Cambrian hourly service consultation

[Gareth Marston]

It won't happen under current legislation. It will have to be refranchised like Scotrail and the others.
ATW are only doing what they are contracted to do (I doubt any other operator would do any different).
DfT and WG do not want to change the current franchise because they know it will push up the subsidy further.
The ATW profits go some way to balance the losses at XC and Chiltern.
Some of us remember First North Western and as an operator Arriva is quite a bit better.

In many ways they are a symptom of the problem rather than a cause, though some on the left don't seem to realise this.

 

[Llanigraham]

The other question, of course, is where are they going to get the additional stock for the hourly Brum - Machy service? ATW don't have a surplus so I doubt that there will be much available until the South wales electrification goes live.
Also they will need additional ERTMS units, which aren't cheap, although I understand that the new Hitachi developed ones are much better and cheaper!

 

[brianthegiant]

The other question, of course, is where are they going to get the additional stock for the hourly Brum - Machy service? ATW don't have a surplus so I doubt that there will be much available until the South wales electrification goes live.
Also they will need additional ERTMS units, which aren't cheap, although I understand that the new Hitachi developed ones are much better and cheaper!

I read somewhere (probably another thread) that the most likely initial scenario would be that the extra in between services would terminate at Shrewsbury where it would connect with other hourly services, Whilst quite a few go through to BHM, I think a lot of people on the Cambrian change at/visit Shrewsbury anyway. Paths into New St from west quite full anyway. Not my ideal scenario, but a big improvement on what we have now.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A "gog" with a chip on his shoulder?

haha, I'm not even proper Welsh, but never mind

 

[cle]

Surely Wolverhampton would be a little better than Shrewsbury?

It has a bay for the line I believe?
It has hourly trains to London.
It has more than hourly ones north to Crewe and thence to Manchester/Liverpool, and towards Scotland too.
It has more frequent onward trains to Birmingham, and Int.
It's a reasonable destination in itself as a uni, employment and retail centre.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Sad thing is that its going to be the same whoever runs the W&B TOC - a "state run" operation is still going to need money thrown at it - especially if it wants to expand.

Indeed, but hopefully you can save £30m off the current £170m subsidy if you just want to maintain current service levels (£10m ATW profit and £20m premium payment to DfT). Or, keep the subsidy at £170m and use that £30m to run more trains instead of paying DfT and ATW.

At Galton Bridge we currently have alternate hour ATW services to Aber and Holyhead. To be honest if I wanted to go to Holyhead from the West Midlands going via Crewe has to be a better option. Why not run hourly Birmingham to the Cambrian with seperate services covering the Salop-Chester-Holyhead requirement. This Cambrian 1tph project has been going on for far to long now, there is a clear economic case based on growth and latent demand. Is it not tome that WAG and NR sorted this one out.

The other question, of course, is where are they going to get the additional stock for the hourly Brum - Machy service? ATW don't have a surplus so I doubt that there will be much available until the South wales electrification goes live.
Also they will need additional ERTMS units, which aren't cheap, although I understand that the new Hitachi developed ones are much better and cheaper!

My answer to both those questions is the same.

Wrexham - Birmingham is an important through flow (according to somebody else on here anyway), but Chester - Holyhead running through to Birmingham via Wrexham is not needed since the through journey is quicker if you change at Chester and Crewe anyway. So:

• Have a seperate Crewe/Chester - Holyhead service, which doesn't need an ERTMS unit to operate
• Cut back the Birmingham - Holyhead service to just Birmingham - Chester (via Wrexham), saving two ERTMS units I think
• Add the hourly Aberystwyth service as a portion splitting from the Birmingham - Chester service at Shrewsbury, using the ERTMS units saved by not sending the Birminghams through to Holyhead

In other words, you'd have an hourly Birmingham - Aberystwyth service with a portion for Chester/Wrexham every two hours (making a four car train east of Shrewsbury) and a portion for Pwllheli in the other hours (making a four car train east of Machynlleth).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Surely Wolverhampton would be a little better than Shrewsbury?
It has a bay for the line I believe?

There's a short bay, but it is not now accessible without a shunt.
Useless, really.

 

[Oliver]

Indeed, but hopefully you can save £30m off the current £170m subsidy if you just want to maintain current service levels (£10m ATW profit and £20m premium payment to DfT). Or, keep the subsidy at £170m and use that £30m to run more trains instead of paying DfT and ATW.

If the State is running the operation, then "saving" the £20 million premium payment isn't a saving, it's a loss to DfT = the State.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If the State is running the operation, then "saving" the £20 million premium payment isn't a saving, it's a loss to DfT = the State.

What premium payment? ATW gets a huge subsidy.
And if you fire the franchise management, are their replacements going to work for free?

 

[Rhydgaled]

What premium payment? ATW gets a huge subsidy.

Yes, it gets a £170m subsidy from WAG and pays a premium of arround £20m to DfT. See this topic where I was querying the premium payment as it seems daft to have a franchise which is both subsidised and paying a premium at the same time.

If the State is running the operation, then "saving" the £20 million premium payment isn't a saving, it's a loss to DfT = the State.

Depends which part of the state you are talking about. If I've understood it correctly (and it's quite possible that I haven't) it is a loss to DfT but a saving for WAG. Of course WAG could instead receive £20m less from Westminster meaning no net difference in funds but a £20m reduction in the subsidy to the Welsh TOC.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Yes, it gets a £170m subsidy from WAG and pays a premium of arround £20m to DfT. See this topic where I was querying the premium payment as it seems daft to have a franchise which is both subsidised and paying a premium at the same time.

Depends which part of the state you are talking about. If I've understood it correctly (and it's quite possible that I haven't) it is a loss to DfT but a saving for WAG. Of course WAG could instead receive £20m less from Westminster meaning no net difference in funds but a £20m reduction in the subsidy to the Welsh TOC.

Yes, we've been here before.
It is possible to have both a simultaneous premium and subsidy because of the revenue support regime, but I'm not sure this applies to ATW.
eg if ATW beats its revenue target it may share the profits with WG, but the relevant line for this in the table is blank...
One of the ironies of the franchise setup is that the heavily-subsidised ATW is performing better than the lightly-subsidised XC and Chiltern!
Northern has the same dilemma (because of the low original expectations when the franchise was let).

Forget the DfT/WG split, it's the same pot, just handed to WG to administer for DfT.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The other question, of course, is where are they going to get the additional stock for the hourly Brum - Machy service? ATW don't have a surplus so I doubt that there will be much available until the South wales electrification goes live.
Also they will need additional ERTMS units, which aren't cheap, although I understand that the new Hitachi developed ones are much better and cheaper!

The north to south line speed improvements should have freed up one unit from the Holyhead t o Cardiff circuit and ATW run a long distance ecs move as a Llandudno to Cardiff express which is a complete waste.

Blaenau Gwent (EbbwVale line) has an hourly service to Cardiff but with only 322K in footfall quite why it qualifies for having a 158 used on it for strengthening when the 10 trains a day in Ceredigion that get 390K in footfall don't I can't understand or the 420K that Montgomeryshire produces with only 8 trains a day to Shrewsbury or The 880K the cambrian coast part of Gwynedd spits out with 8 trains the whole length and a couple 0f extras between Mach and Barmouth.

 

[Gareth Marston]

from http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/push-hourly-rail-service-cambrian-6119695

A major survey of households, passengers and businesses across mid Wales on the need for an hourly service for the Cambrian Lines, is to be launched.

The survey, commissioned by the Transport Minister Edwina Hart, has been described as a “once in a generation” opportunity by Rail Liaison Committee Cllr Mansel Williams.

Recent upgrades to signalling and infrastructure on the line has made an hourly service possible.

Mr Williams said: “We have been discussing the possibility of an hourly service for the Cambrian Lines for many years.

“It is a commitment of the Welsh Government to implement an enhanced service and this survey is an opportunity to demonstrate the need for that service now, which would be a major enhancement for this important line.


During the next few weeks the residents of locations served by the railway can participate by completing a simple survey form.

The surveys will be made available right across the region covered by the Cambrian Lines.

There will also be special open days organised at some of these locations and a special website is also available where people can fill out the surveys online.

Businesses and large organisations are also being asked to take part as well.

Mr Williams added: “This project will be going “live” on October 5 and I urge everyone to take a few minutes to fill in the survey.“
“This project will be going “live” on October 5 and I urge everyone to take a few minutes to fill in the survey.“ More details online at http://midwalesrailsurvey.co.uk/

 

[merlodlliw]

Perhaps the Minister has learned a lesson from the Wrexham Rail Redouble debacle she orchestrated and will treat people with respect on the Cambrian.
I met Cllr Mansel Williams last week in Shrewsbury, he is a Shropshire County Cllr and really keen on the railways advancement in the Marches & Cambrian lines.
a pleasant change to meet a Cllr with a a good understanding of rail and wont be easily bluffed by Cardiff Bay in my opinion

Bob

 

[cle]

Why do the work and then consult for the demand? Ludicrous.

Also, could it slot in with the spare path between Wolves and Brum due to the Scotland and Euston services being linked?

 

[merlodlliw]

Why do the work and then consult for the demand? Ludicrous.

Thats what politicians do with capitol spending,in my neck of the woods, £1M was spent on Minera Leads Mines visitor centre, after six months it closed due to the County Council having no money or expertese to run it, new buildings rotting away on a site steeped in history.I mention this due to the interest in Railways around Minera that were run by GWR

 

[Gwenllian2001]

Why do the work and then consult for the demand? Ludicrous.

I can only assume it is because the government, in Cardiff, is of a different makeup from when the new works on the Cambrian were instigated. It's called politics.

 

[tbtc]

I can only assume it is because the government, in Cardiff, is of a different makeup from when the new works on the Cambrian were instigated. It's called politics.

Lets hope that everything is built before 2016, in that case, otherwise it'll be back to the drawing board to set up more surveys and waste more money (due to politicians of a different colour being in control)

Can't believe that we are still "consulting" over something that should have been resolved a long time ago.

 

[cle]

And if the demand wasn't proven, the work shouldn't have been done originally.

Talk about incompetence.

 

[rebmcr]

the single line occupancy is too high and is a risk.

That seems a bit strange. Surely single-line occupancy is not a risk logically; all the risk is due to the human element. Thus ERTMS should effectively make it no different than any other stretch of ERTMS track, and actually less risky than a conventionally-signalled flat crossing?

Or does 'risk' here refer to delay and not safety?

 

[CardiffKid]

I can only assume it is because the government, in Cardiff, is of a different makeup from when the new works on the Cambrian were instigated. It's called politics.

Its was a Labour-Plaid coalition and is now a Labour administartion.

The Labour Party have always been signed up to this.

 

[The Planner]

Or does 'risk' here refer to delay and not safety?

Delay, as in it would only have took someone sneezing in the wrong direction for it to fall like a pack of cards.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Delay, as in it would only have took someone sneezing in the wrong direction for it to fall like a pack of cards.

sensibly on the ground users (and non users who want to more importantly) are looking for extra trains in AM and PM peaks at both ends of line on weekdays and extras on Saturdays rather than a train every hour.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And if the demand wasn't proven, the work shouldn't have been done originally.

Talk about incompetence.

PF did a survey in 2008 that found that only 41% of current users were happy with frequency on the line.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Its was a Labour-Plaid coalition and is now a Labour administartion.

The Labour Party have always been signed up to this.

Plaid Minister authorized works for loops etc. Labour tend to lose their deposit up here which many people rightly or wrongly in Mid Wales believe is reason for delay.

 

[IKBrunel]

Given the limited paths into Birmingham, and that there are already frequent LM Shrewsbury- Birmingham services.

Is there any mileage in the additional Cambrian services running from Aber to Crewe or Manchester?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Given the limited paths into Birmingham, and that there are already frequent LM Shrewsbury- Birmingham services.

Is there any mileage in the additional Cambrian services running from Aber to Crewe or Manchester?

The easiest option is for them to split/join off the Holyhead services, they'll arrive depart Shrewsbury the same time anyway, though a through train to Crewe combining with the current Crewe to Shrewsbury local would open up a raft of better connections to North of England.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Given the limited paths into Birmingham, and that there are already frequent LM Shrewsbury- Birmingham services.

Is there any mileage in the additional Cambrian services running from Aber to Crewe or Manchester?

There's the lack of rolling stock to consider too. In my opinion, the Cambrian coast portion on the Aberystwyth service should remain (every two hours). That means 2 extra units are required running Aberystwyth - Shrewsbury, if they extended to Crewe you'd probably need more units. Since there are no DMUs off lease at the moment, I think some LHCS operation will be needed somewhere to release the additional two 158s.

The logical place to put an LHCS service on any franchise is the busiest long-distance routes. In the case of ATW, these are probably the Manchester services. Unfortunately for south-east Wales, their Manchesters extend into south-west Wales, where longer trains are rarely necessary. So LHCS on Manchester - north-Wales to cascade some 175s, to cascade some 158s.

Now, the problem there is that alot of 158s are on diagrams that have to be run with a 158 because of ERTMS. Personally, I think the Birmingham - north-Wales services should be reduced to Birmingham - Chester. That would allow the Chester - north-Wales section to be run with 175s instead of 158s, releasing the two 158s needed for the hourly service to Aberystwyth.

In fact, the Aberystwyth service would be hourly to Birmingham, because the extra services could couple to the Birmingham - Chester service at Shrewsbury (this ensures 4-car on all ATW services between Shrewsbury and Birmingham, given the existing Cambrians will have a coast and Aberystwyth portion).

 

[Gwenllian2001]

In fact, the Aberystwyth service would be hourly to Birmingham, because the extra services could couple to the Birmingham - Chester service at Shrewsbury (this ensures 4-car on all ATW services between Shrewsbury and Birmingham, given the existing Cambrians will have a coast and Aberystwyth portion).

I don't share your confidence in the reliable coupling of units. They seem to de-couple without bother but I've count of the times when coupling has been a nightmare.

 

[IKBrunel]

I don't share your confidence in the reliable coupling of units. They seem to de-couple without bother but I've count of the times when coupling has been a nightmare.

But the present timetable relies on regular coupling/decoupling of Aber/Pwhelli 158 sets at Shrewsbury /Mach?

Are you proposing that the new timetable with extra hourly services should aim to reduce in service coupling/decoupling?

 

[PHILIPE]

I thought the intention was for the additional just to run between Aberystwyth and Shrewsbury and return, thus the provision of turn back facilities in Platform 3 at Shrewsbury being part of this plan. I can't think why a regular poster should continually push for LHCS trains as these are regarded as a thing of the past and extremely costly to operate.The new service would run during the intermediate hour and Birmingham direction passengers would catch the current through trains.

 

[The Planner]

Don't see how you can extend any extras to Birmingham. The current coast train departs Shrewsbury at xx.33 with the LM local going at xx.47. Considering the amount of capacity the local eats you would either have to be somewhere between the coast and local train or dragging your backside behind the LM all the way to Birmingham. Which I don't think would work as there is a XC and Virgin up the chuff of that from Wolves.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I don't share your confidence in the reliable coupling of units. They seem to de-couple without bother but I've count of the times when coupling has been a nightmare.

the current tt sees coupling happen roughly six times a day at Shrewsbury and Machynlleth with ppm in the 90's - it isn't an issue.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Don't see how you can extend any extras to Birmingham. The current coast train departs Shrewsbury at xx.33 with the LM local going at xx.47. Considering the amount of capacity the local eats you would either have to be somewhere between the coast and local train or dragging your backside behind the LM all the way to Birmingham. Which I don't think would work as there is a XC and Virgin up the chuff of that from Wolves.

dont know where people are getting the idea that extra trains on the Cambrian means extra trains east of Salop from its always been the case that they can either terminate/start at Salop or couple/decouple from the current BHM INTL to Holyhead trains or go through to Crewe (which is what they did 30 years ago anyway).