Valley Lines Reorganisation Suggestion

[andypops]

I've been suffering like many other people recently with the Valley Lines closure between Cardiff Central ([stn]CDF[/stn]) and Cardiff Queen Street ([stn]CDQ[/stn]). The Replacement timetable is quite interesting:

• Cardiff Central- Merthyr Tydfil - services will be diverted via the City Line (Ninian Park), calling at all stations and not call at Cardiff Queen Street, Cathays or Llandaf
• Barry Island / Penarth - Cardiff Central - Aberdare - services will be diverted via the City Line (Ninian Park), calling at all stations, and will not call at Cardiff Queen Street, Cathays or Llandaf. Trains then call at all stations to Aberdare
• Barry Island to Treherbert services will start at Cardiff Bay, and then call at all normal stops between Cardiff Queen Street and Treherbert
• Barry Island to Caerphilly / Rhymney services - a limited service will start at Cardiff Bay and then call at all normal stops between Cardiff Queen Street and Caerphilly / Rhymney
• Services to and from Coryton will start / terminate at Heath Low Level
• Cardiff Central - Penarth will run half-hourly
• A train shuttle service will also run between Bridgend, Barry Island and Cardiff Central

I like some aspects of this, and perhaps these alterations should be looked at in the future for reasons I'll explain below.
[For the purposes of this thread, I will be ignoring the fact that Maesteg is also part of the Valley Lines, as these trains are quite separate from the other VL services (running over the Marches line, and via the mainline to Llanharran, etc).]


For those of you who do not know, CDQ lies north of CDF, and all Valley Line trains run between them (except Cardiff Bay shuttle). North of CDQ is a junction to either Pontypridd (and onwards to Treherbert, Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare) or to Heath (High and Low Level stations). Low level leads to Coryton, and High level leads to Caerphilly and beyond (Rhymney, Ystrad Mynach etc.).
In terms of capacity, I believe that the CDF-CDQ section of the valley lines is at or close to capacity (8tph to/from Heath, 12 tph to/from Pontypridd) over its two line stretch. There are improvement works underway to the infrastructure, with what looks like provision for a lot of extra signalling going in at the moment, but without new lines, and probably 2 new platforms at CDQ there will always be problems. Therefore I would like to suggest some changes to the timetabling of the Valley Lines services.


I think that the change whereby Barry Island - Treherbert / Caerphilly / Rhymney services start / terminate at Cardiff Bay is a masterstoke. This is removing 6 tph (2 via Pontypridd, 4 via Heath High) from the heavily congested double-track section between CDF and CDQ. In addition, it is removing the need for a unit to act as the "Bay Shuttle", which makes 5 trips per hour between CDQ and Cardiff Bay. Whilst bad for bubbles, IMHO is good for Arriva in saving units, and would also allow quicker turnarounds (rather than having to run through the throat south of Cardiff Central and interfering with other moves through there). So to me, I believe that it should be looked at by Arriva with an open mind after the wash-up from the recent problems.

Secondly, regarding the Coryton service, I am in two minds as to whether it is necessary to run as a "shuttle" between Heath Low Level and Coryton. I think it would be better to have a CDQ - Coryton service, which would be more convenient for passengers in general, and cut down congestion, delays and dwell times at CDF. This would require a bay at CDQ, or (even better), if platform 3 could be used as a platform for terminating services. A crossover does exist between platform 2 (the down valley line) and the Bay branch line, so I would expect the Bay terminating trains to run through P2 at CDQ to Cardiff Bay, then return via P1.

The reason for these Coryton services not starting / stopping at CDF is again to cut down delays in the throat south of CDF while reversing, also to give an overall better flow for passengers between the two stations.

In terms of passenger loadings, it is quite obvious that a number of passengers arrive in the mornings at CDF, and change for the short hop to CDQ. What is especially frustrating is that a number of these people are simply taking any train to CDQ, before changing again at CDQ. Whilst some people will always have the "get the first train that’s going in my right direction" mentality, I believe that it would be more useful to tailor these flows towards passenger demand, which cuts down dwell times for boarding / alighting, and also platform congestion. Therefore, removing some trains between CDF-CDQ will allow a number of extra services to fill through from Barry and Bridgend (via Vale of Glam line), to give a more regular service north.

As an example, there could be an increase of 1tph each for the routes from Barry Island to Pontypridd, Bridgend to Merthyr and also allow provision for 2tph from Penarth, which would be able to reverse at CDF (isn’t there a new bay being built for Valley line services at the S end of CDF?) before proceeding to Radyr.


I would be very pleased to listen to any responses about these ideas!

Thanks for reading,


Andy

 

[emoaconr]

What about the Radyr service via the City Line?

Perhaps it'd be a better idea to introduce a circular service (e.g. Treherbert-Treherbert) via Pontypridd - Radyr - City Line (Ninian Park) - Central - Queen Street - Cathays - Llandaf - Radyr - Pontypridd.

Would then only involve one northbound journey to Queen Street.

Similarly other VL services could operate in the opposite direction to balance out the Radyr - Central section.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I can't agree with not running Treherbert services through to Cardiff Central. It would cause a massive headache for quite a lot of people. Of course, part of this is also me being selfish. My life would be a hell of a lot harder if I had to change at Queen Street aswell (I realise that what my personal life is like shouldn't affect things, but when you are causing a real headache for a lot of other people too, for no real reason that I can see, then I just don't see the point).

Plus, the capacity issues through Queen Street are being worked on anyway(new signalling and new platforms IIRC), so it would make sense to at least wait till they are completed before messing around with something that isn't that broken right now.

 

[Greenback]

I can't agree with not running Treherbert services through to Cardiff Central. It would cause a massive headache for quite a lot of people. Of course, part of this is also me being selfish. My life would be a hell of a lot harder if I had to change at Queen Street aswell (I realise that what my personal life is like shouldn't affect things, but when you are causing a real headache for a lot of other people too, for no real reason that I can see, then I just don't see the point).

Plus, the capacity issues through Queen Street are being worked on anyway(new signalling and new platforms IIRC), so it would make sense to at least wait till they are completed before messing around with something that isn't that broken right now.

I agree. The Central terminators don't seem to cause many delays in themselves. I would suggest delays are caused by the sheer number sof trains using the station now which leaves less flexibility when things go wrong.

 

[David Goddard]

I had been thinking about this the other day and think that a simple change would be to join the Treherbert services with the the Radyr-Coryton trains to create through trains Treherbert - Radyr - Ninian Park - Cardiff Central - Queen Street - Coryton

This would mean a reduction of 2tph Radyr-Cathays - Central, remove terminating taking up valuable platform space at Radyr and CDF while maintaining access to both Cardiff Stations from Treherbert.
Electrification might create increased demand which could then lead to 3tph on the valleys, restoring the 6tph through Cathays.

 

[PHILIPE]

The Timetable is OK as it is and designed in that way to keep to the series of routes per Valley so that in the case of disruption only 1 route is affected rather than impacting on others. The crucial point in your suggestion is the Bay which is deliberately planned as a shuttle for Performance and pathing reasons. You can go down to the Bay OK, but on the return would have to cross the throat at the South of Queen St. which is completly taboo. It might be possible to squeeze a rather tight path in but when they did run beyond Queen St. in the past delays resulted. This reason is similar to that when the Maestegs were separated from the Cardiff Valleys to avoid crossibg the throat to the West of Cardiff Central. There is no problem with trains just following each other at 5 minute intervals between Central and Queen St.

 

[emoaconr]

I wonder what changes to the timetable the full electrification will bring?

My money is on Ebbw Vale Parkway - Maesteg

 

[krus_aragon]

I agree with the original poster that the temporary timetable, now that it has been fully implemented, is an elegant one. I'm not as convinced that it is a good choice to cut through services to Central for Treherbert and Rhymney.

For the benefit of any readers that aren't already aware, the existing plan once the capacity enhancements are finished include:

Extra services from Caerphilly run to Queen Street and then on to the Bay. They might shuttle to Queen St and back before starting back to Caerphilly, taking over the duties of the Bay shuttle unit. Some Rhymney Valley service may run fast or semi-fast to Caerphilly as a result.

Merthyr Services running fast to Radyr via the City Line. A stopper service will run through Queen St as far as Pontypridd.


The seven new platforms (Pontypridd, Barry, Caerphilly, two at Queen St, two at Central) and track work are said to be enough to have 16tph each way between Central and Queen St (4 minute interval) as compared with the current 12tph (5 minute interval). At times of disruption the extra platforms will also allow services to be turned back or leapfrogged to get things back to normal quicker than is possible now.



EDIT:
In fact, having the Caerphilly stopper shuttling to and from Queen St before starting off from the Bay would help deal with the issues PHILIPE mentioned above of crossing the station throat south of Queen St. The shuttle back to Queen St could run into the new bay platform without crossing the throat, and the extra two terminations (with the usual buffer time) should mean that the service can always make its tight path to cross the throat and continue up to Caerphilly. If the delays were sufficiently bad, the shuttle service could even be cancelled altogether in order to make the path in time.

 

[tbtc]

I wonder what changes to the timetable the full electrification will bring?

My money is on Ebbw Vale Parkway - Maesteg

Sounds likely (given that the Cheltenham route will remain diesel, so it seems daft to keep running Cheltenham services through to Maesteg, plus it links up the Ebbw Vale terminator in Cardiff Central)

 

[PaulHarding150]

As an example, there could be an increase of 1tph each for the routes from Barry Island to Pontypridd, Bridgend to Merthyr and also allow provision for 2tph from Penarth, which would be able to reverse at CDF (isn’t there a new bay being built for Valley line services at the S end of CDF?) before proceeding to Radyr.

Platform 5 now wont be (re)built, just platform 8

Still plans for 2 up and 2 down + a bay platfrm for The Bay at Queen St

 

[krus_aragon]

Platform 5 now wont be (re)built, just platform 8

That's a shame. When was this decided?

 

[PaulHarding150]

I was talking to someone from Arriva a few weeks ago who confirmed it to me (no indication that it wasn't public).

I'm intregued by only one extra platform at Central and two more in Queen Street, whilst I'm sure it'll go a long way to improve train flow, I'd have thought four through Vally Line platforms in Central (which 5 wouldn't be) and four through platforms in QS would be very logical.

 

[krus_aragon]

I'm intregued by only one extra platform at Central and two more in Queen Street, whilst I'm sure it'll go a long way to improve train flow, I'd have thought four through Vally Line platforms in Central (which 5 wouldn't be) and four through platforms in QS would be very logical.

Following you earlier post, I've been rooting around and found that both issues are mentioned in Network Rail's 2011 Network Specification.

Additional turnback platforms at Pontypridd, Caerphilly and Barry will enable more peak hour shorter distance services to operate, and two additional platforms will be provided at Cardiff Queen Street, one of which will enable the frequent Cardiff Bay shuttle services to be effectively operated on a self contained basis to release more through capacity. A further, bi-directionally signalled platform at Cardiff Central will be provided for Valleys services, together with a new link between platform four and the Valley lines to create more capacity and operational resilience.

Only one extra platform is mentioned (platform 5 is gone) and new pointwork will allow trains from platform 4 to gain access to Queen Street. I read elsewhere (but have forgotten where) that platform 0 is to be bidirectional. Perhaps this ability to run passenger trains either way there removes the need for the west-facing bay.

 

[PHILIPE]

I agree with the original poster that the temporary timetable, now that it has been fully implemented, is an elegant one. I'm not as convinced that it is a good choice to cut through services to Central for Treherbert and Rhymney.

For the benefit of any readers that aren't already aware, the existing plan once the capacity enhancements are finished include:

Extra services from Caerphilly run to Queen Street and then on to the Bay. They might shuttle to Queen St and back before starting back to Caerphilly, taking over the duties of the Bay shuttle unit. Some Rhymney Valley service may run fast or semi-fast to Caerphilly as a result.

Merthyr Services running fast to Radyr via the City Line. A stopper service will run through Queen St as far as Pontypridd.


The seven new platforms (Pontypridd, Barry, Caerphilly, two at Queen St, two at Central) and track work are said to be enough to have 16tph each way between Central and Queen St (4 minute interval) as compared with the current 12tph (5 minute interval). At times of disruption the extra platforms will also allow services to be turned back or leapfrogged to get things back to normal quicker than is possible now.



EDIT:
In fact, having the Caerphilly stopper shuttling to and from Queen St before starting off from the Bay would help deal with the issues PHILIPE mentioned above of crossing the station throat south of Queen St. The shuttle back to Queen St could run into the new bay platform without crossing the throat, and the extra two terminations (with the usual buffer time) should mean that the service can always make its tight path to cross the throat and continue up to Caerphilly. If the delays were sufficiently bad, the shuttle service could even be cancelled altogether in order to make the path in time.

That's exactly what happened int the past (2005) for Bay/Caerphilly and had hot water poured on it. A bottleneck is possible with increased services at Queen St due to the bridge only having 2 tracks and no plans, so far as I know but correct me if I am wrong. There were 4 tracks at one time but following rationalisation the bridge was replaced by the present one in the 70s.

 

[D107]

A fascinating discussion which leads me to ponder the decisions to remove the loop at Llandaff (permitting trains to run off the City Line direct into Llandaff station) and also the "Big Hill" between Taffs Well and Aber Jct. Think of the flexibility that would nowadays be offered to ATW services, particularly with the new housing developments around Caerphilly. I know you can't turn the clock back, but it's nice to dream!

 

[Rhydgaled]

If I'm right, the current service groups in the ValleyLines network are as follows:

• Maesteg - Cardiff Central / Cheltenham Spa (1tph)
• Treherbert - Cardiff Central
• Radyr - Coryton
• Aberdare/Merthyr - Barry Island / Bridgend via Barry
• Rhymney - Penarth (4tph)
• Cardiff Central - Ebbw Vale Parkway (1tph)
• Cardiff Queen Street - Cardiff Bay (5tph)

Could somebody fill in the blanks on frequency please. There are, I believe, also plans for 1tph between Ebbw Vale Parkway and Newport along with an increase in trains from Maesteg to 2tph and I personally think the Swansea - Cardiff Swanline service should be increased to hourly, call at all stations (currently I think Pencoed, Llanharran and Pontyclun are ommited) and be included under the ValleyLines network.

Assuming that both Maesteg services each hour go via Pontyclun I think they will need to portion work with the Swanline service. So let's say 2tph arriving at CDF from the west on the mainline, one can extend to Ebbw Vale but the other has to go somewhere else. How about having some Treherbert trains extending to Penarth, in place of some Rhymney line trains so the second train each hour from Pontyclun and beyond can run up to Rhymney? Also, I've wondered in the past whether it would be better to extend to Cardiff Bay shuttle, not to the heads of the valleys as others have suggested but to Coryton, but can the Heath - Coryton line take that in addition to the trains from Radyr (which might be better extended further north, at least to Pontypridd). I don't know the valleys at all well (I only have traveled on the CDF and Cardiff Bay to Queen Street and Queen Street to Treherbert lines) so these might be bad ideas but I thought I'd put them out there.

 

[krus_aragon]

• Maesteg - Cardiff Central / Cheltenham Spa (1tph)
• Treherbert - Cardiff Central (2tph)
• Radyr - Coryton (2tph)
• Aberdare/Merthyr - Barry Island / Bridgend via Barry (4tph)
• Rhymney - Penarth (4tph)
• Cardiff Central - Ebbw Vale Parkway (1tph)
• Cardiff Queen Street - Cardiff Bay (5tph)

That's the current pattern.

 

[tbtc]

I personally think the Swansea - Cardiff Swanline service should be increased to hourly, call at all stations (currently I think Pencoed, Llanharran and Pontyclun are ommited) and be included under the ValleyLines network

Having Swansea in the "Valley Lines" would make a bit of a mockery of the name though

 

[PHILIPE]

If I'm right, the current service groups in the ValleyLines network are as follows:

• Maesteg - Cardiff Central / Cheltenham Spa (1tph)
• Treherbert - Cardiff Central
• Radyr - Coryton
• Aberdare/Merthyr - Barry Island / Bridgend via Barry
• Rhymney - Penarth (4tph)
• Cardiff Central - Ebbw Vale Parkway (1tph)
• Cardiff Queen Street - Cardiff Bay (5tph)

Could somebody fill in the blanks on frequency please. There are, I believe, also plans for 1tph between Ebbw Vale Parkway and Newport along with an increase in trains from Maesteg to 2tph and I personally think the Swansea - Cardiff Swanline service should be increased to hourly, call at all stations (currently I think Pencoed, Llanharran and Pontyclun are ommited) and be included under the ValleyLines network.

Assuming that both Maesteg services each hour go via Pontyclun I think they will need to portion work with the Swanline service. So let's say 2tph arriving at CDF from the west on the mainline, one can extend to Ebbw Vale but the other has to go somewhere else. How about having some Treherbert trains extending to Penarth, in place of some Rhymney line trains so the second train each hour from Pontyclun and beyond can run up to Rhymney? Also, I've wondered in the past whether it would be better to extend to Cardiff Bay shuttle, not to the heads of the valleys as others have suggested but to Coryton, but can the Heath - Coryton line take that in addition to the trains from Radyr (which might be better extended further north, at least to Pontypridd). I don't know the valleys at all well (I only have traveled on the CDF and Cardiff Bay to Queen Street and Queen Street to Treherbert lines) so these might be bad ideas but I thought I'd put them out there.

As I've pointed out earlier on this thread, the Valley Lines Timetable is performance driven and was completely revamped in 2005. This Timetable has remained in operation ever since apart from minor tweaks especially in the evening when the service is not so intense.
If trains are delayed on one of the standard routes, the delays is confined to that route without impacting on another, although I admit train crews could be affected. No extra trains, i.e. ex Treherbert, are going to Penarth due to pathing. It is a single line and no capacity. The main feature of this Timetable was to avoid conflicting movements at throats such as south of Queen St (maintaing Bay as a self contained shuttle) and at the West End of Cardiff Central. Maesteg trains used to run to and from the Valleys but this was eradicated due to their having to cross several sets of tracks at Cardiff West, There will be no alterations now until the infrastructure changes which are in process of taking place/electrification. Some of this was instigated by the SRA (at the time) due to delays resulting from conflicting movements. Another example, Network Rail may have been the instigatots of this, was to move Up Londons (which come from Swansea or Up Side Sidings in case of starters) from Platform 2 to Platform 1 due to Regional Train movements from Canton trying to cross each others paths while they were trying to reach to Platform 1.

Would you rather have a pattern of train service as it is or would you rather have trains consistently late which would only escalate due to service frequency

 

[Rhydgaled]

Having Swansea in the "Valley Lines" would make a bit of a mockery of the name though

True, but the Swanline (if it was all stops) would be a similar service to the valleys. Also I would, at a later date, like to see some of the (currently freight-only) valleys north of Swansea incorporated too.

Would you rather have a pattern of train service as it is or would you rather have trains consistently late which would only escalate due to service frequency

I was meerly making suggestions for trying to keep down the number of services terminating in Cardiff (given there are no bays) once the lines are electrified. Note that my suggestion of extending Treherbert services to Penarth was in place of some services from Rhymeny to Penarth (which would be replaced by Rhymney - Maesteg/Swansea services), the frequency to Penarth would be unchanged but formed of services from two different heads of valleys rather than one.

 

[tbtc]

I was meerly making suggestions for trying to keep down the number of services terminating in Cardiff (given there are no bays) once the lines are electrified

Its always going to be lop-sided though, with many more services from Newport/ Queen Street than from Bridgend/ Grangetown.