Next priority project - re-doubling of SW mainline.

[devon_belle]

Do you mean East of Pinhoe so that trains from Exeter can still run to there?

Exeter is west of Pinhoe. I mean so that a train can terminate from the west in Pinhoe up platform and return without shunting onto the single track.

 

[AndrewE]

Exeter is west of Pinhoe. I mean so that a train can terminate from the west in Pinhoe up platform and return without shunting onto the single track.

Thanks, that is clearer now. I must get an atlas which shows single and double track differently!

 

[Krokodil]

But if this is disruption meaning trains have to terminate at Pinhoe, why would that matter?

In which case unless you have suitable signalling to turn back without entering the section you may need a pilot to work to the point of obstruction.

 

[swt_passenger]

My own view is that the landscape has changed since the 1970's when many of the local services were axed, RE-doubling, and upgrading the WEML, would add more flexibility to the line operationally, and would, again IMHO, enable better level of service if the line speed can also be raised.

For the record, Whilst this was not directed towards me, i think that full reopening of the closed route, as both a community, devon metro, and as an alternative for communities along the closed route, to enable the choice if people want to use the train, rather than the car, should be applauded.

If the line speed throughout, was compatible to the exsisting line speeds between Plymouth and London, then surely having an alternative route, for when sometthing closes , or disrupts the exsisting line makes operational sence.

It’s doubtful the line speed would ever be raised enough to be similar to the existing GW route, and closed lines rarely get opened on the basis of potential diversionary use. Remember the Dawlish sea wall problem is deemed fixed with a life of approaching 100 years.

 

[yorksrob]

It’s doubtful the line speed would ever be raised enough to be similar to the existing GW route, and closed lines rarely get opened on the basis of potential diversionary use. Remember the Dawlish sea wall problem is deemed fixed with a life of approaching 100 years.

As I've pointed out on many occasions, the diversionary capacity is only a cherry on the Bakewell. Connecting towns and opening up new hinterlands to rail is the main Bakewell.

Also, an additional route can give passengers more options even where not a single train is diverted.

 

[Recessio]

A couple of years of traffic disruption and millions of pounds... In this case I would settle for a short length of singled or gauntletted track.

What's the advantage of gauntlet track over single track? Does it avoid having points?

 

[Zomboid]

What's the advantage of gauntlet track over single track? Does it avoid having points?

Yes, it still has the common crossing (or whatever the correct term is), but there are no moving parts, so less of a maintenance liability.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, it still has the common crossing (or whatever the correct term is), but there are no moving parts, so less of a maintenance liability.

I'd never considered that before. I wonder why they went for single track sections on the Hastings line rather than gauntlets (although the single track sections offer reversing opportunities).

 

[Zomboid]

I'd never considered that before. I wonder why they went for single track sections on the Hastings line rather than gauntlets (although the single track sections offer reversing opportunities).

You'd need a 3rd rail on both sides to get alignment with the shoes. Which is quite a hazard.

 

[yorksrob]

You'd need a 3rd rail on both sides to get alignment with the shoes. Which is quite a hazard.

Oh yes, of course !

 

[The Planner]

Yes, it still has the common crossing (or whatever the correct term is), but there are no moving parts, so less of a maintenance liability.

Saves you S&C, but still needs the signalling to protect it and would still have to be timetabled as a single line.

 

[brad465]

Does gauntlet track exist on any mainline in the UK? I know the Croydon tramlink has a section of it, but if it doesn't exist on the mainline, a whole new set of safety standards and procedures will be required.

 

[Zomboid]

Does gauntlet track exist on any mainline in the UK? I know the Croydon tramlink has a section of it, but if it doesn't exist on the mainline, a whole new set of safety standards and procedures will be required.

There was some at Selby I believe, but don't there there's any now. Probably too non standard to actually get built somewhere like Exeter, really.

 

[yorksrob]

There was some at Selby I believe, but don't there there's any now. Probably too non standard to actually get built somewhere like Exeter, really.

Bern through Selby on many occasions. Never seen it.

 

[Zomboid]

Bern through Selby on many occasions. Never seen it.

Not there now, I think it was over the bridge in LNER days

 

[marshlinker]

You'd need a 3rd rail on both sides to get alignment with the shoes. Which is quite a hazard.

Whilst that is obviously so, I doubt it was the driver. Mountfield Tunnel was singled in 1974 well before electrification and when the DEMUs were only 15 years old.

 

[AndrewE]

I'd never considered that before. I wonder why they went for single track sections on the Hastings line rather than gauntlets (although the single track sections offer reversing opportunities).

agreed, points into single line sections would allow reversing - if the signalling allowed it - see the posts about Pinhoe up-thread...

You'd need a 3rd rail on both sides to get alignment with the shoes. Which is quite a hazard.

Why a special hazard? It would be unusual but there must be other places with a conductor rail either side of the track. (But the Devon end of the SW main line hasn't got 3rd rail as far as I am aware!) You could spread the gauntlet far enough for each direction to only engage one conductor rail, assuming that it doesn't then foul one of the other running lines... I must get my crayons out to see if it might work!

Saves you S&C, but still needs the signalling to protect it and would still have to be timetabled as a single line.

Definitely would have to be signalled and timetabled as a single line, but just 2 diamond crossings (the "C" of "S&C") and no moving parts at all...

 

[The Planner]

Definitely would have to be signalled and timetabled as a single line, but just 2 diamond crossings (the "C" of "S&C") and no moving parts at all...

Still needs looking after as any fixed diamond does, they aren't overly liked by asset engineers.

 

[AndrewE]

Still needs looking after as any fixed diamond does, they aren't overly liked by asset engineers.

Maybe so, but that's life! (Isn't that their job?) If they can cope with sets of "points" then surely one fixed crossing each end of a gauntletted section should be welcomed by them? Tell them to be grateful that there are no switches to be looked after too...

 

[30907]

Exeter St Davids to Honiton is about 28 minutes on current schedules, so you wouldn't be able to run an hourly service with a single unit. On the basis that it doesn't increase the number of diagrams, it's probably worthwhile running the extra 10 miles to Axminster and back rather than have the train sitting idle (and potentially blocking a platform) at Exeter for most of every hour.

But the proposal is to run through from Crediton, which makes Honiton an ideal turnround for a half hourly or hourly stopper.
If Axminster is busier than Honiton westbound, then that rebalances things.

 

[yorksrob]

But the proposal is to run through from Crediton, which makes Honiton an ideal turnround for a half hourly or hourly stopper.
If Axminster is busier than Honiton westbound, then that rebalances things.

Yes, I think my re-doubling proposal should make the route more of a regional route in its own right, rather than just being the far end of the line from Waterloo.

 

[sharpener]

Why a special hazard? It would be unusual but there must be other places with a conductor rail either side of the track. (But the Devon end of the SW main line hasn't got 3rd rail as far as I am aware!) You could spread the gauntlet far enough for each direction to only engage one conductor rail, assuming that it doesn't then foul one of the other running lines... I must get my crayons out to see if it might work!

Mechanically this is not an issue. Conductor rail frequently overlaps on both side of track in S & C areas to ensure there are no gaps. The opposite directions with gauntlet track would need the conductor rails on opposite (outer) sides. Conductor rail is higher than running rails so the inside shoes would not catch on the latter so I don't see any problem.

 

[Zomboid]

It's not usual to have long stretches with a con rail on both sides though, and then put it in a tunnel as well, with gauntlet track so on the "wrong" side it's not under the train and you've got a lot off unique risks there.

I don't know what it was like in the 80s, but that would be quite the risk assessment these days.

 

[brad465]

But the proposal is to run through from Crediton, which makes Honiton an ideal turnround for a half hourly or hourly stopper.
If Axminster is busier than Honiton westbound, then that rebalances things.

Honiton is busier, but very marginally. The number of passengers from Axminster is high enough to warrant this being the turnback point if doing so doesn't lead to overcrowding into Exeter, plus this also helps cater for the flow between Axminster and Honiton. Here are the approximate flows:

Axminster: 53,500 to EXC, 11,500 to EXD and 11,209 to Honiton
Honiton: 54,600 to EXC, 17,000 to EXD

 

[sharpener]

It's not usual to have long stretches with a con rail on both sides though

I thought we were talking about short stretches of gauntlet track to save widening bridges etc. Over long distances surely the cost of the extra rails (+ 3rd rail or not) would quickly overtake that of the pointwork either end of conventional singled track. Particularly as there is no saving on the signalling.

 

[Zomboid]

Honiton is busier, but very marginally. The number of passengers from Axminster is high enough to warrant this being the turnback point if doing so doesn't lead to overcrowding into Exeter, plus this also helps cater for the flow between Axminster and Honiton. Here are the approximate flows:

Axminster: 53,500 to EXC, 11,500 to EXD and 11,209 to Honiton
Honiton: 54,600 to EXC, 17,000 to EXD

The follow up question is whether Axminster going half hourly (or better) would increase passenger numbers enough to justify the additional unit(s) to run there. Honiton is bigger so has higher potential passenger numbers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jul 2026 ==

I thought we were talking about short stretches of gauntlet track to save widening bridges etc. Over long distances surely the cost of the extra rails (+ 3rd rail or not) would quickly overtake that of the pointwork either end of conventional singled track. Particularly as there is no saving on the signalling.

No, that discussion was about not having gauntlet track on the Hastings line, where the single sections are much longer than anywhere you'll find double con rails.

 

[AndrewE]

I thought we were talking about short stretches of gauntlet track to save widening bridges etc. Over long distances surely the cost of the extra rails (+ 3rd rail or not) would quickly overtake that of the pointwork either end of conventional singled track. Particularly as there is no saving on the signalling.

but lots of savings on fitting and maintaining moving parts of points, power supplies to point motors etc., power cables to be nicked. With gauntletted track "just" the signalling stuff...

 

[brad465]

The follow up question is whether Axminster going half hourly (or better) would increase passenger numbers enough to justify the additional unit(s) to run there. Honiton is bigger so has higher potential passenger numbers.

Axminster however boasts being a railhead for Lyme Regis and Seaton, so arguably serves a larger catchment area.

 

[devon_belle]

To keep a decent line speed through the gauntlet track section, wouldn't you have to have switched frogs due to the acute angle needed? If so is it any easier than just installing normal pointwork?

 

[30907]

Honiton is busier, but very marginally. The number of passengers from Axminster is high enough to warrant this being the turnback point if doing so doesn't lead to overcrowding into Exeter, plus this also helps cater for the flow between Axminster and Honiton. Here are the approximate flows:

Axminster: 53,500 to EXC, 11,500 to EXD and 11,209 to Honiton
Honiton: 54,600 to EXC, 17,000 to EXD

Thanks.