Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[The Ham]

The three options being considered (acording to the link below are:

Retaining the coastal route between Exeter and Newton Abbot;
Providing an alternative route, but retaining the coastal line;
Providing an alternative route and abandoning the coastal line.

Intrestingly the abandonment of the existing route is being looked at (although probably likely to be a long time off).

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...erm-options-for-devon-cornwall-rail-link.html

Following the catastrophic destruction of around 100 m of sea wall at Dawlish during an exceptional storm in February, a taskforce has been established to undertake high-level study into ways of protecting the railway between Devon and Cornwall from extreme weather.

The project is being led by infrastructure manager Network Rail, in partnership with the Department for Transport, Environment Agency, train operating companies and local authorities.

The High Level Option Study is to be completed by June 30. It will consider alternative scenarios in the event that the coastal route is not available because of severe weather or maintenance. It will assess three long-term options:

Retaining the coastal route between Exeter and Newton Abbot;
Providing an alternative route, but retaining the coastal line;
Providing an alternative route and abandoning the coastal line.

The study will consider forecast sea level rises, passenger demand, the impact on communities, environmental, social and economic factors, as well as engineering options for strengthening the sea wall. It will draw on a study which is to examine five potential alternatives to the coastal route, including reopening the former LSWR line through Okehampton and Tavistock.

Following consultation with china clay producers and helped by the fire service, engineers are using high pressure water cannon to bring about a controlled landslip and wash away about 20 000 tonnes of cliff face threatening the line near Teignmouth, 2 km west of Dawlish. The main contractor is AMCO. An unmanned aerial vehicle supplied by Aerial Technics has been used to monitor the site, and fixed-wing aircraft are also being used to take LiDAR laser readings to measure the changing condition of the slip slope.

 

[yorksrob]

The three options being considered (acording to the link below are:

Retaining the coastal route between Exeter and Newton Abbot;
Providing an alternative route, but retaining the coastal line;
Providing an alternative route and abandoning the coastal line.
g
Intrestingly the abandonment of the existing route is being looked at (although probably likely to be a long time off).

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...erm-options-for-devon-cornwall-rail-link.html

Thanks for that. I wasn‘t aware that closure was an option at present. Obviously if this were chosen, a shorter inland diversion would be necessary. However, I still feel that option two is the most desireable and likely outcome for the time being.

 

[47802]

I don't option 3 makes the most sense to me, you have a permanent fix for the problem, then regardless of who still has to pay for it you can look at sea defences without the need to maintain a railway, and of course the line has potential problems with landslips as well as the sea.


I would of course be sad to see it go I have taken many photo's and video's on that section of line it an amazing piece of railway, but its not there for the benefit of Photographers and Enthusiasts, and neither would the Okehampton line be either. I cant help thinking that desire by some people to reopen the Okehampton is motivated by a desire to ensure the Dawlish route stays open when that may not be the best option.

Of course it will come more down to money and politics rather than possibly the best solution

 

[MarkyT]

I don't option 3 makes the most sense to me, you have a permanent fix for the problem, then regardless of who still has to pay for it you can look at sea defences without the need to maintain a railway, and of course the line has potential problems with landslips as well as the sea.


I would of course be sad to see it go I have taken many photo's and video's on that section of line it an amazing piece of railway, but its not there for the benefit of Photographers and Enthusiasts, and neither would the Okehampton line be either.

Of course it will come more down to money and politics rather than possibly the best solution

That's the nature of broad high level studies. You have to examine a range of options, even ones that may at first sight be highly unpalatable (and thus perhaps practically impossible, politically). However the study takes place to formally identify dis-benefits as well as benefits of alternatives, hence a rational analysis can be made and conclusions drawn.

 

[yorksrob]

I don't option 3 makes the most sense to me, you have a permanent fix for the problem, then regardless of who still has to pay for it you can look at sea defences without the need to maintain a railway, and of course the line has potential problems with landslips as well as the sea.


I would of course be sad to see it go I have taken many photo's and video's on that section of line it an amazing piece of railway, but its not there for the benefit of Photographers and Enthusiasts, and neither would the Okehampton line be either. I cant help thinking that desire by some people to reopen the Okehampton is motivated by a desire to ensure the Dawlish route stays open when that may not be the best option.

Of course it will come more down to money and politics rather than possibly the best solution

Well, You‘re spot on in my case. My preference would be for Dawlish to remain open for as long as practically possible. It‘s not just rail enthusiasts, There was a letter from a local lady in the times not long after the breach arguing very passionately about the importance of the route to the Dawlish area.

Certainly to my mind, any solution involving the closure of the stations in the are would, almost by definition, not be the best one.

 

[47802]

Well, You‘re spot on in my case. My preference would be for Dawlish to remain open for as long as practically possible. It‘s not just rail enthusiasts, There was a letter from a local lady in the times not long after the breach arguing very passionately about the importance of the route to the Dawlish area.

Certainly to my mind, any solution involving the closure of the stations in the are would, almost by definition, not be the best one.

I'm sure the railway does bring significant benefit to Dawlish but I think the future of this mainline route is more important than any benefits to Dawlish, I'm sure there will also be some in Dawlish who would prefer a peaceful quiet frontage without the railway.

 

[jmc100]

Whilst NR is responsible for the track at Dawlish, they are also responsible for the maintenance of the sea wall and the cliff faces so I do not think the southern route will be abandoned.

Network Rail are considering various suggestions for an alternative route. The easiest project and probably the less costly of all of them is the reinstatement of the track over Dartmoor. The layout of the route is already in place. All that would require is the removal of vegetation and installation of drainage channels and new ballast. The viaduct at Meldon could easily be strengthened to carry trains on a double track so no real problem there. The route is devoid of some bridges but the viaducts, tunnels and stations are still in place. Really speaking, NR has a ready-made railway route that is the only short-term answer to providing a viable and resilient alternative route.

Maybe, a direct route between Exeter and newton Abbot may be engineered at a later date but an alternative to the Dawlish route is necessary in the shortest possible time as we do not know what nature will throw at us in the winters to come. It's much easier to clear some snow from the track that having to rebuild the sea wall due to wash-outs.

 

[34104]

What are we trying to solve here?

As ever, it depends on how you ask the original question. If the question is “how do you deal with the problems at Dawlish, so that you resolve this weakspot” then the answer(s) seem to be:

• Spend money on repairing the existing line (with a thicker/ longer/ higher wall)
• Build a breakwater to lessen the waves
• Build a diversion that avoids the weakest part of the line (in which case you might as well build a faster one, directly inland)

...that’s what the thread was started up to “solve”, that’s the solution(s) that seem to solve that problem to me (you probably couldn’t justify all three of these bullet points, of course).

Just like the problems at Selby a generation ago (a slow bit of main line caused by a large “kink”, a section of unstable track – although in Selby’s case it was caused by mining underneath) – you build a faster alternative that avoids the problem spot. We didn’t “solve” the Selby issue by reinstating some long scrapped railway several miles away (cue posts arguing for the re-opening of the Hull/Beverley - York line...)!

If, however, you want to move the goalposts and introduce lots of other issues (like “the increased educational opportunities for communities along the route”) then that’s another story. But you're finding "problems" to fit the "solution" that you are going to argue for regardless.

Those in favour of a line via Okehampton were saying that this second route was needed to increase “resilience” and complaining about the number of times that the sea wall has been breached at Dawlish. Well, if this section of line is such a problem then a direct route from Exeter to Newton Abbott would avoid all of that, with the bonus that it’d provide a faster service for InterCity trains – a year round benefit. Year round benefits clearly being better than the option for a rare diversion.

I appreciate that a “DAL” does nothing to help people in Okehampton (one of the criticisms), but the original question was nothing to do with Okehampton.

Now, if the Okehampton supporters say that (despite a “DAL” solving the particular Dawlish problem) we can’t have only one line from Exeter to Penzance (due to other general disruptions) then I’d ask why their Okehampton route would mean that Plymouth – Penzance have still have only one route?

Surely, if it’s so imperative that Cornwall has a “resilient” diversionary line then why would 99% of Cornwall’s passengers still be reliant upon a single track bridge over the Tamar? Should we insist on a chord from Bere Alston to Saltash in case Plymouth Station is closed?

Where do you draw the line at “resilience”? It seems to be an excuse to provide duplicate lines wherever you want (but without the need to provide duplicate lines elsewhere) – a means of justifying the end that you want.

And the great thing about “resilience” is that its handily unquantifiable (like “regeneration”) – it sounds A Good Thing but not something that you can trade off against quantifiable improvements (like raising passenger numbers, better reliability, speed increases).

Yes, there are parallel lines in many parts of the UK, but that doesn’t mean that they could accommodate all of the services from a closed line (e.g. good luck running all Glasgow – Carlisle services via Kilmarnock, if the Lockerbie line is blocked).

An Okehampton route would do nothing for Torbay – where the people are more reliant upon a direct service to Exeter every day than the people of Cornwall are. So do the Okehampton faction want to spend money on a more “resilient” line from Newton Abbott to Exeter (to maintain a year round Torbay service) or do they abandon Torbay when the Dawlish line is closed?

Because, if we are spending money to secure the wall at Dawlish so that its good enough for Torbay services then surely that solves the problem for Penzance services? If we build an avoiding line for Torbay services then that functions as an avoiding line for Penzance services. What’s good enough for the goose...

So, in light of the above, whilst I can see justification for a single track Bere Alston – Tavistock branch (and a lower justification for daily trains from Exeter to Okehampton), the merits of any Tavistock/Okehampton reopening are nothing to do with Dawlish. They stand/fall of their own merits.

People have tried to cloud the issue, but none of the other details (average infrastructure spend per head of population in south west England, the size of the HS2 budget, party politics, some post-flooding bribe from Westminster, cups of tea in Tavistock) affect what the problem is and what the solution is.

Talking of which;

http://www.brucehunt.co.uk/Saltash to Callington Railway.html

 

[341o2]

It has now been announced that Dawlish will reopen 4 April.

As regards reopening the northern route through Okehampton, the first issue is regarding the proposal to reopen between Bere Alston and Tavistock, latest information says that a public consultation will be held later this year and plans could be approved then.

This line was closed in the wake of the Beechig report which targeted "duplication". The withdrawal of the Atlantic Coast Express in 1964 was the death knell of the former Southern network in the West Country

While the 60's saw ever increasing tourist numbers in the West Country most came by car. I recall that for many years the future of other lines with us today such as the Cambrian and Settle & Carlisle was in doubt (especially in the case of the latter when Ribblehead viaduct was found to be disintgrating)

Meldon viaduct could be single track. In the final years two trains were not allowed to be on the viaduct together, and there were the branch lines to Bude and Padstow as well as the main line traffic to cope with

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

Whilst NR is responsible for the track at Dawlish, they are also responsible for the maintenance of the sea wall and the cliff faces so I do not think the southern route will be abandoned.

Network Rail are considering various suggestions for an alternative route. The easiest project and probably the less costly of all of them is the reinstatement of the track over Dartmoor. The layout of the route is already in place. All that would require is the removal of vegetation and installation of drainage channels and new ballast. The viaduct at Meldon could easily be strengthened to carry trains on a double track so no real problem there. The route is devoid of some bridges but the viaducts, tunnels and stations are still in place. Really speaking, NR has a ready-made railway route that is the only short-term answer to providing a viable and resilient alternative route.

Maybe, a direct route between Exeter and newton Abbot may be engineered at a later date but an alternative to the Dawlish route is necessary in the shortest possible time as we do not know what nature will throw at us in the winters to come. It's much easier to clear some snow from the track that having to rebuild the sea wall due to wash-outs.

Would the old route route over Dartmoor from Okehampton really be cheaper than the possible reopening of the Exeter-Newton Abbot line via Heathfield? or is it than the latter route has been partly built over?

 

[jmc100]

Would the old route route over Dartmoor from Okehampton really be cheaper than the possible reopening of the Exeter-Newton Abbot line via Heathfield? or is it than the latter route has been partly built over?

The Heathfield line from Tavistock is only a single-track route. Much of the route has been converted to a cycle track and walkway. The old Walkham viaduct is no more and was replaced by the Gem viaduct which cost a staggering £2million. The Tavistock end of the route has been built over and the southern end is used by the Plym valley railway with the laying of new track to the north of their base. There is no room on this route for loops or double track-work. The majority of the viaducts and tunnels were constructed for single-track working.

 

[34104]

Would the old route route over Dartmoor from Okehampton really be cheaper than the possible reopening of the Exeter-Newton Abbot line via Heathfield? or is it than the latter route has been partly built over?

The A38 is built over a section of the old line at Chudleigh,which would present a significant and expensive problem to solve before any reopening could take place.The tunnel at Perridge has suffered some deterioration over the years;



http://www.forgottenrelics.co.uk/tunnels/gallery/perridge.html

Not insurmountable but again expensive and presumably the tunnel would need to be doubled,although having said that,the same would also be true of the Okehampton route in that the tunnel built to take the A30 over the line is for single track only.There has been some redevelopment along the route,especially at Ide, but in it's favour would be the fact that the line is still open to Heathfield from Newton Abbot and from Alphington to the main line at Exeter.Obviously the most negative factor would be the single track status of the line in comparison to the Okehampton route if a high speed alternative were to be sought,although of course it would be possible to install passing loops at certain points along the route.

 

[LateThanNever]

The Heathfield line from Tavistock is only a single-track route. Much of the route has been converted to a cycle track and walkway. The old Walkham viaduct is no more and was replaced by the Gem viaduct which cost a staggering £2million. The Tavistock end of the route has been built over and the southern end is used by the Plym valley railway with the laying of new track to the north of their base. There is no room on this route for loops or double track-work. The majority of the viaducts and tunnels were constructed for single-track working.

As far as I'm aware this is the Old Great Western Route to Tavistock and Launceston from Plymouth. May be wrong but don't think it ends up anywhere near Heathfield?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What are we trying to solve here?

Surely, if it’s so imperative that Cornwall has a “resilient” diversionary line then why would 99% of Cornwall’s passengers still be reliant upon a single track bridge over the Tamar? Should we insist on a chord from Bere Alston to Saltash in case Plymouth Station is closed?

Intrigued to know how the other 1% of rail passengers get to Cornwall!?

 

[34104]

As far as I'm aware this is the Old Great Western Route to Tavistock and Launceston from Plymouth. May be wrong but don't think it ends up anywhere near Heathfield?--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Intrigued to know how the other 1% of rail passengers get to Cornwall!?

No,it doesn't.Some wires crossed there,i fancy.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

As far as I'm aware this is the Old Great Western Route to Tavistock and Launceston from Plymouth. May be wrong but don't think it ends up anywhere near Heathfield?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Intrigued to know how the other 1% of rail passengers get to Cornwall!?

Passengers to Calstock and Gunnislake use the Calstock viaduct to cross the Tamar into Cornwall!

 

[jmc100]

No,it doesn't.Some wires crossed there,i fancy.

Ooops! Sorry about that, I think you're right. I don't know whatever made me think that the Plym valley railway was the location of Heathfield as that is the old GWR single track route from Tavistock South station.

I believe the old line from Exeter to Heathfield was also a single track for most of the way so quite a lot of work would be required to commission that particular route.

I'm can see the only realistic proposition in the short-term is to bridge the gap over Dartmoor. In the long term, a two-track tunnel is the answer, but that alternative may prove too costly to achieve.

 

[LateThanNever]

Passengers to Calstock and Gunnislake use the Calstock viaduct to cross the Tamar into Cornwall!

You're absolutely right! Forgotten that - Be surprised if it was 1% of total crossing passengers though!

 

[jmc100]

I have just been having a look at the Dawlish Livestream web cam and I think there is some concern about the amount of spray washing over the track. A helicopter has also been circling round the area so I suspect they may be taking some video of the rough sea and how it is affecting the route. Looks mighty dangerous to me.

 

[swt_passenger]

I have just been having a look at the Dawlish Livestream web cam and I think there is some concern about the amount of spray washing over the track. A helicopter has also been circling round the area so I suspect they may be taking some video of the rough sea and how it is affecting the route. Looks mighty dangerous to me.

Looks like usual conditions at high tide when there's a bit of swell and wind around. Not pleasant for people working on the track but fairly normal.

 

[jmc100]

Looks like usual conditions at high tide when there's a bit of swell and wind around. Not pleasant for people working on the track but fairly normal.

But just imagine the conditions during a storm-force scenario.

How did Brunel manage to construct the majority of the wall without it being washed away? Now we can see why an alternative route is urgently required.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

But just imagine the conditions during a storm-force scenario.

How did Brunel manage to construct the majority of the wall without it being washed away? Now we can see why an alternative route is urgently required.

I do wonder if sea-level rises and/or changes to sea defences in other nearby areas over the last 20 years have had an effect on Dawlish beach? I remember from holidays as a child in the 80s/early 90s that the 'low tide' seemed to be far lower than it has been more recently (though this could just be supposition on my part). In recent years when I've been to Dawlish there never seems to be that much beach though...

I'd still favour the Okehampton route before the DAL though, simply because it will be useful 364 days a year rather than for the odd month every 4-5 years. The DAL would be ideal to REPLACE the sea wall route in perhaps 50-100 years, if/when it becomes unviable due to rising sea levels/coastal erosion.

 

[jmc100]

I do wonder if sea-level rises and/or changes to sea defences in other nearby areas over the last 20 years have had an effect on Dawlish beach? I remember from holidays as a child in the 80s/early 90s that the 'low tide' seemed to be far lower than it has been more recently (though this could just be supposition on my part). In recent years when I've been to Dawlish there never seems to be that much beach though...

I'd still favour the Okehampton route before the DAL though, simply because it will be useful 364 days a year rather than for the odd month every 4-5 years. The DAL would be ideal to REPLACE the sea wall route in perhaps 50-100 years, if/when it becomes unviable due to rising sea levels/coastal erosion.

I think it could be down to the fact that high tide sea levels are higher now than say fifty or a hundred years ago. The other consideration is that the southern half of the country is sinking whilst the northern half is rising. I would imagine in Brunel's day the southern land mass would have been higher and the high tide levels would have been lower apart from when storm force conditions dominated.

I personally favour the Okehampton route as a viable alternative as it would be much more resilient than the sea wall route. Also, by knowing what we now know about the natural changes that seem to be drastically affecting the southern coastline, not only around the Dawlish locality, but in other southern coastal areas as well.

 

[341o2]

More likely due to more extreme weather forecast over the coming years due to global warming plus the change of attitude towards the railways since the 1950's. I have just read on this forum of a £170m improvement package for the line between Aberdeen & Inverness and yesterdays news on channels 1 and 3 had the nationwide improvements and expansion of the rail network as headlines.

So why not some improvement to railways in the West Country?

 

[po8crg]

So why not some improvement to railways in the West Country?

Well, the Fifth Five-Year Plan (CP5) starts today (they announced it yesterday to avoid the obvious problem of making an announcement on April 1).

The consultation period for the Sixth Five-Year Plan (CP6) also begins soon. We should be getting announcements of the major projects to be built in 2019-2024 in a couple of years' time (ie about a year after the General Election; enough time for the new Transport minister to get their fee under the table and claim credit for it all).

If your local councils in the West Country are not lobbying now for the flagship project of CP6 to be a big upgrade of rail in the region then they're crackers.

With both MML and GWML electrification complete by 2019, and most of the northern routes done too, it really is the SW that should be the main focus.

I'd expect to see Crewe-Chester and Selby-Hull electrification, maybe some infill work elsewhere, and probably at least one big project in Scotland (perhaps Glasgow-Perth-Dundee-Aberdeen). There will also be some reopenings (possibly Tavistock-Okehampton, possibly the second half of East-West Rail, maybe something in Scotland) but that should leave enough room in the budget for two big projects. One may well be electrifying the North Wales Coast line.

The other should be a major upgrade for the West Country. I'd be opening by asking for a really big project: IEP clearance all the way to Penzance, redouble Salisbury-Exeter, a major remodelling of rail in Exeter, (so trains can get between various lines without reversals), a brand-new much faster Plymouth-Exeter route, and wires over everything south and west of Bristol. You won't get all of it, but you should get a big improvement over what you have, and you can always come back and ask for the rest in CP7.

Plymouth is about 200 miles from London - about the same distance as Manchester, Leeds or Liverpool. It's ridiculous that you can get to those cities from London in only just over two hours, but Plymouth is nearer four than three.

Try talking about "Exeter Hub": hubs seem to be fashionable at the moment. Get all the local councils involved and build up a case for both better connections to the East and better internal connections in Devon and Cornwall.

 

[47802]

Well, the Fifth Five-Year Plan (CP5) starts today (they announced it yesterday to avoid the obvious problem of making an announcement on April 1).

The consultation period for the Sixth Five-Year Plan (CP6) also begins soon. We should be getting announcements of the major projects to be built in 2019-2024 in a couple of years' time (ie about a year after the General Election; enough time for the new Transport minister to get their fee under the table and claim credit for it all).

If your local councils in the West Country are not lobbying now for the flagship project of CP6 to be a big upgrade of rail in the region then they're crackers.

With both MML and GWML electrification complete by 2019, and most of the northern routes done too, it really is the SW that should be the main focus.

I'd expect to see Crewe-Chester and Selby-Hull electrification, maybe some infill work elsewhere, and probably at least one big project in Scotland (perhaps Glasgow-Perth-Dundee-Aberdeen). There will also be some reopenings (possibly Tavistock-Okehampton, possibly the second half of East-West Rail, maybe something in Scotland) but that should leave enough room in the budget for two big projects. One may well be electrifying the North Wales Coast line.

The other should be a major upgrade for the West Country. I'd be opening by asking for a really big project: IEP clearance all the way to Penzance, redouble Salisbury-Exeter, a major remodelling of rail in Exeter, (so trains can get between various lines without reversals), a brand-new much faster Plymouth-Exeter route, and wires over everything south and west of Bristol. You won't get all of it, but you should get a big improvement over what you have, and you can always come back and ask for the rest in CP7.

Plymouth is about 200 miles from London - about the same distance as Manchester, Leeds or Liverpool. It's ridiculous that you can get to those cities from London in only just over two hours, but Plymouth is nearer four than three.

Try talking about "Exeter Hub": hubs seem to be fashionable at the moment. Get all the local councils involved and build up a case for both better connections to the East and better internal connections in Devon and Cornwall.

So Okehampton reopening and a new fast line to Plymouth is that an April fool gag.

Anyway line reopens on Friday problem solved

 

[jmc100]

So Okehampton reopening and a new fast line to Plymouth is that an April fool gag.

Anyway line reopens on Friday problem solved

Yes, and let's hope everything goes according to plan but it still does not solve the problem. An alternative route has now become a urgent necessity unless you can see NR spending millions widening the sea wall by about 20 feet. Unfortunately, the reinstatement of the north Dartmoor route is not covered by CP5 as decisions were made well before the damage to the coastal route.

The link between Okehampton and Bere Alston should be considered a very special case due to the uncertainty of what the elements may throw at us in the future. The sea wall has been patched up but I have to give credit to NR, their partners and all the employees for performing a marvellous repair job considering the extensive damage that was caused by the storms.

 

[47802]

Yes, and let's hope everything goes according to plan but it still does not solve the problem. An alternative route has now become a urgent necessity unless you can see NR spending millions widening the sea wall by about 20 feet. Unfortunately, the reinstatement of the north Dartmoor route is not covered by CP5 as decisions were made well before the damage to the coastal route.

The link between Okehampton and Bere Alston should be considered a very special case due to the uncertainty of what the elements may throw at us in the future. The sea wall has been patched up but I have to give credit to NR, their partners and all the employees for performing a marvellous repair job considering the extensive damage that was caused by the storms.

No and the Okehampton route doesn't solve the problem either, given possible rising sea levels, more severe storms and Land Slips on the Dawlish I think it maybe time to look at a replacement rather than an alternative

 

[yorksrob]

The link between Okehampton and Bere Alston should be considered a very special case due to the uncertainty of what the elements may throw at us in the future.

Exactly. If the Government sees something as a priority, it can make it happen and it should do in this case. An alternative route to Plymouth would soon be as vital a part of the infrastructure as the alternative route from Exeter to London.

 

[LateThanNever]

Exactly. If the Government sees something as a priority, it can make it happen and it should do in this case. An alternative route to Plymouth would soon be as vital a part of the infrastructure as the alternative route from Exeter to London.

I agree with this - Plymouth is an important city - if cutting it off is unimportant then either Plymouth is unimportant or the railway is!

 

[quarella]

Only been dipping in and out of this thread so apologies if going over old ground.
The existing route through Dawlish is at the mercy of the elements. Previous alternatives have been built on. I can see only one answer. Take the existing route to Exmouth and tunnel under Babbacombe Bay to Teignmouth.