Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[yorksrob]

The route via Okehampton would be nearly useless for diversions unless it was largely or completely double track.
Such a route would be stupendously expensive.

You could get a lot of flood defences at Dawlish for that much money.

Where do you get that idea from ? Salisbury to Exeter is almost entirely single track and is regularly used for diversions. Even when the trains themselves aren‘t diverted, the service trains on that route can still provide a lifeline to Exeter.

 

[47802]

where do you get that idea from ? Salisbury to exeter is almost entirely single track and is regularly used for diversions. Even when the trains themselves aren‘t diverted, the service trains on that route can still provide a lifeline to exeter.

lets get this 100% clear okehampton does not address the problem

 

[TheKnightWho]

lets get this 100% clear okehampton does not address the problem

Making a statement does not answer the question. I'm curious as to why you think there can't be (shock and horror) two routes in the south-west.

The Okehampton route would be a lot less rural than many lines we have now, and whilst £250m might sound like a large number, I think we all know that it really isn't that much when it comes to rail budgets.

 

[yorksrob]

lets get this 100% clear okehampton does not address the problem

Yes it does.

The Dawlish route is fine 99% of the time, however, it does have issues relating to its proximity to the sea that lead to it being periodically out of action. Even routes such as Exeter to Paddington that do not have these issues gain immeasurably from having a secondary route that can take the strain when necessary.

Dawlish does not need hundreds of millions spending on a fantasy diversionary route that would add nothing to connectivity and ultimately put the railway to Teignmouth and Dawlish at risk. However, a diversionary route via Okehampton would be useful on those occasions, and would provide year round improved links to the entire area through which it passes, justifying its existance on a long term basis.

 

[Buttsy]

I feel that if the Okehampton route is to be rebuilt to Plymouth, it will mainly stand or fall on it's own BCA, however, the fact that it could be used as an occasional diversionary route may tilt the BCA from a no to a yes.

I see the route as part of a circular hourly service Exeter - Okehampton - Tavistock - Plymouth - Totnes - Dawlish - Exeter & vice versa service. Torbay services would then give Dawlish, Teignmouth & Newton Abbot a half hourly service to/from Exeter.

 

[The Ham]

If you really think that both money will be spent on reopening the Okehampton route and then eventually a Dawlish diversion then that's in the realms of fantasy land quite frankly.

If the Dawlish route needs to be replaced then the solution would be a Dawlish diversion and closure or the Dawlish route, clear and simple, Okehampton is not a solution to that problem, if there is justification to reopen Okehampton fully for the new traffic generated then fine although I personally doubt it, but don't use Dawlish as excuse.

The idea of using Okehampton as a backup to try and justify the reopening of the Okehampton line is half assed solution in my view which doesn't really address the issue properly.

There are three options for railways to Plymouth, all of which require Dawlish at least in the short term. Which, depending on what your requirements are, depends on which addresses the issue properly.

Option 1, stick our heads in the sand and assume that Dawlish is fine and then run around like headless chickens saying why wasn't done last time when something causes problems at Dawlish. This is the cheapest option with basicly £0 extra cost.

Option 2, build a new line avoiding Dawlish, this provides benefits in the form of faster journey times to Plymouth, it would probably open as an electrified line (or at the very least with provision to very quickly and easily electrify it at a later date). However such a route would be fairly costly, probably take a long time to get built (hence it potentially be electrified as at least one line to Exeter may be electrified by the time it is opened) and would involve a lot of politics if it meant that one or more of the existing towns with a station were to loose out. It would also mean that the Dawlish line would still be needed, even if it is just a single line option. However, given time the line through Okehampton could still be opened as it makes a case for itself. The cost could well be £700 million.

Option 3, reopen a fairly short length of line between Okehampton and Tavistock, this provides the benefits of better rail connections in this area, as well as potentially further afield (depending on how the services are run). it would be fairly easy to do, would have lots of local and political support and provides a route (even if it would take longer) which would mean the likelihood of Plymouth being cut off from the network was lessened or it were cut off it is likely to be so for a shorter time. It could also be opened fairly quickly (at least compared to option 2), meaning that we could see some benefit sooner. It could also justify, for instance by encouraging more people to use the line through Yeovil, further improvements to other lines/services. However, we could still end up in time having to do Option 2 as well if Dawlish becomes a very regular problem and/or passenger numbers justify a better (faster) service to Plymouth. The cost could well be £250 million.

I doubt that many would suggest that option 1 was a very good idea. It then comes down to picking between the other two.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Compared to HS2, everything is small fry. But there are a lot of schemes that are small fry compared to a £250m line through Devon (e.g. electrification from Bolton to Wigan was around £37m and should give a big capacity increase on some services on a busy line). Its not about the price tag though, its about the costs when compared to the benefits.

Who mentioned HS2, I compared the £250million to the £30 odd million which was being provided just to make the network in the SW more resilient.

Yes schemes need to stand on their own, however that would go for any potential second/alternative route to Plymouth.

Where I have been pointing out some of the other potential benefits of the Okehampton route, this was to show that the benefits may not just be isolated to between Exeter and Plymouth. As some schemes provide benefits beyond their immediately local area and as such these may not be as obvious as those schemes which only really benefit their local area. Such schemes may also provide a stronger case for other schemes in the locality if it results in higher passenger numbers.

 

[47802]

Yes it does.

The Dawlish route is fine 99% of the time, however, it does have issues relating to its proximity to the sea that lead to it being periodically out of action. Even routes such as Exeter to Paddington that do not have these issues gain immeasurably from having a secondary route that can take the strain when necessary.

Dawlish does not need hundreds of millions spending on a fantasy diversionary route that would add nothing to connectivity and ultimately put the railway to Teignmouth and Dawlish at risk. However, a diversionary route via Okehampton would be useful on those occasions, and would provide year round improved links to the entire area through which it passes, justifying its existance on a long term basis.

So instead your proposing to spend potentially hundreds of millions of pounds on a route which doesn't really solve the problem, and would likely not justify the cost of reopening on its own, I call that fantasy

Taking the Long term view either the Dawlish route is OK or it isn't, if its going to be OK 99% of the time long term then there is no need for an alternate, if it isn't then it needs a new route to replace it, not some meandering route around Dartmoor which doesn't serve Torbay

 

[The Ham]

So instead your proposing to spend potentially hundreds of millions of pounds on a route which doesn't really solve the problem, and would likely not justify the cost of reopening on its own, I call that fantasy

As is building a Dawlish avoiding line if it doesn't justify the cost on its own.

 

[455driver]

The route via Okehampton would be nearly useless for diversions unless it was largely or completely double track.
Such a route would be stupendously expensive.

You could get a lot of flood defences at Dawlish for that much money.

I am sorry but I cannot let this go unanswered!

How very dare you bring common sense into this thread, there is absolutely no room for that on here!

For those who lack any semblance of of a sense of humour, this post is not meant to be taken seriously!

 

[47802]

As is building a Dawlish avoiding line if it doesn't justify the cost on its own.

So there you are then problem solved don't build either, which is what's going to happen anyway, unfortunately this whole episode is being hijacked by those who want to use as an excuse to try and get the Okehampton route reopened, and as I have said before if there is a need and justification for Okehampton to have a train service then clearly that could be done at fairly low cost between Exeter and Okehampton without the need to spend hundreds of millions opening the rest of the route.

 

[TheKnightWho]

So there you are then problem solved don't build either, which is what's going to happen anyway, unfortunately this whole episode is being hijacked by those who want to use as an excuse to try and get the Okehampton route reopened, and as I have said before is there is a need and justification for Okehampton to have a train service then clearly that could be done at fairly low cost between Exeter and Okehampton without the need to spend hundreds of millions opening the rest of the route.

You don't have much of a conception of cost-benefit analysis other than "what I think is probably right", do you...

How do you know they're too expensive and won't justify themselves? Hint: "common sense" and "it's obvious" aren't valid answers. People have been saying that if they don't justify their cost then they shouldn't be built, and not that they categorically don't.

 

[The Ham]

So there you are then problem solved don't build either, which is what's going to happen anyway, unfortunately this whole episode is being hijacked by those who want to use as an excuse to try and get the Okehampton route reopened, and as I have said before if there is a need and justification for Okehampton to have a train service then clearly that could be done at fairly low cost between Exeter and Okehampton without the need to spend hundreds of millions opening the rest of the route.

If it doesn't get built, so be it, however given this tread is called "Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)" you can not be surprised when people put forward suggestions for routes which avoid Dawlish and put their case for why one route is better than the other.

Also, railway re-openings are political and so you also shouldn't be surprised when people use circumstances to peddle their own political agenda. Even the anti's for HS2 have used the line closure at Dawlish to argue that HS2 should not be built.

 

[47802]

You don't have much of a conception of cost-benefit analysis other than "what I think is probably right", do you...

How do you know they're too expensive and won't justify themselves? Hint: "common sense" and "it's obvious" aren't valid answers. People have been saying that if they don't justify their cost then they shouldn't be built, and not that they categorically don't.

Well if you can come up with good BCA which justifies spending a few hundred million on a couple of towns which have a combined population of about 20,000 then feel free, lets see if those who will actually put up the money agree.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Well if you can come up with good BCA which justifies spending a few hundred million on a couple of towns which have a combined population of about 20,000 then feel free, lets see if those who will actually put up the money agree.

While i agree with you, you are missing the point. People are suggesting an increased BCR from the diversionary capabilities. Which i personally doubt.

I think increase the sea defenses is much more economically sensible.

However i do think the route to Tavistock should be reopened for local trains to Plymouth. And to Okehampton for local trains to Exeter. But not the central section, its got the potential that Airdrie Bathgate had.

 

[fsmr]

The route via Okehampton would be nearly useless for diversions unless it was largely or completely double track.
Such a route would be stupendously expensive.

You could get a lot of flood defences at Dawlish for that much money.

The Corby weekend and emergency diversionary route for the MML is single for some length and includes a very long section from Corby to Manton junction and also includes a similar scenario to Plymouth with trains running in an up direction fro Syston junction before changing direction to down at Leicester .
The point being that while it wouldn't be a longer journey, it would be workable and give a potential diversion for a very large section of line for engineering works, including giving time for rebuilding the sea wall more substantially and being able to run during stormy conditions.

Yes It would not help the situation East of Plymouth unless some sort of shuttle was run from Newton Abbot but it would also have secondary benefit opening up Tavistock for development and commuters to Plymouth and Exeter

 

[47802]

While i agree with you, you are missing the point. People are suggesting an increased BCR from the diversionary capabilities. Which i personally doubt.

I think increase the sea defenses is much more economically sensible.

However i do think the route to Tavistock should be reopened for local trains to Plymouth. And to Oakhampton for local trains to Exeter. But not the central section, its got the potential that Airdrie Bathgate had.

I realise that people are trying to increase BCR by using the diversionary capability but my point is, if the Dawlish route does become increasingly unreliable then its not really valid because it doesn't really address the Dawlish issue.

I don't think its really justifiable to spend say £200 million on the Okehampton on the basis it's not justified on its own, but as a diversion it is, if then in 15 years time we have to spend say £400 million on a Dawlish diversion because the existing route becomes too unreliable.

 

[HowardGWR]

While i agree with you, you are missing the point. People are suggesting an increased BCR from the diversionary capabilities. Which i personally doubt.

I think increase the sea defenses is much more economically sensible.

However i do think the route to Tavistock should be reopened for local trains to Plymouth. And to Oakhampton for local trains to Exeter. But not the central section, its got the potential that Airdrie Bathgate had.

It really is OKEhampton.

 

[YorkshireBear]

It really is OKEhampton.

I spelt it like that first time

 

[The Ham]

I realise that people are trying to increase BCR by using the diversionary capability but my point is, if the Dawlish route does become increasingly unreliable then its not really valid because it doesn't really address the Dawlish issue.

I don't think its really justifiable to spend say £200 million on the Okehampton on the basis it not justified on its but as a diversion it is, if then in 15 years time we have to spend £400 million on a Dawlish diversion because the existing route becomes too unreliable.

It depends on what other benefits are seen from the Okehamton route. For instance the Okehampton route would be useful during the construction of the Dawlish avoiding line. Also, the ability to divert via Okehampton isn't lost as soon as you build the Dawlish avoiding line (although it does becomes a LOT less likely to be needed).

Of course, even if we spend £400 million on a Dawlish avoiding line that doesn't mean that we will not also spend the £200 million on the Okehampton route at some point in the future.

There is the argument that given Dawlish is still fine for the most part (at least for the time being) why should we spend £400 million on a route that avoids it for a few days (or even weeks) a year when we could build a route which costs half that and receive nearly the same benefit in terms of still being able to get to Plymouth if the line through Dawlish is closed.

Are we going to see enough of an uplift in passenger numbers and enough time savings to cover the extra cost of the avoiding line? If we do see an uplift, what impact is that going to have on other parts of the network (i.e. do we then need more paths into Paddington)? Which towns would the route miss out and what impact will that have on passengers and will this also have an impact on other parts of the network (i.e. do those places still have enough passengers to justify a direct service to London)?

It then very much depends on how much benefit is ascribed to being able to have an alternative route to Plymouth for each hour, day, weekend which the route through Dawlish is closed for whatever reason (e.g. storms, engineering works, etc.). Yes this may be so insignificant that neither scheme is built. Conversely that it could be that politicians state that no cost is too high as long as it happens fast, in which case the reopening is likely to be the preferred option.

Also the railways 15 years ago were very different to today, so we could see that if we build the route through Okehampton in say 2021, that by 2030 there is starting to be enough demand to justify a new high speed line (without needing the justification of it being a diversion around Dawlish when that line is closed) to serve Exeter and Plymouth from London (potentially as a spur from a line which serves other locations) meaning that the £400 million route would be wasted as the new route would need to be built to cope with 200mph plus trains rather than 125mph trains.

 

[tbtc]

unfortunately this whole episode is being hijacked by those who want to use as an excuse to try and get the Okehampton route reopened, and as I have said before if there is a need and justification for Okehampton to have a train service then clearly that could be done at fairly low cost between Exeter and Okehampton without the need to spend hundreds of millions opening the rest of the route

Agreed.

IF there's justification to run year round week-long services from Okehampton to Exeter then we can do so pretty simply.

IF there's justification to rebuild the line from Tavistock to Bere Alston then that would cost a few quid but could be done as a low speed single track line without needing megabucks spending on it.

But to come up with the "solution" of opening the whole line really doesn't work for me. The justifications are pretty slim (many lines have no realistic diversionary route, many lines run through areas where the Coalition may lost seats at the next election, many lines suffer closure from time to time due to the weather, many lines run alongside the sea...). Speaking of which...

it adds an additional element of competition between Plymouth and Exeter

I appreciate that you'll suggest anything to try to justify your answer of "re-open the Okehampton line"...

...but if you want competition between Plymouth and Exeter then we could save tens/hundreds of millions of pounds and just have XC-specific fares and FGW advance fares between the two cities - sounds a lot simpler/ easier eh?

 

[The Ham]

I appreciate that you'll suggest anything to try to justify your answer of "re-open the Okehampton line"...

...but if you want competition between Plymouth and Exeter then we could save tens/hundreds of millions of pounds and just have XC-specific fares and FGW advance fares between the two cities - sounds a lot simpler/ easier eh?

There's little reason for either XC or GW to do this to any meaningful amount, given how full their trains can be. Although there are advance fares they are train specific.

 

[yorksrob]

While i agree with you, you are missing the point. People are suggesting an increased BCR from the diversionary capabilities. Which i personally doubt.

I think from my point of view, people can argue until the cows come home how many millions the closure of Dawlish will cost to the local economy, but the plain fact is that the length of this closure will be having a substantially negative effect on the economy, and if that isn't reflected in the BCR somehow, then the BCR is seriously flawed and needs to either be amended to take account of it, or replaced altogether.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I appreciate that you'll suggest anything to try to justify your answer of "re-open the Okehampton line"...

...but if you want competition between Plymouth and Exeter then we could save tens/hundreds of millions of pounds and just have XC-specific fares and FGW advance fares between the two cities - sounds a lot simpler/ easier eh?

If you read the thread carefully, you'll note that I was responding to the conjecture as to why such a service might be operated as part of an extended Waterloo service rather than as part of the Great Western Franchise.

 

[K Macdonald]

Well I hate to say it but any disused railway could at some point be a candidate for reopening.

Or for that matter any quiet backwater 2 TPD branch could become a 6 TPH at some point the way things are moving

In the DM article, it says "Eric said he would have to steam ahead with the sale regardless of the uncertainty."

Ah, it's going to be a SR Heritage Railway?

 

[Tobbes]

In the DM article, it says "Eric said he would have to steam ahead with the sale regardless of the uncertainty."

Ah, it's going to be a SR Heritage Railway?

We've got 20 light pacifics in varying states of repair...!

 

[The Ham]

We've got 20 light pacifics in varying states of repair...!

I doubt all 20 would be needed, maybe it would be best to focus on getting 6 working and then worry about the rest, unless two are needed per train. Although that does leave the issue of what coaches are going to be used.

Of course it being steam traction would mean that not only would you have people using the line to travel but also tourists would use it. Potentially increasing the business case to a point where it's a no brainer.

 

[455driver]

In the DM article, it says "Eric said he would have to steam ahead with the sale regardless of the uncertainty."

Ah, it's going to be a SR Heritage Railway?

I think he is quite safe somehow!

 

[DarloRich]

I think from my point of view, people can argue until the cows come home how many millions the closure of Dawlish will cost to the local economy, but the plain fact is that the length of this closure will be having a substantially negative effect on the economy, and if that isn't reflected in the BCR somehow, then the BCR is seriously flawed and needs to either be amended to take account of it, or replaced altogether.

Conversely I am not sure the old I don’t like your business case go away and change it to one I do like approach is a sensible way to run things

I have said before and I will say again – I doubt this line will ever be built unless the government hands the cash over to cover all of the costs. No one else has the money and I doubt the government have the inclination when all is said and done.

 

[Hebden Bridger]

Well if you can come up with good BCA which justifies spending a few hundred million on a couple of towns which have a combined population of about 20,000 then feel free, lets see if those who will actually put up the money agree.

Perhaps its pertinent to point out here that bus services between Okehampton and Tavistock were cut from hourly to two hourly in 2008 and Devon County Council have been nibbling away at the subsidy ever since.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

All this talk about business cases does anybody actually have an idea what the BCR for reopening Okehampron to Tavistock is or is likely to be? What factors where taken into account when determining it? Would the new methodologies developed for HS2 radically alter the outcome? Until someone can provide the answers all this speculation about BCR's is just hot air.

Another point that no one has realistically answered is the political dimension regarding the coasts of reopening vs the coasts of HS2, like it or not there have been several anti-HS2 articles in Devon and Cornwall based Newspapers calling for local MP's to withhold support for HS2 until there is a commitment from the government to sort out the railways in the south west, two raised the issue at PMQ's on Wednesday. Any reopening could easily be funded from a modest cut to the HS2 £14 billion contingency budget (about 2%), it would be a symbolic gesture from government which would have no effect on the delivery of HS2 but could ensure enough votes to get the scheme approved and stave off a rebellion.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I spelt it like that first time

Perhaps you were thinking of the rather nice Oakhampton Park Country House establishment that is in Wiveliscombe in Somerset.