South Wales 'Metro' updates

[Dai Corner]

Surely the whole point of going to tram-train operation for South Wales Metro was to enable expansion (including frequency enhancement) away from the constraints of heavy rail and where necessary take on-street diversions? The grand vision seems to be to take cars off the streets of inner Cardiff, so re-purposing existing highways into a high-priority tram route rather than expensive grade separated junctions at Cardiff West would seem an appropriate consideration, particularly as it removes the interface with Network Rail and GWR/freight (who presumably have rights over the Leckwith Loop which will need to be maintained).

But the railways in Cardiff all link up via their own rights of way and the main city centre destinations ate within walking distance of Central Queen Street or Cathay's.. Bringing tram-trains down to street level and mixing with buses, cars and delivery vans would be a retrograde step. The tram capability is for extensions to the existing network like the Bay.

 

[edwin_m]

But the railways in Cardiff all link up via their own rights of way and the main city centre destinations ate within walking distance of Central Queen Street or Cathay's.. Bringing tram-trains down to street level and mixing with buses, cars and delivery vans would be a retrograde step. The tram capability is for extensions to the existing network like the Bay.

A street link from the City Line to connect with the Bay tramway on the south side of Central would have to use Ninian Park Road to Wood Street. This has a single through traffic lane each way and no obvious alternative for general traffic. There is parking both sides which is for houses and shops which may have no alternative. So not good territory for a tramway, and it's also on the wrong side of the railway so a through route would need to do something complicated at each end.

There have certainly been ideas in the past of making the City Line tram only and taking it over the Barry lines to get to Callaghan Square and on to the Bay. I'm not sure if the present scheme/proposal/idea is quite the same thing.

 

[Signal_Box]

Ideally the metro would be a Nottingham style operation, with interchanges with heavy rail.

The metro we have been lumbered with is a cheap and unfit alternative to fit a funding envelope.

The electrification plan for the Rhymney valley is pathetic, cheap and nasty would be the kind way of describing it.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Ideally the metro would be a Nottingham style operation, with interchanges with heavy rail.

The metro we have been lumbered with is a cheap and unfit alternative to fit a funding envelope.

The electrification plan for the Rhymney valley is pathetic, cheap and nasty would be the kind way of describing it.

Is it any worse to that installed on the TAM lines out of interest?

 

[AdamWW]

Ideally the metro would be a Nottingham style operation, with interchanges with heavy rail.

The metro we have been lumbered with is a cheap and unfit alternative to fit a funding envelope.

The electrification plan for the Rhymney valley is pathetic, cheap and nasty would be the kind way of describing it.

The funding was presumably what was available.

We'll have to see how it goes. It might not be the best solution but if it's an improvement over no electrification then surely that's better than nothing?

Maybe I'm wrong but presumably it could be upgraded later if more funding came along.

 

[Brissle Girl]

The funding was presumably what was available.

We'll have to see how it goes. It might not be the best solution but if it's an improvement over no electrification then surely that's better than nothing?

Maybe I'm wrong but presumably it could be upgraded later if more funding came along.

In theory yes, although the disruption and cost would be a hard sell, when there would be little if any perceived benefit to passengers.

Once the current scheme is complete I’d much rather additional funding goes to other projects such as Hirwaun, Abertillery, or further electrification of the existing network.

 

[AdamWW]

In theory yes, although the disruption and cost would be a hard sell, when there would be little if any perceived benefit to passengers.

i would suppose that depends on whether the current scheme turs out to be the disaster that some people appear to think it will...

 

[Signal_Box]

Is it any worse to that installed on the TAM lines out of interest?

I’ve only seen the plan for the Rhymney as it affects me, the whole package for the Rhymney valley is overall as good as it’ll get with the lack of vision and funding.

I can foresee problems at some point with the lack of OLE and reliance on batteries especially during disruption.

 

[AdamWW]

I’ve only seen the plan for the Rhymney as it affects me, the whole package for the Rhymney valley is overall as good as it’ll get with the lack of vision and funding.

I can foresee problems at some point with the lack of OLE and reliance on batteries especially during disruption.

Won't the Rhymney line be more resiliant in that sense since the trains will be able to fall back onto diesel until the fuel runs out, unlike the tram-trains (which maybe also have less battery capacity?)

 

[Signal_Box]

The funding was presumably what was available.

We'll have to see how it goes. It might not be the best solution but if it's an improvement over no electrification then surely that's better than nothing?

Maybe I'm wrong but presumably it could be upgraded later if more funding came along.

Let’s not be under any illusion, once this work is complete that’ll be it in our lifetimes. This was the once in a lifetime game changer project to really make the valleys line a proper network to be proud of, but the whole plan was to heavily pushed towards street running.

The Treherbert, Aberdare and Merthyr passengers will see a change from June when the 756s start running, but then a real backwards step when the 398s arrives next year.

Like it or not the ideal train for the valleys is the 150, double or triple them up and you’ve the ideal valley train when looked after of course.

I’m sure you’ll all recall “operation princess” from 2001, small but frequent trains through a hub ? Some like another planned concept….remind me how princess worked out ?

The valleys are stuck with the “Queen Street problem” the new layout will be nothing to little to force more trains through the 2 track section across the North Junction. An engineering solution to four track on its own wouldn’t even help as you’ll just push the route separation issue further back towards Cardiff central.

Personally speaking from an operational point of view, is route the majority of Radyr bound trains via the city line with Rhymney valley trains via QS. Running the bay to Radyr via Llandaff to make up the shortfall.

With additional point work and bi do signalling from Ninian Park to Radyr Branch Junc enable parallel moves, into Central P4/6/7. An additional face cross over between P8 and the UP llandaff (towards QS) on the bank upto QS from Central to allow more use of P8.

Even the basic two additional crossovers either side of Central would open up so much many more opportunities to improve performance along the City thus increasing capacity.

But instead we get grand plans or off street running and such like, hence my cynicism of the metro project as a whole.

i would suppose that depends on whether the current scheme turs out to be the disaster that some people appear to think it will...

My cynicism is based on two decades of front line operational experience, and of a basic concept of what a local railway linking home and work should provide.

It won’t be a total disaster, but it won’t live up to anything close to the hype way to much critical fat has been cut away in terms of infrastructure.

Won't the Rhymney line be more resiliant in that sense since the trains will be able to fall back onto diesel until the fuel runs out, unlike the tram-trains (which maybe also have less battery capacity?)

Are the 756s fitted with diesel engines ? I lm not sure to be honest, I do know under test the batteries are better than expectations. Note test conditions….

 

[AdamWW]

My cynicism is based on two decades of front line operational experience, and of a basic concept of what a local railway linking home and work should provide.

In which case your experience is far greater than mine.

I am somewhat sceptical that it will be possible to run a reliable service with the infrastructure we have and the planned frequencies, but in my inexpert view I wouldn't have thought that Operation Princess would be a good analogy given the difference between a local network and one covering most of the UK, and at far lower frequencies even after the increase.

Are the 756s fitted with diesel engines ? I lm not sure to be honest, I do know under test the batteries are better than expectations. Note test conditions….

Yes they definitely are.

 

[Krokodil]

Are the 756s fitted with diesel engines ?

Yes, batteries are for the short gaps between electrified sections, diesel engines are provided for the longer runs south of Cardiff.

 

[Signal_Box]

Yes, batteries are for the short gaps between electrified sections, diesel engines are provided for the longer runs south of Cardiff.

West of Cardiff….

How big are the diesel tanks though, I assume they were specified with X mileage per diagram on batteries charged under live OLE. Reduce the live OLE increase use of the batteries and / or diesel.

The 231s have to be carefully monitored for fuel each day as their working harder and longer diagrams.

In which case your experience is far greater than mine.

I am somewhat sceptical that it will be possible to run a reliable service with the infrastructure we have and the planned frequencies, but in my inexpert view I wouldn't have thought that Operation Princess would be a good analogy given the difference between a local network and one covering most of the UK, and at far lower frequencies even after the increase.



Yes they definitely are.

Princess as you rightly say covered points North, East, South and West over 600+ miles in each direction.

However, the Valleys are so tightly timed (even now) even a small knock to a handful of trains and you’ve serious issues getting it all back on track. XC had the luxury of built in recovery time and slack at hubs along the way, CVL services have little in the way of slack in third timings

 

[AdamWW]

Princess as you rightly say covered points North, East, South and West over 600+ miles in each direction.

However, the Valleys are so tightly timed (even now) even a small knock to a handful of trains and you’ve serious issues getting it all back on track. XC had the luxury of built in recovery time and slack at hubs along the way, CVL services have little in the way of slack in third timings

My understanding was that a problem with Princess was the fact that demand wasn't nicely spread across the increased number of (shorter) trains. I don't see that being an issue here.

But I agree that it really isn't obvious how such service levels could actually work in practise, given how easily it all falls apart even at present. In principle I presume you can turn trains back to make up time when they're late since the next one won't be far behind. But where do you turn them round? Or put the passengers if the trains are full?

And it's not just the extremities with single track of course. a Coryton-Penarth service has single track at both ends, and nowhere to wait to get onto the branches that aren't blocking other trains.

I would rather have a less frequent but more reliable service.

During the lockdowns what did run was extremely reliable. Though I suppose the lack of passengers as well as less frequent services helped.

 

[Zoomer]

The Treherbert, Aberdare and Merthyr passengers will see a change from June when the 756s start running, but then a real backwards step when the 398s arrives next year

Genuine question: in what ways do you predict the 398s will be a backwards step for TAM passengers? Comfort? Capacity? Punctuality?

 

[Krokodil]

West of Cardiff

Is Grangetown not south of Cardiff?

 

[Tom125]

Genuine question: in what ways do you predict the 398s will be a backwards step for TAM passengers? Comfort? Capacity? Punctuality?

I don’t know what the hatred is towards a tram/ train that no passenger has rode on in Wales yet! I lived in Bern for years and I’d take a Swiss tram over a noisy class 150 any day!

 

[Signal_Box]

My understanding was that a problem with Princess was the fact that demand wasn't nicely spread across the increased number of (shorter) trains. I don't see that being an issue here.

But I agree that it really isn't obvious how such service levels could actually work in practise, given how easily it all falls apart even at present. In principle I presume you can turn trains back to make up time when they're late since the next one won't be far behind. But where do you turn them round? Or put the passengers if the trains are full?

And it's not just the extremities with single track of course. a Coryton-Penarth service has single track at both ends, and nowhere to wait to get onto the branches that aren't blocking other trains.

I would rather have a less frequent but more reliable service.

During the lockdowns what did run was extremely reliable. Though I suppose the lack of passengers as well as less frequent services helped.

Penarth and Coryton are serious pinch points where as little as 3 minutes will cause a knock on to those services and those behind. 5-8 minutes and you’ve got significant issues to be your looking at skipping stops which obviously isn’t good for our passengers.

A slightly late train or no train ? I know which one either rather, CVL is never going to be London Underground style no timetable (as such) turn up and go, people will always want X train at X time.

Regards Princess, the main issue was the shear length of services the same as today really and a little knock on Exeter tipples into a rather big knock up in Newcastle, among other things.

 

[AdamWW]

Penarth and Coryton are serious pinch points where as little as 3 minutes will cause a knock on to those services and those behind. 5-8 minutes and you’ve got significant issues to be your looking at skipping stops which obviously isn’t good for our passengers.

A slightly late train or no train ? I know which one either rather, CVL is never going to be London Underground style no timetable (as such) turn up and go, people will always want X train at X time.

When it comes to single track sections the answer for those at the ends is likely no train rather than a slightly late one, so that it can get back on time without causing knock on delays.

 

[Signal_Box]

Genuine question: in what ways do you predict the 398s will be a backwards step for TAM passengers? Comfort? Capacity? Punctuality?

Comfort - through reduced seats and lagout of what seats there are, plus no toliets for those who NEED use one now not in 10/15 minutes at the next station with open and working ones.

Capacity - definitely, although the plan is to double up how many short forms so we see now. At least you can get a decent number of passengers on a 150.

Punctuality - potentially not, better acceleration on the OLE Will out preform a 150 any day of the week.

Operationally - there will be new rules regards who you signal them especially whether they can be permissively signalled at Cardiff central due to their light rail status.

Is Grangetown not south of Cardiff?

I’d say west of…from a railway point of view, being pedantic Grangetown is part of Cardiff.

When it comes to single track sections the answer for those at the ends is likely no train rather than a slightly late one, so that it can get back on time without causing knock on delays.

Penarth can cope without one of its three trians per hour, Coryton perhaps not.

I think Penarth is over served to be honest, it’s more convenient than demand as running to Barry reduces units efficiency.

 

[Krokodil]

Genuine question: in what ways do you predict the 398s will be a backwards step for TAM passengers? Comfort? Capacity? Punctuality?

If the comparison is with a 756 then 398s will be a backwards step in terms of seats (type and number) and toilets.

Probably evens with a 150 - same number of seats, aircon, no engine noise, and much more standing room on event days. On the minus side there's no bog. The big gain is the journey times and the frequency.

 

[Signal_Box]

I don’t know what the hatred is towards a tram/ train that no passenger has rode on in Wales yet! I lived in Bern for years and I’d take a Swiss tram over a noisy class 150 any day!

For me it’s a feeling of being short changed, why do the valleys have to put up with trans rather than 756 units ?
398s will force changes at Cardiff breaking valley to the coast services in the pursuit of a idealist dream of a few hundred meters of semi street running down the bay - the original plan anyway.

 

[Brissle Girl]

I guess we’ve had the debate about trams v trains ad nauseum on this thread over the years, and we can debate it all we like, it’s been a done deal for several years now.

 

[Wyrleybart]

Regards Princess, the main issue was the shear length of services the same as today really and a little knock on Exeter tipples into a rather big knock up in Newcastle, among other things.

Princess was the victim of suits who totally ignored thew real purpose of long distance / intercity travel. And moreso totally ignoring the "sparks" effect of new trains. The standard XC train was 7 vehicles prior to introduction of voyagers, and was generally crewed by three people. A pair of voyagers to provide the same service required three On Board staff in each unit, as well as the driver in the front cab. IMHO no business would more than double it's crewing to achieve the same seating, whilst forcing the extra pax to stand.

But hey

Returning to topic, can anyone please explain the plan for the class 231s after the infrastructure is all installed and the fleets are all in use. AIUI the 398s do most of the TAM whilst the 756s do Rhymney etc. Will the 231s migrate to the liks of Ebbw Vale maybe ?

 

[Signal_Box]

398 on the TAM
756 Rhymney/Coryton/QS/Central/Penarth/Barry and Bridgend via Rhoose.
231 Ebbw Vale, Mesteg,Cheltenham and maybe in the future Bristol.
197 the rest with 67 LHCS mixed in in North to South jobs.

 

[Krokodil]

being pedantic Grangetown is part of Cardiff.

Judging by some of the accents that turn up at Excess Fares claiming to come from there, it might be part of Newcastle or Bristol.

 

[Envoy]

But hey

Returning to topic, can anyone please explain the plan for the class 231s after the infrastructure is all installed and the fleets are all in use. AIUI the 398s do most of the TAM whilst the 756s do Rhymney etc. Will the 231s migrate to the liks of Ebbw Vale maybe ?

231’s are supposed to end up on Ebbw Vale line - probably to Maesteg. They will also be on the Cheltenham to south Wales stoppers.

 

[The exile]

My cynicism is based on two decades of front line operational experience, and of a basic concept of what a local railway linking home and work should provide.

Particularly post COVID, a transport network needs to do a heck of a lot more than that!

 

[Krokodil]

231 Ebbw Vale, Mesteg,Cheltenham and maybe in the future Bristol.

I'd have thought 756s would be better for Bristol, given that most of it is wired and the WG are pushing for the work to be completed.

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder, this is an infrastructure updates thread.

Anything else, such as trip planning/reports, rolling stock or timetabling discussion and also anything of a speculative nature belongs elsewhere please; the forum has plenty of spare capacity for threads on any other subjects!