Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[jmc100]

They have deteriorated since then....

The two viaducts are listed structures and were recently refurbished by the local council. Some new decking was also installed to make the cycle and walk way. At the same time the metalwork was painted, so I would assume that a detailed structural examination was carried out at the same time. As they are two independent structures I don't think the weight of any train will be detrimental to their continued use. In fact, diesel locomotives connected with Meldon quarry operations used the line on the viaduct to head shunt.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

They have deteriorated since then....

When was the last official investigation carried out on the viaducts and what were the findings ?

 

[HSTEd]

The council probably won't have paid to refurbish the bridge to the standard required to run trains.
Walkways have rather lower structural loadings.

 

[yorksrob]

Interesting to note that Rail Magazine has come out in favour of Okehampton whilst Modern Railways appears to have come out in favour of the Dawlish avoider.

Rail Magazine 1
Modern Railways 0

on this occasion.

 

[47802]

Interesting to note that Rail Magazine has come out in favour of Okehampton whilst Modern Railways appears to have come out in favour of the Dawlish avoider.

Rail Magazine 1
Modern Railways 0

on this occasion.

Or

Rail Magazine 0
Modern Railways 1

If your not an Okehampton fan boy.

 

[yorksrob]

Or

Rail Magazine 0
Modern Railways 1

If your not an Okehampton fan boy.

Indeed, Dawlish avoider fab boy

 

[TheKnightWho]

Or

Rail Magazine 0
Modern Railways 1

If your not an Okehampton fan boy.

You won't let this lie will you

The first sign of a lost argument is denigrating the opposition.

 

[yorksrob]

To be fair to all of us on either side of the argument, they both make the case that the area requires substantial investment and that the powers that be need to be held to their commitment.

I thoughr Modern Railways‘ comparison between the prioritisation of longer term improvements as opposed to the "urgent operational requirement" of always having a route open to the South West was quite a pertinent one.

 

[47802]

You won't let this lie will you

The first sign of a lost argument is denigrating the opposition.

Which is exactly the what the Okehampton camp are attempting to do.

What annoys about this whole argument is instead of looking purely at what the best solution for a mainline to the south west its essentially being used to try justify something else, and also trying to justify Okehampton as the quick solution doesn't seem a sensible approach either. as no solution of an alternate or replacement route will be particularly quick.

Yes there are some good things about reopening the Okehampton route, but my fundamental problem with it, is to me it should be a once and for all solution for the foreseeable future, and not spend a fortune on Okehampton but then have to spend another fortune on a Dawlish alternate or replacement 10 or 20 years down the line.

I hope the NR study takes a more sensible long term approach, and I don't see any point in commenting further until some info from the study is revealed.

 

[Gadfly]

What use will the Okehampton route be to Torbay?

 

[yorksrob]

What use will the Okehampton route be to Torbay?

You could equally argue what use is the Yeovil route to Taunton or the Settle Carlisle to Penrith, yet they are still useful diversionary routes.

In the greater scheme of things, the whole South West wouldn‘t be cut off

 

[HSTEd]

Just a big fraction of its population.

The entire population of Devon and Cornwall is 1.6 million.
Only part of which lives west of Dawlish.

The amount cut off by an Okehampton Scheme is significantly increased due to the huge population of Torbay relative to the rest of the area.
Torbay has a population something like a quarter that of the entirity of Cornwall.

The Dawlish avoider does not simply abandon that massive conurbation - and neither do the schemes involving reinforcing the existing route's sea defences.
That is a huge minus.

 

[yorksrob]

Just a big fraction of its population.

The entire population of Devon and Cornwall is 1.6 million.
Only part of which lives west of Dawlish.

The amount cut off by an Okehampton Scheme is significantly increased due to the huge population of Torbay relative to the rest of the area.
Torbay has a population something like a quarter that of the entirity of Cornwall.

The Dawlish avoider does not simply abandon that massive conurbation - and neither do the schemes involving reinforcing the existing route's sea defences.
That is a huge minus.

It is large, granted, but as you mention, the population is only a quarter of Cornwall, and that‘s before you count Plymouth (and Tavistock and Okehampton).

I'm not arguing that Torbay should be abandoned. Infact, I believe it should continue to be the mainline. But you can't expect any main line to be open all of the time.

 

[HSTEd]

It is large, granted, but as you mention, the population is only a quarter of Cornwall, and that‘s before you count Plymouth (and Tavistock and Okehampton).

Well Tavistock would keep its connection to the National rail network in any scheme (assuming the reopening occurs as Projected) so its not really fair to say that is a benefit only of the Okehampton Route.

And Okehampton is nowhere near the population of Torbay.

I'm not arguing that Torbay should be abandoned. Infact, I believe it should continue to be the mainline. But you can't expect any main line to be open all of the time.

Then you plan on spending all this money on a main line standard railway via Okehampton and not even make it the major route?
That sounds rather expensive for the very small normal gain of just having Okehampton on the rail network - since essentially all other gains happen either way.

 

[yorksrob]

Well Tavistock would keep its connection to the National rail network in any scheme (assuming the reopening occurs as Projected) so its not really fair to say that is a benefit only of the Okehampton Route.

And Okehampton is nowhere near the population of Torbay.



Then you plan on spending all this money on a main line standard railway via Okehampton and not even make it the major route?
That sounds rather expensive for the very small normal gain of just having Okehampton on the rail network - since essentially all other gains happen either way.

Oh no, I disagree. Tavistock, the national park and Okehampton would all gain mich more in being part of an inter-regional through route than stuck at the end of a branch. I see it as an important secondary route, complementing the main line, much as the Yeovil route complements the main line through Taunton, and providing avital service to its local area.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

To be fair to all of us on either side of the argument, they both make the case that the area requires substantial investment and that the powers that be need to be held to their commitment.

I thought Modern Railways‘ comparison between the prioritisation of longer term improvements as opposed to the "urgent operational requirement" of always having a route open to the South West was quite a pertinent one.

Indeed so. Whilst I have held a subscription to Modern Railways magazine since its inception, I am not swayed by points of view expressed in this magazine nor in any other magazine, but prefer to reserve my own considered point of view.

I am almost 69 years of age and unlike many of the forum members on this website, have both seen and travelled many now closed railway routes that were operated by steam traction, some of which have now surfaced upon this particular thread.

 

[yorksrob]

Indeed so. Whilst I have held a subscription to Modern Railways magazine since its inception, I am not swayed by points of view expressed in this magazine nor in any other magazine, but prefer to reserve my own considered point of view.

I am almost 69 years of age and unlike many of the forum members on this website, have both seen and travelled many now closed railway routes that were operated by steam traction, some of which have now surfaced upon this particular thread.

They do give a good rasnge of opinion (I just wish they were'nt all in the 3-4 pound range then I wouldn‘t have to resort to reading so many in WHSmith
I must admit, I wish I'd had the opportunity to travel on the "withered arm" (a friend of mine at work was taken as a child, on the last train to Bude, for which I'm eternally jelous. I do really think the old SR route to Plymouth could be a really vital part of the West Country's future.

 

[jmc100]

I think this thread is wandering a bit off-topic. The size of the towns and cities and their population densities are not in question. The heading relates to a viable alternative route to keep the trains running thereby securing the economies and rail travel for the environs of those populated areas and the South-West in general. At present, the Okehampton-Tavistock route is only being discussed as an alternative route not as the main route. The ideal solution would be a tunnel linking Exeter to Newton Abbot but this proposal may turn out to be far more expensive than reinstating the Dartmoor route or any other proposed alternative.

BTW, the Torbay line branches from the main line after Newton Abbot. It is Teignmouth that is on the main line, not Torquay.

 

[The Ham]

At present, the Okehampton-Tavistock route is only being discussed as an alternative route not as the main route. The ideal solution would be a tunnel linking Exeter to Newton Abbot but this proposal may turn out to be far more expensive than reinstating the Dartmoor route or any other proposed alternative.

Quite, which is perhaps why a tunnel linking Exeter to Newton Abbot doesn't apear to be on the NR list of options as provided on the link below:

To add further detail to that, the BBC have now linked to a NR paper on the Dawlish problem, and future options etc, and it includes a breakdown of that £31m into a number of individual SW resilience project costs, of which Cowley Bridge is shown as £6.5m - £12.9m. Eight other projects are included in the total, for example Hinksey track raising at £5m, and earthworks strengthening at Honiton and Crewkerne at £3m.

Info on page 10 of this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/26_02_14_dawlish_jmo.pdf

In fact of all the NR options none would seam to provide much in the way of a speed advantage over the existing line and it is likely that only the route through Okehampton would generate anything of note in the way of extra passengers.

Of the routes lister I would guess that few if any would be the ideal which supporters of a dedicated Dawlish Avoiding Line (DAL) would be wanting. As it may speed up journey times but I doubt it would be by as much as 10 minutes (i.e. halfing the current journey time for the expresses which take 18-21 minutes).

If the jorney time improvementes where four or five minutes on the new DAL then that is unlikley to make a big impact on the econmey (given that there are a lot of lesure travellers for whom time saving is less of an issue).

Conversley, the route through Okehampton could have a significant impact on the local economey. For instance if it were possible to retain a cycle route as well as the rail route through Okehampton people could catch a train from Exeter and Plymouth to Okehampton to hire a bike. It could even provide for new tourist opertunities, for instance people cycleing between two stations on the line as even if they had their own cycles they are likely to want refreshments.

As even a small amount of money spent in one local business can pass through several local business before it leaves a region. For instance a cyclists buys a cup of tea and a cake in a cafe (£4), the cafe owner then uses some of that money to pay a local company for the produce that they had to supplied (e.g. cake and milk), that supplier then uses some of that money to pay the local farmer(s) and businesses who supplies them, who then in tern have people who supply them. In addition any money used to pay staff (in the first or any subsiquent business) then is likely to also pass though other local business. By the time that £4 leaves the local area (through taxes or paying non local business) it could well be that it has been accounted as significantly more than that by the business which it has passed through their books.

 

[po8crg]

If there is to be a line that doesn't make a dramatic improvement to speed, then the L&SWR route is preferable. Not bothering may also make sense - the line really should wash its own face at the very least.

A DAL would need to be as part of a major programme of works to speed up all rail in the SW.

 

[cjmillsnun]

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.

Not by much. You can guarantee this will go to a public inquiry and will be much more high key now that it was before.

 

[The Ham]

Not by much. You can guarantee this will go to a public inquiry and will be much more high key now that it was before.

Although high key, it is probably not beery likely to see much in the way of opposition.

 

[Gadfly]

It is large, granted, but as you mention, the population is only a quarter of Cornwall, and that‘s before you count Plymouth (and Tavistock and Okehampton).

I'm not arguing that Torbay should be abandoned. Infact, I believe it should continue to be the mainline. But you can't expect any main line to be open all of the time.

We should get real. The Dawlish route is not fit for purpose as a main line; eventually it will be taken by the sea. So, a new inland route is needed to assure the future of the main line via Newton Abbot.

The Okehampton route might serve Plymouth but would mean South Devon traffic being obliged to switch to road.

 

[yorksrob]

The Dawlish route is not fit for purpose as a main line; eventually it will be taken by the sea. So, a new inland route is needed to assure the future of the main line via Newton Abbot.

I don't believe that is the case at all. In the distant future ? who knows, but for the time being, the existing main line is fine most of the time.

If the main line wasn't viable, then neither would be Dawlish itself and probably a lot of other coastal settlements as well.

 

[jmc100]

I'm not arguing that Torbay should be abandoned. Infact, I believe it should continue to be the mainline. But you can't expect any main line to be open all of the time.

That's exactly the way I feel about the situation. Having an alternative route will free up the main line for necessary repairs and maintenance - less stressful on NR in planning their future operations.

At present, the route via Dawlish is a great tourist attraction for South Devon and so is the northern route over Dartmoor if it was available. I travelled on the Dartmoor line many times before it was closed and the views of the countryside are spectacular in all seasons. This in itself would be a magnet for tourists, ramblers and cyclists let alone in bringing investment opportunities to the area. The north Dartmoor route would also present many more opportunities to travel directly to any of the towns and cities along the line and/or further without having to go by road and keep the trains running should any impromptu interruptions occur on the southern route.

BTW, Did I read somewhere that NR were also considering a 'chord' route from Rewe on the GW mainline to link directly with the L&SW line near Crediton?

 

[LateThanNever]

Just a big fraction of its population.

The entire population of Devon and Cornwall is 1.6 million.
Only part of which lives west of Dawlish.

The amount cut off by an Okehampton Scheme is significantly increased due to the huge population of Torbay relative to the rest of the area.
Torbay has a population something like a quarter that of the entirity of Cornwall.

The Dawlish avoider does not simply abandon that massive conurbation - and neither do the schemes involving reinforcing the existing route's sea defences.
That is a huge minus.

Cannot vouch for the 1.6 million in Devon and Cornwall which seems a bit high to me but the population of Torbay is not a massive connurbation as would normally be understood with just over 130k. Whereas Cornwall is just over half a million and Plymouth alone just over a quarter of a million. Torbay is therefore only about 14% of the population of Plymouth and Cornwall never mind the whole peninsula! That is why Okehampton is such an effective diversionary route!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's exactly the way I feel about the situation. Having an alternative route will free up the main line for necessary repairs and maintenance - less stressful on NR in planning their future operations.

At present, the route via Dawlish is a great tourist attraction for South Devon and so is the northern route over Dartmoor if it was available. I travelled on the Dartmoor line many times before it was closed and the views of the countryside are spectacular in all seasons. This in itself would be a magnet for tourists, ramblers and cyclists let alone in bringing investment opportunities to the area. The north Dartmoor route would also present many more opportunities to travel directly to any of the towns and cities along the line and/or further without having to go by road and keep the trains running should any impromptu interruptions occur on the southern route.

BTW, Did I read somewhere that NR were also considering a 'chord' route from Rewe on the GW mainline to link directly with the L&SW line near Crediton?

Locally it has been proposed but it doesn't appear on Network Rail's bbc link!

 

[The Ham]

We should get real. The Dawlish route is not fit for purpose as a main line; eventually it will be taken by the sea. So, a new inland route is needed to assure the future of the main line via Newton Abbot.

The Okehampton route might serve Plymouth but would mean South Devon traffic being obliged to switch to road.

Although it is probable that the Dawlish route would, at some point, need to be left to the sea this is unlikley to be for some time. As such there maybe some benefit in having the Okehampton route now for as the Dawlish route starts to become more likely to need to have closures, then as the Dawlish route reaches a stage where it needs to be abandoned then look at a suitable alternitive route. This could then mean that there is justification for a true highspeed route between Exeter and Plymouth with then a more minor route (but still at a reasonable speed and with some Intercity services) serving the existing rail route.

 

[47802]

Although it is probable that the Dawlish route would, at some point, need to be left to the sea this is unlikley to be for some time. As such there maybe some benefit in having the Okehampton route now for as the Dawlish route starts to become more likely to need to have closures, then as the Dawlish route reaches a stage where it needs to be abandoned then look at a suitable alternitive route. This could then mean that there is justification for a true highspeed route between Exeter and Plymouth with then a more minor route (but still at a reasonable speed and with some Intercity services) serving the existing rail route.

I'm sorry but that statement is utterly ridiculous, either the Dawlish line is fit for purpose going forward or it isn't. if it is or can made to be, then no replacement is required, if it isn't then a replacement is needed, not a ridiculous amount of money to be spent on an occasional diversion.

Oh and another message to the Okehampton Fan Boys, despite your attempts to ignore Torbay, Torbay is an significant area of Devon which has for more importance in this argument than Okehampton and Tavistock.

 

[HSTEd]

Cannot vouch for the 1.6 million in Devon and Cornwall which seems a bit high to me but the population of Torbay is not a massive connurabation as would normally be understood with just over 130k. Whereas Cornwall is just over half a million and Plymouth alone just over a quarter of a million. Torbay is therefore only about 14% of the population of Plymouth and Cornwall never mind the whole peninsula! That is why Okehampton is such an effective diversionary route!

Not as effective as a Dawlish avoiding line though. As you abandon more than ten percent of the entire population of said peninsula, plus people living at Newton Abbot and similar.
I can afford to spend more on a DAL than okehampton as it serves more and offers greater journey time and capacity advantages (ie it has some).
Okehampton costs a huge sum additional to the branch line option which gains most of the local benefits.

 

[jmc100]

I'm sorry but that statement is utterly ridiculous, either the Dawlish line is fit for purpose going forward or it isn't. if it is or can made to be, then no replacement is required, if it isn't then a replacement is needed, not a ridiculous amount of money to be spent on an occasional diversion.

47802, I think you are quite incorrect. The sea wall route is becoming problematic. Just look at what the waves did to the temporary containers let alone the retaining wall. This is no time for kicking the ball around. Decisions relating to an alternative route will have to made quickly with implementation of the works to follow immediately. There is no time to dilly-dally on this one. Next winter could well be just as bad or even worse. Who knows? Are you prepared to chance it?