Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[LateThanNever]

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?
Originally Posted by tbtc
Is it an annual occurrence now?

2012, 2013, 2014 looks like annual to me.

TheKnightWho
But that completely ignores the fact that interdisciplinarity exists when it comes to things like things like this. Otherwise you could argue that because "knowing more and more about less and less" applies to experts in every field ever, that that's why we never make any progress with regards to the bigger picture on anything; however, that's patently false. We clearly make progress on a large scale in a number of areas, and so your argument doesn't seem to hold much water, as I can't see why this topic is an exception. However, bureaucracy and ulterior motives can prevent the right experts being on the case, which may explain why we constantly see short-sighted decisions in government. That's also ignoring the fact that whilst some experts might fit your definition, there are others whose very field of expertise is to look at the bigger picture.

By the way, I can't seem to find what "best endeavour supposition" means anywhere, so you'll have to explain it please.

"Best guess" will do in answer to the last question. Nor did I actually say experts should be completely ignored but whilst those inventing say, DNA fingerprinting were undoubtedly expert it also has obvious uses. Whereas many of the 'experts' making investment decisions on the railway are just the high priests of whichever format/formula the Treasury currently favours. In fact the real decision comes down to a seat of the pants job.
Many prospective railway passengers originally thought they would die if they travelled above 20mph. We would probably have finished the research only about now if we'd called in the experts. Indeed, on the railways of the South West, some would say this research is still ongoing .

The average length of a car journey in the UK is under 7 miles. The Dawlish rail debate is about the thousands of passengers every day who choose the quality option of rail travel to access south Devon, Plymouth and Cornwall from Birmingham, Bristol, London etc. We're talking about an entirely different market than the car trips to Sainsbury's or M&S. Those using rail should not regularly (the wall route gets closed for several hours much more often than when a headline breach in the wall happens) be subjected to road transport when travelling to / from this vast region, which has a population of 500,000+ (Plymouth + Cornwall) and is the most popular destination for holidaying Brits in the UK, by rail. The region needs 2 routes, we all know Newton Abbot and Torbay wouldn't be served the reinstated Tavistock option, but it represents the easiest, quickest and cheapest fix, and would open up travel options in west Devon and north Cornwall. It should never have been closed 50 years ago - a regional asset wasted. So let's not talk Cost Benefit for once, if you go down that route forever spending outside London would in all likelihood decrease even further with more spent in London and with that the unsustainable economy that's been created in London over the past 20 - 30 years would implode even sooner than it's likely to at the present.

Agree with all of this. In the end the Teignbridge [Dawlish Teignmouth & Newton Abbot] population is 125k, Torbay 130k, Plymouth 260k, Cornwall 500k, so on the basis of greatest happiness of the greatest number for an affordable price, the Okehampton route, being half built, has to be a pretty obvious win.
An inland line from Exeter to Newton Abbot would save very little time unless it missed out Starcross, Dawlish Warren, Dawlish and Teignmouth, which wouldn't be popular with these tourist/commuter towns. Because of the terrain and the population it is likely to be slow and expensive to build. And in any case, to provide a decent time saving route to Plymouth a line needs to go direct. And that wouldn't be popular with Newton Abbot or Totnes and would be even slower and more expensive to build...
Still we'll eventually get back the existing Dawlish route - though who knows how long for?
Clearly we should then go for the Okehampton route to provide a more robust connection further west. Both routes can then be provided with tilt to increase the speed.(And passengers can be issued with seasick pills through Dawlish itself).
Shall we give the politicians till next year?

 

[po8crg]

I think there's a real risk of bolting stable doors here.

If there's political pressure to do something in a hurry, then Tavistock-Okehampton is a better "quick" choice, as it provides considerable additional benefit and there isn't much in the way of routing choices in that it will follow the original line. It really is a case of bolting stable doors, but it's the cheapest bolt available, and it does generate some benefit beyond the resilience. I expect the BCR of keeping the line open (if it had never been closed, or once it has been reopened) is pretty solid. I appreciate that the capital cost isn't zero, but it's small enough that HMG could eat it as a political gesture.

The DAL is probably a good idea to at least do a proper engineering study and work out the BCR for, but it shouldn't be tied to the 1939 route, and should be a real new study, taking into account modern construction methods (e.g. TBMs), the desire to permit greater speeds, canting corners and maximizing curve radii, etc.

But it makes more sense for this to be part of a wider SW rail review, with the intent of bringing forward a major project for CP6 - shouldn't be that hard to knock an hour off Plymouth-London, but which bottlenecks are the biggest benefit for the smallest cost?

 

[47802]

Agree with all of this. In the end the Teignbridge [Dawlish Teignmouth & Newton Abbot] population is 125k, Torbay 130k, Plymouth 260k, Cornwall 500k, so on the basis of greatest happiness of the greatest number for an affordable price, the Okehampton route, being half built, has to be a pretty obvious win.
An inland line from Exeter to Newton Abbot would save very little time unless it missed out Starcross, Dawlish Warren, Dawlish and Teignmouth, which wouldn't be popular with these tourist/commuter towns. Because of the terrain and the population it is likely to be slow and expensive to build. And in any case, to provide a decent time saving route to Plymouth a line needs to go direct. And that wouldn't be popular with Newton Abbot or Totnes and would be even slower and more expensive to build...
Still we'll eventually get back the existing Dawlish route - though who knows how long for?
Clearly we should then go for the Okehampton route to provide a more robust connection further west. Both routes can then be provided with tilt to increase the speed.(And passengers can be issued with seasick pills through Dawlish itself).
Shall we give the politicians till next year?

how is the Okehampton a pretty obvious win when it misses out some of significant areas mentioned and you don't actually know how much it will cost.

 

[Chris125]

More damage to the sea wall and repair time extended. This is getting really serious as far as the south-west economies are concerned.

The problem facing the south west economy is the impression people have, thanks to the media, that it's 'cut off' - in reality the road links which most people use remain open.

Chris

 

[LateThanNever]

how is the Okehampton a pretty obvious win when it misses out some of significant areas mentioned and you don't actually know how much it will cost.

Because it misses out only Teignbridge and Torbay (total population 255k) and gives a safer connection to Plymouth population 260k and Cornwall (500k) So greater happiness for 505k people I suggest. Most of Teignbridge has short and fairly good connections to Exeter. Torbay is left out I agree, but as their population is 130k they are dwarfed by the other areas. I agree it's crude but the time to approve and build a new South Devon route would be lengthy as coastal South Devon is mostly heavily populated.
I don't say such a route is not desirable, it is just that it cannot hope to be as cheaply or quickly built as the Okehampton route - itself partly built already and the obstacles in most of its restoration are sheep.

 

[47802]

Because it misses out only Teignbridge and Torbay (total population 255k) and gives a safer connection to Plymouth population 260k and Cornwall (500k) So greater happiness for 505k people I suggest. Most of Teignbridge has short and fairly good connections to Exeter. Torbay is left out I agree, but as their population is 130k they are dwarfed by the other areas. I agree it's crude but the time to approve and build a new South Devon route would be lengthy as coastal South Devon is mostly heavily populated.
I don't say such a route is not desirable, it is just that it cannot hope to be as cheaply or quickly built as the Okehampton route - itself partly built already and the obstacles in most of its restoration are sheep.

A population of 255K is quite significant. So then presumably you can give me an accurate overall cost of a Teignbridge Diversion verses the Okehampton restoration then can you to justify your statement?

 

[Cliveblackpool]

No doubt a lot of businesses will be reevaluating their future in Devon & Cornwall. This will also go for companies who may wish to invest in the area.
The politicians need to give reassurance that something positive will be done.

Okehampton would be the quickest solution in the short term, and give another large area of Devon and parts of Cornwall vastly improved access to a rail service.
Best Solution - fast line Newton Abbot to Exeter, but that will be a long time coming.

Business case!
Devon & Cornwall are on the whole a deprived area, and improving rail services in the long term would bring great benefits.
Where would the money be better spent in the area?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Was there ever a proposal, in the days of yore, to take the Moretonhampstead and South Devon Railway past its final terminal railway station at Moretonhampstead ?

 

[HowardGWR]

The problem facing the south west economy is the impression people have, thanks to the media, that it's 'cut off' - in reality the road links which most people use remain open.

Chris

Not for long distance traffic, they don't need to remain open, though. It's a very tiny percentage that go further than 50 miles, except some freight. This 'strategic link' nonsense was a 90s Highways Agency con (which worked) and got all those schemes built. The A30 and A38 are just essentially for local traffic within the two counties. It is rail that provides the strategic link for business travel (same as everywhere else).

 

[YorkshireBear]

I am still not sure how any of you think Okehampton is short term???? It will take at least 5 years if we started the process now! That is not short term. Short term for me would be reinforcing the sea defenses. Gabions at the base big lumps of Cornwall granite etc etc etc

 

[LateThanNever]

A population of 255K is quite significant. So then presumably you can give me an accurate overall cost of a Teignbridge Diversion verses the Okehampton restoration then can you to justify your statement?

It is significant but it is 60% less than 750k and I don't know anyone who can give an accurate cost of either route at present and it will depend on exactly what you do and where you go. But an existing trackbed through a sparsely populated area is at least likely to be quicker - particularly with the planning system - and cheaper don't you think?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not for long distance traffic, they don't need to remain open, though. It's a very tiny percentage that go further than 50 miles, except some freight. This 'strategic link' nonsense was a 90s Highways Agency con (which worked) and got all those schemes built. The A30 and A38 are just essentially for local traffic within the two counties. It is rail that provides the strategic link for business travel (same as everywhere else).

I'm sure too it's the long distance traffic that is train borne - or at present would like to be!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am still not sure how any of you think Okehampton is short term???? It will take at least 5 years if we started the process now! That is not short term. Short term for me would be reinforcing the sea defenses. Gabions at the base big lumps of Cornwall granite etc etc etc

Less of the 'Cornish Granite' - keep it local - otherwise the sea might want to take it back! Surely even 5 years to build a railway in the UK is short term?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Less of the 'Cornish Granite' - keep it local - otherwise the sea might want to take it back! Surely even 5 years to build a railway in the UK is short term?

From what I understand, the cliff areas of Dawlish have geological formations of Permian cross-bedded Aeolian sands and fluvial breccia, together with outcrops of Dawlish sandstone. These seem to have less resistance to the effect of wave erosion than granite, from wherever it is sourced.

So the use of the local geology is not one to be recommended as wave protection material.

 

[The Ham]

I am still not sure how any of you think Okehampton is short term???? It will take at least 5 years if we started the process now! That is not short term. Short term for me would be reinforcing the sea defenses. Gabions at the base big lumps of Cornwall granite etc etc etc

That's still quicker than an avoiding line, which could take that long just in construction (depending on how much tunnelling is required). That would then depend on how much faster you want the Dawlish avoiding line to be designed to: 100mph that's one matter, even 150mph (with the view to be able to run IEP's on it to Cornwall, as they would probably be schemes of a similar time-frame) is another, whilst 200mph (or even a bit faster) so that it can form a key part of any future high speed line without having to slow everything down too much and that's another matter entirely. As although 200mph running would cost more it's unlikely to cost double that of an 100-125 mph line but probably with double the speed advantage over the existing.

 

[YorkshireBear]

That's still quicker than an avoiding line, which could take that long just in construction (depending on how much tunnelling is required). That would then depend on how much faster you want the Dawlish avoiding line to be designed to: 100mph that's one matter, even 150mph (with the view to be able to run IEP's on it to Cornwall, as they would probably be schemes of a similar time-frame) is another, whilst 200mph (or even a bit faster) so that it can form a key part of any future high speed line without having to slow everything down too much and that's another matter entirely. As although 200mph running would cost more it's unlikely to cost double that of an 100-125 mph line but probably with double the speed advantage over the existing.

Just because its quicker than that does not make it short term. People are talking as if it can be done just like that....

It is medium term at best.

 

[LateThanNever]

From what I understand, the cliff areas of Dawlish have geological formations of Permian cross-bedded Aeolian sands and fluvial breccia, together with outcrops of Dawlish sandstone. These seem to have less resistance to the effect of wave erosion than granite, from wherever it is sourced.

So the use of the local geology is not one to be recommended as wave protection material.

Quite - I was just trying to suggest in jocular mode that Devon Granite was also available!

 

[wildcard]

Some comments here presuppose an alternative route would mean Dawlish is abandoned to its fate - personally I think the governments of the future would spend what it takes to keep it open unless the bad weather becomes so chronic we would have far worse to contend with. However an Oakhampton reopening is a relatively cheap and quick fix - and a ready political answer to those good people of Devon and Cornwall who rightly feel let down and forgotten by Westminster . In reality it is not an alternative to a high speed electrified main line from the rest of the UK to the main south coast towns & cities of Devon and Cornwall. Oakhampton is a good idea in its own right. Bovis appear to be paying to Tavistock. The money needs to be found for the central section - single track with passing places and a parkway station at Sourton Down is not expensive in the scheme of things. It would be a poor avoiding route - but it would be an avoiding route, available in extremis .

 

[MarkyT]

Some comments here presuppose an alternative route would mean Dawlish is abandoned to its fate - personally I think the governments of the future would spend what it takes to keep it open unless the bad weather becomes so chronic we would have far worse to contend with

I think the Dawlish coast route would actually have a fairly secure future following construction of a higher speed shorter inland route. If retained for local services and singled that could allow construction of a stronger wall behind the existing face, piled and concreted under the trackbed of the existing outer track. Lower traffic levels, once expresses were diverted to the bypass, could allow greater engineering access to accomplish the work.

 

[LateThanNever]

Some comments here presuppose an alternative route would mean Dawlish is abandoned to its fate - personally I think the governments of the future would spend what it takes to keep it open unless the bad weather becomes so chronic we would have far worse to contend with. However an Oakhampton reopening is a relatively cheap and quick fix - and a ready political answer to those good people of Devon and Cornwall who rightly feel let down and forgotten by Westminster . In reality it is not an alternative to a high speed electrified main line from the rest of the UK to the main south coast towns & cities of Devon and Cornwall. Oakhampton is a good idea in its own right. Bovis appear to be paying to Tavistock. The money needs to be found for the central section - single track with passing places and a parkway station at Sourton Down is not expensive in the scheme of things. It would be a poor avoiding route - but it would be an avoiding route, available in extremis .

Hear hear! It is certainly not an alternative to a 'proper' scheme but in our deprivation we will be grateful for almost anything.....

 

[Bald Rick]

I think the Dawlish coast route would actually have a fairly secure future following construction of a higher speed shorter inland route. If retained for local services and singled that could allow construction of a stronger wall behind the existing face, piled and concreted under the trackbed of the existing outer track. Lower traffic levels, once expresses were diverted to the bypass, could allow greater engineering access to accomplish the work.

Not sure we can wait that long to complete the sea wall strengthening.

So why not build a stronger sea wall in front of the existing face, piled and concreted outside the existing track bed. Being mostly off the railway this could be done with little disruption. Then you have space for a fully functioning two track railway. Or am I being too simple.

 

[HowardGWR]

Not sure we can wait that long to complete the sea wall strengthening.

So why not build a stronger sea wall in front of the existing face, piled and concreted outside the existing track bed. Being mostly off the railway this could be done with little disruption. Then you have space for a fully functioning two track railway. Or am I being too simple.

A tad too simple IMO. Apart from the beach consequences, it brings your barrier nearer to a higher high water. Really it would be handier to knock the houses down and move the track back, perhaps under a 'snow shelf'.

In other words, retreat, not advance.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Some comments here presuppose an alternative route would mean Dawlish is abandoned to its fate - personally I think the governments of the future would spend what it takes to keep it open unless the bad weather becomes so chronic we would have far worse to contend with. However an Oakhampton reopening is a relatively cheap and quick fix - and a ready political answer to those good people of Devon and Cornwall who rightly feel let down and forgotten by Westminster . In reality it is not an alternative to a high speed electrified main line from the rest of the UK to the main south coast towns & cities of Devon and Cornwall. Oakhampton is a good idea in its own right. Bovis appear to be paying to Tavistock. The money needs to be found for the central section - single track with passing places and a parkway station at Sourton Down is not expensive in the scheme of things. It would be a poor avoiding route - but it would be an avoiding route, available in extremis .

It's Okehampton.

 

[47802]

The assumption by many seems to be that Okehampton route will be both quick and cheap, which seems very doubtful to me, Tavistock will cost what up to £26 million and that's for an extremely basic shuttle to Bere Alston. Any Okehampton route would need to be able to support at least 1 diverted express per hour in each direction plus local services. I doubt it will be as cheap as some people seem to think.

 

[MarkyT]

Not sure we can wait that long to complete the sea wall strengthening.

So why not build a stronger sea wall in front of the existing face, piled and concreted outside the existing track bed. Being mostly off the railway this could be done with little disruption. Then you have space for a fully functioning two track railway. Or am I being too simple.

I definitely agree that as much as possible needs to be done to protect the existing double track route in the short and medium term, widening the wall outwards for strength if that's practical. I suggested singling, clearly only once reduced in status after opening of a bypass, to simplify longer term maintenance and renewals of all the assets, provide easier access and a continuous safety refuge for staff and to allow the outer buildings, platform and footbridge at Dawlish to be removed, which incidentally would solve the disabled access problem there - the up platform is great with a newish ramp to street but the down is via a light controlled barrow crossing at the south end, not usable when the station is unmanned.

 

[yorksrob]

The assumption by many seems to be that Okehampton route will be both quick and cheap, which seems very doubtful to me, Tavistock will cost what up to £26 million and that's for an extremely basic shuttle to Bere Alston. Any Okehampton route would need to be able to support at least 1 diverted express per hour in each direction plus local services. I doubt it will be as cheap as some people seem to think.

I don't think that's the case. The figures quoted for the Okehampton route are £150m - £200m, which, even accounting for the longer route and additional infrastructure, is still rather higher mile for mile. It will be interesting to see if the Tavistock section can be done for £26m, however, whether that's optimistic or not, no ones assuming the whole route can be done at the same rate. Nevertheless, in terms of a major infrastructure project, £150m - £200m isn't an unreasonable amount.

 

[swt_passenger]

Not sure we can wait that long to complete the sea wall strengthening.

So why not build a stronger sea wall in front of the existing face, piled and concreted outside the existing track bed. Being mostly off the railway this could be done with little disruption. Then you have space for a fully functioning two track railway. Or am I being too simple.

I don't think you are. The evidence so far seems to be that the sea wall was breached at a particular section that was always much narrower than the rest, (for reasons already pointed out earlier in the thread).

If the current repairs were to be made and then that length widened to match those sections either side there's then no reason to single the route that I can see.

 

[jmc100]

Last evening I did some research using Google Earth of the Okehampton to Tavistock route to find out the state of the bridges and viaducts on the route. What I found using the image facility shows that the stonework of the constructions is in remarkably good condition for their age. If this route was reopened at some time in the near future I feel sure that these structures would remain intact with maybe a slight lowering of the track bed in places to accommodate future electrification.

Whilst searching I also came across two very interesting papers that you may find are worth perusing in detail.

The first by Devon County Council - link below - copy into address bar.

https://www.devon.gov.uk/loadtrimdocument?url=&filename=EEC/10/216/HQ.CMR&rn=10/WD2500&dg=Public

The other paper is a study thesis by David A. Dawson and the full PDF version can be found on this web page and is titled:- The Impact of Sea-Level Rise on the London to Penzance Railway Line. It's well worth a read.

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=Dawlish+avoiding+line+proposals&start=10

 

[yorksrob]

Last evening I did some research using Google Earth of the Okehampton to Tavistock route to find out the state of the bridges and viaducts on the route. What I found using the image facility shows that the stonework of the constructions is in remarkably good condition for their age. If this route was reopened at some time in the near future I feel sure that these structures would remain intact with maybe a slight lowering of the track bed in places to accommodate future electrification.

Whilst searching I also came across two very interesting papers that you may find are worth perusing in detail.

The first by Devon County Council - link below - copy into address bar.
]

Very interesting. The report recognises the value of the Okehampton line as complementing the GW main line but not replacing it (although curiouslysome parts, including the equality impact assesssment read as though it is a replacement scheme). Hopefuly Devon CC will be strenuously pressing their case.

 

[Trainbuff]

I don't think that's the case. The figures quoted for the Okehampton route are £150m - £200m, which, even accounting for the longer route and additional infrastructure, is still rather higher mile for mile. It will be interesting to see if the Tavistock section can be done for £26m, however, whether that's optimistic or not, no ones assuming the whole route can be done at the same rate. Nevertheless, in terms of a major infrastructure project, £150m - £200m isn't an unreasonable amount.

Indeed. Just to clarify. Shillamill Tunnel and Viaduct are in sound condition (though doubted somewhat in the DCC report) as are most of the other structures up to the proposed station limit at least. This was confirmed at a meeting held in Plymouth University in mid January. After the site of the proposed station of course bridges are missing etc so more money would need to be spent.

For instance the Borders Railway is costing £294million to complete. It is 30.5 miles long. Mainly rebuilt as single track it has double track for around 40% of its route miles (12 miles to be precise). That works out at just under £10million per mile. If you take the Airdie-Bathgate line the cost is £300million for 15 miles of double track electified line. Or approximately £20million per mile. Both of these alignments have had to re-furbish and replace bridges. In the former there are pictures of the railway 'burrowing' under a major roundabout. Check out the link below for pictures etc.

http://www.bordersrailway.co.uk/

Worth a look. The likely cost with 40% ( 6.5 miles) of the missing 16.5 miles dualled would be in the order of £165million. Obviously extra work would be required to bring the Meldon-Crediton stretch up to a good speed.

This is just an observation on costs. Whether the Government rebuild it depends on how much people, Businesses and MP's forget about this issue when the Sea Wall has re-opened. In an ideal world a new link would be built under the Haldon Hills and Dawlish kept as a branch line for local traffic AND summer use for holiday services. And the Okehampton route open as well

However. I am a skeptic and know we do NOT live an ideal world!

 

[MarkyT]

I don't think you are. The evidence so far seems to be that the sea wall was breached at a particular section that was always much narrower than the rest, (for reasons already pointed out earlier in the thread).

If the current repairs were to be made and then that length widened to match those sections either side there's then no reason to single the route that I can see.

Singling the existing busy double track on the sea wall now would not work, and would risk becoming a significant source of conflict and delay even if a carefully choreographed timetable could path the capacity required theoretically. The inner track is already signalled bidirectional so it can be used easily at quiet times to allow closure of the outer one for engineering access for example, but a permanent single line has insufficient capacity for the full service.

In the event of a bypass route taking expresses inland, double track remaining on the coast for locals would be preferable to single track operationally, with much more capacity and flexibility, so if it can be retained then that's best.

Some myths busted:
1. A bypass need not and would be very unlikely to result in permanent closure of the coast route in any reasonable foreseeable future, indeed the coast provides much needed extra capacity for service type segregation and regulation during normal operations on a busy part of the network.
2. That coast route retained should not be reduced permanently to single track along the sea wall as part of a bypass scheme, or otherwise in future unless essential for engineering reasons in a critical 'route survival' scenario. Any reduction in capacity or flexibility is not desirable assuming previous work has secured the double track alignment adequately.

I also thought about freight gauging with the possibility of extending W8 clearance west of Exeter, and using the nice level coast line by moving a single line to the centre of the former double track tunnels, but a newly constructed bypass would likely have generous loading gauge anyway although it's potentially steep gradients might be a deterrent to freight operations thereon.

 

[LateThanNever]

Last evening I did some research using Google Earth of the Okehampton to Tavistock route to find out the state of the bridges and viaducts on the route. What I found using the image facility shows that the stonework of the constructions is in remarkably good condition for their age. If this route was reopened at some time in the near future I feel sure that these structures would remain intact with maybe a slight lowering of the track bed in places to accommodate future electrification.


The other paper is a study thesis by David A. Dawson and the full PDF version can be found on this web page and is titled:- The Impact of Sea-Level Rise on the London to Penzance Railway Line. It's well worth a read.

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=Dawlish+avoiding+line+proposals&start=10

This 2010 report is very interesting. Among the salient points- some of which seem remarkably prophetic:
South Devon is sinking faster than any other part of the UK!
44 years of the 160 years the line has been built there have been problems affecting train services and over 50% of those were in the last 25 years
He points out that the sections at Cockwood and along the river Teign are also very vulnerable to rising tide levels and apparently these are maintained by Teignbridge council
"Decision makers must acknowledge that, from this evidence, it is not a case of 'if' but more a case of 'when' the railway will be severely disrupted (and even closed)".
"Who will be involved in making the decision [for an alternative]? Will it be reactive - and wait till the railway network is cut in half? Or will it be strategic – and acknowledge all the potential cost involved to make a well balanced and justified decision?"

 

[YorkshireBear]

David Dawson's work is well worth a read. Very thorough. Probably the best piece of research on this particular issue as it is impartial with him working at the Uni of Leeds. I suggest anyone with a proper interest in this subject at least scan reads it.