South Wales 'Metro' updates

Llanigraham · 9 Feb 2020

Envoy said:
If they could not get a new footpath under the bridge on the Penarth line, then perhaps they could be allowed to have some land off the Tesco site for a dedicated footpath around to just before the petrol station & then a zebra crossing over to Pont-Y-Werin. (This bloody spelling corrector just change ‘Pont’ to ‘Post’). Anyway, the way this area was planned out back in the 80’s is appalling. Tesco car park should have been for a P&R with a new platform on the Penarth Line and that linked via a footway to the present Cogan Station. Tesco could have gone where the Oystercathcher pub is located with a car park to the south. The pub - with a better design - should have been placed facing the waterway thus offering more interesting views that just a mini roundabout. The underpass under the main road from Cogan station car park should never have been filled in.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing and gives you 20/20 vision.
Getting Tesco to give up car parking space would probably need a very expensive Compulsory Purchase Order and a Public Enquiry; forget it!

Timing implications might be totally different if the Penarth Line is extended towards Sully - but as has already been mentioned, houses have been built on the old track bed not far from Cosmeston. (Another short sighted decision by planners).

No it wasn't, because when those houses were planned and built we didn't consider railways to be a method for commuting, especially in South Wales.

As I said earlier, with all the sport facilities just over the Ely, it surely is justified to create a walkway from Cogan station to Pont-y-Werin bridge. (Now the spell corrector had changed ‘Pont’ to ‘Pond’).

And how many customers of the sports facilities do you honestly think are going to use the train?

I further note that Cogan station is not that far from Llandough Hospital - which has terrible parking issues. If the powers that be wish to reduce traffic, then why not get a small bus service linking Cogan station with the hospital as it is rather too far to walk for most people.

Good idea; who is going to pay for it?
And how many of the visitors to Llandough do you think would want or be able to use that facility?

RailUK Forums

JamieLW95 · 9 Feb 2020

Hello all,

My first post on RailUK Forums in a long time – I did have an account many years ago, but I cannot remember its details for the life of me... However, having attended the Institute of Mechanical Engineers lecture on the Valley Lines electrification at Cardiff University on Wednesday evening, I thought that I would share my notes covering what Susan Holyoake, Principle Engineering Manager for Amey, discussed in case they are of interest to anyone in this thread.

Essentially, and very much unsurprisingly, the tight budget allocated to the project means that TFW are seeking to avoid more costly and difficult elements of the project wherever possible. Hence, locations such as Caerphilly Tunnel and Merthyr Viaduct will not be wired; whilst Permanently Earthed Sections will be installed where minimum standards surrounding insulation cannot be met. The latter is particularly the case at overbridges, with around 60 sites currently identified. However, it was explained that it is hoped to reduce the number of these if possible, with permanent earthing only an option where the cost of altering a bridge is too much. Also mentioned were challenges surrounding signal sighting distances on several curves, together with various issues surrounding the geology of the glacial valleys.

More specifically, Cardiff Queen Street won’t be wired to avoid having to wire complex junctions. Instead, the wires will begin to the west of Cathays station on the Merthyr/Rhondda lines and south of Crwys Road on the Rhymney/Coryton line. At Cardiff Bay, there will be charging points installed, allowing the Citylinks to recharge whilst turning around. At Pontypridd, it was explained that the decision to forgo electrification is not only attributable to the extra cost of wiring the junctions, but also to both avoid undertaking any alterations to the Grade II listed canopy, and foundation issues on the bridges in the area. On the Rhymney Line, wiring has been had to be extended from Ystrad Mynach to Bargoed because of issues with Western Power supplying enough power off the existing infrastructure at Rhymney. However, the FLIRTs will be recharge by around 7% whilst turning around in the platforms (enough to get them back down to Bargoed) whilst, so far as I remember anyway, the sidings will be supplied at a reduced charge.

More generally, Taffs Well Depot, Cardiff Canton and Treherbert stabling sidings will be equipped with charging points. Switch over from OHLE to battery power will be undertaken automatically via beacons placed at 13 seconds at line speed from the end of wiring. The Stadlers will also be able to recognise where a Permanently Earthed Section begins and ends, with the change over to battery being automatic.

That’s about all the notes I took at the event; a lot of the more technical specifications were too much for my brain. However, hopefully they may be of use to someone!

Best wishes,

Jamie

Brissle Girl · 9 Feb 2020

Re Llandough, whilst still sceptical, I think we ought to consider the considerable number of staff who might use the service too. Hospitals are large employers of medical and ancillary staff. Similarly but several times over in terms of volumes for an effective rail link for the Heath.

Cardiff123 · 9 Feb 2020

Llanigraham said:
Good idea; who is going to pay for it?
And how many of the visitors to Llandough do you think would want or be able to use that facility?

Brissle Girl said:
Re Llandough, whilst still sceptical, I think we ought to consider the considerable number of staff who might use the service too. Hospitals are large employers of medical and ancillary staff. Similarly but several times over in terms of volumes for an effective rail link for the Heath.

There is already a P&R from a former Toys R Us car park in the Bay retail area to Llandough Hospital, paid for buy Cardiff & Vale health board. Vale of Glamorgan council and TfW have looked at expansion options for Cogan station, including buying up land on a builders merchants site next door for a multi-storey car park. Welsh Govt also currently own a recently cleared vacant plot of land at Cogan station. There just needs to be the £ available and political will to make something happen.

It's also worth noting that TfW originally intended to re-double the Penarth line from roughly where the old Penarth dock station was, all the way to Penarth, and have a new platform at Dingle Rd. I guess that plan has now been cut back to what is essentially just a passing loop between Dingle Rd and Penarth, due to the budget restrains of the Metro scheme.

Brissle Girl · 9 Feb 2020

Good to know that there are some facilities in place, albeit not particularly convenient (?) for rail users. By the way, my experiences of Llandough range from inpatient (mid 1960s!), through daily visitor for 4 months from central Cardiff by the once a day bus (1976) to recent visitor trips, together with very recent daily visitor trips to the Heath. Unfortunately I’m unlikely to have any more association with Cardiff hospitals, but across all those years (well maybe not the 1960s) the lack of rail access for hospitals quite close to active lines has struck me as a glaring omission.

Envoy · 10 Feb 2020

Having a P&R from the former Toys R Us site in the western bay to Llandough Hospital still means that people are driving their cars to this site from wherever. I contend that by having a bus shuttle between Cogan station and Llandough Hospital would help induce people to use the trains from nearer their homes/start point rather than the car. The same goes for Heath Halt to Heath Hospital. If a shuttle bus can be provided between Rhoose station & the Airport, then surely these hospitals could have a similar shuttle bus from their nearest rail stations? They could start this tomorrow for peanuts.

Llanigraham (2941) wonders how many people heading for the sports facilities would use the trains to Cogan? A lot of young people who don’t have cars go to the ice rink & the swimming pool. You also mention the problem of getting Tesco to give up a bit of land. I contend that if a new station were placed on the Penarth line by Cogan Tesco, that it would be in their best interest as potential customers could actually walk through their site & thus boost trade. (It always struck me as odd that the struggling Capitol Shopping Centre at the eastern end of Queen Street, never had a mall entrance facing the station to thus induce footfall. People tend to have to walk around this shopping centre if using the trains at Queen Street. Again, bad planning).

Brissle Girl · 10 Feb 2020

Surely the P&R could call at Cogan station as it’s more or less on the way?

But we’re probably digressing from the thread topic somewhat, and in particular the very interesting information gained from last week’s presentation.

edwin_m · 10 Feb 2020

Envoy said:
Having a P&R from the former Toys R Us site in the western bay to Llandough Hospital still means that people are driving their cars to this site from wherever. I contend that by having a bus shuttle between Cogan station and Llandough Hospital would help induce people to use the trains from nearer their homes/start point rather than the car. The same goes for Heath Halt to Heath Hospital. If a shuttle bus can be provided between Rhoose station & the Airport, then surely these hospitals could have a similar shuttle bus from their nearest rail stations? They could start this tomorrow for peanuts.

Llanigraham (2941) wonders how many people heading for the sports facilities would use the trains to Cogan? A lot of young people who don’t have cars go to the ice rink & the swimming pool. You also mention the problem of getting Tesco to give up a bit of land. I contend that if a new station were placed on the Penarth line by Cogan Tesco, that it would be in their best interest as potential customers could actually walk through their site & thus boost trade. (It always struck me as odd that the struggling Capitol Shopping Centre at the eastern end of Queen Street, never had a mall entrance facing the station to thus induce footfall. People tend to have to walk around this shopping centre if using the trains at Queen Street. Again, bad planning).

Not being familiar with the area I can't comment on these specific examples, but to me the principle seems correct. A Metro should be good enough not just for commuting, but to meet many of people's other travel needs as well, so as well as allowing those with cars to use them less, some people can do without a car entirely. This is the case for many people in London, harder to achieve elsewhere but that's not to say it shouldn't be a worthy goal.

S-Bahn · 10 Feb 2020

JamieLW95 said:
Hello all,

My first post on RailUK Forums in a long time – I did have an account many years ago, but I cannot remember its details for the life of me... However, having attended the Institute of Mechanical Engineers lecture on the Valley Lines electrification at Cardiff University on Wednesday evening, I thought that I would share my notes covering what Susan Holyoake, Principle Engineering Manager for Amey, discussed in case they are of interest to anyone in this thread.

Essentially, and very much unsurprisingly, the tight budget allocated to the project means that TFW are seeking to avoid more costly and difficult elements of the project wherever possible. Hence, locations such as Caerphilly Tunnel and Merthyr Viaduct will not be wired; whilst Permanently Earthed Sections will be installed where minimum standards surrounding insulation cannot be met. The latter is particularly the case at overbridges, with around 60 sites currently identified. However, it was explained that it is hoped to reduce the number of these if possible, with permanent earthing only an option where the cost of altering a bridge is too much. Also mentioned were challenges surrounding signal sighting distances on several curves, together with various issues surrounding the geology of the glacial valleys.

More specifically, Cardiff Queen Street won’t be wired to avoid having to wire complex junctions. Instead, the wires will begin to the west of Cathays station on the Merthyr/Rhondda lines and south of Crwys Road on the Rhymney/Coryton line. At Cardiff Bay, there will be charging points installed, allowing the Citylinks to recharge whilst turning around. At Pontypridd, it was explained that the decision to forgo electrification is not only attributable to the extra cost of wiring the junctions, but also to both avoid undertaking any alterations to the Grade II listed canopy, and foundation issues on the bridges in the area. On the Rhymney Line, wiring has been had to be extended from Ystrad Mynach to Bargoed because of issues with Western Power supplying enough power off the existing infrastructure at Rhymney. However, the FLIRTs will be recharge by around 7% whilst turning around in the platforms (enough to get them back down to Bargoed) whilst, so far as I remember anyway, the sidings will be supplied at a reduced charge.

More generally, Taffs Well Depot, Cardiff Canton and Treherbert stabling sidings will be equipped with charging points. Switch over from OHLE to battery power will be undertaken automatically via beacons placed at 13 seconds at line speed from the end of wiring. The Stadlers will also be able to recognise where a Permanently Earthed Section begins and ends, with the change over to battery being automatic.

That’s about all the notes I took at the event; a lot of the more technical specifications were too much for my brain. However, hopefully they may be of use to someone!

Best wishes,

Jamie

Thanks for the technical notes - much appreciated.

It does sound like there will be a number of hotspots where a failure could occur when switching between wires and battery power, particularly as the switch over occurs at major junctions on the network (Pontypridd and Cardiff).

Guess we'll have to wait and see how resilient the tech is.

S-Bahn · 11 Feb 2020

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-51385343

krus_aragon · 11 Feb 2020

S-Bahn said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-51385343

For the convenience of other forum readers, it's an article about projected capacity of the new trains on the Rhymney line:

Transport for Wales (TfW) has said it is looking at options for seating on one line after concerns new trains would cut capacity.

It plans to use larger, refurbished trains on the Rhymney line in 2020, followed by brand new ones in 2023.

But figures suggest services run by the new trains will have less capacity than the refurbished ones, and in some cases even less than current trains.

TfW said it was "constantly" reviewing its plans.

It plans to temporarily replace the current Pacer trains on the line with refurbished Class 769 trains.

The figures, obtained through a Freedom of Information request, show a large increase in seating on services with the Class 769 trains, only for that to go down again on the Rhymney line's Bargoed and Penarth routes when the new Stadler Flirt trains arrive.

James Price, the chief executive of TfW, has told Assembly Members it was working to ensure there was no drop off in seats once the new trains are introduced

Mr Apples · 11 Feb 2020

krus_aragon said:
For the convenience of other forum readers, it's an article about projected capacity of the new trains on the Rhymney line:

Is the future capacity decrease because the 769s are going to be incredibly cramped with 3Plus2 seating whereas the 2023 trains are back to 2plus2?Just a thought.

Cardiff123 · 11 Feb 2020

Mr Apples said:
Is the future capacity decrease because the 769s are going to be incredibly cramped with 3Plus2 seating whereas the 2023 trains are back to 2plus2?Just a thought.

769s will be 4 x 20m carriage trains. Stadler Flirts will be 3 and 4 x 15m carriage trains, with the centre power cars added in taking up room as well.

Dai Corner · 11 Feb 2020

Cardiff123 said:
769s will be 4 x 20m carriage trains. Stadler Flirts will be 3 and 4 x 15m carriage trains, with the centre power cars added in taking up room as well.

I think this is the source of the story https://twitter.com/foxy_michael/status/1224726694185119746?s=21

In the evening peak, for example, Queen St - Caerphilly sees a 40% increase in capacity between now and Dec 2023. Caerphilly - Bargoed is almost unchanged and Penarth sees a 14% decrease.

S-Bahn · 11 Feb 2020

Mr Apples said:
Is the future capacity decrease because the 769s are going to be incredibly cramped with 3Plus2 seating whereas the 2023 trains are back to 2plus2?Just a thought.

No. of seats.

4 car 319(769) = 319 if no 1st.

3 car Greater Anglia FLIRT = 167 (for future Penarth and City Line)
4 car GA FLIRT = 229 (for future Barry to Rhymney)

Suffice to say, the FLIRTS have more seats than 2 car Pacers and 150 Sprinters and will be OK on the Valley Lines off-peak (at current levels of demand), but given peak time travel can already fill 4 car pacers/sprinters, they are likely to lack the capacity to handle peak times in and out of Cardiff.

edwin_m · 11 Feb 2020

S-Bahn said:
Suffice to say, the FLIRTS have more seats than 2 car Pacers and 150 Sprinters and will be OK on the Valley Lines off-peak (at current levels of demand), but given peak time travel can already fill 4 car pacers/sprinters, they are likely to lack the capacity to handle peak times in and out of Cardiff.

However most of the routes have at least a doubling in train frequency, so this should only be a problem if the FLIRTs take over before that happens.

Dai Corner · 11 Feb 2020

edwin_m said:
However most of the routes have at least a doubling in train frequency, so this should only be a problem if the FLIRTs take over before that happens.

Penarth is going to stay at 4tph. That would explain the reduction in capacity.

Does anyone know how crowded that line is in the peaks?

hilly · 11 Feb 2020

Dai Corner said:
Penarth is going to stay at 4tph. That would explain the reduction in capacity.

Does anyone know how crowded that line is in the peaks?

In my experience (pre class 37) the 1705 from queen street is full, with people standing around the doors, 1720 is wedged (full, standing all throughout) 1735 similar. If there are short forms it messes everything up. I now travel from Rhiwbina, and that can be wedged when a 153 is used

Cardiff123 · 11 Feb 2020

Dai Corner said:
Penarth is going to stay at 4tph. That would explain the reduction in capacity.

Does anyone know how crowded that line is in the peaks?

Not very, at the moment. The Barry line is only getting 1 extra tph, going from 4 to 5tph from December 2023, so not a massive increase at all. The big frequency increases are all north of Queen St.

krus_aragon · 12 Feb 2020

Dai Corner said:
Penarth is going to stay at 4tph. That would explain the reduction in capacity.

Does anyone know how crowded that line is in the peaks?

I recall several services being standing room only on the way into Cardiff in the morning peak, but that was over a decade ago. (I usually had a lift back, so can't speak for the evening peak.)

Dr Day · 12 Feb 2020

Not re-read the franchise requirements recently, but I'm fairly sure there is something in there about the operator being responsible for supplying additional capacity if there are too many Passengers In eXcess of Capacity (ie standing for over 20 minutes). This was presumably put in to avoid the issues of 'no growth' franchises. So the capacity per se, even if it does go down after a stop-gap measure is irrelevant if there isn't the demand to push it over the threshold, which will in itself fall a bit further north with the faster new trains. IIRC, 'overcrowding' on TfW services is far worse in Manchester and Birmingham than it is on the Cardiff Valleys, and will have improved in the south particularly now 150s have replaced many Pacers.

edwin_m · 12 Feb 2020

Dr Day said:
Not re-read the franchise requirements recently, but I'm fairly sure there is something in there about the operator being responsible for supplying additional capacity if there are too many Passengers In eXcess of Capacity (ie standing for over 20 minutes). This was presumably put in to avoid the issues of 'no growth' franchises. So the capacity per se, even if it does go down after a stop-gap measure is irrelevant if there isn't the demand to push it over the threshold, which will in itself fall a bit further north with the faster new trains. IIRC, 'overcrowding' on TfW services is far worse in Manchester and Birmingham than it is on the Cardiff Valleys, and will have improved in the south particularly now 150s have replaced many Pacers.

If TfW have put a clause in like that they will be paying through the nose. Having to bring in an extra train, probably for just a few peak time journeys, costs far more than the extra revenue it would bring in, so franchise bidders will have priced in the risk that they have to do that and TfW will effectively be paying for it whether they need it or not. Either that or it will be one of the things that pushes the franchise into failure.

Dai Corner · 12 Feb 2020

Penarth to Central is only about 14 minutes so they could run a shuttle with no seats at all, make everybody stand and still comply with the '20 minute' requirement

Cambrian359 · 12 Feb 2020

edwin_m said:
However most of the routes have at least a doubling in train frequency, so this should only be a problem if the FLIRTs take over before that happens.

Isn’t Rhymney line staying 4tph? Or have a read wrong!

krus_aragon · 12 Feb 2020

Cambrian359 said:
Isn’t Rhymney line staying 4tph? Or have a read wrong!

4tph to Rhymney, and another 2tph as far as Caerphilly.

Cardiff123 · 12 Feb 2020

edwin_m said:
If TfW have put a clause in like that they will be paying through the nose. Having to bring in an extra train, probably for just a few peak time journeys, costs far more than the extra revenue it would bring in, so franchise bidders will have priced in the risk that they have to do that and TfW will effectively be paying for it whether they need it or not. Either that or it will be one of the things that pushes the franchise into failure.

Aren't TfW RS doing that already with the 37s +Mk2s that are only used on the Rhymney morning and evening peaks? It'll be interesting to see when the 769s finally are running if they are also only used in the Monday - Friday morning and evening peaks, or if they will run all day and at weekends.

krus_aragon · 12 Feb 2020

Cardiff123 said:
Aren't TfW RS doing that already with the 37s +Mk2s that are only used on the Rhymney morning and evening peaks? It'll be interesting to see when the 769s finally are running if they are also only used in the Monday - Friday morning and evening peaks, or if they will run all day and at weekends.

Once all 30 pacers are withdrawn, I'd guess they'll need at least some of the 9 769s in service every day: I can't see the 150s and 153s stretching that far, and they'll needs some maintenance time in the depot too.

S-Bahn · 12 Feb 2020

Sounds like they need to order more 769s as an interim solution, as we all know the electrification won't be ready by 2023 and if the Pacers are fully withdrawn they will be short of units to cover the routes.

Cardiff123 · 12 Feb 2020

S-Bahn said:
Sounds like they need to order more 769s as an interim solution, as we all know the electrification won't be ready by 2023 and if the Pacers are fully withdrawn they will be short of units to cover the routes.

If the electrification isn't ready by 2023 it might not happen at all, the deadlines of 2022 for the Taff Valleys and 2023 for Rhymney must be stuck to or the EU funding disappears

Kyle1 · 12 Feb 2020

Cardiff123 said:
769s will be 4 x 20m carriage trains. Stadler Flirts will be 3 and 4 x 15m carriage trains, with the centre power cars added in taking up room as well.

I thought the Flirts were going to be 20m?

South Wales 'Metro' updates

On Moderation

RailUK Forums

New Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member