• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
Although I wouldn't expect de-energized wire to hang around long.....
Good point. I suppose you could connect up a small temporary feed to provide sufficient tension to seriously deter theft, while not being butch enough to actually supply traction power. That could also help detect faults from any damage before proper switch on. An all new line is also likely to have better fencing and security monitoring.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Clayton

On Moderation
Joined
15 Apr 2018
Messages
259
It's a shame he hasn't voiced support for the Okehampton route.

The development bank is a good idea - one which the coalition talked about, but which came to nothing.
Hasn’t he got other things to be pronouncing on - like Brexit?
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Hasn’t he got other things to be pronouncing on - like Brexit?

One would hope that all parliamentary business doesn't cease just because of Brexit.

I hope that he hasn't been listening too much to his South Devon colleagues, who've been attempting to sabbotage the Okehampton route since the proposal was first mooted in 2014.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
One would hope that all parliamentary business doesn't cease just because of Brexit.

All but the most important parliamentary business has indeed been in abeyance for some time because of Brexit, particularly over the last 3 months. It’s not just Parliament either, some pretty big Government decisions on all sort of issues have been delayed.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
All but the most important parliamentary business has indeed been in abeyance for some time because of Brexit, particularly over the last 3 months. It’s not just Parliament either, some pretty big Government decisions on all sort of issues have been delayed.

In which case, we should probably be quite grateful that Mr Corbyn has found time to make a policy statement on rail in Devon - albeit perhaps not quite the correct one.

Anyhow, I didn't intervene in this thread to have a discussion about Brexit in the first place.
 

Flinn Reed

Member
Joined
8 Dec 2017
Messages
192
An alternative to the Okehampton/Tavistock route could be to re-open the Teign Valley Line.

This is a much shorter diversion, and intercity trains via Plymouth would still serve Exeter St David's, Newton Abbot and Totnes. An intermediate station at Chudleigh could be served.

Local trains could continue via Dawlish/Teignmouth with some improved sea defences.
 

Ash Bridge

Established Member
Joined
17 Mar 2014
Messages
4,043
Location
Stockport
An alternative to the Okehampton/Tavistock route could be to re-open the Teign Valley Line.

This is a much shorter diversion, and intercity trains via Plymouth would still serve Exeter St David's, Newton Abbot and Totnes. An intermediate station at Chudleigh could be served.

Local trains could continue via Dawlish/Teignmouth with some improved sea defences.

If you venture back to posting #857 onwards if may explain why the Teign Valley route isn't considered such a good option with numerous reasons stated.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
An alternative to the Okehampton/Tavistock route could be to re-open the Teign Valley Line
Maybe a similar route via Chudleigh and a long tunnel under Haldon, but not the original alignment, which was single track, lengthy, tortuous and prone to flooding. Much of the route was obliterated by the A38, and apparently part of a tunnel en route has collapsed.
 

duffield

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2013
Messages
1,307
Location
East Midlands
Good point. I suppose you could connect up a small temporary feed to provide sufficient tension to seriously deter theft, while not being butch enough to actually supply traction power. That could also help detect faults from any damage before proper switch on. An all new line is also likely to have better fencing and security monitoring.

Surely if you're not going to energise for actual use immediately then you would just erect the portals/masts etc. and wire them when required? My understanding is that actually stringing the wires could be done quite quickly and non-disruptively during overnight possessions, it's things like the mast bases that are problematic (ground conditions, cables in the way etc.)? (Please correct me if this is wrong).
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
Announced today the the local authority have approved NR’s plans to alter the sea wall at Dawlish:
Major £30m plans for a new sea wall at Dawlish to protect the railway for the next 100 years have been approved – and work could even begin next month.

Network Rail’s long awaited plans to improve the sea wall, which will improve the long-term resilience of the railway linking Devon and Cornwall to the rest of the UK, were unanimously approved by Teignbridge District Council’s planning committee on Tuesday.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/dawlish-sea-wall-plans-protect-2766781

Seems to have been widely predicted for today...
 

rdlover777

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2014
Messages
450
Location
Kent
Sorry if this has also ready been posted, couldn't find an existing thread before posting this :/
The major plans that will see a section of the Dawlish rail line moved out to sea will be revealed next week. Network Rail will unveil their proposals for the protection of the 1.8km stretch of railway between Parsons Tunnel, near Holcombe, and Teignmouth.

The scheme aims to ensure that the rail line is better protected from cliff falls, land slips and damage caused by the sea during extreme weather. It will include moving the railway away from the sections of cliff that pose the greatest hazard and out towards the sea.

To protect the realigned railway, a rock revetment or enhanced sea wall will be built to absorb the energy of the waves and allow for the railway to be relocated away from the cliffs.
Rockfell Shelters could also be built over the top of the railway line while buttresses - sloping rock structures to stabilise the cliffs and protect the railway – will be built.

Full Article
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
Do we have a picture of the new proposed alignment?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
Do we have a picture of the new proposed alignment?
I don’t remember one, just text descriptions. I expect they’ll go online next week, they did similar with the Dawlish section, there was a few days advance notice before drawings appeared.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Well, it says a lot about this country.

Perhaps the best thing would be to employ some volunteers currently in charge of preserved railway projects and pay them to reopen it, ostensibly as a preserved railway.

Then buy it up.

Seriously, unless the railway gets control of its costs, it will be finished.

There needs to be serious consideration as to why, when the Council has already bought up the track bed, it is apparently so much cheaper to lay a busway and a cycle track along it, than a railway.

  • Who has come up with these costings.
  • What are their assumptions.
  • What do they include
  • What are their vested interests.
  • Can anyone else quote a figure
  • What are the sticking points causing this disparity of cost, and can they be removed through legislation.

Such costings need to be disected under greater public scrutiny and not taken at face value.
 
Last edited:

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
So it doesn’t actually make sense for its original purpose, even before trying to extend it as an avoiding line. Not at all surprising really.

It does make sense, but for some reason it costs vastly less to lay a busway and cycle path along the route than a single track railway.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070

BigCj34

Member
Joined
5 Apr 2016
Messages
761
Would having regular passenger services to Okehampton be a suitable pilot to gauge whether an actual extension to Bere Alston would see suitable patronage?
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,283
Would having regular passenger services to Okehampton be a suitable pilot to gauge whether an actual extension to Bere Alston would see suitable patronage?

If GWR were to sub lease a class 159 from SWR then I reckon that they could run an hourly service without actually needing to have any extra units.

First thing a train which isn't due to enter service until later in the day leaves Exeter bound for Okehampton, undertake the return joinery and joins a Waterloo service an hour before it's normal diagram. Then repeat an hour later for a second unit which is normally diagrammed to enter service on the next Waterloo departure. By the time of the next Waterloo departure the first unit has returned from Okehampton.

As an example (during the day as it's easier to show) all times are approximate:
11:20 departure from Waterloo
14:43 arrival to Exeter (due to depart 15:25, now covered by the unit from the 13:43 arrival to Exeter)
15:32 arrival at Okehampton
15:40 depart Okehampton
16:25 arrival Exeter (now covering for the unit which headed to Okehampton at 15:43)
19:49 arrive at Waterloo

As such there's no need for any extra units is just extra milage and staff costs.

If there's disruption delaying the WofE services then the Okehampton service is cut back to Exeter.

Crediton would see an Exeter bound service at xx:15 and xx:37 (22/38 split) and a service from Exeter at xx:27 and xx:53 (26/34 split), of the was a 5 minute turn around at Okehampton (xx37 departure) with a 3 minute stop at Exeter before heading to Waterloo Crediton would have Exeter bound services at xx:12 and xx:37 (25/35 split) which would give it a more even split of services during the day.

There's other advantages, such Okehampton being connected with Exeter Central without needing another path through St Davids. Also by needing to start a unit before it's needed it would likely see a morning peak service from Crediton which is more useful than the current service.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
Tavistock to Bere Alston section looks doubtful. £70 million seems crazy. I dont think we will ever see Tavistock reconnected...

http://www.okehampton-today.co.uk/article.cfm?id=436226&headline=Cost of bringing railway back to Tavistock now in region of £70-million&sectionIs=news&searchyear=2019

It would be more cost effective to just properly support the relevant bus services. Nobody should be throwing away £70m (or anything like that) on a rail scheme with relatively limited potential.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
It would be more cost effective to just properly support the relevant bus services. Nobody should be throwing away £70m (or anything like that) on a rail scheme with relatively limited potential.
'Properly supporting' doesn't get said bus service through traffic congestion that extends journey time at busy periods. People who have the choice will continue to prefer sitting stationary in their own car in traffic, unless some serious measures are taken to improve matters on the bus. My proposal would be to improve access roads and car parking provision at Bere Alston and cut the existing rail service back to there, then run this pod shuttle system between Tavistock and Gunnislake as a feeder in parallel with a cycle and foot path. A single rail unit should then be able to maintain an hourly clockface service all day on the remaining branch and a handful of small bus sized pods could run continually to connect. A rubber tyred vehicle could also get further into central Tavistock, making the service more useful to more people.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,027
Location
SE London
If GWR were to sub lease a class 159 from SWR then I reckon that they could run an hourly service without actually needing to have any extra units.

First thing a train which isn't due to enter service until later in the day leaves Exeter bound for Okehampton, undertake the return joinery and joins a Waterloo service an hour before it's normal diagram. Then repeat an hour later for a second unit which is normally diagrammed to enter service on the next Waterloo departure. By the time of the next Waterloo departure the first unit has returned from Okehampton.

I'm not sure I understand this. Do SWR have a spare class 159 available for lease? I'd be pretty surprised if they did and weren't using all the ones they have.

Or are you saying that you could extend the SWR service from Exeter to Okehampton within the time that the units are waiting at Exeter to return to London? (Which would also surprise me).
 

daodao

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2016
Messages
2,908
Location
Dunham/Bowdon
'Properly supporting' doesn't get said bus service through traffic congestion that extends journey time at busy periods. People who have the choice will continue to prefer sitting stationary in their own car in traffic, unless some serious measures are taken to improve matters on the bus. My proposal would be to improve access roads and car parking provision at Bere Alston and cut the existing rail service back to there, then run this pod shuttle system between Tavistock and Gunnislake as a feeder in parallel with a cycle and foot path. A single rail unit should then be able to maintain an hourly clockface service all day on the remaining branch and a handful of small bus sized pods could run continually to connect. A rubber tyred vehicle could also get further into central Tavistock, making the service more useful to more people.

Bere Alston is a minor and remote village with poor access by road. It is not suitable for a park and ride facility.

I'm not sure I understand this. Do SWR have a spare class 159 available for lease? I'd be pretty surprised if they did and weren't using all the ones they have.

Or are you saying that you could extend the SWR service from Exeter to Okehampton within the time that the units are waiting at Exeter to return to London? (Which would also surprise me).

Okehampton is a minor town (population approximately 6000) and doesn't justify by itself a through hourly service to Waterloo by a 3-6 carriage interurban train such as a class 159. There would need to be a long layover to ensure punctuality and facilities to "refresh" the carriages for another journey, that are only found at major stations. Okehampton can at most justify a 2-hourly 1-2 coach sprinter service (class 150/3) to Exeter, similar to that provided on summer Sundays. Most long-distance passengers to destinations formerly served by LSWR's "withered arm", e.g Bude, are more likely to travel by bus direct to Exeter St David's, to pick up express trains (GW/XC) running via Taunton.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
I'm not sure I understand this. Do SWR have a spare class 159 available for lease? I'd be pretty surprised if they did and weren't using all the ones they have.

Or are you saying that you could extend the SWR service from Exeter to Okehampton within the time that the units are waiting at Exeter to return to London? (Which would also surprise me).
Well they do have a 158 that should be with GWR on daily hire now, but it came back early last December because GWR apparently no longer needed it. The franchise agreement had it with GWR until Dec 2020.

But I don’t see why you’d need to loan anything to GWR if the proposed service was intended to be an end on connection to a Waterloo service.

I also don’t see how an initial pilot extension to Okehampton would have much bearing on the need for a reopening between Bere Alston and Tavistock, which was the question put by BigCj34 last night...
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
Bere Alston is a minor and remote village with poor access by road. It is not suitable for a park and ride facility.
Which is why I suggested some associated road improvements, the active travel and pod shuttle measures in combination.
 

The Ham

Established Member
Joined
6 Jul 2012
Messages
10,283
I'm not sure I understand this. Do SWR have a spare class 159 available for lease? I'd be pretty surprised if they did and weren't using all the ones they have.

Or are you saying that you could extend the SWR service from Exeter to Okehampton within the time that the units are waiting at Exeter to return to London? (Which would also surprise me).

There's not really any spare units and the return trip would take 1:25 hours.

What I'm suggesting is that train A which is currently enters service at 08:25 does so at 07:43 to run a service to Okehampton, so that it's back in time to run the 09:25 service whilst the 08:25 service is run by a train which left at 06:43 which otherwise would have entered service at 07:25.

The 8:43 service from Waterloo then no longer needs to run the 9:25 service and so is free to run to Okehampton and back in time to run the 10:25 and so on through the day until the end of service, where the

As such, although there will be extra miles traveled for the units, there's no need for an extra unit.

Yes there would be extra costs (mostly staff costs and extra maintenance charges) but the actual lease of the units would be split. As such rather than a 2 coach train costing £250,000 it may well be that a 6 coach train on a 34/66 could cost GWR the same amount.

Although Okehampton may not have a large population (6,000), when added to the 7,600 of Crediton it could do rather well.

Part of the reason that Crediton has a low (~50,000) usage figure is down to the 08:05 or 09:47 arrival to Exeter St Davids of the morning peak hour services. Which is hardly useful for 9-5:30 job (although the evening is marginally better at 16:57 and 17:58 but still far from ideal given it's just 10 minutes on the train). Whilst a 08:25 arrival to and a 17:43 departure from Exeter St Davids would be significantly better for commuting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top