Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[JohnB57]

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

Even as a contingency, for a few weeks, as is currently the case?

Rail transport to and from destinations beyond Exeter forms the minority of journeys in and out of that corridor. And sure, rail is important within the mix, but the cost of constructing and maintaining an alternative rail route for when Dawlish next fails is economic nonsense and completely unnecessary.

 

[47802]

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

Yes i'm sure Okehampton would be of some benefit, however I think a more reliable mainline would be of more benefit, and I don't think the costs of reopening Okehampton as a diversion route are really justified.

There are plenty of sections of the mainline which don't really have a satisfactory diversionary route, including Plymouth to Penzance but we are not going to build alternate routes all over the place just because of that.

Ok Dawlish may be an exception but the solution should be to provide a more reliable mainline not a diversion.

 

[455driver]

I believe the old line from Exeter to Heathfield was also a single track for most of the way so quite a lot of work would be required to commission that particular route.

And was subject to flooding on several occasions.

 

[simon.exd]

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.

assuming the true South West starts at the Somerset border how is Plymouth a gateway? And what industry?
Absolutely agree that maintaining a rail link into West Devon and Cornwall but the pro Plymouth brigade seem to have put a Disneyesque spin on the city..
The fact that the airport couldn't generate enough business to sustain a daily flight to London tells its own story.. There is no real business case for HS anything coming this way anytime ever..

 

[The Ham]

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

I was only quoting figures which had been put forward on this thread and stating that they are not all likely to be for the same thing. Given that it could have been for just a single line over the section which is closed (about 25 miles, or about £4m per mile) and most of the heavy earthworks have already been done, I can see how that would seam reaistic to those suggesting it.

The news story which was probably being used can be found here:
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Reo...e-Okehampton/story-18605657-detail/story.html

Likewise a few people have suggested £250 million
http://www.kalyr.com/weblog/railways/transport/storm-damage-at-dawlish/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26068375

Any idea how much the DAL will cost? How can anyone say that the DAL is better if we do not know the cost? If the DAL costs £100 million per mile (bearing in mind Crossrail is costing £188 million per mile and is mostly new tunnels) and may only save upto 10 minutes of the time for the express services (and probably less than that when it comes down to it), is that good value for money?

If the DAL where to cost £1bn (which 10 miles at £100m per mile would be the cost) it could be possible, by reopening a faster new route through Okehampton, could cut 20 minutes off the journey time (based on an average line speed of 90mph for the express services). If it included adding a chord avoiding Exeter (which others have suggested) one or two services a day could cut a further 10 minutes off the journey time, it could result in the fastest services from London to Plymouth being cut by 30 minutes to 2.5 hours and over half of all services being reduced to 3 hours or less (including all services which call at 3 or 4 stations between Exeter and Reading).

Before anyone says what about Exeter, it could then be served by new services from Torbay to London (say two to four services per day) to compensate for the one or two services a day which would then bypass it, resulting in more availabe seats from Exeter to London in addition to a better service for Torbay.

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

Nowhere did I say that Torbay would be cut off from the rail network. The point I was making was that the majority of express services do not directly serve Torbay, so in the greater scheme of things what does it matter that they go another route. I then went on to explain that by doing so Torbay could see an increase in the number of direct services to London.

Of course there maybe other new services which are not currently possible which would further improve things for Torbay further. Suggestions could include new services to (or at least through) Bristol.

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.

Most people would rather see an improvement to their rail service every day, with (for instance) more trains going direct to London (as well as directly to Plymouth), but have to put up with a few days a year of having to get a bus (which will be less problematic as there will be less people wanting to use said buses as everyone to Plymouth or beyond could go via Okehampton and is no worse in terms of numbers of days as the do nothing option).

Whilst the DAL would bring benefits to Torbay in time there would also likely be a fair amount of weekend closures whilst the DAL was built. Meaning maybe the equivilant of up to 10 years worth of storm closures in one year (assuming 10 farily quite years) to build a line which means that they don't need to worry about storm closures once the line is open. Although people like to think that they take the long view, it is likely that everytime the line was closed to build the DAL those pushing the for route through Okehampton would suggest that it should have been built instead.

 

[yorksrob]

Even as a contingency, for a few weeks, as is currently the case?

Rail transport to and from destinations beyond Exeter forms the minority of journeys in and out of that corridor. And sure, rail is important within the mix, but the cost of constructing and maintaining an alternative rail route for when Dawlish next fails is economic nonsense and completely unnecessary.

Well, that‘s complete poppycock as it pre-supposes that the Okehampton route would lay rusting for the rest of the year, which, of course it wouldn‘t. You also forget that a large proportion of the Okehampton route is already built and has to be maintained, sho in many ways it makes sense to pay a bit more and actually make use of that infrastructure all year round.

What is economic madness is an almost religious determination to stick to a railway network limited in scope to the needs of a 1970‘s motor-centric society that was devised by the likes of Marples and Serpell
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

assuming the true South West starts at the Somerset border how is Plymouth a gateway? And what industry?
Absolutely agree that maintaining a rail link into West Devon and Cornwall but the pro Plymouth brigade seem to have put a Disneyesque spin on the city..
The fact that the airport couldn't generate enough business to sustain a daily flight to London tells its own story.. There is no real business case for HS anything coming this way anytime ever..

Cottonopolis it may not be, but like it or not, Plymouth is the main economic, commercial and educational centre in the region, and of course, in railway terms, it is very much the gateway to Cornwall.

 

[47802]

I was only quoting figures which had been put forward on this thread and stating that they are not all likely to be for the same thing. Given that it could have been for just a single line over the section which is closed (about 25 miles, or about £4m per mile) and most of the heavy earthworks have already been done, I can see how that would seam reaistic to those suggesting it.

The news story which was probably being used can be found here:
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/Reo...e-Okehampton/story-18605657-detail/story.html

Likewise a few people have suggested £250 million
http://www.kalyr.com/weblog/railways/transport/storm-damage-at-dawlish/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26068375

Any idea how much the DAL will cost? How can anyone say that the DAL is better if we do not know the cost? If the DAL costs £100 million per mile (bearing in mind Crossrail is costing £188 million per mile and is mostly new tunnels) and may only save upto 10 minutes of the time for the express services (and probably less than that when it comes down to it), is that good value for money?

If the DAL where to cost £1bn (which 10 miles at £100m per mile would be the cost) it could be possible, by reopening a faster new route through Okehampton, could cut 20 minutes off the journey time (based on an average line speed of 90mph for the express services). If it included adding a chord avoiding Exeter (which others have suggested) one or two services a day could cut a further 10 minutes off the journey time, it could result in the fastest services from London to Plymouth being cut by 30 minutes to 2.5 hours and over half of all services being reduced to 3 hours or less (including all services which call at 3 or 4 stations between Exeter and Reading).

Before anyone says what about Exeter, it could then be served by new services from Torbay to London (say two to four services per day) to compensate for the one or two services a day which would then bypass it, resulting in more availabe seats from Exeter to London in addition to a better service for Torbay.



Nowhere did I say that Torbay would be cut off from the rail network. The point I was making was that the majority of express services do not directly serve Torbay, so in the greater scheme of things what does it matter that they go another route. I then went on to explain that by doing so Torbay could see an increase in the number of direct services to London.

Of course there maybe other new services which are not currently possible which would further improve things for Torbay further. Suggestions could include new services to (or at least through) Bristol.



Most people would rather see an improvement to their rail service every day, with (for instance) more trains going direct to London (as well as directly to Plymouth), but have to put up with a few days a year of having to get a bus (which will be less problematic as there will be less people wanting to use said buses as everyone to Plymouth or beyond could go via Okehampton and is no worse in terms of numbers of days as the do nothing option).

Whilst the DAL would bring benefits to Torbay in time there would also likely be a fair amount of weekend closures whilst the DAL was built. Meaning maybe the equivilant of up to 10 years worth of storm closures in one year (assuming 10 farily quite years) to build a line which means that they don't need to worry about storm closures once the line is open. Although people like to think that they take the long view, it is likely that everytime the line was closed to build the DAL those pushing the for route through Okehampton would suggest that it should have been built instead.

So your now saying that the Okehampton route should become the mainline, so that means a double track route with fairly high speed alignment and a chord to avoid Exeter which is going to increase the cost of this route massively, and a chord would not be justified for one or two trains a day. As for the cost in any form the only figure that matters is the figure that Network Rail produce which I suspect will be vastly more than price some so called rail campaigner has come up with.

Meanwhile Torbay which is much more dependent on a Train Service than Okehampton retains the vulnerable Dawlish route, but this is better for Torbay apparently because it might get a few more trains to London when the Line is open.

Why would the existing route need to close while the DAL was being built I see very little reason for that other than when the nessesary pointwork is put in or track realigned if the Dawlish route is closed.

You seem to come with more and crazy arguments to justify the Okehampton route at any cost.

I mean lets go further with the Okehampton route lets build a new line from Okehampton directly into Cornwall to Bodmin and a new fast line to Newquay. lets electrify it, lets also rebuild the line to Bude as well

 

[jmc100]

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

Many thanks for providing that information. It would appear from your figures that the rail distance in all cases is longer than the road distance but rail is probably the faster option if trains are not prone to any holdups. Although the Okehampton route is slightly longer than the coastal route it would still provide a viable alternative between the two cities of Exeter and Plymouth should the coastal route be affected by adverse weather conditions or maintenance.

The railway line along the coast at Dawlish is not the problem. it is because the railway just happens to be sited on the sea wall which is very vulnerable to the elements. The only other alternative to solving the problem of sea wall wash-over and structural damage occurring would be to build a new sea wall all the way along the coast about twenty feet away from the current structure but that may prove to be more costly than reinstating the previous 1960s Dartmoor route.

 

[LateThanNever]

assuming the true South West starts at the Somerset border how is Plymouth a gateway? And what industry?
Absolutely agree that maintaining a rail link into West Devon and Cornwall but the pro Plymouth brigade seem to have put a Disneyesque spin on the city..
The fact that the airport couldn't generate enough business to sustain a daily flight to London tells its own story.. There is no real business case for HS anything coming this way anytime ever..

The story of the loss of the airport in Plymouth has little to do with lack of demand but was because the airport was too small to accommodate larger jet planes which would make journeys faster and profitable. Plymouth's major industry is engineering and also has the UK's ninth largest university.

So your now saying that the Okehampton route should become the mainline, so that means a double track route with fairly high speed alignment and a chord to avoid Exeter which is going to increase the cost of this route massively, and a chord would not be justified for one or two trains a day. As for the cost in any form the only figure that matters is the figure that Network Rail produce which I suspect will be vastly more than price some so called rail campaigner has come up with.

Meanwhile Torbay which is much more dependent on a Train Service than Okehampton retains the vulnerable Dawlish route, but this is better for Torbay apparently because it might get a few more trains to London when the Line is open.

Why would the existing route need to close while the DAL was being built I see very little reason for that other than when the nessesary pointwork is put in or track realigned if the Dawlish route is closed.

You seem to come with more and crazy arguments to justify the Okehampton route at any cost.

I mean lets go further with the Okehampton route lets build a new line from Okehampton directly into Cornwall to Bodmin and a new fast line to Newquay. lets electrify it, lets also rebuild the line to Bude as well

Exaggerating the case doesn't make the converse right. If the Okehampton route could be smoothed it could well make a better mainline and an Exeter avoiding cord would be short, flat and probably single track so should not increase costs massively. All this could give Plymouth and Cornwall a 'cheap', new and faster railway. The Dawlish avoiding line is too much for too little and cuts off Dawlish and Teignmouth to benefit Torbay without offering any more than about 5 minutes time saving for Plymouth and Cornwall. If the current Dawlish line was no longer the only main line then there must be scope for more services than is currently the case passing along the sea wall in poor weather and driving on line of sight as would a tram. This would cause congestion but if there was an alternative main line, the congestion would be workable as limited only to Newton Abbot and Torbay and would not need to affect Plymouth and Cornwall trains.
This way Torbay would get a better service than if the Okehampton route was not rebuilt.

 

[47802]

The story of the loss of the airport in Plymouth has little to do with lack of demand but was because the airport was too small to accommodate larger jet planes which would make journeys faster and profitable. Plymouth's major industry is engineering and also has the UK's ninth largest university.



Exaggerating the case doesn't make the converse right. If the Okehampton route could be smoothed it could well make a better mainline and an Exeter avoiding cord would be short, flat and probably single track so should not increase costs massively. All this could give Plymouth and Cornwall a 'cheap', new and faster railway. The Dawlish avoiding line is too much for too little and cuts off Dawlish and Teignmouth to benefit Torbay without offering any more than about 5 minutes time saving for Plymouth and Cornwall. If the current Dawlish line was no longer the only main line then there must be scope for more services than is currently the case passing along the sea wall in poor weather and driving on line of sight as would a tram. This would cause congestion but if there was an alternative main line, the congestion would be workable as limited only to Newton Abbot and Torbay and would not need to affect Plymouth and Cornwall trains.
This way Torbay would get a better service than if the Okehampton route was not rebuilt.

Well more piffle from the Okehampton fan club, I don't believe it would be a cheap mainline at all.

As I see it the choice is simple.

Firstly I don't buy the half arsed diversion solution, you need to decide if the Dawlish route is going to be fit for purpose for the next 20+ years, if you decide that it is then there is no need for a diversion. if it isn't then you need to replace it.

OK yes you could choose the Okehampton route as the replacement, although I'm somewhat sceptical of the possible journey time on this route, and then you risk Torbay and Newton Abbot being eventually being cut off from the rail Network from the east, so in that sense I don't believe it would be the best option for a replacement mainline, I also think turning the Okehampton route into a fairly high speed mainline would probably be nearly as expensive as a Dawlish Diversionary route, and even if say a DAL costs twice as much then its worth spending if it fixes the problem once and for all, and it serves the existing population centres.

Oh and isn't the East west rail scheme going to cost about 270 million and that's for upgrading and double tracking a route that still exists and is owned by network rail. none of these options will be cheap which is why they will probably never happen

 

[yorksrob]

Well more piffle from the Okehampton fan club, I don't believe it would be a cheap mainline at all.

As I see it the choice is simple.

Firstly I don't buy the half arsed diversion solution, you need to decide if the Dawlish route is going to be fit for purpose for the next 20+ years, if you decide that it is then there is no need for a diversion. if it isn't then you need to replace it.

Well, in a way, that's the issue really.

I don't believe the issue around the Dawlish line is a black and white, "fit for purpose or not" scenario. The likelihood is that it will continue to perform perfectly well as a main line for the majority of the time, but will still be vulnerable to severe weather on occasions.

In this scenario, it's difficult to make a case for any new line unless you include other potential benefits, i.e. greater connectivity in the case of the Okehampton route, or greater speed in the case of a Dawlish avoider.

The problem with the Dawlish avoider is that it will most likely be very expensive in itself, and the additional benefit - greater speed, will only be marginal unless it happens alongside considerable investment along the rest of the main line. That may be justified in its own right, however, I just feel that you will pull in more advantages more quickly and for less cost by reopening Okehampton.

 

[The Ham]

Oh and isn't the East west rail scheme going to cost about 270 million and that's for upgrading and double tracking a route that still exists and is owned by network rail. none of these options will be cheap which is why they will probably never happen

..so with East West Rail costing £270 million for 14 miles of double track and 20 miles of converting single track to double track (about 24 miles of full double track with electrification), you can see why some would suggest about £250m for about 25 miles of none electrified track could be a reasonable comparison for the route through Okehampton.

Yes there would be other costs which would not be included in East West Rail costs, but then let's say that doubles the cost. That is still only £500m for a basic twin track route (so very little in the way of capacity restrictions and likely to be able to maintain the current journey time between Exeter and Plymouth).

Have you come up with a figure for the DAL yet? I can't remember when I first asked, but it was some time ago now. You haven't even provided a rebuttal as to why the suggested cost of £1bn (based 10 miles at £100m per mile compared with Crossrail's costs of £188m per mile) I put on the DAL was wrong.

If the DAL is going to cost £1bn (based on the above), and Okehampton (using EWR as a basic starting point) costs 1/2 of that that's still leaves £500m which could be used to speed up the existing sections of track and put in more loops/double the existing track, build the chord, and still have a fair amount left over to carry out other schemes to benefit the SW like redoubling of the SWT's route. All of which would provide a lot more in benefits for the same or less money.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

So your now saying that the Okehampton route should become the mainline, so that means a double track route with fairly high speed alignment and a chord to avoid Exeter which is going to increase the cost of this route massively, and a chord would not be justified for one or two trains a day. As for the cost in any form the only figure that matters is the figure that Network Rail produce which I suspect will be vastly more than price some so called rail campaigner has come up with.

Meanwhile Torbay which is much more dependent on a Train Service than Okehampton retains the vulnerable Dawlish route, but this is better for Torbay apparently because it might get a few more trains to London when the Line is open.

Why would the existing route need to close while the DAL was being built I see very little reason for that other than when the nessesary pointwork is put in or track realigned if the Dawlish route is closed.

You seem to come with more and crazy arguments to justify the Okehampton route at any cost.

I mean lets go further with the Okehampton route lets build a new line from Okehampton directly into Cornwall to Bodmin and a new fast line to Newquay. lets electrify it, lets also rebuild the line to Bude as well

Why would anyone want or need to build a chord to avoid Exeter?

A single line on the LSWR with decent bidirectional passing loops would be a good start!

Fast line to Newquay etc is entering the World of 'Railway Tycoon'!!
But who knows - I haven't got a crystal ball.
There was a LSWR fast line to Padstow!

 

[LateThanNever]

Well more piffle from the Okehampton fan club, I don't believe it would be a cheap mainline at all.

But you provide no evidence for this belief.

OK yes you could choose the Okehampton route as the replacement, although I'm somewhat sceptical of the possible journey time on this route, and then you risk Torbay and Newton Abbot being eventually being cut off from the rail Network from the east, so in that sense I don't believe it would be the best option for a replacement mainline, I also think turning the Okehampton route into a fairly high speed mainline would probably be nearly as expensive as a Dawlish Diversionary route, and even if say a DAL costs twice as much then its worth spending if it fixes the problem once and for all, and it serves the existing population centres.

So the idea is we'll be spending twice as much to preserve Torbay's links with the main line (whilst at the same time cutting off Dawlish and Teignmouth from the main line) as we would building a new route entirely which also provides a diversionary route?

Cannot see the logic there.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why would anyone want or need to build a chord to avoid Exeter?

To speed up the journey to Plymouth!

 

[Cliveblackpool]

But you provide no evidence for this belief.



So the idea is we'll be spending twice as much to preserve Torbay's links with the main line (whilst at the same time cutting off Dawlish and Teignmouth from the main line) as we would building a new route entirely which also provides a diversionary route?

Cannot see the logic there.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


To speed up the journey to Plymouth!

Just as well have a chord across the Tamar to avoid Plymouth too!
Imo Exeter is an important interchange /destination station!

 

[MarkyT]

Just as well have a chord across the Tamar to avoid Plymouth too!

Yay! then Cornwall expresses could avoid every major station in Devon, that'll really get those seats occupied and enable operators to offer attractive frequent economic service patterns!

Imo Exeter is an important interchange /destination station!

The Western Hub no less!

 

[po8crg]

The Western Hub no less!

I think there already is a "Western Hub" proposal - Bristol.

 

[HowardGWR]

I think there already is a "Western Hub" proposal - Bristol.

I can understand the relieved levity with the re-opening in the offing. Let's just remember that there was a time (late 60s) when the breach at Dawlish would have been used to close everything west of Exeter.

 

[LateThanNever]

Just as well have a chord across the Tamar to avoid Plymouth too!
Imo Exeter is an important interchange /destination station!

Of course it is, but a couple of 'fast' trains every day might shave ?15 mins off the journey to Plymouth and would not really be noticed in Exeter where there appears to be some overcapacity in the daytime on the Exeter- Plymouth trains.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think there already is a "Western Hub" proposal - Bristol.

Perhaps we should call it the South Western hub!

 

[Rapidash]

So, the line reopens tomorrow! Aaaannnnd the line down to the Bay is closed on Sunday I suspect its a bypass thing, alas.

 

[LateThanNever]

So, the line reopens tomorrow! Aaaannnnd the line down to the Bay is closed on Sunday I suspect its a bypass thing, alas.

Oh dear - the irony! so much for the Torbay rail lobby - get the bus....

 

[HowardGWR]

So, the line reopens tomorrow! Aaaannnnd the line down to the Bay is closed on Sunday I suspect its a bypass thing, alas.

I hate that expression 'The Bay'. It conjures up the title of an Australian soap. I find it very difficult to have sympathy with its designation as a strategic destination when its real image is of Fawlty Towers and Gods Waiting Room.

 

[Rapidash]

Well there's no denying that but as there is no longer even a slither of space between the three towns, it is collectively known as The Bay. On a good day it does get warmer than some Spanish resorts! So kinda aussiefiedish I am looking forward to only commuting for an hour, that's for sure. Two hours in traffic jams every day for months ras given me an eye twitch! Bring on the pacers \o/

 

[47802]

Well, in a way, that's the issue really.

I don't believe the issue around the Dawlish line is a black and white, "fit for purpose or not" scenario. The likelihood is that it will continue to perform perfectly well as a main line for the majority of the time, but will still be vulnerable to severe weather on occasions.

In this scenario, it's difficult to make a case for any new line unless you include other potential benefits, i.e. greater connectivity in the case of the Okehampton route, or greater speed in the case of a Dawlish avoider.

The problem with the Dawlish avoider is that it will most likely be very expensive in itself, and the additional benefit - greater speed, will only be marginal unless it happens alongside considerable investment along the rest of the main line. That may be justified in its own right, however, I just feel that you will pull in more advantages more quickly and for less cost by reopening Okehampton.

Well ok the issue around Dawlish is possibly not Black and White but in my view it has to be, otherwise you end up with a fudged decision, and in my view Okehampton would be a fudged decision, which mainly benefits Tavistock and Okehampton but isn't a good long term solution to the issues of the mainline and Dawlish.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

I hate that expression 'The Bay'. It conjures up the title of an Australian soap. I find it very difficult to have sympathy with its designation as a strategic destination when its real image is of Fawlty Towers and Gods Waiting Room.

It's Lyme Bay.

Well ok the issue around Dawlish is possibly not Black and White but in my view it has to be, otherwise you end up with a fudged decision, and in my view Okehampton would be a fudged decision, which mainly benefits Tavistock and Okehampton but isn't a good long term solution to the issues of the mainline and Dawlish.

Plymouth and Exeter would gain the most from the LSWR reopening.

 

[Western Lord]

Of course it is, but a couple of 'fast' trains every day might shave ?15 mins off the journey to Plymouth

If there was a market case for non stop trains from London to Plymouth, there is nothing to prevent them from running now. There isn't and they don't. There are not even non stop trains from London to Bristol. Today's railway is a very different thing from the heyday of The Cornish Riviera Express. Intermediate stops are a fact of today's rail services, bypassing Exeter is not an option in any future fantasy south west rail network.

 

[SWTCommuter]

Interview with Patrick Hallgate, route managing director of Network Rail on this morning's Today programme:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26882211

 

[Bald Rick]

Interesting that the loss to the economy of the 2 month closure was quoted at £30m on the news this morning by a local councillor or similar. Seems much more realistic than the £20m / day banded around before.

 

[The Ham]

If there was a market case for non stop trains from London to Plymouth, there is nothing to prevent them from running now. There isn't and they don't. There are not even non stop trains from London to Bristol. Today's railway is a very different thing from the heyday of The Cornish Riviera Express. Intermediate stops are a fact of today's rail services, bypassing Exeter is not an option in any future fantasy south west rail network.

At present there is probably more to be lost by not calling at Exeter (in the same way that there would be at Reading for the Bristol services), in that the line speed through the station for a non stop service would probably only shave about 4 minutes off the journey time but with enough demand to justify the potential loss of a few people from Plymouth.

However, if by avoiding Exeter it cuts 10 minutes off the journey time and there are other Exeter to London services with more capacity (i.e. those extra services coming from the Torbay area) then there could be a case to miss out Exeter on a limited number of services per day in the future, especially if there were more trains between Exeter and Plymouth overall as well as there being more passengers using the trains.

In fact because of the removal of the change at Newton Abbot, it could result in more services to stations between Exeter and Reading, by them being served by the London to Paignton expresses, without impacting on the journey time from Paignton to London. In fact as most services already call at 2 or 3 stations between Exeter and Reading it could even provide a faster service than the present situation.

There are plenty of fairly major stations (for their route) on the network which are missed by some express services. For instance there are trains which run without making a station stop between Birmingham and London, Stockport and London, Runcorn and London, Warrington and London, Newcastle and London - and I'm sure that there are others.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Interesting that the loss to the economy of the 2 month closure was quoted at £30m on the news this morning by a local councillor or similar. Seems much more realistic than the £20m / day banded around before.

BBC Breakfast was quoting about £80m for Cornwall with the south west being hit for about £100m, so I would suggest the £30m was for Devon.

Using the £30m that's still £0.5m a day, whist £100m is about £1.7m a day.

Very few believed that the £20m a day would have been for a sustained period (if at all), however if the line had been closed until after the Easter Weekend I could see that it would have had a very big impact on the economy of the region (although probably even then £20m per day would have been at the extreme upper end).

Also there will be some knock on effects which may not have been counted yet, like people booking to go elsewhere over Easter (as they didn't quite believe that it would be open on time) so not being around to spend their money (i.e. accommodation would have been counted, but other spending may not have been).

 

[LateThanNever]

At present there is probably more to be lost by not calling at Exeter (in the same way that there would be at Reading for the Bristol services), in that the line speed through the station for a non stop service would probably only shave about 4 minutes off the journey time but with enough demand to justify the potential loss of a few people from Plymouth.

However, if by avoiding Exeter it cuts 10 minutes off the journey time and there are other Exeter to London services with more capacity (i.e. those extra services coming from the Torbay area) then there could be a case to miss out Exeter on a limited number of services per day in the future, especially if there were more trains between Exeter and Plymouth overall as well as there being more passengers using the trains.

In fact because of the removal of the change at Newton Abbot, it could result in more services to stations between Exeter and Reading, by them being served by the London to Paignton expresses, without impacting on the journey time from Paignton to London. In fact as most services already call at 2 or 3 stations between Exeter and Reading it could even provide a faster service than the present situation.

There are plenty of fairly major stations (for their route) on the network which are missed by some express services. For instance there are trains which run without making a station stop between Birmingham and London, Stockport and London, Runcorn and London, Warrington and London, Newcastle and London - and I'm sure that there are others.

My sentiments entirely. In fact I'm fairly sure there is at least one service daily now which doesn't call at Taunton.