Coventry bay platform & second train per hour Nuneaton - Coventry

[Jurg]

It appears that cost increases are currently rendering the new bay platform at Coventry unaffordable. There is a meeting of the Local Enterprise Partnership project board today which will discuss this, and the papers are attached below. The information is under the heading of Coventry Station Masterplan, and the bay platform is referred to in the document as Phase 3 or NUCKLE 1.2.

The document suggests that Network Rail will be looking at alternatives to bring costs down on the bay platform, and that the scheme will have to be reassessed by DFT and the local councils. The upshot of this is of course more delay to the construction of the bay platform, and so it looks unlikely that a second train per hour between Coventry and Nuneaton will happen soon.

 

[mattyb1405]

& kind of related but not trains - Travel Coventry has extended some of their buses into Nuneaton as well so competing with Stagecoach !

 

[paulb1973]

& kind of related but not trains - Travel Coventry has extended some of their buses into Nuneaton as well so competing with Stagecoach !

Possibly tit-for-tat after Stagecoach launched a Coventry city centre to University of Warwick service to compete with NXC's 12X fast service to that Uni. There have been rumours that the National Express 11 (Coventry - Leamington Spa via Kenilworth) may be extended even further into Stagecoach territory. The Nuneaton extension mentioned above starts 27/1/20.

 

[Jurg]

& kind of related but not trains - Travel Coventry has extended some of their buses into Nuneaton as well so competing with Stagecoach !

That's good to know, especially for days such as Boxing Day when the trains aren't running but Stagecoach run no services whatsoever.

 

[43 302]

Where is platform 5 going to be built? The only place I could imagine it being are at the north end of platform 1 by the car park. And it does seem like a bit of a waste considering the 172s going through from Nuneaton to Leamington now.

 

[The Planner]

Where is platform 5 going to be built? The only place I could imagine it being are at the north end of platform 1 by the car park. And it does seem like a bit of a waste considering the 172s going through from Nuneaton to Leamington now.

That is where it is going.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Where is platform 5 going to be built? The only place I could imagine it being are at the north end of platform 1 by the car park. And it does seem like a bit of a waste considering the 172s going through from Nuneaton to Leamington now.

the plan is for an additional Coventry to Nuneaton service providing 2 trains per hour

 

[nuneatonmark]

The original plan was to there to be up to THREE train per hour between Nuneaton and Coventry PLUS extra capability for Coventry Arena shuttles. This could only happen with a new bay platform at Coventry plus a turn back facility north of Coventry Arena. Four years ago, when the two new stations opened, the Coventry councillor in charge of the project said the new bay platform would be opened by the end of 2017! The Nuckle project has been completely mismanaged from the very start and now this! How on earth anyone can expect other re-openings and improvements to come on stream quickly when a project as relatively simple as this one takes years and years, I don't know. Although it's nice to have 2 new stations, the whole point of the investment was to allow a true metro style turn up and go service to be a real alternative to the very congested Nuneaton/Bedworth/Coventry corridor. If the bay platform does not go ahead it will also mean that the proposal to link Coventry and Leicester direct can't happen. What a shambles.

 

[The Planner]

The original plan was to there to be up to THREE train per hour between Nuneaton and Coventry PLUS extra capability for Coventry Arena shuttles. This could only happen with a new bay platform at Coventry plus a turn back facility north of Coventry Arena. Four years ago, when the two new stations opened, the Coventry councillor in charge of the project said the new bay platform would be opened by the end of 2017! The Nuckle project has been completely mismanaged from the very start and now this! How on earth anyone can expect other re-openings and improvements to come on stream quickly when a project as relatively simple as this one takes years and years, I don't know. Although it's nice to have 2 new stations, the whole point of the investment was to allow a true metro style turn up and go service to be a real alternative to the very congested Nuneaton/Bedworth/Coventry corridor. If the bay platform does not go ahead it will also mean that the proposal to link Coventry and Leicester direct can't happen. What a shambles.

Three got binned off very quickly as being impossible to do. The turn back is at Coventry Arena, it was never going to be north of there, the point work will be just south of the station, hence the longer platform on the up side.

 

[43 302]

Will platform 5 be accesible from the WCML for LNWR services to New Street starting at Coventry?

 

[The Planner]

Will platform 5 be accesible from the WCML for LNWR services to New Street starting at Coventry?

No, from Nuneaton only.

 

[DJ_K666]

Would it help connect Rugby to Leicester without the 30 minute wait at Nuneaton? RUG is only 10 minutes from COV so if that helps shorten the journey time that can only be a good thing, right? Only thing is, NWR seem to be just as much of a shower as Southern, so I don't hold out much hope.

 

[RT4038]

Would it help connect Rugby to Leicester without the 30 minute wait at Nuneaton? RUG is only 10 minutes from COV so if that helps shorten the journey time that can only be a good thing, right? Only thing is, NWR seem to be just as much of a shower as Southern, so I don't hold out much hope.

Not sure how it could help, as any train going from Coventry to Leicester would pass through Nuneaton and likely stop there, possibly even twice. This is unlikely to be any faster than travelling from Rugby to Nuneaton on a direct train, and changing for Leicester.

 

[DJ_K666]

Perhaps, although if it avoids the half hour (or more if the connection is late) plus two trains an hour are better than the one TPH from here. That said It would probably be quicker to drive, it's 18 miles away so really, an hour to do 18 miles is less than acceptable by train in my way of thinkin.

 

[keithkondakor]

I am a Warwickshire County opposition councillor and very unhappy about this fiasco. I have asked for the matter to be discussed at the communities overview and scrutiny committee on the 12th February.

Sadly the briefing note produces has been considered confidential and officers want the matter discussed in private.

This is the 2nd/3rd time the bay platform element of NUCKLE has been suspended. It was supposed to be in NUCKLE 1 which was approved and then found to be too complex.

The bay platform and track works were separated from the project to build 2 new stations into NUCKLE 1.2.

A big cost has always been a solution to allow the 3 times a WEEK Bedworth oil train to run with the twice an hour passenger service. The oil train had historic rights come out of 2 short sidings and be coupled up on the main tracks into a 20 wagon train. This is too long to be done in existing infrastructure elsewhere. I have said for years that it would be cheaper to buy out these rights to couple a 20 wagon train in the middle of the day than provide infrastructure. The trains were in fact 16 wagons and do not seem to have run for a some time.

It would be useful if anyone knows when they last ran and if they will ever run again. This could save millions from project costs.

This has been going on for over six years. I had a meeting about this in Feb 2014!





Attached are some files from 2012-14 about oil train mess.

 

[The Planner]

Doesn't matter. Unless the oil terminal closes then two things are likely happening. First, they are reserving their right to keep a connection, secondly, the freight operator with the rights to the flow will object to the Network Change unless they can still run the service they have rights to. Unless the Network Change is signed off (which it must be to be where we are) then you can't technically do the work.

 

[rogercov]

According to this thread the oil terminal closed nearly two years ago:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/question-bedworth-oil-terminal.163214/
can anyone confirm this?

 

[LesF]

According to this thread the oil terminal closed nearly two years ago:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/question-bedworth-oil-terminal.163214/
can anyone confirm this?

The Murco oil train to Bedworth has stopped running but the path has to be retained for a possible new operator. Until the oil depot is demolished (not on the cards) it's difficult to extinguish the historic right for the path.

 

[BantamMenace]

The Murco oil train to Bedworth has stopped running but the path has to be retained for a possible new operator. Until the oil depot is demolished (not on the cards) it's difficult to extinguish the historic right for the path.

Would acquisition and demolition be cheaper than an infrastructure alternative to retain the paths to a closed facility?

 

[The Planner]

Would acquisition and demolition be cheaper than an infrastructure alternative to retain the paths to a closed facility?

Probably not as the infrastructure alternative is just jigging about the sidings at Coventry, you would get some extra stabling capacity by not doing it but that is it.