Any news on proposals to build an alternative route between Exeter & Plymouth?

[The Ham]

Did you mean “wouldn’t be sensible”?

Corrected

 

[The Planner]

Because you know as well as I do that TOC's are primarily concerned with running what they have to without making a loss.

I suspect a fair bit of the South West branches are run on subsidy, I doubt Okehampton would be any different.

 

[yorksrob]

I suspect a fair bit of the South West branches are run on subsidy, I doubt Okehampton would be any different.

Without making a loss in comparison to what their franchise agreement says their franchise should cost.

 

[deltic08]

So your basically saying TPE/EC might just stick with buses, perhaps the TOC's might just do the same with Okehampton.

The closures I have mentioned have been emergency closures such as flooding, headspans down across all tracks and fatalities. There has been no notice to arrange coaches and certainly not sufficient coaches. I have seen all platforms occupied at York with northbound trains and backed up on Doncaster and Leeds lines unable to platform with no sign of bustitution.

With Ripon reinstated at least the delay would be kept to a minimum and no platform blocking.

There can be no bustitution for freight. It has to stop for the duration.

 

[The Ham]

On the matter of Okehampton not having a train service yet (i.e. a shuttle from there to Exeter, not discussing the new/reopened line), isn't that primarily down to the lack of DMU's available rather than anything else?

Obviously there would be costs associated with running the service, but it could increase rail travel from Crediton quite significantly if the trains were at better times in the morning.

 

[Class37.4]

I never said that it would be just like it was in the old days. In fact there's several times where I've said that a reopening wouldn't have been sensible because capacity of the existing lines wouldn't allow it. However there are some cases when reopenings make sense (such as East West, or should we build that as a HS line too?).

I would argue that building the line to bridge the gap to allow through services via Okehampton would make the business case for a HS line better as more people would be using trains to travel between Exeter and Plymouth, and so the economic benefit would be greater as it would benefit more people.

If you are looking for a high speed line going through the Devon countryside is probably one of the last places that will have one built given that it would only have 1 tph using it in each direction from London because of capacity constraints elsewhere.

I've highlighted this problem (and other problems) with a HS route and no one has responded.

Lets face it neither option will be built anytime soon so its a fairly pointless argument anyway, but the idea that reinstating Okehampton route will improve the case for HS line is stretching credibility, but a half hour reduction in journey time might substancially increase numbers. The HS route would become the main route to Plymouth so all services to Cornwall including XC services would be routed this way. I believe the post HST service to Plymouth will be more frequent than hourly, obviously you would still need to send some services via the old route to serve local stations as well as Paignton services but with many 802's being 2x5 there would be the option to split some services at Exeter with one set via the HS line and the other via the old route.

Your right i'm sure the economics compared to conventional HS route don't add up, but then it would being built for a specific issue, if you reopen Okehampton then part of the reason for justifying it goes out of the window, and no government in there right mind is going to spend the money on two routes around Dawlish, and if route is built one day I don't doubt it will be the Okehampton route as will be the cheapest option plus the pressure from the Okehampton gang, but that certainly doesn't mean it will be the best option.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

If you are looking for a high speed line going through the Devon countryside is probably one of the last places that will have one built given that it would only have 1 tph using it in each direction from London because of capacity constraints elsewhere.

I see no justification for a High Speed line but I do for a 100 mph route. It would not carry only trains to London. It would have trains via Bristol to/from South Wales, the Midlands and the North.

 

[deltic08]

What is the difference in mileage Exeter-Plymouth via Dawlish and via Okehampton?
Could via Oakhampton be made a 90mph railway? A 100mph railway is much more expensive to build and maintain.

 

[Bald Rick]

What is the difference in mileage Exeter-Plymouth via Dawlish and via Okehampton?
Could via Oakhampton be made a 90mph railway? A 100mph railway is much more expensive to build and maintain.

Eh? The difference in costs for construction and maintenance of a new 90mph railway and a 100mph railway is essentially nil.

The difference in costs for construction and maintenance for a new 90mph railway and a new 200mph railway is also smaller than you might think, the key difference being that the alignment of the latter has to be straighter, which means it can’t be diverted around potentially difficult obstacles. But it is shorter, which offsets some of the extra expense. The specification of construction for all the key engineering components is more or less the same.

 

[tbtc]

No point building a new line to 100mph standard, could be argued you should build it to HS2 standards even the trains don't run at that speed initially, and certainly engineering it to the max capability of IEP would seem to make sense to me even if they only ran initially at 125mph along with Voyagers etc.

The problem with whole idea of a diversionary route is that its too wrapped with the obsession of the fanatics trying to restore a rail service to North Devon, when your looking at whole concept of a Dawlish diversion, you should be looking at what's best way to achieve that and whether you should also look at as an opportunity to improve journey time, not on trying to restore a train service to Okehampton etc. and looking at building it between Taunton and Plymouth might well have some merit.

Of course at present there isn't much likelihood of any of it happening so its a pointless argument anyway.

On a wider note with regard to railway re-openings, I think there is too much obsession with trying to reopen old routes, yes it may the most cost effective option in some cases but it shouldn't blind the fact that a new route or partial new route may be much more fit for purpose in the 21st century.

^^ I agree with all of this ^^

Where does this idea that Exeter – Okehampton – Tavistock – Plymouth can be done so quickly come from anyway?

Look at Exeter – Okehampton. That’s around an hour.

Gunnislake to Plymouth is forty five minutes (Gunnislake being about as far up the branch as a station at Tavistock would be, so assume the same length of time for Tavistock - Plymouth).

Minimum fifteen miles from Okehampton to Tavistock? Given the nature of rural lines, it’s not going to be High Speed, but let’s be generous and assume just twenty minutes?

So that’s two hours from Exeter to Plymouth, assuming that you can get a decent path on the single track sections and don’t cause conflicts.

(this is where the confusion about double tracking begins, as the argument tends to be in favour of making the reinstatement sound as cheap as possible – e.g. using the partly single track Borders Line as a template – but then also capable of accommodating a couple of trains per hour in the event of disruption – and providing a sufficiently high speed journey on them to make the diversion worthwhile… or should the price for construction also include the cost of bringing the Bere Alston and Barnstaple lines up to 100mph-capable double track?)

Really, it’s all just a means to an end. People will use any old argument in favour of reinstating a quaint line through a rural part of the countryside.

By all means build a short spur from Bere Alston to Tavistock – it’s a town that can sustain a frequent commercial bus service to Plymouth so should be able to justify a train service.

By all means run a handful of regular week day services from Okehampton into Exeter – the infrastructure is there already.

But let’s not pretend that there’s much demand to get from Tavistock to Exeter or from Okehampton to Plymouth. I’m not aware of any commercial bus services(?), and if there’s no demand to justify Stagecoach running a minibus (with one member of staff on board) then I can’t see the demand for a train (that requires at least two members of staff, both paid more than a bus driver, plus signalling and other infrastructure costs).

Demand for a simple Tavistock spur should see that project happen in the medium term. If there are spare DMUs then maybe Okehampton will get a more meaningful service. But this conflation of the Dawlish problem and the obsession with re-opening a line through the middle of nowhere needs to stop – let the Tavistock scheme stand or fall on its own merits. Most of the Dawlish problems are down to the issue of electrical equipment on Voyager roofs, so could be resolved by stopping more XC services at Exeter (with GWR “Castles” running equivalent services west of Exeter). As long as there’s a half hourly service from Exeter to Plymouth, it doesn’t matter to most passengers whether the trains originated in Edinburgh or Bristol or just started at Exeter.

Let’s not pretend that TOCs would be happy to divert most services. Maybe a handful a day to get stock to/from Penzance but they’ll use Replacement Buses most of the time. I’d use the Brighton Main Line as an example – when it was closed a few months ago, the TOC could have run diverted services with the same EMUs but decided it was too much hassle and rang up some coach operators instead. XC already do a daft amount of diversionary training (inconveniencing regular passengers in the process by delaying their services to keep staff regularly trained) – doubling the Plymouth – Exeter journey on a regular basis to keep a box ticked on a staff training database isn’t going to encourage them.

Let’s not pretend that Waterloo services are ever going to come back (given the single track sections on the existing route east of Exeter, adding further single track route to the journey is going to make them even less reliable for the critical section east of Basingstoke – not worth it). SWT/SWR don’t seem bothered about running Waterloo services up the existing line to Barnstaple as it is – I know some people get misty eyed about the idea of “competition” that existed around a hundred years ago but it’d be a complete waste of scarce resources. Just put the words “Atlantic Coast Express” on the timetable to give the nostalgics something to froth about, rather than spending hundreds of millions of pounds to pander to them.

Let’s not pretend that this is a project of such vital national significance that it should be done immediately without worrying about rail budgets – just because HS2 will cost a lot of money to link the four largest conurbations in the country doesn’t mean that your pet project in the countryside is free/cheap. This argument that “it’d only cost every UK tax payer tuppence ha’penny” (from the kind of people who argue that a national project like HS2 is bad because it won’t directly benefit their local line, yet the whole UK should be happy to pay for a new line far from our biggest cities)…

Let’s not pretend that an Okehampton route would stop the large numbers of passengers along the coast (Torbay etc) from being cut off. Or do they not matter (since there’s not a chance to re-open an old line, we don’t care about them)?

There is no realistic diversion route for York-Northallerton when total closure happens 7 times a year on average.

Reinstating Harrogate/Starbeck-Ripon-Northallerton would solve this problem at a stroke and is a very valid reason to reinstate but not strong enough in the business case as East Coast and TPE refused to confirm if they would use it in an emergency.

Reinstating Okehampton should be a no brainer as it would have to be used for diversions for resilience.

There are another dozen valid reasons to reinstate the Ripon line.

Fair enough if you want a single track “one train in steam” siding from Harrogate to Ripon – that could be built reasonably cheaply – there’s a good bus service between the places so that suggests that rail ought to do fairly well. A modest scheme would sound reasonable.

But schemes like this end up with people wanting to add all sorts of bells and whistles – like the idea of Leeds – Ripon – Newcastle being an alternative to running via York.

You say that the ECML is closed seven times a year on average (between York and Northallerton?). For how long? Whole weekends? Planned disruption? Or just a few hours at a time, in which case it'd be very complicated to start diverting London - Edinburgh trains through Ripon (however much you might want to see that out of your window). Think of the logistics of squeezing everything through Leeds.

It's not just Okehampton though. It's also Tavistock as well as Crediton and wider areas of North Cornwall

How would a line from Okehampton to Tavistock serve North Cornwall, Rob?

(given that part of the well-worn argument against Beeching is that he didn’t understand that people don’t like “railheading” and wouldn’t be prepared to drive to a nearby station when their branchline was closed down… yet now a station in Okehampton can serve a huge rural area?)

 

[AndrewE]

Eh? The difference in costs for construction and maintenance of a new 90mph railway and a 100mph railway is essentially nil.

Aren't there a few step-changes in inspection frequency and detail as speeds increase?

 

[yorksrob]

^^ I agree with all of this ^^

Where does this idea that Exeter – Okehampton – Tavistock – Plymouth can be done so quickly come from anyway?

Look at Exeter – Okehampton. That’s around an hour.

Gunnislake to Plymouth is forty five minutes (Gunnislake being about as far up the branch as a station at Tavistock would be, so assume the same length of time for Tavistock - Plymouth).

Minimum fifteen miles from Okehampton to Tavistock? Given the nature of rural lines, it’s not going to be High Speed, but let’s be generous and assume just twenty minutes?

So that’s two hours from Exeter to Plymouth, assuming that you can get a decent path on the single track sections and don’t cause conflicts.

(this is where the confusion about double tracking begins, as the argument tends to be in favour of making the reinstatement sound as cheap as possible – e.g. using the partly single track Borders Line as a template – but then also capable of accommodating a couple of trains per hour in the event of disruption – and providing a sufficiently high speed journey on them to make the diversion worthwhile… or should the price for construction also include the cost of bringing the Bere Alston and Barnstaple lines up to 100mph-capable double track?)

Really, it’s all just a means to an end. People will use any old argument in favour of reinstating a quaint line through a rural part of the countryside.

By all means build a short spur from Bere Alston to Tavistock – it’s a town that can sustain a frequent commercial bus service to Plymouth so should be able to justify a train service.

By all means run a handful of regular week day services from Okehampton into Exeter – the infrastructure is there already.

But let’s not pretend that there’s much demand to get from Tavistock to Exeter or from Okehampton to Plymouth. I’m not aware of any commercial bus services(?), and if there’s no demand to justify Stagecoach running a minibus (with one member of staff on board) then I can’t see the demand for a train (that requires at least two members of staff, both paid more than a bus driver, plus signalling and other infrastructure costs).

Demand for a simple Tavistock spur should see that project happen in the medium term. If there are spare DMUs then maybe Okehampton will get a more meaningful service. But this conflation of the Dawlish problem and the obsession with re-opening a line through the middle of nowhere needs to stop – let the Tavistock scheme stand or fall on its own merits. Most of the Dawlish problems are down to the issue of electrical equipment on Voyager roofs, so could be resolved by stopping more XC services at Exeter (with GWR “Castles” running equivalent services west of Exeter). As long as there’s a half hourly service from Exeter to Plymouth, it doesn’t matter to most passengers whether the trains originated in Edinburgh or Bristol or just started at Exeter.

Let’s not pretend that TOCs would be happy to divert most services. Maybe a handful a day to get stock to/from Penzance but they’ll use Replacement Buses most of the time. I’d use the Brighton Main Line as an example – when it was closed a few months ago, the TOC could have run diverted services with the same EMUs but decided it was too much hassle and rang up some coach operators instead. XC already do a daft amount of diversionary training (inconveniencing regular passengers in the process by delaying their services to keep staff regularly trained) – doubling the Plymouth – Exeter journey on a regular basis to keep a box ticked on a staff training database isn’t going to encourage them.

Let’s not pretend that Waterloo services are ever going to come back (given the single track sections on the existing route east of Exeter, adding further single track route to the journey is going to make them even less reliable for the critical section east of Basingstoke – not worth it). SWT/SWR don’t seem bothered about running Waterloo services up the existing line to Barnstaple as it is – I know some people get misty eyed about the idea of “competition” that existed around a hundred years ago but it’d be a complete waste of scarce resources. Just put the words “Atlantic Coast Express” on the timetable to give the nostalgics something to froth about, rather than spending hundreds of millions of pounds to pander to them.

Let’s not pretend that this is a project of such vital national significance that it should be done immediately without worrying about rail budgets – just because HS2 will cost a lot of money to link the four largest conurbations in the country doesn’t mean that your pet project in the countryside is free/cheap. This argument that “it’d only cost every UK tax payer tuppence ha’penny” (from the kind of people who argue that a national project like HS2 is bad because it won’t directly benefit their local line, yet the whole UK should be happy to pay for a new line far from our biggest cities)…

Let’s not pretend that an Okehampton route would stop the large numbers of passengers along the coast (Torbay etc) from being cut off. Or do they not matter (since there’s not a chance to re-open an old line, we don’t care about them)?



Fair enough if you want a single track “one train in steam” siding from Harrogate to Ripon – that could be built reasonably cheaply – there’s a good bus service between the places so that suggests that rail ought to do fairly well. A modest scheme would sound reasonable.

But schemes like this end up with people wanting to add all sorts of bells and whistles – like the idea of Leeds – Ripon – Newcastle being an alternative to running via York.

You say that the ECML is closed seven times a year on average (between York and Northallerton?). For how long? Whole weekends? Planned disruption? Or just a few hours at a time, in which case it'd be very complicated to start diverting London - Edinburgh trains through Ripon (however much you might want to see that out of your window). Think of the logistics of squeezing everything through Leeds.



How would a line from Okehampton to Tavistock serve North Cornwall, Rob?

(given that part of the well-worn argument against Beeching is that he didn’t understand that people don’t like “railheading” and wouldn’t be prepared to drive to a nearby station when their branchline was closed down… yet now a station in Okehampton can serve a huge rural area?)

As I said on another thread, railheading is a rather more modern phenomenon by which the more well off sections of society drive to a main line connection for a long distance service. This is likely to take place from North Cornwall at least to some extent.

Dr Beeching was expecting whole clientelles of established local stations to railhead, including the elderly going shopping, schoolchildren and families without cars, and this was before car ownership was as widespread as now.

We're talking about very different market segments.

 

[deltic08]

Fair enough if you want a single track “one train in steam” siding from Harrogate to Ripon – that could be built reasonably cheaply – there’s a good bus service between the places so that suggests that rail ought to do fairly well. A modest scheme would sound reasonable.

But schemes like this end up with people wanting to add all sorts of bells and whistles – like the idea of Leeds – Ripon – Newcastle being an alternative to running via York.

You say that the ECML is closed seven times a year on average (between York and Northallerton?). For how long? Whole weekends? Planned disruption? Or just a few hours at a time, in which case it'd be very complicated to start diverting London - Edinburgh trains through Ripon (however much you might want to see that out of your window). Think of the logistics of squeezing everything through Leeds.

I have the advantage over you in having copies of several studies on the Ripon line.

You are assuming that the pinch point is Leeds. The pinch point is York not Leeds. Reinstating via Wetherby, Harrogate and Ripon would take one passenger train an hour away from York. If that happens to be a TPE service to Newcastle and Edinburgh so be it. There are two of them an hour in the draft timetable.

Any freight for West Yorkshire can divert this way.

There was quite a difference in costings for a 100mph railway and 90mph so Ripon was planned to be the latter purely on price.

It is Transport for the North that is looking at developing rail in this corridor in its present study, not the reinstatement group. Harrogate is the biggest town in North Yorkshire and Ripon the only Cathedral city.

Emergency diversion via Ripon would be when north of York is closed not south of York as there are already diversionary routes for south ECML via Hertford, Cambridge, Lincoln or Leeds.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Where does this idea that Exeter – Okehampton – Tavistock – Plymouth can be done so quickly come from anyway?

Look at Exeter – Okehampton. That’s around an hour.

Gunnislake to Plymouth is forty five minutes (Gunnislake being about as far up the branch as a station at Tavistock would be, so assume the same length of time for Tavistock - Plymouth).

Minimum fifteen miles from Okehampton to Tavistock? Given the nature of rural lines, it’s not going to be High Speed, but let’s be generous and assume just twenty minutes?

So that’s two hours from Exeter to Plymouth, assuming that you can get a decent path on the single track sections and don’t cause conflicts.

Very pessimistic timings - the May 1965 timetable shows the fastest timing of 90 mins Plymouth - Exeter St Davids - a winter Sunday DMU calling at Bere Alston, Tavistock, Okehampton and Crediton. Plymouth to Tavistock was a competitive 33mins (bus currently 60+ mins) and Okehampton - St Davids 30 mins (bus 53 mins). Admittedly it was still double track with full signalling, but there were numerous TSRs due to reduced maintenance as a prelude to closure. The weekday Plymouth to Brighton loco-hauled service took 96mins (with an extended stop at Keyham for Navy personnel) but omitting Bere Alston and Crediton.

 

[Bald Rick]

Aren't there a few step-changes in inspection frequency and detail as speeds increase?

Track inspection frequencies are all the same once you get to 90mph or above.

 

[HowardGWR]

Very pessimistic timings - the May 1965 timetable shows the fastest timing of 90 mins Plymouth - Exeter St Davids - a winter Sunday DMU calling at Bere Alston, Tavistock, Okehampton and Crediton. Plymouth to Tavistock was a competitive 33mins (bus currently 60+ mins) and Okehampton - St Davids 30 mins (bus 53 mins). Admittedly it was still double track with full signalling, but there were numerous TSRs due to reduced maintenance as a prelude to closure. The weekday Plymouth to Brighton loco-hauled service took 96mins (with an extended stop at Keyham for Navy personnel) but omitting Bere Alston and Crediton.

As contrast with what now on today's railway is achieved, I raise tbtc with the example of Exeter St Davids to Yeovil Junction (49 miles 44 chains) on a mainly single line with passing places and making 8 stops - in 63 minutes (5.10.am).
Here's RTT for an early train of the day.
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W10689/2018/11/16/advanced

Plenty of people are using this line, trains often packed, and the chance of closure is nil. If Plymouth to Tavistock is a goer and Okehampton to Exeter is a goer, then the bit in between the two towns is a no-brainer (only Tavistock station area requires a fair amount of demolition). Plymouth to Exeter via Okehampton will be quieter than the East Devon line (although plenty of new housing is planned at those two largest locations) but will 'do alright' and no mistake. IMO.

 

[Cowley]

Very pessimistic timings - the May 1965 timetable shows the fastest timing of 90 mins Plymouth - Exeter St Davids - a winter Sunday DMU calling at Bere Alston, Tavistock, Okehampton and Crediton. Plymouth to Tavistock was a competitive 33mins (bus currently 60+ mins) and Okehampton - St Davids 30 mins (bus 53 mins). Admittedly it was still double track with full signalling, but there were numerous TSRs due to reduced maintenance as a prelude to closure. The weekday Plymouth to Brighton loco-hauled service took 96mins (with an extended stop at Keyham for Navy personnel) but omitting Bere Alston and Crediton.

I agree, and taking the for/against arguments away for a minute it’s actually a well laid out route, with far more opportunity for future fast running than the current switchback Totnes to Plymouth one, much of which will always be slow.
I’d be interested to know what the fastest possible journey nowadays could be with fast running, limited Tavistock, Okehampton, Crediton stops and modern fast accelerating DMUs?

 

[Dr Hoo]

As I said on another thread, railheading is a rather more modern phenomenon by which the more well off sections of society drive to a main line connection for a long distance service. This is likely to take place from North Cornwall at least to some extent.

Dr Beeching was expecting whole clientelles of established local stations to railhead, including the elderly going shopping, schoolchildren and families without cars, and this was before car ownership was as widespread as now.

We're talking about very different market segments.

Although what happened 55 years ago isn’t particularly relevant to this thread people do bring up this claim that the Reshaping Report was heavily into ‘railheading’.
Can you point to where this is stated or advocated?

 

[The Ham]

Where does this idea that Exeter – Okehampton – Tavistock – Plymouth can be done so quickly come from anyway?

From the NR report which quotes 75 minutes for the stopping services and +4 minutes on the existing journey time (+14 for two reverses).

 

[RT4038]

^^ I agree with all of this ^^

Really, it’s all just a means to an end. People will use any old argument in favour of reinstating a quaint line through a rural part of the countryside.

Let’s not pretend that an Okehampton route would stop the large numbers of passengers along the coast (Torbay etc) from being cut off. Or do they not matter (since there’s not a chance to re-open an old line, we don’t care about them)?

You are also forgetting the view that any old line reconstruction would prove that the Beeching report was wrong, and if it was wrong there it was wrong on everything else, and therefore this would be justification that all the closed lines should be rebuilt.

A new alignment between Exeter and Plymouth, with a branch to Newton Abbot and Torbay, is the only sensible answer in the 21st Century. If the ex-SR route had never been built, a routeing via Okehampton and Tavistock would never be considered now.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Having a through line would be a lot more popular.
Yes it could be a real plus for North Cornwall - a huge Parkway station at Sourton Cross (A30) would be an easy drive, and get into the centre of Exeter etc without pumping fumes into the air in the heavy traffic.
Also a bus hub serving Bude, Launceston, Tintagel, Boscastle, etc, and maybe even an Express bus service linking Wadebridge, Padstow and Bodmin Parkway. (The North Cornwall line has almost virtually disappeared today)
An electrified 125mph line between Crediton and Bere Alston would make those 'baby' IEP's fly to /from Plymouth, say one fast service only stopping only at Crediton & Sourton Cross Parkway, with others stopping at all main stations. A service from Paignton to Exeter via Plymouth and Okehampton?
Whilst it is not a railway, less regulations, far cheaper and quicker to do the work!
Plymouth would get huge benefit, and bring many jobs to the area. Must be off putting for industry to site production, head offices with the lack of resilience atm.
Siting a major rail depot in Plymouth would lose several points too because of this.

Wow its almost 5 years, and very little progress has been made.
Not fair on property owners looking at the many diversions proposed.
I have no doubt that one day (30 - 50 years?) they will be building the tunnels, to create a faster dependable South of Dartmoor route.
Back to reality, in the late 70's it was on the cards/ talk to electrify the GWR line as far as Plymouth. Semaphore signalling to be replaced.
Then the HST's arrived.
Again electrification has been put back, and are the 800's now the answer?
Oh! the people, who want a quiet life are those who have retired to the area, or have holiday homes!

 

[Clayton]

Although what happened 55 years ago isn’t particularly relevant to this thread people do bring up this claim that the Reshaping Report was heavily into ‘railheading’.
Can you point to where this is stated or advocated?

Railheading makes sense now in a way it didn’t in the sixties. Most households have a car, but not every household member has one, and no one wants to drive into a city. Driving a few miles on quiet roads to catch a train or drop off someone is more appealing than fighting through urban traffic.

 

[The Ham]

You are also forgetting the view that any old line reconstruction would prove that the Beeching report was wrong, and if it was wrong there it was wrong on everything else, and therefore this would be justification that all the closed lines should be rebuilt.

A new alignment between Exeter and Plymouth, with a branch to Newton Abbot and Torbay, is the only sensible answer in the 21st Century. If the ex-SR route had never been built, a routeing via Okehampton and Tavistock would never be considered now.

There's a difference with saying that a town needs a railway now compared with saying that it didn't need a railway at the time of the Breeching Report. Especially given that the rail network is now carrying almost as many passengers as it ever has in the last 100 years.

There's also a big push to encourage people to not be so reliant on motor cars, as such making it easier to get to more places could be more benefital than getting to a few places a little faster (especially given that the main capacity constraints are elsewhere).

Conversely HS2 Vs Grand Central reopening is quite different as HS2 releases capacity for the more minor stations along the WCML and ECML Vs having to cut services to facilitate using the old route.

With regards to would it have the support of it wasn't an old line which had been closed, almost certainly not. However, does that mean that someone wouldn't have joined the dots of the largest settlements running around the northern and western sides of Dartmoor to look at an alternative route. As serving more locations with little or no time penalty would increase the business case.

You also have to bear in mind that there would be the branches, including the one to Barnstaple covering part of the route, to act as a pointer.

You also have to consider that the DAL options (maximum time saving of 7 minutes) has costs of upto £3bn and that's running a new fast line from Exeter to Newton Abbot (being the longest option looked at).

Now think how much further and therefore how much more it would cost to cut the journey time to achieve a 30 minutes journey time? £6bn? £9bn? More?

In which case the £1.2 bn for the enhanced via Okehampton route would look very good value for money. However, there's potential for that route to be descoped a little so that the express journey time was a bit slower over a few of the existing sections which could reduce costs a little from the circa £900 million for the basic route.

Now so you see why there's not much appetite from many on here for a high speed line, which at best (and that would mean almost no GWR 80x's or XC services along the existing route) would have something like 4tph running on it.

 

[yorksrob]

Although what happened 55 years ago isn’t particularly relevant to this thread people do bring up this claim that the Reshaping Report was heavily into ‘railheading’.
Can you point to where this is stated or advocated?

It might or might not be relevant, however it was tbtc who brought up closures fifty years ago in the context that I mentioned that some people from North Devon in this day and age were likely to make use of the mid-Devon line.

Take it up with him.

 

[RT4038]

There's a difference with saying that a town needs a railway now compared with saying that it didn't need a railway at the time of the Breeching Report. Especially given that the rail network is now carrying almost as many passengers as it ever has in the last 100 years.

There's also a big push to encourage people to not be so reliant on motor cars, as such making it easier to get to more places could be more benefital than getting to a few places a little faster (especially given that the main capacity constraints are elsewhere).

Conversely HS2 Vs Grand Central reopening is quite different as HS2 releases capacity for the more minor stations along the WCML and ECML Vs having to cut services to facilitate using the old route.

With regards to would it have the support of it wasn't an old line which had been closed, almost certainly not. However, does that mean that someone wouldn't have joined the dots of the largest settlements running around the northern and western sides of Dartmoor to look at an alternative route. As serving more locations with little or no time penalty would increase the business case.

You also have to bear in mind that there would be the branches, including the one to Barnstaple covering part of the route, to act as a pointer.

You also have to consider that the DAL options (maximum time saving of 7 minutes) has costs of upto £3bn and that's running a new fast line from Exeter to Newton Abbot (being the longest option looked at).

Now think how much further and therefore how much more it would cost to cut the journey time to achieve a 30 minutes journey time? £6bn? £9bn? More?

In which case the £1.2 bn for the enhanced via Okehampton route would look very good value for money. However, there's potential for that route to be descoped a little so that the express journey time was a bit slower over a few of the existing sections which could reduce costs a little from the circa £900 million for the basic route.

Now so you see why there's not much appetite from many on here for a high speed line, which at best (and that would mean almost no GWR 80x's or XC services along the existing route) would have something like 4tph running on it.

The point of building an alternative line is to avoid the seawall section at Dawlish. Both Torbay and Plymouth (with Exeter, the most populous parts of Devon) are affected by the Dawlish problem. Rebuilding a rural, circuitous old railway line via Okehampton will not help Torbay at all, and will be a backwater line of little use to Plymouth. The dots may join the largest settlements on the north and west of Dartmoor, but these settlements are small in the scheme of things. No-one would think of joining these dots with a railway if there hadn't been a dinosaur line in the past. The Barnstaple line certainly acts as a pointer - not exactly large passenger numbers!
There is not much appetite from many on here for a high speed line because they are nostalgic railway enthusiasts, joining lines on a map, rather than thinking about transport economics and where the majority of people really want to travel.

 

[deltic08]

If the route is 50 miles long, it should be possible to complete in less than even time with a 90mph linespeed. 3 minutes addition for each stop should give less than an hour tops.

Class 158/159s would be ideal on a single line from Coleford Jnc with dynamic loops at Okehampton, Tavistock for non stop diversions and then double track again along the river Plym. This would give sufficient capacity for some diversions if the Dawlish route had to close.

 

[Mugby]

No one answered the question about mileage comparisons.

Does anyone have a mileage for Exeter - Plymouth via Okehampton?

 

[Dr Hoo]

No one answered the question about mileage comparisons.

Does anyone have a mileage for Exeter - Plymouth via Okehampton?

Looks like 58.5 miles from St David's from old timetables. (I am aware that the alignment in Plymouth is slightly different these days.)

 

[Cliveblackpool]

If the route is 50 miles long, it should be possible to complete in less than even time with a 90mph linespeed. 3 minutes addition for each stop should give less than an hour tops.

Class 158/159s would be ideal on a single line from Coleford Jnc with dynamic loops at Okehampton, Tavistock for non stop diversions and then double track again along the river Plym. This would give sufficient capacity for some diversions if the Dawlish route had to close.

R. Plym - the old GWR route Lydford, Tavistock South, Tavistock Junction?

 

[Cowley]

Looks like 58.5 miles from St David's from old timetables. (I am aware that the alignment in Plymouth is slightly different these days.)

I think that’s about right. Around six miles longer but with quite a gentle alignment.