Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[The Ham]

Perhaps its pertinent to point out here that bus services between Okehampton and Tavistock were cut from hourly to two hourly in 2008 and Devon County Council have been nibbling away at the subsidy ever since.

Different budgets and all that.

If the rail line is opened and the DfT has to receive less money from either SWT's or GW that is one thing and is probably small change to them. However it then allows Devon CC to cut their subsidy all together between the two towns and if the bus route was withdrawn altogether they could then agree a payment to the TOC to allow the carriage of people with bus passes which would likely cost them less money.

Also, buses and trains are very different beasts, just look at the lengths some people go to so as to avoid using rail replacement buses. Whilst I doubt many (if any) people would object to being put on a train if their bus wasn't able to run, if it meant that they still got where they wanted to in a reasonable time frame.

 

[IanXC]

IF there's justification to run year round week-long services from Okehampton to Exeter then we can do so pretty simply.

It seems there is justification to run such services, there just simply isn't rolling stock available for the time being.

IF there's justification to rebuild the line from Tavistock to Bere Alston then that would cost a few quid but could be done as a low speed single track line without needing megabucks spending on it.

There is justification, and its happening. Clearly you missed the earlier discussion - and no it won't cost megabuck - £26m in fact.

But to come up with the "solution" of opening the whole line really doesn't work for me. The justifications are pretty slim (many lines have no realistic diversionary route, many lines run through areas where the Coalition may lost seats at the next election, many lines suffer closure from time to time due to the weather, many lines run alongside the sea...). Speaking of which...

You are choosing to overlook one important thing in your reasoning, indeed many lines have no realistic diversionary routes, however there isn't another mainline which is at such great risk of periodic closure. To take an example which has cropped up earlier, there is no realistic diversion for York to Northallerton, but there is only some tiny fraction of the risk of this line being closed as compared to the risk at Dawlish.

 

[jmc100]

Providing long term resilience for the South West rail network is the answer.

In the immediate short term, the reinstatement of the Okehampton to Bere Alston route should be positively considered and implemented as soon as possible. The course of this line would provide an interim relief route between Plymouth and Exeter should future disruptions occur on the current route. It would also have advantages for Central and North Devon economies as well. In hindsight, it can now be seen that Beeching made a very big slip-up by closing this particular section of the South West rail infrastructure.

In the longer term, a more practical solution would be the construction of a twin-track tunnel under the Halden Hills from a point just south of Exeter to a point South East of Newton Abbott. This proposal would provide stability and resilience. The distance between the two points is approximately eight miles. I mention this as a tunnel would appear to be the most economical and environmentally-friendly solution. It would also provide the minimum of disruption to local road traffic and when completed would provide an efficient high-speed alternative route with improved journey times to stations further east and west. The coastal route should also be kept and maintained to serve the local communities and also act as a second relief line should disruption or engineering work take place on the other two routes.

Yes, I know it will cost a vast amount, but in the long term it will be worth spending the money.

Looking way ahead, maybe it is the West Country and South West peninsula that should have a brand new high-speed route rather than the proposed HS2. Just thought I would also mention that as the Dutch have constructed some new tunnels and new high-speed lines such as the new 60-mile Hanzelijn Line that was completed in 2012, so what is preventing us from doing the same? This Dutch project is a typical example of positive planning for the future and that is what this country needs to do. Is it all a question of cost or are there local and/or national political considerations stifling so many of the issues?

The powers that be (National Rail, the local councils and the Government) have to start acting NOW before another coastal catastrophe takes place which it surely will sooner or later. Integrated co-operation and action between the relevant authorities is urgently required so let's see some real serious action for a change and not just a load wishful thinking about what could possibly be. Now is the time to turn real possibilities into some
positive action to create and build some long term resilience into the rail infrastructure west of Exeter.

In saying the above, the National rail staff and employees are doing a first-rate job in adverse conditions to get the Dawlish route repaired so the South West peninsula will be open for business again.

 

[47802]

It seems there is justification to run such services, there just simply isn't rolling stock available for the time being.



There is justification, and its happening. Clearly you missed the earlier discussion - and no it won't cost megabuck - £26m in fact.



You are choosing to overlook one important thing in your reasoning, indeed many lines have no realistic diversionary routes, however there isn't another mainline which is at such great risk of periodic closure. To take an example which has cropped up earlier, there is no realistic diversion for York to Northallerton, but there is only some tiny fraction of the risk of this line being closed as compared to the risk at Dawlish.

That is true but my problem with the Okehampton route is it's not a direct or proper alternative, In my eyes you either fix the problem directly or not a all, not with some partial alternative which might be cheaper but doesn't fully address the problem and is an excuse to try and improve Rail services in North Devon.

I don't think anybody is arguing against the cost of Exeter to Okehampton, or the short extension Tavistock for a local service, but cost of putting the line back between the 2 is massively different especially when the cost of doing for purely local traffic would be almost impossible to justify

 

[Geezertronic]

It is quite annoying when people mention the South West and HS2 in the same breath. It seems some naughtiness by the HS2 Action Alliance is to blame because HS2 has nothing to do with funding for the legacy network, just in the same way that CrossRail doesn't (as both will be funded the same way from what I understand).

I don't see a CrossRail Action Alliance group kicking up a stink about the amount of money that is spent on CrossRail every year, and as Alan Marshall points out on the latest blog post on www.railnews.co.uk:

Strange to relate, then, that I am not yet aware of any campaign from Devon and Cornwall for the IC125s to be replaced by IEP ‘dual mode’ trains, which would put the South West on a par with Bristol and South Wales – and could well help achieve Plymouth’s aim for 3-hour London journey times.

Whilst the need for investment is obvious on the South West corridor, HS2 has nothing to do with existing rail budgets so is irrelevant to anyone apart from the mischief makers. Electrification and IEP are examples of current investment

 

[47802]

Providing long term resilience for the South West rail network is the answer.

In the immediate short term, the reinstatement of the Okehampton to Bere Alston route should be positively considered and implemented as soon as possible. The course of this line would provide an interim relief route between Plymouth and Exeter should future disruptions occur on the current route. It would also have advantages for Central and North Devon economies as well. In hindsight, it can now be seen that Beeching made a very big slip-up by closing this particular section of the South West rail infrastructure.

In the longer term, a more practical solution would be the construction of a twin-track tunnel under the Halden Hills from a point just south of Exeter to a point South East of Newton Abbott. This proposal would provide stability and resilience. The distance between the two points is approximately eight miles. I mention this as a tunnel would appear to be the most economical and environmentally-friendly solution. It would also provide the minimum of disruption to local road traffic and when completed would provide an efficient high-speed alternative route with improved journey times to stations further east and west. The coastal route should also be kept and maintained to serve the local communities and also act as a second relief line should disruption or engineering work take place on the other two routes.

Yes, I know it will cost a vast amount, but in the long term it will be worth spending the money.

Looking way ahead, maybe it is the West Country and South West peninsula that should have a brand new high-speed route rather than the proposed HS2. Just thought I would also mention that as the Dutch have constructed some new tunnels and new high-speed lines such as the new 60-mile Hanzelijn Line that was completed in 2012, so what is preventing us from doing the same? This Dutch project is a typical example of positive planning for the future and that is what this country needs to do. Is it all a question of cost or are there local and/or national political considerations stifling so many of the issues?

The powers that be (National Rail, the local councils and the Government) have to start acting NOW before another coastal catastrophe takes place which it surely will sooner or later. Integrated co-operation and action between the relevant authorities is urgently required so let's see some real serious action for a change and not just a load wishful thinking about what could possibly be. Now is the time to turn real possibilities into some
positive action to create and build some long term resilience into the rail infrastructure west of Exeter.

In saying the above, the National rail staff and employees are doing a first-rate job in adverse conditions to get the Dawlish route repaired so the South West peninsula will be open for business again.

Dream On!

And whilst your at it lets have a new fast line into Cornwall avoiding Plymouth along the A30 to Bodmin, reopen the lines to Ilfracombe, Bideford, Bude etc!

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Dream On!

And whilst your at it lets have a new fast line into Cornwall avoiding Plymouth along the A30 to Bodmin, reopen the lines to Ilfracombe, Bideford, Bude etc!

The Atlantic Coast Express ran through Exeter, Okehampton. Halwill Junction, Launceston, Camelford, Delabole (has the deepest quarry in the UK!) Wadebridge, to Padstow.
Exeter - Okehampton - Plymouth
125mph Express trains would receive no support from the Dartmoor National Park.
Main use imo Commuting and tourism (National & local, esp Plymouth).
Secondary use - diversions etc.

 

[LateThanNever]

Perhaps its pertinent to point out here that bus services between Okehampton and Tavistock were cut from hourly to two hourly in 2008 and Devon County Council have been nibbling away at the subsidy ever since.

To be fair which council hasn't been nibbling away at bus service subsidies of late?

But in the context of the Dawlish collapse the line is not intended primarily to serve those two towns but to prevent Plymouth, a city of over a quarter of a million people, being cut off on regular and random occasions by rail to the rest of the UK - this is all the more important as it has lost its airport. The Okehampton route may not be the fastest but it's cheap and half built (or, if your glass is half empty, only half destroyed) so would provide serviceable robustness quickly. Sorry for the burgers of Okehampton or Tavistock but they are just incidental!

 

[HSTEd]

Attempting to run the hourly London HSTs over the Okehampton line without obliterating the local service would be, at best impractical, and at worst a complete disaster.
Then add the hourly XC trains.

Attempting to substitute the HSTs for the local trains would require rather more platform facilities to support the HSTs (SDO is one thing but attempting to stop a HST at a platform designed for a 3 car sprinter is quite another).

You would need multiple passing loops that would not be required for the proposed extension to Tavistock for one thing.
Passing loops sized for HSTs.

The cost goes up and up.

Additional flood defences at Dawlish would almost certainly be cheaper, and lets not forget that the only place that failed on teh entire route was the only place without significant sea defences between the beach and the railway.
This seems to indicate that defences along the majority of the route are sufficient for the forseable future.

 

[yorksrob]

Attempting to run the hourly London HSTs over the Okehampton line without obliterating the local service would be, at best impractical, and at worst a complete disaster.
Then add the hourly XC trains.

Attempting to substitute the HSTs for the local trains would require rather more platform facilities to support the HSTs (SDO is one thing but attempting to stop a HST at a platform designed for a 3 car sprinter is quite another).

You would need multiple passing loops that would not be required for the proposed extension to Tavistock for one thing.
Passing loops sized for HSTs.

The cost goes up and up.

Additional flood defences at Dawlish would almost certainly be cheaper, and lets not forget that the only place that failed on teh entire route was the only place without significant sea defences between the beach and the railway.
This seems to indicate that defences along the majority of the route are sufficient for the forseable future.

I ask again, If diverting over the single track route would be so disastrous, how come they manage it on the Yeovil route. Plus, as I have mentioned before, this route still provides a lifeline to Exeter, even when it is just the service trains that are running?.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It seems there is justification to run such services, there just simply isn't rolling stock available for the time being.

A response also made many times upon the Todmorden Chord thread...

 

[moggie]

Dream On!

And whilst your at it lets have a new fast line into Cornwall avoiding Plymouth along the A30 to Bodmin, reopen the lines to Ilfracombe, Bideford, Bude etc!

You really are an irritating <insert adjective> aren't you? The thread title is quite clear yet anyone with any opinion which doesn't match yours is dismissed as a worthless fantasy.

The Okehampton route CLEARLY offers a solution to providing an alternative route for Exeter - Plymouth services which is what this is really all about. It's not a replacement for the existing route which is going to be retained until such time as nature finishes it off. Do you understand the concept of alternatives?

Your treasured option of an inland route is one option. But unless it serves those communities that are served by the existing coastal route it's not an alternative is it?

I'll dream on and you can go and dream BCR's if that's what pleases you. Let's see what the politicians come up with. Nothing is of course a likely result, that I can agree.

 

[HSTEd]

I ask again, If diverting over the single track route would be so disastrous, how come they manage it on the Yeovil route.

How long is that route and how many passing places are provided?
Now look at length of your proposed 'lifeline' and how many passing places you propose to provide.

You would at best be able to run a token service.

Plus, as I have mentioned before, this route still provides a lifeline to Exeter, even when it is just the service trains that are running?.

A lifeline that is purely psychological in nature considering its tiny capacity compared to the route via Dawlish?
How on earth is this cheaper than preventing a Dawlish closure by filling the 50m gap in the flood defences at the breach site?

 

[LateThanNever]

Attempting to run the hourly London HSTs over the Okehampton line without obliterating the local service would be, at best impractical, and at worst a complete disaster.
Then add the hourly XC trains.

Attempting to substitute the HSTs for the local trains would require rather more platform facilities to support the HSTs (SDO is one thing but attempting to stop a HST at a platform designed for a 3 car sprinter is quite another).

You would need multiple passing loops that would not be required for the proposed extension to Tavistock for one thing.
Passing loops sized for HSTs.

The cost goes up and up.

Additional flood defences at Dawlish would almost certainly be cheaper, and lets not forget that the only place that failed on teh entire route was the only place without significant sea defences between the beach and the railway.
This seems to indicate that defences along the majority of the route are sufficient for the forseable future.

Think you'll find that there are two other less dramatic breaches of the sea wall as well -and also don't forget Dawlish station platform has to be moved back to where it was before so that trains can get past!
Whilst you're right significant double track would be required there is nothing else cheaper or quicker unless you just stick with the existing line and tell the 260K Plymothians when their railway is cut off with such random regularity they've got to lump it.

 

[yorksrob]

Conversely I am not sure the old I don’t like your business case go away and change it to one I do like approach is a sensible way to run things

I have said before and I will say again – I doubt this line will ever be built unless the government hands the cash over to cover all of the costs. No one else has the money and I doubt the government have the inclination when all is said and done.

Seriously though, the BCR methodology is lousy though. Lets not forget, it manages to pluck some mythical figure from the air for road tax "lost" from the treasury not to mentioncounting abstraction from another route as a negative, even if that other route is crowded and justifies investment to enhance capacity in its own right, yet it can't monetise the positive effects of alleviating the massive disruption when the line is blocked, either planned or unplanned.

It's a joke really.

 

[HSTEd]

Think you'll find that there are two other less dramatic breaches of the sea wall as well -and also don't forget Dawlish station platform has to be moved back to where it was before so that trains can get past!

Yes, the other breaches of the sea wall which would have been repaired far far more quickly (on order of days) if it wasn't for 50m of the track and bed being simply gone.

This in possibly the worst storms since 1989.

Whilst you're right significant double track would be required there is nothing else cheaper or quicker unless you just stick with the existing line and tell the 260K Plymothians when their railway is cut off with such random regularity they've got to lump it.

You don't get to claim that its going to occur regularly from one event.
Just because climate change is going to make bad storms more likely doesn't mean it goes from once every 30 years to every single year.

Otherwise I could claim that because something has happened once it is going to happen regularily and we should spend ridiculous sums of money preventing it from happening.

And the cost of raising the vulnerable section of sea wall by a metre would be drastically lower than attempting any of the solutions proposed here.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Seriously though, the BCR methodology is lousy though. Lets not forget, it manages to pluck some mythical figure from the air for road tax "lost" from the treasury not to mentioncounting abstraction from another route as a negative, even if that other route is crowded and justifies investment to enhance capacity in its own right, yet it can't monetise the positive effects of alleviating the massive disruption when the line is blocked, either planned or unplanned.

It's a joke really.

Oh yes. But this is what the DfT has developed, do expect anymore?

 

[The Ham]

Attempting to run the hourly London HSTs over the Okehampton line without obliterating the local service would be, at best impractical, and at worst a complete disaster.
Then add the hourly XC trains.

Attempting to substitute the HSTs for the local trains would require rather more platform facilities to support the HSTs (SDO is one thing but attempting to stop a HST at a platform designed for a 3 car sprinter is quite another).

You would need multiple passing loops that would not be required for the proposed extension to Tavistock for one thing.
Passing loops sized for HSTs.

The cost goes up and up.

Additional flood defences at Dawlish would almost certainly be cheaper, and lets not forget that the only place that failed on teh entire route was the only place without significant sea defences between the beach and the railway.
This seems to indicate that defences along the majority of the route are sufficient for the forseable future.

Yet they manage when there are diversions through Yeovil. OK the HST's tend to be jam packed with people sat all over the floor and/or standing, but it is done.

There's a fair chance that by the time anything is done that the HST's maybe on their way out anyway.

Yes loops would push the costs up, but depending on where they are located they may not add significant costs (i.e. your probably don't want to double track the viaduct). However it depends on what costs you are looking at, as there appear to be two prices abnded about, £100m and £250m. Which could mean that the £250m price tag could have provision for some loops or a certain amount of double tracking anyway.

In very simple terms, the £26m price tag for the single line to Tavistock would then buy you a further few miles of loops, which could get you about 7 loops of about 900m along the route. If one of them was located at the junction for Okehampton that would also provide benefit for the services to Barnstable if that were to ever increase in frequency.

 

[HSTEd]

And how is it preferable to simply preventing the closure from occuring by increased spending on the sea defences at Dawlish?

 

[yorksrob]

How long is that route and how many passing places are provided?
Now look at length of your proposed 'lifeline' and how many passing places you propose to provide.

You would at best be able to run a token service.



A lifeline that is purely psychological in nature considering its tiny capacity compared to the route via Dawlish?
How on earth is this cheaper than preventing a Dawlish closure by filling the 50m gap in the flood defences at the breach site?

I can assure you, Salisbury to Exmouth Junction is pretty bloomin long, and don't forget, it has only just had a loop put in at Axeminster allowing an hourly service, so its hardly been over supplied with capacity through the decades when it has been used for diversions.

Even being able to send one train an hour each way down the alternative route over the next few weeks would have made a massive difference to the wellbeing of the region

 

[LateThanNever]

Yet they manage when there are diversions through Yeovil. OK the HST's tend to be jam packed with people sat all over the floor and/or standing, but it is done.

There's a fair chance that by the time anything is done that the HST's maybe on their way out anyway.

Yes loops would push the costs up, but depending on where they are located they may not add significant costs (i.e. your probably don't want to double track the viaduct). However it depends on what costs you are looking at, as there appear to be two prices abnded about, £100m and £250m. Which could mean that the £250m price tag could have provision for some loops or a certain amount of double tracking anyway.

In very simple terms, the £26m price tag for the single line to Tavistock would then buy you a further few miles of loops, which could get you about 7 loops of about 900m along the route. If one of them was located at the junction for Okehampton that would also provide benefit for the services to Barnstable if that were to ever increase in frequency.

Isn't it mostly double track to Okehampton already?

 

[LateThanNever]

Yes, the other breaches of the sea wall which would have been repaired far far more quickly (on order of days) if it wasn't for 50m of the track and bed being simply gone.

This in possibly the worst storms since 1989.



You don't get to claim that its going to occur regularly from one event.
Just because climate change is going to make bad storms more likely doesn't mean it goes from once every 30 years to every single year.

Otherwise I could claim that because something has happened once it is going to happen regularily and we should spend ridiculous sums of money preventing it from happening.

And the cost of raising the vulnerable section of sea wall by a metre would be drastically lower than attempting any of the solutions proposed here.

I didn't claim it was one event - it has happened regularly for the last 3 years at least and certainly from time to time before that. They still haven't finished repairing the cliff fall of last year!

Raising the sea wall by a metre won't protect anything - it'll just spoil the view!

 

[47802]

You really are an irritating <insert adjective> aren't you? The thread title is quite clear yet anyone with any opinion which doesn't match yours is dismissed as a worthless fantasy.

The Okehampton route CLEARLY offers a solution to providing an alternative route for Exeter - Plymouth services which is what this is really all about. It's not a replacement for the existing route which is going to be retained until such time as nature finishes it off. Do you understand the concept of alternatives?

Your treasured option of an inland route is one option. But unless it serves those communities that are served by the existing coastal route it's not an alternative is it?

I'll dream on and you can go and dream BCR's if that's what pleases you. Let's see what the politicians come up with. Nothing is of course a likely result, that I can agree.

Ok then so you think that what I dismissed as worthless fantasy is realistic then? ie reopen Okehampton route, new route to Newton Abbot, and a new high speed route at some point in the future!

My so called treasured option of an inland route would serve as many existing communities as possible and far more than the Okehampton if the Dawlish route became too unreliable and expensive to maintain, no an inland route probably wouldn't serve Dawlish and Teignmouth in the same way the current route does but it serves everywhere else including Torbay, does the Okehampton route serve, Newton Abbot No, Totnes No, Torquay No, Paignton No, well I suppose technically it could if you have got all day and don't mind a grand tour of Devon.

 

[The Ham]

And how is it preferable to simply preventing the closure from occuring by increased spending on the sea defences at Dawlish?

Firstly there are wider benefits, secondly even if the money is spent on sea defences there would likely still be times when an alternative route would be useful to have. For instance when they have to close the line to beef up the sea wall which the railway line runs on.

 

[HSTEd]

Even being able to send one train an hour each way down the alternative route over the next few weeks would have made a massive difference to the wellbeing of the region

All this expense just to avoid a relatively short bus trip between Teignmouth and Dawlish Warren?
A bus trip that could be avoided by simply fixing the sea defences.

This is just people looking for an excuse to reopen the Southern route which was frankly inferior in pretty much every way to the Great Western one.

I didn't claim it was one event - it has happened regularly for the last 3 years at least and certainly from time to time before that. They still haven't finished repairing the cliff fall of last year!

Closing for a couple of days a year is hardly significant.
This is the first weeks long closure since the line opened that I know of.

And if they haven't finished repairing the cliff fall why wasn't the route closed.... unless of course the cliff fall was not actually preventing the operation of the railway.

Why don't we build a second high speed line to Manchester just in case the first one is taken out of action for some reason?

 

[The Ham]

Ok then so you think that what I dismissed as worthless fantasy is realistic then? ie reopen Okehampton route, new route to Newton Abbot, and a new high speed route at some point in the future!

Depends over what time frame you are talking about. If you are thinking about in the next 15 years for all three, not a chance. If however you are thinking about over the next 50 years then it may be possible.

 

[backontrack]

Excellent idea, just send your cheque to the DaFT and they will start next week, £250 million should do as a first installment!

Are you serious, or are you being sarcastic?

I'd guess the latter.

This is an 'ideal world' situation. I just think they should reopen whichever is best, any diversionary route is a priority.

Why don't we build a second high speed line to Manchester just in case the first one is taken out of action for some reason?

Already done, basically. The Northampton Loop, Birmingham Loop, Wilmslow line and Styal line all count, don't they?

 

[HSTEd]

Firstly there are wider benefits, secondly even if the money is spent on sea defences there would likely still be times when an alternative route would be useful to have. For instance when they have to close the line to beef up the sea wall which the railway line runs on.

So we should build new lines simply to avoid engineering closures (which is what sea defence operations would be - although most of them would not actually require a closure as the path is the 'business end' of the most of the length of the wall)?

I demand a second line from Grantham to Nottingham because there are times when it would be 'useful to have'.

 

[The Planner]

Isn't it mostly double track to Okehampton already?

No, far from it.

 

[455driver]

Are you serious, or are you being sarcastic?

I'd guess the latter.

Of course its the latter!

Can anyone explain what is so different between the buses operating now and the buses that operate when the seawall is shut for engineering work (apart from it being several weeks instead of a week or 2)?

The buses cope fine when the engineering work is on and they are not doing a bad job now, okay being stuck on a bus from Plymouth to Tiverton Parkway isnt much fun but its not too bad.