Improving the Exeter area

[Irascible]

If the sea wall breaches then far more than just the railway goes. I'd be more inclined to think someone will build another wall in front of the current one ( or put a heck of a lot of rocks down ).

--

Turning the old St Davids through line into a platform line by building out is intriguing - what would you be running into the new bay? presumably Exmouth-Paignton and build out P3? if we assume that might go to 4 cars one day I... actually haven't worked out what the remaining platform length would be. Should leave enough space for expansion of WoE services at least & it'd be enough to turn round Barnstaples or 5 car IETs I guess. I take it the hill being there makes splitting P3 without building anything frowned upon.

I forget, are the lines up to Central reversible?

 

[zwk500]

If the sea wall breaches then far more than just the railway goes. I'd be more inclined to think someone will build another wall in front of the current one ( or put a heck of a lot of rocks down ).

Rock armour is probably very likely yes.

Turning the old St Davids through line into a platform line by building out is intriguing - what would you be running into the new bay?

Either SWR or Exmouth Branch trains was the thought but anything from Central direction really.

I forget, are the lines up to Central reversible?

Down (westbound) line is, Up is not. (from Open Time Trains).

 

[devon_belle]

I forget, are the lines up to Central reversible?

I believe the 'down' (Central to St Davids) is reversible.

Should leave enough space for expansion of WoE services at least & it'd be enough to turn round Barnstaples or 5 car IETs I guess.

If the bay was 6 coaches then splitting and joining for extensions of WofE to Plymouth etc would be possible. But then you have the new P2½ being quite far from the entrance/footbridges. Assuming that the Devon Metro will one day command at least 6 coaches for every train, our proposed arrangement may not be suitable long term. Relocating Red Cow crossing could allow for an extension, I suppose.

 

[Irascible]

Making both lines up the hill reversible right through Central & out to Exmouth Jct seems a useful idea. Building out half of P3 does seem like a good idea initially but after somet thought - you end up with two short platforms & you could, presumably, leave it alone, split it, and then run something from the north into the north half while there's a Paignton in the south half anyway ( I don't think the other way round is a good idea, but then having buffers at the bottom of a steep hill isn't my favourite idea either! ). Then if trains do start growing you've still got a full platform.

 

[devon_belle]

Could reinstate the middle line at St David's and use some strategic crossovers to break up the platforms, in the same way as has been suggested for Central.

 

[Meerkat]

Redoubling Cowley Bridge to Crediton needs two new river bridges and an extram Newton St Cyres platform which wouldn’t be cheap! Couldn’t certainly move the end of the Crediton loop a fair way East though.
Would getting the junction off the curve enable notable speed increases though?

 

[MarkyT]

Here are some of my ideas for remodelling the Exeter area:

Redoubling Cowley Bridge to Crediton needs two new river bridges and an extram Newton St Cyres platform which wouldn’t be cheap! Couldn’t certainly move the end of the Crediton loop a fair way East though.
Would getting the junction off the curve enable notable speed increases though?

I'd start the double track section just Crediton side of Newton St Cyres platform for maximum length while avoiding station and bridge work.

 

[Irascible]

Could reinstate the middle line at St David's and use some strategic crossovers to break up the platforms, in the same way as has been suggested for Central.

Making better use of Central to turn trains around might help St David's throughput a bit as well as bring people closer into town. Turning more local trains ( like Barnstaples ) around at Topsham would be a nice idea - to let people from the north/west go straight to the developing areas - but I'm not sure how feasable that'd be even as a concept. I picked Topsham because it's already got some larger infrastructure, but a second platform at Sowton or Newcourt ( which seems to have more space ) would work too. Does make servicing a bit more awkward, I guess.

 

[MarkyT]

Making better use of Central to turn trains around might help St David's throughput a bit as well as bring people closer into town. Turning more local trains ( like Barnstaples ) around at Topsham would be a nice idea - to let people from the north/west go straight to the developing areas - but I'm not sure how feasable that'd be even as a concept. I picked Topsham because it's already got some larger infrastructure, but a second platform at Sowton or Newcourt ( which seems to have more space ) would work too. Does make servicing a bit more awkward, I guess.

Newcourt would be good, home to the Ikea superstore. Perhaps extra large luggage stacks could be included on the trains to accomodate flatpack purchases! Something like the following perhaps:



Notes:
- New terminal platform same side of formation as through platform to avoid costly access bridge at Newcourt.
- Digby & Sowton constrained by access walkways constructed on former second track.
- Gratuitous addition of new station at Whipton to serve local housing and employment including Met Office.

 

[Irascible]

I wonder if replacing Polsloe Bridge with a new island platform station on the west side of Exmouth Jct would work ( socially, I mean - there's a *lot* of space there at the moment so physically not so big a deal ) - if both lines are bi-di then people coming in from the Axminster locals ( and any WoE long distance train that wants to stop ) could just walk over & catch a local down to Sowton or wherever, vs having to cross both lines at one of the stations further west. Or I suppose if the junction itself is moved a little so it's on the west end of the new station then it still works anyway. Then your Whipton station fills in a bigger gap too! and you can probably skip St James Park unless there's a local event.

Make the platform line at Newcourt long enough for a likely Barnstaple ( however long they end up ) and another unit, so if there's ever a need for a rush-hour shuttle to St Davids it can still fit.

 

[devon_belle]

I wonder if replacing Polsloe Bridge with a new island platform station on the west side of Exmouth Jct would work ( socially, I mean - there's a *lot* of space there at the moment so physically not so big a deal )

On the West side of the junction would probably be a push, as the line falls steeply in a cutting. Unless you were able to reclaim some land by expanding the cutting to the North (possibly precluded by the new housing development taking place on the site of the old yard), I don't think this could work. No doubt there are also modern regulations on the width of island platforms and building stations on gradients.

There was once a small halt right next to the Eastern portal of Black Boy Tunnel - similar to St James Park before its numerous extensions - but this probably wouldn't be useful any more.

 

[Irascible]

possibly precluded by the new housing development taking place on the site of the old yard

Oh, they finally got around to doing something... is it just the old PW yard/ coal depot, or does it include the few remaining sidings that were(are? not been there for ages) up against the running lines?

Typical timing, ofc

 

[MarkyT]

There was once a small halt right next to the Eastern portal of Black Boy Tunnel - similar to St James Park before its numerous extensions - but this probably wouldn't be useful any more.

Mount Pleasant Road Halt might have been popular with the staff of the large railway complex at Exmouth Junction during its brief operating period of 1906-1928. It would increase the section time differential between stopping and non stopping services through this actually quite busy area however, so would probably not be good for capacity unless a skip-stop pattern alternating with St James Park was adopted, not the right paradigm for an urban area I suggest. Keep Polsloe Bridge on the branch I say, reinstating the second platform if desired.

 

[devon_belle]

Oh, they finally got around to doing something... is it just the old PW yard/ coal depot, or does it include the few remaining sidings that were(are? not been there for ages) up against the running lines?

Typical timing, ofc

right up to the boundary I believe.

Mount Pleasant Road Halt might have been popular with the staff of the large railway complex at Exmouth Junction during its brief operating period of 1906-1928. It would increase the section time differential between stopping and non stopping services through this actually quite busy area however, so would probably not be good for capacity unless a skip-stop pattern alternating with St James Park was adopted, not the right paradigm for an urban area I suggest. Keep Polsloe Bridge on the branch I say, reinstating the second platform if desired.

I agree with you, the halt would be more trouble than good. However, Whipton Bridge Halt (1906-1923) which was just to the east of Summer Lane could be useful, serving Exeter Arena and St James secondary school. We would no doubt need more capacity on the WofE line before anything like this could be worth doing.

Is a second platform at Polsloe Bridge all that useful? I guess it would be a good way of unclogging the junction.

 

[30907]

Here are some of my ideas for remodelling the Exeter area:

I like the idea of splitting P1 at St David's, though I think you'd need a double slip (or whatever the big railway term is) at the "West" end.
I would also split the long platforms at Central, but do it a la Dovey Jn so as not to preclude full length trains. One middle road is probably enough, and better at the East end.

 

[MarkyT]

I agree with you, the halt would be more trouble than good. However, Whipton Bridge Halt (1906-1923) which was just to the east of Summer Lane could be useful, serving Exeter Arena and St James secondary school. We would no doubt need more capacity on the WofE line before anything like this could be worth doing.

A potential stop for the long-desired additional local service on the line to Honiton or Axminster. Either there or at the bridge over Beacon Lane.

Is a second platform at Polsloe Bridge all that useful? I guess it would be a good way of unclogging the junction.

The junction might be doubled with a shorter double track section reverting to single before Polsloe bridge station for greater resilience without requiring a second platform. Quicker single line clearance might also be arranged with a lengthened 'Penryn/Dovey Jn style' platform with the double to single turnout situated part-way along it. Improvements to the poor steps, then ramp, then steps again access are really required for the single platform.

Something like this perhaps:

I like the idea of splitting P1 at St David's, though I think you'd need a double slip (or whatever the big railway term is) at the "West" end.
I would also split the long platforms at Central, but do it a la Dovey Jn so as not to preclude full length trains. One middle road is probably enough, and better at the East end.

I'd put the middle road back in and build platfrom#1 out to it, with a short platfrom #0 bay for the Exmouths, formed from the original face.

Not convinced about the need for further reversing facilties at Central itself. I'd send trains through to the reversing siding at Exmouth Junction, or further to either the Exmouth branch or to become the stopping service on the main line to Honiton/Axminster. If a turnback facilty at the station was absolutely necessary for diagram/economic reason to save a train on a particular service then an inset bay at the st Davids end might be better, created again by putting a middle road back in and building the platform out to meet it at the Yeovil end. See Option 1 here:

 

[Irascible]

I've been assuming the PSB is rebuilt so there can be major signalling changes There's a fair amout of space to the north out the east end whch is currently just full of trees, and in fact I think ther's some on the south side too?

Running the WoE into St Davids P1 & Paignton/Barnstaple/Okehampton into P3 & maybe P4 would mesh nicely with making everything out to Exmouth Jct bidirectional. What is likely to turn round at Central; basically Barnstaple & Okehamptons that don't carry on to somewhere, so if you can route down WoEs through the up platform at Central then there's possibly no need for a west facing bay if you can hold the branch train in the down platform ( without it tripping up an Exmouth anyway ). Option 2 looks more flexible to me, although again there's a bunch of space outside the running lines still. Coming up the hill on the down line and parking in a turnback on the south side would mean no crossing a WoE train at all ( although the only benefit over Option 2 is not having to cross a running line to get to the train ).

 

[Ashley Hill]

Not convinced about the need for further reversing facilties at Central itself. I'd send trains through to the reversing siding at Exmouth Junction, or further to either the Exmouth branch

Don’t forget the cross over by Pennsylvania Bridge. This used to used quite often years ago to turn trains back towards St Davids but is a move that is seldom used now.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

All this talk of splitting platform 1 at Exeter St David’s etc misses the fact these trains are at the bottom of one of the steepest Railway Gradients in the country which requires enormous overlaps in case of brake issues coming down the bank.

There’s no point splitting platform 1 into two as you need the long overlap. That’s why you can’t have permissive working when trains coming down the bank from Central are involved.

 

[MarkyT]

All this talk of splitting platform 1 at Exeter St David’s etc misses the fact these trains are at the bottom of one of the steepest Railway Gradients in the country which requires enormous overlaps in case of brake issues coming down the bank.

There’s no point splitting platform 1 into two as you need the long overlap. That’s why you can’t have permissive working when trains coming down the bank from Central are involved.

In a comprehensive remodelling and resignalling, NR could potentially reassess whether the current measures are fully justified anymore for trains with modern braking capability and train protection systems. The throw-off on the down Waterloo might be improved to more effectively constrain and arrest an overrun resulting from a train permitted to approach the protecting home signal while the West Junction was blocked by a conflicting movement. Regardless, my buildout to a middle line for a replacement #1 with a short inset bay #0 at the west end along the existing face is designed primarily to accept an incoming local train from Paignton in #0 at the same time as an arrival from Crediton/Taunton or New Yard in the new #1. While that was taking place, a Down Waterloo would be held either at the West Junction Down Home or, if the current overrun arrangements were still justified, at Exeter Central's Down platform starter.

 

[Nucker]

would require a second platform at Polsloe Bridge (my local station), which is poorly located for access from the street. The old platform is gradually disappearing into the jungle. Relocation of the station the other side of the road bridge has been mentioned but it's all down to money.

If the LTN on hamlin lane becomes permanent, then car traffic would continue to be extremely low there, allowing for a widened pavement by removing one lane on the road.
Fighting into the jungle a bit, there would be plenty of room for a lift or ramp for step free access.
And if the other platform were reopened, you might be able to have an underpass that is above street level but below the railway to allow for accessing both platforms without having to go round pinhoe road (not sure if this is structurally possible).

 

[devon_belle]

If the LTN on hamlin lane becomes permanent, then car traffic would continue to be extremely low there, allowing for a widened pavement by removing one lane on the road.
Fighting into the jungle a bit, there would be plenty of room for a lift or ramp for step free access.
And if the other platform were reopened, you might be able to have an underpass that is above street level but below the railway to allow for accessing both platforms without having to go round pinhoe road (not sure if this is structurally possible).

Welcome to the forum! Your post has got me questioning whether modern accessibility requirements would be likely to preclude the construction of a second platform at Polsloe Bridge?

 

[Class172]

Welcome to the forum! Your post has got me questioning whether modern accessibility requirements would be likely to preclude the construction of a second platform at Polsloe Bridge?

I’ve never been able to work out where the boundary of the railway land is because it’s so overgrown, but I think it would be possible to construct a ramp for a platform behind the businesses on Polsloe Road. Perhaps the other question is: can the former platform be restored to a suitable condition, given its of the same construction as the existing platform, or would a replacement be required after 40 odd years of disuse?

 

[Nucker]

Welcome to the forum! Your post has got me questioning whether modern accessibility requirements would be likely to preclude the construction of a second platform at Polsloe Bridge?

Thanks! On the south side, surely there some space. There is nothing there except the railway and the road, both owned by the council. Alternatively, they could have something from Hamlin Lane Playing Fields, (also owned by the council I assume). The platform does stretch over HLPF a bit.

I haven't actually gotten off at St Thomas ever, but does anyone know if its a similar accessibility. Polsloe bridge is my local station, however its still a 15 minute walk, and its much more convenient to cycle making it only ~5 minutes. Its quite annoying that there is no easy way to get a bike up there. So hopefully the council or NR might actually look at renovating it to modern accessibility standards.

However, Whipton Bridge Halt (1906-1923) which was just to the east of Summer Lane could be useful, serving Exeter Arena and St James secondary school. We would no doubt need more capacity on the WofE line before anything like this could be worth doing.

Perhaps there would be room for this at the Eastern Playing Fields area. This would probably be no more than a short walk to St Lukes school as well. Would make most of schools in Exeter served by rail, as Isca Academy is about 15 minutes from Marsh Barton station, West Exe is about 20 minutes from Exeter St Thomas, and Exeter College is obviously served by Exeter Central or St Davids.
Could extra capacity be achieved by a third reversible track in the middle, at least at the new station, allowing for Waterloo services to bypass the local services? (I'm unsure of the proper terms, or if this even something that is done, sorry).

 

[devon_belle]

There is nothing there except the railway and the road, both owned by the council.

My point was more about funding issues rather than practicability. I agree with you that it seems as though there would be space, even if it was partially inset into the base of the embankment.

haven't actually gotten off at St Thomas ever, but does anyone know if its a similar accessibility.

My local for many years, only staircases at the moment. In the up direction it shouldn't be too hard to provide a lift, as long as it doesn't block entrance to any of the stores in the arches. In the down direction, the former station building is now a (derelict) restaurant, and in the only obvious space there is next to the staircase on that side there are entrances to stores in the arches. Not sure what the best solution would be; the down platform used to extend much further, fully over Cowick St, but reinstating this is unlikely to be a priority (or practical). Plus, then, you'd need the road crossing facilities to be improved to get to a lift on that side.

Perhaps there would be room for this at the Eastern Playing Fields area. This would probably be no more than a short walk to St Lukes school as well. Would make most of schools in Exeter served by rail, as Isca Academy is about 15 minutes from Marsh Barton station, West Exe is about 20 minutes from Exeter St Thomas, and Exeter College is obviously served by Exeter Central or St Davids.

Rail services in the area transport a lot of school and college students, from as far away as Crewkerne (but mostly only to Honiton), in my experience. I think that a station in the general vicinity of the former Whipton Bridge Halt would actually be beneficial for a few reasons (or one slightly closer to Morrisons), but could probably not be well-served before there is capacity for fast and local flows on the western end of the WofE line. London passengers probably would not appreciate being forced to stop at another station in the Exeter area.

Could extra capacity be achieved by a third reversible track in the middle, at least at the new station, allowing for Waterloo services to bypass the local services? (I'm unsure of the proper terms, or if this even something that is done, sorry).

Do you mean at this 'Exeter Arena' station that we are proposing near the site of Whipton Bridge Halt? The planning experts will be hot on my tails, but I hesitatingly suggest that this would be too close to the origin point of the services to be useful... maybe it would be better off at Exeter Central, so at least trains could call simultaneously by using a scissors half way along the platform and a new middle road, as suggested above.

 

[Irascible]

Trains could call simultaneously at Central just by using both existing platforms.

 

[devon_belle]

Trains could call simultaneously at Central just by using both existing platforms.

I think the implicit suggestion is to allow for more train movements, which is something currently constrained by the incline between St Davids and Central (although there may be some spare capacity). As such, improvements to Central can unlock more capacity as trains will not be required to queue on the bank.

 

[SJ21]

I do believe that Exeter is becoming very congested, especially coming down 'The Bank' EXD-EXC and vice versa. However, we have got to remember the current infrastructure limits (Including bridges ETC)

To that end:

-Platform 4 at St David's needs to be reconnected to Exeter Central by a new spur. Any option splitting P1 and P3 is not an option. The current signalling is interlocked, so any signal at Central will not clear until P1 or P3 at EXD are completely empty, to allow for a large overlap. Permissive working is allowed from all other directions (Cowley Bridge and St Thomas)
-Allow Bi-Directional running at Exeter Central for platform 3. This would allow trains to turn in the platform, as well as provide more general overall flexibility. To also install a new crossover from the Up Waterloo at Central (P3) to the Down Waterloo outside of St David's would also be beneficial, providing redundancy (Crossover already exist from Down Waterloo to Up Waterloo, allowing for P2 at Central to be Bi-Directonal.
-Insert new Crossovers to allow P4 and P5 to be become Bi-Directional at Taunton, as well as allow further use of P6 the bay.

Not Exeter Signal Box related but Exmouth Junction (Separate box that controls Pinhoe and the Exmouth Branch)

-Redouble the 1st mile of the branch to Exmouth to make use of the redundant platform at Polsloe Bridge, and allow an Overlap for redundancy. This would mean less hold ups on the mainline when a Exmouth train is waiting for unit to come of the branch at Exmouth Junction 8 Signal, and means that the 1 Lima from Exeter to Waterloo can pass without disruption. This method would also allow a new station to be built at Hill Barton, with the double track ending just before this station
-Provide a new passing loop at Whimple for Redundancy.

I believe that these plans will be extremely beneficial, making the best use of the current land and infrastructure in place. Let me know what you think!

 

[Irascible]

I think the implicit suggestion is to allow for more train movements, which is something currently constrained by the incline between St Davids and Central (although there may be some spare capacity). As such, improvements to Central can unlock more capacity as trains will not be required to queue on the bank.

The down line is bidi already, so ( if there's not something else tripping it up ) I suppose you could already dispatch from P1 and P3 at St Davids, so no queueing there. If the up line on the bank was bi-di too you could send a train from Central up platform down to St Davids P1 without crossing the Exmouth branch at all ( which was my rationale for bi-di all the way to Exmouth Jct ), or into P3/P4 with the right pointwork. So, what are we trying to cross? two Exmouth line & a WoE? something's going to be sitting in Central for quite a while before they can get a road whatever happens, although I guess if St D needs a platform it's better they sit there. Need the input of someone keen on building timetables to see what's actually needed I think.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Redouble the 1st mile of the branch to Exmouth to make use of the redundant platform at Polsloe Bridge, and allow an Overlap for redundancy. This would mean less hold ups on the mainline when a Exmouth train is waiting for unit to come of the branch at Exmouth Junction 8 Signal, and means that the 1 Lima from Exeter to Waterloo can pass without disruption.

Realistically you would double from the junction but just short of Polsloe Bridge to avoid expensive station rebuilding work but provide space for a train to Exmouth to clear onto the branch without blocking trains behind.