TfW class 398 Stadler Citylink tram trains

[Anonymous10]

That was a separate project to install 2nd platform & passing loop enabling a 30 minute service service to Rhymney

Having installed infrastructure to make it happen, ATW didn’t deliver

Ah yes I remember, bane my existence when travelling there. Hopefully they gain it soon

 

[PaulHarding150]

Or, rather, the Government didn't specify and fund.

This

 

[MrCheeseGrater]

Will these always be run on the Coryton to Radyr line? Or will 756's be allowed to sign the route also

 

[PaulHarding150]

Will these always be run on the Coryton to Radyr line? Or will 756's be allowed to sign the route also

No. They will run From Central to Radyr and continue up into the Valleys.

Trains to/from Coryton will be 756s and run to Penarth. There’ll be no direct train from Coryton to Radyr.

 

[MrCheeseGrater]

No. They will run From Central to Radyr and continue up into the Valleys.

Trains to/from Coryton will be 756s and run to Penarth. There’ll be no direct train from Coryton to Radyr.

Ahh. Didn't realise they would get rid of the Coryton to Radyr service. Direct trains from Coryton to Penarth will be useful. Many thanks.

 

[daikilo]

Ahh. Didn't realise they would get rid of the Coryton to Radyr service. Direct trains from Coryton to Penarth will be useful. Many thanks.

There is no Coryton to Radyr service and hasn't been for decades, and indeed no track. Not clear why Coryton would be better than Rhymney/Caerphilly for a service to Penarth.

 

[MrCheeseGrater]

There is no Coryton to Radyr service and hasn't been for decades, and indeed no track. Not clear why Coryton would be better than Rhymney/Caerphilly for a service to Penarth.

The trains from Coryton all go to Radyr through Cardiff via the city line except the during the odd series of engineering works where they go to the Bay. I'm not referring to the old track between Coryton and taffs well which I'm aware has been shut for years.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

There is no Coryton to Radyr service and hasn't been for decades, and indeed no track.

Well not to embarrass you, but it has run for many years up to and including today, tomorrow and up until the 398s are in service…

Not direct over the short stretch between the two of course, as there’s no track, but via Cardiff.

 

[AdamWW]

Not clear why Coryton would be better than Rhymney/Caerphilly for a service to Penarth.

I don't think that all the Penarth trains will be to/from Coryton (otherwise they would just get 2 tph).

There is no Coryton to Radyr service and hasn't been for decades, and indeed no track.

I do not believe there has ever been direct track between Coryton and Radyr. The line used to extend from Coryton north to Treforest where it should have but didn't join up with the Taff Vale.

 

[Bob Price]

I do not believe there has ever been direct track between Coryton and Radyr. The line used to extend from Coryton north to Treforest where it should have but didn't join up with the Taff Vale.

Absolutely. The old Cardiff Railway. There is a nature reserve and the river Taff to negotiate in order to link the Coryton line with the Taff Vale lines. The 398's could do the curves and gradients needed but it's whether it's worth the effort.

 

[stevieinselby]

I don't think that all the Penarth trains will be to/from Coryton (otherwise they would just get 2 tph).

All branches are due to be increased to 4tph. That will mean Coryton to Penarth, and Rhymney to Barry (Island or VOG to Bridgend), using 756s – and Merthyr, Treherbert and Aberdare running various combinations of Central via City Line, Central via Cathays and Bay via Cathays, all using 398s.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

That hasn’t been the case with Bury and Rochdale via Oldham Metrolink routes which seem far, far nicer than when 150s or worse shuttled up and down, and even then take into account they got very basic traditional interior trams - small seats, etc - the 398s will have the same seating as trains running from London to Northern Scotland and Cornwall, large pull down tables and will largely be formed of 6 cars rather than 4 on Metrolink.

Are you sure they won't be 3 coaches given the planned higher frequency of the Valley Line / Class 398 services?

 

[Cowley]

Some of the posts about infrastructure are now in this thread:

South Wales 'Metro' updates

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...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bob Price]

398010 has been delivered to Taffs Well

https://twitter.com/SW_MetroUpdates/status/1677089252406960130?t=zTgugevyHiTbFXTPogDJ4A&s=19

 

[norbitonflyer]

I don't think that all the Penarth trains will be to/from Coryton (otherwise they would just get 2 tph).



I do not believe there has ever been direct track between Coryton and Radyr. The line used to extend from Coryton north to Treforest where it should have but didn't join up with the Taff Vale.

Why should it join up? The Cardiff Railway (through Coryton) was a competitor of the Taff Vale. The TVR did not want trains diverted off it towards Cardiff's Bute Docks instead of their own recently completed facilities.

Mr Wiki says there was a connection, but only one train ever used it, in 1909, before the TVR insisted it was unauthorised and should be removed

 

[Bob Price]

Indeed. The link was to the passenger lines and the TVR said they couldn't run freight over them. I am planning a video about it (Bobs Rail Relics YouTube) and looked at the bit north of Coryton already.

Back on topic, if more trams are arriving will we see daylight testing anytime soon??

 

[Brissle Girl]

All branches are due to be increased to 4tph. That will mean Coryton to Penarth, and Rhymney to Barry (Island or VOG to Bridgend), using 756s – and Merthyr, Treherbert and Aberdare running various combinations of Central via City Line, Central via Cathays and Bay via Cathays, all using 398s.

That’s not correct. The Coryton line is remaining at 2tph. That may feel strange, but I suspect there isn’t enough capacity at Queen St North junction without a hugely expensive further intervention, so Coryton was considered the least worst option to remain at 2tph, given the alternative Cardiff bus services.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Does anyone know which Platforms these are to use at Cardiff Central? (Excluding the Bay services which of course will use the new ground level platforms below the main station)

Terminating at 7 while 756s use 6 and 8?

 

[AdamWW]

That’s not correct. The Coryton line is remaining at 2tph. That may feel strange, but I suspect there isn’t enough capacity at Queen St North junction without a hugely expensive further intervention, so Coryton was considered the least worst option to remain at 2tph, given the alternative Cardiff bus services.

It would also require a passing loop somewhere in them middle of the Coryton Line.

Of course the idea of supplementing the rail service with bus services would work better with integrated ticketing (or even if passengers weren't penalised for using different modes for a return journey).

 

[Signal_Box]

There is no Coryton to Radyr service and hasn't been for decades, and indeed no track. Not clear why Coryton would be better than Rhymney/Caerphilly for a service to Penarth.

I think you’ll find there is a Coryton to Radyr service.

 

[Brissle Girl]

It would also require a passing loop somewhere in them middle of the Coryton Line.

Yes, and this was dropped quite a while ago, presumably as part of an attempt to reduce the overspend.

 

[Signal_Box]

Does anyone know which Platforms these are to use at Cardiff Central? (Excluding the Bay services which of course will use the new ground level platforms below the main station)

Terminating at 7 while 756s use 6 and 8?

They’ll use all valley platforms, but with capacity sapping protection measures due to the reduced crashworthyness compared to proper trains.

 

[positron]

Yes, and this was dropped quite a while ago, presumably as part of an attempt to reduce the overspend.

Yeah based on the electrification PDFs sometime between the 2019 published plan and the 2020 the passing loop was descoped (as were toilets at coryton). It surprised me they ever had the passing loop in the plan because as I understood coryton was always sticking to 2tph. Potentially it was to allow them not to block the Rhymney line trains?

Apologies for being slightly off topic there.

 

[Signal_Box]

Yeah based on the electrification PDFs sometime between the 2019 published plan and the 2020 the passing loop was descoped (as were toilets at coryton). It surprised me they ever had the passing loop in the plan because as I understood coryton was always sticking to 2tph. Potentially it was to allow them not to block the Rhymney line trains?

Apologies for being slightly off topic there.

A passing loop, or between still a double lead junction at Heath with a section of double track would certainly help proformance. The main issue is the very tight on and off at Heath, due to the single lead.

 

[Western 52]

A passing loop, or between still a double lead junction at Heath with a section of double track would certainly help proformance. The main issue is the very tight on and off at Heath, due to the single lead.

Prior to 1984 the old Heath Junction was a double lead, so units waiting to join the branch could wait out of the way of the Rhymney line.

 

[Signal_Box]

Prior to 1984 the old Heath Junction was a double lead, so units waiting to join the branch could wait out of the way of the Rhymney line.

Progress eh ?

 

[Western 52]

Progress eh ?

They built houses over the old formation, so probably no room to restore a double lead now. Also quite a steep gradient down from the current junction to Heath Low Level.

 

[Bob Price]

That was changed back in the 1980's. There might be room at Heath Low level for a loop but not much chance of a second platform

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

They’ll use all valley platforms, but with capacity sapping protection measures due to the reduced crashworthyness compared to proper trains.

How do you mean? So they will share platforms with 756s, which of course will be through services while the 398s terminate there?

 

[PaulHarding150]

How do you mean? So they will share platforms with 756s, which of course will be through services while the 398s terminate there?

I’ve been thinking about the plarform allocation at Queen Street and Central.

I honestly can’t see a situation where the 756s and 389s can be kept on separate platforms.

Is it a problem if they mix?