• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

MP calls for Dawlish Bypass

Status
Not open for further replies.

Trainbuff

Member
Joined
1 Jan 2011
Messages
120
Location
Plymouth
In 1937 an Act of Parliament was approved for the Great Western railways revised “Dawlish Avoiding Line” from Exminster to Hackney (Newton Abbot) and due for completion in 1941.The necessary land was bought and "pegged" out prior to construction starting but the outbreak of war stopped everything of course.It involved quadruple tracking and a two mile mile tunnel through the Halden hills.Incidentally at the same time another new line onward from Newton Abbot bypassing Totnes as well as Dainton and Rattery banks and rejoining the present rail route near the twin bore Marley tunnel was also surveyed with hopes of eventually pushing on towards Plymouth at a later date.Also both schemes were to be engineered to a minimum 1 mile radius curvature for high speed.The fact that the Dawlish avoiding line was given the go ahead at all when there was already the alternative Southern route available via Okhampton at the time speaks volumes that even then in 1937 the alternative routes available were not really considered suitable.Another issue with the present route via dawlish is that it is very indirect as far as destinations from Newton Abbot westwards are concerned.Exeter St Davids to Dawlish Warren is 10 rail miles but only actually moves you 1.3 miles closer to Plymouth,that nearly 9 dead miles before you start even.(When a west bound train passes under the M5 at Exminster road traffic heading west is almost moving in the opposite direction to the train).So you can see why this scheme was given the go-ahead in 1937 and why it is again being seen as a long term solution to a historical problem.

Yes I do understand the above. however in 1937 the Great Western Railway and the Southern were competitors.

The GWR would not want to rely on access over another companies metals.

That is why the grandly named Plymouth, Devonport and South Western Junction Railway built the route between Lydford and Devonport Junction (finished 1890) at huge expense. Up till that time the LSWR had running powers over the GWR branch from Lydford to Plymouth via Tavistock and Yelverton. This proved totally unsatisfactory for the LSWR and without doubt they would have made it difficult for the GWR as well.

So it is not true to say that the line was given the go ahead because the Southern Route was unsatisfactory, but rather because it was a seperate company seeking to improve its own line.

Of course the Southern route did serve a more sparse population than in the South of Devon. So like other contributors, despite supporting the reopening of the line via Tavistock and Okehampton, I believe that the route via Newton Abbot and Totnes will have to be preserved in some form or another.

I do believe that the route via Okehampton would make for a very useful Diversionary route, even as just single track with passing places.

These days reversals of trains are not the time consuming things they once were. For instance the services from/to Cardiff from/to Nottingham ALL reverse at Derby!

As for Meldon Viaduct, part of the reason for closure was given as the fact that it needed strengthening. It was strengthened enough in the early 1960's enough so that Rebult Bullied Light Pacifics were allowed to use it. Something that had been banned before then. I am looking at a picture in the excellent book "The Heyday of the Wraships" which shows D808 crossing meldon in July 1966, apparently travelling in the Wrong direction with the Plymouth to Brighton Service. The caption reads that the former up line had been closed earlier in the year and the train was travelling on the Strengthened trestle. Additionally after the line closed to through traffic in 1968, it was still used for many years as a Headshunt for Stone trains from Meldon Quarry. I cant think of many trains heavier than this!!!

However I do suspect by now that work would be needed on the listed structure or a replacement built.

The line from Meldon has been encroached on in a few places and there are at least 3 bridges that would have to be replaced as well as some compulsory purchases, though not many.

As fuel prices rise and, despite ticket prices rising, passenger numbers continue to increase there may well come a time when reopening this route will become viable. I believe when Killbride looked at reopening the line to Tavistock there was also a serious look at the cost of reopening from Tavistock to Okehampton. 15.5 miles. Several years ago this cost was put at £100 million. I am not sure how much the Tunnel under Haldon would cost, but as I said the line from Newton to Exeter WILL need to be replaced sometime in the next 50 years or so.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
Electrification and ETCS for 140mph the entire way.
There may well be a case for 140 mph from Paddington to Bristol and 125 mph on some west of Bristol but I doubt a 140 mph GWML all the way to Plymouth could be justified.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As fuel prices rise and, despite ticket prices rising, passenger numbers continue to increase
The question here is how much of this is down to the availability of rock bottom advance fares which haven't risen that much in real terms. If trains become too busy then it may be that they decide just to start increasing these fares rather than investing more.
 
Last edited:

charlee

Member
Joined
14 Sep 2011
Messages
160
Location
Plymouth
Plymouth will never be electrified!

The reopening of the plymouth to tavistock line makes the odd 8 miles of track from tavistock to okehampton alot cheaper then making a new tunnel. However wou would need to double it and that wont happen.
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
Plymouth will never be electrified!
I wouldn't be so sure about that. It was under consideration by Network Rail a few years back. There is little benefit in electrifying only as far as Exeter unless you are going to start terminating most intercity services there.
 
Last edited:

charlee

Member
Joined
14 Sep 2011
Messages
160
Location
Plymouth
I wouldn't be so sure about that. It was under consideration by Network Rail a few years back. If you end electrification at Exeter then there would be a case for terminating quite a few intercity services there instead of Plymouth and I doubt that would be popular.

There would be uproar, if that every happend. Also it would be very bad for the city which now relies on the train network, after the short sighted council decided to close the airport, the city lacks the transport links it needs.

Do you know why the proposals to electrify down this far never happend?
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
Do you know why the proposals to electrify down this far never happend?
You can't electrify everything at once. The priority was the Paddington to Bristol and Cardiff route. Plymouth was a route for consideration, there was no committment on if or when it should be done.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
There may well be a case for 140 mph from Paddington to Bristol and 125 mph on some west of Bristol but I doubt a 140 mph GWML all the way to Plymouth could be justified.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The question here is how much of this is down to the availability of rock bottom advance fares which haven't risen that much in real terms. If trains become too busy then it may be that they decide just to start increasing these fares rather than investing more.

Perhaps, but ETCS allows line speeds to be raised as high as practicable.
It becomes a track quality and curvature issue and the additional costs of signal siting and the like dissapear as you simply have to have someone walk along the track changing the speed limit programmed into the balises.

And as for Plymouth never being electrified it is currently in a difficult posistion as far as electrification in that it has its intercity services split over two non electrified lines.
GWRM will likely lead to all traffic being rerouted via Bristol with only trains to Taunton via the Berks and Hants.
This improves the case for electrification considerably due to the reduced length of electrification required (Bristol is a lot closer than Newbury) and the fact that more services would be running over the electrified sections. (including any future electrodiesel voyagers).
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
What about Penzance though? The business case for electrification west of Plymouth is just not there.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
You can't electrify everything at once. The priority was the Paddington to Bristol and Cardiff route. Plymouth was a route for consideration, there was no committment on if or when it should be done.

As you say.

The NR electrifcation RUS of 2009 is perfectly clear, there are multiple options listed for electrification as far Plymouth and then as far as Penzance. There is no indication that the Dawlish sea wall is a problem.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
What about Penzance though? The business case for electrification west of Plymouth is just not there.

Well once you are at Plymouth Bi-mode IEP can go the rest of the way, with its distributed traction system it should have no trouble, especially considering the low line speeds.

Half of all the Paddington trains terminate at Plymouth.
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
Well once you are at Plymouth Bi-mode IEP can go the rest of the way, with its distributed traction system it should have no trouble, especially considering the low line speeds.
That's fine but then you'd need two fleets, unless you are suggesting using bi-mode IEP on services that terminate at Plymouth.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,633
That's fine but then you'd need two fleets, unless you are suggesting using bi-mode IEP on services that terminate at Plymouth.

Well I might need two fleets, but neither is additional to the ones we would have anyway. (The all electric IEPs would be an expansion of the fleet used on Bristol services, and the bi-mode ones will exist because we are already getting bi-mode IEPs)
So its a net reduction of one fleet (the HSTs).
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
I have to agree that I think re-instating Bere Alston - Okehampton should be the greater priority. This would be perfectly acceptable for diversions in times of adverse weather. True - it would never compete with the GWML in terms of speed (which, I understand has allowed Plymouth to be reached from London in two hours at times in the past), but by the same token, the new line would never compete with the Okehampton route in terms of improving local connectivity.

Obviously if passenger numbers continue to grow, or climate change causes the Dawlish route to become even more difficult to maintain in the future, it may become necessary to reroute it anyway.
 
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
968
Location
Blackpool south Shore
The government in the UK sadly don't plan long term.
This route to Exeter should be planned out now, mainly to speed up services to Plymouth, avoiding Dawlish. Even though funding may be 20+yrs away. Land etc.when up for sale should be acquired, at fair market values, and leased until needed. The last minute compulsory purchase could be avoided for most of it.
Electrification should be to Penzance. The non electrified lines are in danger of becoming a long branch line!
 

DavidBrown

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2011
Messages
234
Location
North Devon
Here's a map I have showing the route for the 1930's proposed diversion;

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=bi89qg&s=5

There were two routes proposed. One fast line from Exminster, passing west of Kenton and Dawlish before rejoining the current line at Bishopsteignton. The other proposal was for a shorter, but slower route from Dawlish Warren and to the west of Dawlish. This option wouldn't be possible today due to the amount of development at Dawlish Warren.
 

Woody

Member
Joined
10 Dec 2006
Messages
277
More benefit to journey times by extending the Great Western Route Modernisation to Plymouth via the Bristol-to-Plymouth Line.

Electrification and ETCS for 140mph the entire way.

As you say when any money does become available this to me would be by far the best use of limited resourses initially at least.With ETCS and Paddington to Bristol 140mph/Bristol to Bridgewater 125mph/Bridgewater to Exeter 100/110mph.Any real track improvements and alternative routes west of Exeter to Plymouth will sadly have to wait for more enlightened times I suspect.By concentrating investment via Bristol by electrifying Plymouth to Bristol and sending Penzance/Plymouth/Paddington services limited stop that way it would be much more cost effective use of limited resources on one single route.Even Bi-mode Voyagers could then also take advantage of electrification between Bristol and Plymouth.There could still be a semi-fast Paddington to Taunton service on the Berks and hants operated by Bi-mode IEP.
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,985
Location
Exeter
What about Penzance though? The business case for electrification west of Plymouth is just not there.

It may eventually be the case that if you are already doing to Plymouth it becomes more cost effective to continue on. Especially as with Objective One it might be possible to get Europe to pay half!
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
Especially as with Objective One it might be possible to get Europe to pay half!
Objective One ended in 2006. Since 2007 Cornwall has had converngence status although this does have some differences to Objective One. For example it has to be shown that it contributes to the Lisbon Agenda for econonmic growth and jobs.
 

mralexn

Member
Joined
2 Nov 2010
Messages
460
or just reopen the route via okehampton and tavistock properly and use that.

Yes, but imagine how much longer journey times would be :P plus doesn't that line come out just outside the North End of Exeter St Davids?
So a train coming from Plymouth would have to be reversed into ESD and then taking forward again to go north. Just seems to be a lot more hassle than its worth, and of course Not calling at Exeter would not be an option at all!
 
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
968
Location
Blackpool south Shore
Yes, but imagine how much longer journey times would be :P plus doesn't that line come out just outside the North End of Exeter St Davids?
So a train coming from Plymouth would have to be reversed into ESD and then taking forward again to go north. Just seems to be a lot more hassle than its worth, and of course Not calling at Exeter would not be an option at all!

The trains from Okehampton can run into EXD without reversal. But will reverse direction on leaving EXD going back over the same tracks to Cowley bridge (around 2 miles)
The Dawlish diversion is the way to go.
''Network Rail said the line in Dawlish was resilient to adverse weather.''
depends on how you ask the question!!
The sea wall is in good repair at the moment. The stone cages work well.
But Network Rail are not King Neptune!!
Plymouth Council could use the money from the sale of the airport to improve transport links.
imo the Plymouth Okehampton route should be reopened as a secondary route, and the trains using the Southern route to London Waterloo via EXD & EXC.
 

Woody

Member
Joined
10 Dec 2006
Messages
277
Before the motorway age it was common to see a large number of small scale road improvement schemes involving minor realignments to remove tight bends etc which when added together over time speeded up journeys.Surely this approach on the current rail route particularly west of Newton Abbot in the absence of a completely new rail route could over time help to alleviate the worst of the current severely speed restricted (55/60mph) track geometry to Plymouth.It always suprises me when you look out of a HST window and watch the train slowly snake it way down Dainton Bank towards Totnes at 55mph why Brunel chose the present winding alignment here when there was and still is plenty of flatter land available alongside to accommadate a far less speed restricted route.I understand that a big bang approach now would cost too much money but surely if the government funded small bite sized realignments of this inadequate section of route over time as and when finance became available rather than just bodge on as we are the problem could eventually be overcome.The recent closure of Plymouths airport has really brought to head the historical problem of its slow rail link to Exeter and beyond in local MPs and business leaders minds.Certainly the local paper in Plymouth is now frequently campaigning for better rail links in the consultative phase ot the next Great Western Franchise especially as I said since the loss of the citys airport and it evokes a very negative response towards Plymouths rail link particularly to Exeter from the general public.The obvious comparison is the shorter (by 7 miles) and faster (only 50 minutes drive from Plymouth to Tiverton parkway/75 minutes by rail) A38 dual carraigeway road to the M5 at Exeter.With the railways still effectively under government control despite John Majors psuodo privatisation politicians still largely decide rails winners and losers and its clear which category Plymouth and indeed the far South West still fall into at this time.
 

SWTCommuter

Member
Joined
17 Oct 2009
Messages
352
If the Exeter-Okehampton-Plymouth route is reopened, should it be part of the Great Western franchise or would it be better to run it as part of the SWT franchise as an extension of the Waterloo-Salisbury-Exeter route, as in SR and LSWR days? This would introduce an element of competition and there would be no need for trains to reverse at Exeter St Davids.
 

Chafford1

Member
Joined
25 Mar 2008
Messages
242
If the Exeter-Okehampton-Plymouth route is reopened, should it be part of the Great Western franchise or would it be better to run it as part of the SWT franchise as an extension of the Waterloo-Salisbury-Exeter route, as in SR and LSWR days? This would introduce an element of competition and there would be no need for trains to reverse at Exeter St Davids.

To be competitive, this would need Salisbury - Exeter redoubling throughout, line speed increases where possible to 100mph and extra capacity at Waterloo to handle extra trains.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top