An alternative route between Plymouth and Exeter, via Okehampton, should be built

[43096]

When storm-proof Exeter to Newton Abbot line is built, any surviving parts of the Dawlish route could be taken over by preservationists.

Riiiiiight. So Network Rail abandons the sea wall stretch because it's falling into the sea, but somehow some preservationists can prevent that.

 

[HSTEd]

If you want an at all workable service via Tavistock for through journies you can't go via Bere Alston can you?

So that's a significant amount of track in of itself.

 

[30907]

Not sure what you mean by its heyday, but my 1955 timetable shows a rather larger difference. Four through trains drawn at random (I've excluded stoppers and the Cornish Riviera) averaged 23 minutes faster via Totnes (and that's after removing a generous 15 minutes from the ACE to allow for the shunting at Okehampton).

To be as fair as possible to the LSW, I would compare a train with minimal stops (ie the Brighton-Plymouth and vv) 1hr 33 up with 3 stops/ 1hr 41 down with 4 - say 1hr 25/1hr30 nonstop with the best GW time of 1hr 15 down nonstop (on a reduced load, having detached a Torbay portion).

But in any case, there will always be some penalty for running via the LSW, including reversal at ESD - whether it is 10, 20 or 30 minutes is marginal in the context of how many tph could use the diversion.

 

[43096]

If you want an at all workable service via Tavistock for through journies you can't go via Bere Alston can you?

So that's a significant amount of track in of itself.

And if you re-join the Great Western line at Tavistock Junction rather than going via Bere Alston then the line would have been as much use as a chocolate teapot this week...

It's all pie-in-the-sky stuff anyway: there's no business case for re-opening the line through from Exeter to Plymouth. Even if money could be find, it would be far better spent on something else, like electrifying the Great Western properly.

 

[JKF]

Autonomously or semi-autonomously driven lorries will solve the problem of bridge strikes and related closures long before a sleeper is laid between Okehampton and Tavistock.

 

[HSTEd]

To be as fair as possible to the LSW, I would compare a train with minimal stops (ie the Brighton-Plymouth and vv) 1hr 33 up with 3 stops/ 1hr 41 down with 4 - say 1hr 25/1hr30 nonstop with the best GW time of 1hr 15 down nonstop (on a reduced load, having detached a Torbay portion).

But in any case, there will always be some penalty for running via the LSW, including reversal at ESD - whether it is 10, 20 or 30 minutes is marginal in the context of how many tph could use the diversion.

Were these timings via Bere Alston or via the now defunct route to Tavistock from the east side of Plymouth?

Reopening that would dramatically increase the cost.

 

[Irascible]

Were these timings via Bere Alston or via the now defunct route to Tavistock from the east side of Plymouth?

Reopening that would dramatically increase the cost.

There were not -as far as I'm aware, and other than emergencies - any through services from Exeter via Okehampton and then down the GWR route from Tavistock. That definitely was a branch line & not a secondary main line like Tavistock-Bere Alston-Plymouth. I note from your previous post you say you can't have a through service from Tavistock via Bere Alston, but that's the *only* workable route. Bere Alston was the junction for the Callington branch ( now cut back to Gunnislake ), it's not somewhere that would need diverting off the old route.

As I've posted before it's because all the development in Plymouth has been alongside the A386 and A38 roads in the Roborough to Manadon corridor , think hospitals, retail parks, employment. The vast majority of people travelling from Tavistock want those areas. If they travelled by rail to Plymouth Station they'd then need a bus back towards Tavistock. If you want to go from Tavistock to Exeter you go directly via Road not 12 miles in the wrong direction.

Is any of the development in Plymouth anywhere near a rail corridor at all? breifly looking at the map suggests the only place is Plympton.

--

No, rail is not better than a bus when it's an endless money pit eating investment that could be much better allocated elsewhere in the region.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Reopening to Tavistock from Plymouth is a no-brainer, its horrendous by road. What possibly kills the idea is
a. signalling at Bere Alston
b. if it went ahead the argument for reopening to Okehampton would be stronger.
Look at the Waverley route. What has reopened has been successful and there are calls for the route to be reopened in its entirely much of which is through open country much like Dartmoor.
Looking at it as a line in its own right and not just as a diversion one can see advantages. New traffic flows to Plymouth and Exeter,expansion of Tavistock as a town,not just tourist traffic but new build as a commutor route to both cities. Let's look at the positives for the route itself.

 

[HSTEd]

Even if Tavistock is reopened its going to be a nightmare to operate - you end up with a train that can basically do nothing else but stop at Bere Alston and Tavistock, and must be in addition to the Gunnislake service.

It's seriously problematic, especially as it will mean significant work on the line between Bere Alston and Plymouth to fit the train in.

It would almost be better to do the cableway thing or even build a rather impressive viaduct to get the railway from Gunnislake to Tavistock! It would be less of a money pit in the long run, although getting it built might be a challenge!

There were not -as far as I'm aware, and other than emergencies - any through services from Exeter via Okehampton and then down the GWR route from Tavistock. That definitely was a branch line & not a secondary main line like Tavistock-Bere Alston-Plymouth. I note from your previous post you say you can't have a through service from Tavistock via Bere Alston, but that's the *only* workable route. Bere Alston was the junction for the Callington branch ( now cut back to Gunnislake ), it's not somewhere that would need diverting off the old route.

Well that's telling - from the Historical rail map it looks on paper like a far superior alignment!

 

[Irascible]

Well that's telling - from the Historical rail map it looks on paper like a far superior alignment!

Yeah, in some ways right now it'd be a far better route to be looking at. Unfortunately it's mostly not there unlike the other one, and the in-between stops are apparently not amazingly well sited. Plus it just parallels the road. Gunnislake and the rest of the LSWR route is only there because there's no decent roads in that area ( and if they're that bad that the train wasn't axed you know they're pretty bad! ). I guess you could possibly improve the road to Tavvy & close the Gunnislake-Bere Alston section if you reopen to Tavvy, but people might well just drive from Tavistock to Plymouth anyway in that case.

 

[30907]

Were these timings via Bere Alston or via the now defunct route to Tavistock from the east side of Plymouth?

The LSW used the GW route, but only until 1890. I don't have a timetable that old

A connection at Lydford was reinstated during WW2.

 

[irish_rail]

Although what Plymouth really could do with is a tram system.
Never going to happen I know, as there are many other UK cities similarly deserving but in this country we seem to have very few tram systems compared to other places.

 

[Annetts key]

Having read this topic through, I have to ask where people think the money for this suggested route would come from?

Network Rail is in the process of reducing costs for day to day operations and I don’t see any new expensive improvement schemes happening for many years. Any ideas of a resignalling scheme to replace the existing Exeter PSB signalling system is not going to happen anytime in the near future.

And it’s never been within Network Rail’s remit to fund the reopening of closed lines.

Plus, with councils and local authorities struggling, they are not going to fund any expensive new schemes, or reopening closed lines that require expensive works.

In terms of the signalling for the Bere Alston area if the line to Tavistock is reopened. That’s not too big of a challenge (apart from the cost).
Drop the single line train staff and install axle counter sections. Convert the existing ground frame points to a power operated point. Provide five or six new two aspect signals to control movements plus fixed distant boards.

 

[Irascible]

Network Rail is in the process of reducing costs for day to day operations and I don’t see any new expensive improvement schemes happening for many years. Any ideas of a resignalling scheme to replace the existing Exeter PSB signalling system is not going to happen anytime in the near future.

What state is it in? I remember someone saying there aren't any spare circuits to plug anything into so we can't do any track remodelling without removing something else, but is it starting to suffer from age/unreplaceable components? that is a rather bigger worry for Plymouth/Cornwall services than the odd bridge strike.

 

[tbtc]

Reopening to Tavistock from Plymouth is a no-brainer, its horrendous by road. What possibly kills the idea is
a. signalling at Bere Alston
b. if it went ahead the argument for reopening to Okehampton would be stronger

The authorities scared that, if they re-open to Tavistock then they'd have to re-open to Okehampton?

Look at the Waverley route. What has reopened has been successful and there are calls for the route to be reopened in its entirely much of which is through open country much like Dartmoor

"There are calls", but these are just calls by the kind of enthusiasts who "call" for each and every abandoned line through the middle of nowhere to be re-opened (plus some councillors/ MSP/MPs who seem duty bound to be seen to demand huge sums of public subsidy being spent in their neck of the woods) - I don't think that there are any serious "calls" for Tewedbank - Carlisle to be re-opened though

Maybe there'd be a case for a shortish extension to Hawick in the medium term (it's not top of my pecking list, but it's not a terrible idea), but the proposals for a further forty miles through pretty empty countryside to Carlisle seem fanciful

Looking at it as a line in its own right and not just as a diversion one can see advantages. New traffic flows to Plymouth and Exeter,expansion of Tavistock as a town,not just tourist traffic but new build as a commutor route to both cities. Let's look at the positives for the route itself.

A short branch from Tavistock - Bere Alston would do most of that though (but people in favour of the entire mega project are against just opening to Tavistock because they know that a fairly short and fairly cheap scheme would deliver most of the benefits that their horrendously expensive wishlist of demand would ultimately give us)

Having read this topic through, I have to ask where people think the money for this suggested route would come from?

A good question!

But such practicalities never seem to worry the people who keep bringing back these kind of suggestions - it was inevitable that there'd be someone arguing that we spend a billion pounds on a line from Okehampton to Tavistock within ten minutes of that HGV going under the bridge in Plymouth - just like the next time there's a cow on the line between Leeds and Manchester someone will point out that we could always divert services via Skipton/ Colne, if only that line were still open!

 

[Annetts key]

What state is it in? I remember someone saying there aren't any spare circuits to plug anything into so we can't do any track remodelling without removing something else, but is it starting to suffer from age/unreplaceable components? that is a rather bigger worry for Plymouth/Cornwall services than the odd bridge strike.

I think there is some confusion here. The Exeter system uses a ‘free wired interlocking’ system (of BR Western Region design). It does not have a fixed capacity as such (although parts of the sub-systems do have fixed capacities).

If a sub-system is at capacity (lineside cable, remote control system, whatever), then you either provide an additional system, or replace the existing system with a higher capacity system.

For remodelling a junction, then alterations to the existing system would obviously be required. Generally this is not normally a problem, as a limited amount of spare sub-system capacity should have been provided in cables, remote control systems. But that assumes that the space capacity has not been used for other uses.

The limiting factors are generally these: limited number of design staff who understand this system; commissioning and testing takes longer than more modern systems; physical control panel space/area.

Bristol, Reading, Plymouth, Newport, Gloucester are/were all earlier versions. And many of these have been altered in the past. Some quite extensively.

I don’t work on the Exeter area, so don’t know in detail the current state of the existing signaling system. But the main problem with older signalling systems, is the lineside cables degrading. But these will have to be replaced like for like anyway. The second problem, is the insulation on the internal wiring (in cubicles, equipment buildings) degrading. If an item is classed as bad, no new work is allowed until any degraded existing wiring is replaced or a suitable risk assessment has been carried out and signed off.

 

[Aictos]

And can I add Newcastle (plus Darlington, Durham, Sunderland, Middlesbrough) if there's a blockage between York and Northallerton?

Yes, you can physically travel to them if you fancy the trek via Carlisle but for all practical purposes . . .

You can however divert to Newcastle via Hartlepool and Sunderland between Northallerton and Newcastle though if the route via Durham is closed so I don't think you can use that as a option.

Why you would want to go via Carlisle when it be quicker to go via the Coast is beyond me....

 

[BayPaul]

But such practicalities never seem to worry the people who keep bringing back these kind of suggestions - it was inevitable that there'd be someone arguing that we spend a billion pounds on a line from Okehampton to Tavistock within ten minutes of that HGV going under the bridge in Plymouth - just like the next time there's a cow on the line between Leeds and Manchester someone will point out that we could always divert services

Also, I've noticed that the same people arguing that the line should be double track, 125mph throughout are the people arguing that the cost should be no more per mile than the borders railway... You can't have both (or either probably)

 

[Irascible]

I think there is some confusion here. The Exeter system uses a ‘free wired interlocking’ system (of BR Western Region design). It does not have a fixed capacity as such (although parts of the sub-systems do have fixed capacities).

If a sub-system is at capacity (lineside cable, remote control system, whatever), then you either provide an additional system, or replace the existing system with a higher capacity system.

For remodelling a junction, then alterations to the existing system would obviously be required. Generally this is not normally a problem, as a limited amount of spare sub-system capacity should have been provided in cables, remote control systems. But that assumes that the space capacity has not been used for other uses.

The limiting factors are generally these: limited number of design staff who understand this system; commissioning and testing takes longer than more modern systems; physical control panel space/area.

Bristol, Reading, Plymouth, Newport, Gloucester are/were all earlier versions. And many of these have been altered in the past. Some quite extensively.

I don’t work on the Exeter area, so don’t know in detail the current state of the existing signaling system. But the main problem with older signalling systems, is the lineside cables degrading. But these will have to be replaced like for like anyway. The second problem, is the insulation on the internal wiring (in cubicles, equipment buildings) degrading. If an item is classed as bad, no new work is allowed until any degraded existing wiring is replaced or a suitable risk assessment has been carried out and signed off.

I found ( one of ) the posts I was trying to remember - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...pton-exmouth-lines.211997/page-5#post-5074801 a pretty apt summary of the situation from MarkyT. I sort-of had it right ( I think! ), I was just not remembering all of it.

 

[Annetts key]

I found ( one of ) the posts I was trying to remember - https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...pton-exmouth-lines.211997/page-5#post-5074801 a pretty apt summary of the situation from MarkyT. I sort-of had it right ( I think! ), I was just not remembering all of it.

Thanks for that. Obviously MarkyT knows more about the situation there than I do.

Yeah, so

… the 'panel processor', an old processor-based system that provides the multiplexed control links and handles the controls and indication logic for the wider remote-controlled areas overseen by Exeter…

(link) is what I was meaning by a remote control system. Unfortunately in some cases the railway bought systems that quickly became obsolete with no support from the manufacturer. They should have replaced these, but it all costs money. So has to wait until a big scheme comes along with enough money. The other problem being that with these systems, a ‘like for like’ system may not be available, so lots of alterations are needed in order for a new system to be used.

 

[Ashley Hill]

The authorities scared that, if they re-open to Tavistock then they'd have to re-open to Okehampton?

Not have too,I said the case for reopening would be
stronger.

Maybe there'd be a case for a shortish extension to Hawick

Reading an old copy of RM gave a possible date of 2030.

 

[6Gman]

Maybe there'd be a case for a shortish extension to Hawick in the medium term (it's not top of my pecking list, but it's not a terrible idea), but the proposals for a further forty miles through pretty empty countryside to Carlisle seem fanciful

But, but . . . it would be a diversionary route if a lorry hit a bridge at Tweedmouth.

And there's the tourism potential of Riccarton Junction!

 

[HSTEd]

If we accept the need for a second route to Plymouth, why would we build one via okehampton when we could build a high speed line from Exeter to Plymouth that would revolutionise travel in the south west
The IEPs are supposed to be good for 140mph after all

 

[The Planner]

If we accept the need for a second route to Plymouth, why would we build one via okehampton when we could build a high speed line from Exeter to Plymouth that would revolutionise travel in the south west
The IEPs are supposed to be good for 140mph after all

Presumably that is rhetorical, as you well know that unless its a Beeching reversal no one is interested.

 

[Annetts key]

If we accept the need for a second route to Plymouth, why would we build one via okehampton when we could build a high speed line from Exeter to Plymouth that would revolutionise travel in the south west
The IEPs are supposed to be good for 140mph after all

So given that after the HS2 tunnelling work is done, there will be a TBM free (I presume), why not go direct from just outside Exeter (maybe using part of the Exeter City Basin Junction to Alphington Road branch, formerly the Teign Valley line) to just outside Plymouth (looks like there is room just to the north of the Plym Valley Railway) through and under Dartmoor?

 

[tbtc]

Also, I've noticed that the same people arguing that the line should be double track, 125mph throughout are the people arguing that the cost should be no more per mile than the borders railway... You can't have both (or either probably)

True - they also seem to want to argue with the professionals about how much the Borders line actually cost, denying just how expensive it was in the end!

But, but . . . it would be a diversionary route if a lorry hit a bridge at Tweedmouth.

And there's the tourism potential of Riccarton Junction!

How silly of me to forget!

It's like Buffer Stop Phobia - people who can't stand the idea of trains/lines ever actually terminating somewhere

If we accept the need for a second route to Plymouth, why would we build one via okehampton when we could build a high speed line from Exeter to Plymouth that would revolutionise travel in the south west
The IEPs are supposed to be good for 140mph after all

Slashing the Plymouth - Exeter journey time would be much more use week in week out than the "resilience" of an Okehampton route - how much faster do you think it'd be?

 

[irish_rail]

True - they also seem to want to argue with the professionals about how much the Borders line actually cost, denying just how expensive it was in the end!



How silly of me to forget!

It's like Buffer Stop Phobia - people who can't stand the idea of trains/lines ever actually terminating somewhere



Slashing the Plymouth - Exeter journey time would be much more use week in week out than the "resilience" of an Okehampton route - how much faster do you think it'd be?

Your last point is true. Its scandalous that most of Newton Abbot to Plymouth is 60mph tops. Plenty of track that would be good for at least 75mph and maybe 90mph in places.

 

[The Ham]

A reopened Okehampton route would provide an alternative for Plymouth and Cornwall, but not for south Devon which one of these days will be cut off when another massive storm eventually forces the abandonment of the Dawlish route. A inland route between Exeter and Newton Abbot will be needed, built to mainline standards.

The building of the route through Okehampton could actually make the business case for the DAL (Dawlish Avoiding Line) better by increasing capacity, and therefore demand, between Exeter and Plymouth.

If we accept the need for a second route to Plymouth, why would we build one via okehampton when we could build a high speed line from Exeter to Plymouth that would revolutionise travel in the south west
The IEPs are supposed to be good for 140mph after all

In part because there's no capacity for more services, unlike if Crossrail 2 is built and run services from Waterloo to Plymouth. Also if you think the business case for the route through Okehampton was bad the DAL is noticeably worse with little scope for improving it.

Before I am accused of saying that just because it happened in the past, there's a lot of population of the SWML area who currently have to head North or even North East before heading West. By being able to avoid needing to travel via Reading (on a 1tph service) chances are the ability to leave later/arrive earlier could still be done.

No whilst it's unlikely to significantly reduce demand through Reading it may be enough to allow some additional capacity.

Add to that the potential for people opting for an easier journey (for instance Southampton to Salisbury and then Salisbury to Plymouth vs Southampton to Reading using XC and then Reading to Plymouth, potentially having to stand from Reading to Exeter at busy times) then it's for the potential to generate a fair amount of extra income. Certainly more than the DAL would, even though (even allowing for redoubling of the WofE line) the DAL would cost more.

Then there's the running costs, if you're running services on each branch (Okehampton and Tavistock) then the extra trains/staff to run them as a through services would incur almost no extra costs but they would generate some extra income as more than zero people would use it if it existed.

Other than Okehampton and Tavistock, assuming that you've got a fairly reliable service for most of the time along the existing route where else is there of note worth serving by rail between Exeter and Plymouth?

As to we could just run buses, we could, however with a rail alternative those who still needed to use the buses would be better off (for instance shorter wait times for buses), as a bus/coach can generally carry 60 people, even a 30% loaded 9 coach 80x would still need at least 3 coaches, if you can divert 70% of them by train them you only need one coach, so it can be sat waiting, load up and go fairly quickly.

Yes it's £1bn however that's not all that much in the greater scheme of things and it wouldn't require much (if anything) in ongoing support beyond what is already being spent anyway (unlike a lot of other reopenings into rural areas).

 

[HSTEd]

Slashing the Plymouth - Exeter journey time would be much more use week in week out than the "resilience" of an Okehampton route - how much faster do you think it'd be?

Route I put in is heading north out of Exeter St Davids and then swinging around, you are looking at about 62km depending on your plymouth approach.

At 230km/h non-stop, based on the example of 395s on HS1 you are looking at 21 minutes or something of that order.

With higher speeds somewhat faster, somewhat slower if you had stops - but based on the Kyushu Shinkansen even two intermediate stops would leave us at half an hour with a 260km/h top speed.

Compared with about an hour today.

 

[Bald Rick]

as you well know that unless its a Beeching reversal no one is interested.

Not many people are interested in Beeching reversal either!

The building of the route through Okehampton could actually make the business case for the DAL (Dawlish Avoiding Line) better by increasing capacity, and therefore demand, between Exeter and Plymouth.

That’s a cracker! You should do railway stand up comedy!