Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[MarkyT]

. . . 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.

Compared to non-stop Taunton - Reading times of between 1:13 and 1:19, a stop at Westbury results in a TAU-RDG journey of 1:22. A single stop at Castle Cary can be included for a TAU-RDG journey of 1:19, so with improvements to the run-in speed at Westbury, possible by removing the avoiding line junctions, a similar TAU-RDG time should be feasible with a single stop there - the cost being 4 minutes worst case. The current inconsistent times for the non-stops may be down to conflicts through the less than optimal Reading interim layout which will be solved once the final grade separation there is accomplished next year. With a standard hourly stopping pattern as far as Plymouth, whether or not the train goes on to Cornwall or not, a completely standard clock-face timetable can be provided at all station en route. I think the stop at Westbury is worth it for the rail interchange connectivity and the site's potential as a regional parkway railhead, especially with the local road access improvements I suggested, possible by using the avoiding line alignment as a town bypass (note the previous proposed southerly road bypass route around the town was rejected a number of years ago).

 

[HowardGWR]

I don't see what any of this has to do with the need or otherwise for another route through west Devon. Interesting though! New thread perhaps?

 

[Xavi]

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.

Agree it is drifting off the point somewhat, but retaining the right number of HSTs enables the hourly regular interval fast service via B&H to be introduce alleviating pathing issues between Exeter and Newton Abbot and reducing the need for additional tracks. Moving to IEP or Meridian cast-offs would probably result in trying to squeeze too much out of too little which leads to overcrowding and a need for irregular stopping patterns. Then someone says we need more tracks again. Wider joined up thinking is often lacking in today's railway.

 

[HSTEd]

Well ten car IEPs would be able to replace HSTs without much issue I imagine.

 

[HowardGWR]

Before it went behind a paywall, you could actually see the problems caused by late running express traffic to local services along the sea wall, on the webcam there, as well as graphically on Real Time trains website.

Then, in turn, the locals would cause problems too. Reasoning for some of the operating decisions was not evident when I had a look, but doubtless I was missing the wider picture.

But the sea wall is a bottleneck already, no doubt about that.

 

[The Ham]

Well ten car IEPs would be able to replace HSTs without much issue I imagine.

A 9 coach IEP or a pair of 5 coach IEP's has (IIRC) about 18% more seating capacity than the existing HST's, so in that case keeping the existing would lead to more overcrowding.

 

[Xavi]

Well ten car IEPs would be able to replace HSTs without much issue I imagine.

Indeed, but you'd probably find more 5-car versions would be ordered.

 

[The Ham]

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...

To sum up a train with 8 coaches is better than a train with 5 coaches when there is to much demand for a train with 5 coaches. Therefore a train with 5 coaches shouldn't be used on a route which currently has trains which are 8 coaches long.

...so far so good...

However, what happens if when the Voyagers and/or Meridians move to such a route but are run in pairs so as to maintain the capacity where it is needed yet provide a more frequent service formed of shorter trains where there is't quite such high demand. i.e. 11 or ever 12 coach trains from London to Plymouth and then 4, 5, 6 or 7 coach trains beyond Exeter, Plymouth and/or somewhere else where the train could divide, with an increase in the number of services (starting of as hourly plus a few extra and maybe even going to half hourly over time) and the possibility of the two half going to different destinations (for instance to Plymouth AND to the Torbay area or to Penzance AND Falmouth or Newquay). With the split it could allow the same number of stations to retain their direct train to London whilst still improving journey times as after the split the individual sets do not need to call at all the stations. Then what would be the better train?

Just because one type of train works well for what is happening now doesn't mean that with another type of train there maybe other improvements which could come along because it allows greater flexibility.

 

[Grumpy]

How you get to Exeter from the North or East is somewhat irrelevant to this thread, which is about providing a robust route to Plymouth and beyond.

With regard to the comments re services on the B&H I would suggest that the various stopping patterns proposed miss the main point of the Paddington service which is to provide a fast service to the West of England. Any stop between Reading and Exeter probably loses more passengers (because of the slower service) than it gains. Taunton possibly excepted.

If you look at the annual passenger usage stats the intermediate stations generate relatively little. Westbury is the biggest with approx. 0.5m users plus 0.2m interchanges but even this is a tiddler compared to some of the places in the rest of the UK that don’t have a London service e.g. Huddersfield (4.6m), Bolton (3.6) or Lincoln (1.6m) etc. If passengers from these places are expected to change trains, why not passengers from the B&H intermediate points?

 

[Cliveblackpool]

I get the impression that this country cannot afford to spend more on rail/ road infrastructure, but can we not afford not to. Almost every area in the country urgently needs improvements like yesterday, not tomorrow.
I believe there is much suppressed demand on this route as regards to local services. Price hikes, shortage of rolling stock, and peak rate demands were introduced many years ago, trains rammed etc. Again lack of investment.
Electrification to Penzance and Paignton should be brought forward.
(If a large wave causes a short the jumpers may open, but they can be reset) CCTV along the seawall stretch would allow a quick inspection for safety for the seawall, and any problems with the wires.
IMO The LSWR should reopen giving rail users way improved access to Mid Devon etc + VV, and allow a diversion to Dawlish in the near future.
A fast diversion line Newton Abbot to Exeter still needs to be built, but may be quite a few years away.

 

[Rich McLean]

Before it went behind a paywall, you could actually see the problems caused by late running express traffic to local services along the sea wall, on the webcam there, as well as graphically on Real Time trains website.

Then, in turn, the locals would cause problems too. Reasoning for some of the operating decisions was not evident when I had a look, but doubtless I was missing the wider picture.

But the sea wall is a bottleneck already, no doubt about that.

This is what they are proposing to fit down the Sea Wall post IEP introduction when Turbo's move west and Cornwall re-signalling is completed

Standard Hour Down direction
1 XC Voyager or FGW HST/800 Semi Fast to Paignton, stopping Dawlish, Teignmouth, NTA, Torquay and Paignton (Not every hour)
1 x Exmouth - Paignton all shacks (150). From Exeter, calls at Starcross and Dawlish. It will then wait at Dawlish Warrent until
1 x Fast FGW HST to Plym/Cornwall passes which will then arrive at Newton Abbot just after the Semi Fast for connection.
The Stopper from Dawlish Warren then continues to Paignton all shacks
1 x Bristol - Penzance Semi Fast (Class 158) (Extenson of BRI - TAU) calls at Teignmouth, Teignmouth, NTA, then stations to Penzance
1 x Devon Metro all shacks follows this (150), same as the previous stopper which waits at the Warren while
1 x XC Fast to Plymouth, which overtake the Devon Metro, which will catch up with the Semi Fast and overtake it at Newton Abbot.
Then the Devon Metro will continue towards Paignton.

And repeat. However, the only way to fit freight in is to give them a path in the hour of the Paignton Semi Fasts

Opposite pattern in the Up direction. If delays occur however, it will have big knock on effect, and either the Semi Fast BRI - PZN or the 2nd Metro will need to be caped, and restarted elsewhere.

It can be done, unless something runs late, then it will all fall apart

For up HSTs that skip Totnes, they would leave late after the semi fast which will call at Ivybridge, loop at Totnes, where the fast HST will overtake. For HSTs that stop at Totnes, the HST would go first, and the semi fast follow, again picking up the call at Ivybridge. Providing re signalling is done West of Totnes, this is entirely possible. Ivybridge can still get a few HST calls per day in either direction. One thing, Newton Abbot will be very busy

 

[21C101]

This is what they are proposing to fit down the Sea Wall post IEP introduction when Turbo's move west and Cornwall re-signalling is completed

Standard Hour Down direction
1 XC Voyager or FGW HST/800 Semi Fast to Paignton, stopping Dawlish, Teignmouth, NTA, Torquay and Paignton (Not every hour)
1 x Exmouth - Paignton all shacks (150). From Exeter, calls at Starcross and Dawlish. It will then wait at Dawlish Warrent until
1 x Fast FGW HST to Plym/Cornwall passes which will then arrive at Newton Abbot just after the Semi Fast for connection.
The Stopper from Dawlish Warren then continues to Paignton all shacks
1 x Bristol - Penzance Semi Fast (Class 158) (Extenson of BRI - TAU) calls at Teignmouth, Teignmouth, NTA, then stations to Penzance
1 x Devon Metro all shacks follows this (150), same as the previous stopper which waits at the Warren while
1 x XC Fast to Plymouth, which overtake the Devon Metro, which will catch up with the Semi Fast and overtake it at Newton Abbot.
Then the Devon Metro will continue towards Paignton.

And repeat. However, the only way to fit freight in is to give them a path in the hour of the Paignton Semi Fasts

Opposite pattern in the Up direction. If delays occur however, it will have big knock on effect, and either the Semi Fast BRI - PZN or the 2nd Metro will need to be caped, and restarted elsewhere.

It can be done, unless something runs late, then it will all fall apart

For up HSTs that skip Totnes, they would leave late after the semi fast which will call at Ivybridge, loop at Totnes, where the fast HST will overtake. For HSTs that stop at Totnes, the HST would go first, and the semi fast follow, again picking up the call at Ivybridge. Providing re signalling is done West of Totnes, this is entirely possible. Ivybridge can still get a few HST calls per day in either direction. One thing, Newton Abbot will be very busy

I guess the Bristol - Penzance semi fast is what will allow Wellington & Cullompton (and maybe Plympton?) to reopen?

 

[Xavi]

This is what they are proposing to fit down the Sea Wall post IEP introduction when Turbo's move west and Cornwall re-signalling is completed

Standard Hour Down direction
1 XC Voyager or FGW HST/800 Semi Fast to Paignton, stopping Dawlish, Teignmouth, NTA, Torquay and Paignton (Not every hour)
1 x Exmouth - Paignton all shacks (150). From Exeter, calls at Starcross and Dawlish. It will then wait at Dawlish Warrent until
1 x Fast FGW HST to Plym/Cornwall passes which will then arrive at Newton Abbot just after the Semi Fast for connection.
The Stopper from Dawlish Warren then continues to Paignton all shacks
1 x Bristol - Penzance Semi Fast (Class 158) (Extenson of BRI - TAU) calls at Teignmouth, Teignmouth, NTA, then stations to Penzance
1 x Devon Metro all shacks follows this (150), same as the previous stopper which waits at the Warren while
1 x XC Fast to Plymouth, which overtake the Devon Metro, which will catch up with the Semi Fast and overtake it at Newton Abbot.
Then the Devon Metro will continue towards Paignton.

And repeat. However, the only way to fit freight in is to give them a path in the hour of the Paignton Semi Fasts

Opposite pattern in the Up direction. If delays occur however, it will have big knock on effect, and either the Semi Fast BRI - PZN or the 2nd Metro will need to be caped, and restarted elsewhere.

It can be done, unless something runs late, then it will all fall apart

For up HSTs that skip Totnes, they would leave late after the semi fast which will call at Ivybridge, loop at Totnes, where the fast HST will overtake. For HSTs that stop at Totnes, the HST would go first, and the semi fast follow, again picking up the call at Ivybridge. Providing re signalling is done West of Totnes, this is entirely possible. Ivybridge can still get a few HST calls per day in either direction. One thing, Newton Abbot will be very busy

Sounds great. As mentioned earlier, a regular interval service pattern to the north and east of Exeter will be critical to the service that can be operated along the sea wall.

I presume the Up Totnes overtaking is necessary because of the lack of a fourth platform at Newton Abbot? If Newton Abbot track rationalisation of 30 years ago happened today I am sure the four platforms and loops would have been retained with the car park built on the site of the old carriage sidings.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Sounds great. As mentioned earlier, a regular interval service pattern to the north and east of Exeter will be critical to the service that can be operated along the sea wall.

I presume the Up Totnes overtaking is necessary because of the lack of a fourth platform at Newton Abbot? If Newton Abbot track rationalisation of 30 years ago happened today I am sure the four platforms and loops would have been retained with the car park built on the site of the old carriage sidings.

Would it still be possible to revert to the former layout if it would increase the stations current capacity?

 

[Rapidash]

There's still enough space next to P1 to build a new track, but you'd need to bribe the Dance Factory to build a platform on their car park shrubbery.

 

[The Ham]

There's still enough space next to P1 to build a new track, but you'd need to bribe the Dance Factory to build a platform on their car park shrubbery.

Which could risk them saying "We demand another shrubbery!"

 

[MarkyT]

This is what they are proposing to fit down the Sea Wall post IEP
. . .
It can be done, unless something runs late, then it will all fall apart

For up HSTs that skip Totnes, they would leave late after the semi fast which will call at Ivybridge, loop at Totnes, where the fast HST will overtake. For HSTs that stop at Totnes, the HST would go first, and the semi fast follow, again picking up the call at Ivybridge. Providing re signalling is done West of Totnes, this is entirely possible. Ivybridge can still get a few HST calls per day in either direction. One thing, Newton Abbot will be very busy

Very interesting thanks. Note current timetable has very few trains missing Totnes. I remember reading a printed article years ago claiming that such stops are omitted from selected journeys (Newton Abbot also in some cases) purely to achieve headline Plymouth -London journey times that are specified in the franchise. Commercially the operator would probably rather make the regular stops and it would make timetabling a lot easier if the stops were standardised.

The three platforms at Newton Abbot are a big constraint now. Often a preceding down local train has to leave just before a following express arrives because it has to use the same platform 2, platform 1 being occupied by or reserved for an incoming up local train from Paignton. This tends to lead to systemic long connection times (20 minutes or more) from the largely standard pattern XC trains, although from FGW expresses, the more variable patterns result in a seemingly random wait! I doubt it would be justified to reinstate a full 4 platform layout at Newton Abbot, but a 'Cambridge style' scissors crossover dividing platform 1 might be helpful, connected to an outer through track on the old depot side of the station. That could also be useful for freight/engineering traffic, shunting in and out of Hackney Yard, running round etc.

Lower capacity two-aspect signalling actually commences just west of Newton Abbot station on both the main line and the Paignton branch. I don't know whether the Plymouth - Totnes resignalling also plans to improve headways all the way through to Newton Abbot. The signalling equipment west of Totnes is part of the Plymouth PSB extension scheme dating from the early 1970s I believe, so is probably due for wholesale renewal on age grounds by now, whereas Totnes itself and east to Newton Abbot was new in the mid to late 1980s when the old mechanical boxes closed. Perhaps that later equipment might be capable of taking some modification to add a few more intermediate signals.

 

[21C101]

Which could risk them saying "We demand another shrubbery!"

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

Compared to non-stop Taunton - Reading times of between 1:13 and 1:19, a stop at Westbury results in a TAU-RDG journey of 1:22. A single stop at Castle Cary can be included for a TAU-RDG journey of 1:19, so with improvements to the run-in speed at Westbury, possible by removing the avoiding line junctions, a similar TAU-RDG time should be feasible with a single stop there - the cost being 4 minutes worst case. The current inconsistent times for the non-stops may be down to conflicts through the less than optimal Reading interim layout which will be solved once the final grade separation there is accomplished next year. With a standard hourly stopping pattern as far as Plymouth, whether or not the train goes on to Cornwall or not, a completely standard clock-face timetable can be provided at all station en route. I think the stop at Westbury is worth it for the rail interchange connectivity and the site's potential as a regional parkway railhead, especially with the local road access improvements I suggested, possible by using the avoiding line alignment as a town bypass (note the previous proposed southerly road bypass route around the town was rejected a number of years ago).

I think if the semi fast service terminated at Westbury, then indeed the Penzances would need to call there.

However I think it would be better if the semi fasts terminated at Taunton which would allow regular London services also to Frome, Castle Cary a new station at Somerton and maybe even one at Langport as well as connecting with Westbury - Weymouth services at Castle Cary in a way that made Taunton-Yeovil/Weymouth journeys feasible.

At Taunton they could connect with London-Reading-Taunton-Tivparkway-Exeter and beyond as well as the proposed semi fast Bristol to Penzance service.

 

[MarkyT]

There's still enough space next to P1 to build a new track, but you'd need to bribe the Dance Factory to build a platform on their car park shrubbery.

If there was going to be a complete new platform with access and facilities, it should perhaps be an island with tracks either side. That would create a five full length platform station in total, much more flexible. There's a local authority urban connectivity scheme to provide pedestrian access across the railway to the Brunel industrial estate and beyond. Teignbridge's preferred option is to extend the existing station footbridge which would effectively also create an additional station entrance. An extended scope of work could see that work combined with access to an additional platform.

http://www.devon.gov.uk/7_heart_of_teignbridge_sustainable_transport_report.pdf (Section 5.3, page 14)

 

[Rapidash]

If there was going to be a complete new platform with access and facilities, it should perhaps be an island with tracks either side. That would create a five full length platform station in total, much more flexible. There's a local authority urban connectivity scheme to provide pedestrian access across the railway to the Brunel industrial estate and beyond. Teignbridge's preferred option is to extend the existing station footbridge which would effectively also create an additional station entrance. An extended scope of work could see that work combined with access to an additional platform.

http://www.devon.gov.uk/7_heart_of_teignbridge_sustainable_transport_report.pdf (Section 5.3, page 14)

Very interesting stuff! Nice to see the district councils bothering with these things.

I'm surprised there's been no attempt at getting a Kingsteignton station built, as its a fairly sizeable place these days. and there's space for a P&R near the line.

Platforms at Kingskerswell are still there as well. Although I doubt a playground is the best place for a station these days!

Uh, sorry, went off-topic there! (Atleast its near to Dawlish....)

 

[MarkyT]

Very interesting stuff! Nice to see the district councils bothering with these things.

I'm surprised there's been no attempt at getting a Kingsteignton station built, as its a fairly sizeable place these days. and there's space for a P&R near the line.

Platforms at Kingskerswell are still there as well. Although I doubt a playground is the best place for a station these days!

Uh, sorry, went off-topic there! (Atleast its near to Dawlish....)

The old station site at Kingskerswell would be great for pedestrian access from most of the village, but I think traffic concerns and parking have always complicated matters when proposals have been made. I suspect the new South Devon Link Road (aka Kingskerswell bypass) opening in 2015 may further undermine the case for a station as the parallel bus service will become much more reliable and faster once all the through traffic is removed to the bypass. The bus also goes right into the heart of Torquay and Newton Abbot town centres whereas the rail stations at both are quite a way out. People tend to use the trains more for going a little further to Exeter, Teigmouth, Dawlish or Paignton, although there's an appreciable peak traffic between Torquay and Newton Abbot today purely because the the current bus journey is so badly affected by road congestion.

I did mention Dawlish in passing . . . just the once!

 

[Ash Bridge]

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

There is some coverage of this on the Dartmoor Railway Supporters Association website if of interest to anyone. Sorry unable to provide link.

 

[Rich McLean]

I guess the Bristol - Penzance semi fast is what will allow Wellington & Cullompton (and maybe Plympton?) to reopen?

No chance of Plympton re-opening, due to Hemerdon bank. Would eat up too much capacity with what will be 3-4 tph in each direction
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Very interesting thanks. Note current timetable has very few trains missing Totnes. I remember reading a printed article years ago claiming that such stops are omitted from selected journeys (Newton Abbot also in some cases) purely to achieve headline Plymouth -London journey times that are specified in the franchise. Commercially the operator would probably rather make the regular stops and it would make timetabling a lot easier if the stops were standardised.

The three platforms at Newton Abbot are a big constraint now. Often a preceding down local train has to leave just before a following express arrives because it has to use the same platform 2, platform 1 being occupied by or reserved for an incoming up local train from Paignton. This tends to lead to systemic long connection times (20 minutes or more) from the largely standard pattern XC trains, although from FGW expresses, the more variable patterns result in a seemingly random wait! I doubt it would be justified to reinstate a full 4 platform layout at Newton Abbot, but a 'Cambridge style' scissors crossover dividing platform 1 might be helpful, connected to an outer through track on the old depot side of the station. That could also be useful for freight/engineering traffic, shunting in and out of Hackney Yard, running round etc.

Lower capacity two-aspect signalling actually commences just west of Newton Abbot station on both the main line and the Paignton branch. I don't know whether the Plymouth - Totnes resignalling also plans to improve headways all the way through to Newton Abbot. The signalling equipment west of Totnes is part of the Plymouth PSB extension scheme dating from the early 1970s I believe, so is probably due for wholesale renewal on age grounds by now, whereas Totnes itself and east to Newton Abbot was new in the mid to late 1980s when the old mechanical boxes closed. Perhaps that later equipment might be capable of taking some modification to add a few more intermediate signals.

Post GW Electrification, the following will happen.

Plat 1 - Down services to Paignton and Bristol - Penzance Trains
Plat 2 - Down Express
Plat 3 - Up - Min Dwell times

What should be done to Platform 1 is create a loop, with a double cross over half way down, and create an A and B end of the platform, and create two signal berths within the platform with Bi-Di working. Would be less expensive than adding another complete platform, then you could have

Plat 1a - Down services to Paignton and Bristol - Penzance Trains
Plat 1b - Up services to Paignton and Bristol - Penzance Trains
Plat 2 - Down Express
Plat 3 - Up Express

Connections into a Express will go out of the window once Paignton - Exmouth goes half hourly as the max connection time will be just under 30 minutes, with an extra 1tp2hr at Exeter St Davids (or direct from Paignton in some cases)

 

[21C101]

No chance of Plympton re-opening, due to Hemerdon bank. Would eat up too much capacity with what will be 3-4 tph in each direction

3-4 per hour each way is not exactly busy. However if the line only has two aspect signalling (as suggested elsewhere in the thread) then it may have to wait until the next resignalling

Plympton has a population of over 30,000 and must be the largest town in the UK with an open passenger line going through it not to have a station.

 

[drinnicksiding]

im starting to think a 'do nothing' decision will appeal to politicians when the enthusiasts and campaigners for a fiscally-negative rail line can't actually agree what they want.

Even those arguing about the wider economic benefits not being considered, must admit that it's marginal.

I'm not sure what the point of the BCR calculations by Network Rail were. Building a long railway across private, contourous land in a very sparsly populated area is not economically viable. Shock. It's not like Brunel built his sea wall for fun.

The BCR is irrelevant. We are talking about a route as back up to whole Penzance to Exeter line. We are also talking about a public service. The media coverage seems to be very conscious of the financial impact. This is something the area needs for growth and investment - again, shockingly, investments do not always make quick returns and said returns can be hard to gauge. So why don't we just never build anything west of Bristol ever again as its not economically viable.

The Okehampton route will provide an alternative for any breach between Exeter and Plymouth. It will offer a slower but reasonable service for a second choice. A series of tunnels that bypass Dawlish are more expensive, save a matter of minutes (that people in Plymouth selfishly seem to want at the expense of non-Plymouthians using the line), and also allow for the future abandonment of the Dawlish line. Choosing Okehampton will mean future dawlish breaches will still need to be repaired - and do they should! Teignmouth and Dawlish are decent sized towns and deserve a service! I've no doubt that a Dawlish bypass will see those two towns eventually forgotten about.

For me, this is clearly the best option for all. To make the most of it, then see if Tavistock and Okehampton can be given a service as a by-product of a wider economic benefit (might as well whilst passing through).

There was some research into Sourton Parkway by NR I recall. An earlier point was made that the North Cornwall/west Devon/A30 users that would like a 'Tiverton Parkway' style station would want a decent transport hub with HST services. Not sure I'd drive from, say, Bideford to Sourton Parkway to catch a two-coach DMU into Exeter - Id go all the way to Tiverton.

There definitely needs to be unity from those lobbying for a significant and unattractive investment for Westminster. To be honest, the Dawlish breach in February would have been a bigger shock to people in London - I'm not sure they really know what life is like down here and relate it to what losing a rail connection would mean to them! Happy to use that in our favour though. Still plenty to do though. We need it to be a key focus of the 2015 general election.

 

[MarkyT]

3-4 per hour each way is not exactly busy. However if the line only has two aspect signalling (as suggested elsewhere in the thread) then it may have to wait until the next resignalling

Plympton has a population of over 30,000 and must be the largest town in the UK with an open passenger line going through it not to have a station.

The majority of local transport demand around Plympton is likely to be to and from Plymouth city centre. That is served by frequent buses with a weekday 10 minute interval service, and with Plymouth rail station a good walk from many parts of the commercial centre, buses would remain the best choice for many travellers. The next station towards Exeter, Ivybridge, was (re)opened in 1994 (on a different site to the historic station) and has been a disappointment as far as passenger numbers are concerned.

 

[21C101]

The majority of local transport demand around Plympton is likely to be to and from Plymouth city centre. That is served by frequent buses with a weekday 10 minute interval service, and with Plymouth rail station a good walk from many parts of the commercial centre, buses would remain the best choice for many travellers. The next station towards Exeter, Ivybridge, was (re)opened in 1994 (on a different site to the historic station) and has been a disappointment as far as passenger numbers are concerned.

That would certainly be the conventional view, however with peak hour journey times at best 35 minutes and likely to increase with ever worsening traffic congestion in provincial cities I would have thought the train would be quite attractive. The other thing is that it would open up commuting to Exeter which is increasingly popular.

Ivybridge has not been a srtunning success, but then again the service is not that great and the population is a third of Plymptons. The service dosen't exactly help. No eastbound train before 08.21 on Mon-Fri and no trains from Exeter on Mon-Fri between 16.05 and 18.22 are not exactly conducive to commuting to the main Devon conurbation. Give it at least an hourly service and it might work. Nonetheless pax have more than doubled since 2003 from 30,000 per year to 80,000 per year.

Also a Plympton Station on the west side of the town Centre at Underwoord on the B3146 would make a good Parkway station for Plymouth and if designed with a western facing bay platform would make a logical terminating point for trains from Tavistock giving a cross city service.

 

[HowardGWR]

No chance of Plympton re-opening, due to Hemerdon bank. Would eat up too much capacity with what will be 3-4 tph in each direction
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Post GW Electrification, the following will happen.

Plat 1 - Down services to Paignton and Bristol - Penzance Trains
Plat 2 - Down Express
Plat 3 - Up - Min Dwell times

What should be done to Platform 1 is create a loop, with a double cross over half way down, and create an A and B end of the platform, and create two signal berths within the platform with Bi-Di working. Would be less expensive than adding another complete platform, then you could have

Plat 1a - Down services to Paignton and Bristol - Penzance Trains
Plat 1b - Up services to Paignton and Bristol - Penzance Trains
Plat 2 - Down Express
Plat 3 - Up Express

Connections into a Express will go out of the window once Paignton - Exmouth goes half hourly as the max connection time will be just under 30 minutes, with an extra 1tp2hr at Exeter St Davids (or direct from Paignton in some cases)

I presume you meant 1b for Up services from Paignton and Penzance to Bristol Trains?

Making the locals stop where NTA-destined and -originating pax have to use stairs and cross a bridge does not seem very customer-friendly to me.

I think that unless it is planned not to stop some trains at NTA, then a rebuild with locals on platform 3, both up and down, and the crossover using part of the line of platform 2 seems friendlier. Long distance pax will always arrive earlier for those services because of less frequent services and the need to use advance tickets on the correct train, so have the time and the need to use lifts with their luggage. Local pax will not have luggage.

I expect i have missed something, so put me right if so.

 

[LateThanNever]

That would certainly be the conventional view, however with peak hour journey times at best 35 minutes and likely to increase with ever worsening traffic congestion in provincial cities I would have thought the train would be quite attractive. The other thing is that it would open up commuting to Exeter which is increasingly popular.

Ivybridge has not been a srtunning success, but then again the service is not that great and the population is a third of Plymptons. The service dosen't exactly help. No eastbound train before 08.21 on Mon-Fri and no trains from Exeter on Mon-Fri between 16.05 and 18.22 are not exactly conducive to commuting to the main Devon conurbation. Give it at least an hourly service and it might work. Nonetheless pax have more than doubled since 2003 from 30,000 per year to 80,000 per year.

Also a Plympton Station on the west side of the town Centre at Underwoord on the B3146 would make a good Parkway station for Plymouth and if designed with a western facing bay platform would make a logical terminating point for trains from Tavistock giving a cross city service.

Agree that Ivybridge has a very, very poor service. (Seemed to worsen when SWTrains were prevented from reaching Plymouth). There still seem to be efforts to promote it as a Park & Ride station for Plymouth but the service is completely unsuitable. But Plymouth is in fact Devon's main conurbation - if not the county town. Its population is more than double that of Exeter!

 

[MarkyT]

I presume you meant 1b for Up services from Paignton and Penzance to Bristol Trains?

Making the locals stop where NTA-destined and -originating pax have to use stairs and cross a bridge does not seem very customer-friendly to me.

I think that unless it is planned not to stop some trains at NTA, then a rebuild with locals on platform 3, both up and down, and the crossover using part of the line of platform 2 seems friendlier. Long distance pax will always arrive earlier for those services because of less frequent services and the need to use advance tickets on the correct train, so have the time and the need to use lifts with their luggage. Local pax will not have luggage.

I expect i have missed something, so put me right if so.

I think Rich was implying something like this diagram:

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

(Note I've renumbered the platforms though for maximum confusion!)

In the Down direction connections to the branch would be cross-platform but in the Up a crossing of the bridge would be required as is the case usually today. At quiet times as now some Up local branch trains could cross over to the up main (existing #3). The problem with dealing with all locals on the town side platform is that they would then have to cross the relocated fast lines, twice in case of a down train, and there's no room for a centre line between the two lines to create a through line into which a middle scissors crossover could connect.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Agree that Ivybridge has a very, very poor service. (Seemed to worsen when SWTrains were prevented from reaching Plymouth). There still seem to be efforts to promote it as a Park & Ride station for Plymouth but the service is completely unsuitable. But Plymouth is in fact Devon's main conurbation - if not the county town. Its population is more than double that of Exeter!

I also have a theory that Ivybridge station doesn't really attract Ivybridge residents (apart from those in the closest estates within a short walking distance) because it's on the wrong side of town. People won't instinctively get in their car and drive east out of town towards Exeter if they are going west to Plymouth which is presumably the most popular local commuter and leisure destination.