Okehampton - Tavistock (Connection to Launceston - Padstow)

[Gommy]

Dear wise and wizened experienced rial engineering forum,

So...can we please have the railway reinstalled using the existing track beds to reinstate the northern bypass of Dartmoor to Tavistock and onward to Plymouth with a branch off on the old GWR to Padstow.

This would reinvigorate China Clay freight and a Cornish Riviera service from Waterloo. I am yet to understand why the Waterloo train still terminates at Exeter when it could terminate at Okehampton.

The towns are growing much larger than they were, Launceston and Okehampton especially, and with no fast connections without the Faff of going around the south coast (which is why everyone drives to Exeter) to catch the train. That and 15 million stops on the Cornish 'main line' that makes it a very time poor service.

Thoughts? For me its a far better use of the HS2 dividend that any northern or eastern projects as they are so well served with infrastructure as it is.

Yours,

Infrastructurelovinggrumpywestcountrymanengineer.

 

[Brush 4]

You won't get much support from most on here. A few will take a positive view but, most will kill the idea. I presume you mean the GWR line to Bodmin, now preserved, and then on to Padstow via the old SR line. They want to extend to Wadebridge, after that, on your bike really as it is the popular Camel Trail cycleway.

Replacing one early and one late local Oke service with an extended Waterloo service to/from Okehampton should be possible, with a can-do attitude. Not all of them though, at least not until the whole SR route is reopened. (2050ish) I'll be a ghost by then but at least I'll have free invisible travel......

 

[Irascible]

There are some monster Okehampton-Tavistock threads about - it would not be any quicker than the current line even at main-line standards. There's other reasons you might want to build it, but you're not gonig to sell it on speed - far better to spend cash on rebuilding the existing line for higher speeds than have a 2nd route that doesn't improve anything. There was some discussion about Padstow recently, there is the slight issue of how on earth do you get through Wadebridge, going around would put a station way out of any useful location & there's no way through on the old alignment without ripping up some considerable development .. plus the camel trail's popularity. If you are attempting to reinstate the old North Cornwall line from Okehampton-Halwill-Wadebridge, then ... well I'm surprised it lasted as long as it managed, tbh. That is definitely a line through the middle of nowhere. Okehampton-Launceston would be an interesting idea if it didn't require a couple of hundred million of new bridge at Meldon ( guesstimating for construction inflation over the last guess from someone who'd know... ).

Where do people in Launceston want to go, mostly?

Why should Waterloo trains terminate at Okehampton? I'd rather the Okehampton trains turned round at Axminster.

Edit: I missed it somehow, but there was no HS2 dividend, that was smoke & mirrors. There are several lines I'm rather sad that disappeared in Devon & Cornwall - Ilfracombe just had a few too many problems, Bideford & Torrington ( I suspect we wouldn't have passenger trains to Torrington though ) might still be here but for Meeth clay works wanting upgrades, I'd love to be able to go to Bude by train, I've had a rant about Tiverton a few times ... but after 40-50 years it's not a case of just putting things back and if you're building a new railway, ask yourself it the way an old one went is really the best way? Build a case for them, maybe there's an angle we've missed, just be prepared to have it attacked.

 

[SynthD]

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-for-bere-alston-tavistock-okehampton.255787/ is that monster thread.

As far as I remember, that thread is about passenger services. What China clay freight are you expecting to see?

 

[D Williams]

Dear wise and wizened experienced rial engineering forum,

So...can we please have the railway reinstalled using the existing track beds to reinstate the northern bypass of Dartmoor to Tavistock and onward to Plymouth with a branch off on the old GWR to Padstow.

This would reinvigorate China Clay freight and a Cornish Riviera service from Waterloo. I am yet to understand why the Waterloo train still terminates at Exeter when it could terminate at Okehampton.

The towns are growing much larger than they were, Launceston and Okehampton especially, and with no fast connections without the Faff of going around the south coast (which is why everyone drives to Exeter) to catch the train. That and 15 million stops on the Cornish 'main line' that makes it a very time poor service.

Thoughts? For me its a far better use of the HS2 dividend that any northern or eastern projects as they are so well served with infrastructure as it is.

Yours,

Infrastructurelovinggrumpywestcountrymanengineer.

Ha ha! How long have you got for an explanation? The fast connection is already in place from Okehampton. Okehampton is just up the A30 ( 20 miles / 25 mins) from Launceston. A parkway style station is to be built.

The china clay industry is a shadow of its former self. It's more likely to close down than to be reinvigorated. The Cornish Riviera came from and still does, Paddington and goes to Penzance. The Atlantic Coast Express started at Waterloo and after dropping off coaches for all sorts of places en route rambled into Padstow with about two outside the holiday period.

There is no business case for reinstating a rail line to Wadebridge ( it's been looked at) and even if it was then getting to Padstow is impossible without some very creative and costly civil engineering works.

There is a dim plan for a half-hourly service from Okehampton but this requires a lot of investment in infrastructure and signalling and I wouldn't hold your breath waiting.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Oct 2024 ==

I also forgot to mention that china clay never went via Okehampton unless Dawlish was blocked which was very much the exception. Most china clay workings were within what was termed the Cornish Mineral Area ie from the clay works to Par or Fowey then by coaster or deep sea. Some from Lee Mill went via Victoria Wharves at Plymouth. Longer distance traffic went to Stoke or later Irvine ( the "silver bullets"). There wasn't much goods traffic generated on the Okehampton route as there was little or no industry. Meldon quarry provided a lot but then that was mostly for the railway's use. Rebuilding it is a nice thought ( for enthusiasts) but if you drive around the area you wonder why it lasted as long as it did.

 

[Meerkat]

I would think Barnstaple/Oakhampton would rather have a reliable service to Exeter rather than an unreliable service to Waterloo, subject to the vagaries of the busy Waterloo area and the single line sections.

 

[yorksrob]

Dear wise and wizened experienced rial engineering forum,

So...can we please have the railway reinstalled using the existing track beds to reinstate the northern bypass of Dartmoor to Tavistock and onward to Plymouth with a branch off on the old GWR to Padstow.

This would reinvigorate China Clay freight and a Cornish Riviera service from Waterloo. I am yet to understand why the Waterloo train still terminates at Exeter when it could terminate at Okehampton.

The towns are growing much larger than they were, Launceston and Okehampton especially, and with no fast connections without the Faff of going around the south coast (which is why everyone drives to Exeter) to catch the train. That and 15 million stops on the Cornish 'main line' that makes it a very time poor service.

Thoughts? For me its a far better use of the HS2 dividend that any northern or eastern projects as they are so well served with infrastructure as it is.

Yours,

Infrastructurelovinggrumpywestcountrymanengineer.

I agree wholeheartedly, however the Beeching acolytes on here won't !

 

[Meerkat]

I agree wholeheartedly, however the Beeching acolytes on here won't !

Is this the railway equivalent of Godwin’s Law?

 

[InkyScrolls]

Is this the railway equivalent of Godwin’s Law?

It seems to be the RailForums equivalent, certainly.

 

[Ashley Hill]

There’s also a semi-active group campaigning to re-open to Bude. If we can’t even get Tavistock re-opened then there’s really no hope for anything else. Shame really. Has anyone mentioned Ilfracombe yet?

 

[I'm here now]

I agree wholeheartedly, however the Beeching acolytes on here won't !

Put up wires while we’re at it, have it as an all in one construction project.

 

[yorksrob]

Put up wires while we’re at it, have it as an all in one construction project.

Makes sense to do it as one in many ways. That said, I'd be happy to go with whatever gets it done.

 

[kegdr]

The china clay industry is a shadow of its former self. It's more likely to close down than to be reinvigorated.

The lithium industry being built up in the shadow of the clay pits is keen to use the rail infrastructure both for material import and export.

 

[Meerkat]

The lithium industry being built up in the shadow of the clay pits is keen to use the rail infrastructure both for material import and export.

Are their volumes anything like rail suitable?

 

[HSTEd]

Are their volumes anything like rail suitable?

My understanding is that its mostly recovery from brines.

So no, it will be single lorryloads.

EDIT:
THere is apparently a proposed hard rock mine at Trevalour, but its only projected to be 7800 tonnes lithium hydroxide per year.
So about 20 tonnes per day.

 

[kegdr]

Correct, it's the Trelavour part they're most interested in rail use for. The capacity is actually 10,000 tonnes per year. The processing facility there has already been constructed and uses a building complex with an existing rail line going into it - just needs a couple small lengths of track reinstated where a road has been concreted over the line and a general tidy up.

It's not just the export of lithium that might bring traffic but also the import of materials used for the process as well as exports of potential byproducts.

 

[Meerkat]

Correct, it's the Trelavour part they're most interested in rail use for. The capacity is actually 10,000 tonnes per year. The processing facility there has already been constructed and uses a building complex with an existing rail line going into it - just needs a couple small lengths of track reinstated where a road has been concreted over the line and a general tidy up.

It's not just the export of lithium that might bring traffic but also the import of materials used for the process as well as exports of potential byproducts.

Have you got any good links about this - sounds interesting!
10,000 tonnes is surely not viable - even trainloads to a port/distribution centre would be too infrequent for customers.
Unless hard rock involves vast amounts of 'spoil' that can be used as aggregate?

 

[kegdr]

Thankfully their launch event was yesterday (I was on site the day before for work), so plenty of news now coming out about it! https://www.mining.com/cornish-lithium-opens-uks-first-low-emission-lithium-plant/

 

[brad465]

Are their volumes anything like rail suitable?

My understanding is that its mostly recovery from brines.

So no, it will be single lorryloads.

EDIT:
THere is apparently a proposed hard rock mine at Trevalour, but its only projected to be 7800 tonnes lithium hydroxide per year.
So about 20 tonnes per day.

How dangerous a substance is it to transport? Nuclear flask trains are so rail reliant you can have more locos than wagons sometimes on a particular consist (if substance danger/stability is the main reason nuclear flasks go most of the way by rail).

 

[AlastairFraser]

How dangerous a substance is it to transport? Nuclear flask trains are so rail reliant you can have more locos than wagons sometimes on a particular consist (if substance danger/stability is the main reason nuclear flasks go most of the way by rail).

It depends. Water ingress can be dangerous with some forms of lithium. Rail might be worth it with lithium exports if they were direct railhead to port, because then you can minimise any transhipment and opportunities for contamination. It could also be useful for the raw materials if imported (as noted by other members).

 

[Chester1]

I am yet to understand why the Waterloo train still terminates at Exeter when it could terminate at Okehampton.

In addition to the reliability problem mentioned by @Meerkat the other problem is rolling stock. SWR doesn't have sufficient 158s and 159s to extend its Exeter service. This could be changed but then there would be follow on logistical issues. It's perhaps something that could be looked at for a second hourly service. Reliability is extremely important for a line with an hourly service and the current setup is more reliable.

The best option for a London link could be a 5 coach daily GWR service splitting and joining with another unit at Exeter. This might be viable when Okehampton Interchange opens.

 

[stevieinselby]

I am yet to understand why the Waterloo train still terminates at Exeter when it could terminate at Okehampton.

I am yet to understand why the XC service from Cardiff terminates at Nottingham when it could terminate at Skegness.
I am yet to understand why the Northern Hull–York train doesn't run right through to Kyle of Lochalsh...

Here are a few reasons:

• SWR services to Exeter usually run as 6-car sets. That's massive overkill for the branch line to Okehampton. Stepping some units back at Exeter would reduce that but would increase operational complications and tie up platform space.
• Extending the SWR service would require additional units. Doubtful they have enough 159s for that, I would rather they focused on providing sufficient capacity on the routes they do run.
• It significantly increases the risk of delays propagating across the network. The single line sections of the South West Main Line already cause reliability problems, as does the busy line into Waterloo.
• It's pointless. The SWR trains are over an hour slower to London than the fast GWR trains. The vast majority of the very small number of passengers wanting to travel between Okehampton and London would still change at Exeter for a GWR train anyway, even if their train continued to Waterloo.