Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[Altnabreac]

I suppose you wouldn't have had any choice, having to build it under our unenlightened system pre-devolution, come to think of it.

As has been said, both Tavistock and Okehampton have significant housing developments planned, albeit possibly not quite on the same scale as Scotlands central belt.

Agreed, I just think getting both ends up and running first to prove demand is the best way to proceed to justify long term reopening. My point was that opening the quick win, end sections needn't stop the whole thing reopening IF the business case is there in future - especially if the SW got a more enlightened devolution regime.

 

[yorksrob]

Agreed, I just think getting both ends up and running first to prove demand is the best way to proceed to justify long term reopening. My point was that opening the quick win, end sections needn't stop the whole thing reopening IF the business case is there in future - especially if the SW got a more enlightened devolution regime.

Indeed. I'd certainly like to see the Tavistock branch built with provision to extend as well as a more useful service for Okehampton. Of course, the relative isolation of the West country by rail should act in favour of the through routes case.

 

[Xavi]

FGW MD Mark Hopwood and Transport Secretary at Exeter St Davids this morning just departed north from Platform 6 on special 150202. Didn't expect to see that on my trip to Bristol today. Doubt it's to do with Dawlish or Okehampton! Probably some small story about new franchise extension commitments.

 

[21C101]

FGW MD Mark Hopwood and Transport Secretary at Exeter St Davids this morning just departed north from Platform 6 on special 150202. Didn't expect to see that on my trip to Bristol today. Doubt it's to do with Dawlish or Okehampton! Probably some small story about new franchise extension commitments.

On the contrary, it looks like that special was headed for Okehampton with them both on board.


"Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin is in Devon to discuss new rail links between Exeter and Plymouth.

Network Rail is considering various options for more reliable services after part of the track was washed away in Dawlish last winter.

One is to reopen the old line through Okehampton, where much of the track still exists, Mr McLaughlin will meet campaigners.

The £800 million scheme has the support of local MPs."

http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry...ort-secretary-in-devon-to-discuss-rail-links/

I wonder if this is being lined up for announcement in the chancellors autumn statement, given this in the local paper a few days ago:

"AN alternative inland rail route has not been ruled out in the bid to avoid the West Country being cut off again should the Dawlish line be hit by storms.

There had been fears a proposal to look at reopening lines on an inland route had been dropped because it was not seen as value for money.

But following an earlier report by Network Rail, Transport Secretary Patrick McCloughlin has told Parliament that a cross-country link remained on the tab"



http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co....awlish-ruled/story-23489595-detail/story.html

 

[Busaholic]

The rest of your post was political comment. The group chaired by Ben Bradshaw has already been cited. I do accept that reincarnation of the Okehampton route (note spelling, sigh) could have been promoted whether there had been problems at Dawlish, or otherwise. Having had experience of dealing with the local politicians, I find that the enthusiasm for building roads has pushed rail to the background for decades, and only now is beginning to find some recognition. Devon County Council has given serious consideration to the Okehampton to Exeter line, including the proposal for a new parking station at Okehampton East. The developer assisted Plymouth to Tavistock link is on its way.

So it's just the bit in between the two places that is the major project and I believe a good case for it can be made on housing development, environmentally-sustainable connectivity and ditto tourism. The diversion function is a welcome bonus and that's how it should be viewed.

Four tracking from Exeter to NA, via a separated trajectory, is another project and deserves a separate justification. I do notice that the bottleneck between NA and Dawlish Warren gives daily operational problems, as others have mentioned - and that is just with a recently improved half hourly local service.

If committees and public enquiries achieved very much, or indeed anything, we'd have the most just society in the world and the best transport system, etc. Other countries do, we obfuscate and talk about doing, wasting a lot of people's time and a hell of a lot of public money in the process. Of course proper planning has to be undertaken but as the first stage in a process of actually achieving within a timescale of our and our children's lifetimes. Getting a lot of people from MPs and the rail industry to sit in a committee room, as part of their working day for which they are being handsomely remunerated, is one thing, but where is the passion for the subject amongst our elected representatives, beyond a few honourable exceptions or when it's a parochial problem? If Okehampton (and, personally, I've never had a problem with its spelling) does get the go-ahead it will be because (a) it's a workable scheme without costing anything like a billion, prior to subsequent electrification anyway and (b) it is wanted by a sizeable population of Cornwall, West Devon, North Devon and Mid Devon in the event of another 'event' at Dawlish, which nobody wants but many see as inevitable.

 

[HSTEd]

The inland newbuild cuts off mgiht be expensive but they actually achieve something.

They will in all likely be built to a GC compatible structure gauge which builds towards very long term ambitions for a high speed railway to the South West.
They will also be able to significantly improve freight performance in the area, reduce journey times and improve capacity drastically.

A long way round single track route designed for a local multiple unit every hour is essentially worthless as a diversion. (You would have to axe the local service entirely to actually divert anything).

 

[yorksrob]

I'm of the opinion that the inland cut-offs are of negligible value (except in times of disruption - obviously) unless the coastal route becomes completely and permanently undermined and has to close. This is because, realistically the time saving alone is unlikely to:
- attract any motorists to rail who wouldn't otherwise have used the old route
- attract passengers who otherwise wouldn't have travelled
- provide any more journey opportunities for business and employment that didn't exist already
- provide any more journey opportunities for tourism and leisure that didn't exist anyway etc.
- facilitate any new freight flows that didn't exist previously.

A new high speed railway to the South West would most likely use a whole new alignment rather than divert to converge with the cut-off line then diverge again.

A single track inland route could still have loops to allow additional trains, however, even if the local service did have to be suspended at times of diversion, InterCity trains already stop and take on passengers on the existing route via Newton Abbott, therefore they could just take over stops via Okehampton to replace the suspended local instead.

 

[21C101]

The inland newbuild cuts off mgiht be expensive but they actually achieve something.

They will in all likely be built to a GC compatible structure gauge which builds towards very long term ambitions for a high speed railway to the South West.
They will also be able to significantly improve freight performance in the area, reduce journey times and improve capacity drastically.

A long way round single track route designed for a local multiple unit every hour is essentially worthless as a diversion. (You would have to axe the local service entirely to actually divert anything).

Since the only stations on the diverted route would be Okehampton, Tavistock and North Devon (Sourton) Parkway then when the Dawlish route is shut the diverted HSTs would call at these stations (and Crediton) replacing the local service,+ just as they call at Exeter Central, Axminster, Honiton and Yeovil Junction when diverted via that route

 

[MarkyT]

The inland newbuild cut offs . . . will in all likely be built to a GC compatible structure gauge which builds towards very long term ambitions for a high speed railway to the South West. They will also be able to significantly improve freight performance in the area, reduce journey times and improve capacity drastically.

Absolutely, which is why I favour my scheme concept detailed here http://www.townend.me/files/southdevon.pdf or Gerard Duddridge's quite similar Great Haldon route as illustrated in the July edition of Railwatch - http://www.railwatch.org.uk/backtrack/rw140web.pdf. By running alongside the A38 near Chudleigh and Heathfield these options offer the opportunity for a further extension of the fast line from there towards Plymouth alongside the A38, avoiding Newton Abbot, which could nevertheless continue to be served along with Torbay as a branch from Chudleigh via the reconstructed Teign Valley provided as part of the initial cut-off stage. I'm not against a through route via Okehampton at all and could see it as a valuable alternative competitive route in the shorter term including a direct link from the airportless Plymouth area, to Exeter's growing regional and international airport, to the east of the city and possible to serve via a short shuttle transit link from the planned new Cranbrook station on the LSWR route.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

It should be pointed out that not all stops on HSTs which are diverted via The Mule are shown as station calls.

A point being that Honiton wasn't on quite a few of them, the train only stopped there for "Operation Purposes" or OP as it says in a WTT and that was purely for pathing over the single line sections, it wasn't a booked service call, so the doors would have remained locked. Now whether they did or not I don't know, that's neither here nor there now.

But unless they have official permission to call there SSO or Control authorises it by either GSM-R (Recorded) or Guards/TM's phone or it's an emergency then the doors must remain locked.

 

[HowardGWR]

The inland newbuild cuts off mgiht be expensive but they actually achieve something.

They will in all likely be built to a GC compatible structure gauge which builds towards very long term ambitions for a high speed railway to the South West.
They will also be able to significantly improve freight performance in the area, reduce journey times and improve capacity drastically.

A long way round single track route designed for a local multiple unit every hour is essentially worthless as a diversion. (You would have to axe the local service entirely to actually divert anything).

What's this freight to which you are referring? You don't seem very well-informed on this one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Absolutely, which is why I favour my scheme concept detailed here http://www.townend.me/files/southdevon.pdf or Gerard Duddridge's quite similar Great Haldon route as illustrated in the July edition of Railwatch - http://www.railwatch.org.uk/backtrack/rw140web.pdf. By running alongside the A38 near Chudleigh and Heathfield these options offer the opportunity for a further extension of the fast line from there towards Plymouth alongside the A38, avoiding Newton Abbot, which could nevertheless be continue to be served along with Torbay as a branch from Chudleigh via the reconstructed Teign Valley provided as part of the initial cut-off stage. I'm not against a through route via Okehampton at all and could see it a as a valuable alternative competitive route in the shorter term including a direct link from the airportless Plymouth area, to Exeter's growing regional and international airport, to the east of the city and possible to serve via a short shuttle transit link from the planned new Cranbrooke station on the LSWR route.

A well-written and sober contribution. I suspect this is how it will end up (eventually!!). I think it's Cranbrook?

 

[MarkyT]

What's this freight to which you are referring?

There's very very little at the moment I believe, but even that isn't really constrained in load or performance by the coast route, as the line is almost entirely level to Newton Abbot, and the 60 to 80MPH speed restrictions don't slow freight down, unlike the expresses. Beyond Newton Abbot of course the formidable Devon banks would represent a more significant obstacle to heavy freight if it existed.

A well-written and sober contribution. I suspect this is how it will end up (eventually!!). I think it's Cranbrook?

Thanks. I was just changing the spelling as you were replying!

 

[po8crg]

It's worth noting that the new Western Route Study consultation says the following:

In the longer term, in order to accommodate the full 2043 ITSS, provision of four tracks between Exeter and Newton Abbot would be required. It would be difficult to achieve this alongside the existing coastal route, therefore one of the alternative route options developed as part of the West of Exeter Route Resilience Study may provide additional capacity and an alternative route and requires further consideration.

The ITSS is "Indicative Train Service Specification", which is (diagram, p211):

2 tph local Exeter-Paignton, 3tph express (2 from London, 1 XC) Exeter-Plymouth (two terminate at Plymouth, one through-train into Cornwall) plus one "stopping pattern not defined" from London alternating between Paignton and Plymouth.

That's six trains an hour between Exeter and Newton Abbot, which doesn't seem to be so many that it needs a four-track railway, so unless that's intended to be additional services (ie on top of the five that run at present, raising services to 11tph) then I can't see how this adds up.

 

[Busaholic]

A route alongside the A38 dual carriageway twixt Exeter and Plymouth really would be 'blue sky thinking', with a branch off at Buckfastleigh down to Totnes which could then be used along to Newton Abbot and Torbay when the rest of the coastal route becomes inoperable. Oh, there'd still be the complaints about using old and preserved railway lines from the usual quarters!

 

[LateThanNever]

There's very very little at the moment I believe, but even that isn't really constrained in load or performance by the coast route

As you say. There may be very little now but there is absolutely no prospect of any freight company in their right mind trying to add to it in the future unless there is an inland alternative route to Dawlish.
Like many, whilst tunnelling through Dartmoor would be nice to have, I cannot see billions being spent just to arrive in Newton Abbot 4 minutes quicker than before. So Okehampton is really the only game in town.

 

[MarkyT]

That's six trains an hour between Exeter and Newton Abbot, which doesn't seem to be so many that it needs a four-track railway, so unless that's intended to be additional services (ie on top of the five that run at present, raising services to 11tph) then I can't see how this adds up.

Clearly it's possible to run up to perhaps twenty trains or more an hour in each direction along a pair of tracks, as long as they all run at the same speed, calling at the same station stops. The problem with Exeter - Newton Abbot is the density of local stations and desire for more local 'Devon Metro' services combined with the much faster London and Cross Country expresses sharing the same tracks, the vast majority of which do not stop at these intermediate stations. To partially offset this it is possible for local trains to pull into the platform loops at Dawlish Warren and wait to allow an express to overtake, but this can add five to ten minutes to the local train's journey time and is risky operationally as a small delay to a local can result in a fairly large knock on effect to a longer distance closely following express train which may then lose slots through junctions and stations further afield. Delays to the Paignton services can also be quite chaotic as these trains also have to fit into single line slots on the Exmouth branch, although that can be mitigated somewhat by having longer reversing allowances at Exeter St Davids. The problem with increasing padding there is that as well as increasing overall journey times again, recent service increases, including the hourly Salisbury trains, mean that capacity in platforms 1 and 3 is also becoming a problem!

 

[LateThanNever]

A route alongside the A38 dual carriageway twixt Exeter and Plymouth really would be 'blue sky thinking', with a branch off at Buckfastleigh down to Totnes which could then be used along to Newton Abbot and Torbay when the rest of the coastal route becomes inoperable. Oh, there'd still be the complaints about using old and preserved railway lines from the usual quarters!

Less blue sky, more red sky in the morning! The A38 dual carriageway generally doesn't have the room for a railway beside it and Haldon Hill is a challenge to a bus - never mind a train!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not against a through route via Okehampton at all and could see it as a valuable alternative competitive route in the shorter term including a direct link from the airportless Plymouth area, to Exeter's growing regional and international airport, to the east of the city and possible to serve via a short shuttle transit link from the planned new Cranbrook station on the LSWR route.

And this is why it is particularly disappointing to see the MD of Late Western rather than SWT going to Okehampton with the transport minister!

 

[The Ham]

Absolutely, which is why I favour my scheme concept detailed here http://www.townend.me/files/southdevon.pdf or Gerard Duddridge's quite similar Great Haldon route as illustrated in the July edition of Railwatch - http://www.railwatch.org.uk/backtrack/rw140web.pdf. By running alongside the A38 near Chudleigh and Heathfield these options offer the opportunity for a further extension of the fast line from there towards Plymouth alongside the A38, avoiding Newton Abbot, which could nevertheless continue to be served along with Torbay as a branch from Chudleigh via the reconstructed Teign Valley provided as part of the initial cut-off stage. I'm not against a through route via Okehampton at all and could see it as a valuable alternative competitive route in the shorter term including a direct link from the airportless Plymouth area, to Exeter's growing regional and international airport, to the east of the city and possible to serve via a short shuttle transit link from the planned new Cranbrook station on the LSWR route.

Nice idea, although given the cost of the new build options I would have thought that any scheme which was longer and required more tunnelling would cost significantly more than the £3bn of the options on the table.

I could see that it could be more viable than the schemes on the table if a further pair of lines were required between Exeter and Newton Abbot at some point after 2040 (how far past depends on how well passenger loadings can be balanced to get people to go via Okehampton).

As it would bring a significant boost to journey time savings it could draw back those priced on to the trains via Okehampton as well attracting those who currently drive (bearing in mind that the roads are only going to get busier). This means that the number of people it benefited was significantly higher than any of the current schemes and potentially make it a viable scheme regardless of the need to provide a diversion route for Dawlish.

I think that some on here see whatever done now as all that will happen (ever) west of Exeter, however reopening via Okehampton could be the catalyst (over time) for further improvements west of Exeter.

 

[21C101]

[

It should be pointed out that not all stops on HSTs which are diverted via The Mule are shown as station calls.

It was the fastest route to London until Western Region wrecked it after they got their hands on it in 1963.

A point being that Honiton wasn't on quite a few of them, the train only stopped there for "Operation Purposes" or OP as it says in a WTT and that was purely for pathing over the single line sections, it wasn't a booked service call, so the doors would have remained locked. Now whether they did or not I don't know, that's neither here nor there now.

But unless they have official permission to call there SSO or Control authorises it by either GSM-R (Recorded) or Guards/TM's phone or it's an emergency then the doors must remain locked.

Well Last time I went home by from Crewkerne on a Sunday a year or two back from visiting close family, I bailed out at Yeovil Junction after seeing that a train going to Paddington was behind me and boarded an HST about 15 minutes later, which was most definitely making an advertised stop and when I checked national rail had made advertised stops at ExC, HON and AXM.

Unfortunately I hadn't realised how much slower the B&H line has got since its BR heyday, and together with having to go at about 20mph from Yeovil Pen Mill to Castle Cary, and finding myself in a hard aircraft seat about seven feet tall with poor window alignment (I had given up a comfortable facing table seat aligning with the window on the 159), wished I hadn't bothered by the time I got there.

Increasingly, since some infrastructure was restored allowing an hourly service on the Southern line, people from that part of the world who used to drive to Taunton (from places like Chard or Ilminster) now use the Southern line. Last time I planned to go that way on a Satuday, I discovered that there was a two hour gap from Paddington to Taunton between the 09.06 and 11.06 intercities (unlike the SWT which is hourly with consistent journey times seven days a week) There is a similar gap between 11.06 and 13.06 filled with only a slow train to Taunton with nine intermediate stops at 12.18 that takes 2h 23mins, only five minutes less than the 12.20 from Waterloo takes to get to Crewkerne (despite making more intermediate stops and running on a single track line with lower linespeed and a good five minutes sitting in a loop north of Tisbury)

..and not wishing to take a chance on something going wrong and being stranded for two hours, went from Waterloo instead. Rather a reliable mule than an irregular combination of tortoises and hares I would say. Espescially as the mule is cheaper.

 

[HowardGWR]

I think all this reference to GWR /SR rivalry and other comments from one or two posters rather dates them, and detracts from what may be otherwise relevant comments. We need extra capacity on all the routes.

Let's hope the welcoming committee did a good job on the S o S and it leads to some commitment. We must remember that we shall most likely have a different combination of people in government next year so it would be good if their hands were tied, in the nicest possible way, from the outset.

 

[47802]

The inland newbuild cuts off mgiht be expensive but they actually achieve something.

They will in all likely be built to a GC compatible structure gauge which builds towards very long term ambitions for a high speed railway to the South West.
They will also be able to significantly improve freight performance in the area, reduce journey times and improve capacity drastically.

A long way round single track route designed for a local multiple unit every hour is essentially worthless as a diversion. (You would have to axe the local service entirely to actually divert anything).

Indeed and I hope the Minister gets a good balance of Opinions rather than just a bunch of Okehampton fanatics

 

[MarkyT]

Unfortunately I hadn't realised how much slower the B&H line has got since its BR heyday

That is simply not true. The line has not been downgraded as far as linespeed is concerned, and is as high as it can be economically with its historic route geometry with some 110MPH sections created east of Westbury. The perception problem is the wide mix of stopping patterns today with nearly every train serving a different collection of stations en route! Nevertheless a non-stop HST service can achieve Taunton to Reading in as little as 1 hour and 13 minutes, whilst stops at a random selection of intermediate stations can add a further 20 minutes or so. Even though there is broadly an hourly service most of the day at the major stations the intervals are far from even and the timetable confusing and impossible to remember.

Increasingly, since some infrastructure was restored allowing an hourly service on the Southern line, people from that part of the world who used to drive to Taunton (from places like Chard or Ilminster) now use the Southern line.

Glad to hear that and I'm not surprised. The Axminster dynamic loop has been a real boon and the resultant easily understood regular service pattern is the key to popularity especially for short notice journeys. There are usually much better value fares available via Salsibury as you say without so much faffing about trying to book weeks ahead.

The B&H service really needs a full overhaul with regular intervals and stopping patterns too. The longer distance expresses to Plymouth and Cornwall should really omit most of the smaller calls, with an additional service tier (or more) superimposed to serve those. Part of the problem is that such a strategy has not been economic to date, and timetabling has always been difficult trying to mix expresses with slow lumbering aggregates trains and the limited local service out to Bedwyn, all on the same track pair, so adding yet another tier is a major task, although clearly if hourly interval once it's worked out for a sample hour it can simply be rinsed and repeated ad infinitum. Some of the smaller stations have a very peaky commuter flow too with next to no demand during the day to sustain regular hourly calls, so they currently get rather random stops from expresses every so often largely just to prevent the intervals becoming too extreme.

Settlements along and near the B&H could be prime candidates for further housing growth and hence might be able to provide the kind of demand that could justify such additional services.

 

[swt_passenger]

The longer distance expresses to Plymouth and Cornwall should really omit most of the smaller calls, with an additional service tier (or more) superimposed to serve those.

That's already one of the aims of the post IEP timetable isn't it? With extra 'middle distance' trains to Westbury or Taunton picking up the intermediate stops?

 

[21C101]

That's already one of the aims of the post IEP timetable isn't it? With extra 'middle distance' trains to Westbury or Taunton picking up the intermediate stops?

To my mind the logical thing to do would be to run an hourly service calling at only Reading, Taunton, Tiverton Parkway and Exeter (and beyond) and a new hourly semi fast service calling at the following:

Reading
Newbury
Kintbury (limited service only)
Hungerford
Bedwyn
Pewsey
Devizes (new station on A342)
Westbury
Frome
Castle Cary
Somerton (New)
Langport (New)
Taunton
Norton Fitzwarren for WSR & Taunton P&R (New)
Wellington (New)
Tiverton Parkway
Cullompton (New)
Exeter St Davids
Exeter Central
(in time it might go on to Cranbrook if Exeter Airport takes off)

Its not as if such a semi fast service from Waterloo has been an abject failure....

 

[Xavi]

That's already one of the aims of the post IEP timetable isn't it? With extra 'middle distance' trains to Westbury or Taunton picking up the intermediate stops?

Regular hourly interval Reading, Taunton, Exeter, Newton Abbot service pattern would also help with fitting in the much needed half-hourly Devon Metro. Cross Country is already pretty much regular interval departing Exeter 45 mins past the hour. So if the hourly fast leaves Paddington at 06 mins past the hour it will depart Exeter at about 15 past the hour. Timetable the Metro from Exeter to Paignton to depart at 22 & 52 past the hour and you have good connections for Dawlish, Teignmouth etc and no looping at Dawlish Warren. Simple and trust me the demand is there it just needs support / investment for retention of sufficient HSTs by DfT. Intermediate B&H station service would be hourly to Westbury as proposed with IEP and bi-hourly to Exeter. I appreciate fitting everything in is more complicated than this, but this ought to be investigated as the basis for a way forward.

 

[MarkyT]

To my mind the logical thing to do would be to run an hourly service calling at only Reading, Taunton, Tiverton Parkway and Exeter (and beyond)

I would also call all the fasts at Westbury as its such an important interchange, especially with the improvements on the Westbury - Swindon line and this would provide an hourly single change journey from Plymouth and Cornwall to Bath and the Solent area. The Westbury avoiding line could be abandoned, the junctions removed (saving maintenance/renewals) and the alignment straightened for running faster into the station, then the former trackbed could be used as an alternative route for a town road bypass, also potentially giving much better road access to the station area and the nearby industrial areas. The station could be improved as a major parkway, with its fourth platform reinstated (as, I believe, already suggested/proposed).

and a new hourly semi fast service calling at the following:

Reading
Newbury
Kintbury (limited service only)
Hungerford
Bedwyn
Pewsey
Devizes (new station on A342)
Westbury
Frome
Castle Cary
Somerton (New)
Langport (New)
Taunton
Norton Fitzwarren for WSR & Taunton P&R (New)
Wellington (New)
Tiverton Parkway
Cullompton (New)
Exeter St Davids
Exeter Central

Nice but you missed Bruton!
I would keep the Bedwyns separate doing:

Paddington
Reading
Theale
Thatcham
Newbury
Kintbury
Hungerford
Bedwyn

electrified and extended to Marlborough as has been suggested.

Then the next tier could go:

Paddington
Reading
Newbury
Hungerford
Pewsey
Devizes Parkway (new station)
Westbury

From Westbury there are many alternatives:

Frome
Radstock

OR

Frome
Bruton
Castle Cary

THEN

Somerton (New)
Langport (New)
Taunton

OR (alternate hours?)

Yeovil Pen Mill
Yeovil Junction

(filling in gaps in Bristol - Weymouth service)

END

Any new Exeter - Taunton stopping service I would probably send to Bristol via Weston Super Mare in preference to London via Westbury as that would probably have more local traffic potential, and the fast trains at Tiverton Parkway and Taunton would be more attractive for the London bound traveller (who could also interchange from local stops into those expresses).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Regular hourly interval Reading, Taunton, Exeter, Newton Abbot service pattern would also help with fitting in the much needed half-hourly Devon Metro.

Yes agreed, the NR Route Study suggests regular clockface paths for the expresses between Newton Abbot and Exeter could help considerably in that respect, but with the B&H service as it is today that is impossible.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Westbury important? It's a tiddly little town, with little going for it.

It has a good service to/from Portsmouth/Salisbury/Bath & Bristol and if/when the IEP services kick in it should have an hourly service to/from London if it's lucky.

To even suggest that all trains call there & that they abandon the avoider is just plain crass.

 

[21C101]

Westbury important? It's a tiddly little town, with little going for it.

It has a good service to/from Portsmouth/Salisbury/Bath & Bristol and if/when the IEP services kick in it should have an hourly service to/from London if it's lucky.

About as many people use Westbury station to travel to the town of Westbury as use Clapham Junction station to travel to the town of Clapham.

Its importance is as a junction to allow people to travel between London and the rather larger settlements of Warminster (pop 19,000), Wiltshires county town, Trowbridge (pop 32,000), Frome (26,000) and Bradford on Avon (10,000) by connecting train. Nonetheless with a population of 17,000 Westbury is a significant size in its own right. Together these places have a population of 104,000.

I didn't think this would really need spelling out on a rail forum.

To even suggest that all trains call there & that they abandon the avoider is just plain crass.

With a combined population of 104,000 in its catchment area, along with providing easy connections to Salisbury, Southampton and Portsmouth, it is not an idea entirely without merit, although personally I wouldnt like to see any stops between Reading and Taunton for the Penzances if a semi fast service were introduced.

 

[Xavi]

Whatever else is decided, let's keep the old going - both Dawlish route and HSTs. Travelling west from Exeter this morning on The Merchant Venturer on an HST that's just gone through Kilmarnock works and has the WiFi working. This train is so much better than the Voyagers I have endured for the past couple of days which were full and standing for at least 40 per cent of my journeys from Exeter to Birmingham and Bristol in the last 2 days and a lot of the travelling was outside the peak. Any notion that Voyagers or Meridians could do a job on Paddington - Devon / Cornwall should be dismissed out of hand. Overcrowding would be worse at times for certain than the alternate of a retained standard fleet of 20 x 8-car HST and as for comfort...

 

[47802]

Whatever else is decided, let's keep the old going - both Dawlish route and HSTs. Travelling west from Exeter this morning on The Merchant Venturer on an HST that's just gone through Kilmarnock works and has the WiFi working. This train is so much better than the Voyagers I have endured for the past couple of days which were full and standing for at least 40 per cent of my journeys from Exeter to Birmingham and Bristol in the last 2 days and a lot of the travelling was outside the peak. Any notion that Voyagers or Meridians could do a job on Paddington - Devon / Cornwall should be dismissed out of hand. Overcrowding would be worse at times for certain than the alternate of a retained standard fleet of 20 x 8-car HST and as for comfort...

I imagine that HST's will be retained as intrim solution, under FGW direct award and when the franchise is re-let It will be up to bidder's to propose a longer term solution, but that's getting away from the point really.