crosscity
Member
Not quite. Since the timetable change in December, Edinburgh has direct regular services to London via completely different routes - Virgin via Carstairs and the WCML, and East Coast via the ECML.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)
- Thread starter John S2
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Looking at the 1965 timetable on www.timetableworld.com, it appears that the fastest westbound service from Exeter to Plymouth was 1hr40, the fastest eastbound is 1hr30, stopping in each direction only at Devonport, Bere Alston, Tavistock, Okehampton.
Much as it would be great to see this line reopen, I think the reality of the situation is that any replacement to the sea wall line is going to be south of Dartmoor. That's where all the population is (both Okehampton and Tavistock are sizeable, but there's nowhere else of note between Crediton and Plymouth), and it avoids reversal.
The diversionary route with two reversals would take, say, 1hr40 from arrival at Exeter to departure from Plymouth, allowing for ten to twenty minutes minutes speeding up since 1965. That would be a journey time of 3hr40 from Exeter to Penzance. You can drive it in just over 90 minutes.
I can't help feeling that the South West beyond Exeter is somewhere where a regular (i.e. hourly) railway run express coach service from St. Davids forecourt might be the best solution, not as a replacement to the railway, but as an addition, which would ease the problem when the railway line got cut. If you ran the express coach service Mon-Fri, you'd also then own a fleet of coaches and railway employed drivers to move to whichever part of the line is closed every weekend.
I know it wouldn't be an entire solution, but it would be a quick relatively low-cost start. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has given up using the railway line down to the south west following a number of horrible travelling experiences, which weren't so much the fault of FGW, but down to the complete lack of alternatives when things go wrong.
Much as it would be great to see this line reopen, I think the reality of the situation is that any replacement to the sea wall line is going to be south of Dartmoor. That's where all the population is (both Okehampton and Tavistock are sizeable, but there's nowhere else of note between Crediton and Plymouth), and it avoids reversal.
The diversionary route with two reversals would take, say, 1hr40 from arrival at Exeter to departure from Plymouth, allowing for ten to twenty minutes minutes speeding up since 1965. That would be a journey time of 3hr40 from Exeter to Penzance. You can drive it in just over 90 minutes.
I can't help feeling that the South West beyond Exeter is somewhere where a regular (i.e. hourly) railway run express coach service from St. Davids forecourt might be the best solution, not as a replacement to the railway, but as an addition, which would ease the problem when the railway line got cut. If you ran the express coach service Mon-Fri, you'd also then own a fleet of coaches and railway employed drivers to move to whichever part of the line is closed every weekend.
I know it wouldn't be an entire solution, but it would be a quick relatively low-cost start. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has given up using the railway line down to the south west following a number of horrible travelling experiences, which weren't so much the fault of FGW, but down to the complete lack of alternatives when things go wrong.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,293
That was then.
This is now.
We have access to TBMs that eat Granite for breakfast.
Just ask the Swiss.
If we have a new route it has to be a direct high speed line from North of Exeter (with a triangle) to roughly Plymouth Laira depot where it would rejoin the classic line.
And forget 200kmh, lay out for 320kmh+ like the HS2 tunnels shall be in the Chilterns.
If that is out of the question, then the least worst option is an offshore breakwater and slab track at Dawlish.
That would prevent a storm demolishing so much track before it can be repaired.
Last edited:
Google maps puts the drive time as 2 hours, not 90 minutes. That's with no stops, if you add in going to Truro that makes it 15 minutes longer just in driving time. That makes it only one hour faster assuming no congestion and only serving two places west of Exeter.
Given a coach can take 70 people, which means, assuming a lightly loaded train with say 170 people, then that's 3 coaches on a 5 hour round trip that 15 coaches to run an hourly service. If you need to carry 600 people then that's 50 coaches for an hourly service. Given Cornwall has a very seasonal numbers in passengers you either have a lot of coaches which don't do a lot in the winter or hire in a lot during the summer.
simon.exd
Member
Good luck with the decades of environmental wrangling that result in the idea of building literally anything in Dartmoor National Park
Not sure on that one.. I imagine the National Park would embrace any idea to reduce the number of cars in the area, especially during the main tourist season.. A railway line would also increase the number of visitors to the area without causing increased environmental issues..
However.... the Teign Valley line has to make more sense.. the LSWR route will allow trains to run between Exeter and Plymouth then on to Cornwall but totally excluse Newton Abbot, Totnes, Paignton and Torquay.. Reopening the Teign Valley would see trains keave the mainline at Exeter and rejoin at Newton Abbot.. In terms if diatance the Teign Valley is 1 mile longer than the coastal route, the Dartmoor option is 50?
I am quite sure that the former would also be able to attract a decent amoubt of traffic locally too...
Apologies for any dodgy spelling.. touchphones are crap!!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
when you say you can drive from Exeter to Penzance in 90 minutes I assume you mean at 3am in a stolen Ferarri??? It takes more than an hour to get to Bodmin... If you want to add the 20 odd minutes it takes to get from the centre of Exeter to the a30 too...
I should have written hourly!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Those times were with steam traction on a line being deliberately run down. With today's track standards and serving Tavistock, A30 P&R (that would be very well used), Okehampton and Crediton. I reckon it would be 1 hr - 1 hr 10, Exeter - Okehampton would be 85 - 100 mph. People, and the economy, would keep moving to Plymouth / Cornwall and Totnes (via Plymouth) if the line was there and they'd be more than happy. It would not be dissimilar to the recent Whiteball diversions, the services via Honiton and Castle Cary that I've used have been well used, and the Waterloo route is a bit busier too. People are realistic and accept the need for maintenance and slightly longer journey times, but they don't like bus replacements!
Newton Abbot and Torbay deserve a new inland cut off for future resilience, but initially a repaired sea wall is the priority.
As an aside, travelling from Castle Cary via Yeovil to Exeter last week made me realise how sensible and deserving for the south west it would be to double-track the full Pinhoe- Yeovil - Castle Cary route. If this went ahead there'd barely be any impact from any Cowley flooding etc in the future. It would also allow the speeding up of Waterloo - Exeter services with a separate stopping service at the western end including serving the new Cranbrook. You could even extend the stopping service from Yeovil Jnc - Castle Cary - Melksham - Swindon. All sorts of journey opportunities open up, particularly if East West Rail brings the return of a Bristol - Oxford (and beyond) service. What great benefit for a modest outlay. Perhaps government may even realise the political gain, then something could happen!
Exactly. It‘s about combining the various positives to build the case. By reopening Okehampton, not only do you get a diversionary route (for planned blockades as well as unplanned incidents) but you also get the added value of better connectivity and congestion alleviation in the other parts of Devon for the rest of the year. Arguments about express coaches don't really cut it for me. If this mode of transport were so popular, National Express would already be running twice as many coaches.
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 19,663
If re-opening the old route is such a winner, why has it not got anywhere before this incident? The way people are talking is that the BCR would be so astronomical that it is a certainty. It is still effectively building a new railway, structures, earthworks, signalling, track, stations, maintenance etc etc.... who is funding the upgrades to the road network as people drive to what this would effectively be park and rides on a secondary line. When the wall gets re-built and nothing major happens for a couple of years this is only going to quietly gather dust on a consultants shelf.
Hebden Bridger
Member
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 163
I walked the route of the old Teign Valley line about 10 years ago and was of the opinion that the route was far more sensible for a railway than any new direct Newton Abbot-Exeter route. Which is of course why it was built there.
From Newton Abbot the route follows the easy terrain of the Teign Valley northwards for around 12miles. The A38 has gobbled up a 2km stretch of the old route. Otherwise most of the route is clear. It does pass through a couple of villages which would probably need rerouting if a main line was to built on the route. And the nimbies would be out in force.
From here the line turned east through more difficult sparsely populated wooded, rolling hills for the 5 or so miles to Exeter. There are a number of tunnels here most in a poor state e.g. the 829 yard Perridge Tunnel is in a state of collapse. (OS maps show a track running through the tunnel - this is certainly not the case now). On the outskirts of Exeter the A377 has been built over a 200m stretch of the track, but the track was still in place through the built up area itself.
It is ironic that according to wiki, this second upland section of the line was closed in 1961 due to flooding, presumably of a tunnel or cutting.
Last edited:
Absolutely, the challenges in Switzerland are usually the great depth under the alps and therefor what the huge pressures have done to rock leading to cracks and crumbled rock. Solid and predictable rock that isn't kilometres below the surface is straightforward.
So I think repair and maintain Dawlish, then reinstate the Tavistock route in the next 5-10 years, then when HS2 is under construction or in service put a bill through parliament for a high speed line between Exeter and Plymouth and possibly beyond. The Tavistock route will not be an impediment to a high speed route as it will need to serve local stations and with a low line speed won't have the capsasity to prevent the need for a high speed one.
That's the same reasoning that nothing was done before. We must also remember that for anywhere outside the south east, rebuilding and substituting old closed routing with new chords and connections (see Bicester) is a changed policy phenomenon that has only recently arrived in some peoples' noodles.
Quite.
EWS 58038
Member
While everyone is shouting for the re-opening of a long closed route, please do remember that the business case to keep the current Dawlish line open will be impacted. It might even come that far that the Seawall route could be closed by this. Is that what we want?
A better solution is to ask the Dutch 'Can you help us keep our feet dry?' A simple solution can be build 500 yard or 1 mile into sea. Build a dam that leaves 20 inch of clearance between the dam and sea level. The current will be broken and things like we have seen this week will only be a thing from the past.
Now you can keep your railway open at ANY time with a more reliable service at a third of the cost of a new route. (perhaps even less)
A better solution is to ask the Dutch 'Can you help us keep our feet dry?' A simple solution can be build 500 yard or 1 mile into sea. Build a dam that leaves 20 inch of clearance between the dam and sea level. The current will be broken and things like we have seen this week will only be a thing from the past.
Now you can keep your railway open at ANY time with a more reliable service at a third of the cost of a new route. (perhaps even less)
I don't think the Teign Valley route was built as part of any plan for a main line bypass of the sea wall section. In the 1930s the GWR actually proposed a new main line inland route to bypass the sea wall. If the Teign Valley route was best suited for this then I'd have thought they would have attempted to upgrade it rather than plan to build a new line.
Last edited:
The reason that this indecent has pushed it to the fore is that until now the division reason for reopening has always been played down. In that Dawlish has always reopened fairly quickly. However with such a long closure has demonstrated that there is a real risk and not just scaremongering. As such it is a political issue and not not just a purely cost/benefit issue, therefore where it wouldn't normally be built it may be built anyway.
However, I can also see that there's a risk that it could end up gathering dust if nothing happens next winter.
stanley T
Member
- Joined
- 28 Jun 2011
- Messages
- 146
Remember that even if the railway closed and was replaced by an inland cut off, the sea wall at Dawlish would need to be maintained, because the town behind it depends on it - and come what may, Network Rail would probably have to continue to foot the bill. So you might as well continue to use an existing railway on it, until and if climate change no longer permits this, in which case this has much bigger implications for Dawlish than just the railway.
Yes, reopening the Teign Valley as a diversionary route instead of the LSWR makes sense, despite the need for some wholly new sections, because it serves Torbay, and via Okehamption is long, slow, needs extensive track relaying and extra doubled sections as well as new track Bere Alston - Okehampton. £100 million is optimistic. However the LSWR route is politically much easier and therefore quicker to implement, and politics is driving this now, especially all those marginal Con/Lib Dem seats (so both parties in the coalition will be behind it...)
At least two reversals is much less of a problem than in the days of loco hauled stock, and all surveys show that passengers would much prefer an extra half hour or hour on a diversion than having to hop on and off buses. You need a heck of a lot of buses on standby for a full HST...
That said, kudos to FGW for getting replacement buses up and running quickly, although I note that they are running from Taunton and Exeter rather than Tiverton as has been suggested here.
Any data on how often the Dawlish section has been closed by the weather and for how long, in recent years?
Still, sometimes things go awry whatever you plan. Flooding at Cowley Bridge, so go LSWR - oh no, landslip at Honiton... in this case, it has been high tides and very unusual southerly storm force winds, the alignment of the wall partly protects it from the much more usual westerlies or south westerlies.
Yes, reopening the Teign Valley as a diversionary route instead of the LSWR makes sense, despite the need for some wholly new sections, because it serves Torbay, and via Okehamption is long, slow, needs extensive track relaying and extra doubled sections as well as new track Bere Alston - Okehampton. £100 million is optimistic. However the LSWR route is politically much easier and therefore quicker to implement, and politics is driving this now, especially all those marginal Con/Lib Dem seats (so both parties in the coalition will be behind it...)
At least two reversals is much less of a problem than in the days of loco hauled stock, and all surveys show that passengers would much prefer an extra half hour or hour on a diversion than having to hop on and off buses. You need a heck of a lot of buses on standby for a full HST...
That said, kudos to FGW for getting replacement buses up and running quickly, although I note that they are running from Taunton and Exeter rather than Tiverton as has been suggested here.
Any data on how often the Dawlish section has been closed by the weather and for how long, in recent years?
Still, sometimes things go awry whatever you plan. Flooding at Cowley Bridge, so go LSWR - oh no, landslip at Honiton... in this case, it has been high tides and very unusual southerly storm force winds, the alignment of the wall partly protects it from the much more usual westerlies or south westerlies.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 5,581
Surely the sensible option is to rebuild and keep the existing line, but then also to create a new route (whichever one you choose)? Eventually the new route would become the high speed route that the long distance services would use, and the current route could be run effectively as a branch line for local services (with some timetabled longer distance services in the summer if you want).
The odds are that nothing so severe will happen next winter, so I hope this doesn't lure people into a false sense of security. The point is that the frequency of events of this type will increase as sea level continues to rise.
Using the climate of the last 150 years to predict what is likely to happen in the future is misguided because the environment has changed.
stanley T
Member
- Joined
- 28 Jun 2011
- Messages
- 146
Ideal, but expensive given the local terrain, and thus difficult to justify economically for the population it serves (less than 2 million)
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,293
It might be worth nothing that a London-Plymouth high speed line would potentially be able obtain ~70 minute journey times end to end if the train ran fast from Heathrow.
Which would be a rather large game changer with regards the South West's economy.
An alternative Plymouth-Exeter alignment would be a large part of such a route.
Which would be a rather large game changer with regards the South West's economy.
An alternative Plymouth-Exeter alignment would be a large part of such a route.
Would you actually run fast to Plymouth though? It seems that these days Exeter (not Plymouth) is the most important location west of Bristol and so all high speed services to the Devon and Cornwall should call there.
Last edited:
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,293
No need.
A high speed line means we are essentially swimming in paths.
Exeter would be served by a seperate hourly/half hourly service that ran fast to either Taunton or Exeter and then slow to Plymouth along the existing alignment.
Last edited:
I'm not sure there would be demand for a direct service to Plymouth though without calling at Exeter. The demand for travel in general seems to be much lower from Plymouth. Exeter has demand for an airport and a dual 3 lane motorway. Plymouth only has demand for a 2 lane dual carriageway which never seems to get that busy and no longer has an aiport. You can have as many paths as you want but the demand needs to be there and I'm not sure it is in the case of Plymouth.
Last edited:
It don't really agree that it does.
You say so yourself that the sea wall will need to be maintained in some form or other anyway, and the local stations will still need to be served, so it makes sense for the time being to keep the former GW railway alignment along it.
Once this is accepted, where is the point on spending further money on a Teign valley diversion which was poorly engineered to start off with and will offer little in the way of additional journey opportunities. It's not just politics, it makes sense to build in those other opportunities and take care of those other transport considerations in Devon such as North cornwall connectivity and congestion in Tavistock at the same time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Leaving to one side the bias against railway reopenings, only someone who's been living in a cave for the past five years could have failed to notice that the Tavistock reopening is one of the most progressed and politically supported reopening schemes in the country at the moment.
LateThanNever
Member
- Joined
- 18 Jul 2013
- Messages
- 1,029
You could argue that it is just because Plymouth has lost its airport that the railway should be improved. As for the A38 never being busy you must be on it at the right time and me always the wrong time... Think you'll find that the M5 didn't ever make it to Plymouth precisely because Dartmoor was in the way...
Seems like a catch 22. Exeter is probably doing well in part due to its superior transport links. But we shouldn't invest in better links for Plymouth and Cornwall, as there is no demand, because everyone is in Exeter.
Who is to say that better transport links for the further south west won't mean more growth and more demand?
The aiport was closed as it was no longer considered to be viable. If there are to be rail improvements then the demand woud need to be there to justify it and I'm not sure that it exists considering the aiport was not able to stay open. As for the M5 to Plymouth, I'm not sure it would have been built even if Dartmoor wasn't there. A quick look at the traffic counts show 57227 on the M5 before Exeter reducing to 36279 on the A38 at Chudleigh, that's over 20000 less vehicles per day.
Last edited:
Correct - the GWR proposed a line which diverted away from the Dawlish line at Powderham and avoided Dawlish sea wall.
It was approved in the late 1930s but the war prevented any progress.
I think the key as to what to do has to be looked at in a couple of ways:
firstly, what can Plymouth justify in terms of rail provision? It has a population of circa 250,000 - a similar size to Southampton, yet unlike Southampton it's never going to be part of the London commuter belt - whereas Southampton already is.
The Dawlish issue is there is no alternate route - which suggests there are two options:
1 - a 'Dawlish avoiding line'
2 - the old Southern route from Okehampton - Tavistock
I don't believe there will ever be the option of both, not least because the BCR is unlikely to stand up.
The GWR route serves more places of significance - e.g. Newton Abbot and doesn't mean reversal is needed on the journey from London Paddington.
The Southern route makes sense to reinstate as a diversion route - the 'gap' between Tavistock and Okehampton isn't a significant distance, whereas a Dawlish avoiding line will almost certainly take decades to get approval for.
The one thing I think may help the Dawlish avoiding line case is whether electrification will ever extend beyond Exeter - if it does, then frankly the current route through Dawlish is a non-starter, not least because of the impact on the infrastructure from being that exposed to the sea. That would make a new inland route more viable - but would kill either the Dawlish sea front route or the Southern reopening.
You can't change the location of the cities though. I'm not sure Plymouth is ever going to have anything more to offer than Exeter.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As things stand, very few services terminate at Exeter so ending the wires there would not allow many services to go over to full EMU operation. If the current Plymouth terminating (FGW and XC) services were to be cut back to Exeter though, you'd only have need diesel for through services to Penzance and for shuttles between Exeter and Plymouth/Penzance and the branches.
Last edited:
As I see it, there are two options:
- first reopen the line through Oakhampton. The advantage of it is that the existing branch lines become a through route but with the advantage that it can provide a diversion route as it's needed. However it could be expensive and wouldn't be very quick compared to the existing route (although that does mean that Dawlish would still be needed)
- second look at a closer alternative route, whether that's a reopening or a whole new route. This would be a comparable journey time to the existing and could serve all or at least most of the settlements of the existing. The problem is that there isn't much scope for extra passenger numbers over the existing.
My view is that both will happen in time, it just depends on the costs and benefits of each.
- first reopen the line through Oakhampton. The advantage of it is that the existing branch lines become a through route but with the advantage that it can provide a diversion route as it's needed. However it could be expensive and wouldn't be very quick compared to the existing route (although that does mean that Dawlish would still be needed)
- second look at a closer alternative route, whether that's a reopening or a whole new route. This would be a comparable journey time to the existing and could serve all or at least most of the settlements of the existing. The problem is that there isn't much scope for extra passenger numbers over the existing.
My view is that both will happen in time, it just depends on the costs and benefits of each.
- Status