Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[Western Lord]

At present there is probably more to be lost by not calling at Exeter (in the same way that there would be at Reading for the Bristol services), in that the line speed through the station for a non stop service would probably only shave about 4 minutes off the journey time but with enough demand to justify the potential loss of a few people from Plymouth.

However, if by avoiding Exeter it cuts 10 minutes off the journey time and there are other Exeter to London services with more capacity (i.e. those extra services coming from the Torbay area) then there could be a case to miss out Exeter on a limited number of services per day in the future, especially if there were more trains between Exeter and Plymouth overall as well as there being more passengers using the trains.

In fact because of the removal of the change at Newton Abbot, it could result in more services to stations between Exeter and Reading, by them being served by the London to Paignton expresses, without impacting on the journey time from Paignton to London. In fact as most services already call at 2 or 3 stations between Exeter and Reading it could even provide a faster service than the present situation.

There are plenty of fairly major stations (for their route) on the network which are missed by some express services. For instance there are trains which run without making a station stop between Birmingham and London, Stockport and London, Runcorn and London, Warrington and London, Newcastle and London - and I'm sure that there are others.

I don't see that the line speed through the station has much relevance here. In the days when such things existed, trains not stopping at Reading passed at full line speed (i.e.100mph). Not stopping at Exeter would reduce the Exeter to Plymouth service and deprive the trains of revenue from the connections at Exeter. As for Exeter being served by "the London to Paignton expresses", you are aware I suppose that there are three per day, one via Bristol.

With regard to trains running non stop to London, there is one train from Birmingham to Euston non stop, with no corresponding return service. The other places you mention are all services that start from much larger places than any that they miss on the way to London (I know that Plymouth is larger than Exeter, but Exeter is, arguably, a more importan traffic centre as well as being the county town).

I have to say that your second and third paragraphs above are so difficult to decipher that it is difficult to see what you are getting at.

Time savings of ten minutes to Plymouth are totally irrelevant, most of the traffic is not time sensitive. The railway is now operating again and it's all there is going to be in the foreseeable future.

 

[The Ham]

I don't see that the line speed through the station has much relevance here. In the days when such things existed, trains not stopping at Reading passed at full line speed (i.e.100mph). Not stopping at Exeter would reduce the Exeter to Plymouth service and deprive the trains of revenue from the connections at Exeter.

For instance, at Reading, due to the congestion most trains have to pass through fairly slowly at least for part of their trip, so the extra time for a stop is minimal.

As for Exeter being served by "the London to Paignton expresses", you are aware I suppose that there are three per day, one via Bristol.

I have to say that your second and third paragraphs above are so difficult to decipher that it is difficult to see what you are getting at.

Time savings of ten minutes to Plymouth are totally irrelevant, most of the traffic is not time sensitive. The railway is now operating again and it's all there is going to be in the foreseeable future.

I think you were missing the point that there I was suggesting that there would be a new services running from Paignton (say three or four EXTRA per day, or about every 2 hours).

By doing so there would be MORE capacity on the trains through Exeter (at least one extra services, and two services which started in Torbay rather than serving Plymouth).

By the time this happened it is likely that there would be more passengers, making the business case better for extra services.

As passengers using the NEW services to London from Torbay would not have to change at Newton Abbot their services could all at more stops than the existing expresses and still be as fast at getting to London.

However, as most of the existing express services which people from Torbay change onto call at at least two stations between Exeter and Reading the NEW expresses could be faster as there would be no change time allocation at Newton Abbot.

With regard to trains running non stop to London, there is one train from Birmingham to Euston non stop, with no corresponding return service. The other places you mention are all services that start from much larger places than any that they miss on the way to London (I know that Plymouth is larger than Exeter, but Exeter is, arguably, a more important traffic centre as well as being the county town).

The point I was making was that it does happen, yes some are not very frequent, but then there are some stations (like Basingstoke) which are fairly key locations on the line they serve which are missed by some express services on an hourly basis.

In the same way I wasn't suggesting that Exeter was missed out by all the services, probably just one or two a day in each direction.

The other thing bearing in mind is that the suggestion of 10 minute journey time saving by bypassing Exeter is in the context of the route between Exeter and Plymouth (via a much faster route through Okehampton) taking 40 minutes. Meaning that a 30 minute journey time saving over the existing (where the current fastest journey time is three hours for London to Plymouth) could attract quite a number of extra passengers.

Then of course, even the services which still went via Exeter to Plymouth would have extra passengers, as there could be journey time savings of 20 minutes it would mean that most trains could get from London to Plymouth in about 3 hours (which would be noticeably faster than by road, which is about 4 hours).

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Of course cutting 20 minutes of the journey time to Penzance from London would put more services on a comparable journey time to driving it, with a few being a little faster.

Making it more likely that there would be more passengers willing to use the train and therefore making it more likely that there would be more services to Cornwall.

 

[LateThanNever]

Time savings of ten minutes to Plymouth are totally irrelevant, most of the traffic is not time sensitive. The railway is now operating again and it's all there is going to be in the foreseeable future.

So if most of the traffic is not time sensitive why aren't we happy with the horse and cart? I would suggest that all traffic is time sensitive!

 

[The Ham]

So if most of the traffic is not time sensitive why aren't we happy with the horse and cart? I would suggest that all traffic is time sensitive!

Also it means that the DAL (which is likely to only have a 10 minute time save) would be pointless in doing

 

[LateThanNever]

Also it means that the DAL (which is likely to only have a 10 minute time save) would be pointless in doing

Agreed, except that you'd avoid the sea, and 10 mins is probably generous. But as we know there are other ways of avoiding the sea!
Continually mystified why the section after Newton Abbot is never mentioned - this is 50 odd mph top speed and is a major obstacle to any increase in speed towards Plymouth and Cornwall. The Okehampton route could surely provide better speeds to Plymouth (though obviously the twice covered track between Plymouth North Road and St Budeaux is a handicap for Cornwall) but there is/was a lot of relatively straight line, which, with rebuild could probably be improved.

 

[jmc100]

Well ok the issue around Dawlish is possibly not Black and White but in my view it has to be, otherwise you end up with a fudged decision, and in my view Okehampton would be a fudged decision, which mainly benefits Tavistock and Okehampton but isn't a good long term solution to the issues of the mainline and Dawlish.

Yes, the Dartmoor route would benefit Okehampton and Tavistock but not only those stations as there are other stations on the route that are either operational or could be refurbished. The idea of an alternative route is to keep the trains running all year round with the minimum of disruption. Using the Dartmoor route would be a slight inconvenience as reversing would have to take place at Plymouth unless a new line is constructed south of Tavistock to Plymouth so that reversing can be eliminated.

As I have said before, it's not the railway that's the problem on the southern coastal route, it's the construction of the sea defences especially at Dawlish and eastwards along the coastline. The seaward edge of the wall is too close to the track. With the weight of water during the storms in February it's no wonder that the wall gave way in so many places. To cope with winter storms the sea wall needs widening to keep the main weight of water away from the track bed. Unfortunately, I do not think this will come about in the near future but we may see some intermediate strengthening taking place to the existing sea wall. The only problem is that rolling stock and the track will still be the subject to spray washing over during times of very bad weather which would disrupt services but if an inland alternative route was available, disruption of main line services from Cornwall and Plymouth to the east would not be an issue.

 

[Western Lord]

For instance, at Reading, due to the congestion most trains have to pass through fairly slowly at least for part of their trip, so the extra time for a stop is minimal.

This is going off thread but I can't let this basic misunderstanding of railway operation pass. "Due to congestion"?? This is not a road junction, railways are a controlled environment. The line speed through Reading used to be 100mph (I have no idea what it is now). The reason that all trains stop at Reading is nothing to do with congestion slowing them down, it's because it is too important a traffic generator to ignore. There is a substantial time penalty in stopping trains there. As the alignment is straight, there would appear to be no reason why trains could not run through Reading at 125mph if it were desired.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So if most of the traffic is not time sensitive why aren't we happy with the horse and cart? I would suggest that all traffic is time sensitive!

Most of the traffic to the west country is leisure travel. Saving ten minutes on the journey is neither here nor there to such traffic. There is no justification in spending hundreds of millions of pounds to shave ten minutes off the journey to Plymouth and beyond

 

[Graiser]

This is going off thread but I can't let this basic misunderstanding of railway operation pass. "Due to congestion"?? This is not a road junction, railways are a controlled environment. The line speed through Reading used to be 100mph (I have no idea what it is now). The reason that all trains stop at Reading is nothing to do with congestion slowing them down, it's because it is too important a traffic generator to ignore. There is a substantial time penalty in stopping trains there. As the alignment is straight, there would appear to be no reason why trains could not run through Reading at 125mph if it were desired.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Most of the traffic to the west country is leisure travel. Saving ten minutes on the journey is neither here nor there to such traffic. There is no justification in spending hundreds of millions of pounds to shave ten minutes off the journey to Plymouth and beyond

I've been closely involved with all the track work from the Warren to Kennaway and seen close hand all the damage down to Teignmouth.
While there's been some romantic hysteria for reopening Okehampton and Teigngrace etc, it's my opinion strengthening the sea wall is a more realistic option.
Apart from the main breech most of the damage was to the parapets and walkways with 5 small washouts , there were no washouts from Parsons to Teignmouth
So for me it's a reality check:

Raise the walkway alongside sea lawn to created a double skin sea wall.

Identify any geo issues, close the railway and carry out a similar civils project to that just completed.

Investigate the advantages,if any, the construction of breakwaters in dawlish and Teignmouth bays.

I think the above would more economic and realistic than any DAL.

However if a DAL is pursued then for me it's:

Reopen the dartmoor route where due to the longer straights higher speeds would be more attainable than the Teign Valley route.

Single the line between the Warren and Teignmouth utilising the reversible signalled up line.

 

[yorksrob]

Surely prudent forward planning, rather than "hysteria" !

 

[The Ham]

This is going off thread but I can't let this basic misunderstanding of railway operation pass. "Due to congestion"?? This is not a road junction, railways are a controlled environment. The line speed through Reading used to be 100mph (I have no idea what it is now). The reason that all trains stop at Reading is nothing to do with congestion slowing them down, it's because it is too important a traffic generator to ignore. There is a substantial time penalty in stopping trains there. As the alignment is straight, there would appear to be no reason why trains could not run through Reading at 125mph if it were desired.

Yes the railways are controlled, however that doesn't mean that trains do not stop on the approach to Reading (or other staions for that matter) waiting for the line ahead to clear. In which case I would call that conjestion, however you can call it what you like.

Yes it would be possible to run through Reading at high speed, however it would mean that there would have to be a clear run through. Given how busy a station and junction it is the likelihood of being able to run through at high speed is fairly remote. Even once the fyover is open it is unlikely to happen as the gaps that creates will be used by new services.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Most of the traffic to the west country is leisure travel. Saving ten minutes on the journey is neither here nor there to such traffic. There is no justification in spending hundreds of millions of pounds to shave ten minutes off the journey to Plymouth and beyond

I cannot agree that most of the traffic is leisure related in the West Country.
The journey time to Plymouth should be reduced. A city with much potential.
Looking forwards, the main line needs electrification. Additional expense of jetting the insulators and conductors to remove salt build up.
Salt water is corrosive, and must contribute to a much higher corrosion rate to the rolling stock. Steel, alloys and electrical components especially.

Investment in railways needs to be significantly increased.

 

[The Ham]

Most of the traffic to the west country is leisure travel. Saving ten minutes on the journey is neither here nor there to such traffic. There is no justification in spending hundreds of millions of pounds to shave ten minutes off the journey to Plymouth and beyond

Quite, hense the reason the DAL is (in my view) not a useful option. However a chord (costing a few tens of millions), if added together with a faster route through Okehampton (with a total cost of hundreds of millions), produces 30 minute time saving then that may attarct more buiness travel to the rail network (where time savings are of improtance) as well atracting more leisure travel to the network (as although it doesn't add value it makes the journey more attractive). Which could mean that the combined benefits (i.e. a small amount of business time saving, more passengers, economic growth due to businesses finding Plymouth a more attractive place to do business, etc.) could make it nearly worth doing with the small amount of extra made up of the benefit of two routes to Plymouth.

 

[JohnB57]

Most of the traffic to the west country is leisure travel.

According to the most recent survey I can find, 59% of trips into the region were for leisure purposes with 88% of journeys made by car, bus or campervan. 7% of the tourist traffic was by rail, a figure I believe reduced to 6% for last year.

If you're right and most train use in the region is in fact for leisure purposes, it's still a tiny proportion of the total market. This makes the lost tourism figures we have been led to believe were purely down to Dawlish look completely bogus and consequently the justification for massive rail investment for the south-west very difficult.

 

[LateThanNever]

I've been closely involved with all the track work from the Warren to Kennaway and seen close hand all the damage down to Teignmouth.
While there's been some romantic hysteria for reopening Okehampton and Teigngrace etc, it's my opinion strengthening the sea wall is a more realistic option.
Apart from the main breech most of the damage was to the parapets and walkways with 5 small washouts , there were no washouts from Parsons to Teignmouth
So for me it's a reality check:

Raise the walkway alongside sea lawn to created a double skin sea wall.

Identify any geo issues, close the railway and carry out a similar civils project to that just completed.

Investigate the advantages,if any, the construction of breakwaters in dawlish and Teignmouth bays.

I think the above would more economic and realistic than any DAL.

However if a DAL is pursued then for me it's:

Reopen the dartmoor route where due to the longer straights higher speeds would be more attainable than the Teign Valley route.

Single the line between the Warren and Teignmouth utilising the reversible signalled up line.

What must not be forgotten is that the line has also been blocked by stray debris that has been thrown up in storms that do not threaten the integrity of the sea wall. If you make the wall impregnable you've probably got to put the trains in a protective tunnel of some sort to make it a truly 365 day railway. My father remembers just post WW2 going past Dawlish when it was stormy and sand and stones were thrown over the carriage - I think a window got broken. They were more philosophical then! These days there would be an Elf and Safety crisis and the line would be closed... The western part of the Dawlish sea wall (is that Kennaway tunnel?) is already below the highest tide wave crest height and that is only going to get worse with rising tide levels.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...poCQBA&usg=AFQjCNGiFaukZdCH9-ij5TrXXM4YMloImw

Quite, hense the reason the DAL is (in my view) not a useful option. However a chord (costing a few tens of millions), if added together with a faster route through Okehampton (with a total cost of hundreds of millions), produces 30 minute time saving then that may attarct more buiness travel to the rail network (where time savings are of improtance) as well atracting more leisure travel to the network (as although it doesn't add value it makes the journey more attractive). Which could mean that the combined benefits (i.e. a small amount of business time saving, more passengers, economic growth due to businesses finding Plymouth a more attractive place to do business, etc.) could make it nearly worth doing with the small amount of extra made up of the benefit of two routes to Plymouth.

Also the current repair, good though it clearly is, cost £35m. A fair bit of that cost was surely because it was an emergency repair carried out 24 hours a day with limited tendering opportunities etc. Any alternative route is likely to 'lower' further repair costs to some extent because reinstatement will not be quite so urgent.

 

[Western Lord]

Yes the railways are controlled, however that doesn't mean that trains do not stop on the approach to Reading (or other staions for that matter) waiting for the line ahead to clear. In which case I would call that conjestion, however you can call it what you like.

Yes it would be possible to run through Reading at high speed, however it would mean that there would have to be a clear run through. Given how busy a station and junction it is the likelihood of being able to run through at high speed is fairly remote. Even once the fyover is open it is unlikely to happen as the gaps that creates will be used by new services.

Not only would it be possible to run through Reading at high speed, it used to routinely happen. South Wales trains used to be first stop Newport, there were non stop trains to Bath and Bristol and even Oxford had non stops. I do not understand where you think the obstruction on the fast lines that would prevent trains from proceeding at high speed is. Local trains run on the relief lines and do not terminate in the fast line platforms at Reading. Being a busy junction does not stop trains from running through Crewe at high speed.

 

[341o2]

Surely prudent forward planning, rather than "hysteria" !

Exactly. I am at risk of repeating myself, the route via Okehampton was closed becuase at the time the railways were seen as a failing industry.

Network Rail have been quoted that it would take "hundreds of millions of £££", a local campaigner states cost around £100m

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Reopened-pound-100million-rail-route-Okehampton/story-18605657-detail/story.html

As for most journeys in the West Country being leisure, well the area relies heavily on the tourist trade

 

[yorksrob]

According to the most recent survey I can find, 59% of trips into the region were for leisure purposes with 88% of journeys made by car, bus or campervan. 7% of the tourist traffic was by rail, a figure I believe reduced to 6% for last year.

If you're right and most train use in the region is in fact for leisure purposes, it's still a tiny proportion of the total market. This makes the lost tourism figures we have been led to believe were purely down to Dawlish look completely bogus and consequently the justification for massive rail investment for the south-east very difficult.

The issue is that rail investment in the South West is already starting from a very low base. If there is a smaller than average proportion of long distance travellers who use the train in the South West, it strongly suggests that more investment is required. Some of those missing passengers will use road transport instead, but some will either travel elsewhere or not travel at all.

 

[The Ham]

Not only would it be possible to run through Reading at high speed, it used to routinely happen. South Wales trains used to be first stop Newport, there were non stop trains to Bath and Bristol and even Oxford had non stops. I do not understand where you think the obstruction on the fast lines that would prevent trains from proceeding at high speed is. Local trains run on the relief lines and do not terminate in the fast line platforms at Reading. Being a busy junction does not stop trains from running through Crewe at high speed.

"it used to routinely happen" there are lots of things that used to happen, which are no longer possible becaise of the increase in the number of services which run. The problem at Reading is that it is not un common for trains to be held on the approach or at a platform whilst another train crosses the junction (normally a HST from the SW or a XC service to the south coast).

I do not have experiance of Crewe so do not know if there are any differences which makes the difference.

Anyway, the fact that trains do all stop at Reading doesn't mean that all trains have to stop at Exeter (although they would likely to be only in the minority anyway).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The issue is that rail investment in the South West is already starting from a very low base. If there is a smaller than average proportion of long distance travellers who use the train in the South West, it strongly suggests that more investment is required. Some of those missing passengers will use road transport instead, but some will either travel elsewhere or not travel at all.

One of the problems with the SW is the long journey times, to put it in perspective it takes less time from London to get to Blackpool (with a 15 minute change) than it does to get to Plymouth (direct service)!

If there were faster journey times then more people would use the trains and if the trains were more frequent more people would use the trains. Combined a lot more people would likely use the trains.

If the SW can get a faster journey time to Plymouth (i.e. most services taking 2.5 hours to 3 hours) and a more frequent service (possibly with shorter sets which split to go to different end points, so as to not increase or to limit the increase of paths required into London and to not run full length trains when they are not always needed), then the SW could see a sharp rise in passenger numbers. However it would require a big change in the infrestructure and the rolling stock to do so.

 

[tsr]

Note that a very small number of weekday passenger trains are scheduled to run non-stop through Reading (AFAIK).

 

[jmc100]

I've been closely involved with all the track work from the Warren to Kennaway and seen close hand all the damage down to Teignmouth.
While there's been some romantic hysteria for reopening Okehampton and Teigngrace etc, it's my opinion strengthening the sea wall is a more realistic option.
Apart from the main breech most of the damage was to the parapets and walkways with 5 small washouts , there were no washouts from Parsons to Teignmouth
So for me it's a reality check:

Raise the walkway alongside sea lawn to created a double skin sea wall.

Identify any geo issues, close the railway and carry out a similar civils project to that just completed.

Investigate the advantages,if any, the construction of breakwaters in dawlish and Teignmouth bays.

I think the above would more economic and realistic than any DAL.

However if a DAL is pursued then for me it's:

Reopen the dartmoor route where due to the longer straights higher speeds would be more attainable than the Teign Valley route.

Single the line between the Warren and Teignmouth utilising the reversible signalled up line.

I do not think there is any "romantic hysteria" for reopening the Dartmoor route as before Beeching it was the main Southern Region line from Waterloo to Plymouth and Padstow. In fact, the Atlantic Coast Express travelled this route.

Now, it's a question of necessity that an alternative route is available as the current sea wall defences at Dawlish and along the coast are proving to be inadequate considering the facts that the southern half of the country is 'sinking' and climate change is affecting our Winter weather. Even in Brunel's day the coastal route was subject to washouts so the problems with the defences on which the railway is installed is nothing new.

I would agree with you that the walkway along the sea wall should be increased in width, possibly triple the current width with an integrated low sea-facing wall to buffer the weight of water during storm-force conditions at high tide. The area where the main washout took place was a very vulnerable part of the sea wall. This in main was due to the fact that the walkway at this location is at a lower level. I am amazed that this particular stretch of the sea wall remained intact for so long.

Watching the Dawlish Beach web cam one can see that this coastal line is of significant importance due to the number of train movements each day, except for Sundays when their is a limited service and some stock movements. It's easy to see why an alternative route is urgent necessity and should come about sooner rather than later. The majority of the track bed and infrastructure on the Dartmoor route is still in place so it would not be a question of a completely new construction but a refurbishment of an old abandoned 1960s route.

 

[Graiser]

What must not be forgotten is that the line has also been blocked by stray debris that has been thrown up in storms that do not threaten the integrity of the sea wall. If you make the wall impregnable you've probably got to put the trains in a protective tunnel of some sort to make it a truly 365 day railway. My father remembers just post WW2 going past Dawlish when it was stormy and sand and stones were thrown over the carriage - I think a window got broken. They were more philosophical then! These days there would be an Elf and Safety crisis and the line would be closed... The western part of the Dawlish sea wall (is that Kennaway tunnel?) is already below the highest tide wave crest height and that is only going to get worse with rising tide levels.
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...poCQBA&usg=AFQjCNGiFaukZdCH9-ij5TrXXM4YMloImw



Also the current repair, good though it clearly is, cost £35m. A fair bit of that cost was surely because it was an emergency repair carried out 24 hours a day with limited tendering opportunities etc. Any alternative route is likely to 'lower' further repair costs to some extent because reinstatement will not be quite so urgent.

The figure quoted includes the cliff fall and a future estimation for completion of the repairs.
Also worth remembering included in that figure was the track renewals adjacent to the cliffs which were planned to do, subsequently cancelled due to the fall and then re actively reinstated
There were a lot of add ons which if the works were proactively planned and tendered for the figure quoted would be dramatically lowered.

 

[47802]

I do not think there is any "romantic hysteria" for reopening the Dartmoor route as before Beeching it was the main Southern Region line from Waterloo to Plymouth and Padstow. In fact, the Atlantic Coast Express travelled this route.

Now, it's a question of necessity that an alternative route is available as the current sea wall defences at Dawlish and along the coast are proving to be inadequate considering the facts that the southern half of the country is 'sinking' and climate change is affecting our Winter weather. Even in Brunel's day the coastal route was subject to washouts so the problems with the defences on which the railway is installed is nothing new.

I would agree with you that the walkway along the sea wall should be increased in width, possibly triple the current width with an integrated low sea-facing wall to buffer the weight of water during storm-force conditions at high tide. The area where the main washout took place was a very vulnerable part of the sea wall. This in main was due to the fact that the walkway at this location is at a lower level. I am amazed that this particular stretch of the sea wall remained intact for so long.

Watching the Dawlish Beach web cam one can see that this coastal line is of significant importance due to the number of train movements each day, except for Sundays when their is a limited service and some stock movements. It's easy to see why an alternative route is urgent necessity and should come about sooner rather than later. The majority of the track bed and infrastructure on the Dartmoor route is still in place so it would not be a question of a completely new construction but a refurbishment of an old abandoned 1960s route.

On the contrary I think there is massive romantic hysteria about reopening the Dartmoor route, of course I don't doubt if any alternate route is built it will be this one as a cheap diversionary route, because it will be the cheapest option, but is it the best solution no it isn't.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

On the contrary I think there is massive romantic hysteria about reopening the Dartmoor route, of course I don't doubt if any alternate route is built it will be this one as a cheap diversionary route, because it will be the cheapest option, but is it the best solution no it isn't.

With a huge chunk of Devon and Cornwall without a rail service, reopening the Tavistock - Okehampton route will make a big difference to transport in that area.
As well as giving reliability to the service to Plymouth and beyond. Rolling stock will no longer clog up the roads lol, Laira Depot would not need resiting, and businesses will consider moving to Plymouth, rather than others considering moving upcountry. Having a second route will make it a lot easier to have long closures on the GWR route for improvements.

Dawlish Breakwater. Years & years of studies, environmental issues, and a consultation with King Neptune before the first rock is dropped into the sea.
Will be a pretty penny too. May cause more problems than it solves.

 

[47802]

With a huge chunk of Devon and Cornwall without a rail service, reopening the Tavistock - Okehampton route will make a big difference to transport in that area.
As well as giving reliability to the service to Plymouth and beyond. Rolling stock will no longer clog up the roads lol, Laira Depot would not need resiting, and businesses will consider moving to Plymouth, rather than others considering moving upcountry. Having a second route will make it a lot easier to have long closures on the GWR route for improvements.

Dawlish Breakwater. Years & years of studies, environmental issues, and a consultation with King Neptune before the first rock is dropped into the sea.
Will be a pretty penny too. May cause more problems than it solves.

And that's why we should replace the Dawlish route with a new route to Newton Abbot to create a resilient main line, and if you want Okehampton reopening then justify it on the traffic it will generate.

But unfortunately I agree Okehampton route will be the likely choice if an alternate is built because its will probably be the cheapest option, along with possibly some Dawlish improvements, but its not the best solution in my book. I also think that Okehampton and Tavistock should ignored and regarded as irrelevant to any discussion about the future of the mainline, unfortunately I don't think that will happen either.

 

[yorksrob]

On the contrary I think there is massive romantic hysteria about reopening the Dartmoor route, of course I don't doubt if any alternate route is built it will be this one as a cheap diversionary route, because it will be the cheapest option, but is it the best solution no it isn't.

On the contrary, the protestations against the Okehampton reopening seem to be becoming increasingly hysterical. Certain councillors desperately claiming that journey times will be "up to an hour" lomger than the existing route and implying that a reopened route would be some sort of "heritage line" spring to mind.

 

[jmc100]

On the contrary I think there is massive romantic hysteria about reopening the Dartmoor route, of course I don't doubt if any alternate route is built it will be this one as a cheap diversionary route, because it will be the cheapest option, but is it the best solution no it isn't.

Alright, I will admit there is a degree of romantic hysteria but, in my view, there is also a very urgent need for the Dartmoor line to be reinstated as the most promising alternative to the Dawlish route.

It's probably the easiest constructional option due to the route being in place and most likely will be the less costly of the five suggestions. If the Dartmoor route is chosen as the alternative then maybe we will some interesting operational diversity.

As I have said before, I think a tunnel under Haldon Hills would provide much more resilience but unfortunately tunnelling is very expensive.

 

[JohnB57]

The issue is that rail investment in the South West is already starting from a very low base. If there is a smaller than average proportion of long distance travellers who use the train in the South West, it strongly suggests that more investment is required. Some of those missing passengers will use road transport instead, but some will either travel elsewhere or not travel at all.

Rail investment in the SW is at a low base because the demographic - permanent resident and tourist traffic - only justifies that level of spending.

The main tourist markets are self catering and camping, markets that rail travel can only hope to serve peripherally because of its relatively high inconvenience and significant cost penalty, hence the 6% modal figure for tourist rail in the region.

Could you afford or even manage a rail based holiday in the south-west? We regularly holidayed down there with our children and I can assure you that we couldn't have done it, either financially or practically by rail. It just didn't - and still wouldn't - stack up. And reducing journey times wouldn't change that.

The south-west deserves its share of investment and it certainly deserves to grow in terms of both commerce and tourism. I just believe it's misguided to think that a second mainline would have any significant effect, certainly on the latter.

 

[yorksrob]

I've had rail based holidays in the South West five out of the last six years. Very reasonable to get there with forward planning and travelling around using the branchlines is quite cheap I find.

The South West is more than just cream teas and holidays. The idea that the whole region can be adequately served by a single long and winding branch from Exeter is optimistic in the extreme.

 

[JohnB57]

I've had rail based holidays in the South West five out of the last six years. Very reasonable to get there with forward planning and travelling around using the branchlines is quite cheap I find.

The South West is more than just cream teas and holidays. The idea that the whole region can be adequately served by a single long and winding branch from Exeter is optimistic in the extreme.

Then I can only assume that you're untypical of the kind of holidaymakers that provide the vast majority of financial support to the region. These are the kind that probably have children and have to make the most of their time and their money - and they certainly can't afford cream teas. If the tourist market isn't all holidays, what is it by the way?

I don't care how much planning you do, it's still more expensive to holiday using the railway by a huge factor and that applies everywhere, not just the south-west. And getting around after you've arrived is neither cheap nor convenient - I simply don't know how you can say that.

Rob, I'm glad that rail works for you. But I think you have to accept that however much you are able to make it figure in your life, it isn't like that everywhere and for everyone and no amount of investment in it will ever change that.

 

[yorksrob]

The fact that rail works for some people and doesn‘t for others is true everywhere in the Country, be it for leisure, business or anything else. That doesn‘t alter the fact that where transport provision is inadequate, people will be deterred from doing business and engaging in leisure activity in that area.
The lack of investment in the South West rail network including poor travel times and lack of resilience will be supressing demand for travel in the area and as a consequence the local economy will suffer.