Cornwall Metro funding approved

[zwk500]

Just to be clear, this is authorisation is for work that has actually already been completed, and means that there are no legal barriers to actually running a service that uses the infrastructure, correct?

This is the ORR approval for NR to use the specified infrastructure, which has been completed and inspected. It would still be subject to any NR and TOC acceptance or approval processes still outstanding. I have no information if there is anything further. There would then of course be the operational questions around stock and crew availability and timetabling the services in.

 

[alf]

Isn’t ORR having to sign off trackwork red tape gone too far?

Do they bar the use of new pointwork, a new crossover, a lengthened platform or a siding extended by a carriage length (as at Bedwyn) until they have visited & approved it.

ORR & its 370 staff plus consultant army did not exist under BR.
BR’s able civil engineers were considered up to the job.
It’s true the Railway Inspectorate signed off new lines but as far as I know they did not inspect reinstated loops or repositioned points.

 

[83G/84D]

Local briefings state that the commissioning of Tregoss loop and the additional platform at Newquay are deferred until later this year.
November or December are being mentioned as alternative dates but there is nothing definite yet.

 

[John R]

Isn’t ORR having to sign off trackwork red tape gone too far?

Do they bar the use of new pointwork, a new crossover, a lengthened platform or a siding extended by a carriage length (as at Bedwyn) until they have visited & approved it.

ORR & its 370 staff plus consultant army did not exist under BR.
BR’s able civil engineers were considered up to the job.
It’s true the Railway Inspectorate signed off new lines but as far as I know they did not inspect reinstated loops or repositioned points.

I made the same point some months ago and completely agree.

 

[apbj]

It seems some stations on the Par-Newquay branch will be omitted from the full Mid-Cornwall Metro service, which seems a bit odd. For sure, the intermediate stations are low-traffic at present (hardly surprising given the timetable) but I can't imagine there's much of a time penalty for stopping and they're all unmanned anyway so there's no cost implication.

Cllr Rogerson (Cornwall Council transport conv) confirmed: “It is correct that the hourly service to Newquay will not stop at every station. I think it’s more like a two-hourly service to those stations, which is not ideal. There are real opportunities to do better in the future, but for now, unfortunately, it will be an hourly service to Newquay and slightly less frequent for some of those clay country stations. It’s not what I want to see, but that’s where we’re starting.”

Cornwall Live/West Briton
Concerns have surfaced that the £56.8 million Mid Cornwall Metro rail project may not include regular stops at some stations along its route. Cornwall Council’s cabinet member for transport admitted the situation is “not ideal.”
The government-funded scheme aims to transform local travel by connecting communities with jobs, education, and leisure opportunities, while supporting a “cleaner, greener, fairer and more inclusive Cornwall.” However, it has emerged that stations in parts of the county most affected by deprivation may not receive consistent service.
The Mid Cornwall Metro promises an hourly coast-to-coast rail link between Newquay, Par, St Austell, Truro, Penryn, and Falmouth. The service between Newquay and Par will increase from every two hours to hourly starting in 2026. Direct services running the full route between Newquay and Falmouth will follow once the first phase, between Newquay and Par, is up and running.
During a Cornwall Council sustainable growth scrutiny committee meeting, Reform UK councillor Kevin Towill, representing Newquay Porth and Tretherras, raised concerns: “It was always envisaged from the beginning of the Mid Cornwall Metro project that the train would stop at the villages – including Roche and Bugle – but I’ve heard a rumour this might change. The train will now run straight through without stopping.” He sought clarification from Liberal Democrat transport cabinet member Dan Rogerson.
Cllr Rogerson confirmed: “It is correct that the hourly service to Newquay will not stop at every station. I think it’s more like a two-hourly service to those stations, which is not ideal. There are real opportunities to do better in the future, but for now, unfortunately, it will be an hourly service to Newquay and slightly less frequent for some of those clay country stations. It’s not what I want to see, but that’s where we’re starting.”

Rail project 'a total waste of money' as plan to skip stops is shared

'Just think how quickly they could get from Newquay to Falmouth without having to stop and without any passengers on board'

www.cornwalllive.com

 

[BrianW]

It seems some stations on the Par-Newquay branch will be omitted from the full Mid-Cornwall Metro service, which seems a bit odd. For sure, the intermediate stations are low-traffic at present (hardly surprising given the timetable) but I can't imagine there's much of a time penalty for stopping and they're all unmanned anyway so there's no cost implication.

Cllr Rogerson (Cornwall Council transport conv) confirmed: “It is correct that the hourly service to Newquay will not stop at every station. I think it’s more like a two-hourly service to those stations, which is not ideal. There are real opportunities to do better in the future, but for now, unfortunately, it will be an hourly service to Newquay and slightly less frequent for some of those clay country stations. It’s not what I want to see, but that’s where we’re starting.”

Why this? Surely the time penalty is minimal; esp set against the potential gain, however small?

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Presumably it is an attempt to speed up the overall journey times, as Newquay to Falmouth via Par and Truro isn't exactly direct, or because of pathing difficulties on the main-line?

It you live in the clay villages you are going to be getting the bus direct to St. Austell - the local stations are not terribly convenient.

 

[lachlan]

Is there any proposal to improve connectivity from Roche to Roche station?

It's only a 25 minute walk but there's no pavement. A shared use path parallel to the road, or even closing the road now that a bypass is in place, would make the station much more accesible.

 

[Geep]

Presumably it is an attempt to speed up the overall journey times, as Newquay to Falmouth via Par and Truro isn't exactly direct, or because of pathing difficulties on the main-line?

It you live in the clay villages you are going to be getting the bus direct to St. Austell - the local stations are not terribly convenient.

Is it actually going to be much different from the current pattern of services? At present, all the two-hourly services call at all stations on demand. Is that to be hourly, or will the request stops be eliminated, that is the question.

 

[sor]

Is there any proposal to improve connectivity from Roche to Roche station?

It's only a 25 minute walk but there's no pavement. A shared use path parallel to the road, or even closing the road now that a bypass is in place, would make the station much more accesible.

yes - https://letstalk.cornwall.gov.uk/roche-bugle-active-travel

as you say, completely necessary to make Roche station usable. Although the bypass will have taken a lot of traffic (especially HGVs!) out, it's still a bit of a deathwish trying to walk between the village and the station.

It you live in the clay villages you are going to be getting the bus direct to St. Austell - the local stations are not terribly convenient.

Well, chances are you'd probably drive to St Austell or Bodmin Parkway at present as the bus service is woeful and slow. I'd definitely consider getting the train if it becomes practical.

That said I think the council's proposal is probably reasonable as a starting point.

 

[apbj]

Yes I wonder if there has been some confusion over request stops versus fixed calls as I can't see how the timings would be affected.

It you live in the clay villages you are going to be getting the bus direct to St. Austell - the local stations are not terribly convenient.

This is true ... and unlike the Devon metro, which is timetabled with long stops in the loop platforms at Dawlish to avoid conflict with main line services, there is no such facility between Par and Truro. I can forsee this becoming an operational headache.

 

[MarkyT]

Yes I wonder if there has been some confusion over request stops versus fixed calls as I can't see how the timings would be affected.

This is true ... and unlike the Devon metro, which is timetabled with long stops in the loop platforms at Dawlish to avoid conflict with main line services, there is no such facility between Par and Truro. I can forsee this becoming an operational headache.

Between Par and Truro there is only one stop, at St Austell, and the linespeed is mostly only 65mph throughout. Hence the likely running time difference between the new local trains and other existing longer-distance traffic on the same stopping pattern will be minimal. That's not the case with Devon Metro where the frequently stopping locals take considerably longer than the limited stop expresses.

 

[The exile]

Between Par and Truro there is only one stop, at St Austell, and the linespeed is mostly only 65mph throughout. Hence the likely running time difference between the new local trains and other existing longer-distance traffic on the same stopping pattern will be minimal. That's not the case with Devon Metro where the frequently stopping locals take considerably longer than the limited stop expresses.

There will of course be additional conflicts caused at both Truro and Par because the branch services will now need to cross over in one direction, but that shouldn’t have the same knock-on effects as all those Devon stops.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The initial hourly service will only be between Newquay and Par and v.v. anyway - through running to Falmouth will be in 2027. Perhaps GWR have decided some of the intermediate stops are not commercially worthwhile every hour? Quintrell Downs is a stop, anyway, because of the level crossing.

 

[Farigiraf]

I think those articles are exaggerating it a bit (I know Cornwall Live is a Reach site so we should be glad it's at least not written by AI yet.)
Even if Luxulyan, Roche, Bugle and St Columb Road remain 2-hourly, it will still be a considerable time saving if going to St Austell or Truro, since wait times at Par for connections are rarely short. Even more of a time saving if heading to Falmouth or Penryn. This is assuming that the Falmouth-Newquay will have these stations as request stops available every 2-hours, instead of a separate Newquay-Par stopper. The plan is for Newquay services to be taken over by an hourly service from Truro and later Falmouth, not running alongside a 2-hourly stopper. Either way it's clickbait to say the train won't ever be stopping at the request stops.

On the other hand, I do think it would still be better for all services to call at the smaller stops anyway. For one, they would be request stops, so most of the time won't be stopping, and the time savings of slowly passing a station are small compared to passing at speed. Also, I'd understand skipping the smaller stations if it were an increase from 1tph to 2tph (hence why not stopping at Perranwell on both Falmouth trains also makes sense) as that would be slight overprovision, but these are infrequent services, and going from 0.5tph to 1tph is essentially going from relatively useless to usable.

 

[I'm here now]

I think those articles are exaggerating it a bit (I know Cornwall Live is a Reach site so we should be glad it's at least not written by AI yet.)
Even if Luxulyan, Roche, Bugle and St Columb Road remain 2-hourly, it will still be a considerable time saving if going to St Austell or Truro, since wait times at Par for connections are rarely short. Even more of a time saving if heading to Falmouth or Penryn. This is assuming that the Falmouth-Newquay will have these stations as request stops available every 2-hours, instead of a separate Newquay-Par stopper. The plan is for Newquay services to be taken over by an hourly service from Truro and later Falmouth, not running alongside a 2-hourly stopper. Either way it's clickbait to say the train won't ever be stopping at the request stops.

On the other hand, I do think it would still be better for all services to call at the smaller stops anyway. For one, they would be request stops, so most of the time won't be stopping, and the time savings of slowly passing a station are small compared to passing at speed. Also, I'd understand skipping the smaller stations if it were an increase from 1tph to 2tph (hence why not stopping at Perranwell on both Falmouth trains also makes sense) as that would be slight overprovision, but these are infrequent services, and going from 0.5tph to 1tph is essentially going from relatively useless to usable.

Perranwell is bizarre - request stops should add needless complexity. The Newquay line is dead slow anyway so it wouldn’t be that much time saved.

 

[Farigiraf]

Perranwell is bizarre - request stops should add needless complexity.

The system of request stops would be far less complex if the UK decided to enter the 21st century in this aspect and install some buttons at stations/on trains instead of waving your hand or asking a conductor on a network with less and less common onboard staff. ScotRail already trialled this on the Far North Line and I can't see a problem with it really.
I think the skip/stopping of Perranwell is to do with timings of passing the other train at Penryn - otherwise it would be far easier to just call both trains at the station. Sure, you'd only get an average of about 1-2 people boarding per train but it simplifies the timetable of the branch line.

The Newquay line is dead slow anyway so it wouldn’t be that much time saved.

I think most people on this thread agree with this. If Newquay desperately requires faster services then you could run more services from the Plymouth direction (such as more IETs from London, or an entirely new Plymouth-Newquay) or even a faster express bus service to St Austell and/or Truro.

 

[Geep]

The system of request stops would be far less complex if the UK decided to enter the 21st century in this aspect and install some buttons at stations/on trains instead of waving your hand or asking a conductor on a network with less and less common onboard staff. ScotRail already trialled this on the Far North Line and I can't see a problem with it really.
I think the skip/stopping of Perranwell is to do with timings of passing the other train at Penryn - otherwise it would be far easier to just call both trains at the station. Sure, you'd only get an average of about 1-2 people boarding per train but it simplifies the timetable of the branch line.

I think most people on this thread agree with this. If Newquay desperately requires faster services then you could run more services from the Plymouth direction (such as more IETs from London, or an entirely new Plymouth-Newquay) or even a faster express bus service to St Austell and/or Truro.

The current working timetable shows that on Mondays to Fridays, the service is two hourly throughout from May to December. On Saturdays from May to 13 September, the service was two hourly, but with a couple of gaps to permit the through expresses to run.

However, on Saturdays from 20th September, the timetable now shows an hourly pattern on the branch! The previous two hourly services continue to run in the same pattern so far as I can see, with request stops at Luxulyan, Bugle, Roche and St Columb Road, together with the stop at Quintrell Downs. There are now alternate hour trains having a request stop only at St Columb Road, plus the stop at Quintrell Downs. The same pattern applies in the other direction.

Timings are as follows:

Par to Newquay with five request stops and Quintrell Downs run at xx16 from Par, due Newquay at xx04, a standard time of 48 mins. The alternate hour services, with only one request and one firm stop, also run at xx16 from Par, with arrival at Newquay at xx59, a standard time of 43 mins, a saving of 5 mins.

Newquay to Par with five request stops plus Quintrell Downs run at xx20 from Newquay, and arrive Par at xx08, again a standard time of 48 mins. However, the alternate hour 'semi-fasts' leave at xx22, arriving Par usually at xx10, which in fact shows no difference in journey time to the apparently slower services. There is indeed one 'semi-fast' service at 1222 which actually takes 50 mins to Par for some unaccountable reason.

There are minimal changes (if any) on Sundays, with the usual request stops.

So, a doubling of the service on Saturdays, in a pattern which is presumably likely to be the future weekday format when the full metro service is introduced.

 

[Express380]

The plan is for Newquay services to be taken over by an hourly service from Truro and later Falmouth, not running alongside a 2-hourly stopper.

Interesting Truro starts that's surprising thought it would be Par-Newquay hourly then straight into the full route.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The current working timetable shows that on Mondays to Fridays, the service is two hourly throughout from May to December. On Saturdays from May to 13 September, the service was two hourly, but with a couple of gaps to permit the through expresses to run.

However, on Saturdays from 20th September, the timetable now shows an hourly pattern on the branch! The previous two hourly services continue to run in the same pattern so far as I can see, with request stops at Luxulyan, Bugle, Roche and St Columb Road, together with the stop at Quintrell Downs. There are now alternate hour trains having a request stop only at St Columb Road, plus the stop at Quintrell Downs. The same pattern applies in the other direction.

Timings are as follows:

Par to Newquay with five request stops and Quintrell Downs run at xx16 from Par, due Newquay at xx04, a standard time of 48 mins. The alternate hour services, with only one request and one firm stop, also run at xx16 from Par, with arrival at Newquay at xx59, a standard time of 43 mins, a saving of 5 mins.

Newquay to Par with five request stops plus Quintrell Downs run at xx20 from Newquay, and arrive Par at xx08, again a standard time of 48 mins. However, the alternate hour 'semi-fasts' leave at xx22, arriving Par usually at xx10, which in fact shows no difference in journey time to the apparently slower services. There is indeed one 'semi-fast' service at 1222 which actually takes 50 mins to Par for some unaccountable reason.

There are minimal changes (if any) on Sundays, with the usual request stops.

So, a doubling of the service on Saturdays, in a pattern which is presumably likely to be the future weekday format when the full metro service is introduced.

Hmm. St. Columb Road is one of the lesser used stations so all very odd - it shouldn't be though as it is reasonably convenient for Indian Queens and Fraddon so maybe that is the thinking. It is one of those stations that should appear in the 'Rename' thread!

 

[Geep]

Not so surprising as you might think, when you look at the data for Newquay line intermediate stations. If you compare Paddington destinations on the attached matrix of ORR estimated journeys, St Columb Road has by far the greatest journeys, 104 annually compared with 33, 26 or 13 from other intermediate stations, and is also near the top for Plymouth. Doubtless convenient for 'near Newquay' passengers, I presume.

Note the data is normalised, so that it provides exactly half the total number of journeys in both directions, or alternatively put the total number of journeys in both directions between the two locations is double that shown.

 

[Bald Rick]

I can't imagine there's much of a time penalty for stopping and they're all unmanned anyway so there's no cost implication.

Why this? Surely the time penalty is minimal; esp set against the potential gain, however small?

In principle, journey time matters. Especially when the competiton is usually better. Revenue is king in such matters.

There is also a direct cost of stopping (braking and acceleration costs fuel and brake pads) which builds up over time. It might only be (say) £10 a stop, but 5 stops, evey hour, 16 hours a day, two ways, 300+ days a year…

 

[Zomboid]

Not so surprising as you might think, when you look at the data for Newquay line intermediate stations. If you compare Paddington destinations on the attached matrix of ORR estimated journeys, St Columb Road has by far the greatest journeys, 104 annually compared with 33, 26 or 13 from other intermediate stations, and is also near the top for Plymouth. Doubtless convenient for 'near Newquay' passengers, I presume.

Note the data is normalised, so that it provides exactly half the total number of journeys in both directions, or alternatively put the total number of journeys in both directions between the two locations is double that shown.

Looking at those totals, total usage seems to be been 4 and 9 passengers going *anywhere* per day. (Or should that be 8 & 18?)
A 2 hourly service is pretty extravagant for that kind of usage, and definitely doesn't point towards a desperate need to increase frequency.

 

[BayPaul]

I think it's great news that there will be limited calls at the villages en-route. A non-stop train ought to be at least 10 minutes faster than one calling at all 5 halts, and none of them see more than 20 passengers per day. Far better to achieve a really decent journey time and frequency to Newquay which desperately needs it, rather than mucking around with fairly pointless stops in the middle of nowhere.

 

[jamieh27]

I think it's great news that there will be limited calls at the villages en-route. A non-stop train ought to be at least 10 minutes faster than one calling at all 5 halts, and none of them see more than 20 passengers per day. Far better to achieve a really decent journey time and frequency to Newquay which desperately needs it, rather than mucking around with fairly pointless stops in the middle of nowhere.

Looks like some stations might get hourly stop and some won't, I hope St. Columb Road gets hourly stop as its near to Kingsley village.

 

[BrianW]

In principle, journey time matters. Especially when the competiton is usually better. Revenue os king in such matters.

There is also a direct cost of stopping (braking and acceleration costs fuel and brake pads) which builds up over time. It might only be (say) £10 a stop, but 5 stops, evey hour, 16 hours a day, two ways, 300+ days a year…

Thank you. Might not an increased frequency of call encourage greater useage? I appreciate it's a balance. Is there a 'social' case- greater connectivity, less isolation, travel to work possibilities, ...? Is there a minimum size of 'local community' to warrant such and such a service frequency? I imagine a 'driver' for the Cornwall 'Metro' was some kind of 'social good'? I recognize that service patterns can be adapted over time. Request stops?

 

[BayPaul]

Thank you. Might not an increased frequency of call encourage greater useage? I appreciate it's a balance. Is there a 'social' case- greater connectivity, less isolation, travel to work possibilities, ...? Is there a minimum size of 'local community' to warrant such and such a service frequency? I imagine a 'driver' for the Cornwall 'Metro' was some kind of 'social good'? I recognize that service patterns can be adapted over time. Request stops?

Yes it probably would, but at the expense of usage in Newquay.

What is better, doubling numbers at a country halt from 20 a day to 40 a day, or for Newquay to go from its current 150,000 a year to the half million plus it should be delivering. Even with the improvements, the service to Newquay is still too slow, and every minute saved will have a significant impact on that number.

 

[PR102]

It seems some stations on the Par-Newquay branch will be omitted from the full Mid-Cornwall Metro service, which seems a bit odd. For sure, the intermediate stations are low-traffic at present (hardly surprising given the timetable) but I can't imagine there's much of a time penalty for stopping and they're all unmanned anyway so there's no cost implication.

Cllr Rogerson (Cornwall Council transport conv) confirmed: “It is correct that the hourly service to Newquay will not stop at every station. I think it’s more like a two-hourly service to those stations, which is not ideal. There are real opportunities to do better in the future, but for now, unfortunately, it will be an hourly service to Newquay and slightly less frequent for some of those clay country stations. It’s not what I want to see, but that’s where we’re starting.”

It might got something to do with rolling stock and driver training - it's all very well having infrastructure to 'support' an hourly service, but will we have enough DMU's to actually run and keep up with serving both branches whilst connecting via St.Austell? Cl.175 training is now underway, but will there be enough units and drivers signed off ready to go, to support this service without detriment to the main line services?

As far as any arguments about 'existing usage being low' with regard to the intermediate stations on the Newquay line, I believe in the adage 'build it and they will come', i.e if the service is regular and reliable enough, then passenger usage will grow. Since the stations do not get a stopping service at all in the summer, its no wonder hardly anyone uses the trains at the moment. And since the train operation simply swaps out the main line train for the branch when it is required to run long formations in the summer, it suggests that the purse strings will be very tight indeed with regards to having any (try not to laugh) 'spare units' loitering around.

 

[Zomboid]

Build it and they will come - yes, but who? There's not much of a population in the area, and the few people there are will be getting a 2 hourly year round service (one of the justifications for the work was not having to reduce the local service to allow for long distance seasonal traffic).

That's pretty good for those kinds of station, and if traffic booms then more trains can call in future. But it's right to focus on Newquay as the main source & sink of traffic on the line.

 

[PR102]

Build it and they will come - yes, but who? There's not much of a population in the area, and the few people there are will be getting a 2 hourly year round service (one of the justifications for the work was not having to reduce the local service to allow for long distance seasonal traffic).

That's pretty good for those kinds of station, and if traffic booms then more trains can call in future. But it's right to focus on Newquay as the main source & sink of traffic on the line.

I never meant to suggest taking focus off Newquay in any way. If the new service of 2-hourly is going to be all year round without the reduction in the summer as is current, then I agree it is a good starting point; the demand (if its there) will grow from that, precisely because it will be all year round. I would suggest a next step would be to develop a viable park-and-ride out of one of the stations nearer Newquay, near to the A30...possibly St. Columb Road, which used to be quite a large station in its time, has room for a loop and indeed has a nearby population (along the old A30) that is perhaps not as sparse as some. Have a bus connection from there to Newquay airport, and it could become viable.