South Wales 'Metro' updates

[5021]

Excellent Ryan, many thanks! Would you (and the Forum administrator) be happy for me to submit some of these for possible publication in the BLS newsletter please? It's been very short of first hand reports as to actual progress with the Metro "transformation" work and largely relying on infrastructure notices and TfW press releases. They would be duly acknowledged but no repro fees unfortunately

 

[timmygba]

I snapped a few pictures of the Bay branch this morning. The trains are running at the moment so the level of construction activity is lower than during the blockade. However (not pictured), there is also a lot of ground clearance going on around the new Butetown station site, and I also glimpsed the beginnings of the new second track formation being laid near Queen St. I’ll try and get a picture of that tomorrow if I can.

I have a few pictures from further up the line just north of Herbert Street. They have done work on the bridge which required the existing track to be removed and the bridge completly cleared. Some second track has been laid and some vegatation has been removed.

However it seems that there were issues in that only the first train made it to Cardiff Bay yesterday and no trains in service since. I did find one tweet which says that the train hit the buffers (https://twitter.com/foxy_michael/status/1673308820481753088). RTT has the cancellation reason as "This service was cancelled due to a problem with the brakes (MN)." (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W28009/2023-06-26/detailed#allox_id=0).

Last night there was 1 train which did go along the line slowly, and the same this morning.

 

[MikePJ]

I have a few pictures from further up the line just north of Herbert Street. They have done work on the bridge which required the existing track to be removed and the bridge completly cleared. Some second track has been laid and some vegatation has been removed.

However it seems that there were issues in that only the first train made it to Cardiff Bay yesterday and no trains in service since. I did find one tweet which says that the train hit the buffers (https://twitter.com/foxy_michael/status/1673308820481753088). RTT has the cancellation reason as "This service was cancelled due to a problem with the brakes (MN)." (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W28009/2023-06-26/detailed#allox_id=0).

Last night there was 1 train which did go along the line slowly, and the same this morning.

Thank you! I see the bay shuttle is still being cancelled this morning "due to an obstruction on the line". (according to RealTimeTrains) or "due to a safety inspection on the track" (from TfW's status page).

 

[Markdvdman]

Does anybody know if they plan on completely dualling the branches north of Pontypridd in the future? On the Merthyr branch there are a couple of poor single track sections even though they have instilled a few passing loops and a long dual section between Merthyr and Pentrebach. Big problem is landowners, and bridges I guess!

 

[Dai Corner]

Does anybody know if they plan on completely dualling the branches north of Pontypridd in the future? On the Merthyr branch there are a couple of poor single track sections even though they have instilled a few passing loops and a long dual section between Merthyr and Pentrebach. Big problem is landowners, and bridges I guess!

Don't think so. Just enough loops to permit four tram-trains an hour provided there is no disruption.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Does anybody know if they plan on completely dualling the branches north of Pontypridd in the future? On the Merthyr branch there are a couple of poor single track sections even though they have instilled a few passing loops and a long dual section between Merthyr and Pentrebach. Big problem is landowners, and bridges I guess!

I doubt landowners are the problem, as I would imagine the full width of the trackbeds are still under railway ownership. There's been no suggestion that any further dualling will be carried out, although I suppose experience might change that, if a single track section proves excessively problematic in the event of disruption.

Not sure what you mean by "poor single track section" either - are you talking about length or state of the track?
Don't forget that the trams will be much more fleet of foot, so will clear the single track sections quicker than the current rolling stock does.

 

[Tumbleweed]

Does anybody know if they plan on completely dualling the branches north of Pontypridd in the future? On the Merthyr branch there are a couple of poor single track sections even though they have instilled a few passing loops and a long dual section between Merthyr and Pentrebach. Big problem is landowners, and bridges I guess!

I don't think the Treherbert line can be dualled completely again - it looks very tight at Tonypandy Station.

 

[Markdvdman]

I am talking about length of single section track. You can have the fastest trains anywhere but if ONE breaks down therein locks it down. Always has been a problem and always will. However, as you say it will take something like that to happen before they look to dual up!!

 

[59CosG95]

I don't think the Treherbert line can be dualled completely again - it looks very tight at Tonypandy Station.

Tonypandy could hypothetically be relocated south of its existing position, so that the northern end of the platform(s) is the B4278 bridge. However, the retaining wall arrangements would need to be altered to allow the Up line's restoration.

 

[Brissle Girl]

I am talking about length of single section track. You can have the fastest trains anywhere but if ONE breaks down therein locks it down. Always has been a problem and always will. However, as you say it will take something like that to happen before they look to dual up!!

Unless you have bi-directional signalling a blockage on one line equally stuffs the service up.

 

[Signal_Box]

They already run 4 trains an hour to Penarth with existing single line section - on occasions, trains are held at Cogan Jct signal, awaiting returning Penarth service to clear single line

Installing a loop adds resilience, question is, where it should be ? For me, siting it either side Dingle Road Stn will be a better location - trackbed already exists, as does the old platform overgrown with vegetation - can still hold trains here

The distance between Dingle Road Stn & Penarth Stn is circa half a mile (?) siting a new loop nearer to Penarth along with new platform gives a marginal difference in turnaround time (?)

On cost alone, constructing new platform in a cutting, adjoining station overbridge, would be more expensive

Instead of a multi million pound loop, and signalled why not make the service more resilient, okay big ask. So reduce from 4tph to say 3tph does Penarth need a train every 15 minutes ? I suggest not.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Instead of a multi million pound loop, and signalled why not make the service more resilient, okay big ask. So reduce from 4tph to say 3tph does Penarth need a train every 15 minutes ? I suggest not.

I seem to recall that extending services to Penarth avoids having them turn around at Central, which would be even more detrimental to performance.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Instead of a multi million pound loop, and signalled why not make the service more resilient, okay big ask. So reduce from 4tph to say 3tph does Penarth need a train every 15 minutes ? I suggest not.

I would be inclined to believe that Penarth justifies a 15m (or better) frequency. But it also avoids trains reversing at Central (as @Brissle Girl points out). Penarth should probably take what it can subject to restrictions at Cogan Junction, then junction near Canton (for the city line ?). The road route from Cardiff to Penarth is not as straight forward as North of Cardiff from my experience so maybe demand is there.

 

[Signal_Box]

I seem to recall that extending services to Penarth avoids having them turn around at Central, which would be even more detrimental to performance.

TfW don’t have enough trains to run the timetable unfortunately at the moment, so cutting out 1 TPH isn’t going to have a negative effect on performance.

Even when / if the new fleets are running and reliable the question still remains does Penarth need 4 TPH, does Barry Island need 3 TPH ? Cut out a whole circuit and move that “spare” set onto a maintenance cover/hot spare or add it to a diagram which needs additional cars.

To put a loop in on the Penarth is big bucks with additional track, not to mention signalling and potentially additional platforms with all the extra equipment that’ll require.

There are number of small (in railway terms) projects, mainly signalling which would add a huge amount of resilience and flexibility between Cardiff Central and Cogan if any money is floating about.

A loop on the Penarth branch simply isn’t required.

I would be inclined to believe that Penarth justifies a 15m (or better) frequency. But it also avoids trains reversing at Central (as @Brissle Girl points out). Penarth should probably take what it can subject to restrictions at Cogan Junction, then junction near Canton (for the city line ?). The road route from Cardiff to Penarth is not as straight forward as North of Cardiff from my experience so maybe demand is there.

Okay, what are passenger numbers between say 0900 and 1700 Monday to Friday at Dingle Road and Penarth that require a 15 minute or greater service ?

 

[Peter Sarf]

..........................


Okay, what are passenger numbers between say 0900 and 1700 Monday to Friday at Dingle Road and Penarth that require a 15 minute or greater service ?

No idea. Just going off what some I know who use it say and the size and location of Penarth. No doubt moderated by how many currently work from home some days.

 

[Signal_Box]

I have a few pictures from further up the line just north of Herbert Street. They have done work on the bridge which required the existing track to be removed and the bridge completly cleared. Some second track has been laid and some vegatation has been removed.

However it seems that there were issues in that only the first train made it to Cardiff Bay yesterday and no trains in service since. I did find one tweet which says that the train hit the buffers (https://twitter.com/foxy_michael/status/1673308820481753088). RTT has the cancellation reason as "This service was cancelled due to a problem with the brakes (MN)." (https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W28009/2023-06-26/detailed#allox_id=0).

Last night there was 1 train which did go along the line slowly, and the same this morning.

I’m sorry, I know I sound like the voice of doom all the time!

The money spent on the Bay branch could and should of been spent on the wider Valley network, the work down there, and to significantly remodel Queen Street is only required to allow future expansion beyond the existing Bay station. That in itself is at the moment a few hundred meters of tram track to justify the order of tram trains.

A full fat OLE program on all the four Valley routes, forget batteries and dead sections do a proper job or as we now know as the project is outside of funding envelope cut the fat such as the tram track beyond the bay and major remodel of QS.

The Bay service as it stands carries few passengers out of the peaks and uses up valuable resources.

What is with the obsession of tripping service frequencies, and pushing in the region of 17 TPH through QS when passenger numbers aren’t there, and aren’t likely to be for some time if ever - unless significant anti car measures are put in place.

The once in a life time opportunity to really transform the Valley Lines into a network we could be proud of has been lost in the misty eyes of Cardiff Bay day dreamers,

No idea. Just going off what some I know who use it say and the size and location of Penarth. No doubt moderated by how many currently work from home some days.

That’s the problem, I don’t know either.

But going on what some people say who use a handful of services at selected times of day isn’t really a business case for a multi million pound bit of infrastructure.

I base my opinion that’s worth less than a promise from the WAG, on operational knowledge of the branch and seeing daily how it works across the whole day and night over every day of the week.

Investment money if there is any could, and should be spent up at Central to allow more flexibility.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I’m sorry, I know I sound like the voice of doom all the time!

The money spent on the Bay branch could and should of been spent on the wider Valley network, the work down there, and to significantly remodel Queen Street is only required to allow future expansion beyond the existing Bay station. That in itself is at the moment a few hundred meters of tram track to justify the order of tram trains.

A full fat OLE program on all the four Valley routes, forget batteries and dead sections do a proper job or as we now know as the project is outside of funding envelope cut the fat such as the tram track beyond the bay and major remodel of QS.

The Bay service as it stands carries few passengers out of the peaks and uses up valuable resources.

What is with the obsession of tripping service frequencies, and pushing in the region of 17 TPH through QS when passenger numbers aren’t there, and aren’t likely to be for some time if ever - unless significant anti car measures are put in place.

The once in a life time opportunity to really transform the Valley Lines into a network we could be proud of has been lost in the misty eyes of Cardiff Bay day dreamers,



That’s the problem, I don’t know either.

But going on what some people say who use a handful of services at selected times of day isn’t really a business case for a multi million pound bit of infrastructure.

I base my opinion that’s worth less than a promise from the WAG, on operational knowledge of the branch and seeing daily how it works across the whole day and night over every day of the week.

Investment money if there is any could, and should be spent up at Central to allow more flexibility.

I do get the impression that Central is going to become a growing bottleneck.

I think rail will become more attractive in Cardiff as I have noticed more road restrictions in Cardiff that has certainly fouled up traffic flow. There is a road that was formerly two lanes each way. That now has a bus lane in it approaching a junction which means every car going straight on or left gets stuck behind the queue to turn right. Irony is the buses that want to turn right now get stuck waiting for an opportunity to get in the right hand lane. It is Castle Street as it approaches (Lower) Cathedral Road from the East. Its vandalism of the road network.

 

[Signal_Box]

I do get the impression that Central is going to become a growing bottleneck.

I think rail will become more attractive in Cardiff as I have noticed more road restrictions in Cardiff that has certainly fouled up traffic flow. There is a road that was formerly two lanes each way. That now has a bus lane in it approaching a junction which means every car going straight on or left gets stuck behind the queue to turn right. Irony is the buses that want to turn right now get stuck waiting for an opportunity to get in the right hand lane. It is Castle Street as it approaches (Lower) Cathedral Road from the East. Its vandalism of the road network.

I 100% agree with you, alter the road layout to cause congestion and reduce traffic flow increasing emissions then cry congestion and increasing emissions!

I’m all for clean air, as clean as you can get in a major city with traffic and people. But this quest to make vehicle drivers the root of all evil and ultimately have to pay isn’t the way to go about it.

The irony of the clean air zones is that if you can afford to pay your OK to pollute the air, with your big V8 engine or whatever the most powerful normal vehicle engines are. But if you’re a normal Joe in a normal job who’s working hours simply don’t suit public transport it’s pay up Joe unless you can afford a compliant vehicle.

Off topic, but related to the metro in as much as investment for Metro will be sucked out of a congestion / emissions zone.

 

[Envoy]

They have certainly created traffic jams in Cardiff city centre by inserting bus and cycle lanes forcing cars into one lane where once they had two.

Mention has been made of work on the Bay branch such as making it 2 tracks. I should point out that the intention is (& funded) to have a tramway going from the Bay branch across Callaghan Square to new platforms where the Central station car park is at present. They would then like to connect this to the present tracks to cross the Taff and reach the City Line to the western suburbs. In the Bay, they intend to demolish the Red Dragon Centre and build a new Arena on the land or nearby. That would create additional demand for transport to the Central Station/ Queen Street & beyond. With sudden outflows of people from this Arena, I doubt that the proposed increased rail service could cope. When events take place in the city centre, at least the public are dispersed at Central station onto trains gong in different directions.

Back in the 1980’s when the Bay regeneration scheme was kicking off, it was the intended that the Bay branch would be ripped up and what was *Bute Square would be enlarged eastward to provide a better road layout with Lloyd George Avenue. When the Bay branch started gaining more passengers, its value became apparent. *Labour came to power and the branch remained and Bute Square was renamed Callaghan Square.

On the Penarth line, it is regrettable that a new station was not inserted at Cogan where the Tesco car park now stands. This could have been a P&R for the Marina area. A footpath could have directly linked this with the Pont Y Werin bridge which links to the ice rink, swimming pool and white water centre. The greatest benefit for the least bucks would surely be to link the present Cogan station by footpath with the Pont Y Werin bridge. From time to time, people can be seen crossing the main road to reach that bridge having come off trains at Cogan.

 

[Dai Corner]

Regarding the frequency on the Penarth branch, note that the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, who is responsible for the railways, lives in the town. I don't know whether he catches the train to work.

 

[Broseley man]

Regarding the frequency on the Penarth branch, note that the Deputy Minister for Climate Change, who is responsible for the railways, lives in the town. I don't know whether he catches the train to work.

It's a generally accepted idea that if you can get 15 min intervals users see it as 'turn up anytime for a train/tram'. So that is the target throughout the metro area where possible. I don't think there is any need to make unnecessary comments about our politicians of whatever party where there is an intent to be doing the right thing.

 

[Dai Corner]

It's a generally accepted idea that if you can get 15 min intervals users see it as 'turn up anytime for a train/tram'. So that is the target throughout the metro area where possible. I don't think there is any need to make unnecessary comments about our politicians of whatever party where there is an intent to be doing the right thing.

We're discussing whether spending money to enable a robust 15 min interval on the Penarth branch is 'the right thing' or whether it could be better spent elsewhere.

Is the current turn up and go service attracting enough passengers to fill four trains an hour all day every day?

 

[Brissle Girl]

We're discussing whether spending money to enable a robust 15 min interval on the Penarth branch is 'the right thing' or whether it could be better spent elsewhere.

Is the current turn up and go service attracting enough passengers to fill four trains an hour all day every day?

How many other services are full all day every day? As noted, the purpose of a 15 min service is often to make it “turn up and go” and attract more passengers than a less frequent service would. Success is not defined by trains being completely full.

And as noted before there are likely operational advantages in not having trains terminate at Central but run them through to Penarth instead.

Finally, it’s been 4tph for many years, if not decades, so for the Metro project to reduce the frequency would be somewhat at odds with the overall aim of the project.

 

[Dai Corner]

How many other services are full all day every day? As noted, the purpose of a 15 min service is often to make it “turn up and go” and attract more passengers than a less frequent service would. Success is not defined by trains being completely full.

I was really asking how full the Penarth trains are. Anyone know?

 

[CapitalStar378]

We're discussing whether spending money to enable a robust 15 min interval on the Penarth branch is 'the right thing' or whether it could be better spent elsewhere.

Is the current turn up and go service attracting enough passengers to fill four trains an hour all day every day?

No trains are full all day, every day, so that's not a valid benchmark. Providing a turn up and go service has been proven to increase usage of railways, and remember that Penarth is the terminus of Bargoed and Rhymney trains, not just the short Cardiff run.

 

[K.o.R]

I’m sorry, I know I sound like the voice of doom all the time!

The money spent on the Bay branch could and should of been spent on the wider Valley network, the work down there, and to significantly remodel Queen Street is only required to allow future expansion beyond the existing Bay station. That in itself is at the moment a few hundred meters of tram track to justify the order of tram trains.

A full fat OLE program on all the four Valley routes, forget batteries and dead sections do a proper job or as we now know as the project is outside of funding envelope cut the fat such as the tram track beyond the bay and major remodel of QS.

The Bay service as it stands carries few passengers out of the peaks and uses up valuable resources.

Hear, hear!

 

[CapitalStar378]

Hear, hear!

Cardiff is getting very little in terms of the overall Metro scheme compared to the massive infrastructure works in the valleys. The Coryton and City lines remain 2 tph for the foreseeable future and Cardiff Parkway seems to be in the long grass. The Bay needs to have good transport infrastructure to allow developments like the arena and open up Roath Dock and areas around Ocean Way to investment.

I'd be interested to see the investment split in £ for the valleys v Cardiff, but I imagine it's very weighted towards the Treherbert, Merthyr and Aberdare lines.

 

[Dai Corner]

No trains are full all day, every day, so that's not a valid benchmark. Providing a turn up and go service has been proven to increase usage of railways, and remember that Penarth is the terminus of Bargoed and Rhymney trains, not just the short Cardiff run.

That's what I'm trying to establish. Has the turn up and go frequency to Barry and Penarth led to greater usage than the less frequently served lines?

 

[Brissle Girl]

That's what I'm trying to establish. Has the turn up and go frequency to Barry and Penarth led to greater usage than the less frequently served lines?

I've tracked back that Penarth has had 4tph since at least 2007, so any information on change of usage of that branch following the increase in frequency will be very historic (and I don't think you can make any comparison with the valley branches, as the demographics and type of branch (single centre versus a very linearly distributed population) are completely different.

 

[Last Hurrah]

I would be inclined to believe that Penarth justifies a 15m (or better) frequency. But it also avoids trains reversing at Central (as @Brissle Girl points out). Penarth should probably take what it can subject to restrictions at Cogan Junction, then junction near Canton (for the city line ?). The road route from Cardiff to Penarth is not as straight forward as North of Cardiff from my experience so maybe demand is there.

It’s all very well suggestions being made for better use of this particular funding . .

Remember, this is NR track, not TFW’s . . enhancement for Penarth branch has managed to get DoT approval . .

While TFW can ask NR for any number of things - what’s done will be governed by DoT / Treasury