Keolis/Amey to take over Wales and Borders

[Y Ddraig Coch]

First impressions:
We're going to have to wait quite a while for some of these new services.
2tph Wrexham-Bidston is not till 2021.

158s, and presumably 175s, stay around until 2022/23, so the new CAF? DMUs are not coming quickly.​

Chester station upgrade (whatever that is) is not till 2028!
LHCS is 3tpd Holyhead-Cardiff, so not Manchester-Holyhead or Manchester-Cardiff
2-car DMUs on Milford Haven-Manchester and elsewhere is not an upgrade.
In fact why are we persisting with 2-car trains with poor per-vehicle economics?
And personally I prefer to see the driver in a proper cab and not a broom cupboard for a 200+ mile journey.
The changes in fares for under 11s and 16-18s presumably is on Welsh-only routes (would be entertaining on shared English routes otherwise).
How will that work with other operators within Wales (eg ICGW, ICWC/WCP)?
Nothing much said about services in England (eg to Manchester/Birmingham airports, or to Bristol).
There's a danger of the 60mph D-Train units clogging up the 90mph main lines while working to/from their designated lines (eg Chester-Crewe shuttle) - that would be unwelcome.

I have yet to discover how the franchise is being contracted.
All the announcements talk about "we", but it's not clear who "we" is - TfW or KeolisAmey.
This is now on the KeolisAmey web site: http://www.keolisamey.cymru/news-an...es-and-borders-network-and-south-wales-metro/


I can't see anything about rolling stock contracts, or depot policy (aside from Machynlleth).
In any case the Metro vehicle spec is apparently not finalised, so early orders are unlikely.
The KA contract and handover phase from ATW starts today.
2tph Chester-Wrexham is probably feasible with the reduced upgrade, but not at all clockface hours. The services might be imbalanced as a result.

The improvements and general ambition are to be welcomed, especially after the ATW straightjacket, but I'm less impressed the more I read.
I haven't seen anything on branding, apart from the colour scheme and Metro logos which look fine.
A lot of Arriva green (and even some FNW green and FirstGroup lilac) will have to be replaced!
What will be plastered on the trains outside the Metro area?

From the BBC website :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-44316772


"New trains and light rail cars will be in red and black colours - and carry Transport for Wales (TfW) branding, not company logos."

So It looks as though all new trains will be in the red and black and carry the TFW logos' it doesn't mention rebranding the older trains. So the green could be here to stay for a while yet minus any arriva logos obviously.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

From the BBC website :
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-44316772
"New trains and light rail cars will be in red and black colours - and carry Transport for Wales (TfW) branding, not company logos."
So It looks as though all new trains will be in the red and black and carry the TFW logos' it doesn't mention rebranding the older trains. So the green could be here to stay for a while yet minus any arriva logos obviously.

I'm actually interested in the "& Borders" bit which Chris Grayling stipulated had to be on trains working into England (ie most all of them).

 

[Gareth Marston]

I'm actually interested in the "& Borders" bit which Chris Grayling stipulated had to be on trains working into England (ie most all of them).

Seems a deliberate move to almost airbrush Birmingham and Manchester out of the picture , little WG not wanting to upset big powerful English City regions?

One of my acid tests for this franchise was the elimination of 2 car long distance DMU's into major city's I'm yet to see it......though the first class between Swansea and Manchester on hourly services from West Wales does suggest a spli join method of operation at Swansea and a 4 car railway up the core main line of the franchise.

 

[Muzer]

So the Tram Trains are going ahead, and the Cardiff Bay branch is going to be completely replaced with street running, is it? Do we know if it's reusing the existing trackbed towards Cardiff Bay or if it's a completely new alignment? And will street running be using in any of the valleys themselves or only in Cardiff?

 

[Domh245]

All the materials released say a short section of on track running - mainly as a trial - beyond Cardiff Bay

 

[krus_aragon]

So the Tram Trains are going ahead, and the Cardiff Bay branch is going to be completely replaced with street running, is it? Do we know if it's reusing the existing trackbed towards Cardiff Bay or if it's a completely new alignment? And will street running be using in any of the valleys themselves or only in Cardiff?

Furthe to Domh245's post, hitting 4tph for Merthyr, Aberdare and Treherbert will require extra passing loops or redoubling up in the valleys. As these are "core metro" lines, the loops can be built to tram standards at a lower cost (at the expense of not allowing trains up there any more).

 

[Robertj21a]

Furthe to Domh245's post, hitting 4tph for Merthyr, Aberdare and Treherbert will require extra passing loops or redoubling up in the valleys. As these are "core metro" lines, the loops can be built to tram standards at a lower cost (at the expense of not allowing trains up there any more).

Presumably, no real need for any other trains to go up there nowadays (freight ?)

 

[MarkyT]

Presumably, no real need for any other trains to go up there nowadays (freight ?)

AFAIK, freight still goes beyond Aberdare to an opencast coal loading point, so any work on that line would still have to be heavy rail compatible.

 

[krus_aragon]

Presumably, no real need for any other trains to go up there nowadays (freight ?)

Other than maintainance, no. The Rhymney line is another matter, hence why it's not slated for tram-train conversion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One of my acid tests for this franchise was the elimination of 2 car long distance DMU's into major city's I'm yet to see it......though the first class between Swansea and Manchester on hourly services from West Wales does suggest a spli join method of operation at Swansea and a 4 car railway up the core main line of the franchise.

I think the argument for building 2-car DMUs is not so much for running them on their own and more so they are suited to being cascaded onto branch lines later.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I think the argument for building 2-car DMUs is not so much for running them on their own and more so they are suited to being cascaded onto branch lines later.

Ive just looked through the rolling stock plans again after this morning and the long distance fleet is set to increase substantially from today (and thankfully its not carting too much fresh air from Cardiff to Holyhead). Its going to be c 220 vehicles in size compared to today's 125. And with First Class between Swansea and Manchester something I have been championing. Some confirmation of anticipated diagram lengths off peak/peak into/out of Manchester/Birmingham/Cardiff is needed. The announcement shied away from talking about Manchester/Birmingham for some reason. Around a dozen diagrams are going to be needed for the new Liverpool services and a couple for the extra Cambrians however we should see some quite considerable improvements.

 

[Kite159]

AFAIK, freight still goes beyond Aberdare to an opencast coal loading point, so any work on that line would still have to be heavy rail compatible.

Hasn't Tower Colliery closed down with minimal freight working there now? One for @Freightmaster ?

 

[gareth950]

Furthe to Domh245's post, hitting 4tph for Merthyr, Aberdare and Treherbert will require extra passing loops or redoubling up in the valleys. As these are "core metro" lines, the loops can be built to tram standards at a lower cost (at the expense of not allowing trains up there any more).

I've read this from Skates' cabinet statement as HR standards being maintained up the 'Central Metro', tram-train operated lines:

"The Metro Vehicles will use a technology often referred to as Tram-Train. They will operate under Heavy Rail regulations on conventional railway, but will be capable of use in Light Rail (or Tram) mode for extendibility."

https://gov.wales/about/cabinet/cabinetstatements/2018/railservicesupdate/?lang=en

By the way, did anyone here "World Class" utterred today?

 

[MarkyT]

Hasn't Tower Colliery closed down with minimal freight working there now? One for

Looking at RTT there are still Q paths planned but there are no reports of anything that has actually run in the last week.

 

[sw1ller]

It is a longer route via Stafford & Brum. The Marches line has also had speed improvements between Shrewsbury & Chirk.

It certainly has, 70 up to 90. Hardly utilised at the moment and it’s always scuppered by connecting/detaching at Shrewsbury. Having driven it for the last year I’ve never had to go above 60mph to keep to times.

I realise Stafford is a longer route but the times must be quicker. Keep Shrewsbury out of the diagram and there’s less chance the job will stop due to failure. Look at how the snow affected the area last year. It was pathetic. It simply shouldn’t be like it is in 2018.

 

[Dai Corner]

Unanswered questions:

I don't think we've heard whether the 'Core Valley Lines' are staying with Network Rail or being transferred, and if so to whom

Was there actually an ITT beyond "We've got £5bn to spend. What can you do for us?"

Will the traction supply really be 100% renewable and 50% Welsh-generated? The KA timeline says low-carbon which fits more with them tying in to the NR supply which is notionally 100% nuclear.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Well, The evening Gerald is already around 15 minutes faster as of last month, so I presume there will be a similar acceleration to other services. The redoubling (now partial) from Chester to Wrexham was mooted to take 15 minutes off the journey, and there have been line speed increases further south as well, also I think along the coast.

The redoubling itself hardly saves anything because of the remaining 60mph limit on the track they didn't replace.
There are gains between Gobowen and Shrewsbury with the (mostly) 90mph, and maybe now on the coast with the new signalling.
But nothing like 15 minutes for all trains, more like 5.
Gerald benefits more because before the upgrade it had to follow the 60mph loco speed Wrexham-Shrewsbury whereas DMUs were 70mph.

 

[jhy44]

. Surely those issues would more then outweigh the mysterious unspecified advantages in having a route run by a TOC based in Derby over one based in Cardiff.....

Operationally yes, it may fit in neatly with the Welsh franchise, but administratively it's not ideal at all

The issue is purely an administrative/funding one rather than an operational one. As provision of rail transport is devolved further and further, cross-border services become more and more of a headache. The Welsh-government run TfW will now be effectively running the service, using large quantities of Welsh money. Whilst this doesn't make operations in England impossible, it is likely to result in some complicated SLAs or budget transfers needing to take place between the Welsh government and their English counterparts (DfT, possibly local councils), which add to the administrative burden.

There is then also the headache of stakeholders; the more services in England TfW run; the more councils, MPs across the border will become stakeholders, complicating governance procedures. Further still, there is the issue of accountability and priority. A Welsh government run franchise could; or could be accused of, prioritising the services in places they're directly and legislatively accountable (the Welsh electorate) over areas they're not (Cheshire).
For these same reasons, trains don't often run too far across international borders where possible, and for the same reason people in the Home Counties are wary of TfL taking over their services.

For those reasons, it makes everyone's life a lot easier if TfW run as few services outside of Wales as possible; something they themselves identified during initial franchise-requirement specification discussions were taking place years ago.

The Crewe-Chester shuttle is one such service which could very easily be transferred to an English operator. Be it Northern, East Midlands, even Southeastern as a ludicrous example, would all be a 'better' solution to this legislative problem.

Seeing as Arriva Northern is partially managed by the much less powerful 'Transport for the North', and both Cheshire authorities are constituent authorities of TfN, it would make the most sense for services in Cheshire to be run by Arriva Northern wherever possible. This would become even more so the case if further devolution and strengthening of TfN's power and remit were to occur, as could be likely.

 

[8H]

Operationally yes, it may fit in neatly with the Welsh franchise, but administratively it's not ideal at all

The issue is purely an administrative/funding one rather than an operational one. As provision of rail transport is devolved further and further, cross-border services become more and more of a headache. The Welsh-government run TfW will now be effectively running the service, using large quantities of Welsh money. Whilst this doesn't make operations in England impossible, it is likely to result in some complicated SLAs or budget transfers needing to take place between the Welsh government and their English counterparts (DfT, possibly local councils), which add to the administrative burden.

There is then also the headache of stakeholders; the more services in England TfW run; the more councils, MPs across the border will become stakeholders, complicating governance procedures. Further still, there is the issue of accountability and priority. A Welsh government run franchise could; or could be accused of, prioritising the services in places they're directly and legislatively accountable (the Welsh electorate) over areas they're not (Cheshire).
For these same reasons, trains don't often run too far across international borders where possible, and for the same reason people in the Home Counties are wary of TfL taking over their services.

For those reasons, it makes everyone's life a lot easier if TfW run as few services outside of Wales as possible; something they themselves identified during initial franchise-requirement specification discussions were taking place years ago.

The Crewe-Chester shuttle is one such service which could very easily be transferred to an English operator. Be it Northern, East Midlands, even Southeastern as a ludicrous example, would all be a 'better' solution to this legislative problem.

Seeing as Arriva Northern is partially managed by the much less powerful 'Transport for the North', and both Cheshire authorities are constituent authorities of TfN, it would make the most sense for services in Cheshire to be run by Arriva Northern wherever possible. This would become even more so the case if further devolution and strengthening of TfN's power and remit were to occur, as could be likely.

The significant nuisance for West Cheshire rail routes is not the Welsh border at all but the “border” with the Merseytravel area with it’s much better frequencies. This was of course until recently a simple party political/funding border.

In the case of the Wrexham Bidston route for example it is Flintshire who have sustained services for English users as well as Welsh with their sustained financial support for additional services above and beyond the frankly rotten basic franchise spec in the old Arriva agreement. So thanks Wales your input and co-operation with English authorities is recognised and appreciated!

 

[PHILIPE]

There are going to be a lot of disappointed passengers on Day 1 of the new Franchise who may expect that the now historical overcrowding and any other ATW shortcomings will disappear when it could take quite a while yet.

 

[PR1Berske]

There are going to be a lot of disappointed passengers on Day 1 of the new Franchise who may expect that the now historical overcrowding and any other ATW shortcomings will disappear when it could take quite a while yet.

Not really, I guess passengers are used to franchises changing. Not many people genuinely think that improvement comes from day one.

 

[OrangeJuice]

There are going to be a lot of disappointed passengers on Day 1 of the new Franchise who may expect that the now historical overcrowding and any other ATW shortcomings will disappear when it could take quite a while yet.

That can almost be guaranteed to happen. Most of the improvements aren't happening until 2022/2023 (which is understandable for new trains/infrastructure), so the people who expect a step change will be disappointed.

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

 

[Gareth Marston]

That can almost be guaranteed to happen. Most of the improvements aren't happening until 2022/2023 (which is understandable for new trains/infrastructure), so the people who expect a step change will be disappointed.

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

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

 

[The Ham]

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

Which is currently only 18 months away, so there's probably going to be some improvements fairly well on into the new franchise.

Personally I would look to bring in the new units faster than I retired the Pacers so that it resulted in the peak number of units sooner and gave the drivers a chance to learn the new stock without needing it in service.

If the finances worked I'd try and get a good deal on the Pacers, as they would only being for scrap otherwise, so that January 2020 saw a drop in the number of units that were in use. Probably working out the earliest that they could go off lease and then offering some amount (say 10% of their scrap value for each month they stay "on lease" for a minimum of 3 months) that means the extra cost to me is low but it's worth the ROSCO letting me keep them. It could be that the first few I would have to let go at their earliest end of lease point to show that I didn't need them.

Of course there would still be other costs, like maintenance and fuel, but it is likely to earn a lot of good feedback from the passengers, with the drop in units at a time when passenger numbers were high (due to Christmas) and fall back on the New Year. Which should cussion the impact of the loss of the total number of units.

 

[John R]

Which is currently only 18 months away, so there's probably going to be some improvements fairly well on into the new franchise.

Personally I would look to bring in the new units faster than I retired the Pacers so that it resulted in the peak number of units sooner and gave the drivers a chance to learn the new stock without needing it in service.

If the finances worked I'd try and get a good deal on the Pacers, as they would only being for scrap otherwise, so that January 2020 saw a drop in the number of units that were in use. Probably working out the earliest that they could go off lease and then offering some amount (say 10% of their scrap value for each month they stay "on lease" for a minimum of 3 months) that means the extra cost to me is low but it's worth the ROSCO letting me keep them. It could be that the first few I would have to let go at their earliest end of lease point to show that I didn't need them.

Of course there would still be other costs, like maintenance and fuel, but it is likely to earn a lot of good feedback from the passengers, with the drop in units at a time when passenger numbers were high (due to Christmas) and fall back on the New Year. Which should cussion the impact of the loss of the total number of units.

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.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Which is currently only 18 months away, so there's probably going to be some improvements fairly well on into the new franchise.

Personally I would look to bring in the new units faster than I retired the Pacers so that it resulted in the peak number of units sooner and gave the drivers a chance to learn the new stock without needing it in service.

If the finances worked I'd try and get a good deal on the Pacers, as they would only being for scrap otherwise, so that January 2020 saw a drop in the number of units that were in use. Probably working out the earliest that they could go off lease and then offering some amount (say 10% of their scrap value for each month they stay "on lease" for a minimum of 3 months) that means the extra cost to me is low but it's worth the ROSCO letting me keep them. It could be that the first few I would have to let go at their earliest end of lease point to show that I didn't need them.

Of course there would still be other costs, like maintenance and fuel, but it is likely to earn a lot of good feedback from the passengers, with the drop in units at a time when passenger numbers were high (due to Christmas) and fall back on the New Year. Which should cussion the impact of the loss of the total number of units.

It all hinges on over things coming to fruition
5 x 4 769 Flexs being available by Q4 2018 - to work Rhymney Valley-Penarth services
5 x 1 153's being released by WMT by May 2019- to work West Wales locals

This allows the 150 & 158 fleet to have PRM Mods.

Having achieved this by 31 December 2019 we then have to get

Greater Anglias 170 fleet cascaded by Q4 2019
4 x 2 & 8 x 3 170's - to work local services in South Wales initially.

3 x 4 Plus DVT Mk4's from LNER by Q4 2019

 

[47421]

"It all hinges on over things coming to fruition
5 x 4 769 Flexs being available by Q4 2018 - to work Rhymney Valley-Penarth services
5 x 1 153's being released by WMT by May 2019- to work West Wales locals"

The 153s are coming from GWR, which should be achievable as Turbo cascade continues, but relying on those 769s being available in next few months seems far from ideal.

 

[daikilo]

It certainly looks as though it is likely to get worse before it gets better, particularly when they start on the OHLE and probable track realignments.

 

[47421]

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.

 

[cactustwirly]

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.

No, even with the toilets locked out, the 142s still don't meet the PRM-TSI spec, so cannot be used in service unless they are modified, or they get a derogation.