Keolis/Amey to take over Wales and Borders

Dai Corner · 6 Jun 2018

The main impression I'm taking away from the announcement is that the plans are those of railway managers, not politicians or academics.

That 300m of tramway in the Bay sticks out like a sore thumb. Perhaps it is there to please the latter two groups? :rolleyes:

RailUK Forums

JordyWM · 6 Jun 2018

Will be interesting to see the new trains pass through the West Midlands with a big ‘T’ on the side. It’s quite non descript for Wales as it is. I’m already feeling the name ‘T Train’.

I’m never keen on Tram/Train ideas, but the mockups for the new stock elsewhere for Wales and Borders look nice and sounds like the whole franchise will be a big improvement over ATW.

krus_aragon · 6 Jun 2018

JordyWM said:
Will be interesting to see the new trains pass through the West Midlands with a big ‘T’ on the side. It’s quite non descript for Wales as it is. I’m already feeling the name ‘T Train’.

I'm sure the on-board catering will only serve only the finest Welsh tea on the T Trains. There may even be a choice of supplier!

Images of Glengettie and Murroughs Welsh Brew tea

Gareth Marston · 6 Jun 2018

Dai Corner said:
The main impression I'm taking away from the announcement is that the plans are those of railway managers, not politicians or academics.

That 300m of tramway in the Bay sticks out like a sore thumb. Perhaps it is there to please the latter two groups?

Yes its very much common sense within the constraints of "core valleys lines" . Perhaps a lesson for some in the Welsh Government about the perils of "competitive dialogue" and losing half your bidders. It would still boil down to cost and delver-ability and we know that MTR had Mark "South Wales Metro was idea" Berry in the team so we can surmise that their bid was full of Light Rail proposals but ultimately off the mark in terms of cost, deliver-abilty and improvements across the whole of Wales. I suspect they had two very contrasting bids to score.

Keolis has certainly given a nod to what we believed the Welsh Government were after but only just. 3 Geralds a day and a small on street extension light rail into the Bay. The rest of it is remarkably passenger/ economic reality focused with a few places missing out on any frequency improvements (Maesteg/Conwy Valley/ Pemrokeshire)

The Ham · 6 Jun 2018

John R said:
You're forgetting the PRM deadline of Dec 19, which means that any unmodified Pacers need to be withdrawn by then. They could stay in service with the toilets locked out, but there has been a recent categorical statement from the Welsh government that this will not happen and that they are going. Whatever replaces the pacers in the short term will immediately have more capacity, even if they have the same number of coaches. Politically, being the only part of the UK still operating pacers in 2020 is a big no-no, even if there is a rationale argument as to why it makes sense.

December 2019 is 18 months away, I thought it was the end of December, which is why I refer to Christmas (2019) as the point where there's a possible drop in the number of units.

tbtc · 6 Jun 2018

OrangeJuice said:
the cascaded trains will get rid of the pacers by 2019 so that's a bonus

This is worth repeating.

I've seen so much talk about "derogations" (post 31 December 2019) that the fact that Wales will be Pacer-free on 1 January 2020 seems significant - given the timescales, full Pacer replacement is probably the most impressive part of the new franchise.

Gareth Marston said:
If plans go to plan there will be a10% uplift in vehicles by 2020.

Plus a bigger increase in seats, since a lot of the replacement vehicles will be 23m (Mk4s, 170s, 153s) rather than the 15m Pacer carriages that will be leaving.

47421 said:
yep, but fair play to them, was worth waiting for in my view. Sure there is going to be lots of engineering related disruption, and it is a shame that many of the improvements are going to take 4 years BUT overall it is an impressive package. The rolling stock plan is good (on paper) - they are getting rid of all the pacers by 2020. And the integrated infrastructure plan looks good too. In England there are very limited firm commitments to enhancements in CP6, in contrast TfW are now on the hook to deliver extensive electrification and journey time improvements, way beyond many people speculated would be achievable esp after there were only two bids in the end. And what a contrast to the old no growth franchise. Yes it was a very low bar, but it does look good.

Agreed, it's looking good.

The only note of caution I'd sound (bearing in mind that you mentioned the "no growth" franchise) is that the new TOC will presumably still be heavily subsidised (though I've not seen a figure for the subsidy required?), so any improvements above and beyond the laudable ones that they have committed to will potentially get the same reaction that Arriva gave (i.e. "pay us more money or we won't do it").

That's the danger with a fifteen year franchise on a subsidised TOC - if you don't nail down everything into the contract then the TOC will come cap-in-hand for any other improvements - it probably won't be commercially viable for Keolis/Amey to pay for these themselves.

Looking at things in 2018, it looks like a fairly great set of proposals that should cope with future growth and provides new links (e.g. Liverpool) whilst upgrading the fleet - fantastic. But, this now locks Wales (and "borders") into these commitments for fifteen years - we may see arguments like the ones we had with Arriva, where the TOC refuse to put their hands on their pocket to pay for things over and above the contract that they signed up to. Always a risk with long franchises - but maybe a long franchise was required to implement all of the improvements.

berneyarms · 6 Jun 2018

Gareth Marston said:
Yes its very much common sense within the constraints of "core valleys lines" . Perhaps a lesson for some in the Welsh Government about the perils of "competitive dialogue" and losing half your bidders. It would still boil down to cost and delver-ability and we know that MTR had Mark "South Wales Metro was idea" Berry in the team so we can surmise that their bid was full of Light Rail proposals but ultimately off the mark in terms of cost, deliver-abilty and improvements across the whole of Wales. I suspect they had two very contrasting bids to score.

Keolis has certainly given a nod to what we believed the Welsh Government were after but only just. 3 Geralds a day and a small on street extension light rail into the Bay. The rest of it is remarkably passenger/ economic reality focused with a few places missing out on any frequency improvements (Maesteg/Conwy Valley/ Pemrokeshire)

So after an awful lot of negativity expressed previously by yourself Gareth is that a qualified vote of approval for what you’ve seen so far of the franchise award?

krus_aragon · 6 Jun 2018

tbtc said:
Looking at things in 2018, it looks like a fairly great set of proposals that should cope with future growth and provides new links (e.g. Liverpool) whilst upgrading the fleet - fantastic. But, this now locks Wales (and "borders") into these commitments for fifteen years - we may see arguments like the ones we had with Arriva, where the TOC refuse to put their hands on their pocket to pay for things over and above the contract that they signed up to. Always a risk with long franchises - but maybe a long franchise was required to implement all of the improvements.

It's probably also worth bearing in mind that the financial relationship between franchiser and franchisee is different this time round. It's natural for the operator to ask for more money to do additional things, but with profits capped, perhaps they'll be more amenable to negotiation than ATW were. And future expansion of the SW Metro will have to be costed, evaluated and negotiated as add-ons.

Regardless, the plan of 3tph along the North Wales Coast to Llandudno Junction and 2tph to Bangor within four years is going to keep me happy for a good portion of the 15 year franchise.

LNW-GW Joint · 6 Jun 2018

Unless I've missed it, there has been no explanation of the contractual and financial relationship between KeolisAmey and TfW/WG.
Word was that TfW would own trains, stations, ticketing and revenue risk, with the operator simply running the trains and collecting the fares (a la Merseyrail/LO).
Do we know the details of the new setup?
At first sight it looks more like a classic franchise.

Gareth Marston · 6 Jun 2018

berneyarms said:
So after an awful lot of negativity expressed previously by yourself Gareth is that a qualified vote of approval for what you’ve seen so far of the franchise award?

I would like to think that the criticism of certain aspects of what was being proposed (i.e the hourly Cardiff to Holyhead aspiration and Light Rail Core Valley Lines with potty street extensions in central Cardiff) on this forum (think of it as the tip of an iceberg) and elsewhere resulted in a rethink ...however whilst the WG may have wanted certain things initially competitive dialogue couldn't guarantee it as essentially you got 4 firms playing a version of pin the tail on the donkey without an ITT.

Only WG knows which one of the four was closest to their vision and if rumors are correct it was Abeilio who mirrored the desires of Welsh Labour most closely however they ended up with 2 bids not 4. Unless we get to see what was in the other 3 bids there's not way of knowing for certain what was on the cards - Keolis might have been Hobson's choice and won almost by default (given some of stuff the rumor mill was saying about MTR they were proposing a lot more infrastructure work i,e LRT extensions and somewhat neglected the rest of Wales as a result Keolis were keener on price and spread the more jam further across Wales as they wern't digging up Cardiff City Centre).

No doubt officially the novel procurement process produced a great result for Wales however this hypothesis is unproven due to the lack of final bids.

The Keolis plan looks cohernat and benefits many 7.5 of of 10 but 3 out of 10 on timescale.
The die hard LRT Enthusiasts have been notable by their absence from all 3 threads since Mondays announcement.

Del1977 · 6 Jun 2018

Gareth Marston said:
The die hard LRT Enthusiasts have been notable by their absence from all 3 threads since Mondays announcement.

Who are these die-hard LRT enthusiasts that are missing from all three threads?

Gareth Marston said:
The Keolis plan looks cohernat and benefits many 7.5 of of 10 but 3 out of 10 on timescale.

I'm surprised that we have not heard more complaints from people who previously cited concerns over 'a lack of toilets', breaking services between Pontypridd and the Vale, or diverting services to the Bay (forcing a change at Cardiff Queen Street), that tram/trains etc. wouldn't provide enough seats, or other assertions that non-heavy rail vehicles would not be able to enter Cardiff Central etc. etc.

Looks as though the end position has satisfied most.

krus_aragon · 6 Jun 2018

LNW-GW Joint said:
Unless I've missed it, there has been no explanation of the contractual and financial relationship between KeolisAmey and TfW/WG.
Word was that TfW would own trains, stations, ticketing and revenue risk, with the operator simply running the trains and collecting the fares (a la Merseyrail/LO).
Do we know the details of the new setup?
At first sight it looks more like a classic franchise.

Here are the relevant tidbits I can find in Ken Skates' written statement:

"We used an outcome-based procurement approach, under the Utilities Contracts Regulations (2016)..."

"Transport for Wales, our not-for-profit arm’s length company, will partner with the new ODP KeolisAmey to put passengers’ key priorities at the centre..."

"On top of the contractual profit capping and sharing mechanism, the ODP does not expect to pay dividends to its shareholders for the first five years, reinvesting profits to fund this investment."

"The contract ensures that Transport for Wales’ ODP will be penalised if passengers have to stand for longer than 20 minutes."

"I have already described how our approach has sought to avoid the type of disruption that has arisen around the UK in recent years. However, we have included appropriate protections, so that should we see a problem of this nature starting to develop Transport for Wales has a number of options to remedy the situation. Our protections include a parent company guarantee, break clauses allowing us to terminate the contract at year five and year 10 and the ability to appoint an operator of last resort. In the short term we will make use of the UK’s buying power for the operator of last resort, but as Transport for Wales becomes more established, our aim is for Transport for Wales to take on this responsibility as well."

Not a lot of detail to go on for the financial side of things...

Gareth Marston · 6 Jun 2018

Del1977 said:
Who are these die-hard LRT enthusiasts that are missing from all three threads?
.

Solaris and NotATrainspott

gareth950 · 6 Jun 2018

Del1977 said:
Who are these die-hard LRT enthusiasts that are missing from all three threads?

I'm surprised that we have not heard more complaints from people who previously cited concerns over 'a lack of toilets', breaking services between Pontypridd and the Vale, or diverting services to the Bay (forcing a change at Cardiff Queen Street), that tram/trains etc. wouldn't provide enough seats, or other assertions that non-heavy rail vehicles would not be able to enter Cardiff Central etc. etc.

Looks as though the end position has satisfied most.

I'm not happy about the splitting of through services between Barry and Pontypridd. And I'm not convinced that the tram-trains on Taff Valleys will provide the seats that passengers say they want. A 3 section tram-train will provide no more seats than a 2 car 150. 2 tram-trains doubled up will be no longer than a 4 car 150, although this would be an improvement on the usual 2 car Pacers and 150s we see on Taff Valley services now. I think they will quickly realised that, despite the increased frequencies, at peak times tram-trains need to run doubled up, I hope they have enough of them.

I hope that bicycles are also not banned on the Taff Valley tram-trains. Apparently a big part of Keilos' bid was promoting active travel. Banning bikes from the Taff Valleys, that runs alongside the Taff Trail, isn't exactly a step towards promoting 'Active travel' and will be very unpopular.

On the other hand, Rhymney will be getting 3/4 car Stadler tri-modes. A 6 car (2 x 3 car) Stadler tri-mode at peak time on Rhymney services will be a huge capacity increase! Running Barry, Bridgend via VoG and Penarth trains to Rhymney/Caerphilly/Coryton keeps the cross-city running and crucially keeps the cross-city link with Queen St commuter flows to & from Barry, Penarth & the Vale.

All Valleys are being wired to 25 kV AC. This will make interworking at Cardiff Central much easier with the mainline being wired to 25 kV AC.
The City line and VoG lines are very much included in the 'Central Metro', and as I hoped, the City line will be utilised to relieve pressure on Queen St and run more services down from the Valleys into Central. Mine and the other Gareth's fears were that we'd see a network split at Queen St and mass terminations at Central. The absolutely insane ideas of running trams on-street in Cardiff city centre, rather than fully utilising the HR network through Cardiff, also thankfully appear to have been binned.

And despite tram-trains being used in the Taff Valleys, it appears that the whole network will be kept to conventional HR standards, except for any on-street extensions (if they ever happen).
CASR investment has been saved and is being made use of rather than ripped out and binned (it appears).

So whilst there are one or two downsides (the loss of Barry - Pontypridd through services and we need clarification on whether bicycles will be allowed on the tram-trains) overall I'm pleasantly surprised and relieved in equal measure.

Robertj21a · 6 Jun 2018

gareth950 said:
I'm not happy about the splitting of through services between Barry and Pontypridd. And I'm not convinced that the tram-trains on Taff Valleys will provide the seats that passengers say they want. A 3 section tram-train will provide no more seats than a 2 car 150. 2 tram-trains doubled up will be no longer than a 4 car 150, although this would be an improvement on the usual 2 car Pacers and 150s we see on Taff Valley services now. I think they will quickly realised that, despite the increased frequencies, at peak times tram-trains need to run doubled up, I hope they have enough of them.

I hope that bicycles are also not banned on the Taff Valley tram-trains. Apparently a big part of Keilos' bid was promoting active travel. Banning bikes from the Taff Valleys, that runs alongside the Taff Trail, isn't exactly a step towards promoting 'Active travel' and will be very unpopular.

On the other hand, Rhymney will be getting 3/4 car Stadler tri-modes. A 6 car (2 x 3 car) Stadler tri-mode at peak time on Rhymney services will be a huge capacity increase! Running Barry, Bridgend via VoG and Penarth trains to Rhymney/Caerphilly/Coryton keeps the cross-city running and crucially keeps the cross-city link with Queen St commuter flows to & from Barry, Penarth & the Vale.

All Valleys are being wired to 25 kV AC. This will make interworking at Cardiff Central much easier with the mainline being wired to 25 kV AC.
The City line and VoG lines are very much included in the 'Central Metro', and as I hoped, the City line will be utilised to relieve pressure on Queen St and run more services down from the Valleys into Central. Mine and the other Gareth's fears were that we'd see a network split at Queen St and mass terminations at Central. The absolutely insane ideas of running trams on-street in Cardiff city centre, rather than fully utilising the HR network through Cardiff, also thankfully appear to have been binned.

And despite tram-trains being used in the Taff Valleys, it appears that the whole network will be kept to conventional HR standards, except for any on-street extensions (if they ever happen).
CASR investment has been saved and is being made use of rather than ripped out and binned (it appears).

So whilst there are one or two downsides (the loss of Barry - Pontypridd through services and we need clarification on whether bicycles will be allowed on the tram-trains) overall I'm pleasantly surprised and relieved in equal measure.

It must be the way I'm reading it but you certainly seem unimpressed by the tram-train plans. Why are people on here so anti something that has the greatest potential for future expansion, even if it's decades away ?

Why raise the issue of carrying bikes when you have no knowledge of what the arrangements will be ?

Since when was street running in Cardiff an insane idea ? - at some point in the future I would hope that it becomes a reality.

As I say, it must be the way I'm reading it, but it does come across as very negative towards anything that isn't 100% 'proper trains'.

WelshBluebird · 6 Jun 2018

Robertj21a said:
Why are people on here so anti something that has the greatest potential for future expansion, even if it's decades away ?

No one is anti light rail specifically. What we are anti is making the current passenger experience worse.
Removing toilets, cutting cross city links for some passengers = making it worse. And whilst not worse, only providing tram-trains that are the same length as existing services and that do not take advantage of recent (and not so recent) infrastructure improvements seems naive.

Robertj21a said:
Since when was street running in Cardiff an insane idea ? - at some point in the future I would hope that it becomes a reality.

Because right now from Cathays to Central takes just 8 minutes. You come off the rails and go through Cardiff's congested streets instead, well, it'll be a fair bit longer than that (Google Maps is saying with current traffic its at least a 17 minute drive). And that just gets worse the more street running you have in the city centre.

Street running that serves areas currently not served by heavy rail is great. What would be a massive shame (and a failure imo) would be if that meant that areas currently served by heavy rail end up having to deal with the issues street running brings (so again, not against it in general, but against it where it degrades the current passenger experience).

LNW-GW Joint · 6 Jun 2018

krus_aragon said:
Not a lot of detail to go on for the financial side of things...

Indeed.
There's this in Railway Gazette:

Transport for Wales CEO James Price told Railway Gazette that the ODP contract was a cross between a traditional Department for Transport franchise and a more tightly controlled concession, as used in London and Merseyside; it had been designed to ‘remove artificial and commercial barriers’ to improvements that would benefit the travelling public.

and this:

KeolisAmey has selected CAF as preferred bidder to supply 51 two-car and 26 three-car Civity DMUs for use on regional routes from 2022. These are to be assembled at the factory which CAF is to open at Newport later this year

Which seem to me to be more like a traditional franchise, with the TOC making the rolling stock decisions and taking risk.
There's no hint of WG owning the trains here.
No doubt the small print will emerge sometime (probably at the point the first dispute happens!).

gareth950 · 6 Jun 2018

Robertj21a said:
Why raise the issue of carrying bikes when you have no knowledge of what the arrangements will be?

Please name me any other tram or tram-train system in the UK where you are allowed to take full size bikes on board.

Robertj21a said:
Since when was street running in Cardiff an insane idea ? - at some point in the future I would hope that it becomes a reality.

You obviously do not live or work in or anywhere near Cardiff and have no real life experience of the streets in and around Cardiff city centre, and have no real life experience of how the existing HR stations and alignments serve all areas in the city centre perfectly.

WelshBluebird said:
No one is anti light rail specifically. What we are anti is making the current passenger experience worse.
Removing toilets, cutting cross city links for some passengers = making it worse. And whilst not worse, only providing tram-trains that are the same length as existing services and that do not take advantage of recent (and not so recent) infrastructure improvements seems naive.

Because right now from Cathays to Central takes just 8 minutes. You come off the rails and go through Cardiff's congested streets instead, well, it'll be a fair bit longer than that (Google Maps is saying with current traffic its at least a 17 minute drive). And that just gets worse the more street running you have in the city centre.

Completely agreed, and i wouldn't be surprised if the Cathays - Central time comes down further to 5-6 mins (allowing for dwell times), with a clear run Cathays - Queen St is 1 - 2 mins, Queen St - Central 2 - 3 mins.

adrock1976 · 6 Jun 2018

Regarding the Manchester - Bangor (Gwynedd), could this be extended to a reopened Caernarfon?

This would then leave Mold being the sole remaining county town (Clwyd) that does not have a railway. Carmarthen (Dyfed), Swansea/Abertawe (West Glamorgan), Cardiff (both Mid Glamorgan and South Glamorgan), Newport (Gwent), and Llandrindod Wells (Powys) are county towns of Wales that are presently connected to the railway network.

berneyarms · 6 Jun 2018

Gareth Marston said:
I would like to think that the criticism of certain aspects of what was being proposed (i.e the hourly Cardiff to Holyhead aspiration and Light Rail Core Valley Lines with potty street extensions in central Cardiff) on this forum (think of it as the tip of an iceberg) and elsewhere resulted in a rethink ...however whilst the WG may have wanted certain things initially competitive dialogue couldn't guarantee it as essentially you got 4 firms playing a version of pin the tail on the donkey without an ITT.

Only WG knows which one of the four was closest to their vision and if rumors are correct it was Abeilio who mirrored the desires of Welsh Labour most closely however they ended up with 2 bids not 4. Unless we get to see what was in the other 3 bids there's not way of knowing for certain what was on the cards - Keolis might have been Hobson's choice and won almost by default (given some of stuff the rumor mill was saying about MTR they were proposing a lot more infrastructure work i,e LRT extensions and somewhat neglected the rest of Wales as a result Keolis were keener on price and spread the more jam further across Wales as they wern't digging up Cardiff City Centre).

No doubt officially the novel procurement process produced a great result for Wales however this hypothesis is unproven due to the lack of final bids.

The Keolis plan looks cohernat and benefits many 7.5 of of 10 but 3 out of 10 on timescale.
The die hard LRT Enthusiasts have been notable by their absence from all 3 threads since Mondays announcement.

I gather all of that and agree totally re the process - it really ought to have been far more transparent.

But you didn’t really answer my question directly!!

Are you happy with the details as we know them going forward? You were extremely vocal in your criticisms of what might happen, right up to the weekend, yet you’ve been far quieter since the details emerged, and I was wondering about your overall view of the franchise spec across the network.

Online forums tend to be taken with a grain of salt by politicians and civil servants in my experience - it’s direct submissions that count.

PR1Berske · 6 Jun 2018

adrock1976 said:
Regarding the Manchester - Bangor (Gwynedd), could this be extended to a reopened Caernarfon?

This would then leave Mold being the sole remaining county town (Clwyd) that does not have a railway. Carmarthen (Dyfed), Swansea/Abertawe (West Glamorgan), Cardiff (both Mid Glamorgan and South Glamorgan), Newport (Gwent), and Llandrindod Wells (Powys) are county towns of Wales that are presently connected to the railway network.

Tfw/Ca'rG have made their plans for the duration of the franchise quite clear, a reopening that significant would have been mentioned.

iantherev · 6 Jun 2018

Today there is a concert at the Principality Stadium. Westgate Street is closed. If I had arrived at Cardiff Central from a trip away I would need to walk to Greyfriars Road to get my bus to Brecon. Given that the number of events at the Stadium and associated road closures seem to be increasing, how would you get a street running tram through the City Centre when the stadium is closed?

Llanigraham · 6 Jun 2018

Robertj21a said:
Since when was street running in Cardiff an insane idea ? - at some point in the future I would hope that it becomes a reality.

Because those of us that know Cardiff because we were born there, live there, work there or visit there know that the geography and physical layout of the city does not lend itself to that sort of system.

As has been said numerous times here!

Gareth Marston · 6 Jun 2018

adrock1976 said:
Regarding the Manchester - Bangor (Gwynedd), could this be extended to a reopened Caernarfon?

This would then leave Mold being the sole remaining county town (Clwyd) that does not have a railway. Carmarthen (Dyfed), Swansea/Abertawe (West Glamorgan), Cardiff (both Mid Glamorgan and South Glamorgan), Newport (Gwent), and Llandrindod Wells (Powys) are county towns of Wales that are presently connected to the railway network.

Clwyd hasn't existed for 22 years!

Gareth Marston · 6 Jun 2018

berneyarms said:
I gather all of that and agree totally re the process - it really ought to have been far more transparent.

But you didn’t really answer my question directly!!

Are you happy with the details as we know them going forward? You were extremely vocal in your criticisms of what might happen, right up to the weekend, yet you’ve been far quieter since the details emerged, and I was wondering about your overall view of the franchise spec across the network.

Online forums tend to be taken with a grain of salt by politicians and civil servants in my experience - it’s direct submissions that count.

As I said I'm relatively happy with the plan overall if it comes to fruition however disappointed with the timescale. Remember we were promised an hourly service on the Cambrian last Centrury I'll be pleased when it actually arrives not because WG have put a new date for it ( been there got t shirt).

Quite a bit of what's on offer I could have written spec myself. However as I believe in mainline electrification and that of HR networks around city regions it was always going to fall short! Further detail needs to come out but overall it is potentially a big step change. Core Valley Lines remains a bodge for political purposes but not going loopy onLRT extensions and getting the Flirts on the Rhymney line have got WG out of jail to a large degree we can thank Keolis for that.

berneyarms · 6 Jun 2018

Gareth Marston said:
As I said I'm relatively happy with the plan overall if it comes to fruition however disappointed with the timescale. Remember we were promised an hourly service on the Cambrian last Centrury I'll be pleased when it actually arrives not because WG have put a new date for it ( been there got t shirt).

Quite a bit of what's on offer I could have written spec myself. However as I believe in mainline electrification and that of HR networks around city regions it was always going to fall short! Further detail needs to come out but overall it is potentially a big step change. Core Valley Lines remains a bodge for political purposes but not going loopy onLRT extensions and getting the Flirts on the Rhymney line have got WG out of jail to a large degree we can thank Keolis for that.

Glad to hear that - as a regular visitor to Wales from Ireland I do follow what’s happening there very closely and I’m glad that after all the fears that you expressed, you’re by and large pleased with the outcome both in terms of service provision and rolling stock.

Robertj21a · 6 Jun 2018

gareth950 said:
Please name me any other tram or tram-train system in the UK where you are allowed to take full size bikes on board.

You obviously do not live or work in or anywhere near Cardiff and have no real life experience of the streets in and around Cardiff city centre, and have no real life experience of how the existing HR stations and alignments serve all areas in the city centre perfectly.

Completely agreed, and i wouldn't be surprised if the Cathays - Central time comes down further to 5-6 mins (allowing for dwell times), with a clear run Cathays - Queen St is 1 - 2 mins, Queen St - Central 2 - 3 mins.

Full size bikes have certainly been on Nottingham and Sheffield trams. No idea if that is policy or not. My point was that you latch on to something negatively before you have any idea of what is proposed.

I don't live near Cardiff and have only visited about 20 - 30 times I suppose. I've no idea why you refer to HR serving all areas of the city centre perfectly when nobody has even referred to the city centre !. Can you really not see that there will/should be opportunities in future years to allow light rail to venture into those suburbs where the buses are heavily loaded - or where new developments may take place ?

WelshBluebird · 6 Jun 2018

Robertj21a said:
Full size bikes have certainly been on Nottingham and Sheffield trams. No idea if that is policy or not. My point was that you latch on to something negatively before you have any idea of what is proposed.

They aren't allowed on either, so wherever you have seen that, the people were breaking the rules and were running the risk of being kicked off at the next stop.

Robertj21a said:
I don't live near Cardiff and have only visited about 20 - 30 times I suppose. I've no idea why you refer to HR serving all areas of the city centre perfectly when nobody has even referred to the city centre !. Can you really not see that there will/should be opportunities in future years to allow light rail to venture into those suburbs where the buses are heavily loaded - or where new developments may take place ?

In future years serving other places - yes. Right now, serving places already served by HR but via a much longer, more time consuming and congested route (which is what some people, including some suggestions from the WG have suggested) - madness.

gareth950 · 6 Jun 2018

Robertj21a said:
Full size bikes have certainly been on Nottingham and Sheffield trams. No idea if that is policy or not. My point was that you latch on to something negatively before you have any idea of what is proposed.

As WelshBluebird has said, bikes are officially banned on those trams, so the answer to whether there are any tram or tram-rain services in the UK that allow full size bikes on board is that there are none.

I don't live near Cardiff and have only visited about 20 - 30 times I suppose. I've no idea why you refer to HR serving all areas of the city centre perfectly when nobody has even referred to the city centre !. Can you really not see that there will/should be opportunities in future years to allow light rail to venture into those suburbs where the buses are heavily loaded - or where new developments may take place ?

Nobody has ever referred to street running in Cardiff city centre? Honestly? You obviously weren't reading this forum a few months ago when we were extensively debating the plans to run trams on-street through the city centre instead of via the existing HR links.

adrock1976 · 6 Jun 2018

PR1Berske said:
Tfw/Ca'rG have made their plans for the duration of the franchise quite clear, a reopening that significant would have been mentioned.

You've not answered the question that was put in the previous post, rather having answered the one that you would have liked to have been asked.

It was a very straightforward "yes" or "no" answer.

Keolis/Amey to take over Wales and Borders

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Member

Established Member