Cardiff and Wales improvements DfT announcement 21Aug

[Snow1964]

The DfT has announced improvements

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...structure-and-improve-journeys-for-passengers

Major progress has been made on ambitious upgrades to Wales’ railways following £343 million of investment to help deliver better journeys for passengers, UKgovernment Transport Secretary Grant Shapps has set out today (21 August 2020).

The raft of schemes to be funded include kickstarting the design of the Cardiff Central station upgrade, advancing plans for cutting-edge digital signalling on the Cambrian line and speeding up journeys between Cardiff and Swansea.

Work on a new, modern design for Cardiff Central station will be funded through the release of £5.8 million. It will focus on improving access and ensuring platforms are suited for longer trains, boosting space and capacity for passengers.

The Transport Secretary has also announced £3 million to advance plans for upgraded signalling on the 241-kilometre Cambrian line from Shrewsbury Sutton Bridge Junction to Aberystwyth and Pwllheli. The planned state-of-the-art digital signalling system will modernise the network, improving the reliability of services, and support the introduction of a new fleet being rolled out across the network in December 2022.

In addition, almost £2 million has been made available for the next phase of development work on proposals to speed up journeys between Cardiff and Swansea, Chester and Llandudno Junction, and the Severn Tunnel and Cardiff, through better-aligned tracks and exploring putting additional services on the lines.

 

[PaulHarding150]

£5.8million released for design work on Cardiff Central? So what's that likely to involve - just artitects drawings or some actual improvements like the much motted installation of escalators to the platforms?

James Price, Transport for Wales CEO added:

At Transport for Wales we are continuing with our investment programme and in the last financial year we spent £796 million transforming our rail services. This included £516 million acquiring the Core Valleys Lines, £187 million on the Wales and Borders rail service and an additional £28 million on projects and service operation.

Please tell me TfW/WG didn't pay £516 for the Core Valley Lines‽

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Whats wrong with the current signalling over the Cambrian coast? There are plenty of other lines that need the signalling modernised first.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Whats wrong with the current signalling over the Cambrian coast? There are plenty of other lines that need the signalling modernised first.

A pure guess is that as the ETRMS pilot it is incompatible with the latest versions that are starting to be rolled out nationally. So with new rolling stock being introduced, they want to put standard kit into the units rather than stuff that works with the older version.

 

[Llanigraham]

Whats wrong with the current signalling over the Cambrian coast? There are plenty of other lines that need the signalling modernised first.

Nothing is wrong with it, all this money is to bring the system and programmes up to date. Remember just how long ago they were written!

 

[Tomos y Tanc]

Please tell me TfW/WG didn't pay £516 m for the Core Valley Lines‽

I can't recall the exact figure but essentially the transfer was financially neutral for both Network Rail and TfW. IIRC Treasury rules required that the CVL were 'sold' for an agreed price but HMG then returned an equivalent sum to the Welsh Government.

 

[Meerkat]

I can't recall the exact figure but essentially the transfer was financially neutral for both Network Rail and TfW. IIRC Treasury rules required that the CVL were 'sold' for an agreed price but HMG then returned an equivalent sum to the Welsh Government.

Didn’t the Welsh have to pay tax on the transfer, or was that sent back too?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

And sadly nothing to electrify to Swansea

 

[Bletchleyite]

Whats wrong with the current signalling over the Cambrian coast? There are plenty of other lines that need the signalling modernised first.

The fundamental problem with it is that it's an isolated system that is not used anywhere else in the UK (and is gross overkill). It was installed as a trial pending ETCS being used on UK mainlines, but in the meantime it means a dedicated fleet, which for a line with very peaky July-August traffic makes no sense at all, because what you need to be able to do is run longer trains there in summer by taking them from lines that don't have as high traffic in summer e.g. commuter services. Though to be fair TfW have stuffed that up as well by having all the different dedicated fleets.

But I don't believe the proposals will fix that. The trial is done, rip it out and install new-generation RETB as used on the Scottish rural lines (allowing portable units to be moved around and so trains lengthened in summer using units from elsewhere), and go install it somewhere it actually makes sense like the WCML or ECML.

 

[The Planner]

But I don't believe the proposals will fix that. The trial is done, rip it out and install new-generation RETB as used on the Scottish rural lines (allowing portable units to be moved around and so trains lengthened in summer using units from elsewhere), and go install it somewhere it actually makes sense like the WCML or ECML.

There is no way you would put in RETB back in there, especially as when we ever bite the bullet with Shrewsbury it will be ETCS.

 

[Unixman]

A pure guess is that as the ETRMS pilot it is incompatible with the latest versions that are starting to be rolled out nationally. So with new rolling stock being introduced, they want to put standard kit into the units rather than stuff that works with the older version.

(More in hope than expectation)

Return of steam ?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is no way you would put in RETB back in there, especially as when we ever bite the bullet with Shrewsbury it will be ETCS.

So the line will suffer on capacity for years - unless TfW can put ETCS into all the 197s (or at least say 5-10 more than needed for the base service).

More priority really should be given to passenger needs than to using the line as a testbed.

 

[Tomos y Tanc]

Though to be fair TfW have stuffed that up as well by having all the different dedicated fleets.

I'm not sure I understand that last point. TfW will only have three fleets, two of which, the Staedler trimodes and the CAF fleet, would be able to run on the Cambrian were it not for the signalling issue. There's no reason I can see why commuter units other than the ones on the Taff Vale lines couldn't be used for summer services.

 

[Tom Quinne]

So more money is wasted on the “Birmingham New Street” of South Wales.

As in many millions spent on commercial opportunities, with not a single extra train path or capacity improvement.

Great

 

[Meole]

I'm not sure I understand that last point. TfW will only have three fleets, two of which, the Staedler trimodes and the CAF fleet, would be able to run on the Cambrian were it not for the signalling issue. There's no reason I can see why commuter units other than the ones on the Taff Vale lines couldn't be used for summer services.

Is there not a gauging issue ?

 

[Brissle Girl]

So more money is wasted on the “Birmingham New Street” of South Wales.

As in many millions spent on commercial opportunities, with not a single extra train path or capacity improvement.

Great

Hasn’t that happened in the past few years? Two new platforms, and more flexibility with signalling, particularly for trains terminating at Central.

Capacity is not just the number of trains you can get in and out, but the ability to get the volume of passengers through the station too.

 

[Tom Quinne]

Hasn’t that happened in the past few years? Two new platforms, and more flexibility with signalling, particularly for trains terminating at Central.

Capacity is not just the number of trains you can get in and out, but the ability to get the volume of passengers through the station too.

The East end was remodelled yes, but it removed capacity for freight. The west end was Resignalled but did nothing for capacity.

Platform 8 is poor, you can’t easily use it for QS bound trains due to the way signals have been set out at QS. Movements into 8 from the west are also limited as you blocked 7 when running to 8 from the west.

The majority of the Resignalling was poorly planned and done on the cheap in my opinion.

 

[MarkyT]

To be future proof, I expect ALL the new Welsh rolling stock will be 'ETCS ready' if not with ETCS already fully enabled. On modern European rolling stock, legacy national warning systems like AWS/TPWS are emulated wholly within the ETCS computer and cab displays. For the Cambrian infrastructure, I expect there will be targetted physical component upgrades and software and configuration data updates, maybe with new measures incorporated to safeguard against the temporary speed restriction vulnerability discovered with the original system. There are unlikely to be any major changes beyond that for £3m.

 

[Belperpete]

A pure guess is that as the ETRMS pilot it is incompatible with the latest versions that are starting to be rolled out nationally. So with new rolling stock being introduced, they want to put standard kit into the units rather than stuff that works with the older version.

I may be missing something here, but I thought the whole point of ETCS was that it was supposed to be fully compatible. One manufacturer's stock will run on another's line, and so forth. So surely it should be possible for trains fitted with someone else's new ETCS on-board kit to run on an existing ETCS-fitted line? If not, then we are going to have big problems.

The Cambrian may have been a trial system for the UK, but it was not a prototype system. It has been used elsewhere in Europe. It can't be obsolete already, surely? ETCS signalling kit surely can't have this short a lifespan?

 

[anthony263]

And sadly nothing to electrify to Swansea

Which is what I think we should have seen announced

 

[Brissle Girl]

The East end was remodelled yes, but it removed capacity for freight. The west end was Resignalled but did nothing for capacity.

Platform 8 is poor, you can’t easily use it for QS bound trains due to the way signals have been set out at QS. Movements into 8 from the west are also limited as you blocked 7 when running to 8 from the west.

The majority of the Resignalling was poorly planned and done on the cheap in my opinion.

As I understood it, trains from the east can now terminate and head back east from platforms without having first to exit the station westwards and return to 0/1/2. That in itself is a major improvement, as it should reduce movements and enable quicker turnarounds.

I would have thought the intention of platform 8 should be that it is predominately used for through trains east to west, platform 6 for through trains west to east, and platform 7 becomes the one that is used bidirectionally for services terminating at Central.

Whether either of these are being used in that way is a different matter. There is a history over the last 10 years of infrastructure upgrades in the valleys being almost unused, starting with the platform extensions (not enough stock), the Tir Phil loop, and I don’t believe the bay platforms at Caerphilly and Pontypridd are over-used either.

 

[baza585]

And sadly nothing to electrify to Swansea

Because there is no viable business case for doing so.

If the Welsh Govt want to electrify the line as a vanity project, fine. The UK Govt rightly won't pay for it when there are much more deserving business cases elsewhere.

 

[Tom Quinne]

As I understood it, trains from the east can now terminate and head back east from platforms without having first to exit the station westwards and return to 0/1/2. That in itself is a major improvement, as it should reduce movements and enable quicker turnarounds.

I would have thought the intention of platform 8 should be that it is predominately used for through trains east to west, platform 6 for through trains west to east, and platform 7 becomes the one that is used bidirectionally for services terminating at Central.

Whether either of these are being used in that way is a different matter. There is a history over the last 10 years of infrastructure upgrades in the valleys being almost unused, starting with the platform extensions (not enough stock), the Tir Phil loop, and I don’t believe the bay platforms at Caerphilly and Pontypridd are over-used either.

Tir Phil loop is used by a few trains each day, but not over used no.
Caerphilly bay is being used Frequently frequently at the moment with the blockade on the Pontypridd arm of the valleys, trains are going Caerphilly Bay to Cardiff Bay.

Platform 8 was a missed opportunity, pretty much useful for eastbound movements. The frequency of set swaps at central causes issues when they lay over for any period of time.

“Down side starts” Newport direction into Cardiff P3/4 can happen yes, although bringing them into the Up side and keeping them there is easier. The problem with the Dn side start is again the layout at the east end, and double blocking of the signals to prevent a train being held across the whole ladder.

Westbound freight off the DN relief has to use a single 25mph approach control crossing, to access the DN RL (Line D) through the station brining a 2000t train down to a crawl then waiting for it to build up speed again is a waste of fuel and capacity.
Its much better to have then straight down the relief / line E / Plat 3 or 4 then onto Line E towards Leckwith that keeps them rolling but requires forward thought to avoid blocking P3 or 4 with a terminator.

 

[PHILIPE]

Tir Phil loop is used by a few trains each day, but not over used no.
Caerphilly bay is being used Frequently frequently at the moment with the blockade on the Pontypridd arm of the valleys, trains are going Caerphilly Bay to Cardiff Bay.

Platform 8 was a missed opportunity, pretty much useful for eastbound movements. The frequency of set swaps at central causes issues when they lay over for any period of time.

“Down side starts” Newport direction into Cardiff P3/4 can happen yes, although bringing them into the Up side and keeping them there is easier. The problem with the Dn side start is again the layout at the east end, and double blocking of the signals to prevent a train being held across the whole ladder.

Westbound freight off the DN relief has to use a single 25mph approach control crossing, to access the DN RL (Line D) through the station brining a 2000t train down to a crawl then waiting for it to build up speed again is a waste of fuel and capacity.
Its much better to have then straight down the relief / line E / Plat 3 or 4 then onto Line E towards Leckwith that keeps them rolling but requires forward thought to avoid blocking P3 or 4 with a terminator.

Caerphilly Bay also sees an hourly turnback on Sundays and 4 turnbacks on weekdays

 

[stj]

What is happening with the new station at Llanwern?

 

[BantamMenace]

And sadly nothing to electrify to Swansea

Which is what I think we should have seen announced

The straightening of the lines and speed improvements are something you want to do before you erect a load of steel at either side of the running lines. This announcement is to do exactly that.

 

[Tom Quinne]

Caerphilly Bay also sees an hourly turnback on Sundays and 4 turnbacks on weekdays

Indeed, it’s quite useful. Shame there isn’t a reduced overlap facility on the DN Rhymney, meaning you have to hold the DN train back at Aber when you’ve one in or out of the bay.

 

[Llandudno]

Speeding up trains between Chester and Llandudno Junction, a couple of minutes here and there maybe useful, but of much more benefit would be running longer trains and operating something resembling a clock face timetable...

 

[Tom Quinne]

The Rhyl Resignalling scheme did little to increase capacity on the route, there are regular delays due to long block sections in both directions on busy summer days with large numbers of passengers getting off and on at Rhyl and Prestatyn.

What is happening with the new station at Llanwern?

Not a lot by the looks of it unfortunately, it’s seriously needed.

 

[MarkyT]

Indeed, it’s quite useful. Shame there isn’t a reduced overlap facility on the DN Rhymney, meaning you have to hold the DN train back at Aber when you’ve one in or out of the bay.

With the platform length available, it ought to be possible to move the signal back towards Aber a bit to achieve this. Is there a short restricted overlap available today for use with a delayed yellow warning approach?