Great Western Coffee Shop

Following last month's announcement on Evergreen 3, Chiltern Chairman
Adrian Shooter is asking Modern Railways readers what Evergreen 4
should provide. Roger Ford likes the idea of a 4 track 125mph
electrified railway but reckons that this will have to wait for
Evergreen 5 (and a potential franchise extension to 2026, according to
the article!) !

Comments to Roger Ford at:  Evergreen4@alycidon.com

How about the push that's required to finally get East-West Rail off of the ground...?  What a nice little network Chiltern would have if they could add Oxford/Aylesbury to Milton Keynes and Bedford to their portfolio.

Like IndustryInsider idea.

Add Bourne End to Wycombe to it as well, East West being relatively cheap from Bicester to Milton Keynes. Would also probably require double tracking (or a loop) betwen Risborough and Aylesbury and double track to Aylesbury Parkway and another loop from there to the East West at Quainton Road?

Then Chiltern would have links to all the major towns of Bucks and East Berks and link its Birmingham line with an extra link to the GWML and with the WCML and MML.

Bedford Cambridge is probably for later I go with electrification before that.

I think 4 tracking in the B'ham area (Tyseley to Dorridge) should be next, to allow for 100 mph running without the LM stoppers getting in the way. This would shorten XC journeys as well. Then a line to Milton Keynes and up the Great Central to a M6/M1 parkway near Rugby.

Yes, that would certainly have it's merits as it's a notorious section for delays - mind you, most routes in the West Midlands are!  I think XC want to route more of their trains via Coventry in the future though?

Interestingly enough the orignal four tracking south of Tyesly was carried out in the 30s as a job creation scheme. There is a craking picture of an overbridge being tested by 4 Kings couped together and running very fast over the new bridge. Unfortunately reinstating the four tracks would result in the loss of parking, as the car parks at several stations are on the trackbed of the removed rails.

We are currently in a recession a good time to start.

Although carparking would be lost I think it would be a small price to pay. If the route was quadrupled then all XC services could be routed that way with Chiltern or LM taking over the Leam-Cov section (which itself should be doubled).

A scheme that I'd love to see and think could be viable would be the building of a Warwick University branch from the Leam - Cov line. The branch would use part of the old Kenilworth - Berkswell line which could be reinstated in full to help keep freight off the main Cov - Brum route. Having been a student at Warwick I know the journey from both Leam and Cov to the campus can be a long and frustrating one by bus taking upto an hour in the peak for a journey that could take 10 mins by train.

I don't think XC would be keen to take up that offer!  As I mentioned I think it's their ambition to route more trains via Coventry as it has significant revenue opportunities within its 300000 residents and a fairly centrally located station.  Birmingham International is also a nice juicy carrot!

The main limitation was the single track between Leamington and Coventry with just the passing loop at Kenilworth, but now the double track has been extended a few miles south of Coventry towards Kenilworth that's not quite so much of a problem.  Kenilworth itself has of course had a proposed station on the cards for many years, but suffered (like Kidlington has) with not having a suitable local service to justify it, as despite a population of 20000, that's not really enough to warrant an extra stop in the XC services that pass by.

If the track was fully redoubled, it might be a worthwhile idea to look at a station at Kenilworth and an hourly Leamington to Coventy service by extending the roughly hourly diesel service from Nuneaton and Bedworth through Coventry and then on to Kenilworth and Leamington Spa, but as I said I doubt very much that sort of service would stop XC from wanting to serve Coventry on at least an hourly basis.

It appears that Captain Deltic's Chiltern Chairman Challenge may be
connected to further upgrade proposals from Chiltern:

This from TransportXtra 25 February:

'Delivering the Evergreen III project will see Chiltern^s franchise
extended from its current guarantee of 12.5 years to run for its full
20-year term, but Shooter said that he was continuing to work up
further investment projects for the network which he expected to
reveal shortly.'

I didn't realise at the time, but there are some fairly advanced plans to do just that!  Phase 1 improves the Nuneaton to Coventry link with two new stations, platform lengthening and an additional bay platform at Coventry.  Phase 2 sees a station built at Kenilworth and the trains extending to Leamington Spa as I suggest above.

The scheme is known as NUCKLE (Nuneaton, Coventry, Kenilworth, and Leamington) and you can read more about it here: http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/corporate/committe.nsf/f97183b3a13d475d80256f7000397ba1/89117f6f2d94a309802576dc003d3464/$FILE/08%20Nuneaton-Coventry-Kenilworth-Leamington%20%28NUCKLE%29%20Rail%20Line%20Upgrade.pdf (http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/corporate/committe.nsf/f97183b3a13d475d80256f7000397ba1/89117f6f2d94a309802576dc003d3464/$FILE/08%20Nuneaton-Coventry-Kenilworth-Leamington%20%28NUCKLE%29%20Rail%20Line%20Upgrade.pdf)

Does NUCKLE include electrifying Nuneaton Coventry as an in fill?

If it's intended to be a through service to Leamington then Coventry Leamington would also neeed wires. Which gives an excuse to wire back to Snow Hill.

I suspect there's no way wiring is included in those costs. It would be around another ^1m per mile on top - unless NR have discovered a really cheap way of wiring since I read up on the subject in the electrification RUS.

[For accuracy the figures used in their costings are given as ^500k - ^650k per single track km - ^1m per mile is towards the high end of that.]

However the electrification RUS does already include Leamington - Coventry electrification under the XC route strategy, and Coventry Nuneaton under Freight schemes...

Paul

Good news for those NUCKLE fans out there:

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/2011/02/05/coventry-to-nuneaton-train-service-stopping-at-ricoh-gets-amber-light-from-government-92746-28116598/ (http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/2011/02/05/coventry-to-nuneaton-train-service-stopping-at-ricoh-gets-amber-light-from-government-92746-28116598/)

A full list of schemes that have made it into the 'amber light' category that the Coverntry Telegraph talks about can be found here:

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/clientmicrosite/Content/Detail.aspx?ClientId=202&NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=417803&SubjectId=36 (http://nds.coi.gov.uk/clientmicrosite/Content/Detail.aspx?ClientId=202&NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=417803&SubjectId=36)

One of the odd features of the 'NUCKLE' proposals is that on the one hand they are proposing a 'Nuneaton bay' on the up side at Coventry, so that a higher frequency can be operated without affecting the through platforms; but they then go on to suggest running through to Leamington via Kenilworth - which would make their new bay platform redundant, and lead to extra conflicting moves at Coventry, with additional trains crossing the whole layout.

I have an idea that through services won't happen, and if Kenilworth is ever opened it'll be a XC call, and then there'll be the obvious issues with capacity on the trains.

Paul

To work properly Nuckle needs at least Coventry Nuneaton to be electrified.

You can then run a Crewe Coventry via Trent Valley stopper via Bedworth and and use the Nuneaton bay at Coventry. You could then give a regular service to Norton Bridge and Polesworth.

If Coventry Leamington was added then extend the Birmingham stoppers to Leamington to serve Kenilworth although they would have to cross at Coventry.

Ideally Nuneaton Birmingham NS (Direct and via Camp Hill Kings Norton) and Walsall Rugely should also be electrified to add to diversionary possibilities and to make most of the ex LNW and Midland suburban services electric.

That leaves the ex GW rouutes still diesel.

How would your proposed Crewe - Coventry get over the WCML fasts at Nuneaton?  I think there was an underpass but it's been taken out of use as part of WCRM...  Typical  ::)

However extending the present Birmingham - Coventry stoppers through to Leamington sounds straightforward, and it wouldn't increase conflicts though?  They must already cross the down fast platform line, (sorry I don't know the platform numbers), as they sit in the down slow platform during their layover between services. But they already have a cunning plan to extend them all to Northampton - it's going through the track access procedures at the moment for a May 2011 start.  Nothing to stop it changing again in future though.  And last but not least they used to be pretty keen on running the XC Reading - Newcastles via Coventry - causing even more congestion...

Paul