Keolis/Amey to take over Wales and Borders

[Kite159]

Yeah but the reason they are going for intermittent is because they are doing it on a shoestring. As the majority of stops will be heavy rail even in the centre of Cardiff then keeping the buildings and achieving level boarding by altering the platform edges or resurfacing the platforms, avoiding large scale track renewal, that will save hundreds of millions. Sheffields trial has demonstrated you suffer for trying to bring low floor platforms onto the heavy rail nework.

The conversion makes the valleys a lot more like Manchester than the other exclusively new build systems.

Nah, it's Wales, they will spend the money on lowering all the platforms for their project to prevent the lines from returning to regular trains without large costs

 

[The Ham]

Nah, it's Wales, they will spend the money on lowering all the platforms for their project to prevent the lines from returning to regular trains without large costs

I would suggest that if there's a network of (say) 50 existing stations and 10 new stops the cost of building platforms for those new stops (which will be away from an operating railway) would be significantly cheaper.

Also to lower platforms means closing that station for use until all the stations on that line are done (even if you run services from one platform and lower the other will be very disruptive) will cause a lot of problems and wouldn't go down well with users. Headlines like "No services for two weeks is World Class" would be embarrassing.

In addition getting ramped access to some (existing accessable platforms) could be hard and stopping a platform from being accessable wouldn't go down well, add it would be seen as going backwards.

It could be possible to go for low floor trams but given the potential costs and issues with doing so I would be surprised if it happened (as I don't have many hats I'll not offer to eat it!).

 

[Robertj21a]

Nah, it's Wales, they will spend the money on lowering all the platforms for their project to prevent the lines from returning to regular trains without large costs

Very sensible too.

 

[gareth950]

Very sensible too.

If you want to argue in favour of the fundamentally flawed concept of having trams on the "Core Valley lines", severing an existing cross-city network, dismantling recently installed brand new HR signalling & infrstructure on the Valleys etc, head over tothe 'South Wales Metro' thread in Infrastructure & Stations.

 

[MarkyT]

I would suggest that if there's a network of (say) 50 existing stations and 10 new stops the cost of building platforms for those new stops (which will be away from an operating railway) would be significantly cheaper.

Also to lower platforms means closing that station for use until all the stations on that line are done (even if you run services from one platform and lower the other will be very disruptive) will cause a lot of problems and wouldn't go down well with users. Headlines like "No services for two weeks is World Class" would be embarrassing.

In addition getting ramped access to some (existing accessable platforms) could be hard and stopping a platform from being accessable wouldn't go down well, add it would be seen as going backwards.

It could be possible to go for low floor trams but given the potential costs and issues with doing so I would be surprised if it happened (as I don't have many hats I'll not offer to eat it!).

Good arguments there. I suspect they will be able achieve perfectly level boarding at most stations with a slightly lower vehicle floor height than is normal for UK rolling stock, like the Anglia FLIRTs, and any horizontal gaps might be solved by movable gap filler stepboards.

 

[gareth950]

So given that we now know that MTR are not going to legally challenge the awarding of the franchise to KeilosAmey, what's the delay in releasing the full details of their bid? After all, TfW's number one champion in the media, Sion Barry, told us that if MTR didn't challenge, we would find out the details of the winning bid 'much sooner' than the end of the 10 day standstill period.
Have KeilosAmey really been gagged so tightly that they aren't even allowed to tell us what their going to do before TfW says so? Is this what the next 15 years are going to be like, everything has to be run past TfW for the spin doctors to approve first?

 

[Dai Corner]

So given that we now know that MTR are not going to legally challenge the awarding of the franchise to KeilosAmey, what's the delay in releasing the full details of their bid? After all, TfW's number one champion in the media, Sion Barry, told us that if MTR didn't challenge, we would find out the details of the winning bid 'much sooner' than the end of the 10 day standstill period.
Have KeilosAmey really been gagged so tightly that they aren't even allowed to tell us what their going to do before TfW says so? Is this what the next 15 years are going to be like, everything has to be run past TfW for the spin doctors to approve first?

The Assembly are on hols (Half Term Recess). That's the time to release bad news but Carwyn and Ken obviously think it's good news so we'll have to wait til they're back in and ready to take credit for the world-class announcement.

 

[WatcherZero]

It could be they created a marketing plan around the final date with press briefings and social media campaigns planned and so they will stick to it, but just because their opponent isn't challenging doesn't mean no one can, some individual or other company that dropped out earlier can still challenge the award if they had evidence or suspicion of malpractice, the Dft/WaG can also cancel its own decision during those 10 days of cooling off.

 

[Robertj21a]

If you want to argue in favour of the fundamentally flawed concept of having trams on the "Core Valley lines", severing an existing cross-city network, dismantling recently installed brand new HR signalling & infrstructure on the Valleys etc, head over tothe 'South Wales Metro' thread in Infrastructure & Stations.

No need, I had read that thread already.

I wasn't arguing anything. My personal preference is for a proper light rail system so that, in due course, it has the potential to fully enter town centres, suburbs etc.

 

[Gareth Marston]

No need, I had read that thread already.

I wasn't arguing anything. My personal preference is for a proper light rail system so that, in due course, it has the potential to fully enter town centres, suburbs etc.

So you'll realise that nowhere in downtown Cardiff is more than 10 minutes from the existing heavy rail stations making street running trams from existing HR lines an uncessarry, expensive and disruptive gimmick.

 

[Robertj21a]

So you'll realise that nowhere in downtown Cardiff is more than 10 minutes from the existing heavy rail stations making street running trams from existing HR lines an uncessarry, expensive and disruptive gimmick.

Where did I suggest Cardiff ?

 

[MarkyT]

No need, I had read that thread already.

I wasn't arguing anything. My personal preference is for a proper light rail system so that, in due course, it has the potential to fully enter town centres, suburbs etc.

And high platforms do not prevent that. Either construct high level new platforms for the extensions as in Manchester and a number of German systems, or have split level floor height on the vehhicles as on the Cadiz CAF tram trains. http://www.caf.es/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-detalle.php?p=211

 

[Robertj21a]

And high platforms do not prevent that. Either construct high level new platforms for the extensions as in Manchester and a number of German systems, or have split level floor height on the vehhicles as on the Cadiz CAF tram trains. http://www.caf.es/en/productos-servicios/proyectos/proyecto-detalle.php?p=211

Or just do it properly so that future generations appreciate the forethought that their parents/grandparents had all that time ago in 2018.
It would be nice to see some forward thinking on the subject rather than seemingly entrenched views from heavy rail enthusiasts.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or just do it properly so that future generations appreciate the forethought that their parents/grandparents had all that time ago in 2018.
It would be nice to see some forward thinking on the subject rather than seemingly entrenched views from heavy rail enthusiasts.

I agree. I think using tram concepts on branch lines is a very worthy idea indeed - not least because it'll make extensions and additional stations much cheaper. I think such a concept (using self-powered LRVs; you're hardly going to wire it) would fit the Conwy Valley well, to give another example. And much as I don't mind the idea of 230s, I think it'd fit St Albans and the Isle of Wight well too (not least because you could then extend the former on to the Midland station).

 

[gareth950]

Or just do it properly so that future generations appreciate the forethought that their parents/grandparents had all that time ago in 2018.
It would be nice to see some forward thinking on the subject rather than seemingly entrenched views from heavy rail enthusiasts.

Have you actually been to Cardiff Central and seen the way the Valleys heavy rail network is currently integrated into the rest of the mainline system? I presume not from your posts.
How is severing a HR cross city network 'forethought' exactly? How is mothballing / ripping out £300 million worth of recently installed brand new signalling and HR infrastructure 'forethought'?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Or just do it properly so that future generations appreciate the forethought that their parents/grandparents had all that time ago in 2018.
It would be nice to see some forward thinking on the subject rather than seemingly entrenched views from heavy rail enthusiasts.

Explain how the rest of world has been creating cross city links of either Lr or HR flavour but Welsh Government want to destroy a pre existing cross city HR network whose stations are very well placed for the city it serves constitutes forethought?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Where did I suggest Cardiff ?

Where else then let's test your knowledge of South Wales?

 

[Gareth Marston]

It could be they created a marketing plan around the final date with press briefings and social media campaigns planned and so they will stick to it, but just because their opponent isn't challenging doesn't mean no one can, some individual or other company that dropped out earlier can still challenge the award if they had evidence or suspicion of malpractice, the Dft/WaG can also cancel its own decision during those 10 days of cooling off.

Boys and Girls are back at the Sended on Monday 4th June. so it's once their back and a big announcement with smiling Ken and Carwyn at Cardiff Central next week or a cut and run job in next two days with a press release.

 

[MarkyT]

Or just do it properly so that future generations appreciate the forethought that their parents/grandparents had all that time ago in 2018.
It would be nice to see some forward thinking on the subject rather than seemingly entrenched views from heavy rail enthusiasts.

I'm by no means what you might describe as a "heavy rail enthusiast", but I am largely agnostic as to whether a system has high or low platforms. Many light systems around the world do have high platforms yet run happily in street sections and pedestrian areas as well as along segregated reservations. Manchester is but one of these. Conversion of the whole valleys network to low floor would be an extremely large job and would require extensive suspension of service to achieve, which is why I don't think it will happen. The main benefits of light rail, steeper gradients, tighter curves, the ability to easily cross roads on the level, run alongside roads and share traffic lanes where expedient for any future extensions would still remain with high platforms.

 

[Llanigraham]

Where did I suggest Cardiff ?

And what other large conurbations do you think are in the area included in the scheme?

 

[Robertj21a]

Have you actually been to Cardiff Central and seen the way the Valleys heavy rail network is currently integrated into the rest of the mainline system? I presume not from your posts.
How is severing a HR cross city network 'forethought' exactly? How is mothballing / ripping out £300 million worth of recently installed brand new signalling and HR infrastructure 'forethought'?

Not only been there but travelled on all the Valley lines. Always entertaining to ride a fleet of elderly DMUs !
I recognise that I'm a bit off topic (for this thread) but I'm trying to encourage some creative thinking now that there is a reasonably clean sheet of paper to design a brand new network.
I'm not really concerned whether there's been recent investment in signalling etc as that's historic investment, and of little need on a light rail system. What I'm more concerned about is that more heavy rail will inevitably rule out future extensions if/when needed - for all you know, there could yet be significant investment in The Valleys (housing, new towns etc) or a town layout rebuilt/extended. For Cardiff itself a light rail system could be extended into busy suburbs.
It's the apparent lack of forward thinking that is disappointing but I recognise that this forum is pro-heavy rail.
We'll just have to disagree !

 

[The Ham]

Not only been there but travelled on all the Valley lines. Always entertaining to ride a fleet of elderly DMUs !
I recognise that I'm a bit off topic (for this thread) but I'm trying to encourage some creative thinking now that there is a reasonably clean sheet of paper to design a brand new network.
I'm not really concerned whether there's been recent investment in signalling etc as that's historic investment, and of little need on a light rail system. What I'm more concerned about is that more heavy rail will inevitably rule out future extensions if/when needed - for all you know, there could yet be significant investment in The Valleys (housing, new towns etc) or a town layout rebuilt/extended. For Cardiff itself a light rail system could be extended into busy suburbs.
It's the apparent lack of forward thinking that is disappointing but I recognise that this forum is pro-heavy rail.
We'll just have to disagree !

I don't think that we are saying that it had to be heavy rail, rather the light rail would be better having platform boarding as otherwise you would have to spend a LOT more to remove platforms at the many places that already have them just to avoid having to save having to build them where they don't exist.

In summary: yes have light rail, no don't have ground level boarding.

Also, given that your largest market (Cardiff) is well catered for by existing stations and the majority of other places served will be with through services at present there's likely to be limited need for on street running and although needing platforms will increase future costs of extensions it wouldn't be by a lot.

Unless you can suggest places where it would be beneficial (which had been asked previously)?

 

[Robertj21a]

I don't think that we are saying that it had to be heavy rail, rather the light rail would be better having platform boarding as otherwise you would have to spend a LOT more to remove platforms at the many places that already have them just to avoid having to save having to build them where they don't exist.

In summary: yes have light rail, no don't have ground level boarding.

Also, given that your largest market (Cardiff) is well catered for by existing stations and the majority of other places served will be with through services at present there's likely to be limited need for on street running and although needing platforms will increase future costs of extensions it wouldn't be by a lot.

Unless you can suggest places where it would be beneficial (which had been asked previously)?

I was responding to the comments re costly new signalling etc. I also understand the issues surrounding the rebuilding of existing high platform stations (an on-going costly overhead).
I thought I'd already commented on the need to design a flexible network so that light rail could be extended for future generations at any time - whether that be regeneration in the valleys or to serve Cardiff suburbs.
Anyway, off-topic for this thread so I'll leave it there before I get reprimanded !

 

[Envoy]

Network Rail seem to think London trains need to use platform 0 in order to make sufficient capacity for the expected increase in traffic, including an extra two trains per day to London in the morning peak and back in the evening peak: They suggest that platform 0 be the main platform for eastbound services, with platform 2 being the main platform for westbound services and platform 1 being available for services in both directions.

So it appears that the problem is Network Rail have decided that platforms 3 and 4 will be dedicated to releif line services (with the latter also being shared by the ValleyLines) and thus unavailable for use by London trains. Elsewhere in the document, they suggest that Ebbw Vale services (2tph), 1tph between Cardiff and Bristol and a Cardiff-Cheltenham service would use the relief lines after upgrading the linespeeds on them to match the mains. That doesn't make sense to me, because the Ebbw Vale services would then have to cross the mains at Ebbw Junction. Wouldn't it make more sense to put the Cardiff-Nottingham and Cardiff-Portsmouth services on the relief lines instead? Platform 0 could then be used for trains to Ebbw Vale and the marches line, leaving platform 1 free for London services.

The problem with doing that, I guess, is that the proposed new station(s) between Cardiff and Newport would require platforms on all four lines, not just the reliefs, so that the Ebbw branch services could call. Also, moving Bristol services to the relief lines would result in down trains crossing the main lines at Severn Tunnel Junction to reach the down relief (up trains have a flyover; could that be made bi-directional or is it too busy?).

Surely, it would be best to keep the Ebbw Vales on the main lines as people at any intermediate station between Cardiff & Newport - such as St.Mellons, would need access to Newport station in order to change trains for destinations to/from England. So, as the Ebbw Vales don't go into Newport - no point in having them on the reliefs with the additional problem of pathing them over the mains. (They could use the 769’s for the Ebbw Vales when available as they could use the overhead wires to Ebbw Junction and can do 100mph).

A new station in east Cardiff - such as at St.Mellons, needs to have a large ideally free to use car park. This would surely induce a lot of people to switch to rail travel as currently, residents of east Cardiff either have to go the wrong way into Cardiff Central or go to Newport to catch trains. Therefore, it would surely make sense to have the Cheltenham all stops services and the Taunton all stops on the reliefs to serve any intermediate stations between Cardiff & Newport. Therefore no need to build platforms on the mains between Cardiff & Newport. Platform 0 at Cardiff could be used for the Ebbw Vales, Cross Country Express services to Birmingham & beyond, the Portsmouths and those trains that head up The Marches. This surely means that platform 1 could be used for the longer London trains and therefore save the considerable cost of knocking down the main booking hall as Cardiff Central?

 

[sw1ller]

Is it inconceivable to have a tram with doors at different heights? 2 end coaches at platform height and a middles coach/s at street height?? People would know where to stand when boarding.

It would also mean you could spend the next 15 years gradually lowering existing platforms where needed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think that we are saying that it had to be heavy rail, rather the light rail would be better having platform boarding as otherwise you would have to spend a LOT more to remove platforms

You don't necessarily have to remove them, you can pile the ballast up a bit and keep them. But it would be nice to see the kind of investment we got in the Metrolink Oldham line, which involved flattening the lot and starting again even if it did result in high platforms - they aren't the original ones, unlike the 1990s on the cheap bodge job of the Alty and Bolton lines, they are a totally new railway, just like the Chiltern Oxford line. It would actually have been cheaper to put it on a new alignment!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is it inconceivable to have a tram with doors at different heights? 2 end coaches at platform height and a middles coach/s at street height?? People would know where to stand when boarding.

It can be done, and is in places, but TBH I'd favour the "nuclear option" of flatten the lot and start again, one line at a time. It did give a period of pain for Metrolink users, but it resulted in a proper European quality light rail service rather than a classic British cheapo bodge job. (The new bits of Metrolink genuinely have the feel of a German Stadtbahn type U-Bahn - even things like proper platform canopies rather than cheapo bus shelters).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Ken Skates has made his first utterance on the new franchise.
This is in the Merseytravel aanouncement of the completion of the work to bring the Halton Curve into full service, with a Wales & Borders service starting in December:
https://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/abo...-time-ready-for-new-services-in-December.aspx

Ken Skates, Welsh Government Transport Secretary, said: "Improved rail connectivity between North Wales and Liverpool will create significant economic and social opportunities for passengers and businesses. Today's announcement is a major step towards delivering these improvements.
"We will continue to work closely with our cross-border partners including Merseytravel to maximise the opportunities and benefits that will arise from the new Wales and Borders franchise and make it easier for people to commute between the regions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nah, it's Wales, they will spend the money on lowering all the platforms for their project to prevent the lines from returning to regular trains without large costs

Now Metrolink has been done properly rather than a cheapo 1990s bodge, do you hear the people of Manchester clamouring for the return of Sprinters and Pacers?

No, I thought not. A light rail system will be hugely popular and successful, and a mark of a true European capital city. And it'll fuel regeneration of run-down towns and villages - a modern electric tram sells itself in a way a DMU doesn't.

 

[takno]

Is it inconceivable to have a tram with doors at different heights? 2 end coaches at platform height and a middles coach/s at street height?? People would know where to stand when boarding.

It would also mean you could spend the next 15 years gradually lowering existing platforms where needed.

It's conceivable. Obviously only having half the doors available at any given station, with passengers unsure of which one they needed to be at isn't a recipe for short station dwell times, so that's one of the theoretical advantages of trams completely eliminated.