Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[YorkshireBear]

As is Taunton. A Dawlish bypass isn't going to help with either of these.

It just proves my point that no amount of route reopening would help against what has happened

 

[LateThanNever]

I note exeter is cut off completely now. Which 50s railway lone will solve that!

Ah but it's only till Monday - not for months...

 

[Zoe]

Ah but it's only till Monday

As long as the flooding north/east of Taunton has cleared.

 

[pistonvalve]

Can somebody update the position regarding Meldon viaduct - is it rail connected i.e. the head shunt in-use. Is the Quarry open?

A look at Google earth shows rails connected to the site.

Mike.

 

[KeithP]

Can somebody update the position regarding Meldon viaduct - is it rail connected i.e. the head shunt in-use. Is the Quarry open?

A look at Google earth shows rails connected to the site.

Mike.

Does this picture help with the first question:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/383392...e1-e8LL5t-e8LL4Z-e8Sp5o-jCjkoj-baR7vi-jy2mS6/​

 

[stanley T]

There are plenty of routes in the UK that run by the sea

There are plenty of routes in the UK that have no realistic parallel route for diversions

There are plenty of routes in the UK that have been closed for periods over the last few years

There's nothing unique about the Dawlish line in this respect.

I'm all for re-opening lines that have a decent business case (or, y'know, opening brand new alignments that aren't necessarily following the trackbed of something built 150 years ago), but...

...an "inland" route through Devon should be assessed alongside other proposed new routes/ infrastructure spending (is it more of a priority than Bristol to Portishead? is it more of a priority than electrifying from Bristol to Weston once the wires reach Temple Meads? is it more of a priority than re-doubling the Exeter - Salisbury line) - not just a blanket assumption that we must reopen every old line.

There is a wise saying in the legal profession that "hard cases make bad law". In this case, a great journalistic story with viral Youtube videos may lead to bad investment compared to alternatives. Comments from Devon/Cornwall residents here suggest that Cowley Bridge is a worse problem.

The big problem with the LSWR route is Meldon Viaduct. Pity the LSWR did it in wrought iron on the cheap instead of brick. That looks unpainted to me : in the damp SW climate there must be some serious corrosion issues, some of them hidden. As for replacing it, expensive and it is a listed structure.

 

[MarkyT]

An interesting geological point of view here -

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~imw/Teignmouth-Dawlish

In particular there is a theory that the 1880s widening and rerouting of the original trackbed and the consequent seaward rebuild of the wall quickly caused the substantial loss of the Dawlish beach that protected the town and original line previously. The sea originally crushed and spread material crumbling from the cliffs all along the beach, but the railway wall now prevents much of that erosion in the first place, and groynes and breakwaters limit its movement along the beach from north to south, leading to deep scouring all the way from Dawlish Warren to Kennway Tunnel just south of Dawlish Station, the section that seems to be most at risk.

Maybe one way to protect this area would be to attempt to re-establish a beach alongside the wall. That might be maintained by removing the groynes and breakwaters to allow its replenishment by the natural longshore drift action of the sea, replacing the previous cliff fall supply with large quantities of new sand brought in periodically from elsewhere by rail.

I still think some sort of inland diversion could still be justified as, even if the wall can be made more secure, rough seas will always have potential to limit the speed and capacity of operations even if extended closures were much less likely.

There are other reasons for considering an alternative too. The coast route is slow, limited by curvature and noise nuisance and safety constraints due to proximity to properties and amenities through both Dawlish and Teignmouth. It is also a long route, about 8 km longer than a notional direct route between Exeter and Newton Abbot. Capacity is severely constrained by the running time differential between frequent non-stop expresses competing with all stations locals. Both service groups have increased in day long, year round frequency, although the sheer numbers of holiday trains on 1950s Summer Saturdays (mostly non or limited stop between Exeter Newton Abbot) will likely never be matched again.

A new more inland route between Exeter and Newton Abbot could:

- Ensure Long distance services in particular remain largely unaffected by severe weather and sea conditions along the sea wall through Dawlish, and any damage to infrastructure resulting therefrom.

- Improve express journey time between Exeter and Newton Abbot, Torbay, South Hams, Plymouth and Cornwall by up to 10 minutes

- With retention of the existing coast route, simplified and partially singled, provide capacity for speed and stopping pattern segregation of different train service categories, allowing fast expresses to overtake locals and freights for example.

A new high speed route providing such benefits might partly follow the old Teign Valley route from Newton Abbot with the Heathfield 'corner' cut off though the relatively flat clay workings then passing in tunnel beneath Haldon Forest to re-emerge onto the old branch alignment once again near Alphington.

 

[455driver]

All very well but one small problem is the fact that the seawall prevents the natural erosion of the cliffs there is no material to replenish the beaches, if you remove the groins then the whole beach will disappear not just the Kennaway tunnel end.

 

[MarkyT]

All very well but one small problem is the fact that the seawall prevents the natural erosion of the cliffs there is no material to replenish the beaches, if you remove the groins then the whole beach will disappear not just the Kennaway tunnel end.

Hence the idea to deliver new sand from elsewhere periodically by train. I wonder how much annually you'd need to maintain a decent beach. BTW I'm not actually saying the logistics to unload and spread this would be practical, it's just an idea.

 

[PHILIPE]

If the decision was to be taken by the hierarchy to re-open route, it would take 2 years on Planning and Bureaucracy red tape to even get anywhere near to making a start. It would then take years to re-build.

 

[Kettledrum]

I'm all for re-opening lines that have a decent business case (or, y'know, opening brand new alignments that aren't necessarily following the trackbed of something built 150 years ago), but...

...an "inland" route through Devon should be assessed alongside other proposed new routes/ infrastructure spending (is it more of a priority than Bristol to Portishead? is it more of a priority than electrifying from Bristol to Weston once the wires reach Temple Meads? is it more of a priority than re-doubling the Exeter - Salisbury line) - not just a blanket assumption that we must reopen every old line.

The business case methodologies haver been misused and abused to give whatever result was one the politicians required. Electrification on the MML had one of the best business cases I've ever seen, yet it was put prioritised behind lots of other schemes including other electrification schemes, Scottish re-openings, and Crossrail, and further ago Thameslink.

If you prioritised all schemes just on the basis of business case, nothing outside London would ever get done.

In the case of the need for a more reliable route into the far South West, how do you put a value on the wider regeneration and social benefits and political benefits that would arise?

 

[tbtc]

It just proves my point that no amount of route reopening would help against what has happened

Also worth pointing out that with the recent weather we've had, there's no guarantee that an Exeter - Okehampton - Plymouth route would currently be free of landslides/ flooding/ fallen trees/ damaged bridges etc

there is a political calculation for the Secretary of State to make, many West Country MP's are unhappy with the amount of spending on HS2 whist Devon and Cornwall are getting next it nothing in terms of rail spending, some are even threatening to vote against HS2. Reopening Okehampton - Tavistock would cost £250 Million or approximately 2% of HS2 £14 billion contingency fund.

The much hyped "rebellions" in Westminster against HS2 have come to nothing thus far - I doubt that a few MPs from the south west are going to make much difference to it's progress. And since its an area dominated by coalition MPs (of both colours) there's little political advantage for any sitting MP to blame the authorities too much (not as if Devon or Cornwall are high up the Labour list of swing seats).

As I keep trying to explain, the (£250m) bill for an inland route through Devon should stand or fall on its own merits - nothing to do with the weather, nothing to do with ensuring that every route in the UK has a parallel diversion, nothing to do with some crumbs from HS2's leftovers - I suspect that we are going to see a lot of weak schemes being justified with the "...but its a fraction of the cost of HS2..." argument.

 

[John S2]

As I keep trying to explain, the (£250m) bill for an inland route through Devon should stand or fall on its own merits - nothing to do with the weather.

The weather is central to the case. This stretch of main line [Exeter-Newton Abbott] is unique and is not comparable to other stretches of line you have tried to compare it with in some of your posts.

 

[tbtc]

The business case methodologies haver been misused and abused to give whatever result was one the politicians required. Electrification on the MML had one of the best business cases I've ever seen, yet it was put prioritised behind lots of other schemes including other electrification schemes, Scottish re-openings, and Crossrail, and further ago Thameslink.

If you prioritised all schemes just on the basis of business case, nothing outside London would ever get done.

I don't have a problem with giving priority to the schemes with the best business case. Playing politics and tokenism would create a "camel" of a railway.

In the case of the need for a more reliable route into the far South West, how do you put a value on the wider regeneration and social benefits and political benefits that would arise?

Something like "the wider regeneration and social benefits and political benefits" is clearly intangible, and sounds like the kind of thing used to prop up a weak case.

Any investment will have some regeneration/ social benefits, whether that's in urban London or rural Devon - you can fiddle these kind of figures however you want (which is why I'm wary of them).

That I agree with, I would like to see the new methodology used for HS2 used to assess reopening other closed rail routes across the country, I wonder if could make some re-openings viable?

Depends on whether you see reopening redundant lines as an end in itself (or a means to achieving other things) I suppose

With the exception of Portishead, all of your other examples are existing routes that already provide a decent service. None of these would provide anything like the improvement that reopening the mid Devon route would bring because what is there at the moment is already pretty decent

...but if you want to spend £250m on an Okehampton route then you need to prove that its better than spending that £250m on other schemes (and, as I've suggested, there are other competing schemes in the south west - would an Okehampton route benefit more people than redoubling the SWT line to Exeter / reopening Bristol to Portishead/ further electrification?) - which scheme would bring about the biggest increase in passenger numbers/ benefit the most people?

 

[Trainbuff]

I don't have a problem with giving priority to the schemes with the best business case. Playing politics and tokenism would create a "camel" of a railway.



Something like "the wider regeneration and social benefits and political benefits" is clearly intangible, and sounds like the kind of thing used to prop up a weak case.

Any investment will have some regeneration/ social benefits, whether that's in urban London or rural Devon - you can fiddle these kind of figures however you want (which is why I'm wary of them).



Depends on whether you see reopening redundant lines as an end in itself (or a means to achieving other things) I suppose



...but if you want to spend £250m on an Okehampton route then you need to prove that its better than spending that £250m on other schemes (and, as I've suggested, there are other competing schemes in the south west - would an Okehampton route benefit more people than redoubling the SWT line to Exeter / reopening Bristol to Portishead/ further electrification?) - which scheme would bring about the biggest increase in passenger numbers/ benefit the most people?

The problem is that the amount of investment....lets call it what it is rather than subsidy.....is less per head of population in Devon and Cornwall than in the rest of the country. And it is decreasing! Money needs to be spent on infrastructure here!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-16235349

Also a recent report by many councils in South west revealing the above!

http://www.plymouth.gov.uk/the_south_west_spine.pdf

Why not fix Dawlish, reopen Okehampton, which was constructed as a mainline as a diversionary route, and look at A permanent alternative to the Sea Wall. Mentioned in the thread before was the slow speed (40mph) from Lydford to Plymouth. This was done by the Southern as an economy. The speeds were higher in LSWR days! The speed is higher now between St Budeaux and Bere Alston. 60 mph running is easily achievable and more likely. Remember the track between Plymouth and Newton Abbot is very twisty and turny with speed limits largely at 60mph.

Okehampton-Bere Alston CAN compete even despite reversals. If trains start from Plymouth there will only be one.

Bere Alston to Tavistock is on. I would refer you to the thread below

Tavistock to Bere Alston reinstatement moves closer

 

[transmanche]

Whilst I can understand the romance and nostalgia of reinstating a long-closed route; but is re-opening the Okehampton route the best choice for a Dawlish avoiding line?

What is the Okehampton line meant to be? A secondary diversionary route? Or to take over as the main route, with the Dawlish route being retained for local services and diversions only?

Surely the best thing to do is to look at the long-term strategic needs of the region? Would a completely new and faster inland alignment be better? Allowing for a reduction in journey times, as well as securing the route from further coastal erosion.

 

[John S2]

Surely the best thing to do is to look at the long-term strategic needs of the region? Would a completely new and faster inland alignment be better? Allowing for a reduction in journey times, as well as securing the route from further coastal erosion.

Yes. Personally I see the Okehampton route as desirable rather than essential. What is essential, to prevent Plymouth and Cornwall from being inaccessible by rail, is a new inland route. On cost grounds it will probably be easier to pursuade a government to authorise a direct Exeter-Newton Abbott line rather than an Exeter -Plymouth direct line.

 

[Goatboy]

Yes. Personally I see the Okehampton route as desirable rather than essential. What is essential, to prevent Plymouth and Cornwall from being inaccessible by rail, is a new inland route.

Why is it essential?

Because we've just had the first collapse since 1855?

As a resident of the South West affected by this disruption I'd rather they spent hundreds of millions on something else. It's a kneejerk reaction. Dawlish does not close often.

 

[John S2]

Why is it essential?

Because we've just had the first collapse since 1855?

As I have explained previously, the past climate is not a useful guide to the future when looking at this particular type of extreme event. The environment has changed, therefore the mathematical return period of such an event becomes considerably shorter.

 

[tbtc]

The problem is that the amount of investment....lets call it what it is rather than subsidy.....is less per head of population in Devon and Cornwall than in the rest of the country. And it is decreasing! Money needs to be spent on infrastructure here!

Investment sounds like we are going to make our money back, subsidy sounds like no economic justification, glass half full/ empty I guess.

Regardless, we've got to be careful when using figures like these. Infrastructure investment tends to be very "stop start" in areas because of the way that schemes work - £250m worth of infrastructure via Okehampton would probably give the south west a disproportionately high amount of investment in one period - depends how you smooth figures out.

Also, mass transportation like rail is always going to be easier to justify in areas of "dense" population - which is why its easier to justify investment in urban areas like London/ Manchester/ Glasgow - public spending is tailored to different needs in more rural areas.

Mentioned in the thread before was the slow speed (40mph) from Lydford to Plymouth. This was done by the Southern as an economy. The speeds were higher in LSWR days!

Whilst I can understand the romance and nostalgia of reinstating a long-closed route; but is re-opening the Okehampton route the best choice for a Dawlish avoiding line?

What is the Okehampton line meant to be? A secondary diversionary route? Or to take over as the main route, with the Dawlish route being retained for local services and diversions only?

Surely the best thing to do is to look at the long-term strategic needs of the region? Would a completely new and faster inland alignment be better? Allowing for a reduction in journey times, as well as securing the route from further coastal erosion.

Sensible words
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why is it essential?

Because we've just had the first collapse since 1855?

As a resident of the South West affected by this disruption I'd rather they spent hundreds of millions on something else. It's a kneejerk reaction. Dawlish does not close often.

Can't argue with any of that.

Kneejerk politics is a dangerous route.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Well, Dawlish will reopen in 2-3 months time, probably all will go quiet, back burner, and start to gather dust!
A direct faster route will benefit Newton Abbot Plymouth etc and all stations West.
Exeter - Okehampton - Tavistock - Plymouth will benefit those towns and a chunk of N Cornwall/ Devon.
If Okehampton etc is not capable of a large amount expansion (or full of Nimbys) that would make a case not to reinstate the railway. (Okehampton and Tavistock becoming an easy commute to Exeter/ Plymouth.
Meldon Viaduct. The North one (Right hand one in picture) was built first, and a second was added with a different design. The North one is the best one, and had the most strengthening done to it, but sounds like a new timber deck required, and further reinforcing.
It is made of wrought iron, which is very expensive to dismantle/ scrap. One reason it is still standing?

 

[bnm]

Reading this topic right through it appears a majority are in favour of reopening Okehampton-Tavistock/Bere Alston as the diversionary route versus an alternative new build inland route from Exeter-Newton Abbot.

All well and good to shout for Okey-Tavy but it does nothing for the sizeable population of Torbay. A population that seems to have been missed by that majority calling for the LSWR route to re-open.

My preference is for a new build from Exminster to Newton Abbot over reopening the 'Withered Arm', along similar lines as to that which received an enabling act in 1936, with the original line through Starcross, Dawlish and Teignmouth given over to mostly local services. Then when the sea wall causes problems you don't have the sizeable population of Torbay left with replacement buses and you don't have those for Plymouth & Cornwall meandering sedately around the north of Dartmoor.

 

[IanXC]

Whilst I can understand the romance and nostalgia of reinstating a long-closed route; but is re-opening the Okehampton route the best choice for a Dawlish avoiding line?

What is the Okehampton line meant to be? A secondary diversionary route? Or to take over as the main route, with the Dawlish route being retained for local services and diversions only?

Surely the best thing to do is to look at the long-term strategic needs of the region? Would a completely new and faster inland alignment be better? Allowing for a reduction in journey times, as well as securing the route from further coastal erosion.

My view is that a potential reopening of the Okehampton route is the only viable medium term option (ie if something is to be done before 2020). It would allow enhanced Devon local services (which the local councils seem to be keen on - who is to say that a section 106 agreement for development in Okehampton could not provide a share of the funding a la Tavistock?). It would also allow an acceptable route for diversions 58 miles versus 52 should (with appropriate speed works) allow for a palatable journey time for occasional diversions.

I hear the concerns about the cost of a potential new alignment from Exeter to Newton Abbot and I agree it could be difficult to justify in the wider budget. My suggestion for a good next step in that option would be for it to be promoted in the next Greater Western franchise competition - perhaps even as a priced option.

 

[HowardGWR]

I believe this Okehampton proposal has been consented to by Devon CC.

http://www.devon.gov.uk/loadtrimdocument?url=&filename=EE/12/6.CMR&rn=12/WD403&dg=Public

So a reopening Plymouth to Tavistock is agreed. The bringing to life from Exeter to Okehampton is agreed.

So we are only talking of Okehampton to Tavistock which does not present insuperable difficulties. (I have recce'ed the whole route, some CPOs are required, it's true.)

 

[swt_passenger]

My suggestion for a good next step in that option would be for it to be promoted in the next Greater Western franchise competition - perhaps even as a priced option.

Passenger franchisees are not normally responsible for large scale infrastructure projects though, are they.

The Chiltern situation doesn't really create a precedent, because the DfT policy changed completely immediately after their current franchise was signed off.

A re-opening such as is being discussed could only be achieved by DfT directing NR to do the infrastructure work, IMHO, and once that was done the DfT would vary the relevant TOC's franchise spec to include a passenger service if required...

 

[The Planner]

Is there demand to/from Okehampton now? the tracks are there and in money terms would be a lot cheaper to get going. DCR tried it and didn't get off the ground. FGW didn't appear too bothered by them trying and certainly haven't shown any interest in it?

 

[HowardGWR]

Is there demand to/from Okehampton now? the tracks are there and in money terms would be a lot cheaper to get going. DCR tried it and didn't get off the ground. FGW didn't appear too bothered by them trying and certainly haven't shown any interest in it?

If you peruse the report to which I linked, the proposal is connected with a substantial development of housing in Okehampton and the parkway station just to the east, which would act as a P and R to the Cornish side and North Devon.

We must remember that Cowley bridge (or rather the Exe) still lies in the way and so needs to be solved, I suspect with a part low viaduct solution, (to allow the water to flow through), and this may be the costliest single piece of infrastructure needed, to overcome the inland problems.

The line from Crediton to Okehampton is straight as a die, and could be made very fast indeed. Have a look at the map.

 

[The Planner]

Has anything happened in the two years since that was written? It mentions the DCR attempt which fell flat. The station plan only seems to have about 50 car parking spaces, doesn't exactly inspire massive use to me.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

The much hyped "rebellions" in Westminster against HS2 have come to nothing thus far - I doubt that a few MPs from the south west are going to make much difference to it's progress. And since its an area dominated by coalition MPs (of both colours) there's little political advantage for any sitting MP to blame the authorities too much (not as if Devon or Cornwall are high up the Labour list of swing seats).

That's all well and good providing that all MP's put the national interest in building HS2 above their own local interests in improving local transport links. However politics doesn't work like that especially when there are voters in the south west looking at the £50 billion cost of HS2 which won't benefit them and saying why is nothing being done to upgrade out transport links down here, especially with European elections around the corner and a general election only one year away.

As I keep trying to explain, the (£250m) bill for an inland route through Devon should stand or fall on its own merits - nothing to do with the weather, nothing to do with ensuring that every route in the UK has a parallel diversion, nothing to do with some crumbs from HS2's leftovers - I suspect that we are going to see a lot of weak schemes being justified with the "...but its a fraction of the cost of HS2..." argument.

I don't have a problem with giving priority to the schemes with the best business case. Playing politics and tokenism would create a "camel" of a railway.

Something like "the wider regeneration and social benefits and political benefits" is clearly intangible, and sounds like the kind of thing used to prop up a weak case.

Any investment will have some regeneration/ social benefits, whether that's in urban London or rural Devon - you can fiddle these kind of figures however you want (which is why I'm wary of them).

Depends on whether you see reopening redundant lines as an end in itself (or a means to achieving other things) I suppose

...but if you want to spend £250m on an Okehampton route then you need to prove that its better than spending that £250m on other schemes (and, as I've suggested, there are other competing schemes in the south west - would an Okehampton route benefit more people than redoubling the SWT line to Exeter / reopening Bristol to Portishead/ further electrification?) - which scheme would bring about the biggest increase in passenger numbers/ benefit the most people?

Well I am enthusiastic a supporter of HS2, however I believe the increase in costs from £32 billion to £42 billion has done sever damage to the project. A cut in £14 billion contingency fund with the money being reallocated to other transport projects who help to reduce some of the controversy surrounding the project without having to much impact on the scheme; ideally this would go to the schemes with the best BCR, however politics will mean that the money will go to areas not on the HS2 route to placate the HS2 does nothing for me brigade.

As for reopenings I would like to see a comparison made using the new methodology vs previous studies that used the old BCR e.g. in some cases taking passengers off an existing route counted against a project but building HS2 to take passengers of the existing routes is ok

 

[swt_passenger]

An 8 trains per day 7 day Exeter to Okehampton service was a priced option in the ITT for the 2013 franchise:

Option GW3A -Exeter -Okehampton Monday – Sunday -Operation of eight trains per day in each direction between Exeter St David’s and Okehampton services calling at all stations between 06:30 and 20:30 from Exeter St David’s.
Assumed start date: December 2014 subject to rolling stock availability. If rolling stock is a constraint, Bidders should indicate this in the submission and start the service from the earliest achievable timetable change date.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...hment_data/file/3596/invitation-to-tender.pdf

Was this kicked into touch with the abandonment of the franchise process? Then again the Melksham and Paignton service increases had similar status at the time the ITT was published, but for Dec 2013, and they still happened OK, so it would perhaps be wrong to write Okehampton off completely. There's always the 'subject to stock availability' caveat of course...