaller Shoots barrage - between the two Severn Bridges - is more realistic and achievable and that could be easily integrated with a new Severn Rail crossing.

 

[Towers]

Its not a pain at all to operate. A passenger train is in and out in 4 minutes.

It’s a monumental pain in the a*se to maintain, though!

 

[JonathanH]

It’s a monumental pain in the a*se to maintain, though!

Even if that is true, and I don't doubt that it is, how many years of savings in the maintenance budget would it cost to build a new fixed link, taking into account the new fixed link would also need to be maintained? It would appear unaffordable given there is already a fixed link.

 

[HSTEd]

Even if that is true, and I don't doubt that it is, how many years of savings in the maintenance budget would it cost to build a new fixed link, taking into account the new fixed link would also need to be maintained? It would appear unaffordable given there is already a fixed link.

The maintenance and operation of the generator backed multiply redundant water pumping system necessary to keep the tunnel from rapidly flooding is not going to come cheap - far more than most comparable land based tunnels.

If a new severn crossing is eventually required for capacity reasons, building it for four tracks and discarding the tunnel is likely to be more economic than merely supplementing it.

 

[JonathanH]

The maintenance and operation of the generator based multiply redundant water pumping system necessary to keep the tunnel from rapidly flooding is not going to come cheap - far more than most comparable land based tunnels.

Indeed, so my question is can the savings from abandoning the existing Severn Tunnel pay for a replacement fixed link in a reasonable timescale?

 

[Towers]

Even if that is true, and I don't doubt that it is, how many years of savings in the maintenance budget would it cost to build a new fixed link, taking into account the new fixed link would also need to be maintained? It would appear unaffordable given there is already a fixed link.

It’s one of those situations which politicians are terrified of; “long term strategy”!

Britain’s railway is sleepwalking straight into a ‘knackered victorian structures’ crisis, doing the bare minimum required to keep things standing and avoiding paying big money to replace life expired infrastructure in the hope that it might become someone else’s problem before it reaches a critical stage. The Severn Tunnel is part of that landscape, and at some point it will need either a heck of a lot of work to keep it open or a full replacement of some kind. If this project can encompass that replacement, it really makes a lot of sense to just get it done.

 

[Topological]

Surely any replacement will be 2 tracks as well. All that is needed is a few more signals to make sure that the sections are shorter? The line is 2-track from Severn Tunnel Junction to Bristol Parkway anyway.

Possibly a stupid question, but what distance is needed to get the line to sufficient height to bridge the Severn?

I can see why a barrage has benefit for power generation etc. If there are conflicting wildlife demands that prevent a barrage is a bridge that daft?

 

[Towers]

Surely any replacement will be 2 tracks as well. All that is needed is a few more signals to make sure that the sections are shorter? The line is 2-track from Severn Tunnel Junction to Bristol Parkway anyway.

Possibly a stupid question, but what distance is needed to get the line to sufficient height to bridge the Severn?

I can see why a barrage has benefit for power generation etc. If there are conflicting wildlife demands that prevent a barrage is a bridge that daft?

Presumably a similar degree of incline to that required for the depth of the current tunnel?

 

[The Planner]

Possibly a stupid question, but what distance is needed to get the line to sufficient height to bridge the Severn?

Presumably a similar degree of incline to that required for the depth of the current tunnel?

Depends on the maximum gradient expected. 1 in 100 is a norm on the railway and as the Prince of Wales height above the river is 37m, then 3700m or 2¼ miles for whatever distance is deemed for the summit. Its going to be 4½ miles long.

 

[Topological]

Depends on the maximum gradient expected. 1 in 100 is a norm on the railway and as the Prince of Wales height above the river is 37m, then 3700m or 2¼ miles for whatever distance is deemed for the summit. Its going to be 4½ miles long.

Thank you.

That is not impossible looking at the geography of the area. Assuming here that the bridge leaves the Welsh side somewhere near the old pier and then lands in England about 1km north of the M4. The line would need to cross the M4 at normal road bridge height and descend further to meet the current line somewhere just west of the M5.

This all assumes that the 37m was set for a reason and that any new bridge would therefore have to be 37m+

 

[The Planner]

Thank you.

That is not impossible looking at the geography of the area. Assuming here that the bridge leaves the Welsh side somewhere near the old pier and then lands in England about 1km north of the M4. The line would need to cross the M4 at normal road bridge height and descend further to meet the current line somewhere just west of the M5.

This all assumes that the 37m was set for a reason and that any new bridge would therefore have to be 37m+

I expect there was some kind of stipulation to still allow tall ships up the Severn at high tide. It may not exist now of course.

 

[Smwrff]

The alternative to a bridge could be another tunnel. But a modern immersed tube type.

 

[HSTEd]

That is not impossible looking at the geography of the area. Assuming here that the bridge leaves the Welsh side somewhere near the old pier and then lands in England about 1km north of the M4. The line would need to cross the M4 at normal road bridge height and descend further to meet the current line somewhere just west of the M5.

From Google Earth it seems the railway has already risen by about 25-30m above sea level by the time it reaches the M5, so the ramp might end up very shallow in the English side.

The welsh side is likely where the impressive engineering would have to be

 

[Topological]

From Google Earth it seems the railway has already risen by about 25-30m above sea level by the time it reaches the M5, so the ramp might end up very shallow in the English side.

The welsh side is likely where the impressive engineering would have to be

On the Welsh side I am presuming the line follows the Gloucester line past Caldicott and therefore has a bit of the height above sea level. More height can be gained as it skirts round to the north of Sudbrook.

Although it would need checking carefully, the point at which piles would need driving for the viaduct element of the bridge should be to the north of the existing tunnel.

Ideally, it would be possible to construct all but the final connections without closing the SWML and to do the part alongside the Gloucester line without too much disruption to the Gloucester line.

Some changes to the approaches at Severn Tunnel Junction would be needed to get the fast trains on the south side of the formation.

The satellite view suggests minimal demolition is needed on the Welsh side.

 

[Severnia333]

It mentions aiming for a travel time of 1hr from London to Bristol, and 30mins Bristol to Cardiff. How could these times be achievable, what sort of realistic upgrades could be done? Perhaps this should be another thread?

I would assume it’d be Parkway for the Bristol-London timings. The line through to Wootten Bassett is fairly modern and straight, could higher speeds be obtained there? Grade separation at Westerleigh Jn?

I think the only realistic chance of hitting this target would be a high speed tunnel out of Paddington to Reading, maybe via Heathrow, similar to the bit of HS1 that gets you out of London in about ten minutes. And that wouldn’t be cheap! I have often though high-speed exits from cities, avoiding all the junctions, clutter and suburban stations would deliver a decent time saving for inter city travellers. Who hasn’t gritted their teeth as you slowly crawl round the bend into Leeds from the south or suffer the pedestrian pace through Guide Bridge etc. going into Manchester Piccadilly?

A replacement Severn Crossing could be built along the top of a Severn Barrage tidal energy scheme, which I think has been suggested before. Some proposals for this have been as far west as Weston Super Mare, but there are large environmental concerns especially the effect on wetlands further upstream, and interference to shipping to the Port of Bristol (which still has proposals for a deep container port at Avonmouth).

Interesting also to see a proposal for a new Pilning station. Perhaps this could be sited closer to the actual town, or if stuck at the mouth of the tunnel could actually replace Severn Beach station and allow closure of that line to passengers beyond Avonmouth.

Pilning is definitely underutilised. Even without any extra development in the area there'd be decent demand for 1tph to Temple Meads (unsure which path you'd take)

 

[brad465]

On the Welsh side I am presuming the line follows the Gloucester line past Caldicott and therefore has a bit of the height above sea level. More height can be gained as it skirts round to the north of Sudbrook.

Although it would need checking carefully, the point at which piles would need driving for the viaduct element of the bridge should be to the north of the existing tunnel.

Ideally, it would be possible to construct all but the final connections without closing the SWML and to do the part alongside the Gloucester line without too much disruption to the Gloucester line.

The tunnel is used to regular closures for engineering works, so I doubt a closure for linking up a new route at each end will be much more disruptive, if at all.

If a bridge/alternative tunnel was built, then it would make sense to tie this in with line speed enhancements to improve the service as well. Currently the tunnel is 75mph throughout; if a new crossing could be raised to at least 100mph and Severn Tunnel jct be remodelled (which I suspect would have to happen anyway if a replacement crossing was built), then this could also, with other infrastructure enhancements, increase the line speed from Severn Tunnel jct to Newport, which is fairly straight at 75/HST90 and being 4-track, slower trains would be out of the way here.

 

[Meerkat]

The barrage plan I saw had a duplicated rail line viaduct around the ship lock so that the trains would use the side/end that the ships aren't using.