Transport Secretary gives the go-ahead to 24 New Schemes and announces over £600M of

[philjo]

Details in Dft press release:

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/clientmicrosite/Content/Detail.aspx?ClientId=202&NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=416188&SubjectId=36

Most of the schemes approved are road projects.

a second group of supported schemes subject to final costings include
Leeds Station Southern Access
Midland Metro Extension

There is a further list of projects ("the development group") which will bid for funds to be decided by the end of 2011 including:
Leeds Rail Growth package
Sheffield Supertram additional vehicles

These are in a list of projects still be evaluated by end of January 2011 to see if they will proceed to the development group:
Croxley Rail Link
Coventry-Nuneaton Rail Upgrade
- Leeds New Generation Transport


The department will consider the following scheme with conditional approval for full approval and will set out specific requirements with the promoter:

- Reading Station Highway Works

 

[Class377/5]

What is Leeds New Generation Transport? Trams or guided bus routes?

 

[tbtc]

What is Leeds New Generation Transport? Trams or guided bus routes?

Its a posh word for Trolleybus. Its bus tyres,no tracks but runs of electrified overhead wires.

 

[starrymarkb]

Trolley Bus IIRC....

Improvements to M5 J29, east of Exeter, providing access to new housing and employment areas;

Bullpoo! what the plan here is to stuff the lot up with Traffic Lights!

 

[route:oxford]

The department will consider the following scheme with conditional approval for full approval and will set out specific requirements with the promoter:

- Reading Station Highway Works

Reading buses should be co-funding that one.

Do NR take a fee for taxis at Reading station? There are usually at least 50 taxis queing in the main rank, and an extension rank was built in the adjacent derelict bus station to accommodate a further 30 or so.

 

[Metroland]

The vast majority are improvements to the road network or luny busways. The rail improvements are few and far between, leaving aside what was announced last week with most money going to the ECML/WCML, Crossrail, LUL etc.

 

[YorkshireRider]

I take it the proposed new station at Kirkstall Forge looks unlikely now then, shame because the site has scope for a lot of car parking space and would be of far more value than the lame trolleybus.

 

[starrymarkb]

The vast majority are improvements to the road network or luny busways. The rail improvements are few and far between.

Smacks of Cecil Parkison's 'roads to prosperity' to me, which was really just political gesturing to the road lobby.

Why are busways loony? I know Cambridge's was a bad idea for the start but in some areas they work very well.

Similarly the BRT schemes seem to be akin to the Swansea Metro, modify the roads to give public transport priority.

Plus it looks like most of the road schemes are Active Traffic Management rather then actual engineering solutions. ATM will not solve the M4/M5 problems, which are caused traffic from the M5 to M4 (M5 J15) having to weave between traffic from the A38 to M5 (J16) (and same southbound) in the space of a hundred yards, what would help would be to extend the M4 sliproads over the junction (with a link to the existing) and have them feed in after the junction.

This explains it better - http://www.cbrd.co.uk/badjunctions/4-5-38/

 

[tbtc]

Why are busways loony? I know Cambridge's was a bad idea for the start but in some areas they work very well

There's nothing wrong with guided busways, in the way there's nothing wrong with buses/ coaches/ trams/ trains etc. Different things suit different "problems". No point in pretending that heavy rail is the only "solution"

 

[Zoe]

Plus it looks like most of the road schemes are Active Traffic Management rather then actual engineering solutions. ATM will not solve the M4/M5 problems, which are caused traffic from the M5 to M4 (M5 J15) having to weave between traffic from the A38 to M5 (J16) (and same southbound) in the space of a hundred yards, what would help would be to extend the M4 sliproads over the junction (with a link to the existing) and have them feed in after the junction.

It also seems the long awaited Kingskerswell bypass is to be axed.

 

[WatcherZero]

Yeah most of these are BRT (Bus lanes, priority at traffic lights, often train station like bus stations).

One Guided bus at risk however, the Manchester Cross City is a BRT through Salford and Manchester along the university corridor, this is at risk and has to rebid to the £600m pot. Meanwhile the Leigh-Salford guided busway is locally funded, passed a review last month and so is 100% safe however it plugs into the Cross City network at Salford, if Cross City is cancelled it will have to be cancelled (much to locals delight).

 

[Metroland]

Why are busways loony? I know Cambridge's was a bad idea for the start but in some areas they work very well.

It depends on the scheme, but most of them might just as well be normal bus priority schemes. I don't regard the Cambridge one @ £160 million for no time savings good value for money.

Buses are a flexible vehicle, and do not need guided rights of way with the added costs. If you want to spend that sort of money you might as well go for ultra light rail (which has a similar capital cost to BRT) or light rail, which can be cheaper in the long term, have a better record on modal shift, better flow and so on. In any case, this sort of investment can only be justified on the busiest corridors.

The money is better spent on subsidising services to reduce fares and integrate public transport schemes IMHO.

Guided busways have been about for years, very few have been built, which is telling. The only reason the UK is doing so many, is because the planning and compensation laws do not run in the favour of light rail, which is the case in Europe and the US.

Nottingham has been defined as one of the least car dependent cities outside London, and the secret there was to introduce a tram on the busiest corridors and integrate the (council run) buses with cheap tickets that cover everything.

Contrast this with Bristol, where monopolistic first group charge extortionate amounts for bus tickets, and the city is in perpetual grid lock due it's past misguided planning policies.

 

[142094]

I take it the proposed new station at Kirkstall Forge looks unlikely now then, shame because the site has scope for a lot of car parking space and would be of far more value than the lame trolleybus.

Still haven't heard word yet apparently. IIRC this was going to be built with developer contributions (Section 106 agreement) so might escape the cuts.

 

[The Engineer]

I take it the proposed new station at Kirkstall Forge looks unlikely now then, shame because the site has scope for a lot of car parking space and would be of far more value than the lame trolleybus.

I believe that the Kirkstall Forge station is at least part developer funded and is still expected to go ahead....

 

[shinkansen1966]

Great Western Electrification ?
IEP ?

(or am I in the wrong thread ...)

 

[Kneedown]

Great Western Electrification ?
IEP ?

(or am I in the wrong thread ...)

MML electrification?
IEP ?

Fixed your post!

 

[starrymarkb]

Which would still leave the question of what is going to run on the GWML when the HSTs are withdrawn (you are only looking at 5-10 years life extension, so you'd still have to keep the GWML plans active)

 

[Kneedown]

Which would still leave the question of what is going to run on the GWML when the HSTs are withdrawn (you are only looking at 5-10 years life extension, so you'd still have to keep the GWML plans active)

Howz about some form of bi-mode or diesel that can be converted to AC if and when the wires do finally go up on the GWML.
I'm thinking IEP or Polaris type thingies.

Remember, there has never been any commitment to extending the wires to Penzance, so diesel's will still have an essential part to play.

 

[starrymarkb]

Is there a Bi-Mode capable of 125 under diesel out there? Most (including IEP) are designed for a max diesel speed of 90mph or would it be something like Bombardier's 22x with panto cars.

 

[imagination]

Remember, there has never been any commitment to extending the wires to Penzance, so diesel's will still have an essential part to play.

Or Newquay/Paignton/Carmarthen/Hereford/Weston-Super-Mare

and for the 165/166s:
Greenford/Windsor/Marlow/Henley/Bedwyn/Banbury (Bicester will be taken over by Chiltern; Basingstoke and Gatwick could easily be taken by another TOC)

 

[Drsatan]

Or Newquay/Paignton/Carmarthen/Hereford/Weston-Super-Mare

and for the 165/166s:
Greenford/Windsor/Marlow/Henley/Bedwyn/Banbury (Bicester will be taken over by Chiltern)

The only problem with GWML electrification is that lots of in-fill electrification would be necessary to avoid too many diesel trains running 'under the wires'.

For instance, many FGW services carry onto Swansea, so if the GWML was electrified to Cardiff passengers would either need to change trains there or the locomotive would need to be changed (a bi-mode IEP sounds too complicated to work well in practice)

By the time that happens the Pacers and 150s used on Valley Lines services will be life expired. Therefore it would make economic sense to scrap those and electrify the Valley Lines.

Other than that, any news on what's going to happen to the Fareham-Gosport guided busway? I was aware that the trackbed of the Fareham-Gosport railway was being cleared in preparation.

 

[robvulpes]

The Secretary of State said "Work is continuing on the evaluation of additional investment in major rail projects, and I expect to be able to make an announcement to the House on that in the next few weeks."

That's why there's so little rail-related in yesterday's announcement

Robert

Hansard:-
http://www.publications.parliament....101026/debtext/101026-0001.htm#10102622000001

 

[bladesman123]

Details in Dft press release:

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/clientmicrosite/Content/Detail.aspx?ClientId=202&NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=416188&SubjectId=36


There is a further list of projects ("the development group") which will bid for funds to be decided by the end of 2011 including:
Leeds Rail Growth package
Sheffield Supertram additional vehicles

Will the extra vehicles for the supertram be them train-tram things that were supposed to run between Sheffield and Rotherham ???

 

[tbtc]

The only problem with GWML electrification is that lots of in-fill electrification would be necessary to avoid too many diesel trains running 'under the wires'.

For instance, many FGW services carry onto Swansea, so if the GWML was electrified to Cardiff passengers would either need to change trains there or the locomotive would need to be changed

This is a major problem with GWML electrification. If you are going to do it properly then it is going to be "massive". Look at all the branches that currently have some direct link to London (Fishguard/ Weston/ Newquay/ Torbay/ Hereford etc). Either "bite the bullet" and stop daytime through trains beyond Bristol/ Exeter*/ Cardiff, electrify *everything* or be prepared for lots of fiddly diesel haulage to Swansea/ Cornwall etc.

Not popular, I know, and there will be protests from the "extremes". However, this is why I think MML electrification is a lot easier. One line from Bedford to Moorthorpe via Derby, Sheffield and Bolton on Dearne, the line from East Midlands Parkway to Chesterfield via Nottingham, Swinton to Doncaster and you've basically covered everything "inter city". The Mansfield/ Matlock branches are fairly self contained, so keep DMUs for those lines plus Skegness and Lincoln. However, there is the scope to wire routes like Meadowhall - Barnsley - Leeds, Nottingham to Grantham etc, but not essential that these are electrified at the same time.

(* - possibly Plymouth)

 

[Kneedown]

I say do Matlock and maybe Lincoln too. For those few extra miles you release a lot of Sptinters for cascade.

 

[YorkshireBear]

You can keep it simple with MML and you can release DMU's quickly, sheffield adwick, sheffiled leeds via moorthorpe and like you say with very little extra electrification youve got matlock and lincoln with loads of DMU's free'd up but its not esential for branches like this to be done, it can be done as and when rather than being essential so diesels arnt under wires for 90%

 

[tbtc]

I say do Matlock and maybe Lincoln too. For those few extra miles you release a lot of Sptinters for cascade.

I'd rather they were done than not done, but the "high speed" units on the MML stick to just the main route, so they could electrify the main lines fairly easily without anyone losing a link to London.

Ideally I'd do the main lines plus Nottingham to Birmingham*, the Matlock branch, Nottingham to Worksop, Sheffield - Retford - Lincoln, Nottingham - Grantham and Nottingham - Lincoln, plus a little "fill in" in Yorkshire (the Rotherham loop, the Barnsley line). However, all of this could be done in the next phase and are independant (whereas GWML would need everything doing in one batch to relase a real saving in units)

(* - which would mean all XC services north of Birmingham were electrified)

 

[swt_passenger]

Great Western Electrification ?
IEP ?

(or am I in the wrong thread ...)

Wrong thread I think. This DfT announcement is mainly about work that was previously dealt with in the regions under Regional Funding Allocations. The RFA procedure was binned in the budget, and this is the new decision making process for that type of expenditure.

Obviously stuff like Thameslink and IEP was nothing to do with RFA...

The problem, it seems to me, is that people were led to expect one all embracing announcement about everything from electirfcation down to their local bypass or bus station - and that was always unlikely.

 

[jon0844]

Yes, most people can't take in all of that information in one hit (I refer to the media mainly!) and a Government would want positive publicity for as long as possible. Drip feeding info is commonplace for any business, so no surprise.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I'd rather they were done than not done, but the "high speed" units on the MML stick to just the main route, so they could electrify the main lines fairly easily without anyone losing a link to London.

Ideally I'd do the main lines plus Nottingham to Birmingham*, the Matlock branch, Nottingham to Worksop, Sheffield - Retford - Lincoln, Nottingham - Grantham and Nottingham - Lincoln, plus a little "fill in" in Yorkshire (the Rotherham loop, the Barnsley line). However, all of this could be done in the next phase and are independant (whereas GWML would need everything doing in one batch to relase a real saving in units)

(* - which would mean all XC services north of Birmingham were electrified)

while i was at it id redo the line to stocksbridge electrify it and lincolcn stocksbridge stopping services via a done up victoria not midland frees up a little capcity too..... just a dream

I agree with everything they would all benefit with electrification and seen as were not hitting any particular natural beauty sites it would be much easier to get planning permission.