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

[bnm]

No need for bustitution, just send them around the other way.

You mean a commuter from Torbay to Exeter would be expected to get a train to Newton Abbot, then one to Plymouth, then one to Exeter via the LSWR route?

Such a diversion would not suit long distance passengers for Teignbridge, Torbay and the South Hams either.

Promoting the LSWR option as a suitable diversionary route for the 400,000 people in the above three districts doesn't work. They will still need buses, and a lot of them, during sea wall disruption. Most importantly it doesn't require sourcing buses during disruption. Something that isn't easy to arrange at short notice. We've seen in Bristol recently just how bad a supposedly properly organised bustitution service, long planned for the Filton Bank closure, can be.

A Dawlish Avoiding Line between Exminster and Newton Abbot, with the potential for a park and ride to serve Dawlish and Teignmouth, keeps all existing passenger flows rail served during disruption. It also allows for modest journey time improvements for Plymouth and Cornwall. Long distance trains can take the DAL route to Newton Abbot and beyond. Semi-fasts and locals can stick to a rationalised sea wall route.

The LSWR route has merit as a line to attract new business to the railways. For local services serving North and West Devon certainly. Alternative long distance services can also go that way if the business case stacks up. It should not however be costed on its suitability as a diversionary route during sea wall closures. That option does nothing for the existing considerable passenger numbers to and from Teignbridge, Torbay and the South Hams.

 

[The Ham]

You mean a commuter from Torbay to Exeter would be expected to get a train to Newton Abbot, then one to Plymouth, then one to Exeter via the LSWR route?

Such a diversion would not suit long distance passengers for Teignbridge, Torbay and the South Hams either.

Promoting the LSWR option as a suitable diversionary route for the 400,000 people in the above three districts doesn't work. They will still need buses, and a lot of them, during sea wall disruption. Most importantly it doesn't require sourcing buses during disruption. Something that isn't easy to arrange at short notice. We've seen in Bristol recently just how bad a supposedly properly organised bustitution service, long planned for the Filton Bank closure, can be.

A Dawlish Avoiding Line between Exminster and Newton Abbot, with the potential for a park and ride to serve Dawlish and Teignmouth, keeps all existing passenger flows rail served during disruption. It also allows for modest journey time improvements for Plymouth and Cornwall. Long distance trains can take the DAL route to Newton Abbot and beyond. Semi-fasts and locals can stick to a rationalised sea wall route.

The LSWR route has merit as a line to attract new business to the railways. For local services serving North and West Devon certainly. Alternative long distance services can also go that way if the business case stacks up. It should not however be costed on its suitability as a diversionary route during sea wall closures. That option does nothing for the existing considerable passenger numbers to and from Teignbridge, Torbay and the South Hams.

The problem with the DAL is that it costs between 2 and 3 times the cost of the via Okehampton route.

Yes at times of disruption to the existing line there would be benefits by having it over the other options. However the extra costs and lower business case make it less likely to be built.

Therefore do you:
a) do nothing and accept buses along with everyone from Plymouth and West
b) build the Via Okehampton route and accept that you'd need some buses, but know that there's less pressure on the buses as most places West of South Devon can go around by train
c) hold out for the DAL but to all intense and purposes you are stuck with a) for some time

 

[bnm]

However the extra costs and lower business case make it less likely to be built.

The benefit/cost ratio of the Okehampton route, in the only costed study of all options*, was lower than a couple of the DAL route options. And only half that of the Teign Valley option. And that was taking into account new traffic the reopened LSWR line would attract.


*https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/West-of-Exeter-Route-Resilience-Study.pdf

 

[RT4038]

The problem with the DAL is that it costs between 2 and 3 times the cost of the via Okehampton route.

Yes at times of disruption to the existing line there would be benefits by having it over the other options. However the extra costs and lower business case make it less likely to be built.

Therefore do you:
a) do nothing and accept buses along with everyone from Plymouth and West
b) build the Via Okehampton route and accept that you'd need some buses, but know that there's less pressure on the buses as most places West of South Devon can go around by train
c) hold out for the DAL but to all intense and purposes you are stuck with a) for some time

The only sensible option is (c). Spending that kind of money to re-instate a rural backwater line so for a few days a year passengers can be carted via Okehampton is only a nostalgic railway enthusiasts/employees dream. Today it takes no more time to detrain passengers at Tiverton Parkway and bus them to Plymouth, than to send them on a train via the 'direct' line (let alone via Okehampton!). From a competitive point of view this should be ringing alarm bells. A new direct line (roughly the route of the A38) is required between Exeter & Plymouth, with a branch to Newton Abbot and Torbay, to make this line fit for the future. Anything else is a waste of money. I realise that this will cost more than the alternative half-baked bodge, but the same argument of HS2 vs. upgradng/re-instating applies. I am all for new rail build where it is going to benefit the major flows of passengers, not re-instating bucolic hopeless rural lines serving sparse populations.

 

[Class37.4]

The only sensible option is (c). Spending that kind of money to re-instate a rural backwater line so for a few days a year passengers can be carted via Okehampton is only a nostalgic railway enthusiasts/employees dream. Today it takes no more time to detrain passengers at Tiverton Parkway and bus them to Plymouth, than to send them on a train via the 'direct' line (let alone via Okehampton!). From a competitive point of view this should be ringing alarm bells. A new direct line (roughly the route of the A38) is required between Exeter & Plymouth, with a branch to Newton Abbot and Torbay, to make this line fit for the future. Anything else is a waste of money. I realise that this will cost more than the alternative half-baked bodge, but the same argument of HS2 vs. upgradng/re-instating applies. I am all for new rail build where it is going to benefit the major flows of passengers, not re-instating bucolic hopeless rural lines serving sparse populations.

Like button Please!

 

[HowardGWR]

Like button Please!

Dislike button also required please!

I don't see what one has to do with the other. The Okehampton route is worth pursuing and so is a resilient South Devon DAL route, unless the NR 'out at sea' Teignmouth proposal is a goer.

 

[MarkyT]

Dislike button also required please!

I don't see what one has to do with the other. The Okehampton route is worth pursuing and so is a resilient South Devon DAL route, unless the NR 'out at sea' Teignmouth proposal is a goer.

I still think the big opportunity here long term is a significant improvement in journey time, which even a complete rebuild of the existing route could never achieve simply because of the length of the route, curvature, in places and proximity to housing through the coastal towns. I've nothing against the Okehampton route if someone wants to make a case for it in which diversionary use plays a small part. I strongly believe a heavily improved GW route incorporating a Dawlish avoider should attempt to serve both Newton Abbot and Totnes with all long distance trains to Plymouth and beyond stopping, as otherwise these towns will likely end up with a through London and Cross Country service as poor as that serving the Paignton branch today. At least with (nearly) all longer distance trains stopping at Newton, Torbay's main line railhead is only a short drive, bus or local train journey away.

 

[RT4038]

Dislike button also required please!

I don't see what one has to do with the other. The Okehampton route is worth pursuing and so is a resilient South Devon DAL route, unless the NR 'out at sea' Teignmouth proposal is a goer.

The 'out at sea' Teignmouth route does nothing to improve journey times or competitiveness of rail. It is just a patch-up job. The Okehampton route is worth pursuing as much as reopening the Selby-Driffield line, so please put them both in the same pile of priorities.

 

[HowardGWR]

I still think the big opportunity here long term is a significant improvement in journey time, which even a complete rebuild of the existing route could never achieve simply because of the length of the route, curvature, in places and proximity to housing through the coastal towns. I've nothing against the Okehampton route if someone wants to make a case for it in which diversionary use plays a small part. I strongly believe a heavily improved GW route incorporating a Dawlish avoider should attempt to serve both Newton Abbot and Totnes with all long distance trains to Plymouth and beyond stopping, as otherwise these towns will likely end up with a through London and Cross Country service as poor as that serving the Paignton branch today. At least with (nearly) all longer distance trains stopping at Newton, Torbay's main line railhead is only a short drive, bus or local train journey away.

Yes, I think that is very sensible, but after DAL could be constructed, I think there is a case to see what could be done to speed up the Totnes to Plymouth stretch. Luckily, Totnes has through roads, so it's trying to see what could be done elsewhere skirting southern Dartmoor.

 

[HowardGWR]

The 'out at sea' Teignmouth route does nothing to improve journey times or competitiveness of rail. It is just a patch-up job. The Okehampton route is worth pursuing as much as reopening the Selby-Driffield line, so please put them both in the same pile of priorities.

I don't disagree totally with that, but apart from the missing link from the viaduct at Meldon to Tavistock, I think the two 'end' schemes are very worth while. If the Barnstaple line should be retained, then the two I just mentioned are just as desirable as that line, as local schemes. I believe (note believe) that once restored, the case for the joining up of the two northern branches will return very shortly thereafter.

 

[MarkyT]

Yes, I think that is very sensible, but after DAL could be constructed, I think there is a case to see what could be done to speed up the Totnes to Plymouth stretch. Luckily, Totnes has through roads, so it's trying to see what could be done elsewhere skirting southern Dartmoor.

For this section, up thread I suggested a new route from Wrangaton to Plymouth closely hugging the A38 in the bottom of the valley rather than the current higher level route following the sides of the hills with its constant curvature and high viaducts following the contours and crossing side valleys. The A38 is already much straighter than the existing railway and the gradients don't look too severe for modern electric passenger trains. Perhaps creation of such a new rail link could be combined with a rebuild and upgrade of the road to motorway standards, maybe with the rail alignment placed in the central reservation for a significant distance to make road junctions much simpler. Original post: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...n-exeter-plymouth.143927/page-18#post-3735274

 

[RT4038]

Yes, I think that is very sensible, but after DAL could be constructed, I think there is a case to see what could be done to speed up the Totnes to Plymouth stretch. Luckily, Totnes has through roads, so it's trying to see what could be done elsewhere skirting southern Dartmoor.

It really needs a new line constructing right through to Plymouth. It is well known that, due to a historical accident, the line between Newton Abbot and Plymouth is sinuous and steeply graded. Railway enthusiasts have long celebrated the difficulties in operating this stretch. It is high time the modern railway overcame this with a new fast line. The shortest (and thereby fastest) routeing between Exeter and Plymouth would probably not go near to Newton Abbot or Totnes though. Likely Newton Abbot would be on a Torbay branch and Totnes served by railhead.

 

[HowardGWR]

For this section, up thread I suggested a new route from Wrangaton to Plymouth closely hugging the A38 in the bottom of the valley rather than the current higher level route following the sides of the hills with its constant curvature and high viaducts following the contours and crossing side valleys. The A38 is already much straighter than the existing railway and the gradients don't look too severe for modern electric passenger trains. Perhaps creation of such a new rail link could be combined with a rebuild and upgrade of the road to motorway standards, maybe with the rail alignment placed in the central reservation for a significant distance to make road junctions much simpler. Original post: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...n-exeter-plymouth.143927/page-18#post-3735274

Thanks, I am sorry I missed that post. Incidentally, for some reason, my spelling checker has ceased to work on UK Rail postings, so I apologise for the numerous typos that I spend the next 10 minutes correcting while you were posting this!

 

[Cowley]

Re the current sea wall section, Dawlish Warren, Dawlish and Teignmouth see substantial amounts of passengers during peak times and especially in summer.
These towns will still need a rail service because road access (particularly from Dawlish) to Exeter isn’t great.
Dawlish and Teignmouth during summer are served by long distance (and busy) trains.

 

[RT4038]

Re the current sea wall section, Dawlish Warren, Dawlish and Teignmouth see substantial amounts of passengers during peak times and especially in summer.
These towns will still need a rail service because road access (particularly from Dawlish) to Exeter isn’t great.
Dawlish and Teignmouth during summer are served by long distance (and busy) trains.

This will be for the politicians to decide if the enormous expenditure of keeping the line open is worth it. However, Dawlish and Teignmouth local traffic needs should not be holding everyone west of these towns hostage to slow and disrupted rail service. The former track bed to Dawlish and Teignmouth would make a great cycleway.

 

[MarkyT]

This will be for the politicians to decide if the enormous expenditure of keeping the line open is worth it. However, Dawlish and Teignmouth local traffic needs should not be holding everyone west of these towns hostage to slow and disrupted rail service. The former track bed to Dawlish and Teignmouth would make a great cycleway.

Or a great local railway, or tramway, or busway. Or it could be retained as two branch lines: One from Exeter to Dawlish and one from Newton Abbot to Teignmouth with the troublesome unpopulated bit between through the tunnels abandoned. If timed for good connections Teignmouth - NA, then new route by express to Exeter will almost certainly be quicker than following the coast and Exe estuary on an all stations local.

 

[Meerkat]

Network Rail are on the hook for maintaining the sea wall whether or not there are trains on it aren’t they?

 

[Cowley]

Network Rail are on the hook for maintaining the sea wall whether or not there are trains on it aren’t they?

I think so, and the current sea wall will have to be maintained to certain standard regardless of whether there’s a railway on it or not.

 

[Cowley]

Or a great local railway, or tramway, or busway. Or it could be retained as two branch lines: One from Exeter to Dawlish and one from Newton Abbot to Teignmouth with the troublesome unpopulated bit between through the tunnels abandoned. If timed for good connections Teignmouth - NA, then new route by express to Exeter will almost certainly be quicker than following the coast and Exe estuary on an all stations local.

I could see this idea working.
I can’t see abandoning Dawlish - population of around 15000, and Teignmouth - population about 19000, as well as the substantial summer traffic that both towns depend on as even remotely conceivable in this day and age.
These are not remote wayside halts.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The coastal route should be retained in the (unlikely) event that a new fast inland route is built, given that the sea wall has to be maintained anyway. The key point is that any storm disruption would be localised, rather than the whole of South Devon and Cornwall being cut off as at present. Sections could be singled to help allievate problems with cliff slippage.

 

[HowardGWR]

I am surprised this discussion has not been moved to 'speculation' by mods, but I suppose, as NR has been floating several studies, it could be said we are only discussing what it is discussing. It seems to me that a sub regional body, with funding, should be taking a leading role, not a government agency like NR. But we don't have that level of devolution in the SW, since both the SW Regional Assembly and SWRDA were abolished by Gordon Brown and David Cameron respectively.

 

[Cowley]

I am surprised this discussion has not been moved to 'speculation' by mods, but I suppose, as NR has been floating several studies, it could be said we are only discussing what it is discussing. It seems to me that a sub regional body, with funding, should be taking a leading role, not a government agency like NR. But I’m we don't have that level of devolution in the SW, since both the SW Regional Assembly and SWRDA were abolished by Gordon Brown and David Cameron respectively.

It’s interesting to note how different the areas of Devon we’re talking about are to each other too.
The wilds of north Dartmoor could not be more different to a summer Saturday on the sands of Dawlish Warren.

 

[yorksrob]

The LSWR route has merit as a line to attract new business to the railways. For local services serving North and West Devon certainly. Alternative long distance services can also go that way if the business case stacks up. It should not however be costed on its suitability as a diversionary route during sea wall closures. That option does nothing for the existing considerable passenger numbers to and from Teignbridge, Torbay and the South Hams.

Why wouldn't one take into consideration it's use as a diversionary route for services to Plymouth and West. To value it as a diversionary route for Torquay would be incorrect, but ignoring the value as a diversionary route to Plymouth and beyond would be equally incorrect.

 

[yorksrob]

The only sensible option is (c). Spending that kind of money to re-instate a rural backwater line so for a few days a year passengers can be carted via Okehampton is only a nostalgic railway enthusiasts/employees dream. Today it takes no more time to detrain passengers at Tiverton Parkway and bus them to Plymouth, than to send them on a train via the 'direct' line (let alone via Okehampton!). From a competitive point of view this should be ringing alarm bells. A new direct line (roughly the route of the A38) is required between Exeter & Plymouth, with a branch to Newton Abbot and Torbay, to make this line fit for the future. Anything else is a waste of money. I realise that this will cost more than the alternative half-baked bodge, but the same argument of HS2 vs. upgradng/re-instating applies. I am all for new rail build where it is going to benefit the major flows of passengers, not re-instating bucolic hopeless rural lines serving sparse populations.

It is a very old fashioned 1960's point of view that suggests that any amount of money is worth throwing at shortening journey times to satisfy motorists desire for speed, yet nothing is worth spending on bringing passengers from places such as Tavistock and Okehampton back into the orbit of the rail network. If the existing route were as uncompetitive as you suggest, surely all the trains would be emptying at Tiverton parkway onto buses, yet whenever I travel the route, the trains to and from Plymouth seem to be full !

Perhaps instead of wasting money trying to impress people who are more inclined to drive anyway, we should be expanding the network to connect more towns to it.

 

[Class37.4]

It is a very old fashioned 1960's point of view that suggests that any amount of money is worth throwing at shortening journey times to satisfy motorists desire for speed, yet nothing is worth spending on bringing passengers from places such as Tavistock and Okehampton back into the orbit of the rail network. If the existing route were as uncompetitive as you suggest, surely all the trains would be emptying at Tiverton parkway onto buses, yet whenever I travel the route, the trains to and from Plymouth seem to be full !

Perhaps instead of wasting money trying to impress people who are more inclined to drive anyway, we should be expanding the network to connect more towns to it.

Except of course the Okehampton fan club keep conveniently ignoring the fact that both Okehampton and Tavistock can be put back on the Rail network and serve the majority of demand at relatively low cost, without spending a fortune to reopen the section between Okehampton and Tavistock, or the need to upgrade existing sections from a basic railway which would be good enough for a local service but not for a major diversionary route.

Its all academic anyway as clearly any money will be going improving the resilience of the existing route and an alternate route wont be happening anytime soon and probably not in my lifetime.

 

[Cowley]

Except of course the Okehampton fan club keep conveniently ignoring the fact that both Okehampton and Tavistock can be put back on the Rail network and serve the majority of demand at relatively low cost, without spending a fortune to reopen the section between Okehampton and Tavistock.

It’s not really a fortune in the grand scheme of things though is it?
If done with a bit of intelligence it could open an unserved part of the country up to rail travel for a relatively low amount of money.
Don’t get me wrong, there’s road building schemes that I support too. I grew up watching motorways being built everywhere with fascination.
But there are relatively simple improvements to the current railway network that could’ve easily been sorted out by now with a slightly different attitude in our thinking.

 

[Meerkat]

Yes, yes it is a fortune. To connect the middle of car owning nowhere to the middle of car owning nowhere.

 

[Class37.4]

It’s not really a fortune in the grand scheme of things though is it?
If done with a bit of intelligence it could open an unserved part of the country up to rail travel for a relatively low amount of money.
Don’t get me wrong, there’s road building schemes that I support too. I grew up watching motorways being built everywhere with fascination.
But there are relatively simple improvements to the current railway network that could’ve easily been sorted out by now with a slightly different attitude in our thinking.

In the context of HS2 no, but still a substancial amount of money, while reopening locally to Tavistock and Okehampton is in the tens of millions rather than the hundreds of millions for the whole route, and if Network Fail have costed it, it probably be at least twice as much by the time it was finished.

 

[yorksrob]

Except of course the Okehampton fan club keep conveniently ignoring the fact that both Okehampton and Tavistock can be put back on the Rail network and serve the majority of demand at relatively low cost, without spending a fortune to reopen the section between Okehampton and Tavistock, or the need to upgrade existing sections from a basic railway which would be good enough for a local service but not for a major diversionary route.

Its all academic anyway as clearly any money will be going improving the resilience of the existing route and an alternate route wont be happening anytime soon and probably not in my lifetime.

Well, it's about time they got their finger out and connected Tavistock and Okehampton permanently to the network as a starting point.

You're probably right in one respect. Nothing I want to happen on the railway network ever seems to happen anyway.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, yes it is a fortune. To connect the middle of car owning nowhere to the middle of car owning nowhere.

Tavistock and Okehampton aren't "the middle of nowhere" and not everyone there owns a car.