Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[yorksrob]

The towns en route still need a service, you know. It's that kind of thinking that led to the disastrous network we have now, where duplicate routes were closed with no thought for the people living in the towns actually on the routes.

Quite.

We'd be replacing a double track main line plus a single track secondary route with one double track route only. A pretty undesireable outcome in terms of capacity and resilience !
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As for Tavistock-Okehampton, I think the £500m-£700m price is for a mainline-standard route along the whole length from Exeter to Plymouth; building to branch-line standards would be much cheaper and provide almost all the benefits to locals of a full rebuild - but would not provide capacity or speed for express services. The only train I could see using the North Devon route in the case of a more typical (2-3 day) closure would be the Night Riviera. You'd be looking at coaches from Exeter for everything else anyway.

I suspect the £500 - £700 price has probably been plucked out of the air by Cllr Evans, much like his vision of the Okehampton route as some sort of "heritage line" (presumably complete with santa specials etc).

There's no reason why a single track secondary route couldn't carry diversions. They do via Yeovil.

 

[The Ham]

I can't see the case for the DAL (or similar route) on its own.

As part of a strategic upgrade for routes to the SW, designed to get London-Plymouth timings down, it would definitely have its place, but as a pure stand-alone exercise, the time gains don't justify the cost.

As for Tavistock-Okehampton, I think the £500m-£700m price is for a mainline-standard route along the whole length from Exeter to Plymouth; building to branch-line standards would be much cheaper and provide almost all the benefits to locals of a full rebuild - but would not provide capacity or speed for express services. The only train I could see using the North Devon route in the case of a more typical (2-3 day) closure would be the Night Riviera. You'd be looking at coaches from Exeter for everything else anyway.

If Tavistock-Okehampton hadn't been closed by the Beeching Axe, then, as the mostly-single-track branch-line that is all its normal traffic-flows could justify, what I'd expect to see at the moment is an emergency timetable with a single hourly service from Penzance to London, with a Paignton-Plymouth service (via Newton Abbot) timed for a connection and a Cross-Country leaving from Exeter timed to allow Plymouth/Cornwall passengers to connect.

If I was given a large budget to really upgrade the SW's services, I'd close Salisbury-Exeter for an upgrade, dual-track, electrify and straighten that entire route, put in a chord from Exeter Central to St Thomas (bypassing St Davids), and build the DAL from Exeter to Newton Abbot. Electrify Salisbury-Basingstoke, and do the proposed Basingstoke-Waterloo conversion to OHLE. That would get a faster London-Plymouth service than the GWR route (it's shorter, straighter and on better terrain), and have the advantage of running from Waterloo instead of Paddington.

When you're finished, you might even close Reading-Taunton, as the fast London-Exeter service would then run from Waterloo and you'd retain the slow route via Bristol to Paddington (also needed for XC services via Birmingham).

Although I agree with much of what you have said there are a few problems:

- Running from Waterloo would require Crossrail 2 to allow more services to be able to run. Although this then does allow the services which move away from Paddington to be replaced with additional services to other areas on the GW network. Although in reality is probably at least 15 years away, so that's a long time to wait for journey time improvements.

- If you are electrifying from Waterloo to Exeter then there would probably be a fairly good case to electrify to Newton Abbot (assuming the DAL is built with passive provision for wires). Although this could cause problems on the existing route through Dawlish, as then it starts being a good idea to electrify between Paignton and Exmouth for the local services if they used the DAL but not if they followed the coast. Therefore a strong case could be made to have a very limited DMU service through Dawlish as those services would only be serving a very few people.

- If you are spending about £500m on the line through Okehampton (and NR's brief does include looking at options where the journey time can be reduced from the current) then chances are that the average speed for the journey could creep above 60mph (especially for non stop services), meaning that it would be able to give the existing route a run for it's money if not be able to beat the improvements that the DAL could provide. For instance if the average speed for the journey was to be 65mph it would take about 55 minutes (about 5 minutes faster) up it to 70mph and it would take about 50 minutes and start to be in the realms of beating the journey time saving that the DAL could achieve, up it to above 90mph and it could take 40 minutes or less (which would be more than the DAL could dream of achieving unless there were other line-speed improvements).

- You probably could spend a similar amount on the existing line(s) to get similar journey time savings, but then we could be looking at the same sort of problems that the WCML upgrade had where there's lots of weekend closures (and I can imagine the political fallout from that if you couldn't get to Cornwall during a school holiday weekend by train!).

 

[HowardGWR]

Possibly some tongue in cheek contributions here today?

 

[po8crg]

Possibly some tongue in cheek contributions here today?

I know mine was!

 

[Graiser]

Here is another snippet of information, but does anyone recognise the station?

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co....tory-20789960-detail/story.html#ixzz2vqPIkXwF

Looks like Cullompton

 

[HowardGWR]

Looks like Cullompton

It is - well, I suppose it begins with a C, is in Devon, and is within 50 miles of Crediton. It's so confusing being a cub reporter, I suppose.

 

[Graiser]

Whereas I would live to see the Okehampton route open again, after seeing first hand the design of the work on the main washout site, there will never be a breach at that particular location ever again, so why not over a period of time reconstruct the sea wall and formation to a similar design from Red Rock to Teignmouth and maybe breakwater's opposite Dawlish and Spray Point

 

[yorksrob]

Whereas I would live to see the Okehampton route open again, after seeing first hand the design of the work on the main washout site, there will never be a breach at that particular location ever again, so why not over a period of time reconstruct the sea wall and formation to a similar design from Red Rock to Teignmouth and maybe breakwater's opposite Dawlish and Spray Point

Good idea (once the secondary route via Okehampton is safely up and running).

 

[Graiser]

It is - well, I suppose it begins with a C, is in Devon, and is within 50 miles of Crediton. It's so confusing being a cub reporter, I suppose.

It's quite an old picture that's the M5 Cullompton services now
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
For interest, the track is planned to commence reinstatement on March 23rd, when trains start running again (April 4th ) this conversation will subside like a spring tide

 

[yorksrob]

this conversation will subside like a spring tide

And Councillor Evans will still be stuck out on a limb, waiting for the next time his short sightedness leaves Plymouth without any trains.

 

[Graiser]

It's not just the sea wall, the critical path is now the cliff, 25000 - 40000 tons about to fall

 

[yorksrob]

It's not just the sea wall, the critical path is now the cliff, 25000 - 40000 tons about to fall

This conversation will probably have to un-subside then.

 

[The Ham]

Whereas I would live to see the Okehampton route open again, after seeing first hand the design of the work on the main washout site, there will never be a breach at that particular location ever again, so why not over a period of time reconstruct the sea wall and formation to a similar design from Red Rock to Teignmouth and maybe breakwater's opposite Dawlish and Spray Point

If the quoted cost of £15m for the current reinstatement is right, how much would it cost to reconstruct the whole length and how many weekend closures would it take?

 

[Graiser]

If the quoted cost of £15m for the current reinstatement is right, how much would it cost to reconstruct the whole length and how many weekend closures would it take?

I think you have to remember that this work was unplanned and includes several smaller but still significant breaches and cliff falls, so it's not circa 15m for the main breach which is the main focus for the media, so you have about a mile of vulnerable sea wall from Red Rock to Kennaway Tunnel and a further 1.25 miles from Parsons Tunnel to Teignmouth, albeit a significant investment but not anywhere near the 300-500 million range mentioned for Okehampton.
As for closures, well we've been closed for 6 weeks now, with planned works much more could be achieved in that timescale, needs thinking about.

 

[yorksrob]

albeit a significant investment but not anywhere near the 300-500 million range mentioned for Okehampton.

So not a Dawlish cut-off then.

 

[Graiser]

So not a Dawlish cut-off then.

With significant investment- NO

 

[yorksrob]

With significant investment- NO

Well, the South West needs significant rail investment. Will still be the poor relation compared to Cities like Exeter that have more than one route out though.

 

[moggie]

If the diversionary route built is the DAL option in preference to reinstatement of the Okehampton route what chances of a similar expensive repair of the existing coastal route being undertaken next time it gets hammered when the alternative route is so close by?

The DAL option could lead to withdrawal of a usable rail service for Dawlish and Teignmouth sooner unless this route is chosen with these towns in mind also.

 

[The Ham]

If the diversionary route built is the DAL option in preference to reinstatement of the Okehampton route what chances of a similar expensive repair of the existing coastal route being undertaken next time it gets hammered when the alternative route is so close by?

The DAL option could lead to withdrawal of a usable rail service for Dawlish and Teignmouth sooner unless this route is chosen with these towns in mind also.

That is the point I've been trying to make but no one else apears to have noticed, which is why I would (at the current time) favour the route through Okehampton. As the DAL either has to serve the existing towns and therefore is unlikely to see much journey time saving. If, however, it doesn't there is a risk that because places like Dawlish and Teignmouth contribute relitivly few passengers to the train services that they are left with a token service.

The only way I could see the DAL possibly save getting on for the 15 minutes quoted by others would be by the local stoppping services no longer stop at Dawlish and Teignmouth by nipping along the DAL. That would only benefit fairly small numbers of people, but they would be a significant number of people who use those local services. You could then bet that the people of Torbay would start to call for more of their services to use the DAL rather than following the coastal route if they were looking to be able to save (say) 20 minutes a day if they work in Exeter.

Their demands will get all the louder if there is a case for electricfication beyond Exeter (espicially if the branch to Torbay is included in the wiring up proposal) as then the local services could be running most of the way under wires and with a fairly small amout of extra wiring (i.e. to Exmouth) the local services could be run by EMU's but only if they use the DAL. As to wire the coastal route as well could add a significant cost to the budget with little benefit.

However the DAL is going to be hard pushed to achive much more than a few minutes (espicially if it does serve the coastal towns as well) on the express services (which is where it would count the most as they carry the vast majority of passengers between Exeter and Newton Abbot) if it is only 7 miles of new track.

In due course, once passenger numbers grow more, that risk diminishes as although there will still be fairly few passengers from those towns compared with the longer distance services the actual number could be enough to provide a reasonable service along the coast.

 

[HSTEd]

Presumably IC services would divert via the DAL and the seafront line would be left with local services between Exeter and Plymouth, which may be increased in frequency.

Could also extend trains from Barnstaple to Teignmouth/Newton Abbot to give a few extras.

 

[The Ham]

Presumably IC services would divert via the DAL and the seafront line would be left with local services between Exeter and Plymouth, which may be increased in frequency.

Could also extend trains from Barnstaple to Teignmouth/Newton Abbot to give a few extras.

That maybe what would be the best option, but there are a few problems with that:

- Newton Abbot to Exeter takes about 38 minutes on the stopping services, so any extension to the Barnstable services would probably require two additional DMU's (which are very hard to come by at present).

- If by bypassing Dawlish the local services could get to Exeter 10 minutes faster there is going to be a significant amount of presure from Torbay for their services to go that way, espicially if it means that they could have an EMU service. Meaning that the extension from Barnstable could be the only service Dawlish could have (as Barnstable is likely to remain as a DMU service for some time), which could mean that to get to Torbay would require a change at Newton Abbot.

 

[HSTEd]

I am assuming that if we are building several miles of new track, we can spare a few DMUs to operate a relatively short extension of the service.
A handful of Turbostars or similar would not cost a very large fraction of the schemes, and if they are unaffordable how on Earth is Oakhampton going to get rolling stock?

 

[jmc100]

Whereas I would live to see the Okehampton route open again, after seeing first hand the design of the work on the main washout site, there will never be a breach at that particular location ever again, so why not over a period of time reconstruct the sea wall and formation to a similar design from Red Rock to Teignmouth and maybe breakwater's opposite Dawlish and Spray Point

You're quite right. I suspect another storm will not be able to touch the sites of the repairs. But what about the rest of the sea wall - it is still vulnerable to the excesses of nature. An alternative route is more than a necessity to keep services running. If a similar event and a washout happens again, which it could, the only station affected would be Dawlish as it's the only station on the sea wall. Trains from Newton Abbot could still run to the Torbay and Teignmouth and services could be maintained with Exeter and further afield. I do not think journey times are as important as service continuity. But without the reinstatement of an alternative route everything will revert back to square one - again.

 

[MarkyT]

If there was a fast DAL whether electrified or not, there would certainly be capacity for an additional regular tier of fast services between the Torbay branch and Exeter St. Davids via the new route. That might be extended to form the suggested local service east of Exeter, calling all stations to Taunton including new stops at Collumpton and Wellington. The existing stopping service via Dawlish is likely to be be retained and increased too with the attraction of running through to Exeter Central and Sowton en route to Exmouth, and that would maintain direct links between Torbay and Teignmouth and Dawlish, also ensuring a frequent turn-up-and-go service on the Torbay branch for local passengers and those interchanging to and from long distance trains at Newton Abbot. The undesirability of electrification along the entire coast line might be tackled by using proposed new electric trains with battery or other energy storage on board for the local services. The idea is these units can negotiate gaps in the catenary where its provision is difficult or uneconomic, recharging when under the wires.

 

[The Ham]

...how on Earth is Oakhampton going to get rolling stock?

That depends on the line speed on the route and what you are using as your baseline.

If they can run end to end and be ready to run again in 90 minutes or less then you only need three sets.

However if you are assuming that the route to Tavistock would be running anyway with one set and the route to Okehampton would be running anyway with one set (both of which are likely to happen) then that is only one extra set which would be required rather than the two sets which I suggested would be needed to extend the Barnstable service to Newton Abbot.

Also, it is likely that the service through Okehampton would generate more passnegers than the extension to Newton Abbot, which would mean a better return on the use of the rolling stock.

 

[po8crg]

There won't be a big shortage of DMUs by the time anything is built, as the CP5 electrification programme will release lots of DMUs. Obviously, many of them will be used to get rid of the Pacers, but electrification is much more extensive than that.

Someone is going to be making a lot of new EMUs.

 

[The Ham]

There won't be a big shortage of DMUs by the time anything is built, as the CP5 electrification programme will release lots of DMUs. Obviously, many of them will be used to get rid of the Pacers, but electrification is much more extensive than that.

Someone is going to be making a lot of new EMUs.

Some on here have their doubts as to how many Pacers we're going see scrapped in 2020, as although there are a lot of lines being electrified there are also a lot of lines which need more capacity. Therefore by the time you scrap some sets, use some for extending existing services, use some to provide a bt more slack for mainternance (and most DMU's are very intensively used) and use others for already committed new sevices that doesn't leave many trains for non committed services.

Yes there maybe more DMU's which could be replaced by EMU's once the CP6 electrification schemes start, and there may need to be a new order of DMU's in CP6 due to the number of DMU's which will need to be replaced due to their age (i.e. trains built in the 1980's will all be 35+ years old by the end of CP6) but I doubt we will ever see a time when there are more DMU's than could be used. This means that it would be difficult to find 2 sets for a nice to have service (i.e. extending the service from Barnstable).

In fact I wouldn't be supprised if even finding the trains for the committed services in the (i.e. in the SW the services to Okehampton, to Tavistock and to Portishead) is going to be very hard work.

Siemens and Bombardier already are making quite a few EMU's (about 200 coaches for Southern, TPE and London Mindland which are currently being delivered), even if you ignore the orders placed for Thameslink and Crossrail. Then of course you have the Hitachi trains for GW and ICEC coming along soon too. That's over 2,500 coaches in those three orders alone all of which are due for delivery in the next 5 years! Other than freeing up the existing Thameslink stock and the IC 225's they are either for new lines or are replacing the IC125's.

Then there's the possibility of new commuter EMU's for the Thames Valley (will free up DMU's but chances are it has have already been decided where they're going), new EMU's for East West (new line), new EMU's for ICWC (free's up 221's, mostly likely to be used by XC), even more EMU's for SWT's (basicly just strengthing services) and some form of electric train for the MML (frees up 222's, possibly heading to Scotland or to replace the IC125's to the West Country, depending on which way you think they'll go) which I would expect to be delivered in a similar timeframe. That's just those which are well known about, I wouldn't be supprised if as the new franchises are let there's even more EMU's which are ordered. In short, yes someone is going to be building a LOT of EMU's, however very few of them will be to allow DMU's to be used elsewhere other than strenghting existing services or replacing scraped trains.

 

[47802]

That is the point I've been trying to make but no one else apears to have noticed, which is why I would (at the current time) favour the route through Okehampton. As the DAL either has to serve the existing towns and therefore is unlikely to see much journey time saving. If, however, it doesn't there is a risk that because places like Dawlish and Teignmouth contribute relitivly few passengers to the train services that they are left with a token service.

The only way I could see the DAL possibly save getting on for the 15 minutes quoted by others would be by the local stoppping services no longer stop at Dawlish and Teignmouth by nipping along the DAL. That would only benefit fairly small numbers of people, but they would be a significant number of people who use those local services. You could then bet that the people of Torbay would start to call for more of their services to use the DAL rather than following the coastal route if they were looking to be able to save (say) 20 minutes a day if they work in Exeter.

Their demands will get all the louder if there is a case for electricfication beyond Exeter (espicially if the branch to Torbay is included in the wiring up proposal) as then the local services could be running most of the way under wires and with a fairly small amout of extra wiring (i.e. to Exmouth) the local services could be run by EMU's but only if they use the DAL. As to wire the coastal route as well could add a significant cost to the budget with little benefit.

However the DAL is going to be hard pushed to achive much more than a few minutes (espicially if it does serve the coastal towns as well) on the express services (which is where it would count the most as they carry the vast majority of passengers between Exeter and Newton Abbot) if it is only 7 miles of new track.

In due course, once passenger numbers grow more, that risk diminishes as although there will still be fairly few passengers from those towns compared with the longer distance services the actual number could be enough to provide a reasonable service along the coast.

What utter rubbish there is no reason why the existing services which currently call at Dawlish continue to do so, while those that don't take the DAL

In any case to make that an argument for justifying Okehampton is the most ridiculous nonsense I have ever come across

As for the argument about electrification which is clearly a long way off, well yes possibly Dawlish might not be electrified while DAL is but i'm sure a suitable service could be provided instead by Diesels, Hybrids or even Battery EMU's, in any case to use that as an argument in favour of Okehampton is ridiculous.

 

[The Ham]

What utter rubbish there is no reason why the existing services which currently call at Dawlish continue to do so, while those that don't take the DAL

In any case to make that an argument for justifying Okehampton is the most ridiculous nonsense I have ever come across

As for the argument about electrification which is clearly a long way off, well yes possibly Dawlish might not be electrified while DAL is but i'm sure a suitable service could be provided instead by Diesels, Hybrids or even Battery EMU's, in any case to use that as an argument in favour of Okehampton is ridiculous.

There is no reason other than it is the only way the DAL is likely to provide a noticable jounrney time saving over the existing route. As 7 miles of faser route for the expresses isn't going to get them down much below the current 18 minutes, maybe to just a little bellow 15 minutes. 4 or maybe 5 minutes saving on a journey where a lot of people will be travelling for about 3 hours (and the vast majority would be travelling for at least an hour) is hardly going to make any difference to anyone.

I didn't say it justified the route through Okehampton, I said that it cause me to favoured it, there is a difference. If the case for the DAL is better than the route through Okehampton then build that; but watch out for campains for the local services to go via the DAL, as that is where the largest time savings would be possible.

 

[47802]

There is no reason other than it is the only way the DAL is likely to provide a noticable jounrney time saving over the existing route. As 7 miles of faser route for the expresses isn't going to get them down much below the current 18 minutes, maybe to just a little bellow 15 minutes. 4 or maybe 5 minutes saving on a journey where a lot of people will be travelling for about 3 hours (and the vast majority would be travelling for at least an hour) is hardly going to make any difference to anyone.

I didn't say it justified the route through Okehampton, I said that it cause me to favoured it, there is a difference. If the case for the DAL is better than the route through Okehampton then build that; but watch out for campains for the local services to go via the DAL, as that is where the largest time savings would be possible.

If as you say the DAL only saves a few mins, and it remains to be seen, then its not going to make any difference to local services going via Dawlish or Torbay expresses for that matter, you could use that logic now to speed up local services and Torbay expresses by not calling at Dawlish and Teignmouth. etc, but there is no current justification for doing that.