Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[Tobbes]

Patrick Hallgate of Network Rail has stated that it would cost £400-500million to reinstate the Dartmoor route

When did he say this? What scope of works does this cover?

Thanks

Tobbes

 

[PHILIPE]

Is that so you can miss out Exeter? Why ever would you want to do that?

Reversal is hardly an issue for DMUs or even HSTs and presumably IEPs. If it's done during a station call it possibly adds two or three minutes to the normal timings while the driver changes ends. I don't think it is considered an issue when trains run Plymouth > Exeter > Honiton; and I don't think it was ever considered a significant issue when diverted HSTs were reversing at Banbury, or at Westbury to/from Waterloo.

XC Voyagers between Bristol and West and Manchester (unless via Camp Hill) and also North East to South Coast reverse in Birmingham New St all the time. The latter also reverse in Reading.

 

[Kettledrum]

I know this wasn't aimed at me but I'll answer it anyway. I'm not a supporter of reopening out of nostalgia but out of practicality. It is much cheaper and easier to build a railway along an existing alignment as there is less civil engineering to do and much less legal stuff to do if much of the route is either already in railway hands or not built on.

DDB

It's also much easier politically. We've seen the strength of feeling from the NIMBYS who are objecting to HS2. It's much more difficult to object, if the route has previously been used for a rail line.

On the other hand, it would be better to eliminate some of the original curves of the line, as the original routes were built by Victorian engineers, so couldn't always make the lines as straight as modern engineering allows.

(I nearly wrote the Victorian lines were often slower, but then realised that's often not the case!)

 

[yorksrob]

What scope of works does this cover?

Quite. We don't want a project that's stillborn through gold plating.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Reversal is hardly an issue for DMUs or even HSTs and presumably IEPs. If it's done during a station call it possibly adds two or three minutes to the normal timings while the driver changes ends. I don't think it is considered an issue when trains run Plymouth > Exeter > Honiton; and I don't think it was ever considered a significant issue when diverted HSTs were reversing at Banbury, or at Westbury to/from Waterloo.

The Cardiff to Portsmouth services reverse at Temple Meads (indeed any service from north or west of BRI that then runs east towards Bath will). So as you say, it really isn't seen as much of an issue these days.

 

[swt_passenger]

The Cardiff to Portsmouth services reverse at Temple Meads (indeed any service from north or west of BRI that then runs east towards Bath will). So as you say, it really isn't seen as much of an issue these days.

XC at Reading is a good example as well. The time to call including reversal isn't that much longer than a normal call - the timings vary but they get about 5 mins normally, and there's almost always crew changes and shop re-stocking as well. Hardly worth building new chords for...

 

[LateThanNever]

I have a suggestion that you may find interesting. Many people have mentioned about speeding up journey times from Penzance and Plymouth to London and other locations as well as alternatives to the Dawlish sea wall route.

I think the Dartmoor route should be reinstated to two track permanent way throughout its length then construct a new chord section north of Cowley Junction from the GW mainline to the Barnstaple/Okehampton line to create a resilient solution. The only problem I can see would be finding a way into Plymouth without the need for reversal operations.

Patrick Hallgate of Network Rail has stated that it would cost £400-500million to reinstate the Dartmoor route, but I think this amount may be a bit over-the-top. However, if this was the case and the invested amount was projected over a twenty-five year operational term the project should pay dividends and would also provide North Devon with a much-needed rail infrastructure.

Best to overstate the case. A House of Commons Committee suggested in 2009 that it would be £100m, so + inflation which is limited these days thank goodness, suggests that it would be pretty similar!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Nostalgically reopening the Okehampton route would be great, I understand the comment reference the economy of rebuilding on an existing old route but why discount the old Teign Valley line as a diversionary route.

Because it's a line now much obscured by roads and rurally engineered only single track!

 

[The Ham]

The difference between £100m and £500m is likely to only be in part inflation, the main difference is proberebly down to what would be provided for that money.

£100m (potentially excluding the £25m plus for the line to Tavistock) would probably get you a single line with not many (if any) passing points with a line speed of 75mph.

£500m would probably get you a fully double track route with 100mph (or possibly faster in places) running for the most part, possibly with most of the works for electrification in place (i.e. just put up some posts and string up the wires when its needed) and maybe new bridges where the existing ones may need replacing, along with a healthy reserve for unforeseen costs.

 

[LateThanNever]

The difference between £100m and £500m is likely to only be in part inflation, the main difference is proberebly down to what would be provided for that money.

£100m (potentially excluding the £25m plus for the line to Tavistock) would probably get you a single line with not many (if any) passing points with a line speed of 75mph.

£500m would probably get you a fully double track route with 100mph (or possibly faster in places) running for the most part, possibly with most of the works for electrification in place (i.e. just put up some posts and string up the wires when its needed) and maybe new bridges where the existing ones may need replacing, along with a healthy reserve for unforeseen costs.

The £100m was quoted by West Devon Council for the whole route after having arrived at their estimate for their bit. I think £500m is outrageous - perhaps the bankers are designing for Network Rail??

 

[Bald Rick]

The £100m was quoted by West Devon Council for the whole route after having arrived at their estimate for their bit. I think £500m is outrageous - perhaps the bankers are designing for Network Rail??

Perhaps you'd like to quote for it ?

Given that it would need tieing in to existing railways at both ends with the signalling implications there, and the line from Crediton to Okehampton would need upgrading and limited doubling to be an effective diversionary route, as would, to a lesser extent, the lines from Bere Alston to St Budeaux, and Cowley Bridge to Crediton, there's a good £100m of work on the existing lines.

And let us not forget, this is before 30km+ of new railway is built. £400m looks about right for a knock down basic railway suitable for diverting a train or two an hour.

And then it will flood at Cowley Bridge Jn...

 

[LateThanNever]

Perhaps you'd like to quote for it ?

Given that it would need tieing in to existing railways at both ends with the signalling implications there, and the line from Crediton to Okehampton would need upgrading and limited doubling to be an effective diversionary route, as would, to a lesser extent, the lines from Bere Alston to St Budeaux, and Cowley Bridge to Crediton, there's a good £100m of work on the existing lines.

And let us not forget, this is before 30km+ of new railway is built. £400m looks about right for a knock down basic railway suitable for diverting a train or two an hour.

And then it will flood at Cowley Bridge Jn...

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

£31m is supposed to have been allocated for Cowley Bridge!
http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...ntry-railway/story-20604249-detail/story.html

 

[47802]

So hopefully now at £400 to £500 million we can forget this crazy nonsense of the Okehampton route

 

[yorksrob]

Perhaps you'd like to quote for it ?

Given that it would need tieing in to existing railways at both ends with the signalling implications there, and the line from Crediton to Okehampton would need upgrading and limited doubling to be an effective diversionary route, as would, to a lesser extent, the lines from Bere Alston to St Budeaux, and Cowley Bridge to Crediton, there's a good £100m of work on the existing lines.

And let us not forget, this is before 30km+ of new railway is built. £400m looks about right for a knock down basic railway suitable for diverting a train or two an hour.

And then it will flood at Cowley Bridge Jn...

Considering the Borders railway is costing £300m for approximately 48km of new railway, that seems on the high side to me.

http://www.bordersrailway.co.uk/project/overview.aspx

 

[Bald Rick]

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

£31m is supposed to have been allocated for Cowley Bridge!
http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk...ntry-railway/story-20604249-detail/story.html

The Devon paper is merely restating a House of Commons 'enquiry' which quoted £100m. 5 years ago. I'll bet my mortgage that there was no proper estimating done to get to that number.

The £31m is for a package of measures including Cowley Bridge.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Considering the Borders railway is costing £300m for approximately 48km of new railway, that seems on the high side to me.

http://www.bordersrailway.co.uk/project/overview.aspx

Yes I wondered that. What I don't know is whether the £294m, sorry £355m quoted includes all the costs leading up to construction, i.e feasibility, early design, getting the enabling Act through parliament (8 years ago...), land purchase etc. And the signalling is certainly much simpler than would be required on the Okehampton route.

We also know that 22km of twin track, electrified railway between Airdrie and Bathgate cost £300m all in. Okehampton- Tavistock is about 22km. Take out £40m worth of OLE, add in 4 years of inflation, and it won't be much different.

 

[Goatboy]

In fact there is already a longer and perhaps more robust alternative route which can be used when the Somerset levels route is disrupted or if there is engineering work

It's of limited value though becuase it takes so much longer that most itinieries from the South West put you on a rail replacement bus.

 

[snowball]

Especially as construction inflation is so much higher than general inflation.

 

[Bald Rick]

It's of limited value though becuase it takes so much longer that most itinieries from the South West put you on a rail replacement bus.

Which is precisely what would happen with Okehampton, not that it counters many of the arguments.

 

[Tobbes]

It would also presumably consider the costs of the Meldon viaduct.

So, if the cost is £400m +/- 25%, is it good value? Well, I suppose it depends on whether this would be net new money (ie, that wouldn't be spent elsewhere on the network)? If so, I'm all for it (after all, the west facing junction at Heathrow which seems to be a large sop to Theresa May MP is costing £500m) - but if it had to come from other improvements it would be more difficult to justify.

Let's see what NR come up with - I still think at £400m it will prove a good investment.

 

[Bald Rick]

It would also presumably consider the costs of the Meldon viaduct.

So, if the cost is £400m +/- 25%, is it good value? Well, I suppose it depends on whether this would be net new money (ie, that wouldn't be spent elsewhere on the network)? If so, I'm all for it (after all, the west facing junction at Heathrow which seems to be a large sop to Theresa May MP is costing £500m) - but if it had to come from other improvements it would be more difficult to justify.

Let's see what NR come up with - I still think at £400m it will prove a good investment.

In public funding, value is not determined by where the money comes from, but by how much benefit is realised for every pound spent. Only if, after the 60 year appraisal period, it pays back the investment in net present benefit, is it good value.

 

[TheKnightWho]

So hopefully now at £400 to £500 million we can forget this crazy nonsense of the Okehampton route

Hopefully? I'm starting to think you're not just pessimistic but actively gunning for it not to reopen.

 

[yorksrob]

The Devon paper is merely restating a House of Commons 'enquiry' which quoted £100m. 5 years ago. I'll bet my mortgage that there was no proper estimating done to get to that number.

The £31m is for a package of measures including Cowley Bridge.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yes I wondered that. What I don't know is whether the £294m, sorry £355m quoted includes all the costs leading up to construction, i.e feasibility, early design, getting the enabling Act through parliament (8 years ago...), land purchase etc. And the signalling is certainly much simpler than would be required on the Okehampton route.

We also know that 22km of twin track, electrified railway between Airdrie and Bathgate cost £300m all in. Okehampton- Tavistock is about 22km. Take out £40m worth of OLE, add in 4 years of inflation, and it won't be much different.

One would hope that with more of an impetus from central Government, some of the preliminary costs can be kept down (i.e not having to endure successive studies as with most reopening projects or tacking the project onto an existing bill in parliament) .

Another thing to consider is that single track would most likely be cheaper and in this case, it seems that a lot of the trackbed is already owned by quasi-public organisations to begin with (i.e cycle routes, highwauys agency etc.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It would also presumably consider the costs of the Meldon viaduct.

So, if the cost is £400m +/- 25%, is it good value? Well, I suppose it depends on whether this would be net new money (ie, that wouldn't be spent elsewhere on the network)? If so, I'm all for it (after all, the west facing junction at Heathrow which seems to be a large sop to Theresa May MP is costing £500m) - but if it had to come from other improvements it would be more difficult to justify.

Let's see what NR come up with - I still think at £400m it will prove a good investment.

Fortunately there's a link somewhere in this thread to a local newspaper article which quotes the local highways engineer as suggesting that all the major infrastructure pieces were in fairly good condition.

I agree that 500m for one curve seems like questionable value for money.

 

[47802]

Hopefully? I'm starting to think you're not just pessimistic but actively gunning for it not to reopen.

That's correct rather than spend that sort of money on a diversionary route mainly for the benefit of those who want to see Okehampton route re-opened I would rather see the money put towards a proper solution ie a Dawlish diversion.

But on those costing its probable that neither would be considered good value for money at this time, and in the medium term a much smaller amount of money is spent on the sea wall and sea defences.

 

[yorksrob]

It illustrates why we need to know exactly what specification Mr Hallgate is thinking of, including a breakdown of what the costs are (e.g. does this include some costs which will need to be borne anyway - for example, can some costs for signalling be reduced by absorbing the work into already planned signalling works etc).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But on those costing its probable that neither would be considered good value for money at this time, and in the medium term a much smaller amount of money is spent on the sea wall and sea defences.

Back to square one then. Perhaps the mod's will keep this thread open for the next time there's a catastrophic storm in the South West.

 

[47802]

well of course i'm not the decision maker so my opinion doesn't matter, but last year there was no doubt a clamour in many parts of the country for better gritting and snow shifting equipment, this year where's the snow?

And what planned Signalling work are you talking about?, In the current proposal to Tavistock for instance I don't think there any significant changes to signalling planned that's why its only going to be a shuttle to Bere Alston.

 

[TheKnightWho]

That's correct rather than spend that sort of money on a diversionary route mainly for the benefit of those who want to see Okehampton route re-opened I would rather see the money put towards a proper solution ie a Dawlish diversion.

But on those costing its probable that neither would be considered good value for money at this time, and in the medium term a much smaller amount of money is spent on the sea wall and sea defences.

Except, as has been repeated many times, it's more than just about being a diversion.

 

[Bald Rick]

I agree that 500m for one curve seems like questionable value for money.

Come on, it's a bit more than 'one curve'. And it opens up the whole Western corridor to direct rail services to Heathrow, something that today requires either a lengthy diversion with change, and/or a bus / coach.

So I suggest that it will benefit many more people, economically and socially, all year, than providing a diversionary route for Dawlish could ever do.

The assessment methodology will be the same, and they are both projects to open new railways by joining up bits of existing railways. So if the Heathrow western access comes out with a better BCR than Okehampton, will you accept that it should come further up the priority list?

 

[Tobbes]

Come on, it's a bit more than 'one curve'. And it opens up the whole Western corridor to direct rail services to Heathrow, something that today requires either a lengthy diversion with change, and/or a bus / coach.

If you can squeeze them in, or divert existing London bound trains.

So if the Heathrow western access comes out with a better BCR than Okehampton, will you accept that it should come further up the priority list?

I would. But these investments are a classically political decision because if we simply made investment choices based on BCR, nothing outside London/SE would ever get done. Moreover, investing half a billion pounds in LHR before the airports commission had reported does feel a little like cart-before-horse.

It's very amusing to look at the 2012 CP5 announcements by the constituency MPs affected; a surprising number of Cabinet Ministers, oddly enough! Indeed, the good people of Witney could feel hard done by because the package didn't include the reopening of the Fairford branch....

Tobbes

 

[47802]

Except, as has been repeated many times, it's more than just about being a diversion.

In what spending £500 million for a couple of towns with 20,000 people in them, which can have a service without spending £500 million.

I would rather money be spent on a proper diversion which improves journey time on the mainline, and doesn't result in Torbay having to bus it, and a reduced service and longer journey time on the diversion if Dawlish is out of action.

If you want to make case for other parts of Devon to have better rail access then fine, but don't use Dawlish as an excuse.

 

[TheKnightWho]

In what spending £500 million for a couple of towns with 20,000 people in them, which can have a service without spending £500 million.

I would rather money be spent on a proper diversion which improves journey time on the mainline, and doesn't result in Torbay having to bus it, and a reduced service and longer journey time on the diversion if Dawlish is out of action.

If you want to make case for other parts of Devon to have better rail access then fine, but don't use Dawlish as an excuse.

And we're back to where we were before, which is you making random suppositions with nothing to back them up. Just because it seems obviously far too expensive to you does not mean that it is the case. £500m for this sounds suspiciously like the £80bn for HS2 we keep hearing bandied about.

Screaming and shouting about people having a civil discussion you don't approve of is not conducive to a good forum, and I'd kindly ask you to stop doing it when you're just repeating the same points.

 

[47802]

And we're back to where we were before, which is you making random suppositions with nothing to back them up. Just because it seems obviously far too expensive to you does not mean that it is the case. £500m for this sounds suspiciously like the £80bn for HS2 we keep hearing bandied about.

Screaming and shouting about people having a civil discussion you don't approve of is not conducive to a good forum, and I'd kindly ask you to stop doing it when you're just repeating the same points.

And what are you doing exactly apart from,
we must open Okehampton,
we must open Okehampton,
we must open Okehampton,
we must open Okehampton,
we must open Okehampton,
we must open Okehampton.

And we will try and come up with any justification for it.