Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[simon.exd]

I agree with this - Plymouth is an important city - if cutting it off is unimportant then either Plymouth is unimportant or the railway is!

How exactly is Plymouth so important? No doubt that a rail service HAS to be maintained into West Devon and Cornwall, no disputing the massive blow to this region by the line being closed but comparing Plymouth to somewhere like Manchester as a previous commentator did is crazy... very little industry, not in an area if high population, unable to attract sizable companys due to its location, even the airport closed...

 

[po8crg]

comparing Plymouth to somewhere like Manchester as a previous commentator did is crazy

My only comparison to Manchester is that Plymouth is about the same distance from London.

If conventional rail can cover 200 miles in about two hours, why does it take three and a half to get to Plymouth?

Even the tricky WCML route through Cumbria manages about 90mph. Warrington-Glasgow is within a couple of miles of Plymouth-Paddington, but is nearly an hour quicker.

 

[yorksrob]

How exactly is Plymouth so important? No doubt that a rail service HAS to be maintained into West Devon and Cornwall, no disputing the massive blow to this region by the line being closed but comparing Plymouth to somewhere like Manchester as a previous commentator did is crazy... very little industry, not in an area if high population, unable to attract sizable companys due to its location, even the airport closed...

Plymouth is a large City (albeit in the second tier after the core cities) and as well as being the local centre of industry and education, acts as a gateway to rhe wider South Weest. The fact that the surrounding area is economically underdeveloped makes it even more vital that the region is seen to be open for business in terms of transport.

 

[34104]

No and the Okehampton route doesn't solve the problem either, given possible rising sea levels, more severe storms and Land Slips on the Dawlish I think it maybe time to look at a replacement rather than an alternative

Don't really understand your point.The Okehampton route is about as far inland as you could wish for to avoid any consequences of climate change and the subsequent effect on coastal regions.How would it not solve the problem?

 

[jmc100]

My only comparison to Manchester is that Plymouth is about the same distance from London.

If conventional rail can cover 200 miles in about two hours, why does it take three and a half to get to Plymouth?

Even the tricky WCML route through Cumbria manages about 90mph. Warrington-Glasgow is within a couple of miles of Plymouth-Paddington, but is nearly an hour quicker.

You have to remember that when the route was constructed to Plymouth and beyond in the early 1800s, speed was not a major factor but a railway provided the convenience of being able to travel between cities rather than using a horse-drawn carriage. Geography of the area was a contributing factor as well. Brunel saw that the easiest way he could construct a route for a main line between Exeter and Newton Abbot would be to follow the coastline and that is what we see at Dawlish. The line is practically on the level between these two locations.

As an example of why it sometimes takes longer to travel by rail between two points consider the line from Bristol to Gloucester. By road, it is just over thirty miles but by rail it is fifty-five miles and this is the same problem with the routes in the South-West. The routes are not straight but twist and turn. Have a look at the cab view journey on youtube between Newton Abbot and Plymouth and you will see what I mean. Really, to improve journey times the route needs to be re-engineered and straightened but this could be an expensive exercise. Maybe, a new HS3 need to be planned for the future between London and Penzance if you consider journey times an important issue.

Anyway, the consideration of journey time is not what this thread is about. It would appear that the only alternative route worth considering in the short term to keep the trains running 365 days would be the Dartmoor route. The route is practically intact and would only require some new bridges and strengthening work to the viaduct at Meldon. I think if a major decision was taken this year it could be operational within two to three years, maybe even less.

 

[47802]

Anyway, the consideration of journey time is not what this thread is about. It would appear that the only alternative route worth considering in the short term to keep the trains running 365 days would be the Dartmoor route. The route is practically intact and would only require some new bridges and strengthening work to the viaduct at Meldon. I think if a major decision was taken this year it could be operational within two to three years, maybe even less.

Ok so what deluded planet are you on, as far as I am aware some of the Track bed around Tavistock doesn't still exist, Network rail don't own most of the missing section so the idea of getting this up and running in 2 to 3 years or less aint going to happen.

In any case we should be taking the best long term view.

 

[Western Lord]

As an example of why it sometimes takes longer to travel by rail between two points consider the line from Bristol to Gloucester. By road, it is just over thirty miles but by rail it is fifty-five miles and this is the same problem with the routes in the South-West. The routes are not straight but twist and turn. Have a look at the cab view journey on youtube between Newton Abbot and Plymouth and you will see what I mean. Really, to improve journey times the route needs to be re-engineered and straightened but this could be an expensive exercise. Maybe, a new HS3 need to be planned for the future between London and Penzance if you consider journey times an important issue.

And where exactly is this 55 mile route between Bristol and Gloucester? Temple Meads to Gloucester Central is 39.14 miles. by road the journey is 34 miles. An "HS3" from London to Penzance is in the realms of fantasy. The rail network in the south west is what it is and there will be no significant changes to it. Speed is simply not a factor in most journeys to the south west and massive investment in infrastructure would be a monstrous waste of money.

 

[jmc100]

Ok so what deluded planet are you on, as far as I am aware some of the Track bed around Tavistock doesn't still exist, Network rail don't own most of the missing section so the idea of getting this up and running in 2 to 3 years or less aint going to happen.

In any case we should be taking the best long term view.

47802, Anyone would think you own a property on the old route the way you are writing. Do you?

The long term view cannot be considered at present only what action can be taken in the short term. The reinstatement of the old Dartmoor route can be brought about by action NOW without the usual dilly-dallying as to what should, or could, be done. The sea wall section is very vulnerable to the elements. Have you watched the Dawlish Beach web cam when there is rough seas or rough weather? For the drivers of trains and the passengers travelling along this route it has to be a scary hair-raising experience and I would expect it is also very frightening for some people.

The long term answer to the problem is a twin-track tunnel under the Haldon Hills, but that is not something that could be achieved in the short term, whereas reinstatement of the Dartmoor route is more than a possibility.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And where exactly is this 55 mile route between Bristol and Gloucester? Temple Meads to Gloucester Central is 39.14 miles. by road the journey is 34 miles. An "HS3" from London to Penzance is in the realms of fantasy. The rail network in the south west is what it is and there will be no significant changes to it. Speed is simply not a factor in most journeys to the south west and massive investment in infrastructure would be a monstrous waste of money.

Suggest you have a look at Google Earth and check out the twisting route whereas the A38 trunk road is more or less a direct route between the two cities. My quote of 55 miles may be somewhat slightly exaggerated but the distance by rail is definitely longer.

I sometimes wonder why this country seems so far behind other countries but after researching what has been going on in some of those other countries as far as the upgrading of their rail transport infrastructure I can understand the reasons why.

 

[47802]

47802, Anyone would think you own a property on the old route the way you are writing. Do you?

The long term view cannot be considered at present only what action can be taken in the short term. The reinstatement of the old Dartmoor route can be brought about by action NOW without the usual dilly-dallying as to what should, or could, be done. The sea wall section is very vulnerable to the elements. Have you watched the Dawlish Beach web cam when there is rough seas or rough weather? For the drivers of trains and the passengers travelling along this route it has to be a scary hair-raising experience and I would expect it is also very frightening for some people.

The long term answer to the problem is a twin-track tunnel under the Haldon Hills, but that is not something that could be achieved in the short term, whereas reinstatement of the Dartmoor route is more than a possibility.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Suggest you have a look at Google Earth and check out the twisting route whereas the A38 trunk road is more or less a direct route between the two cities. My quote of 55 miles may be somewhat slightly exaggerated but the distance by rail is definitely longer.

I sometimes wonder why this country seems so far behind other countries but after researching what has been going on in some of those other countries as far as the upgrading of their rail transport infrastructure I can understand the reasons why.

If the Dawlish is as vulnerable as you indicate then the solution needs to be a replacement of the line between Exeter and Newton Abbot not diversionary route that will probably take longer, and have limited capacity, and if it takes longer to build well that's a price worth paying for a permenant solution to the problem.

Oh but then I forgot a lot of people on here don't actually want to fix the problem, they are only interested in reopening the Okehampton route.

 

[yorksrob]

Anyway, the consideration of journey time is not what this thread is about. It would appear that the only alternative route worth considering in the short term to keep the trains running 365 days would be the Dartmoor route. The route is practically intact and would only require some new bridges and strengthening work to the viaduct at Meldon. I think if a major decision was taken this year it could be operational within two to three years, maybe even less.

Absolutely spot on.

Speed will need to be addressed in the long term, but too many people are using it to distract from the matter in hand - a resilient railway network that will keep trains running to the South West all year round.

The encroachments on to the Okehampton route are minor, and include a Council which would gladly give up part of its building for the improved transport link.

 

[snowball]

Suggest you have a look at Google Earth and check out the twisting route whereas the A38 trunk road is more or less a direct route between the two cities. My quote of 55 miles may be somewhat slightly exaggerated

It's exaggerated by 40%. Just because it's a somewhat twisty route doesn't entitle you to use a figure that's unrelated to the facts.

but the distance by rail is definitely longer.

He isn't denying that. His figures are about right.

 

[The Ham]

If the Dawlish is as vulnerable as you indicate then the solution needs to be a replacement of the line between Exeter and Newton Abbot not diversionary route that will probably take longer, and have limited capacity, and if it takes longer to build well that's a price worth paying for a permenant solution to the problem.

Oh but then I forgot a lot of people on here don't actually want to fix the problem, they are only interested in reopening the Okehampton route.

Are you sure that it will take longer and have limited capacity? If it was built as a single line with long distances between passing points then probably yes, but then it is unlikely to cost the upper end of prices being quoted.

Until we know the costs and routes being looked at it is all speculation. Yes, there are some who would like to see the route through Okehampton opened and are using this to put their case forward. Likewise there are those who want the DAL and are putting their case forward.

It would be easy to make the cost of the DAL massively high and even make it slower than the existing route by building the infrastructure to cope with 200mph trains running on double tracks, yet only have it so that it was single line along its whole length.

Likewise the Okehampton route could be faster than the DAL, possibly for not much more than the DAL depending on what was built.

 

[Western Lord]

Suggest you have a look at Google Earth and check out the twisting route whereas the A38 trunk road is more or less a direct route between the two cities. My quote of 55 miles may be somewhat slightly exaggerated but the distance by rail is definitely longer.

Google Earth? Whats wrong with a map, which would show you that the road from Bristol to Gloucester is the M5, you'd be nuts to use the A38. To describe the former Midland Railway route from Bristol to Gloucester as "twisting" is absurd. The Railway Performance Society's fastest time from Bristol Parkway to Gloucester (33.31 miles) is 24m 35s, an average speed of 81.3 mph, somewhat quicker than you could legally manage in a car. Unfortunately the insane franchising system means that these days there is only one express each way daily.

 

[47802]

Are you sure that it will take longer and have limited capacity? If it was built as a single line with long distances between passing points then probably yes, but then it is unlikely to cost the upper end of prices being quoted.

Until we know the costs and routes being looked at it is all speculation. Yes, there are some who would like to see the route through Okehampton opened and are using this to put their case forward. Likewise there are those who want the DAL and are putting their case forward.

It would be easy to make the cost of the DAL massively high and even make it slower than the existing route by building the infrastructure to cope with 200mph trains running on double tracks, yet only have it so that it was single line along its whole length.

Likewise the Okehampton route could be faster than the DAL, possibly for not much more than the DAL depending on what was built.

Yes it is all speculation, and in its most basic form as a diversionary route then I think it will take longer and have limited capacity, yes you could build it with more capacity and faster buts that's going to increase cost and is probably only justified if you decide to make this route the main line, but I don't think politically you have a new main route that doesn't serve Torbay.

 

[The Ham]

Yes it is all speculation, and in its most basic form as a diversionary route then I think it will take longer and have limited capacity, yes you could build it with more capacity and faster buts that's going to increase cost and is probably only justified if you decide to make this route the main line, but I don't think politically you have a new main route that doesn't serve Torbay.

You mean like increase the cost form £100m to £250m and then to £400m? (all of which have been quoted on here and are unlikely to be for the same scheme, i.e. the highest cost is possibly for something more than a single, slow speed, track with a few passing places, as it came from NR when they were taking about their brief to include improving journey times).

The current mainline doesn't serve Torbay, so what would be the difference? Other than possibly having to change at Exeter rather than Newton Abbot.

If the Okehampton Route is built it could well be better for Torbay than the DAL (other than when the line is closed) as by diverting the London trains via Okehampton it could result in Torbay seeing more direct services to London (as paths become available due to the works at Reading) as well as direct trains to Plymouth (with the trains having run from London to Torbay and then back out to Newton Abbot and on to Plymouth).

Just because a new line doesn't serve station A it doesn't mean that station A will not benefit from it. i.e. HS2 is not going to stop at Milton Keynes, yet it is fairly likely that the service frequency will improve, or how the works at Reading could lead to an increase in the number of services to the west country.

 

[jmc100]

It's exaggerated by 40%. Just because it's a somewhat twisty route doesn't entitle you to use a figure that's unrelated to the facts.



He isn't denying that. His figures are about right.

So my figure of 55 miles was incorrect by 40% - my apologies as I wouldn't wish to mislead anyone but you have to admit that the route I quoted is more miles by rail than it is by road.

Now what about the Exeter to Plymouth and the Plymouth to Penzance routes. How do they compare?

 

[47802]

You mean like increase the cost form £100m to £250m and then to £400m? (all of which have been quoted on here and are unlikely to be for the same scheme, i.e. the highest cost is possibly for something more than a single, slow speed, track with a few passing places, as it came from NR when they were taking about their brief to include improving journey times).
.

Oh so its only going to cost £100 million now is it, some how I don't think so

The current mainline doesn't serve Torbay, so what would be the difference? Other than possibly having to change at Exeter rather than Newton Abbot.
.

What's the difference? what an unbelievable statement to make, given that Torbay is served from the mainline beyond the problem area that we are trying to fix

If the Okehampton Route is built it could well be better for Torbay than the DAL (other than when the line is closed) as by diverting the London trains via Okehampton it could result in Torbay seeing more direct services to London (as paths become available due to the works at Reading) as well as direct trains to Plymouth (with the trains having run from London to Torbay and then back out to Newton Abbot and on to Plymouth).
.

So making the mainline via Okehampton and leaving Torbay at the mercy of a weather dependent Dawlish branch is better for Torbay is it, really.

 

[SWTCommuter]

Now what about the Exeter to Plymouth and the Plymouth to Penzance routes. How do they compare?

FWIW

Exeter St Davids to Plymouth by rail via Dawlish: 52.025 miles
Exeter St Davids to Plymouth by rail via Okehampton: 58 miles approx
Exeter St Davids to Plymouth by road (A38 & A374): 45.4 miles

Plymouth to Penzance by rail 79.475 miles
Plymouth to Penzance by road (A38 & A30) 77.6 miles

 

[yorksrob]

So making the mainline via Okehampton and leaving Torbay at the mercy of a weather dependent Dawlish branch is better for Torbay is it, really.

This really is a very strange argument indeed.

The Chiltern line forms a very useful diversionary route to the West Coast Mainline, serving additional population centers along the way, yet by your logic, the entire route is useless because it misses out Milton Keynes and Watford

 

[Rapidash]

Its not like more people are using the line out of the Bay or anything.....

Oh wait, they are. With numbers higher than quite a few Northern stations to boot. 1.2 million journeys between the three of 'em, and that's not including the million at Newton Abbot.

Yep. Torbay is in no need of a mainline route. Nope, no sirree

Atleast the local MP's are keeping up the pressure, certainly seen a few questions asked in the Commons in the last week or so.

 

[yorksrob]

Yep. Torbay is in no need of a mainline route. Nope, no sirree

Is anyone suggesting Torbay should go without a mainline :?

 

[Rapidash]

Is anyone suggesting Torbay should go without a mainline :?

Those suggesting that any alternative route should be the Oakhampton route? If Dawlish does end up being put out of action permanently, any route which doubles the current times and changes between Torbay and Exeter is pretty much giving the Bay the middle digit.

 

[yorksrob]

Those suggesting that any alternative route should be the Oakhampton route? If Dawlish does end up being put out of action permanently, any route which doubles the current times and changes between Torbay and Exeter is pretty much giving the Bay the middle digit.

That's really not the case for the vast majority who want Okehampton reopened. The best idea is to have two routes, such as London - Exeter/London - Birmingham/Leeds - Manchester etc.

If Dawlish ends up being put out of action permanently (and that's still a big "if" IMO), it will get it's cut-off built (if it hasn't been done already).

 

[47802]

That's really not the case for the vast majority who want Okehampton reopened. The best idea is to have two routes, such as London - Exeter/London - Birmingham/Leeds - Manchester etc.

If Dawlish ends up being put out of action permanently (and that's still a big "if" IMO), it will get it's cut-off built (if it hasn't been done already).

The vast majority that want Okehampton reopened simply want Okehampton reopening, and Dawlish is the excuse, when what we should be doing is looking at the best solution to the Dawlish problem not what's best for Okehampton

 

[yorksrob]

The vast majority that want Okehampton reopened simply want Okehampton reopening, and Dawlish is the excuse, when what we should be doing is looking at the best solution to the Dawlish problem not what's best for Okehampton

Show me one major transport corridor that doesn't benefit massively from having an alternative route.

 

[MarkyT]

Well, the Fifth Five-Year Plan (CP5) starts today (they announced it yesterday to avoid the obvious problem of making an announcement on April 1).

Try talking about "Exeter Hub": hubs seem to be fashionable at the moment. Get all the local councils involved and build up a case for both better connections to the East and better internal connections in Devon and Cornwall.

Great, Love it! Perhaps 'Western Hub'?

 

[JohnB57]

Show me one major transport corridor that doesn't benefit massively from having an alternative route.

And you don't consider all of the road options suitable alternatives in the case of Dawlish?

 

[yorksrob]

And you don't consider all of the road options suitable alternatives in the case of Dawlish?

No, of course not.

They're not for the East Coast Mainline, the West Coast Mainline. Why should it be acceptable for the Great Western main line, the trans Pennine route !

 

[JohnB57]

No, of course not.

They're not for the East Coast Mainline, the West Coast Mainline. Why should it be acceptable for the Great Western main line, the trans Pennine route !

But in reality, in all the cases you cite they are - and alternatives I have used when the rail route in question has had problems, such as post Hatfield.

It might not suit the rail-centric, but the most cost effective alternative route in many if not most cases is road. In fact, in the case of the West Country, I spent many years traveling to and from Redruth every six weeks and I was never able to justify using rail as the road alternative was just so much quicker, cheaper and better.

Rail ain't always the superior mode you know...

 

[yorksrob]

But in reality, in all the cases you cite they are - and alternatives I have used when the rail route in question has had problems, such as post Hatfield.

It might not suit the rail-centric, but the most cost effective alternative route in many if not most cases is road. In fact, in the case of the West Country, I spent many years traveling to and from Redruth every six weeks and I was never able to justify using rail as the road alternative was just so much quicker, cheaper and better.

Rail ain't always the superior mode you know...

Firstly, yes it is.

Secondly, we both live in Yorkshire. We have a fairly comprehensive network. Even though a route may be replaced with buses, there are usually other routes that passengers can catch. Short distance hops might force you to use a bus, but in reality, most people on longer distance journeys can use an alternative route.

Take the closure of Holme tunnel. The vast majority of longer distance travellers between Yorkshire and Lancashire who might have used the route when open wouldn't have struggled on to a bus. They would have just gone via Manchester or Lancaster instead.

Short hops for the bus, yes, but the idea that it is a suitable alternative for a long distance main line is nuts.