Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[D1009]

I'm not against improvements East of Exeter, but in reality the route already takes diversions and supports a reasonable service. Yes, I did mention redoubling, but it is the single track nature of the route that prevents us dispatching successions of trains down it. Yes, you could put in more loops, but the one at Axeminster cost £20m, so by the time you've got two of those in, you're at £40m already and you might as well go the whole way.

I travelled over the Yeovil to Exeter section a number of times during the Whiteball block both on the Waterloo Exeter and diverted services, and I would not call the journey times reasonable. To sit in a loop to cross not one but two trains going the other way was a frequent occurrence. There is a huge housing development going on at Cranbrook where a new station is about to be constructed. This is in the longest single line section, Pinhoe to Honiton. If we can't have it doubled throughout a further stretch of double track is definitely needed in this section, so an enhanced service can operate.

 

[yorksrob]

I travelled over the Yeovil to Exeter section a number of times during the Whiteball block both on the Waterloo Exeter and diverted services, and I would not call the journey times reasonable. To sit in a loop to cross not one but two trains going the other way was a frequent occurrence. There is a huge housing development going on at Cranbrook where a new station is about to be constructed. This is in the longest single line section, Pinhoe to Honiton. If we can't have it doubled throughout a further stretch of double track is definitely needed in this section, so an enhanced service can operate.

Oh quite, but it gets the job done for the time being. I just think getting Okehampton diversion up and running should be a bigger priority at the moment.

 

[MarkyT]

I have updated my Dawlish bypass sketch (v5) to remove all reference to singling the remaining coastal route. I want to stress now that with expresses removed from the coast route to a bypass, there would be more access flexibility for routine and preventive maintenance activity on the sea wall, hence helping to secure its long term future.

http://www.townend.me/files/southdevon.pdf

 

[Rich McLean]

I have updated my Dawlish bypass sketch (v5) to remove all reference to singling the remaining coastal route. I want to stress now that with expresses removed from the coast route to a bypass, there would be more access flexibility for routine and preventive maintenance activity on the sea wall, hence helping to secure its long term future.

http://www.townend.me/files/southdevon.pdf

How steep would you say the first gradient would be from the east on the avoiding line?

 

[LateThanNever]

I travelled over the Yeovil to Exeter section a number of times during the Whiteball block both on the Waterloo Exeter and diverted services, and I would not call the journey times reasonable. To sit in a loop to cross not one but two trains going the other way was a frequent occurrence. There is a huge housing development going on at Cranbrook where a new station is about to be constructed. This is in the longest single line section, Pinhoe to Honiton. If we can't have it doubled throughout a further stretch of double track is definitely needed in this section, so an enhanced service can operate.

Very true. And Cross Country either never make any effort or are not allowed to use this avoiding route - there's probably no room?-so for Brum it's always the bus!
Think we could usefully add this on to the Okehampton route campaign because trains coming from Pinhoe direction would not need to reverse and that (for reasons I can't fathom) seems to be an obstacle for many. It also could be used to give Plymouth a better link to Exeter airport (?from Cranbrook) which they might appreciate having lost their own airport...

 

[MarkyT]

How steep would you say the first gradient would be from the east on the avoiding line?

As shown the line has to climb about 100 metres out of Exeter in 7km, so averaging about 1 in 70, but with allowance for vertical curves etc the maximum might be as steep as 1 in 40, which I understand is the maximum allowed for HS2 and similar to the existing maximum gradients west of Newton Abbot.

 

[LateThanNever]

Is there land in Okehmapton that could be developed to pick up more developer funding for the route?

DDB

There probably is but Okehampton has already been subject to much new housing development, which is one of the reasons the road egress from the A30 in Exeter is so busy - it's 25 minutes to get to Exeter turn off and the same again to get to Exeter itself. This is one of the main reasons why an Okehampton train service was supported by Devon County Council.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As shown the line has to climb about 100 metres out of Exeter in 7km, so averaging about 1 in 70, but with allowance for vertical curves etc the maximum might be as steep as 1 in 40, which I understand is the maximum allowed for HS2 and similar to the existing maximum gradients west of Newton Abbot.

Vertical curves? Excuse my ignorance, but are we going into space?

 

[MarkyT]

Vertical curves? Excuse my ignorance, but are we going into space?

It doesn 't mean we need to be aiming for the vertical! There does need to be a transitional curve in the vertical axis however when a line is changing between steady gradients.

 

[455driver]

Cross Country either never make any effort or are not allowed to use this avoiding route - there's probably no room?-so for Brum it's always the bus!

The fact their crews dont sign the route and dont have any work over the route probably has something to do with it as well! :roll:

FGW Exeter crews take the sleepers over that route regularly so do sign the route which helps when you want to divert trains that way!

 

[Tobbes]

And it would only have taken 11 years+ from feasibility study!

Fair point. Does anyone have a reasonable idea of how much it would cost to redouble Plymouth - Tavistock and Okehampton - Exeter? And if there was only a single line between the two with loops at say Lydford and Bridestowe, how frequent a through service could be supported?

Thanks in advance,

Tobbes

 

[yorksrob]

It‘s worth remembering that the 11 years of "planning" the Tavistock branch would have mainly consisted of scrabbling around for local funding, rather than actually planning anything. Central government funding would likely shorten this time considerably.

 

[47802]

You're still proposing to abandon Torbay to the weather, though. What's the cost of upgrading Exeter-Okehampton and Plymouth-Bere Alston/Tavy to handle diversion traffic, ignoring the cost of the centre section for now? surely "feed all Cornwall traffic through a basic branch line" is not a real plan?

I don't particularily care how CC-Yeovil-Exeter is upgraded ( I haven't mentioned total redoubling once, you did that ), it just chokes every time it's used as a diversion at the moment. Given the increasing problems in Somerset and the usual problems in the Culm valley, improving things west of Exeter without looking at east of Exeter at the same time seems a little blinkered.

I agree I think spending a fortune on a diversionary route is on the basis that it helps to reopen Okehampton and Tavistock is crazy. Okehampton and Tavistock should be irrelavant to the argument, the solution should be a Dawlish diversion which fixes the problem once and for all and serves Torbay which I suggest is more important to the economy of Devon than Okehampton and Tavistock, If these locations justify a train service then it should be done on thier own merit. I would also agree that upgrading Yeovil Exeter should be a high priority as well.

In my view the Okehampton route would only be justified if it became the main route to Plymouth and Cornwall, but that would push the costs substancially and still wouldn't serve Torbay.

 

[LateThanNever]

The fact their crews dont sign the route and dont have any work over the route probably has something to do with it as well! :roll:

FGW Exeter crews take the sleepers over that route regularly so do sign the route which helps when you want to divert trains that way!

So Cross Country can't be bothered was indeed the correct conclusion!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If it were only possible, I would love to see a posting from Isambard Kingdom Brunel on this thread to say how he would have addressed this matter at Dawlish...:roll:

On an ancillary matter, he would obviously be pleased that the leather sections in his atmospheric railway tubes would have seen the rats washed away by the recent tidal Armageddon..

 

[LateThanNever]

If it were only possible, I would love to see a posting from Isambard Kingdom Brunel on this thread to say how he would have addressed this matter at Dawlish...:roll:

On an ancillary matter, he would obviously be pleased that the leather sections in his atmospheric railway tubes would have seen the rats washed away by the recent tidal Armageddon..

Recalls the joke where the ticket inspector comes around and asks Mr Brunel why he is travelling. He replies that it is just that tickets are so much cheaper when purchased 150 years in advance...

 

[yorksrob]

I agree I think spending a fortune on a diversionary route is on the basis that it helps to reopen Okehampton and Tavistock is crazy. Okehampton and Tavistock should be irrelavant to the argument, the solution should be a Dawlish diversion which fixes the problem once and for all and serves Torbay which I suggest is more important to the economy of Devon than Okehampton and Tavistock, If these locations justify a train service then it should be done on thier own merit. I would also agree that upgrading Yeovil Exeter should be a high priority as well.

Not looking at the wider transport context of the region when making spending decisions is what would be crazy. The majority of the Okehampton route already justifies a train service (hence moves for services at both the Okehampton and Tavistock ends). Not to include these needs as part of a review of what we should spend limited funding on next would be very silly indeed.

Dawlish aside, your proposal would still leave Plymouth and the West of England at the mercy of scheduled engineering works west of Newton Abbott. Let's not forget, it is these which tend to be the bane of the regular travellers life as much as extreme weather.

 

[47802]

Not looking at the wider transport context of the region when making spending decisions is what would be crazy. The majority of the Okehampton route already justifies a train service (hence moves for services at both the Okehampton and Tavistock ends). Not to include these needs as part of a review of what we should spend limited funding on next would be very silly indeed.

Dawlish aside, your proposal would still leave Plymouth and the West of England at the mercy of scheduled engineering works west of Newton Abbott. Let's not forget, it is these which tend to be the bane of the regular travellers life as much as extreme weather.

If you start working that argument into it then you need diversionary routes all over the place including Plymouth to Penzance which clearly not going to happen. Also quite frequently these days even where there are diversionary routes for engineering works they are quite often not used eg virgin not using the S&C recently, but there is difference between scheduled engineering works and a route being closed for a couple of months due to the sea.

I also don't see the need to look at the wider context, you either look at the Dawlish issue and either fix it as a specific problem or you don't, not well if we open Okehampton it sort of helps the problem a bit and by the way we can have a new train service as well. If you spend £200 million on Okehampton you still don't fundamentaly address the problem unless you decide that's going to be mainline and Tough luck for Torbay.

 

[The Ham]

I agree I think spending a fortune on a diversionary route is on the basis that it helps to reopen Okehampton and Tavistock is crazy. Okehampton and Tavistock should be irrelavant to the argument, the solution should be a Dawlish diversion which fixes the problem once and for all and serves Torbay which I suggest is more important to the economy of Devon than Okehampton and Tavistock, If these locations justify a train service then it should be done on thier own merit. I would also agree that upgrading Yeovil Exeter should be a high priority as well.

In my view the Okehampton route would only be justified if it became the main route to Plymouth and Cornwall, but that would push the costs substancially and still wouldn't serve Torbay.

It depends on how much help it provides to the reopening and how much a Dawlish Avoiding Line (DAL) costs. Also the reopening doesn't mean that the DAL will not be built at a later date, nor does the DAL mean that the reopening can't happen.

Yes the reopening needs to be done on its own merit, but so should the DAL and if neither are justified in their own right then it will come down to whichever one is the cheapest to "fund" to provide an alternative route.

Therefore the reopening isn't irrelevant to the argument (it may not provide the best route when compared to the DAL) however if it is the choice between not doing anything (as the BCR is way too low for the DAL) or reopening through Okehampton then clearly the preference should be for the reopening.

Yes the reopening shouldn't be done, just because it doesn't cost as much, is likely to be able to be built faster and there would be some kudos in reopening a long closed line. However nor should the DAL be built just because it is the better long term option (and most people saying positive things for the reopening would agree that it is the best long term option). Note that a better long term option doesn't mean that it is viable for sometime to come, as it may only really start to come into its own if it is coupled with other time saving infrastructure projects.

One possible problem with a DAL is that we may run out of paths at other points on the network. For instance with the DAL there maybe a need for 3tph between Exeter and Plymouth (1 or more to/from London, 1 XC and 1 local stopper) which may then mean that there are insignificant paths through Exeter St Davids for any other future services (e.g. 2tph to Waterloo, extra branch line services, or even hourly services to Okehampton), meaning that building the DAL could scupper other rail improvements which could have just as much justification in the future but wouldn't be able to fund works to provide more paths at Exeter.

Upgrading of Yeovil to Exeter is something that a lot of people would like to see and as I've pointed out before the reopening could (although there is no certainty and it depends on lots of things) actually make the case for such works to be done a lot stronger.

Just because one project (in this case the reopening through Okehampton) doesn't key in with some peoples ideas of the best use of resources for an area doesn't mean that it is not the best solution for the time being. Likewise just because it reopens a line closed by Beaching it also doesn't mean that it is the best use of resources for an area.

 

[Tobbes]

I also don't see the need to look at the wider context, you either look at the Dawlish issue and either fix the specific problem or you don't, not well if we open Okehampton it sort of helps the problem a bit and by the way we can have a new train service as well

On the contrary, the wider picture is essential. No one seems to be seriously suggesting that Dawlish isn't repaired asap; it should be and it will be. But the future must be considered, and the likelihood is that there will be more, more frequent interruptions along the coast route.

This means either that you accept more loss of connectivity west of Exeter, or you find another route that is less susceptible to winter storms. This in effect means either the Okehampton route or a whole new alignment: even I can work out which will be quicker and cheaper (and it's not the Dartmoor Base Tunnel!).

The fact that Exeter - Okehampton - Tavistock - Plymouth appeals to rail romantics is nice but deeply irrelevant; the fact that it opens new journey opportunities from North Devon is nice and marginally relevant (the business case to re-open based on local traffic is clearly marginal at best, otherwise it would've happened), but it helps. The real reason is to ensure connectivity year round for points west of Exeter.

 

[LateThanNever]

On the contrary, the wider picture is essential. No one seems to be seriously suggesting that Dawlish isn't repaired asap; it should be and it will be. But the future must be considered, and the likelihood is that there will be more, more frequent interruptions along the coast route.

This means either that you accept more loss of connectivity west of Exeter, or you find another route that is less susceptible to winter storms. This in effect means either the Okehampton route or a whole new alignment: even I can work out which will be quicker and cheaper (and it's not the Dartmoor Base Tunnel!).

The fact that Exeter - Okehampton - Tavistock - Plymouth appeals to rail romantics is nice but deeply irrelevant; the fact that it opens new journey opportunities from North Devon is nice and marginally relevant (the business case to re-open based on local traffic is clearly marginal at best, otherwise it would've happened), but it helps. The real reason is to ensure connectivity year round for points west of Exeter.

And quickly! Think in fact there is a significant possibilty that some Okehampton Exeter services would already be running if the franchise let hadn't been cocked up. As Ham implies it is the best solution for the time being. Not ideal for Torbay but currently really the only game in town.

 

[Trainbuff]

So Cross Country can't be bothered was indeed the correct conclusion!

It is not that crosscountry cant be bothered I believe. The crew used to 'sign' the route but capacity constraints meant there are not the paths. In which case Great Western got them. More people travel to London than Birmingham and the North

 

[47802]

And quickly! Think in fact there is a significant possibilty that some Okehampton Exeter services would already be running if the franchise let hadn't been cocked up. As Ham implies it is the best solution for the time being. Not ideal for Torbay but currently really the only game in town.

The best solution for the time being and that's a key point, as there seems to be view that their will be money for Okehampton and then Dawlish diversion at a later date.

Meanwhile in the real world I suspect getting money for either will be difficult, while the idea of getting money for both will be in the relm's of fantasy. It should be looked at as the best solution to the problem, not a partial fix, not a quick fix, not a cheap fix.

And ignoring the missing links for the moment, how much will it actually cost to upgrade the existing sections of track to a competent diversionary route?

 

[L&Y Robert]

Excellent story. Although the alternate supply was already there and working, and I hope the cable didn't cost £250m

Well, in a way it did! - young family, 3 boys, we had just occupied old house needing repairs and renovation - all that, so we were "Hard up" as we northeners say. So it was a bit of an effort to go out and buy - pay for, rather, 100m of uPVC sheathed 7/036 twin and earth - especially with a bill for the new supply in the offing. But it was worth it! And then we could re-use the temporary cable for other things. (Still got a bit of it). THE PARABLE HOLDS! - more or less. Let's mend Dawlish and then do Okehampton and stop griping.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And another thing! When Dawlish is mended, and the rails are shiny again, will we all feel it's over and done, now? (then). But as autumn merges into winter will we anxiously scan the weather forecast, looking out for more gales? Stopping traffic for safety's sake on that pictureque but so vulnerable bit of railway once again, mending it once more, again and again. Or do we think it's over now? - a once in hundred year (or whatever it is) event, not to be repeated until, say, 2114. I'd guess that something like this, the last few weeks, will become an annual event - and what then? I reckon the Dawlish railway is doomed, if not by political decision, then by nature herself. At last, a year or two ahead, someone will say "Enough is enough. Where are those plans for the avoiding line did you say?"

 

[455driver]

So Cross Country can't be bothered was indeed the correct conclusion!

Why spend a lot of money training crews on routes they wont ever work over? :roll:

There wouldnr be enough paths on the line for XC to go that way either as FGW have first dibs (SWT have to amend their service to fit the FGW trains in as well), it would be a complete waste of time and money, but hey anything for a dig isnt it! :roll:

 

[D1009]

Why spend a lot of money training crews on routes they wont ever work over? :roll:

There wouldnr be enough paths on the line for XC to go that way either as FGW have first dibs (SWT have to amend their service to fit the FGW trains in as well), it would be a complete waste of time and money, but hey anything for a dig isnt it! :roll:

If you reread your post #669 you might understand why Latethannever responded in that way.

 

[The Ham]

The best solution for the time being and that's a key point, as there seems to be view that their will be money for Okehampton and then Dawlish diversion at a later date.

It depends on the timeframe you look at. Over the next 10-20 years after the reopening (if that is what does happen) it is unlikely that Dawlish division is fairly unlikely to be built. However as time goes by if the line at Dawlish starts to see more and more closures and passenger numbers grow then the case for the diversion will become much stronger.

Meanwhile in the real world I suspect getting money for either will be difficult, while the idea of getting money for both will be in the relm's of fantasy. It should be looked at as the best solution to the problem, not a partial fix, not a quick fix, not a cheap fix.

Again it depends on the timeframe, yes pure fantasy to have both in the next 15 years, fairly unlikely in the next 30 years, but then beyond that having a diversion route as well as a reopening would start to become a possibility. As if at present the number of passengers to Plymouth (and Cornwall) are say 5,000 per day, whilst with just 2.5% growth over 30 years that could be over 10,000 per day, which could be 3tph or even 4tph between Exeter and Plymouth via Dawlish. That could well justify a division route.

And ignoring the missing links for the moment, how much will it actually cost to upgrade the existing sections of track to a competent diversionary route?

I would have thought (and until NR produce their report it is mostly speculation on how much any scheme would cost) that the £250m would include the required upgrades to the existing lines, given that the old estimate was for £100m add a bit for inflation and even if that's £75m for inflation that £75m for additional works on the existing network that's about what 4 passing loops based on the cost of the West of England Line loops. However that was on a line where the extra signaling was needing to be put in in isolation, whilst with the reopening would require a whole new signaling project so the cost of each signal would be lower.

 

[HSTEd]

There is never going to be so much damage to Dawlish that repairing it or reinforcing its defences is not cheaper than building a new line.
£200m gets you a wall several metres high over the vulnerable section.

 

[LateThanNever]

There is never going to be so much damage to Dawlish that repairing it or reinforcing its defences is not cheaper than building a new line.
£200m gets you a wall several metres high over the vulnerable section.

But if the sands continue shifting at Dawlish Warren and Cockwood is the next bit of line to go then however many metres of high wall at Dawlish will not help. Okehampton & Tavistock will!

 

[HSTEd]

But if the sands continue shifting at Dawlish Warren and Cockwood is the next bit of line to go then however many metres of high wall at Dawlish will not help. Okehampton & Tavistock will!

Cockwood is unlikely to be anywhere near as vulnerable as Dawlish, since it is facing the other side of the Estuary instead of directly at the open sea.

The wave power at Dawlish is orders of magnitude greater than at Cockwood or Starcross.

Okehampton and tavistock is a sticking plaster that will not do anything to improve journey opportunities beyond the branch line reinstatements at each end which would cost a tiny fraction as much. (It will almost certainly be even slower than the current route - which at least has some major straights on it).

 

[jmc100]

Does any member have any idea how much the Dawlish repairs will cost?