Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[The Planner]

Does anyone actually know what the £26 mill is buying on the Tavistock extension? I am guessing no loops and one train in section with the minimal of signalling? Is it one platform at Tavistock, any sidings etc? It isn't one I have seen any plans of.

 

[yorksrob]

All this expense just to avoid a relatively short bus trip between Teignmouth and Dawlish Warren?
A bus trip that could be avoided by simply fixing the sea defences.

This is just people looking for an excuse to reopen the Southern route which was frankly inferior in pretty much every way to the Great Western one.



Closing for a couple of days a year is hardly significant.
This is the first weeks long closure since the line opened that I know of.

And if they haven't finished repairing the cliff fall why wasn't the route closed.... unless of course the cliff fall was not actually preventing the operation of the railway.

Why don't we build a second high speed line to Manchester just in case the first one is taken out of action for some reason?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for better sea defences, but this route will always be vulnerable to extreme weather. Let's face it, closure is never going to be for just a couple of days a year, and replacement buses are never going to be confined to the Teignmouth Dawlish section.

 

[LateThanNever]

All this expense just to avoid a relatively short bus trip between Teignmouth and Dawlish Warren?
A bus trip that could be avoided by simply fixing the sea defences.

This is just people looking for an excuse to reopen the Southern route which was frankly inferior in pretty much every way to the Great Western one.



Closing for a couple of days a year is hardly significant.
This is the first weeks long closure since the line opened that I know of.

And if they haven't finished repairing the cliff fall why wasn't the route closed.... unless of course the cliff fall was not actually preventing the operation of the railway.

Why don't we build a second high speed line to Manchester just in case the first one is taken out of action for some reason?

Overstating the case isn't seemly.

The line has had regular problems with the sea and this is by no means the first long closure. But it is probably true to say that during the previous protracted closure there was an alternative route - via Okehampton I think.
And didn't say that the route was still closed because of the cliff falls but it was and it is now closed regularly for weather problems on certainly more than "a couple of days a year".

Closure is highly significant if you are planning on getting to or from Plymouth particularly as there have been delays and problems in the past in getting buses at short notice. And closure is not a lot of use to IMERYS - or if you want to use the sleeper that night!

 

[yorksrob]

Of course its the latter!

Can anyone explain what is so different between the buses operating now and the buses that operate when the seawall is shut for engineering work (apart from it being several weeks instead of a week or 2)?

The buses cope fine when the engineering work is on and they are not doing a bad job now, okay being stuck on a bus from Plymouth to Tiverton Parkway isnt much fun but its not too bad.

They require a change at each end, they're uncomfortable. They don't live up to an InterCity service, and long periods of them will affect whether people choose to go to the West Country and spend dosh.

 

[Bald Rick]

Seriously though, the BCR methodology is lousy though. Lets not forget, it manages to pluck some mythical figure from the air for road tax "lost" from the treasury not to mentioncounting abstraction from another route as a negative, even if that other route is crowded and justifies investment to enhance capacity in its own right, yet it can't monetise the positive effects of alleviating the massive disruption when the line is blocked, either planned or unplanned.

It's a joke really.

It may (or may not) be lousy. But at least it is consistently lousy across all projects. So even if it was de-loused, reopening this (or indeed any other) line would be prioritised in the same order for funding.

As an aside, I once sat in a cross-transport prioritisation meeting for the East of England that showed all the schemes proposed to be taken forward, ranked by BCR. Those to be taken forward were marked green, those to be postponed marked red. Almost all the schemes with High BVRs (5+) were red. There were a number of greens in the 2-4 range. All the high red ones were road projects. Almost all the greens were rail / bus. So it is political.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Does anyone actually know what the £26 mill is buying on the Tavistock extension? I am guessing no loops and one train in section with the minimal of signalling? Is it one platform at Tavistock, any sidings etc? It isn't one I have seen any plans of.

No loops, OTW and a simple platform. Connection at Bere Alston tbc. But last I saw was it would be a connecting shuttle (ie not direct train to Plymouth) to save on signalling at Bere Alston. And I'll have a tenner that it costs more than £26m.

 

[455driver]

Does anyone actually know what the £26 mill is buying on the Tavistock extension? I am guessing no loops and one train in section with the minimal of signalling? Is it one platform at Tavistock, any sidings etc? It isn't one I have seen any plans of.

One platform no sidings, no signals, bare minimum, oh it isnt actually in Tavistock either but on the edge because it cant get to the old station site!

 

[yorksrob]

It may (or may not) be lousy. But at least it is consistently lousy across all projects. So even if it was de-loused, reopening this (or indeed any other) line would be prioritised in the same order for funding.

As an aside, I once sat in a cross-transport prioritisation meeting for the East of England that showed all the schemes proposed to be taken forward, ranked by BCR. Those to be taken forward were marked green, those to be postponed marked red. Almost all the schemes with High BVRs (5+) were red. There were a number of greens in the 2-4 range. All the high red ones were road projects. Almost all the greens were rail / bus. So it is political.

I dare say that road tax issue would have had an effect.

If it is "political" as you say, then it is "lousy". If it's designed to benefit road projects, then it is lousy. A cost benefit analysis for this route which takes no account of the additional resilience afforded by having an extra route at times when the existing one, bearing in mind it's increased vulnerability, is not available, is simply not fit for purpose, regardless of what goes on elsewhere in the Country.

I remember reading through the 2008 report for the Uckfield - Lewes link. In the table setting out the costs and benefits, under "wider economic benefits" the figure was a big fat zero. I wonder how many road projects feature such an omission.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And I'll have a tenner that it costs more than £26m.

If it gets anywhere close, in the context of infrastructure projects in general, it will be a bargain. I'd sign the contractors up for the remaining section (after due tendering processes of course )

 

[IanXC]

No loops, OTW and a simple platform. Connection at Bere Alston tbc. But last I saw was it would be a connecting shuttle (ie not direct train to Plymouth) to save on signalling at Bere Alston.

Thats my understanding, except the shuttle will be a Bere Alston-Gunislake service, with the through service being to Tavistock. As I understand it the proposal is that the first service of the day would be something like a 150 with a 153, which would be detached at Bere Alston and locked into the branch for the day. At Bere Alston the ideal solution seems to be some kind of built out platform to enable passengers to cross between the 2 services/platforms, without the need for a footbridge to be constructed.

 

[47802]

It may (or may not) be lousy. But at least it is consistently lousy across all projects. So even if it was de-loused, reopening this (or indeed any other) line would be prioritised in the same order for funding.

As an aside, I once sat in a cross-transport prioritisation meeting for the East of England that showed all the schemes proposed to be taken forward, ranked by BCR. Those to be taken forward were marked green, those to be postponed marked red. Almost all the schemes with High BVRs (5+) were red. There were a number of greens in the 2-4 range. All the high red ones were road projects. Almost all the greens were rail / bus. So it is political.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


No loops, OTW and a simple platform. Connection at Bere Alston tbc. But last I saw was it would be a connecting shuttle (ie not direct train to Plymouth) to save on signalling at Bere Alston. And I'll have a tenner that it costs more than £26m.

So there's your starter for £26 million, lets sort the signalling at Bere Alston for through trains, add a loop and a second platform at Tavistock, so how much has it gone up by now?, and we haven't got past Tavistock yet.

 

[YorkshireBear]

How busy is the Gunnislake branch? No capacity/demand for one train per hour to each terminus?

 

[IanXC]

That is true but my problem with the Okehampton route is it's not a direct or proper alternative, In my eyes you either fix the problem directly or not a all, not with some partial alternative which might be cheaper but doesn't fully address the problem and is an excuse to try and improve Rail services in North Devon.

Its not exactly out of the way - 58 miles rather than 52 isn't it? Hardly a huge diversion across country!

My view is it addresses the problem in a similar way to ECML diversions via Lincoln. Yes it may be slow, yes it may extend journey times, but time and time again through trains are was passengers say they want.

 

[47802]

Its not exactly out of the way - 58 miles rather than 52 isn't it? Hardly a huge diversion across country!

My view is it addresses the problem in a similar way to ECML diversions via Lincoln. Yes it may be slow, yes it may extend journey times, but time and time again through trains are was passengers say they want.

No but we are not spending many millions putting the line to Lincoln back, plus the line itself it serves far bigger intermediate populations than the Okehampton route, it doesn't have to justify its existence mainly on the basis of a diversion.

 

[yorksrob]

No but we are not spending many millions putting the line to Lincoln back, plus the line itself it serves far bigger intermediate populations than the Okehampton route.

But we (the Prime Minister) are talking about hundreds of millions to improve rail resilience in the South West. A single platform halt costs over a million. Anywhere near 26 million to reopen to Tavistock is really very good.

 

[IanXC]

No but we are not spending many millions putting the line to Lincoln back, plus the line itself it serves far bigger intermediate populations than the Okehampton route.

I would agree. However we are spending millions increasing capacity on the line via Lincoln so that more services can run this way as a diversion from the ECML so its comparable to some extent.

 

[47802]

I would agree. However we are spending millions increasing capacity on the line via Lincoln so that more services can run this way as a diversion from the ECML so its comparable to some extent.

I am aware of that although isn't that really a capacity free up exercise for the east cost by running more freight that way rather than a resilience issue. I'm not sure how much is being spent on that but I doubt its anything like as much at Okehampton would be, and if the Lincoln line was partially no longer existing like Okehampton would they put the lines back.

 

[Bald Rick]

I love this thread. Such polarised views.

I have today commended it to the chap who will be studying the case.

 

[The Planner]

No loops, OTW and a simple platform. Connection at Bere Alston tbc. But last I saw was it would be a connecting shuttle (ie not direct train to Plymouth) to save on signalling at Bere Alston. And I'll have a tenner that it costs more than £26m.

Thought as much to be fair, so proverbially Jack Merde for the money with a two aspect and fixed distant board at the Bere Alston end I'll bet. Gotta love value management!

 

[LateThanNever]

I love this thread. Such polarised views.

I have today commended it to the chap who will be studying the case.

Hope you are also able to point him to the other thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=96305&page=23

where the 'container sea wall' has been breached.

Hopefully he or she will conclude that this is not a satisfactory rail link for Plymouth!

 

[tbtc]

It is quite annoying when people mention the South West and HS2 in the same breath. It seems some naughtiness by the HS2 Action Alliance is to blame because HS2 has nothing to do with funding for the legacy network, just in the same way that CrossRail doesn't (as both will be funded the same way from what I understand).

I don't see a CrossRail Action Alliance group kicking up a stink about the amount of money that is spent on CrossRail every year, and as Alan Marshall points out on the latest blog post on www.railnews.co.uk:

Whilst the need for investment is obvious on the South West corridor, HS2 has nothing to do with existing rail budgets so is irrelevant to anyone apart from the mischief makers. Electrification and IEP are examples of current investment

Yes, it annoys me to.

We've had many years of the "left" arguing that (insert big public spending project here) "is a fraction of what we spend on Trident" (as if this guarantees that its value for money)...

...and the "right" arguing that (insert big public spending project/ tax cut here) "is a fraction of what we spend on Overseas Aid".

Recently we've had people arguing that (insert big public spending project here) "is a fraction of what we spend on Bankers Bonuses".

It looks like we're now going to be for a period of people arguing that (insert local railway project here) "is a fraction of what we spend on HS2".

What should matter is the cost/ benefit ratio. The fact that we are spending more on bigger projects doesn't suddenly justify the business case of anything else.

We're probably going to have to get used to this daft argument though, now the press has picked up on it. You can argue "what benefit does HS2 give Devon" but then you could argue "what benefit does (investment in one region) give (investment in any other region)". Electrifying the GWML doesn't really benefit me in Sheffield, but I think its got a good enough business case to go ahead.

You are choosing to overlook one important thing in your reasoning, indeed many lines have no realistic diversionary routes, however there isn't another mainline which is at such great risk of periodic closure. To take an example which has cropped up earlier, there is no realistic diversion for York to Northallerton, but there is only some tiny fraction of the risk of this line being closed as compared to the risk at Dawlish.

I've mentioned other coastal lines on this thread (like the North Wales Coast line which was recently closed, the clifftop bits of the ECML near places like Berwick and Stonehaven), but these don't have people clamouring for diversionary lines to be built for "resilience".

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.

In comparison, the bus frequency from Stirling to Alloa was seven or eight commercial services an hour along the main road (plus three an hour via Stirling University and the back road via Menstrie etc), which is why it isn't surprising that the train line has attracted a decent number of passengers.

AFAICR Tavistock to Plymouth is a twenty minute bus service, so that suggests there's a (smaller) market for a train service. But the Tavistock to Okehampton service... doesn't look like natural rail territory.

Seriously though, the BCR methodology is lousy though. Lets not forget, it manages to pluck some mythical figure from the air for road tax "lost" from the treasury not to mentioncounting abstraction from another route as a negative, even if that other route is crowded and justifies investment to enhance capacity in its own right, yet it can't monetise the positive effects of alleviating the massive disruption when the line is blocked, either planned or unplanned.

It's a joke really.

You mean it doesn't give the answer that you want?

I can assure you, Salisbury to Exmouth Junction is pretty bloomin long, and don't forget, it has only just had a loop put in at Axeminster allowing an hourly service, so its hardly been over supplied with capacity through the decades

Surely making this a double track line is a big priority in terms of "resilience" then?

This is just people looking for an excuse to reopen the Southern route

Agreed

How busy is the Gunnislake branch? No capacity/demand for one train per hour to each terminus?

Gunnislake itself gets around seventy passengers a day, Bere Alston gets a similar number, the rest of the rural stations are pretty quiet (until you get to Devonport)

My view is it addresses the problem in a similar way to ECML diversions via Lincoln. Yes it may be slow, yes it may extend journey times, but time and time again through trains are was passengers say they want.

Lincoln has around a hundred thousand people, which is five times the combined population of Okehampton and Tavistock. If these intermediate places in Devon were anywhere near the size of Lincoln, I'd have no problem supporting a line.

 

[yorksrob]

You mean it doesn't give the answer that you want?

I've given specific reasons why I think the BCR is claptrap. You haven't countered them.

Surely making this a double track line is a big priority in terms of "resilience" then?

Well obviously it is, but how is a route, that already provides resilience to the neighbouring mainline by hosting diverted trains, more of a priority than a mainline which has no alternative route.

On the one hand, you argue, "yes, we should spend money on doubling this important InterCity diversionary line because it increases resilience", yet on the other hand, for an equally important InterCity mainline (possibly more important, if you consider there are trains from the north joining it, which there aren't on the mainline east of Taunton), that has no diversionary capability, you argue that there is no point in spending money on a diversionary route at all.

 

[LateThanNever]

Yes, it annoys me to.
Lincoln has around a hundred thousand people, which is five times the combined population of Okehampton and Tavistock. If these intermediate places in Devon were anywhere near the size of Lincoln, I'd have no problem supporting a line.

So I trust the odd quarter of a million in Plymouth will also be no problem! Also the same number in Cornwall as it happens...

 

[MarkyT]

I've mentioned other coastal lines on this thread (like the North Wales Coast line which was recently closed, the clifftop bits of the ECML near places like Berwick and Stonehaven), but these don't have people clamouring for diversionary lines to be built for "resilience".

Few other coastal routes connect such a large and populous area to its broader region and the rest of the nation. The North Wales Coast is much more rural by comparison, and whilst its a very long way round from say Newcastle to Edinburgh via Carlisle, it IS an alternative route.

AFAICR Tavistock to Plymouth is a twenty minute bus service, so that suggests there's a (smaller) market for a train service. But the Tavistock to Okehampton service... doesn't look like natural rail territory.

I believe congestion on existing single carriageway roads leads to significant journey time variability for both buses and private cars on the Tavistock - Plymouth axis, and rail's consistency in this respect could be its unique selling point. As long as there's sufficient provision for car parking and bus interchange at the new Tavistock branch station it could become an important railhead, attracting riders from a large hinterland without the expensive rails extending any further north.

 

[LateThanNever]

As long as there's sufficient provision for car parking and bus interchange at the new Tavistock branch station it could become an important railhead, attracting riders from a large hinterland without the expensive rails extending any further north.

Except they'd be required as a safer route for Plymouthian bretheren if the Dawlish route was closed -as now!

 

[tbtc]

Well obviously it is, but how is a route, that already provides resilience to the neighbouring mainline by hosting diverted trains, more of a priority than a mainline which has no alternative route.

On the one hand, you argue, "yes, we should spend money on doubling this important InterCity diversionary line because it increases resilience", yet on the other hand, for an equally important InterCity mainline (possibly more important, if you consider there are trains from the north joining it, which there aren't on the mainline east of Taunton), that has no diversionary capability, you argue that there is no point in spending money on a diversionary route at all.

The big difference is that a double tracked line from (Waterloo - Basingstoke - ) Salisbury to Exeter is going to be pretty busy every day of the year - there's a big enough everyday demand to justify investment on that route - its not *just* a diversionary route...

...whilst an inland route via Okehampton is really only going to be busy at times of diversion. It could probably cope with a handful of 153s a day for most weeks in the year.

At the moment, we've got enough problems meeting everyday demand on some existing lines that we don't have resources for spare lines everywhere that would be nice to have just in case.

So I trust the odd quarter of a million in Plymouth will also be no problem! Also the same number in Cornwall as it happens...

I said that the population of Lincoln justifies it having a line, just like the population of Plymouth obviously justifies it having a line. Not sure whether you are trying to twist my words?

The difference is that a route that parallels part of the ECML (Peterborough - Sleaford - Lincoln - Doncaster) serves a big enough population to justify its existence because the intermediate places are big enough. A route that parallels part of the Paddington - Penzance line (i.e. via Okehampton) serves nowhere of any great size, so wouldn't be very well used most weeks.

There are better things to be spending railway money on than "nice to have" diversionary routes - any new line would have to stand on its own two feet rather than relying on diversionary traffic.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As long as there's sufficient provision for car parking and bus interchange at the new Tavistock branch station it could become an important railhead, attracting riders from a large hinterland without the expensive rails extending any further north

Do Gunnislake/ Bere Alston etc not provide a railhead to this large rural hinterland? Wouldn't it be cheaper to put a bigger car park at these existing stations than this grand ambition?

Same with Crediton etc on the Exeter line?

 

[MidlandMainlie]

It looks like we're now going to be for a period of people arguing that (insert local railway project here) "is a fraction of what we spend on HS2".

What should matter is the cost/ benefit ratio. The fact that we are spending more on bigger projects doesn't suddenly justify the business case of anything else.

We're probably going to have to get used to this daft argument though, now the press has picked up on it. You can argue "what benefit does HS2 give Devon" but then you could argue "what benefit does (investment in one region) give (investment in any other region)". Electrifying the GWML doesn't really benefit me in Sheffield, but I think its got a good enough business case to go ahead.

Yes but that argument is becoming increasingly political, HS2 needs to gain enough votes from MP's to become a reality. At the moment a significant number of MP's from the south west are threatening to vote against the project because of the issues at Dawlish so the government has a calculation to make, does it risk a vote without the support of south western MP's or does it cave to their demands for a devisionary route which as I have previously pointed out would cost a fraction of HS2 (about 0.6% of the total HS2 or 2% of the £14 billion contingency fund). £250 million may be small change for the government to secure enough votes to stave off a rebellion over HS2 especially if there are cost savings from HS2 project next month and funds are available to be allocated to other projects.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Hope you are also able to point him to the other thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=96305&page=23

where the 'container sea wall' has been breached. Hopefully he or she will conclude that this is not a satisfactory rail link for Plymouth!

Did Network Rail say that the new breach occurred outside of the area that was protected by these welded and stone filled containers ?

 

[yorksrob]

The big difference is that a double tracked line from (Waterloo - Basingstoke - ) Salisbury to Exeter is going to be pretty busy every day of the year - there's a big enough everyday demand to justify investment on that route - its not *just* a diversionary route...

...whilst an inland route via Okehampton is really only going to be busy at times of diversion. It could probably cope with a handful of 153s a day for most weeks in the year.

At the moment, we've got enough problems meeting everyday demand on some existing lines that we don't have resources for spare lines everywhere that would be nice to have just in case.

If we look at all of the routes in the South West, they are undergoing a renaissance. There isn't one of them that isn't doing well. It is purely by bad planning and poorly thought out policy that towns such as Okehampton and Tavistock have been left off of the map for all of these years. Had they still been linked, they would be undergoing a renaissance as well. All the route needs is a boost to get over the malaise and Okehampton and Tavistock could be sharing in the bonanza. The extra resilience of having an additional through route is the icing on the cake that could make it possible, and Plymouth and Cornwall could enjoy life without being cut off by rail during ordinary works let alone whatever is happening now.

There is nothing to suggest that Okehampton and Tavistock would be any different from the other settlements in Devon in generating passenger usage. Just because we don't always have the resources at a given time, doesn't mean that we shouldn't agitate for them.

Look at the Todmorden Curve. We don't have the resources for that, yet it has been built, and you can be sure that the resources will follow.

 

[LateThanNever]

I said that the population of Lincoln justifies it having a line, just like the population of Plymouth obviously justifies it having a line. Not sure whether you are trying to twist my words?

The difference is that a route that parallels part of the ECML (Peterborough - Sleaford - Lincoln - Doncaster) serves a big enough population to justify its existence because the intermediate places are big enough. A route that parallels part of the Paddington - Penzance line (i.e. via Okehampton) serves nowhere of any great size, so wouldn't be very well used most weeks.

There are better things to be spending railway money on than "nice to have" diversionary routes - any new line would have to stand on its own two feet rather than relying on diversionary traffic.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So are you quite happy to have half a million people including Britain's biggest Naval port cut off intermittently without notice from the UK rail network. Where else is this an annual occurrence? What is their alternative?

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Yes but that argument is becoming increasingly political, HS2 needs to gain enough votes from MP's to become a reality. At the moment a significant number of MP's from the south west are threatening to vote against the project because of the issues at Dawlish so the government has a calculation to make, does it risk a vote without the support of south western MP's or does it cave to their demands for a devisionary route which as I have previously pointed out would cost a fraction of HS2 (about 0.6% of the total HS2 or 2% of the £14 billion contingency fund). £250 million may be small change for the government to secure enough votes to stave off a rebellion over HS2 especially if there are cost savings from HS2 project next month and funds are available to be allocated to other projects.

The other major political consideration in Devon and Cornwall is the number of Con / Lib Dem marginal seats so we get Patrick McLoughlin saying what a marvellous scenic line Dawlish is and he would be sorry to see it close - code for supporting Anne-Marie Morris (Newton Abbot - maj 523). Cornwall is frequently mentioned (all seats are marginal) whilst Plymouth hardly gets a shout. There has been no reaction from Geoffrey Cox (West Devon - covers Tavistock) or Mel Stride (Central Devon - covers Okehampton) - relatively safe seats and never known to be interested in railways. Ben Bradshaw (Lab Exeter) took a swipe at 'armchair experts' proposing alternative routes - but he hinted at favouring a new inland route - cue for supporting Labour in Plymouth. Cynical I know but sadly that is how things work. Dawlish will reopen, the furore will die down and that will that I'm afraid.

 

[MarkyT]

Do Gunnislake/ Bere Alston etc not provide a railhead to this large rural hinterland? Wouldn't it be cheaper to put a bigger car park at these existing stations than this grand ambition?

The Gunnislake branch stations provide a useful railhead, but only to a rather limited local area. Road links into that area are non existent towards Plymouth, which is why the branch survived, but they are not that great from Tavistock or beyond either, as the main road from Tavistock to Plymouth (A386) follows a completely different route to the railway, via Yelverton. In addition the upper section of the branch beyond Bere Alston is very tortuous and slow, typically taking 20 minutes to cover under two and a half miles as the crow flies! The great advantages of Tavistock as a railhead are a much better connection to the road network and an attractive, predictable journey time.