Should Cardiff to Swansea be electrified?

[whole diary]

[GWR 158]

The purpose of this poll is to gather opinions if the line from Cardiff to Swansea should be electrified.

[grahame]

The purpose of this poll is to gather opinions if the line from Cardiff to Swansea should be electrified.

Indeed.   What (if any) are your wider objectives - how do you plan to make use of the results of the various polls?

[GWR 158]

I don't plan to do anything with the info from voting I just want to gather people's views on the topic

[eightf48544]

Not just for IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) TfW would also run the lcoal stoppers with EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) especcialy if any of the new stations are built and the Valley lines electrified. It could be a Westward extension of the Cardiff Bristol Metro.

[paul7575]

The thread title is making a statement that “Cardiff to Swansea [is ]electrified” though?
Should it not be expressed as a question?

Paul

[GWR 158]

Paul, I understand how you may have misunderstood but I meant the heading as a topic not a statement
Tom

[paul7575]

You should have simply titled it “Cardiff to Swansea electrification”.  It’s about the past tense “electrified” being wrong.

[GWR 158]

Fair enough, thank you for bringing it to my attention.

[Red Squirrel]

I've changed the subject of the OP^▸ (Original Poster / topic starter) to make it clearer what this is about.

[grahame]

I've changed the subject of the OP^▸ (Original Poster / topic starter) to make it clearer what this is about.

Thanks, Red Squirrel. It can be a challenge to differentiate between the text to use for the title and the question in a poll - something I've got very used to doing over the years, but it's all too easy to make an unclear mixture.

On topic now ...

Electrification onwards from Cardiff to Swansea is very much a part of Network Rail's long term, green / carbon zero agenda, and I would be very surprised to find a vote of members here to come up with a "don't do it" outcome.  But then the (real) purpose of a survey/poll/consultation is to find out - either to check what you think you know or to inform or even to surprise.

Carrying on from Cardiff - at least - to Swansea makes sense. Not only for the London expresses, but also for the Swan Line local trains which have been very much in the diesel doldrums.  Passenger numbers at Llanshamlet, Skewen, Briton Ferry and Baglan look somewhat low to me; personal experience of using Llanshamlet suggests there might be potential for green growth there with a good local service.

Perhaps there is logic in including overheads up to Maesteg too?  Or running that service with 769s, electric as far as Bridgend?

In writing the above, I am not answering "should Cardiff to Swansea be electrified next?" - I look at Chippenham to Bristol Temple Meads, and Didcot to Oxford as top candiates, with Bristol Temple Meads to Bromsgrove and Basingstoke to Reading as also in my thoughts for the most immediate/first candidates in a rolling program.  I am not addressing the question "should we upgrade the line while we are at it?" either.

[ellendune]

In writing the above, I am not answering "should Cardiff to Swansea be electrified next?" - I look at Chippenham to Bristol Temple Meads, and Didcot to Oxford as top candidates, with Bristol Temple Meads to Bromsgrove and Basingstoke to Reading as also in my thoughts for the most immediate/first candidates in a rolling program.  I am not addressing the question "should we upgrade the line while we are at it?" either.

I think that really has to be the point.

A rush to electrify without doing upgrades first adds significantly to the cost of those upgrades.  Someone once told me how much more Temple Meads Roof would if it was electrified first.  I can't remember the amount but it was very large!  I expect we could say the same about Bristol East Junction.  If improvements need doing to raise line speeds between Cardiff and Swansea then they must be done before electrification. 

[grahame]

Well ... I'm not surprised at the outcome of the poll ... any thoughts / comments from the original poster    - is the outcome along the lines you would have thought??

[onthecushions]

May I pose a related question, would it be acceptable to break existing services so that only or predominantly, electric traction was used on this route?

Would changing trains at the limits of the wires be acceptable?

OTC

[grahame]

May I pose a related question, would it be acceptable to break existing services so that only or predominantly, electric traction was used on this route?

Would changing trains at the limits of the wires be acceptable?

OTC

Historical analysis suggests you loose between 42% and 46% of through journeys when you replace it with separate services with a change / connection.   Now - my recollection of Cardiff is that a lot of awful people get off and an awful lot get on when a through train between Swansea and London calls there - so perhaps you're looking at 45% of 45% - so perhaps your loss is only around a quarter - 25%.

But - hang - on - where the speed / capacity / calling metric is similar for both electric and non-electric legs, don't  we have bi-modes?  Classes 755, 769, 800, 802, 805, 810, Class 73 and 88 loco hauled.   Much of that already and it could be moved to new changeover points rather than having people change on the way.  Not universal, of course - I'm not going to suggest London to Gunnislake, Looe or Exmouth through bi-modes.

[bobm]

Now - my recollection of Cardiff is that a lot of awful people get off and an awful lot get on when a through train between Swansea and London calls there

You didn’t really mean that did you?