More News On Ricoh Train Station (2 Viewers)

skybluetony176 · Aug 25, 2015

chiefdave said:
Nobody has said the council run the rail network. What has been said is that public money has been given to this scheme on the basis of a level of service which will now not be provided. Would you not expect there to be some sort of safeguard where public money is involved?

Also if you actually read the article the closure of the station on matchdays is nothing to do with Network Rail or London Midland, it is down to the SAG which is led by the council.

SAG's are actually coordinated by the LA AND The Emergency Services. No ones blaming the emergency services though. The clue is also in the acronym, ADVISORY. They make recommendations based on ALL the facts. As I've already pointed out the issue isn't with the station, it's the trains servicing the station. The SAG or any of the parties who coordinate it are not responsible for the rolling stock. That responsibility lies with the rail operators. All the SAG have advised is that peak capacity at the Ricoh stadium can't be safely accommodated with the current operation. The train operators then have a decision to make. Invest to meet peak times capacity or turn business away. They and they alone have chosen to do the latter at this moment in time.

chiefdave · Aug 25, 2015

fernandopartridge said:
In fairness I don't blame the SAG, huge crowds building up for a maximum of 75 (150 in either direction) spaces on a train is potentially unsafe.

But the original proposal, when requests for public money were being made, had capacity for close to 2.5K passengers an hour. Now we're told maximum of 75 - that's a pretty big difference so what has happened there?

If London Midland had paid to build the station and were saying it is low capacity and not for matchday use then that would be one thing but its been paid for with public money, including a crowd control system for large crowds and will now be shut at the time most people would want to use it!

skybluetony176 · Aug 25, 2015

fernandopartridge said:
You're right. I think most of the network that London Midland use is electrified and therefore they don't have much diesel stock. The NUCKLE line is supposed to electrified at some point but can't see it happening under the current government.

Perhaps a few of the Nuneaton based posters can write to their local Tory MP. Mind, the same could be done for anybody based in Cov too who can write to the Labour ones.

Leamington/Warwick and Rugby MP's too. In fact anyone from the local area with an interest in using the station at the Ricoh on a regular basis should be writing to there MP I would say. I'll be emailing Mark Pawsey myself later.

fernandopartridge · Aug 25, 2015

wingy said:
Let's give Pete Waterman a call.
Sure he could find us something.talking of him I wonder If he was st Walsall on Saturday.

Waterman was always good with (rolling) Stock eh

chiefdave · Aug 25, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
SAG's are actually coordinated by the LA AND The Emergency Services.

As I said it is led by the council, more specifically Building Control.

From the CCC website:

The Safety Advisory GroupBuilding Control works to protect public safety and co-ordinates the Safety Advisory Group which includes other agencies

Maybe the Telegraph could ask on what basis the SAG have made this decision. I can't see that it would impede access for fire or ambulance crews so that leaves the council, police and St Johns (an unlikely candidate I would have thought).

Whoever has blocked it there should be questions asked as to why public money was allocated to a project with seemingly no security on what the project would deliver or mechanism to reclaim the public money in the event the project failed to deliver.

Ashdown · Aug 25, 2015

You couldn't make it up really could you, so typical of everything that slightly affects our blighted and jinxed football club. It makes a mockery of the whole project and the existing spend. It will end up servicing a handful of pensioners doddering on and off it to go shopping.

skybluetony176 · Aug 25, 2015

chiefdave said:
As I said it is led by the council, more specifically Building Control.

From the CCC website:

Maybe the Telegraph could ask on what basis the SAG have made this decision. I can't see that it would impede access for fire or ambulance crews so that leaves the council, police and St Johns (an unlikely candidate I would have thought).

Whoever has blocked it there should be questions asked as to why public money was allocated to a project with seemingly no security on what the project would deliver or mechanism to reclaim the public money in the event the project failed to deliver.

The Safety ADVISORY Group hasn't made any decision, they've ADVISED. Like I said, the clue is in the name.

It's then upto the people they are advising to decide what to do with that advice. On this occasion it's pretty clear that the rail operators don't want to invest in rolling stock to meet demand. Not the SAG or anyone conected to it's fault.

Like FP has pointed out the line is earmarked for electrification in the future. Perhaps the rail operators are waiting for this to happen before investing in the rolling stock.

fernandopartridge · Aug 25, 2015

Ashdown said:
You couldn't make it up really could you, so typical of everything that slightly affects our blighted and jinxed football club. It makes a mockery of the whole project and the existing spend. It will end up servicing a handful of pensioners doddering on and off it to go shopping.

Who don't actually pay either!

wingy · Aug 25, 2015

fernandopartridge said:
Waterman was always good with (rolling) Stock eh

Hehe my sides are Aekin.
What a farce It's become. Tend to agree with your view on this, the Private sector don't see a return here or many other towns across the country.
Now If It was London centric?

Specs WT-R75 · Aug 25, 2015

They had one job... one job!

ccfc92 · Aug 25, 2015

fernandopartridge said:
In fairness I don't blame the SAG, huge crowds building up for a maximum of 75 (150 in either direction) spaces on a train is potentially unsafe.

I agree. It just takes a surge of people, and people could fall onto the tracks. Plus there will be arguments about who queued for the train etc...

Why they didn't plan for this and put a regular 5-6 carriage train every 15 mins or so on match day is beyond me.

fernandopartridge · Aug 25, 2015

Interesting Network Rail's consultation; for whatever reason London Midland were seeking compensation off the back of the new stations.....

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...lands\NCG12014LNW620 NUCKLE Phase 1 Package 1

Sbarcher · Aug 25, 2015

I think if some of the Nationals, or Private Eye picked this up they will have a field day. And rightly too, main basis was to alleviate traffic problems but looks like we have a major white elephant on our hands. Obviously following Jumbo on the City badge.......

fernandopartridge · Aug 25, 2015

Another thread from an enthusiasts forum: 2017 or 2019 mentioned as dates when some spare rolling stock / electrification might happen.

fernandopartridge · Aug 25, 2015

Another thread from an enthusiasts forum: 2017 or 2019 mentioned as dates when some spare rolling stock / electrification might happen.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=94176&page=2

These were always known issues yet the PR machine rolled on (unlike the trains)...

M&B Stand · Aug 25, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
Leamington/Warwick and Rugby MP's too. In fact anyone from the local area with an interest in using the station at the Ricoh on a regular basis should be writing to there MP I would say. I'll be emailing Mark Pawsey myself later.

You'd imagine the stadium owners and possibly the football club would already be lobbying to sort this out.

How much would it cost to electrify?
Is there finance to pay for it?
How long will it take?

At least we've got a platform to build on.
Soz!

chiefdave · Aug 25, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
The Safety ADVISORY Group hasn't made any decision, they've ADVISED. Like I said, the clue is in the name.

Concerns about overcrowding at the unmanned station have led the independent stadium Safety Advisory Group to order the one-hour closure after major events, including sports fixtures and concerts.

ccfc92 said:
Why they didn't plan for this and put a regular 5-6 carriage train every 15 mins or so on match day is beyond me.

The original plan had 2 trains an hour as the regular service, that service was to be extended to 3 carriages on event days with an additional shuttle service between Coventry and Ricoh stations running 2 trains per hour of 6 carriages each. At some point that's been massively scaled back.

rupert_bear · Aug 25, 2015

Did anyone really expect anything different, even when this station was first mentioned years ago there was never going to be train after train coming from Cov station to the Ricoh even with a Ricoh full house. What should happen is the ccc relax the ridiculous match day parking restrictions which i believe affect attendances as much as anything. These restrictions stretch as far back as Bell Green and into Keresley meaning everyone living in those areas need parking permits for match days and have to PAY now for visitor permits or risk a parking ticket for football or rugby days. A license to print money.

Ashdown · Aug 25, 2015

chiefdave said:
The original plan had 2 trains an hour as the regular service, that service was to be extended to 3 carriages on event days with an additional shuttle service between Coventry and Ricoh stations running 2 trains per hour of 6 carriages each. At some point that's been massively scaled back.

Because as with many things these days, some cunty accountant has looked at his abacus all too late and decided that there is no guarantee of any profit and voila ! The world is being run now by these bean counters lets be honest !

Otis · Aug 25, 2015

At least there IS a station by the ground.

For the new stadium we will all have to get there by boat.

skybluetony176 · Aug 25, 2015

chiefdave said:
The original plan had 2 trains an hour as the regular service, that service was to be extended to 3 carriages on event days with an additional shuttle service between Coventry and Ricoh stations running 2 trains per hour of 6 carriages each. At some point that's been massively scaled back.

From the government website about SAG:-

"SAGs provide a forum for discussing and advising on public safety at an event. They aim to help organisers with the planning, and management of an event and to encourage cooperation and coordination between all relevant agencies. They are non-statutory bodies and so do not have legal powers or responsibilities, and are not empowered to approve or prohibit events from taking place. Event organisers and others involved in the running of an event, retain the principal legal duties for ensuring public safety."

Any suggestion in the CT that the SAG have took this decision is either overstated or just completely wrong.

hutch1972 · Aug 25, 2015

so in reality it is a total waste of space . All the waiting for what is effectively a travel option for people who work there.

McLovin87 · Aug 25, 2015

Otis said:
At least there IS a station by the ground.

For the new stadium we will all have to get there by boat.

Why's that Otis, is Cloud Cuckoo Land surrounded by water?

chiefdave · Aug 25, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
From the government website about SAG:-

"SAGs provide a forum for discussing and advising on public safety at an event. They aim to help organisers with the planning, and management of an event and to encourage cooperation and coordination between all relevant agencies. They are non-statutory bodies and so do not have legal powers or responsibilities, and are not empowered to approve or prohibit events from taking place. Event organisers and others involved in the running of an event, retain the principal legal duties for ensuring public safety."

Any suggestion in the CT that the SAG have took this decision is either overstated or just completely wrong.

Well in that case I look forward to away fans being moved much closer to the home fans as we have been repeatedly told it is the SAG that have blocked that happening.

Otis · Aug 25, 2015

McLovin87 said:
Why's that Otis, is Cloud Cuckoo Land surrounded by water?

I forgot to add, it's a banana boat and there is only one every fortnight. Oh and it's not in Cloud Cuckoo Land, it's somewhere in the middle of the Bermuda Triangle.

RegTheDonk · Aug 25, 2015

chiefdave said:
From the original proposal, which was the basis for funding being awarded:

Trouble is chief it's a proposal. Council should have had a contract from the operator before putting money in.

chiefdave · Aug 25, 2015

RegTheDonk said:
Trouble is chief it's a proposal. Council should have had a contract from the operator before putting money in.

Exactly, at the very least there should be a mechanism for the grant to be revoked and public money returned if certain key services aren't delivered.

Kingokings204 · Aug 25, 2015

Can't this be sorted with a deal struck surely? John Daziel has had his say and it's a joke he agrees with us. He is the match day announcer man.

A train station for 75 passengers an hour. At a 32k seater stadium. 2 teams play there. Big shopping area also. Cost around 10mil to build.

You couldn't make it up!

Otis · Aug 25, 2015

Kingokings204 said:
Can't this be sorted with a deal struck surely? John Daziel has had his say and it's a joke he agrees with us. He is the match day announcer man.

A train station for 75 passengers an hour. At a 32k seater stadium. 2 teams play there. Big shopping area also. Cost around 10mil to build.

You couldn't make it.

I'm sure they are probably already on to it as we speak, but I still whizzed a couple of emails off to the national press just to make sure anyway.

This will definitely be in the papers tomorrow without any shadow of a doubt.

Sky Blue Harry H · Aug 25, 2015

Otis said:
I'm sure they are probably already on to it as we speak, but I still whizzed a couple of emails off to the national press just to make sure anyway.

This will definitely be in the papers tomorrow without any shadow of a doubt.

It's not what you know, it's who you know, eh Otis (are you one of those masons?)

Otis · Aug 25, 2015

Sky Blue Harry H said:
It's not what you know, it's who you know, eh Otis (are you one of those masons?)

Illuminati my friend, illuminati!

chiefdave · Aug 25, 2015

Don't worry, Cllr Maton is on the case. Just to point out these are actual quotes and not something I've made up for a cheap laugh.

Having a station there allows the train operators to respond to that demand at some point

The route was about being able to move people into the city centre and for people to access the shopping facilities at the Ricoh Arena

and my personal favourite

I’m confident, in a period of time I can’t specify, there will be a solution

M&B Stand · Aug 25, 2015

chiefdave said:
Don't worry, Cllr Maton is on the case. Just to point out these are actual quotes and not something I've made up for a cheap laugh.

and my personal favourite

Class. Now It was built for Tesco!

Otis · Aug 25, 2015

chiefdave said:
Don't worry, Cllr Maton is on the case. Just to point out these are actual quotes and not something I've made up for a cheap laugh.

and my personal favourite

And you're trying to tell me that he is a councillor representing the people of Coventry?

No wonder we're fooked.

chiefdave · Aug 25, 2015

M&B Stand said:
Class. Now It was built for Tesco!

Yes, strange this was never mentioned before. In fact Cllr McNicholas who is deputy cabinet member for transport previously said:

“I am sure it will be well used by local people and on match days – rugby and football – it will provide an additional way for fans to get to games.”

More News On Ricoh Train Station (2 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency