Conwy Valley Line

[krus_aragon]

Hinkley Point - the distance from there to the transload at Bridgwater is more than that from Trawsfynydd to Blaenau Ffestiniog. And the A470 runs directly between Trawsfynydd and Blaenau, unlike the minor roads to Hinkley Point (though they may have been upgraded by the power station contractors).

The A470 between Blaenau and Trawsfynydd includes an acute turn in Llan Ffestiniog, a low overbridge (under the railway line) immediately after, and a nasty hilly and windy section between Llan Ffestiniog and Bontnewydd. I don't think it's even a trunk route for road purposes. Taking the A496 through Tanygrisiau and then the A487 past Gellilydan would be the more sensible route for a HGV.

 

[TB]

On a different topic, the only crossing loop on the line is at North Llanrwst station.
How do trains operate through the station? Do they use both platforms or (as the line is essentially 'one train in steam' unless there is a charter or something) do trains use the same platform/track in either direction with the second platform/track only used on the rare occasion of needing to cross trains?

 

[Krokodil]

The points are sprung. The loop is always left-hand running, without interference from the signaller. Presumably the intention was to convert to RETB/NST-R and close the box but the job was never completed.

 

[Russel]

The points are sprung. The loop is always left-hand running, without interference from the signaller. Presumably the intention was to convert to RETB/NST-R and close the box but the job was never completed.

When was the loop last used as a passing loop?

Not sure why they don't concentrate all services on one platform, it would make it disabled friendly without the need to use the barrow crossing.

 

[krus_aragon]

When was the loop last used as a passing loop?

Not sure why they don't concentrate all services on one platform, it would make it disabled friendly without the need to use the barrow crossing.

If you're talking about scheduled passenger services passing, it's donkey's years. 2D53's timetable graphs would suggest that summer 1989 was the last time passenger services were passing at Llanrwst.

After that, it was used for passenger trains passing Trawsfynydd freight while that lasted. The main use it has these days is in allowing charter railtours to pass service trains while on the branch. There's two such passing movements on Wednesday the 15th of this month, for example.

 

[Krokodil]

Not sure why they don't concentrate all services on one platform, it would make it disabled friendly without the need to use the barrow crossing.

How much do you want to spend on submersible point motors and their maintenance? Not to mention an extra starting signal and the cost of re-locking the frame?

 

[Russel]

How much do you want to spend on submersible point motors and their maintenance? Not to mention an extra starting signal and the cost of re-locking the frame?

I have no idea, but at some point the track and pointwork will in situ will need renewing, is replacing it like for like for the sake of a few charter services cost effective, especially when you factor in the signallers wages?

 

[Krokodil]

I have no idea, but at some point the track and pointwork will in situ will need renewing, is replacing it like for like for the sake of a few charter services cost effective, especially when you factor in the signallers wages?

You don't need a signaller to pass trains. NST-R can do that. To close the box you just need to redirect the crossing phones to Junction PSB (or SWCC) and install token instruments on the platform. Obviously you need someone to answer those phones and it remains to be seen whether they're deemed an acceptable extra workload for the Junction signaller. No chance of rationalising the loop. Apart from charter traffic it also allows Network Rail's test trains and any potential freight to pass the passenger service during the hours the line is open. Do away with the loop and you can't fit them in, and you also quash any potential extra services - the WG has expressed vague aspirations to improve frequencies in the long term

 

[Bletchleyite]

You don't need a signaller to pass trains. NST-R can do that. To close the box you just need to redirect the crossing phones to Junction PSB (or SWCC) and install token instruments on the platform. Obviously you need someone to answer those phones and it remains to be seen whether they're deemed an acceptable extra workload for the Junction signaller. No chance of rationalising the loop. Apart from charter traffic it also allows Network Rail's test trains and any potential freight to pass the passenger service during the hours the line is open. Do away with the loop and you can't fit them in, and you also quash any potential extra services - the WG has expressed vague aspirations to improve frequencies in the long term

Speculative thread to continue: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/improving-conwy-valley-services-and-infrastructure.267192/

Unless you were going for an uneven service the loop is slightly in the wrong place to increase to two hourly clockface which is the likely best you are going to achieve without seriously major works (the spare time could be used to do more Llandudno-Jn shuttles or run stopping to Holyhead so the expresses could run fast). A second platform at Betws (or a Dyfi Junction style arrangement there as the platform is quite long) would probably be needed. I did try to work out a timetable a while back and it couldn't be done with the loop where it is.

You would want clockface because of the Sherpa bus connections.

 

[splashoutradio]

I have no idea, but at some point the track and pointwork will in situ will need renewing, is replacing it like for like for the sake of a few charter services cost effective, especially when you factor in the signallers wages?

As @Krokodil has already mentioned, it's unlikely that control of the line will be passed to Llandudno Junction signal box.

Whilst the line itself doesn't have much rail traffic, the number of user worked crossings on the line is likely to create significant call volumes, especially at times of the year when farmers are at thier busiest. Dealing with these, as well as dealing with the safety of trains, isn't likely to be considered an acceptable workload for the signaller at LLJ.

Removing the passing loop would remove any flexibility the line currently has. Whilst it wouldn't present an issue to the current passenger service, it would prevent any route learning, charter or departmental trains (as well as any potential freight flows in the future) during the day, without decimating the passenger service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Removing the passing loop would remove any flexibility the line currently has. Whilst it wouldn't present an issue to the current passenger service, it would prevent any route learning, charter or departmental trains (as well as any potential freight flows in the future) during the day, without decimating the passenger service.

You could probably save a path for a charter round trip once a day (I have said before that you could easily work out a 4 or 5 round-trip timetable that would actually be more useful than the present blind every 3 hours one (6 trips) by thinking of the specific purpose of each train and timing them accordingly - there's an old thread on it somewhere) but if it's marginal in terms of needing a dedicated signaller anyway you might as well keep it. Probably easier to do it there than Windermere (which can't fit any charters despite the massive attractiveness they would have).

OTOH I think we're quite lucky we avoided any cuts to it given how it'd have similar status to the Pwllheli route which has been slashed in winter.

 

[Llandudno]

You could probably save a path for a charter round trip once a day (I have said before that you could easily work out a 4 or 5 round-trip timetable that would actually be more useful than the present blind every 3 hours one (6 trips) by thinking of the specific purpose of each train and timing them accordingly - there's an old thread on it somewhere) but if it's marginal in terms of needing a dedicated signaller anyway you might as well keep it. Probably easier to do it there than Windermere (which can't fit any charters despite the massive attractiveness they would have).

OTOH I think we're quite lucky we avoided any cuts to it given how it'd have similar status to the Pwllheli route which has been slashed in winter.

There isn’t much to cut on the Conwy Valley Line, during Covid and for many months after the last train left Llandudno just after 4pm!

 

[Krokodil]

The line requires just one unit diagram so anything short of closure wouldn't save much there. I imagine that the social aspect played a significant role, there are buses shadowing most of the Cambrian so nowhere is left completely severed.