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

[Annetts key]

In Plymouth it's not really the location of the city centre station that's the issue in the context of a Tavistock re-opening it the fact that all the modern development has taken place alongside the main road to Tavistock and it stretches to the city limits at Roborough about 5 miles from the station.

But allowing new development without planning for possible future public transport is one of the reasons that we have such poor public transport in this country. Trying to insert a railway afterwards is not very practical, and if you do try it, not very popular and very expensive (compared to leaving a possible line of route that may, or may not be used for a public transport link at a later date).

And this is a problem all over the country.

 

[The Ham]

But allowing new development without planning for possible future public transport is one of the reasons that we have such poor public transport in this country. Trying to insert a railway afterwards is not very practical, and if you do try it, not very popular and very expensive (compared to leaving a possible line of route that may, or may not be used for a public transport link at a later date).

And this is a problem all over the country.

Very expensive indeed, the cost of farm land with no ability to be developed costs thousands of pounds per acre (typically sub £20,000) vs developable land which costs hundreds of thousands of pounds (over £1 million isn't impossible, but does depend on the area and what's permitted).

 

[HSTEd]

At the risk of upsetting people - how about a tramway to Tavistock?

You could use the road in the settlements and run beside it on the verge outside them.

 

[tbtc]

Most closed railway lines should not be re-opened. Many should not have been built in the first place. Questioning the merits of re-opening a short stretch of abandoned railway running through very sparsely populated countryside does not indicate negativity. It indicates common sense. It's noticeable that those advocating this re-opening use very shaky arguments: e.g. Okehampton, population 6000, is a "large town."

Those suggesting that a new high speed Dawlish avoiding line would be more beneficial to more people have not recommended closing any existing minor railway routes.

Agreed - I like the railway, I want the railway to do well, I can appreciate some of the proposals that get brought up (generally simple services from towns like Ashington/ Skelmersdale into the nearest big city)

However it'd only take one bad scheme to ruin the chances for all of the other proposals - if your billion pound project flops and requires lots of subsidy each year then the Treasury is going to be "twice shy" when it comes to other projects

The problem on here is that anyone who tries to draw some kind of line in the sand in terms of "quality control" of re-opening proposals gets a reaction along the lines of people suggesting that you "hate" railways, that you are some kind of "Beeching aficionado" etc - it's a shame that some people want to see things in such black./white terms I guess - they seem to think that anyone who falls short of the full (Glenfarg/ Hawick/ Woodhead/ Bakewell/ Okehampton/ Great Central etc) smorgasbord of re-openings is a traitor!

Ashington/ Blyth have several bus services into central Newcastle so that line ought to sustain a train service

I haven't seen a lot of negativity on this forum about re-opening the Newcastle-Ashington line to passengers.
Could this be because re-opening lines in the most (road) congested urban and suburban areas is an appropriate place to spend the available funds.

That's how I see it.

Some people can see a scheme like Newcastle - Ashington as a solution to a genuine problem (there are large numbers of people commuting from south east Northumberland into Newcastle, there's been a lot of new housing built around Ashington/ Blyth/ Cramlington, there are a lot of bus services - a train service could take a lot of vehicles off the road/ encourage people to move out of Newcastle for housing or giving Northumberland people access to the jobs of Tyneside)

Whereas there are other schemes where people come up with their preferred "solution" first and work backwards to try to justify it (which is why we see some people changing the "reasons" whilst still advocating the same justification)

So clearly the bus is doing what its designed to do, moving people short distances within urban areas. That sounds like a very long winded, congested journey for people wanting to get from Tavistock to further afield

How many of the "eleven thousand" people in Tavistock want to go further afield than Plymouth each day then?

Are there many people who travel from Tavistock to London/ Birmingham each day? Thousands? Hundreds? On a daily basis? Or is it more of a "might be useful a couple of times a year"?

(I'm sure it might be handy for people in Normanton wanting a holidays in the south west though)

 

[Ash Bridge]

How many of the "eleven thousand" people in Tavistock want to go further afield than Plymouth each day then?

Are there many people who travel from Tavistock to London/ Birmingham each day? Thousands? Hundreds? On a daily basis? Or is it more of a "might be useful a couple of times a year"?

(I'm sure it might be handy for people in Normanton wanting a holidays in the south west though)

I think you may have omitted at least some of the other 7,799999m tourist/holidaymakers who also visit Dartmoor annually of which Tavistock (and Okehampton) is one the main gateway towns to this national park?

 

[D6130]

(I'm sure it might be handy for people in Normanton wanting a holidays in the south west though)

Not to mention the hundreds of people from Tavistock wanting a holiday in Normanton!

 

[BayPaul]

I think you may have omitted at least some of the other 7,799999m tourist/holidaymakers who also visit Dartmoor annually of which Tavistock (and Okehampton) is one the main gateway towns to this national park?

It is, but Dartmoor really isn't very practical to visit by public transport, and a new railway around the edge wouldn't really make a difference to that. Those 8M visitors will still come by car.

 

[JKF]

It is, but Dartmoor really isn't very practical to visit by public transport, and a new railway around the edge wouldn't really make a difference to that. Those 8M visitors will still come by car.

Exacty - it’s not like the seaside where you’ll probably spend most of the week at the same resort, with Dartmoor you’ll want to go to somewhere different every day, and that most likely means driving there given the lack of other alternatives.

 

[yorksrob]

Ashington/ Blyth have several bus services into central Newcastle so that line ought to sustain a train service

And Tavistock has several bus services into Plymouth, so that ought to sustain a train service. Similarly, there is planned housing development in Plymouth, and there is road congestion between Tavistock and Plymouth, so by your arguments the line should also succeed. Indeed, the local council bought up the trackbed with a view to reinstatement, so they must have had confidence that such a service would be popular (although the inability of the industry to control reinstatement costs seems to have stalled this).

The problem is that some people on this forum have an agenda that if a reopening doesn't fit their view of what a reopening should be - usually an urban/suburban high intensity service, they will not countenance a heavy rail reopening under any circumstance. If they see some green fields along the route, the reopening is immediately dismissed, in spite of the fact that experience of the existing railway shows that rural lines linking towns, generate considerable passenger usage, boosting the local area. We know that the Windermere line, the Marshlink line, the Borders line all generate substantial passenger usage, in spite of being rural routes, that would never get past the prejudice of the anti-heavy rail contingent on here.

There is a refusal to look at real life examples in the network today, and instead to clutch at any argument that supports their prejudice.

 

[Bald Rick]

There is a refusal to look at real life examples in the network today, and instead to clutch at any argument that supports their prejudice.

Exactly.

 

[Killingworth]

Ashington and Blyth had several bus services into Newcastle in the 1960s when the rail link was withdrawn. They were more frequent and served more places than the railway. They were slower and less comfortable but well used. Since then there has been massive investment in new roads in that area and road connections are greatly improved. Frequent bus services are still well used.

The old rail service was infrequent and went into Manors, not Newcastle Central. In citing reopening of the line to Ashington we need to take care. Until it's tried in practice it could go either way, much depending on frequency of the service and commuting, shopping and leisure use post-Covid. This Dartmoor case is rather different in many respects.

 

[The Planner]

Exactly.

Post of the year so far.

 

[A0]

I think you may have omitted at least some of the other 7,799999m tourist/holidaymakers who also visit Dartmoor annually of which Tavistock (and Okehampton) is one the main gateway towns to this national park?

A National Park with relatively low visitor numbers though https://www.statista.com/statistics/613118/great-britain-national-park-by-number-of-visits-uk/

And before anyone says "it's because of the poor rail connections" - the Brecon Beacons isn't much better off in that respect yet manages to get about 50% more.

 

[yorksrob]

Post of the year so far.

No, this is the best post of the year so far....

 

[XAM2175]

There is a refusal to look at real life examples in the network today, and instead to clutch at any argument that supports their prejudice.

Out of curiosity, are there any reopening proposals that even you think are infeasible?

 

[yorksrob]

Out of curiosity, are there any reopening proposals that even you think are infeasible?

There are loads - I'll tend not to comment on ones I don't think are sensible/or don't know enough about to have an opinion.

 

[30907]

We know that the Windermere line, the Marshlink line, the Borders line all generate substantial passenger usage, in spite of being rural routes, that would never get past the prejudice of the anti-heavy rail contingent on here.

Windermere: the railway to the main town (apologies to Keswick) of one of the two busiest inland tourist areas of the country.
Marshlink: a through route between two well-populated areas and within easy reach of London.
Fairly obvious why those never closed.
Borders: a suburban route with a long rural extension - for whatever mix of reasons - to a railhead in a reasonably populous area

Tavistock-Bere Alston (which is the most realistic part of the line under discussion, and which I favour) is nothing like the first two, and not even very like the third (though it has the similar advantage of a pro-rail tier of government).

(I suppose if Marshlink had been closed, and local authorities were lobbying to reinstate the line from Ashford to Rye only, that would be similar in scope, though Rye is rather smaller than Tavistock. Or Swanage - but I'm not sure either analogy is close enough.)

 

[Starmill]

The problem is that some people on this forum have an agenda that if a reopening doesn't fit their view of what a reopening should be - usually an urban/suburban high intensity service, they will not countenance a heavy rail reopening under any circumstance.

That's because reopening rural routes which don't convey traffic to major cities is a poor use of rail capital spending. Such new routes simply aren't going to open. It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks that's simply the reality.

From my perspective I find it very frustrating how rail fails to serve some close-by major urban centres effectively at all, but that these generate no real attention. For example, there's no functional rail service connecting Milton Keynes with Luton, Coventry with Leicester, Hartlepool with Durham, Northampton with Kettering, Neath with Rhondda, Harlow with Chelmsford, Reading with Wycombe and Aylesbury with Oxford. But there's precious little attention on those and lots on Okehampton to Tavistock.

 

[yorksrob]

Windermere: the railway to the main town (apologies to Keswick) of one of the two busiest inland tourist areas of the country.
Marshlink: a through route between two well-populated areas and within easy reach of London.
Fairly obvious why those never closed.
Borders: a suburban route with a long rural extension - for whatever mix of reasons - to a railhead in a reasonably populous area

Tavistock-Bere Alston (which is the most realistic part of the line under discussion, and which I favour) is nothing like the first two, and not even very like the third (though it has the similar advantage of a pro-rail tier of government).

(I suppose if Marshlink had been closed, and local authorities were lobbying to reinstate the line from Ashford to Rye only, that would be similar in scope, though Rye is rather smaller than Tavistock. Or Swanage - but I'm not sure either analogy is close enough.)

Clearly no route is going to be identical to another, however I don't think its fair to say that Tavistock is nothing like the first two. Ultimately they are rural routes of the type continually dismissed by the usual suspects on this forum. Obviously two have the advantage of not having been shortsightedly closed in the first place, but when talking about the ability of rural routes linking smaller towns and tourist areas, they demonstrate the value that such routes can provide to their communities.

That's because reopening rural routes which don't convey traffic to major cities is a poor use of rail capital spending. Such new routes simply aren't going to open. It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks that's simply the reality.

Yes, there are far better things for the rail capital budget to be spent on than actually providing towns with a rail service, such as closing level crossngs to protect incompetent motorists from themselves, swapping one set of HST's with another a year before withdrawal, to tick boxes etc....

 

[Starmill]

Yes, there are far better things for the rail capital budget to be spent on than actually providing towns with a rail service, such as closing level crossngs to protect incompetent motorists from themselves, swapping one set of HST's

Only a handful of crossings are successfully being closed, but where they are it's protecting the railway from everything from delays to the safety of the people on the trains to expensive litigation. Sounds worth it to me. HST replacement isn't a capital expense so I don't really understand how that's relevant.

 

[XAM2175]

There are loads - I'll tend not to comment on ones I don't think are sensible/or don't know enough about to have an opinion.

Ah, but at least we can say that even the world's most enthusiastic reopener agrees that there's a limit.

... swapping one set of HST's with another a year before withdrawal, to tick boxes etc....

HST replacement isn't a capital expense so I don't really understand how that's relevant.

I would suggest that replacing stock in a way that improves accessibility is a good idea in principle and for the most part more than just "box ticking". The fact that the LNER/EMR arrangement to which you're referring was complicated by unforeseen issues with the replacement stock is a delivery problem and not a defect with the overall concept.

 

[A0]

Clearly no route is going to be identical to another, however I don't think its fair to say that Tavistock is nothing like the first two. Ultimately they are rural routes of the type continually dismissed by the usual suspects on this forum. Obviously two have the advantage of not having been shortsightedly closed in the first place, but when talking about the ability of rural routes linking smaller towns and tourist areas, they demonstrate the value that such routes can provide to their communities.

But it is different - quite different.

The Windermere line survived partly due to tourism - the whole Windermere / Bowness area is the main tourist destination for the Lakes and has been for many years - far more so than Keswick and partly by virtue of serving one of the largest places in the area - Kendal (current popn ~ 28k) compared with say Keswick (current popn ~5k) or the subject of this thread Tavistock (~11k). You simply can't argue Tavistock has even close to the same attraction and as I pointed out, the Dartmoor National Park has the *lowest* visitor numbers of all the national parks https://www.statista.com/statistics/613118/great-britain-national-park-by-number-of-visits-uk/ whereas the Lakes are second only to the South Downs.

Marshlink also had a freight requirement - Dungeness power station which helped it's cause, in the same way Sizewell helped the case for the Ipswich - Lowestoft line. There is precisely no freight demand between Tavistock and Plymouth. Had there not been that, I suspect Marshlink would have closed, in the same way that Tunbridge Wells - Eridge - East Grinstead closed

 

[Starmill]

Marshlink also had a freight requirement - Dungeness power station which helped it's cause, in the same way Sizewell helped the case for the Ipswich - Lowestoft line. There is precisely no freight demand between Tavistock and Plymouth. Had there not been that, I suspect Marshlink would have closed, in the same way that Tunbridge Wells - Eridge - East Grinstead closed

The modern success of the Marshlink line was also down to HS1 primarily, with the extra 'commuter' services to Ashford International for connecting services to London St Pancras making it ideal for journeys like Rye to London, where in the old days that would have been almost impossible.

 

[yorksrob]

Ah, but at least we can say that even the world's most enthusiastic reopener agrees that there's a limit.



I would suggest that replacing stock in a way that improves accessibility is a good idea in principle and for the most part more than just "box ticking". The fact that the LNER/EMR arrangement to which you're referring was complicated by unforeseen issues with the replacement stock is a delivery problem and not a defect with the overall concept.

I'm not sure that I am the worlds most enthusiastic reopener.

Out of everything that's been closed, there are only a specific list of routes I'd tend to support which are a tiny proportion of closures. The ones that I do support, tend to have local support for various reasons.

In terms of the HST replacement, I would suggest that it was a poor idea and a waste of money even before covid hit. The time to build in such improvements is when the full complement of replacement stock is available to provide replacement capacity.

 

[HSTEd]

Marshlink also had a freight requirement - Dungeness power station which helped it's cause, in the same way Sizewell helped the case for the Ipswich - Lowestoft line. There is precisely no freight demand between Tavistock and Plymouth. Had there not been that, I suspect Marshlink would have closed, in the same way that Tunbridge Wells - Eridge - East Grinstead closed

Well I could work up a proposal for a nuclear power station on the Roadford Lake or somewhere in North Devon!

Not sure people would like that though

 

[tbtc]

I think you may have omitted at least some of the other 7,799999m tourist/holidaymakers who also visit Dartmoor annually of which Tavistock (and Okehampton) is one the main gateway towns to this national park?

I was taking @yorksrob 's quote about the importance of the "people wanting to get from Tavistock to further afield" at face value, i.e. this time when he's suggesting the same thing he's promoting it in terms of the thousands of people living in Tavistock who travel further than Plymouth each day

(I'm sure he'll be back to promote exactly the same solution - but with a different "problem" before long though)

Not to mention the hundreds of people from Tavistock wanting a holiday in Normanton!

A crucial market - why isn't there a direct link already?

And Tavistock has several bus services into Plymouth, so that ought to sustain a train service

Yes - and I've repeatedly suggested that a simple Tavistock - Plymouth service would be worth considering - it's a link from a town of eleven thousand people to the nearest city on a corridor that can sustain a frequent commercial bus service - whilst the train won't serve the popular Hospital or penetrate Plymouth City Centre properly, it's worth investigating whether a railway can be re-opened for that kind of line

It wouldn't need to be anything fancy, a single track siding from Bere Alston, it doesn't need to be "high speed" - but then projects like Ebbw Vale and Alloa were pretty modest (simple short and "slow") and seem to have worked okay

However, your perennial problem is that you can never accept just a modest proposal and have to try to tie it into a much bigger scheme with bells and whistles (through large chunks of empty countryside, a double track line capable of sustaining a competitive Exeter - Plymouth journey time for all of the InterCity services)

If the Tweedbank line had been tied to the Hawick - Carlisle route it would never have got built - but re=opening obsessives never bother to learn the lessons from what works elsewhere, they are always trying to plan mega-schemes instead of focussing on a practical case that might stand a chance (e.g. I could see benefits in a simple short and slow single track line like Harrogate - Ripon but that always gets packaged up as a line to run InterCity services from Leeds - Northallerton - Newcastle faster than the current route via York... I could see the benefit in a simple short and slow single track line from Matlock to Buxton but that always gets packaged up as a London - Buxton - Manchester route...

...look at how the Levenmouth line will be re-opening - a simple short and slow route from Thornton junction - because providing a line into Leven/ Methil etc will provide practical benefits to a lot of people - but insisting that nothing should happen unless we re-open the whole route from Thornton Junction to Leuchars via Leven, St Andrews and lots of empty countryside in between would be doomed to failure.

You've said a few times that you wouldn't support (just) a Tavistock - Plymouth re-opening because it wouldn't deliver as many benefits as the entire-bells-and-whistles double tracked through route via Okehampton though

We know that the Windermere line, the Marshlink line, the Borders line all generate substantial passenger usage, in spite of being rural routes, that would never get past the prejudice of the anti-heavy rail contingent on here

I think you're fighting a Strawman here

Windermere does well as a popular tourist town where the station is pretty central as well as Kendall (and if you think the five thousand people in Okehampton make it "large" then Kendall is worth of city status)

Marshlink sees the shortest trains in the Southern/ South Eastern area - and only every hour - so not a resounding success

The Tweedbank line provided a link from the "stagnant" Borders area to the "overheating" city of Edinburgh (certainly, when the line was being built, Edinburgh was booming, the housing market pricing a lot of people out but not a lot of jobs in the much more affordable Galashiels area) - it also had a good bus service and provided stations in Midlothian which were prime commuter territory and sustained lots of commercial bus services into Edinburgh

So it's instructive to look at the different cases, rather than blindly supporting each and every case.

There is a refusal to look at real life examples in the network today, and instead to clutch at any argument that supports their prejudice.

Exactly.

Post of the year so far.

Might as well call off the competition, even though its only September - there's no topping that

From my perspective I find it very frustrating how rail fails to serve some close-by major urban centres effectively at all, but that these generate no real attention. For example, there's no functional rail service connecting Milton Keynes with Luton, Coventry with Leicester, Hartlepool with Durham, Northampton with Kettering, Neath with Rhondda, Harlow with Chelmsford, Reading with Wycombe and Aylesbury with Oxford. But there's precious little attention on those and lots on Okehampton to Tavistock.

Some excellent examples there

Sadly we'll be discussing Woodhead/ SELRAP/ Bakewell etc every few months whilst ignoring the corridors that don't fit neatly into the "Beeching" folder or aren't through several miles of national park

 

[yorksrob]

The modern success of the Marshlink line was also down to HS1 primarily, with the extra 'commuter' services to Ashford International for connecting services to London St Pancras making it ideal for journeys like Rye to London, where in the old days that would have been almost impossible.

That will have been a factor, however the combination of the introduction of the 171's (much as I love the thumpers) and the extension west of Hastings have done a great deal to increase ridership over the last twenty years.

That's because reopening rural routes which don't convey traffic to major cities is a poor use of rail capital spending. Such new routes simply aren't going to open. It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks that's simply the reality.

From my perspective I find it very frustrating how rail fails to serve some close-by major urban centres effectively at all, but that these generate no real attention. For example, there's no functional rail service connecting Milton Keynes with Luton, Coventry with Leicester, Hartlepool with Durham, Northampton with Kettering, Neath with Rhondda, Harlow with Chelmsford, Reading with Wycombe and Aylesbury with Oxford. But there's precious little attention on those and lots on Okehampton to Tavistock.

I can't speak for anyone else, however I don't personally have much involvement in those areas of the country, other than travelling through. To be honest, where I have needed to get to these places by train, I've been able to, so it hasn't really affected me.

The difference with Tavistock and Okehampton is that there is currently no option to get to either by train (although one will be solved shortly).

 

[BayPaul]

The difference with Tavistock and Okehampton is that there is currently no option to get to either by train (although one will be solved shortly).

They are hardly two of the largest towns in Southern England that it is impossible to reach by train though. It does also feel like your argument is that if it is possible to get to somewhere by train then all is well, no matter how awkward or pointless that connection is. I have little doubt that there are more journeys from Luton to Milton Keynes than from Tavistock to Plymouth (and certainly Tavistock to Okehampton), so surely it would be better to serve that market by rail, even though those places are already connected to London, rather than a smaller market?

 

[Starmill]

The difference with Tavistock and Okehampton is that there is currently no option to get to either by train (although one will be solved shortly).

But it has already been said that would be feasible to connect Tavistock with Plymouth by rail, although it would be expensive, produce a limited service of perhaps every two hours on a single track, and would probably not be a reasonable priority.

However that's not an argument for Tavistock to Okehampton.

 

[yorksrob]

They are hardly two of the largest towns in Southern England that it is impossible to reach by train though. It does also feel like your argument is that if it is possible to get to somewhere by train then all is well, no matter how awkward or pointless that connection is. I have little doubt that there are more journeys from Luton to Milton Keynes than from Tavistock to Plymouth (and certainly Tavistock to Okehampton), so surely it would be better to serve that market by rail, even though those places are already connected to London, rather than a smaller market?

I'm saying I don't have enough knowledge of the situation to make a judgment on that case. That's not to say there isn't a case to be made for Luton - Milton Keynes, in which case why aren't you and @Starmill making the case for that connection on it's own merits, rather than having a go at the Tavistock/Okehampton proposals ?

Incedentally, the proposal to reopen the Dunstable line a few years back could have formed part of a viable Luton - Milton Keynes rail connection, however the anti-rail powers that be copped out with a guided busway instead.