Does Gunnislake have a future?

[civ-eng-jim]

When first proposed by the developers (forgotten their name) there was a draft timetable which showed the proposed services... I believe a link was posted on this website... Tavistock trains were patched around the existing Gunnislake trains...

Has the proposed service changed from that originally proposed???

They're 6 years old but try these documents:

http://www.kilbridegroup.com/tavistock/docs.asp

 

[Busaholic]

Here is another permutation!!
Run one train (153) between Tavistock and Gunnislake .
And another 2 coach train between Bere Alston and Plymouth.
Hope they can spend a little more & install some signalling and a loop.

That would mean both Gunnislake and Tavistock passengers bound for Plymouth changing! Also, the intention in the long run is to extend beyond Tavistock to Okehampton and a fully-functioning line over north Dartmoor to Exeter.

 

[40129]

How about trains being 2xcl.153 Plymouth-Bere Alston with one car continuing to Tavistock and one to Gunnislake?

 

[edwin_m]

How about trains being 2xcl.153 Plymouth-Bere Alston with one car continuing to Tavistock and one to Gunnislake?

Good idea in principle but that would extend running times by about 10min due to all the faffing with tokens and couplings.

 

[Tomnick]

The intention is to have no signalling at all beyond the place at St Budeaux where the branch staff is picked up and dropped off - this then unlocks the frame at Bere Alston in conjunction with a one-train staff to Gunnislake. Even providing an instrument at Bere Alston is an extra cost, both for cable routes and for alterations to the interlocking at St Budeaux.

Hopefully if the line is successful, or when Plymouth is re-signalled, the arrangements can be improved.

I accept that changing from OTW to NSTR would involve extra cost, but I wouldn't have thought that it'd be relatively significant - in particular, I'm sure that it could be done without any substantial changes to the interlocking at the Plymouth end, with the conditions for signalling a train onto - and off? - the branch (all tokens in) and clearing the down 'starter' at St Budeaux (token released) presumably being similar to the present arrangements. The bulk of the work would be in providing the intermediate instruments and getting them all in communication. Now perhaps an S&T bod could pop in and prove me wrong on all of the above .

The proposed arrangements though - an OTW section with another OTW section branching off midway - sound like a potential operating nightmare though, with no way (short of conveying the train staff by road) of getting a unit on or off the Gunnislake section without being 'escorted' by another unit. Possibly easy to arrange at the start and end of service, but a potential operating nightmare otherwise.

Given that the Majority of people would be heading to Plymouth, even timing it so that the Gunislake unit could make it to Devonport probably wouldn't bring that much benefit.

Looking at just the stations between Plymouth and Bere Alston their annual use is about 68,000 people, this is compared with 42,000 for Bere Alston and 52,000 for Gunnislake, with a further 30,000 for Calstock (a total of about double that of the first few stations out of Plymouth at about 128,000).

If there was justification for direct services it may be possible to run Plymouth to Gunnislake and back on an 3 hour cycle with the time in the middle used for two shutle runs between Gunislake and Bere Alston. That would then mean that it would just be possible for two units doing that to run it on a 2 hour frequency (passing at Bere Alston), although it would be farily tight.

Apologies, didn't make myself very clear there. I was trying to propose arranging the service such that the Gunnislake unit occupied the St Budeaux - Bere Alston section - in one direction - whilst the Tavistock unit was between St Budeaux and Plymouth and back.

The track layout at Bere Alston to provide a Gunislake-Tavistock shuttle would require a footbridge to access the platforms - An extra capital expense for D.C.C. The plan is to build out the existing island platform (The former UP platform) so passengers on the Tavistock-Plymouth and the Gunislake-Bere Alston services can board and alight on the island side. The existing operational platform will be used only twice a day when the Gunislake and Tavistock trains combine/split in the evening and morning.

I agree that is does seem a waste as a Gunislake-Bere Alston shuttle is not an efficient use for a train and staff.

If the Gunnislake service is operated as a through service, though, there'd be no need for a bay platform at all - just a single through platform. A bay platform might be desirable though, for flexibility.

 

[swcovas]

Interesting thread. However is there actually any progress on the possible reopening? I seem to remember that the whole project was dependant on the construction of some 800 houses by the Kilbride Group in Tavistock. what's happening with that?

 

[civ-eng-jim]

Interesting thread. However is there actually any progress on the possible reopening? I seem to remember that the whole project was dependant on the construction of some 800 houses by the Kilbride Group in Tavistock. what's happening with that?

A single option design for track, drainage, stations, geotech, bridges and comms is to be submitted soon for Approval in Principle. When approved this design will form the basis for the planning application which could take 18 months. Detailed Design probably won't begin until the end of 2015 at the earliest. Construction could take a year.

I'm not entirely sure on the funding but a large bulk will come from section 106 money as a result of a housing development in Tavistock.

 

[yorksrob]

If the Gunnislake service is operated as a through service, though, there'd be no need for a bay platform at all - just a single through platform. A bay platform might be desirable though, for flexibility.

This is true. At Castleford, we have a single platform which accommodates four reversing trains each hour (plus various through freights etc) so one platform at Bere Alston could easily accommodate Gunnislake and Tavistock services (signalling permitting).

 

[edwin_m]

This is true. At Castleford, we have a single platform which accommodates four reversing trains each hour (plus various through freights etc) so one platform at Bere Alston could easily accommodate Gunnislake and Tavistock services (signalling permitting).

But while the Gunnislake train was in the platform, a Tavistock train would have to be prevented from arriving, and vice versa. This would either require fixed signals or several extra token stops on the approaches to the station.

 

[civ-eng-jim]

This is true. At Castleford, we have a single platform which accommodates four reversing trains each hour (plus various through freights etc) so one platform at Bere Alston could easily accommodate Gunnislake and Tavistock services (signalling permitting).

I'm not sure I'm following: So the Gunislake to Plymouth service would be the principal service and Tavistock trains just shuttle back and forth between Bere Alston and Tavistock?

Signalling will remain as token block.

 

[edwin_m]

The proposed arrangements though - an OTW section with another OTW section branching off midway - sound like a potential operating nightmare though, with no way (short of conveying the train staff by road) of getting a unit on or off the Gunnislake section without being 'escorted' by another unit. Possibly easy to arrange at the start and end of service, but a potential operating nightmare otherwise.

If the need arose to swap the Gunnislake unit during the day, it could just be attached to the next working towards Plymouth. This might cause a few minutes delay but probably acceptable for an unusual event.

 

[Tomnick]

But while the Gunnislake train was in the platform, a Tavistock train would have to be prevented from arriving, and vice versa. This would either require fixed signals or several extra token stops on the approaches to the station.

Indeed, that would only work if the Gunnislake service could operate through to Plymouth - it'd be no use if it had to be shut inside all day, and I doubt (despite my earlier post making a suggestion to the contrary) it'd even work with a single NSTR section from St Budeaux to Tavistock. I still think that a relatively cheap and simple installation at Bere Alston would provide much more operational flexibility and a more meaningful service overall, even if that did come at the cost of a couple of minutes extra in Tavistock trains.

 

[swcovas]

A single option design for track, drainage, stations, geotech, bridges and comms is to be submitted soon for Approval in Principle. When approved this design will form the basis for the planning application which could take 18 months. Detailed Design probably won't begin until the end of 2015 at the earliest. Construction could take a year.

I'm not entirely sure on the funding but a large bulk will come from section 106 money as a result of a housing development in Tavistock.

Thanks for the info. Good to know it is still really happening!

 

[Taunton]

Merging back with the points about stations remote from the town centre, this route, although not ex-GWR, also has this problem. Both Bere Alston and Gunnislake stations are well outside the built-up areas of the places they purport to serve, the latter especially is a dangerous walk along the main A390 road through open country (in fact the station is really in the next village), while Bere Alston is off down an extremely narrow country lane. You could never allow children to walk to either.

Meanwhile this error looks likely to be repeated, if built, at Tavistock. This is a surprisingly large place, but the station will be on the outer periphery, beyond walking distance of much of the town.

 

[21C101]

Merging back with the points about stations remote from the town centre, this route, although not ex-GWR, also has this problem. Both Bere Alston and Gunnislake stations are well outside the built-up areas of the places they purport to serve, the latter especially is a dangerous walk along the main A390 road through open country (in fact the station is really in the next village), while Bere Alston is off down an extremely narrow country lane. You could never allow children to walk to either.

Meanwhile this error looks likely to be repeated, if built, at Tavistock. This is a surprisingly large place, but the station will be on the outer periphery, beyond walking distance of much of the town.

Its not that far out, only a 10/15 minute walk from the town centre.

It will be walkable along a paved road (or the old railway track path). The new station will be adjacent to the new housing estate and AIUI have parking.

It would be nice if they were able to extend to the old station but that had the problem of being at the top of a huge viaduct, appoached up a very steep hill with little or no parking.

I understand the latest ideas for timetabling is that a Gunnislake to Bere Alston Shuttle will be "locked in" (in much the same way as is done on the Marlowe line in the peaks) and an hourly Plymouth to Tavistock service run.

Steam stopping trains took 30 minutes from Tavistock North to St Budeax Victoria Road in 1950 so 25 minutes from St B V R to the new Tavistock station with 10 minutes there to turn round would be feasible.

 

[yorksrob]

But while the Gunnislake train was in the platform, a Tavistock train would have to be prevented from arriving, and vice versa. This would either require fixed signals or several extra token stops on the approaches to the station.

I suppose the point is that given that services on the route are so sparse, couldn't we just
have more and alternate between Gunnislake and Tavistock ? Obviously this depends on infrastructure south of Bere Alston, but as someone else has suggested, perhaps trains could be timed to pass on the main line section if needs be.

 

[Tomnick]

Steam stopping trains took 30 minutes from Tavistock North to St Budeax Victoria Road in 1950 so 25 minutes from St B V R to the new Tavistock station with 10 minutes there to turn round would be feasible.

That sounds tight in itself, once you've accounted for the time taken to reoccupy the single line at St Budeaux Jn too - I'd estimate that to be around 8 or 9 minutes between a train towards Plymouth arriving at St Budeaux and a train towards Bere Alston departing. Even if that worked, you'd still need two units to operate an hourly service, with a long layover at Plymouth - I'm sure that those two units, along with a third unit that'd otherwise be shut inside the Gunnislake section, could be used to also provide a decent through service to Gunnislake if the signalling design would permit it.

 

[21C101]

That sounds tight in itself, once you've accounted for the time taken to reoccupy the single line at St Budeaux Jn too - I'd estimate that to be around 8 or 9 minutes between a train towards Plymouth arriving at St Budeaux and a train towards Bere Alston departing. Even if that worked, you'd still need two units to operate an hourly service, with a long layover at Plymouth - I'm sure that those two units, along with a third unit that'd otherwise be shut inside the Gunnislake section, could be used to also provide a decent through service to Gunnislake if the signalling design would permit it.

Agreed. I think the shut - in plan is being put forward because it is very cheap to do and far better than the previous idea of the units alternatively serving Gunnislake and Tavistock two hourly.

If the line is a success, hopefully proper signalling with a loop and bay reinstated at Bere Alston will follow.

 

[Taunton]

Its not that far out, only a 10/15 minute walk from the town centre.

(location of proposed Tavistock station) For a good walker. It's quite a slog uphill. But unfortunately the bulk of the town housing is on the opposite side of the river, beyond the town centre. The station on the old GWR line was better located for the town.

 

[Tomnick]

Agreed. I think the shut - in plan is being put forward because it is very cheap to do and far better than the previous idea of the units alternatively serving Gunnislake and Tavistock two hourly.

If the line is a success, hopefully proper signalling with a loop and bay reinstated at Bere Alston will follow.

Indeed, with a bit more investment in signalling, I think it'd be almost possible to achieve an hourly through service to Tavistock and two-hourly to Gunnislake - and that without a bay or loop at Bere Alston. Would Gunnislake be better served by a two-hourly through service though, or an hourly shuttle connecting into/out of Tavistock trains? Has anyone even looked at a timetable for a 'shut inside' Gunnislake unit? At first glance, it looks potentially quite awkward to arrange - there's not time for it to connect out of an ex-Plymouth train, run to Gunnislake and back to connect into the same train returning to Plymouth (unless the latter has a long turnaround at Tavistock, which will then destroy the ability to run an hourly service), so it'd have to be a compromise with longer connection times in one direction or the other.

 

[21C101]

Indeed, with a bit more investment in signalling, I think it'd be almost possible to achieve an hourly through service to Tavistock and two-hourly to Gunnislake - and that without a bay or loop at Bere Alston. Would Gunnislake be better served by a two-hourly through service though, or an hourly shuttle connecting into/out of Tavistock trains? Has anyone even looked at a timetable for a 'shut inside' Gunnislake unit? At first glance, it looks potentially quite awkward to arrange - there's not time for it to connect out of an ex-Plymouth train, run to Gunnislake and back to connect into the same train returning to Plymouth (unless the latter has a long turnaround at Tavistock, which will then destroy the ability to run an hourly service), so it'd have to be a compromise with longer connection times in one direction or the other.

I would imagine the Gunnislake Shuttles will connect with Plymouth services only.

Seeing as the 79/x79b bus runs half hourly from Gunnislake to Tavistock and takes 14 minutes, five minutes less to get to Tavistock than the train takes to Bere Alston*, I doubt there will be much if any demand for Gunnislake to Tavistock connections until such time as the line to Okehampton reopens.

* Up journeys take 20 minutes Gunnislake to Bere Alston, down journeys 19 minutes. Its a very twisty colonel Stephens light railway with 25 mph speed limit as per the light railway order and an obligation to give way to road vehicles at open level crossings!

THe Kilbride documents (pre the lock in idea) confirm that an hourly service is feasible with two units as the journey time from Tavistock to Plymouth will be 32 minuts (all stations) or 27 minutes if calling only at Bere Alston and St Budeaux and provide draft timetables.

http://www.kilbridegroup.com/tavistock/Docs/Evidence of Deliverability - 03 Sections 12-18.pdf page 173

Latest news as of January 2014 is that the council have already bought over half the trackbed with negotiations ongoing for the rest, with compulsory purchase available if needed. "the new service would mean alterations to Bere Alston station and a regular service between Tavistock and Plymouth, hopefully hourly." http://www.tavistock-today.co.uk/News.cfm?id=3207&headline=Railway+could+be+in+place+by+2020

 

[Tomnick]

I would imagine the Gunnislake Shuttles will connect with Plymouth services only.

Seeing as the 79/x79b bus runs half hourly from Gunnislake to Tavistock and takes 14 minutes, five minutes less to get to Tavistock than the train takes to Bere Alston*, I doubt there will be much if any demand for Gunnislake to Tavistock connections until such time as the line to Okehampton reopens.

* Up journeys take 20 minutes Gunnislake to Bere Alston, down journeys 19 minutes. Its a very twisty colonel Stephens light railway with 25 mph speed limit as per the light railway order and an obligation to give way to road vehicles at open level crossings!

Even if (which I'd envisaged too) the Gunnislake shuttle didn't try to provide connections for a (minimal?) Gunnislake - Tavistock flow, it'd be awkward to connect both out of the ex-Plymouth train (for Plymouth - Gunnislake passengers) and into the return working to Plymouth (for Gunnislake - Plymouth passengers). To take an example:

Plymouth          xx:00
Bere Alston       xx:23 xx:27
Gunnislake              xx:47
Tavistock         xx:33

Tavistock         xx:38
Gunnislake  xx:04
Bere Alston xx:24 xx:48
Plymouth          x1:13

Providing a decent connection out of the ex-Plymouth train means that anyone heading from Gunnislake to Plymouth has a 24 minute connection. Trying to shorten that would just lengthen the connection in the other direction - the average connection time will surely end up in the region of 10-15 minutes. Yes, it can be adjusted to suit the 'peak' flow, but that'll just make it worse for anyone going against the peak!

 

[21C101]

Even if (which I'd envisaged too) the Gunnislake shuttle didn't try to provide connections for a (minimal?) Gunnislake - Tavistock flow, it'd be awkward to connect both out of the ex-Plymouth train (for Plymouth - Gunnislake passengers) and into the return working to Plymouth (for Gunnislake - Plymouth passengers). To take an example:

Plymouth          xx:00
Bere Alston       xx:23 xx:27
Gunnislake              xx:47
Tavistock         xx:33

Tavistock         xx:38
Gunnislake  xx:04
Bere Alston xx:24 xx:48
Plymouth          x1:13

Providing a decent connection out of the ex-Plymouth train means that anyone heading from Gunnislake to Plymouth has a 24 minute connection. Trying to shorten that would just lengthen the connection in the other direction - the average connection time will surely end up in the region of 10-15 minutes. Yes, it can be adjusted to suit the 'peak' flow, but that'll just make it worse for anyone going against the peak!

Alternatively the Gunnislake branch will be two hourly as now, not as if it justifies an hourly service?

 

[Tomnick]

It could be - an hourly shuttle would go some way to compensating for the lack of a through service (and lengthened journey times) though, that's all!