Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[Cliveblackpool]

I really do encourage you to respond on their website.

For me, the arguments are straightforward. The Okehampton route will cost about 25% of the cost of a tunnelled route, delivers more resilience, connects North Devon and indirectly North Cornwall and can be built "quickly" before any other interventions which are eventually decided upon. You can reopen Okehampton and then build an expensive tunnel. Any decision to build an expensive tunnel in the "near" future will kick Okehampton into the very very long grass.

The disadvantages of the Okehampton route are wrong-facing junctions in both Exeter and Plymouth. Can anyone on this forum suggest ways in which that particular objection can be overcome?

For everyday services on a Waterloo to Plymouth via Okehampton - no reversals necessary. Don't think that service would be extended to Penzance.
(Diverted trains would need 2 reversals)
A proposed Devon and Cornwall TOC could further isolate Devon, Plymouth & Cornwall.

 

[drinnicksiding]

I think the report is poor. This report had been hyped up as a significant step when announced the media that it would be due in September. A long time in the making to essentially make very obvious points about why there is a business case for shorter journey times.

The prospect of an additional line is nowhere near prominent enough and the business case is harder to judge/quantify. I had assumed this had been where the taskforce's "skill set" would have of value. This report in no way signifies progress for me and reading the comments to the media, one of the contributors appears to imply he is a very busy man and that he doesn't have the time to progress the issue.

Yet another indicator that nothing will happen very quickly. If they think 20 years, and that'll be them being optimistic, I think we may have been the first signs that the inland route is slowly being phased out of media interest

 

[yorksrob]

I think the report is poor. This report had been hyped up as a significant step when announced the media that it would be due in September. A long time in the making to essentially make very obvious points about why there is a business case for shorter journey times.

The prospect of an additional line is nowhere near prominent enough and the business case is harder to judge/quantify. I had assumed this had been where the taskforce's "skill set" would have of value. This report in no way signifies progress for me and reading the comments to the media, one of the contributors appears to imply he is a very busy man and that he doesn't have the time to progress the issue.

Yet another indicator that nothing will happen very quickly. If they think 20 years, and that'll be them being optimistic, I think we may have been the first signs that the inland route is slowly being phased out of media interest

Is there a link to the comments of this individual?

I believe the public have a right to ask why someone given this responsibility isn't pulling his weight.

 

[HowardGWR]

For everyday services on a Waterloo to Plymouth via Okehampton - no reversals necessary. Don't think that service would be extended to Penzance.
(Diverted trains would need 2 reversals)
A proposed Devon and Cornwall TOC could further isolate Devon, Plymouth & Cornwall.

There is more potential flexibility than that. Diversions from Pad can be via Yeovil, especially if the Exeter -Yeovil stretch is finally doubled throughout.

At the same time, Waterloo to Exeter trains could run through to Plymouth via Okehampton, perhaps every other one (thus two hourly). What I think is troubling the various lobbies, is that any 'crayonista' solutions such as Okehampton to Tavistock re-opening (not really crayonista) will mean decades of waiting for them. Thus I imagine a simple plea for a speed up has found favour. The only problem with that is that such does not address the strategic issue. A simpler case would have been 'we have an A38 /A380 and and A30 so why not an Okehampton route reopening? Do we want to restore resilient rail strategic links or don't we?

 

[yorksrob]

There is more potential flexibility than that. Diversions from Pad can be via Yeovil, especially if the Exeter -Yeovil stretch is finally doubled throughout.

At the same time, Waterloo to Exeter trains could run through to Plymouth via Okehampton, perhaps every other one (thus two hourly). What I think is troubling the various lobbies, is that any 'crayonista' solutions such as Okehampton to Tavistock re-opening (not really crayonista) will mean decades of waiting for them. Thus I imagine a simple plea for a speed up has found favour. The only problem with that is that such does not address the strategic issue. A simpler case would have been 'we have an A38 /A380 and and A30 so why not an Okehampton route reopening? Do we want to restore resilient rail strategic links or don't we?

Indeed. It appears to be a case of completely forgetting the main issue that prompted these reports in the first place and alighting on a general wish-list of upgrades.

 

[Martin_1981]

For everyday services on a Waterloo to Plymouth via Okehampton - no reversals necessary. Don't think that service would be extended to Penzance.
(Diverted trains would need 2 reversals)
A proposed Devon and Cornwall TOC could further isolate Devon, Plymouth & Cornwall.

Train reversals are much easier now, with predominantly multiple unit trains (inc HST's) than they ever used to be back in the days of locomotive hauled trains, so reversals shouldn't pose too much of an issue. If the Paddington-Penzance sleeper is still loco hauled if the Okehampton route was ever to be reopened, yes there would be a need for 2 loco run rounds. This train sometimes reverses at Exeter anyway if it is diverted via Honiton and Yeovil, which it is sometimes, usually on Sunday nights.