Cardiff and Wales improvements DfT announcement 21Aug

[oglord]

What is happening with the new station at Llanwern?

It's not in Cardiff, so nothing.

 

[Tom Quinne]

With the platform length available, it ought to be possible to move the signal back towards Aber a bit to achieve this. Is there a short restricted overlap available today for use with a delayed yellow warning approach?

No, the only ones are on the Mainline workstion which are down at Central.

 

[MarkyT]

No, the only ones are on the Mainline workstion which are down at Central.

Measuring on Google Earth, the distance from signal to estimated clearance point at the bay turnout is under 40m, so there's no space for any kind of restricted or reduced overlap without moving the signal. The platform is in excess of 240m long however, which is a little excessive for typical traffic, so there's definitely scope for moving the signal back. For the all traffic approach speed of 50mph at Caerphilly, an unrestricted reduced overlap of minimum 105m would usually be allowed, so if the signal was moved accordingly, that would still leave platform standage of over 180m, which should be perfectly adequate for today's traffic and all likely future scenarios. The signals would no longer be parallel clearly, which is the preferred arrangement, but the bay starting signal is to the left of its track, would be obscured completely from the mainline if a train was in the bay at the time and I believe it would be very clear to drivers which signal applied to each line so there would be a negligible risk of confusion.

 

[BrianW]

And sadly nothing to electrify to Swansea

Surprised, what with Brigend being a Conservative constituency now; but not otherwise ...
A semblance of investment

 

[Chris125]

I may be missing something here, but I thought the whole point of ETCS was that it was supposed to be fully compatible. One manufacturer's stock will run on another's line, and so forth. So surely it should be possible for trains fitted with someone else's new ETCS on-board kit to run on an existing ETCS-fitted line? If not, then we are going to have big problems.

IIRC the Cambrian ETCS was a pilot when much development work was still underway - a bit like a pre-production train it's somewhat bespoke and needs to be brought up to date with the final design. That's a gross simplification but I hope you get the idea.

 

[MarkyT]

IIRC the Cambrian ETCS was a pilot when much development work was still underway - a bit like a pre-production train it's somewhat bespoke and needs to be brought up to date with the final design. That's a gross simplification but I hope you get the idea.

Also the ca £3m being talked about is nowhere near enough for a complete resignalling. I suspect it's a targetted renewal of certain components and subsystems to latest variants, upgrades to interlocking and radio system software and configuration data to exploit all the functionality available on the new trains, make the system more dependable and maintainable, plug the temporary speed restriction vulnerability uncovered recently, and maybe (just speculating here) actually make it easier to run specials using heritage traction under new operating modes. The new Welsh rolling stock is all bound to be native ETCS with DMI (cab display), EVC (main onboard computer with its traction and braking interfaces), and GSM-R, and will likely use these to also emulate AWS/TPWS rather like new Thameslink and Crossrail trains do. There may also be some minor layout tweaks in terms of number and position of block markers but don't expect much within that price, certainly no new or extended passing loops and the like.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Also the ca £3m being talked about is nowhere near enough for a complete resignalling. I suspect it's a targetted renewal of certain components and subsystems to latest variants, upgrades to interlocking and radio system software and configuration data to exploit all the functionality available on the new trains, make the system more dependable and maintainable, plug the temporary speed restriction vulnerability uncovered recently, and maybe (just speculating here) actually make it easier to run specials using heritage traction under new operating modes. The new Welsh rolling stock is all bound to be native ETCS with DMI (cab display), EVC (main onboard computer with its traction and braking interfaces), and GSM-R, and will likely use these to also emulate AWS/TPWS rather like new Thameslink and Crossrail trains do. There may also be some minor layout tweaks in terms of number and position of block markers but don't expect much within that price, certainly no new or extended passing loops and the like.

And/or possibly some modifications to deal with the fallout from the October 2017 signalling failure.

 

[MarkyT]

And/or possibly some modifications to deal with the fallout from the October 2017 signalling failure.

Yes indeed. I'd mentioned that as the 'temporary speed restriction vulnerability', records of which were erased when a subsystem was rebooted in attempting to restore normal operations after a failure. I expect measures to address that are a certainty.

 

[Belperpete]

Also the ca £3m being talked about is nowhere near enough for a complete resignalling. I suspect it's a targetted renewal of certain components and subsystems to latest variants, upgrades to interlocking and radio system software and configuration data to exploit all the functionality available on the new trains, make the system more dependable and maintainable, plug the temporary speed restriction vulnerability uncovered recently, and maybe (just speculating here) actually make it easier to run specials using heritage traction under new operating modes. The new Welsh rolling stock is all bound to be native ETCS with DMI (cab display), EVC (main onboard computer with its traction and braking interfaces), and GSM-R, and will likely use these to also emulate AWS/TPWS rather like new Thameslink and Crossrail trains do. There may also be some minor layout tweaks in terms of number and position of block markers but don't expect much within that price, certainly no new or extended passing loops and the like.

Yes, I suspect that when NR went back to the manufacturer to get the TSR problem fixed, they will have been told something along the lines of "sorry, we don't support that version of the software anymore. To get it fixed, you will need to upgrade to the latest version of the software, but unfortunately that won't run on the interlocking hardware you have got, so you will also need to upgrade to the latest interlocking hardware. Unfortunately, .......". I doubt that the passengers will see much benefit from this upgrade to "the latest digital signalling". Hence the somewhat over-simplistic explanation, probably in the hope no-one will ask any awkward questions.

 

[BrianW]

And/or possibly some modifications to deal with the fallout from the October 2017 signalling failure.

I'm picturing something more like a pared down 'one engine in steam' Shrewsbury- Machynlleth- Aberystwyth- Pwellhi and no signals? How mad am I? Looking to be put right

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I wonder how transition will go.
Will the current Cambrian 158s be able to run under the upgraded system, or will it force a big bang, 158s being replaced overnight by 197s?
I assume the current system is controlled locally at Machynlleth. Will control go to Cardiff ROC?

 

[Belperpete]

I'm picturing something more like a pared down 'one engine in steam' Shrewsbury- Machynlleth- Aberystwyth- Pwellhi and no signals? How mad am I? Looking to be put right

As a box of frogs. Suggest that you look at the timetable if you think OES Shrewsbury - Mach is going to work.

I wonder how transition will go.
Will the current Cambrian 158s be able to run under the upgraded system, or will it force a big bang, 158s being replaced overnight by 197s?
I assume the current system is controlled locally at Machynlleth. Will control go to Cardiff ROC?

Any ETCS fitted train should be able to run on any ETCS fitted line. The whole point of ETCS is that it is an interoperable system. There should be no need for a big bang.

The current system is indeed controlled from Mach. There were plans to recontrol from Cardiff, but I had heard they had been dropped. However, the building at Mach doesn't look too long-term to me. Not quite a portacabin, but definitely not bricks and mortar.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Any ETCS fitted train should be able to run on any ETCS fitted line. The whole point of ETCS is that it is an interoperable system. There should be no need for a big bang.

In which case there's no need for an upgrade if 197s can be slotted in regardless...
Given the angst over software upgrades for on-train signalling systems elsewhere, I suspect it won't be that simple!

 

[Philip Phlopp]

In which case there's no need for an upgrade if 197s can be slotted in regardless...
Given the angst over software upgrades for on-train signalling systems elsewhere, I suspect it won't be that simple!

The Class 197s will work with the Cambrian signalling - it's running 2.3.0.d which is the Baseline 2 specification and all ETCS compatible rolling stock must (should, anyway) work with Baseline specification installations (referred to as backwards compatibility) so even if the CAF rolling stock is provided with Baseline 3 compatible software, it must still work with Baseline 2.

What the upgrade entails isn't clear, as several of us have said, there are some safety issues from the October 2017 signalling failure which ORR want fixed and given the budget involved, it seems like it might be that type of thing plus replacing some components which aren't proving to be as reliable as expected, rather than anything major.

 

[BrianW]

As a box of frogs. Suggest that you look at the timetable if you think OES Shrewsbury - Mach is going to work.


I was picturing a pared down timetable ... trying to imagine being in the Treasury? Shoot me down ... something like one train am, one pm, maybe something midday or not ... One train Shrewsbury- Aberystwth connecting to and/or from Pwllheli (or not). Expenditure delayed is money saved, for now; it's my money and yours. It's a beautiful route; I rode it once as a tourist. Once. I don't live there.

 

[Tom Quinne]

I wonder how transition will go.
Will the current Cambrian 158s be able to run under the upgraded system, or will it force a big bang, 158s being replaced overnight by 197s?
I assume the current system is controlled locally at Machynlleth. Will control go to Cardiff ROC?

I can’t see a 3rd signalling control system being installed in Cardiff.

 

[Chris125]

What the upgrade entails isn't clear, as several of us have said, there are some safety issues from the October 2017 signalling failure which ORR want fixed and given the budget involved, it seems like it might be that type of thing plus replacing some components which aren't proving to be as reliable as expected, rather than anything major.

As I suspected the Railway Gazette are reporting that it will be updated to Baseline 3.0, which will presumably address some of it's 'issues'... https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/d...ements-and-freight-improvements/57209.article

Another £3m will advance plans to update the ETCS equipment on the 241 km Cambrian Line from Sutton Bridge Junction near Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth and Pwllheli, to support the introduction of a new trains by December 2022. The route was originally equipped with ETCS Version 2.2.2 and needs to be updated to the current Baseline 3 standards.

 

[Belperpete]

As I suspected the Railway Gazette are reporting that it will be updated to Baseline 3.0, which will presumably address some of it's 'issues'... https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/d...ements-and-freight-improvements/57209.article

Thanks for that. The update needs doing, and the new trains provide a useful excuse to persuade the politicians to provide the money for it. As to how necessary the update is in order to run the new trains seems to be something best glossed over.

And the DfT press release makes it clear that this funding is separate from the funding for the new station at Bow Street.

 

[Jacob Didcote]

They're still changing CDF station? there is literally nothing wrong with the main station building. I would understand if it were falling apart but it's not. Just spending money that doesn't need to be spent! Why not upgrade other stations to look more "glamorous"?!?

 

[Belperpete]

They're still changing CDF station? there is literally nothing wrong with the main station building. I would understand if it were falling apart but it's not. Just spending money that doesn't need to be spent! Why not upgrade other stations to look more "glamorous"?!?

I am not sure how much, if any, of that money is for the main station building. The press release states:

It will focus on improving access and ensuring platforms are suited for longer trains, boosting space and capacity for passengers.

They are presumably preparing for a considerable increase in passenger numbers using the station once the Metro takes off.

 

[Jacob Didcote]

I am not sure how much, if any, of that money is for the main station building. The press release states:

They are presumably preparing for a considerable increase in passenger numbers using the station once the Metro takes off.

Well they released some photos not too long ago of the revamped station building render. Waste of money basically putting a canopy over the original station building

 

[Western 52]

Well they released some photos not too long ago of the revamped station building render. Waste of money basically putting a canopy over the original station building

Looks awful to me. An expensive way to wreck a classic building. I thought it was listed? Surprised this got through the planners. If the money is there use it to improve other stations which badly need upgrading.

 

[Ianno87]

Well they released some photos not too long ago of the revamped station building render. Waste of money basically putting a canopy over the original station building

Looks awful to me. An expensive way to wreck a classic building. I thought it was listed? Surprised this got through the planners. If the money is there use it to improve other stations which badly need upgrading.

Would make more sense if they'd "done a Strasbourg" and used the glass canopy to convert the area in front of the station into a larger, naturally lit concourse.

 

[WesternBiker]

Would make more sense if they'd "done a Strasbourg" and used the glass canopy to convert the area in front of the station into a larger, naturally lit concourse.

I agree - although if you look closely at the artist's impression, there are people on the current roof of the building under the canopy. I'm trying to think what that might achieve?

 

[Legolash2o]

I can't recall the exact figure but essentially the transfer was financially neutral for both Network Rail and TfW. IIRC Treasury rules required that the CVL were 'sold' for an agreed price but HMG then returned an equivalent sum to the Welsh Government.

Surely it would have been better to have some sort of system where NR still owned the lines but TfW controlled their future? The £516m could have been spent on improvements instead.

Would NR still maintain the lines?

 

[Dai Corner]

Surely it would have been better to have some sort of system where NR still owned the lines but TfW controlled their future? The £516m could have been spent on improvements instead.

Would NR still maintain the lines?

There wasn't £516m of additional money to spend. It was just an accounting procedure.

 

[CapitalStar378]

I agree - although if you look closely at the artist's impression, there are people on the current roof of the building under the canopy. I'm trying to think what that might achieve?

I think the original plan was to provide footbridge access to the platforms to increase platform access capacity. No idea what the current plan is as have only seen a CGI of a new large building on the south side.

 

[Rhydgaled]

And sadly nothing to electrify to Swansea

Network Rail's TDNS features electrification to at least Carmarthen (and possibly even Fishguard) so hopefully it will happen eventually. I think the 'delay' (as I hope the current 'cancellation' will turn out to be) to Swansea electrification has a silver lining, which BantamMenace has also spotted:

The straightening of the lines and speed improvements are something you want to do before you erect a load of steel at either side of the running lines. This announcement is to do exactly that.

As well as line speed improvements, I think the line between Cardiff and Port Talbot / Bridgend needs capacity improvements (particularly the ability for fast trains to overtake stoppers). This would also be best done before electrification. I've no idea of the extent of the improvements currently planned however, there may be just a tiny bit of linespeed improvement and no new capacity.

Regarding the Cambrian ETCS...

There is no way you would put in RETB back in there, especially as when we ever bite the bullet with Shrewsbury it will be ETCS.

I hope they never bite the bullet with Shrewsbury; that listed signal box needs looking after and I can't see them allowing public access so that it can have a new use given that it is in the middle of the railway triangle. Perhaps re-signal to ETCS but keep it controlled from the signal box (and possibly re-control the Cambrian ETCS to the 'box while you're at it).

The new Welsh rolling stock is all bound to be native ETCS

To be future proof, I expect ALL the new Welsh rolling stock will be 'ETCS ready' if not with ETCS already fully enabled.

'ETCS Ready' only I understand. Not sure about the Metro stock, but TfW have confirmed that they plan for only 21x class 197s to be ETCS-fitted, that's three units fewer than are currently fitted for the Cambrian.

I would have thought the intention of platform 8 should be that it is predominately used for through trains east to west, platform 6 for through trains west to east, and platform 7 becomes the one that is used bidirectionally for services terminating at Central.

I thought the eventual aim was to have two platforms per direction for Metro services to/from Queen Street, with the current platform 4 (which logically in my brain should be platform 5) joining 6, 7 and 8 as 'Metro' platforms. I may not be remembering correctly however, and I'm not too keen on the idea of losing platform 4/5 for mainline services.

They're still changing CDF station? there is literally nothing wrong with the main station building. I would understand if it were falling apart but it's not. Just spending money that doesn't need to be spent! Why not upgrade other stations to look more "glamorous"?!?

I am not sure how much, if any, of that money is for the main station building. The press release states:

It will focus on improving access and ensuring platforms are suited for longer trains, boosting space and capacity for passengers.

They are presumably preparing for a considerable increase in passenger numbers using the station once the Metro takes off.

Yep, increased passenger circulation space has been the driver (or one of the drivers) for the redevelopment of Cardiff Central for some time. There are some tight spaces for what is a very busy station, but previous attempts at designing something to address these issues have trashed the place. Note also the 'ensuring platforms are suited for longer trains' bit...

Looks awful to me. An expensive way to wreck a classic building. I thought it was listed? Surprised this got through the planners. If the money is there use it to improve other stations which badly need upgrading.

I agree - although if you look closely at the artist's impression, there are people on the current roof of the building under the canopy. I'm trying to think what that might achieve?

Yes it is listed, but so is Aberystwyth station and that didn't save it from having a 'carbuncle' stuck on the side. I don't think a listed building consent application has been made for any of the previous attempts to redevelop Cardiff Central (such as the image pictured) so it hasn't got past the planners, yet. I guess the 'ensuring platforms are suited for longer trains' refers to Network Rail's long-standing aspiration to make platform 0 the main platform for services to London (with platform 2 becoming the main platform for services from London and platform 3 being for services off the relief lines east of Cardiff), meaning that platform 0 would potentially need to be 260m long to accommodate a pair of 5-car IET sets. Unfortunately, this appears to be completely unachievable without wrecking the listed building, since there is no space for a 260m platform 0 without demolishing most of the main building. I think the station clock is also missing from the image posted earlier, the people on the roof are probably on the extended platform 0. I'm dead against the idea; with the measure tool on Google Maps I think you could extend platform 0 to 161m (7x23) without having to demolish anything, which could accommodate most non-London services, but IETs are out. If you extended the platform out over the Taff (which would mean having to move pointwork) you could even do 240m (20x12) which could even take a 9-car IET potentially but 10-car is still a no-no without destroying one of the best pieces of railway architecture in Wales.

 

[Starmill]

Because there is no viable business case for doing so.

If the Welsh Govt want to electrify the line as a vanity project, fine. The UK Govt rightly won't pay for it when there are much more deserving business cases elsewhere.

Note how, notwithstanding the poor value for money assessment using current case models, the route is considered "core electrification" by the decarbonisation strategy.

 

[The Planner]

Regarding the Cambrian ETCS...
I hope they never bite the bullet with Shrewsbury; that listed signal box needs looking after and I can't see them allowing public access so that it can have a new use given that it is in the middle of the railway triangle. Perhaps re-signal to ETCS but keep it controlled from the signal box (and possibly re-control the Cambrian ETCS to the 'box while you're at it).

Sorry, but that is rose tinted glasses world. Shrewsbury will end up in Cardiff at some point, as will Machynlleth. You are not going to close the latter and put it in an island at Shrewsbury.

'ETCS Ready' only I understand. Not sure about the Metro stock, but TfW have confirmed that they plan for only 21x class 197s to be ETCS-fitted, that's three units fewer than are currently fitted for the Cambrian.

19 needed for the timetable I have heard.