Gowerton re doubling green light

[Gareth Marston]

News Releases: Wales & West
RAIL PLANS FOR WEST WALES UNVEILED

Monday 12 Dec 2011 14:00

A £40m plan to significantly improve the rail infrastructure between Swansea and Gowerton is unveiled today as Network Rail submits its proposal to Carmarthenshire Council.

Backed by the Welsh Government and the South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium (SWWITCH), this improvement will meet a key rail strategy to improve performance, connectivity and cater to a rising passenger demand in West Wales. It is forecast that passengers in West Wales could rise by 20% by the end of the decade.

Jointly funded by Network Rail and the Welsh Government, the scheme combines two core programmes of work - the replacement of the Loughor viaduct and the installation of an additional six-mile track between Cockett West Junction and Duffryn West Junction.

In addition, the disused eastbound platform at Gowerton station will be reinstated to cater for the new track.

Mark Langman, route managing director for Network Rail Wales, said: “Today’s announcement of our plan is another affirmation of Network Rail’s commitment to growing the railway in Wales. This scheme has come about by a shared vision with the Welsh Government and SWWITCH, and the recognition that investment in rail infrastructure is good for the economy and will help support and nurture Welsh economic growth. We hope that local authorities, passengers and the local community share our vision of the long term benefits and support us during the construction works to deliver the scheme successfully.

"The scheme promises to bring huge social economic benefits in south west Wales by improving capacity and connectivity to key employment centres such as Swansea, Llanelli, Carmarthen, Fishguard and Milford Haven. There will be an improved passenger experience with shorter journey times and better connections that will also encourage modal shift, potentially removing around 300,000 trips from road to rail and improving the green credentials of rail"

Key benefits of the scheme include:

1. A new structure at Loughor and that is strong enough to support two tracks

2. Better performance on the railway as the additional new track will allow trains to continue to run when one of the lines is shut or congested.

3. Provide more capacity on the railway to potentially enable two more trains to run between Swansea and Llanelli and one more train to run between Swansea and Carmarthen per hour.

4. A bigger, accessible and secure Gowerton station with two platforms, a new DDA compliant footbridge with ramps, real-time customer information system, CCTVs and better lighting

5. Modernised signalling infrastructure and enhanced crossing equipment at Duffryn to improve infrastructure reliability and safety

6. Stronger bridges at Traffle Mill, Gypsy Cross and Rhosog

Subject to planning approval and listed building consent, Network Rail is proposing to keep the existing natural stone abutments and some of the Grade II listed trestles and erect a small section of the old Loughor viaduct on the West shore as part of its conservation efforts.

In addition, Network Rail will be seeking approval from Environment Agency Wales, Countryside Council for Wales, WG Marine Consent Team to help protect the environment at the Loughor Estuary and Carmarthen Bay area. An environmental impact assessment has also been carried out.

Work will also be planned carefully to minimise disruption to passengers by carrying out majority of the work without having to close the railway.


Notes to Editors:

- The proposal submitted to Carmarthenshire Council on 12 December is for the plan to replace Loughor viaduct. The submission includes a planning document, listed building consent and an environmental impact assessment for the work at Loughor.

- Separate planning submissions for works to the bridges (Traffle Mill, Gypsy Cross and Rhosog) and Gowerton station will be submitted to the City and County of Swansea Council early next year.

- Information of the scheme is also available to the public at Swansea library and Gowerton library from 12 December onwards.

- Details of Network Rail's planning application for the work at Lougher can be found on www.carmarthenshire.gov.uk

Proposed timeline *subject to planning approval*
Winter 2011
– Submit listed building consent and environmental consent to seek approval for work on Loughor viaduct

Spring 2012
- Construction work begins at Loughor viaduct

Autumn 2012
- Upgrading work begins at Rhosog bridge and Broadoak Tramway

Winter 2012/2013
- Upgrading work begins at River Lliw and Gypsy Cross bridges
- Rail closure to allow existing bridge to be demolished and new deck to be installed at Loughor viaduct
- New footbridge at Gowerton station installed

Spring 2013
- Rail closure to allow testing and commissioning of new infrastructure before the new track is opened to the public.




For more information please contact :

Mavis Choong
Network Rail
t:01793 389749
m:07515 620384
e: [email protected]

 

[Greenback]

This is excellent news for this area. This section should never have been singled in the first place.

 

[Markdvdman]

This is excellent news for this area. This section should never have been singled in the first place.

Yup wonderful news - an atrocious decision that is costing £40m to repair.

Why do we do this in this country? It is INCREDIBLE!

 

[anthony263]

Nice to see this finally going ahead.

I agree that this line shouldn't have been singled.

I wonder if the 07:28 Carmarthen - London Paddington service would make a call at Gowerton at 08:10 after the line has been double tracked since it does provide a commuter service into Swansea.

I just hope this wont lead to the Swansea district line being singled as a result of Gowerton being doubled tracked.

 

[tbtc]

Yup wonderful news - an atrocious decision that is costing £40m to repair.

Why do we do this in this country? It is INCREDIBLE!

Agreed - good news, but a huge price tag - £40m for six miles of track (and a replacement viaduct)

 

[Gareth Marston]

Agreed - good news, but a huge price tag - £40m for six miles of track (and a replacement viaduct)

What were the "savings" in singling I wonder?

 

[Penmorfa]

What were the "savings" in singling I wonder?

Not £40 million that's for sure!

 

[tbtc]

What were the "savings" in singling I wonder?

No idea, but that doesn't necessarily justify the "blank cheque" costs quoted here

 

[Greenback]

The line was singled in 1986. I doubt that 25 years of less track to maintain has saved £1.6 million per year, and there must have been a cost to single the line in the first place, even if you only count the modifications to the signalling.

I would like to see how the cost breaks down. It seems that everything that is done on the railway now costs a fortune. That said, I imagine it will cost a bit to replace the Loughor bridge.

 

[Techniquest]

Yeah I was thinking that's going to be the most expensive bit to do. A rather big job, since the viaduct's quite long and of course you're at the mercy of the tides and weather in general doing such a job. I'd suggest the viaduct replacement will easily be 50% or more of the cost of the job.

Glad to hear re-doubling will happen soon, will be a good excuse to re-visit the area for the micro-gricing opportunities. As for the District Line being singled, why on Earth would they want to do that? Less need to send freight that way, so less traffic to be routed that way so a single-line railway could probably manage in places on it but that equates roughly to shooting yourself in the foot. It would only mean an expensive project in the future and means less opportunities to improve the passenger service through Gowerton, one key reason for this going ahead aside from Loughor Viaduct needing to be replaced.

 

[PHILIPE]

I could never understand why they singled many lines, sections between Salisbury and Exeter as another example where some re-instatement has had to be made. What difference does it make to maintenance costs as the line which remains gets twice as much use and wear and tear and also additional points have to be put in and to be maintained.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I could never understand why they singled many lines, sections between Salisbury and Exeter as another example where some re-instatement has had to be made. What difference does it make to maintenance costs as the line which remains gets twice as much use and wear and tear and also additional points have to be put in and to be maintained.

Govt actually gave BR grants for modernisation if they could demonstrate they were making savings. Hence many an 80's re signalling project was bought by stripping out capacity to appease Whitehall.

 

[merlodlliw]

Good for the South, the Wrexham redouble is also £40 millions, when it was singled it saved £450K on a bridge.

Bob

 

[Gareth Marston]

Unsure of NR/WG split anyone know?

 

[a good off]

Back in 1986 when it was singled I doubt many senior managers on BR(W) would have envisaged the line west of Swansea surviving past the 1990's. I think it was the first part of a run down strategy taking place.

On the subject of the District line, I thought it would be an obvious candidate for having a local passenger service with some station reopenings. I'm surprised no one has yet taken this forward on a political level.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Back in 1986 when it was singled I doubt many senior managers on BR(W) would have envisaged the line west of Swansea surviving past the 1990's. I think it was the first part of a run down strategy taking place.

On the subject of the District line, I thought it would be an obvious candidate for having a local passenger service with some station reopenings. I'm surprised no one has yet taken this forward on a political level.

Regional Railways and John Davies in particular turned West Wales round in increments from the later 80's , - the District line has had a fair amount of relaying by the HOT train in recent years , so it should retrain its double status.

Any overlay passenger service , as mentioned before , can only come from support from the strapped revenue budget !

 

[Greenback]

I don't think the prospects for the future in 1986 would have seemed that bleak. There were new DMU's on the horizon, more services were running than a few years previously, and there was more freight then than there is now,

 

[ChiefPlanner]

A very strategic decision for the future ..........(a once in a century choice , almost)

 

[merlodlliw]

Unsure of NR/WG split anyone know?

I would like to know this, I've stirred all the A.Ms & M.Ps in North East Wales about timelines , NR don't seem to want to spend up here.
I sent the press release to the local regional papers and they were phoning around yesterday to clarify if the Wrexham/Saltney money is protected, or shifted.

Excellent news for South West Wales of course. It would be a disaster if we are limited to three trains an hour, but I suspect politics is at play again.


Bob

 

[Rhydgaled]

I wonder if the 07:28 Carmarthen - London Paddington service would make a call at Gowerton at 08:10 after the line has been double tracked since it does provide a commuter service into Swansea.

While the full 1.5tph offered by ATW to Carmarthen and beyond should call (with up to 2tph calling if frequency of trains from Carmarthen etc. to Swansea is increased) I don't think the FGW services should. I wouldn't suggest stopping HOWL services either. If you want more trains to stop at Gowerton, then I'd suggest 2tph from Swansea High Street, one to Gwaun-Cae-Gurwen and one to Swansea Docks via a new station, 'Morriston Parkway' on the Swansea district line. Both these trains would call at Llangennech and Bynea, meaning HOWL trains don't need to stop at those two stations either. In the same vain of creating a ValleyLines network for Swansea, I'd suggest a service from Gwaun-Cae-Gurwen to Swansea Docks via Morriston Parkway and from Swansea Docks up to Glyn-Neath/Aberdare/Cardiff/Barry/Maesteg (track extension required) and Onllwyn (perhaps a tram, running through to Mumbles via Swansea High Street).

Yup wonderful news - an atrocious decision that is costing £40m to repair.

Clearly, it is very expensive to undo the mistakes of the past, which is precisely why I am very concerned that this re-doubling is going ahead. This is because, once that's done, Network Rail intend to make the same mistake on the Swansea District Line, which will kill off the only hope of rail west of Swansea being time competitive with the car for journeys east of Swansea.

As for the District Line being singled, why on Earth would they want to do that? Less need to send freight that way, so less traffic to be routed that way so a single-line railway could probably manage in places on it but that equates roughly to shooting yourself in the foot. It would only mean an expensive project in the future and means less opportunities to improve the passenger service through Gowerton, one key reason for this going ahead aside from Loughor Viaduct needing to be replaced.

Very well said, but Network Rail (perhaps I should use the term Nitwit Rail that I've heard branded on here in the past) intend to do something of that nature, precisly what I don't know but the Swansea District Line is in need of saving.

We believe that the solution to passenger growth
and future capacity requirements for the sections of route with a higher capacity utilisation can be met by a combination of several initiatives:

• train lengthening, and where appropriate supported by platform lengthening;
• incremental enhancements (which can be delivered as improvements to planned track, structures and signalling renewals) and certain limited stand alone enhancements. These have the potential to improve performance (necessary for growth), enable specific increases in train paths and facilitate timetable restructuring, and include:
  • potential redoubling of the Cockett to Duffryn single line;
  • rationalisation of the Swansea District Line west of Llandarcy;

Rationalisation of any sort would NOT be good news.

On the subject of the District line, I thought it would be an obvious candidate for having a local passenger service with some station reopenings. I'm surprised no one has yet taken this forward on a political level.

Politicaly, the Swansea District Line does not exist, the AMs don't seem to know about it. In discussions about Fishguard, I've read that one of them said something like "We need to look at the barriers to introducing extra services to run to Fishguard, for example the Gowerton single line". Clearly, these persons did not know that the only Fishguard day time train at the time did not pass over this single track at all. As for services, in addition to the expansive ValleyLines ideas above, I'd have one express train every two hours between Cardiff and Pembrokeshire, calling west of Carmarthen at Llanelli, Port Talbot and Bridgend only (prefrablly every hour between Cardiff and Carmarthen).

the District line has had a fair amount of relaying by the HOT train in recent years, so it should retrain its double status.

What does HOT train stand for? Perhaps they've changed their mind since the quote above.

Any overlay passenger service, as mentioned before, can only come from support from the strapped revenue budget!

I'd suggest starting small, by getting the 175 off WAG2 and the 150 leased to Northern. The 175 would release a 150 from Holyhead - Cardiff (or other 150 operated long distance service), giving two 150s. One I'd suggest putting to work on Gwaun-Cae-Gurwen - Swansea Docks trains (should manage every two hours) and the other I'd put on the Maesteg line to replace a 158. That 158 would then run a morning service from Milford/Fishguard/Carmarthen to express service to Cardiff over the district line, then the Fishguard boat train, then a relief train for the 17:39 running express to Fishgaurd/Milford via district line. The 150 that currently goes off to Fishguard on the boat train would then be free to plug all (excpet one I think) of the gaps in the mostly hourly Cardiff - Cheltenham service. Since ATW already lease all the stock involved, the increase in costs would be fairly small, and scrapping Ieuan Air should help find the money.

 

[The Planner]

What does HOT train stand for? Perhaps they've changed their mind since the quote above.

High Output Ballast Cleaner or the track relayer (TRS4)

 

[Techniquest]

Very well said, but Network Rail (perhaps I should use the term Nitwit Rail that I've heard branded on here in the past) intend to do something of that nature, precisly what I don't know but the Swansea District Line is in need of saving.

We believe that the solution to passenger growth

and future capacity requirements for the sections of route with a higher capacity utilisation can be met by a combination of several initiatives:

• train lengthening, and where appropriate supported by platform lengthening;
• incremental enhancements (which can be delivered as improvements to planned track, structures and signalling renewals) and certain limited stand alone enhancements. These have the potential to improve performance (necessary for growth), enable specific increases in train paths and facilitate timetable restructuring, and include:
  • potential redoubling of the Cockett to Duffryn single line;
  • rationalisation of the Swansea District Line west of Llandarcy;

Rationalisation of any sort would NOT be good news.

Agreed rationalisation is not good news, regardless of what sort it may be. I must admit I had no idea it was being considered for the District Line west of Llandarcy, quite some distance that. Hopefully NR will leave it alone, alas I doubt this will be the case.

 

[Flamingo]

I wonder how ATW's decision to downgrade Carmarthen station by removing all dispatch staff and making it self-dispatch ties in with this supposed increase in capacity and commitment?

 

[Greenback]

I wonder how ATW's decision to downgrade Carmarthen station by removing all dispatch staff and making it self-dispatch ties in with this supposed increase in capacity and commitment?

It only ties in with reducing costs and increasing profits, while subsidy cntinues at the same level.

Has this (the downgrade) happened or is it yet to be implemented?

 

[sidmouth]

I wonder how much money overall had actually been saved to GB plc by singalling the total length of track that was singled during the 1970s / 1980s; due either to the total cost of:
• Subsequent reinstatement (here as an example, or Chiltern Line)
• Increased signalling costs
• Increased operational costs (eg trains Norwich Peterborough since reversing at Ely)
Just wondering....
Apologies if this question is digressing too much of topic.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I'm sure the cost of putting back stuff at post 1993 railway prices is a hefty multiple of any savings BR had.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

BR was under obligations (indeed incentives) to reduce track miles back in the 1970's and 1980's - the railway was seen to be in decline pretty well everywhere , and the HST and so on was a welcome boost to the future survival and revival.

This was the "golden age" of cheap fuel , continued growth in motorway building and so on - there is no point in comparing previous policy , when the corrections are bieng made. (in any case , only in recent years has growth required re-instatement of singled routes etc , as timetabling and longer trains have largely coped with growth)

 

[Greenback]

BR was under obligations (indeed incentives) to reduce track miles back in the 1970's and 1980's - the railway was seen to be in decline pretty well everywhere , and the HST and so on was a welcome boost to the future survival and revival.

This was the "golden age" of cheap fuel , continued growth in motorway building and so on - there is no point in comparing previous policy , when the corrections are bieng made. (in any case , only in recent years has growth required re-instatement of singled routes etc , as timetabling and longer trains have largely coped with growth)

You are correct, as I have said a few times now. Railways were seen as old fashioned and having no real future. Fortunately, that view is not far from being as prevalent as it used to be, which means that prposals like rationalising the Swansea District Line are short sighted.

Have no lessons been learnt from the past? Not only do we need to think of capacity for tofay, but also for the growth that is likely in the next couple of decades.

 

[Flamingo]

It only ties in with reducing costs and increasing profits, while subsidy cntinues at the same level.

Has this (the downgrade) happened or is it yet to be implemented?

Middle of Jan, I believe. It's happening to Hereford as well. The instructions for a new method of working have been issued. Apparently ATW station staff will close the station entrance 1 minute before departure to prevent late runners opening doors.

 

[Greenback]

Middle of Jan, I believe. It's happening to Hereford as well. The instructions for a new method of working have been issued. Apparently ATW station staff will close the station entrance 1 minute before departure to prevent late runners opening doors.

I wonder whether there will ever be a thread from a disgruntled Carmarthen passenger who can't get on the station one minute before departure?