Keolis/Amey to take over Wales and Borders

[Bwlch y Groes]

I'd like to know how to widen the subways without causing problems to the platforms above. Do they realise the cost of moving grade-listed buildings brick by brick?!

They're going to lift it. Or so they say. Part of me expects them to "realise" they can't do it and find an excuse to knock it all down - perhaps with the "promise" of rebuilding that never happens

 

[43096]

No not a chance. Franchising /ROSCO's/ commercial deals don't work like that.

If Keloisamey wanted to increase/replace the existing Long distance ATW fleet in their bid then the choices open to them when they prepared their bid were:

1. Rolling Stock that the ROSCO's could offer that were known to be off lease or were known to becoming off lease
2. New Build.

The only known suitable rolling stock to be becoming off lease are

• Greater Anglias 156 & 170 fleets (by end of 2019)
• TPE surplus 185 fleet (2020/2021 though there's some conjecture that TPW may take over Liverpool to Nottingham and need them)
• West Midlands Trains 170 fleet (2021)

XC 220's are leased up until the end of the XC franchise (2020) and then protocol/precedent gives the new bidders first refusal on leasing them again.

They could also go for 2+4 or 2+5 HSTs. Can easily see how WAG have seen what ScotRail are doing and thought “we would like some of that”.

 

[gareth950]

They're going to lift it. Or so they say. Part of me expects them to "realise" they can't do it and find an excuse to knock it all down - perhaps with the "promise" of rebuilding that never happens

I agree that's the most likely outcome. It's not just the station frontage though. If platform 0 is to be extended the entire booking hall needs to be moved forward, which is also listed.

 

[Mr Apples]

Widening the subways and moving the main building are both going to massive, and interesting, engineering operations. Gareth950, please keep us informed.

 

[Rhydgaled]

It's not the frontage, it's more the brand new rear station entrance that is to be demolished and completely re-built again under TfW's and Cardiff Council's proposals. Presumably because NR and DfT designed and built the current, brand new rear entrance, but now TfW and Welsh Govt want a go. Madness.

No, those plans were binned ages ago as that plan was flatly turned down for funding by DfT.
They're hoping the new plans to demolish recently the DfT funded rear station entrance, and move the GWR listed frontage of the station forward to extend platform 0, have more chance of getting approved.
Under the new plans the subways stay but are somehow widened.

Not sure if what you're discussing is the same proposals I'm (vaugely) aware of, or if those have been superceeded again, but my understanding is slightly different.

Network Rail's Welsh Route Study (March 2016) gives a figure of 13m passengers using Cardiff Central (CDF) in 2013 and estimates that will rise to 23m by 2023 and 32m by 2043. It claims "A modernisation of the station is rapidly required" to increase capacity for both passengers and peak-hour trains. To acheive the latter, they suggest a new west-facing bay platform (platform 5, but to me the new bay would logically be platform 4 with the current platform 4 becoming platform 5) and extension of platform 0 into a full-length platform for class 800s. Expanded circulation space to cater for the increased passenger numbers is also, apparently, needed.

It's not just the station frontage though. If platform 0 is to be extended the entire booking hall needs to be moved forward, which is also listed.

The Welsh Route Study includes an "Artists impression of the redevelopment of Cardiff Central" by powelldobson architects. I have seen further artists impressions from the same set (I think in a Wales Online article) and having looked at all of them I have come to one rather alarming conclusion: they essentially plan to demolish almost the entire station. The frontage with the 'GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY' lettering would survive, but the booking hall behind it would be essentially GONE (I don't think they are planning to move the frontage forwards, it would just stay put). Even the clock on the top of the booking hall appears to be missing on the artists impressions. The wing that currently houses M&S (and has a car park on top next to platform 0) would also be demolished and replaced by a 'greenhouse', with a similar 'greenhouse' on the other side of the frontage. On the platforms, all current buildings and the canopies woul be demolished and a Reading-style transfer deck installed. ALL of that (apart perhaps for the M&S bit; don't know if that is a later addition) is part of the listed building as far as I'm aware. In my opinion, by developing these plans Network Rail and powelldobson architects are showing an unacceptable disregard for the listed buildings system. I have uploaded three of the powelldobson impressions to my Flickr alongside some of my photographs for comparison purposes:

• frontage (west / M&S)
• booking hall (east end)
• platforms

I'd like to know how to widen the subways without causing problems to the platforms above. Do they realise the cost of moving grade-listed buildings brick by brick?!

I'd be very supprised if they are planning to move it, they just want to demolish most of it. If they were to move it brick-by-brick, I'd suggest moving the whole lot to the St. Fagans muesum; but it's far too big for that to be practical. I did read somewhere (I think it was a Wales Online article) that widening one or both subways was an option, as an alternative to the Reading-style transfer deck above the platforms.

Widening the subways and moving the main building are both going to massive, and interesting, engineering operations. Gareth950, please keep us informed.

How is the station actually constructed? Are the subways tunnels through a solid embankment? Or is the whole thing essentially on a bridge with empty space (or staff only areas) beneath? I tried asking Network Rail and they refused to answer. If there is empty space under there, then I would support widening the subway that accesses the lifts (not the stairs one, that's one of the wonderful features of the listed building) to increase passenger space and avoid all the demolition.

 

[gareth950]

Not sure if what you're discussing is the same proposals I'm (vaugely) aware of, or if those have been superceeded again, but my understanding is slightly different.

Network Rail's Welsh Route Study (March 2016) gives a figure of 13m passengers using Cardiff Central (CDF) in 2013 and estimates that will rise to 23m by 2023 and 32m by 2043. It claims "A modernisation of the station is rapidly required" to increase capacity for both passengers and peak-hour trains. To acheive the latter, they suggest a new west-facing bay platform (platform 5, but to me the new bay would logically be platform 4 with the current platform 4 becoming platform 5) and extension of platform 0 into a full-length platform for class 800s. Expanded circulation space to cater for the increased passenger numbers is also, apparently, needed.

The Welsh Route Study includes an "Artists impression of the redevelopment of Cardiff Central" by powelldobson architects. I have seen further artists impressions from the same set (I think in a Wales Online article) and having looked at all of them I have come to one rather alarming conclusion: they essentially plan to demolish almost the entire station. The frontage with the 'GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY' lettering would survive, but the booking hall behind it would be essentially GONE (I don't think they are planning to move the frontage forwards, it would just stay put). Even the clock on the top of the booking hall appears to be missing on the artists impressions. The wing that currently houses M&S (and has a car park on top next to platform 0) would also be demolished and replaced by a 'greenhouse', with a similar 'greenhouse' on the other side of the frontage. On the platforms, all current buildings and the canopies woul be demolished and a Reading-style transfer deck installed. ALL of that (apart perhaps for the M&S bit; don't know if that is a later addition) is part of the listed building as far as I'm aware. In my opinion, by developing these plans Network Rail and powelldobson architects are showing an unacceptable disregard for the listed buildings system. I have uploaded three of the powelldobson impressions to my Flickr alongside some of my photographs for comparison purposes:

• frontage (west / M&S)
• booking hall (east end)
• platforms

I'd be very supprised if they are planning to move it, they just want to demolish most of it. If they were to move it brick-by-brick, I'd suggest moving the whole lot to the St. Fagans muesum; but it's far too big for that to be practical. I did read somewhere (I think it was a Wales Online article) that widening one or both subways was an option, as an alternative to the Reading-style transfer deck above the platforms.

How is the station actually constructed? Are the subways tunnels through a solid embankment? Or is the whole thing essentially on a bridge with empty space (or staff only areas) beneath? I tried asking Network Rail and they refused to answer. If there is empty space under there, then I would support widening the subway that accesses the lifts (not the stairs one, that's one of the wonderful features of the listed building) to increase passenger space and avoid all the demolition.

Those plans have now been binned.

The latest plans are for 'Metro Central', which yes, Ken Skates has described as 'world class'. Presumably the new proposals aren't as 'world class' as the previous proposals. The majority of the Cardiff Central station re-development in the new plans would be at the rear of the station, but still involves changes at the front and extending platform 0 to take London trains.
Again, these plans are yet to be approved as DfT hasn't confirmed match funding.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/new-vision-sees-cardiff-central-14157440

 

[jayah]

There's a piece in the Daily Post about WG wanting new subsidised domestic air services to Cardiff.
It's too disjointed to lift quotes from, but majors on services to Manchester, with the list also mentioning Leeds, Humberside, Glasgow, Aberdeen and even London.
They also seem to want a larger plane on Holyhead-Cardiff.
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/business/business-news/subsided-air-route-manchester-cardiff-14700133
Maybe they have given up expecting major rail improvements to these destinations, but Manchester is a little odd, with its half-decent hourly service.
There can't be much scope for a short hop to London, either.

I do pity Wales run by idiot politicians who faced with an NHS in crisis think their contribution to public life is to subsidise ludicrous air routes like Cardiff to Humberside.

 

[mmh]

Perhaps you gogs should be better educated. It's the place where the Welsh National Anthem was first performed.

Well I didn't know that, so thank you.

It sounds like a piece of historical trivia very few people anywhere would know though, and similar to the WG's insistence that the North, putting it bluntly, should give more than the no stuffs it's ever given about the South.

It's that sort of "don't you know, you should" approach that reinforces division everywhere.

 

[Merthyr Imp]

...they suggest a new west-facing bay platform (platform 5, but to me the new bay would logically be platform 4 with the current platform 4 becoming platform 5)

So it sounds as if they would be reinstating the bay platform that previously existed between platforms 3 and 4. I'm not sure when it was filled in (1960s at a guess), but it can be seen in this photo dated 1931. Also a plan of the station which shows that all the way back in 1910 the bay platform was numbered 5 despite being between nos. 3 and 4!

Photo is scanned from the book 'Railways of Cardiff' by Laurence Waters.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Those plans have now been binned.

The latest plans are for 'Metro Central', which yes, Ken Skates has described as 'world class'. Presumably the new proposals aren't as 'world class' as the previous proposals. The majority of the Cardiff Central station re-development in the new plans would be at the rear of the station, but still involves changes at the front and extending platform 0 to take London trains.
Again, these plans are yet to be approved as DfT hasn't confirmed match funding.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/new-vision-sees-cardiff-central-14157440

What! They really are thinking about moving the building forward! Mind... Blown...

This (3rd?) version of the 'plan' seems to be a lot less developed than the previous one; there's no indication of whether the platform buildings and canopies would survive. I hope they are not intending to demolish the subway that leads to the stairs, with the platform numbers on the tiles which are presumably the reason the station has a platform 0 and no platform 5 rather than the whole lot having been renumbered 1-8.

Is extending platform 0 really worth doing? I believe it is currently 110m long and could be extended towards the booking hall building to between 124 and 127 meters without destroying/moving that structure. 124m would be the same length as the platforms on the Rhymney and Treherbert lines that were extended to take trains of 6x20m vehicles. That would probably allow platform 0 to cater for most trains serving the station except for the Paddington trains which could continue to use platforms 1-3. Further extension of platform 0 in the westbound direction onto the bridge over the river might also be possible; looking at Google Earth I reckon you'd just about get to 184 meters (enough for 8x23m vehicles) before reaching the points that lead to the up main (the through road nearest platform 2). Extending further west would be tricky, because you'd have to move those points west and put an extension on the side of bridge to make it wide enough for the platform, but you could then get to about 220 meters of platform. That's enough for 8x26m vehicles (8x26 = 208). Although a 9-car class 800 at 234m still wouldn't fit, as long as GWR try to keep first class at the London end the lead door is not a passenger door so you could simply place the class 800/3 stop marker beyond the east end of the platform, alongside the booking hall building. If one was in reverse formation, you could either route it into platforms 1-3 or use the selective door openning to lock out one door. As for 10-car formations, either use platforms 1-3 for them or stick them on Oxfords and Bristols and ban them from Wales, but if push came to shove you'd still be able to platform at least one or two doors on each set.

I think the 184 metre platform would be my prefered option, since it avoids both damage to the listed station building and messing up the look of the bridge. Most trains would be able to use it, helping keep at least one of platforms 1-3 available for London trains. You'd have to avoid rostering 800s into platform 0, but if you absolutely had to divert one into platform 0 you could still open the doors on 7 coaches (7x26 = 182).

NOTE: I'm not sure if the track layout I'm looking at while writing the above is pre-CASR, and am of course assuming that the class 800's selective door openning system is cabable of selecting and deselecting any number of doors.

It is nice to see that, as I have desired for some time, there appears to be a tram line outside the southern entrance (although no overhead wires? and no platform for the trams to stop at?), which hopefully means the line from Central to Queen Street (and hopefully hence to Treherbert, Aberdare, Merthyr and Rhymney) will remain available for heavy-rail services (even if they share some of the route with tram-train rolling stock). That new design for the southern entrance though... It's hideous.

So it sounds as if they would be reinstating the bay platform that previously existed between platforms 3 and 4. I'm not sure when it was filled in (1960s at a guess), but it can be seen in this photo dated 1931. Also a plan of the station which shows that all the way back in 1910 the bay platform was numbered 5 despite being between nos. 3 and 4!

Photo is scanned from the book 'Railways of Cardiff' by Laurence Waters.

Thank You! Ever since I read that there was once a west-facing bay at Cardiff Central I've wanted to see a picture of what it looked like. I've also always assumed the bay was platform 4; interesting to learn that it was numbered out of sequence when it existed.

 

[Dai Corner]

Apologies if I’ve missed something, but why is it so desperately important to enable Paddington trains to use Pl 0 ?

 

[tiptoptaff]

Apologies if I’ve missed something, but why is it so desperately important to enable Paddington trains to use Pl 0 ?

Lack of capacity at CDF when half of it gets turned in to a tram stop

 

[gareth950]

Apologies if I’ve missed something, but why is it so desperately important to enable Paddington trains to use Pl 0 ?

I don't see why it is, surely the use of 3 (possibly 4) platforms (1,2, 3 and 4 if needed) for a half hourly service to & from London is enough?

Meanwhile, whilst we are waiting for the details of Keolis/Amey bid to be announced next week, to keep us amused I've come across Ken Skates' spin on the new 'Metro Central' development, the re-branded name for Cardiff Central bus station, since Welsh Govt bought the land off Cardiff Council, as the council became incapable of getting a new bus station started.

“I am pleased that following the Welsh Government’s acquisition of the Interchange Site, we have been able to move quickly to the start of construction on this vital project.

“As a Welsh Government we are committed to creating modern, integrated metro networks that put users right at their heart. Working with our partners we want to provide world class, accessible public transport that encourages the modal shift we need and sparks inclusive economic growth across wider geographical regions.

“The Cardiff Central interchange is key to our wider vision for the South Wales Metro and we are proud to be working with Cardiff Council, Network Rail and Right Acres, under the terms of our newly agreed collaboration agreement, to make it a reality.

“I am proud that Welsh Government involvement in this partnership is helping to deliver solutions that are firmly focussed on economic growth, and I am confident this will help attract wider investment. It is a model I’m keen to explore in other areas of Wales, too.”

I've emboldened his usual, now meaningless buzz words.

https://businessnewswales.com/work-underway-on-cardiff-transport-interchange/
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/new-bus-station-cardiff-could-14628104

 

[The Ham]

I don't see why it is, surely the use of 3 (possibly 4) platforms (1,2, 3 and 4 if needed) for a half hourly service to & from London is enough?

Meanwhile, whilst we are waiting for the details of Keolis/Amey bid to be announced next week, to keep us amused I've come across Ken Skates' spin on the new 'Metro Central' development, the re-branded name for Cardiff Central bus station, since Welsh Govt bought the land off Cardiff Council, as the council became incapable of getting a new bus station started.

“I am pleased that following the Welsh Government’s acquisition of the Interchange Site, we have been able to move quickly to the start of construction on this vital project.

“As a Welsh Government we are committed to creating modern, integrated metro networks that put users right at their heart. Working with our partners we want to provide world class, accessible public transport that encourages the modal shift we need and sparks inclusive economic growth across wider geographical regions.

“The Cardiff Central interchange is key to our wider vision for the South Wales Metro and we are proud to be working with Cardiff Council, Network Rail and Right Acres, under the terms of our newly agreed collaboration agreement, to make it a reality.

“I am proud that Welsh Government involvement in this partnership is helping to deliver solutions that are firmly focussed on economic growth, and I am confident this will help attract wider investment. It is a model I’m keen to explore in other areas of Wales, too.”

I've emboldened his usual, now meaningless buzz words.

https://businessnewswales.com/work-underway-on-cardiff-transport-interchange/
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/new-bus-station-cardiff-could-14628104

Bingo!

 

[Dai Corner]

Interesting that he’s ‘proud to be working with ..... Network Rail....’ on this but is doing his best not to elsewhere!

A masterpiece of weaving meaningless phrases together to create a communication conveying approximately zero information though. Congratulations to them author. He/she will go far in the Welsh civil service.

 

[PHILIPE]

Interesting that he’s ‘proud to be working with ..... Network Rail....’ on this but is doing his best not to elsewhere!

A masterpiece of weaving meaningless phrases together to create a communication conveying approximately zero information though. Congratulations to them author. He/she will go far in the Welsh civil service.

Just moving on from Third World to World Class

 

[Rhydgaled]

Apologies if I’ve missed something, but why is it so desperately important to enable Paddington trains to use Pl 0 ?

I don't see why it is, surely the use of 3 (possibly 4) platforms (1,2, 3 and 4 if needed) for a half hourly service to & from London is enough?

Network Rail seem to think London trains need to use platform 0 in order to make sufficient capacity for the expected increase in traffic, including an extra two trains per day to London in the morning peak and back in the evening peak:

Altering the routeing into and out of Cardiff Central is crucial to freeing up sufficient capacity, at the station, to accommodate the services envisaged under the 2043 ITSS and 2043 freight forecast. However, unlike other parts of the South Wales Main Line, the points of constraint remain the same, regardless of which Routeing Model is used.

On the Main Line side of the station, there will be limited platform
availability.

They suggest that platform 0 be the main platform for eastbound services, with platform 2 being the main platform for westbound services and platform 1 being available for services in both directions.

A key element of the proposed routeing models is that they remove the need for services which turn round at Cardiff, to cross the station
layout in between arrival and departure, by splitting the station into Main Line and Relief Line sides.

So it appears that the problem is Network Rail have decided that platforms 3 and 4 will be dedicated to releif line services (with the latter also being shared by the ValleyLines) and thus unavailable for use by London trains. Elsewhere in the document, they suggest that Ebbw Vale services (2tph), 1tph between Cardiff and Bristol and a Cardiff-Cheltenham service would use the relief lines after upgrading the linespeeds on them to match the mains. That doesn't make sense to me, because the Ebbw Vale services would then have to cross the mains at Ebbw Junction. Wouldn't it make more sense to put the Cardiff-Nottingham and Cardiff-Portsmouth services on the relief lines instead? Platform 0 could then be used for trains to Ebbw Vale and the marches line, leaving platform 1 free for London services.

The problem with doing that, I guess, is that the proposed new station(s) between Cardiff and Newport would require platforms on all four lines, not just the reliefs, so that the Ebbw branch services could call. Also, moving Bristol services to the relief lines would result in down trains crossing the main lines at Severn Tunnel Junction to reach the down relief (up trains have a flyover; could that be made bi-directional or is it too busy?).

 

[HH]

Just moving on from Third World to Third World Class

Corrected.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Corrected.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Would seem were not expecting anything from Stadler for the franchise going on this article.

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/stadler-sets-sights-on-supplying-trains-for-new-franchises

Stadler is targeting more business in the UK, with upcoming franchises providing opportunities for the Swiss train manufacturer. The company is also investigating providing alternative power for its trains.

Speaking in Bussnang on May 3, before the unveiling of the first Class 755/4 bi-mode unit for Greater Anglia (see separate news story and feature), Stadler UK Marketing Director Ralf Warwel said that there were “quite a few activities” the company was looking at, suggesting East Midlands and maybe the West Coast Partnership.

The company is also keen to supply locomotives (possibly Class 68s) for the CrossCountry and Chiltern Railways franchises, where potential bidders have investigated the Class 68/Mk 5A concept about to be introduced by TransPennine Express.

Stadler is also interested in the Invitation to Tender issued by Direct Rail Services last year for ten diesel-electric locomotives, to be delivered next year.

Warwel said that the company was looking at all the products available, adding: “We are looking at alternative energy. It is too early to see technical details. Diesel is very good, but batteries are probably the furthest advanced for alternative power. Batteries are something that has the potential to be good, but technology moves so fast. Batteries need recharging, so more work is needed.”

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd put money on CAF.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I'd put money on CAF.

I wonder if MTR went with somebody else..........

 

[MarkyT]

.
The problem with doing that, I guess, is that the proposed new station(s) between Cardiff and Newport would require platforms on all four lines, not just the reliefs, so that the Ebbw branch services could call. Also, moving Bristol services to the relief lines would result in down trains crossing the main lines at Severn Tunnel Junction to reach the down relief (up trains have a flyover; could that be made bi-directional or is it too busy?).

Down services from Bristol switching to the reliefs would not cross the Up main, they could switch track easily on the paired by direction section between STJ and Bishton. An Up train going to Chepstow does have to cross the Down main however just west of STJ. I would have thought trains from Bristol are less likely to pick up any extra new station calls between STJ and Cardiff, so might as well stay on the mains, while additional Chepstow locals are more likely to do this. The Ebbws are more likely to have extra calls inserted and those going to Cardiff already have to cross the Up Main to gain the Down Main, on which they need a path anyway. Crossing to the Down Relief is little extra hardship and any other traffic on the reliefs in the area can be regulated accordingly. Crossing from Up Relief towards Park Jn at Ebbw Jn will additionally block the Down Main however, but clearly then it will probably be the Ebbw trains that are regulated to avoid any Main line delays. The Chepstow locals running on the reliefs is a bit of a problem with respect to the layout between STJ and Bishton. Makes me ponder that a further reshuffle of the lines in the area might be justified to make it paired by use with the Reliefs staying on the south side. The Flyover could stay for getting Up Relief trains easily over onto the Up Main. Grade separation might be possible just west of Ebbw Jn with the Independant Ebbw lines passing under the A48 and over the river via abandoned former siding alignments then flying over the mains to gain the reliefs in the space before the next overbridge near Duffryn. For light modern DMUs, a fairly steeply graded and tightly curved single track flyover would probably be OK. Speeds are not high in the area anyway. Thus all main line conflict would be removed.

 

[Gareth Marston]

An excitable Sion Berry in the Western Mail reporting MTR are not legally challenging the award to Keolis

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/busin...hallenge-wales-14719125#ICID=sharebar_twitter

 

[WatcherZero]

KeolisAmey, due to the 10 day cooling off period, has yet to disclose details of its plans for the franchise and electrification of the core Valley Lines, in terms of rolling stock, new stations and any network extensions.

However, on the Valley Lines it is understood they have gone for tram-trains with battery power capacity.

Intermittent electrification and tram-trains?
Will they be high floor or low floor as there would be a lot of advantages in the Welsh network going for high floor to lower the cost of conversions.

 

[Robertj21a]

Intermittent electrification and tram-trains?
Will they be high floor or low floor as there would be a lot of advantages in the Welsh network going for high floor to lower the cost of conversions.

I'd be amazed if anyone ordered high floor trams for a new system nowadays. In the medium to longer term I'd assume that the trams would infiltrate some of the streets of towns rather than just terminating at the station. I wouldn't want high platforms (as in Manchester) on a new system.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Would seem were not expecting anything from Stadler for the franchise going on this article.
https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/stadler-sets-sights-on-supplying-trains-for-new-franchises

Intermittent electrification and tram-trains?
Will they be high floor or low floor as there would be a lot of advantages in the Welsh network going for high floor to lower the cost of conversions.

I'd put money on CAF.

Remember that the Sheffield Tram-Train (class 399) is now a Stadler product, since they bought Vossloh's facility in Spain.​

 

[Parallel]

Slightly off topic but I noticed the waiting room at Cardiff Central between 3/4 has been locked out of use, and the windows covered. Anyone know if it’s being refurbished?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Remember that the Sheffield Tram-Train (class 399) is now a Stadler product, since they bought Vossloh's facility in Spain.

It is but there's no reason CAF couldn't offer a competing product; they make both trains and trams, it's not exactly a difficult step, particularly as low-floor EMUs that are basically beefed-up trams anyway are probably the best selling railway product from any supplier in mainland Europe.

 

[WatcherZero]

I'd be amazed if anyone ordered high floor trams for a new system nowadays. In the medium to longer term I'd assume that the trams would infiltrate some of the streets of towns rather than just terminating at the station. I wouldn't want high platforms (as in Manchester) on a new system.

Yeah but the reason they are going for intermittent is because they are doing it on a shoestring. As the majority of stops will be heavy rail even in the centre of Cardiff then keeping the buildings and achieving level boarding by altering the platform edges or resurfacing the platforms, avoiding large scale track renewal, that will save hundreds of millions. Sheffields trial has demonstrated you suffer for trying to bring low floor platforms onto the heavy rail nework.

The conversion makes the valleys a lot more like Manchester than the other exclusively new build systems.