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

[stuu]

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.

The simple solution to the south coast-south west problem, if indeed there is one, is to change at Westbury. To go further west than Newton Abbot you will need to change again at the moment, but that would be on the same platform at Newton Abbot or Taunton. And if there is such a worthwhile untapped market, timetables could be altered to stop trains from Plymouth at Westbury, far easier and cheaper than rebuilding a line through the middle of nowhere

 

[Dr Hoo]

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

Absolutely, but it's not a new concept.

Some people in other threads have sought to justify the historic keeping of the Birmingham Snow Hill-Wolverhampton Low Level line as heavy rail even after Messrs Marples and Beeching had equipped the West Midlands with two distinct electrified, four-aspect signalled routes between Birmingham New Street and Wolverhampton [Edit to correct] High Level in the 1960s.

 

[Bald Rick]

Absolutely, but it's not a new concept.

Some people in other threads have sought to justify the historic keeping of the Birmingham Snow Hill-Wolverhampton Low Level line as heavy rail even after Messrs Marples and Beeching had equipped the West Midlands with two distinct electrified, four-aspect signalled routes between Birmingham New Street and Wolverhampton Low Level in the 1960s.

High Level, surely. The Great Western PH would never look the same with OLE running past the back yard into LL.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Thanks BR. Edited to correct, of course. (And I commuted that way for four years. Doh!)

 

[tbtc]

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

1. If there's that much demand from "the SWML area" to places west of Exeter then wouldn't it be a lot simpler (and a billion pounds cheaper) to find a single 158 to reinstate the through services from Waterloo to Torbay/ Plymouth that BR/ SWT used to provide?

2. Under your proposal, presumably lots of people from "the SWML area" would still have to "head North or even North East before heading west"; the only difference is that they'd be heading to somewhere like Basingstoke onto a 1tph service rather than heading to Reading onto a 1tph service?

3. If the Reading - Exeter service is so busy that you have to stand all the way then isn't the priority to improve that service in the first instance?

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

It's 23 miles by road between Okehampton and Tavistock - unless you are going to build this line to particularly fast alignments I'd doubt that one unit could provide an hourly service between the two (based on the fact that one DMU cannot manage to provide an hourly service on lines like Huddersfield to Bradford or Wakefield, given the need for turnaround times)

I think one DMU requires around £250,000pa staffing costs (given the fact that you're probably talking about twelve hours a day/ fifty two weeks a year, so need holiday cover etc - plus we need to cover NI contributions/ pensions), as well as the costs of the train itself (depreciation, fuel, maintenance etc), so you'd be needing a lot more than "zero" people on board

And there are suggestions of building the line for two trains per hour throughout? Which is a problem with these threads - people want this to be both a simple cheap route (in the "how hard can it be" league of projects) but also fast enough to allow two InterCity trains per hour from Plymouth to Exeter at comparable speeds to the Dawlish route)

Yes it's £1bn however that's not all that much in the greater scheme of things

£1bn is a lot in the greater scheme of things

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)

See above re the cost of just one DMU in service - you'd need to cover the ongoing subsidies (e.g. nobody talks about the drain that routes like the Borders line are on public finances - meeting expected passenger numbers doesn't necessarily mean that a line breaks even in terms of operational costs)

 

[Ashley Hill]

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

The line past the scrapyard by Sainsburys has been lost for several miles. Likewise around Chudleigh and Chudleigh Knighton. Plus one of the tunnels has had a partial collapse.

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

Unless the rest of either the GWML or SWML were upgraded what's the point of building a 140mph line. Let's be realistic, if Okehampton-Bere Alston was ever reopened,to aim for 75mph would be more likely, 90mph if finances allow. As I said earlier,let's look at it in its own right and not just a diversionary route.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think one DMU requires around £250,000pa staffing costs (given the fact that you're probably talking about twelve hours a day/ fifty two weeks a year, so need holiday cover etc - plus we need to cover NI contributions/ pensions), as well as the costs of the train itself (depreciation, fuel, maintenance etc), so you'd be needing a lot more than "zero" people on board

Typically each SX traincrew diagram needs a minimum ‘cover ratio’ of 2 people on it to cover the whole year and weekends. A simple service of, say, a 16 hour service day (0600 -2200) would need at least three diagrams to include the empty working at start / end of day plus setting up / closing down the unit, etc. Six drivers and six conductors wouldn’t leave you much change from £1m pa, once you include allowances, company pension contributions, employers NI, all the ancillary costs, etc. That’s just the on train staff of course...

 

[HSTEd]

Unless the rest of either the GWML or SWML were upgraded what's the point of building a 140mph line.

Because building a 140mph line costs not much more than building a 75mph or 90mph line and cuts forty minutes off of journey times between Plymouth/Cornwall and the rest of the country. It actually serves a discernable bulk passenger transport purpose - unlike some random line through empty countryside north of the moor.

A four hour run Penzance-Paddington might become borderline feasible with such a scheme.

Let's be realistic, if Okehampton-Bere Alston was ever reopened,to aim for 75mph would be more likely, 90mph if finances allow. As I said earlier,let's look at it in its own right and not just a diversionary route.

And on that basis there is no case at all.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Because building a 140mph line costs not much more than building a 75mph or 90mph line and cuts forty minutes off of journey times between Plymouth/Cornwall and the rest of the country. It actually serves a discernable bulk passenger transport purpose - unlike some random line through empty countryside north of the moor.

I see your point but a whole new line runs into problems. What route and how much? HS2 has run into a vast amount of Nimbyism despite the benefits it has promised. Via Okehampton is not HS3. Itis a known route with no surprises. Apart from a handful of buildings at Tavistock and perhaps a bridge or two its largely intact. The only Nimbyism comes from the owners of former stations.

 

[Bald Rick]

The only Nimbyism comes from the owners of former stations.

A very brave assumption! Just ask East West Rail...

 

[Ashley Hill]

A very brave assumption! Just ask East West Rail...

That's a whole different kettle of fish

 

[Bald Rick]

That's a whole different kettle of fish

How exactly? I’m talking about the stretch Oxford - Bicester - Bletchley - Bedford, most of which had the distinction of being an active railway. The NIMBYs were out in force. It would be the same in Devon, indeed worse.

 

[Annetts key]

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.
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).

Network Rail have worked out that they need nearly a dozen extra staff to maintain the Okehampton line… Not to mention all the other costs.

The line past the scrapyard by Sainsburys has been lost for several miles. Likewise around Chudleigh and Chudleigh Knighton. Plus one of the tunnels has had a partial collapse.

You obviously did not get that my suggestion was not serious… Unless you think I am a madman and did really mean to use a tunnel boring machine to tunnel all the way under Dartmoor… (although it would be the fastest and most direct route if money was no object).

 

[Irascible]

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

I feel somewhat less alone! well you don't really need 140mph, albeit if it's new build it's the same price as 125mph I guess - although you probably don't want to be drilling much so being able to corner a little sharper is probably quite attractive.

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?

Heh . Well, taking a serious look at a route all the way, a) Newton Abbott and b) I have no idea how long a single TBM would take to drill all that granite ( or even if it could! ). Drilling through some of the twistier & hillier parts of the existing line with it on the other hand, that could help a lot.

 

[Ashley Hill]

How exactly? I’m talking about the stretch Oxford - Bicester - Bletchley - Bedford, most of which had the distinction of being an active railway. The NIMBYs were out in force. It would be the same in Devon, indeed worse.

Several years ago when Bere Alston to Okehampton was again being looked at after the Dawlish breach there was a feature on the local BBC news program Spotlight. Several interested parties were interviewed from both the fors and againsts. The only credible complaints came from owners of former stations. One had been converted into a B&B and would apparently be forced to close. Brentor is (was) owned by an enthusiast who just shrugged his shoulders at the loss of his garden. Plus it's in a remote area so perhaps less to object too.
The line east of Bicester had not been lifted so fail to see why people on that stretch could object to something that was already there. Sandy-Cambridge on the other hand involves total rebuild,some on a new alignment,therefore much more to object to and more people to object.

 

[The Planner]

Several years ago when Bere Alston to Okehampton was again being looked at after the Dawlish breach there was a feature on the local BBC news program Spotlight. Several interested parties were interviewed from both the fors and againsts. The only credible complaints came from owners of former stations. One had been converted into a B&B and would apparently be forced to close. Brentor is (was) owned by an enthusiast who just shrugged his shoulders at the loss of his garden. Plus it's in a remote area so perhaps less to object too.
The line east of Bicester had not been lifted so fail to see why people on that stretch could object to something that was already there. Sandy-Cambridge on the other hand involves total rebuild,some on a new alignment,therefore much more to object to and more people to object.

Apart from when trying to close level crossings people wanted massive bridges for bridleways etc, the level crossing just south of Islip being a case in point. It was previously a 30mph single line with a DMU trundling along it, not the twin track 100mph main line it now is.

 

[Falcon1200]

The line east of Bicester had not been lifted so fail to see why people on that stretch could object to something that was already there.

I think there had been little if any traffic for a number of years, so people got used to there being no trains, or had indeed moved in more recently and had never seen a train ! East/West Rail will make the line busier than it has ever been (as has already happened with the Oxford/Bicester section). Similar objections were raised when the Stirling/Alloa/Longannet line was resuscitated, although the main issue there was the coal trains which of course no longer run.

 

[JKF]

There were certainly grumbles from residents in Pill when the Portbury dock line was opened a number of years back, mainly from housing built since the closure, but big coal trains were running quite late/through the night and there was no reinstated passenger service as a benefit. The track was still down then but unused for more than 20 years.

 

[Ashley Hill]

I think the lesson for house buyers is that if there's a railway line next to the house then expect a train,unless you live on the St Ives-Cambridge line then expect a bus! I cannot understand why objections in these circumstances are thought valid. Thinking a train will never appear is either ignorant or believing the estate agent when they're flogging you the house that trains will never run because the haven't run for years.
With a closed and lifted line I can see the argument.

 

[yorksrob]

The lesson from the Beeching accolytes seems to be that nimbyism is evil and must be resisted at all costs where a new alignment is concerned, but as soon as an existing alignment is proposed for re-use, the word of the objectors becomes gospel that cannot be contradicted.

 

[Bald Rick]

Several years ago

time moves on

The line east of Bicester had not been lifted so fail to see why people on that stretch could object to something that was already there.

242 objections were received for this stretch. Local authorities, political parties, Parish / Town councils, statutory bodies, utilities, land owners, community groups, groups of all types of interests, and individuals.

It is extraordinarily naïve to think that the same won’t happen for any new railway proposal, regardless of whether the line of route is new, a former or mothballed railway, or in use.

 

[HSTEd]

The lesson from the Beeching accolytes seems to be that nimbyism is evil and must be resisted at all costs where a new alignment is concerned, but as soon as an existing alignment is proposed for re-use, the word of the objectors becomes gospel that cannot be contradicted.

Or more likely that a new alignment can be engineered to minimise objections.

An existing alignment cannot

 

[BayPaul]

Several years ago when Bere Alston to Okehampton was again being looked at after the Dawlish breach there was a feature on the local BBC news program Spotlight. Several interested parties were interviewed from both the fors and againsts. The only credible complaints came from owners of former stations. One had been converted into a B&B and would apparently be forced to close. Brentor is (was) owned by an enthusiast who just shrugged his shoulders at the loss of his garden. Plus it's in a remote area so perhaps less to object too.
The line east of Bicester had not been lifted so fail to see why people on that stretch could object to something that was already there. Sandy-Cambridge on the other hand involves total rebuild,some on a new alignment,therefore much more to object to and more people to object.

I'm sure there would be very reasonable complaints from the users of the granite way that would lose it's alignment. But no doubt it will be argued that a rail alignment is only ever borrowed and must be instantly available to any new rail use, no matter how many decades ago it was discarded!

 

[Ashley Hill]

I'm sure there would be very reasonable complaints from the users of the granite way that would lose it's alignment. But no doubt it will be argued that a rail alignment is only ever borrowed and must be instantly available to any new rail use, no matter how many decades ago it was discarded!

Many of the 242 objectors to EWR are probably just hanging on for a payoff if offered and will carry on objecting until their price is met.
As for a handful of walkers and cyclists who probably only use the Granite Way a couple of times a year each, should they be allowed to bar the way of progress?
And you're last statement should be compulsory for any trackbed that is disposed of.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm sure there would be very reasonable complaints from the users of the granite way that would lose it's alignment. But no doubt it will be argued that a rail alignment is only ever borrowed and must be instantly available to any new rail use, no matter how many decades ago it was discarded!

Since many of these paths justified their construction on the basis of preserving the rail alignment for future use, I would say that that's a perfectly justified argument.

 

[zwk500]

Many of the 242 objectors to EWR are probably just hanging on for a payoff if offered and will carry on objecting until their price is met.

This is a very cynical view. The line hasn't been operational for the best part of 50 years. You could forgive somebody for buying a house in the early 90s being somewhat miffed their charming village will become another dormitory town for commuters.

should they be allowed to bar the way of progress?

Is it 'progress' to build a railway for no good reason, almost entirely because there happened to be one there before? That's not progress, that's nostalgia. And I'd be very supportive of any objection to demolition for the sake of nostalgia!

 

[tbtc]

I've started a separate thread to discuss just how many generations must pass until we are allowed to accept that a failed line has failed and isn't coming back: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-on-it-its-treated-as-a-new-alignment.222120/

 

[Bald Rick]

Many of the 242 objectors to EWR are probably just hanging on for a payoff if offered and will carry on objecting until their price is met.

‘Hanging on for a payoff’ = requesting compensation for genuine loss of earnings / business / amenity.

 

[Ashley Hill]

This is a very cynical view. The line hasn't been operational for the best part of 50 years. You could forgive somebody for buying a house in the early 90s being somewhat miffed their charming village will become another dormitory town for commuters.

Is it 'progress' to build a railway for no good reason, almost entirely because there happened to be one there before? That's not progress, that's nostalgia. And I'd be very supportive of any objection to demolition for the sake of nostalgia!

It's not nostalgia if there's a business case. Cast your mind back some years ago,there was a list of railway lines proposed for reopening. One of the was the Brixham branch. How does that fit with your argument?

‘Hanging on for a payoff’ = requesting compensation for genuine loss of earnings / business / amenity.

Everybody had their price!
An objection for reopening by the B&W of the line from Boscarne to Wenford Bridge came from the owner of a caravan type take away claiming loss of business. I'm surprised he had any business given how quiet this supposedly busy cycle path was.
At the end of the day there are those of us locally who would like to see the SR route reopened as a line in its own right,and those who don't. It's not a nostalgia thing,it's bringing new business and opportunities. Some lines are worth reopening and I know it's not going to be cheap. The West needs some rail regeneration and this could provide it.

 

[zwk500]

It's not nostalgia if there's a business case. Cast your mind back some years ago,there was a list of railway lines proposed for reopening. One of the was the Brixham branch. How does that fit with your argument?

Well the Brixham branch isn't open, is it? So I'm not really sure what point you are making here.

@Altnabreac has a set of criteria for reopened lines that generally serve as fairly reliable indicators of successful projects. If I'm remembering them correctly, Okehampton to Exeter meets about half of them, but Okehampton to Tavistock meets none of them.
They're along the lines of 10k Town, under an hour to nearest big town/city, extension of existing service with no additional stock requirement, etc.