Suggestions for Dawlish avoiding route(s)

[Busaholic]

A very simple point from a very simple person who doesn't understand (or, let's be honest, want to understand ,the mathematical formulae, etc) : if you don't really want to build a project you'll exaggerate the costs and difficulties ( e.g. Okehampton) ; if you want
to build a project you'll under-estimate both those factors (e.g. Borders Railway).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A very simple point from a very simple person who doesn't understand (or, let's be honest, want to understand ,the mathematical formulae, etc) : if you don't really want to build a project you'll exaggerate the costs and difficulties ( e.g. Okehampton) ; if you want
to build a project you'll under-estimate both those factors (e.g. Borders Railway).Who 'you' are may vary from the British government, Scottish parliament, Network Rail to consultants hoovering up fees (I call the latter the Atkins Diet) but, in the end, it is a political decision and politicians can always drum up figures which they think support their decisions.What is the TRUE cost of the Borders Railway with its half-hourly service? None of the figures I have seen, and certainly that £350 million one that keeps being tossed around, includes any trains or staffing costs, which is very convenient.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, but once you've built the thing, how is that cost any different from running any other socially necessary railway ? You're paying to run a public service to the area which you wouldn't get with a short cut-off.

 

[Rapidash]

Sorry for the thread necormancy, but IT'S ALIVE!!! *cough*

Exeter Express and Echo

The Government will “shortly” announce whether to fund an additional rail line to the vulnerable coastal link at Dawlish that collapsed into the sea earlier this year.

Leader of the House of Commons William Hague confirmed the Department for Transport will reveal its plans imminently after being pressed for a debate on the options mapped out by rail bosses Network Rail.

This summer, the Government published the report that detailed seven alternative routes that would cost between £400 million and £3 billion.

Wonder how soon is soon? And more importantly, how big will the bribe, uh, I mean budget for the improvements will be.

 

[Busaholic]

Sorry for the thread necormancy, but IT'S ALIVE!!! *cough*

Exeter Express and Echo



Wonder how soon is soon? And more importantly, how big will the bribe, uh, I mean budget for the improvements will be.

The Western Morning News is claiming all will be revealed (or not) in the Chancellor's Autumn Statement, whenever that is.

 

[swt_passenger]

The Western Morning News is claiming all will be revealed (or not) in the Chancellor's Autumn Statement, whenever that is.

Last year's was in the first week of December. Some have been late November.

 

[Cletus]

It's Wednesday 3rd December this year.

 

[The Ham]

On a related note, the Western Route Study states:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/improv...ans/long-term-planning-process/route-studies/

Analysis has identified that the following infrastructure or equivalent would be required to operate the full 2043 ITSS:
.....
• provision of a four-track railway between Exeter St Davids and Newton Abbot
.....

It goes on to say:

The provision of a four track railway between Exeter St Davids and Newton Abbot would be difficult to accommodate along the current coastal route. However, should capacity for a four track railway be required by 2043 in order to deliver the full 2043 ITSS, this could be provided through a combination of the existing two-track formation and a new two-track railway as investigated under the West of Exeter Route Resilience Study. However, this is one choice that will be reviewed as further work is undertaken to consider the resilience requirements over future control periods up to 2043.

 

[Class 170101]

That has been kicked into the long grass then. Pray for good winters between now and 2043:roll:

 

[Busaholic]

That has been kicked into the long grass then. Pray for good winters between now and 2043:roll:

That was almost word-for-word what I was going to write. If there is nothing concrete in the Chancellor's Autumn Statement then that will be it until the English Channel devours the line for good.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

''would be difficult to accommodate along the current coastal route.'' lol!
More accurate imo
''would be a folly to accommodate along the current coastal route.''.

 

[Busaholic]

''would be difficult to accommodate along the current coastal route.'' lol!
More accurate imo
''would be a folly to accommodate along the current coastal route.''.

It'd be like having tracks along Blackpool Prom on the seaward side. Oh, hang on.....

 

[21C101]

Given that the papers are reporting that Gidiot is to authorise up to £1.2Million in upgrading the A303, it seems a major operation to prop up southwestern Libdem MPs / Get Tory votes to depose Southwest Libdem MPs *** is going on.

*** delete as appropriate

I'm beginning to wonder whether we are going to get an announcement of a major upgrade of what will be the Waterloo to Plymouth/Barnstaple main line, ie reopening Okehampton to Bere Alston and major redoubling east of Exeter.

At the least I suspect they will big up Bere Alston to Tavistock reopening and perhaps fund passive provision for its extension northwards, possibly even including funding for reopening the original town centre station as well as the new "Tavistock South" that will be built.

 

[HowardGWR]

"Given that the papers are reporting that Gidiot is to authorise up to £1.2Million in upgrading the A303"

That should buy a few new road signs, not much else.

 

[swt_passenger]

"Given that the papers are reporting that Gidiot is to authorise up to £1.2Million in upgrading the A303"

That should buy a few new road signs, not much else.

The FT article actually about the A303, primarily a renewed push for a Stonehenge tunnel, reads "A full upgrade is estimated to cost £1.2bn" though. But it's all a bit wooly - the figures being bandied about might include various national schemes as far apart as the A1 north of Morpeth...

You can find the FT source by Googling 'stonehenge traffic jams'

Also a Daily Mail version comes up on the same search:

Stonehenge traffic jams to be consigned to history as Government dusts off plans for a tunnel to by-pass the neolithic site
Chancellor George Osborne will announce the tunnel plan in December
The National Trust is in favour of an ambitious scheme to bury the A303
An earlier tunnel plan was scrapped by Labour due to cost concerns
A full upgrade of the A303 will cost an estimated £1.2 billion

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-dusts-plans-tunnel-pass-neolithic-site.html

Doesn't read as though there'll also be news of the Waterloo - Barnstaple main line though...

 

[snowball]

The FT article actually about the A303, primarily a renewed push for a Stonehenge tunnel, reads "A full upgrade is estimated to cost £1.2bn" though. But it's all a bit wooly - the figures being bandied about might include various national schemes as far apart as the A1 north of Morpeth....

The three roads mentioned by the FT - the third being the A27 - are three of six covered by studies announced earlier this year:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/strategic-road-network-the-scope-of-6-feasibility-studies

So it was already likely that any major roads to be announced would be among those six.

 

[MarkyT]

The FT article actually about the A303, primarily a renewed push for a Stonehenge tunnel, reads "A full upgrade is estimated to cost £1.2bn" though. But it's all a bit wooly - the figures being bandied about might include various national schemes as far apart as the A1 north of Morpeth...

You can find the FT source by Googling 'stonehenge traffic jams'

Also a Daily Mail version comes up on the same search:

The busy road definitely needs some relief and has some significant gradients where it drops into the dip at the at the A344 junction on the single carriageway. That in itself causes extra noise and emissions from lorries and slows down following traffic. Winterbourne Stoke deserves a bypass too. I struggle to see the justification for such an expensive tunnel solution however when the northern and southern alignment alternatives would achieve the transport benefit whilst moving the road further away from the monument and easing the gradients. I can't see the argument that the major road must not be visible from the site. Are military flightpaths diverted so visitors won't see other modern technology. Perhaps incongruous personal electronic devices should be confiscated and visitors made to dress in prehistoric garb and walk miles to the attraction.

Sorry for continuing the off-topic diversion!

 

[21C101]

The busy road definitely needs some relief and has some significant gradients where it drops into the dip at the at the A344 junction on the single carriageway. That in itself causes extra noise and emissions from lorries and slows down following traffic. Winterbourne Stoke deserves a bypass too. I struggle to see the justification for such an expensive tunnel solution however when the northern and southern alignment alternatives would achieve the transport benefit whilst moving the road further away from the monument and easing the gradients. I can't see the argument that the major road must not be visible from the site. Are military flightpaths diverted so visitors won't see other modern technology. Perhaps incongruous personal electronic devices should be confiscated and visitors made to dress in prehistoric garb and walk miles to the attraction.

Sorry for continuing the off-topic diversion!

I'm not convinced. Half of me wants this to be done but:

At the moment, once you are past Stonehenge it is fine (and there are ways round that jam )

Dual the lot and a shedload of private cars, commercial vehicles and trucks will all divert off the M5/M4 and you will end up with a westcountry A14. not a nice thought.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

As a regular user of the A303, the first thing that needs to be done is to put a bridge OVER the Countess Roundabout and then put the A303 in a cutting beyond where the road goes past Stonehenge, a viaduct over the top of Winterbourne Stoke and the rest is a simple dual carriageway job, including the ineptly designed & seriously flawed Ilminster bypass and the A358 to Taunton.

Anyway let's get back to topic.

 

[Busaholic]

As a regular user of the A303, the first thing that needs to be done is to put a bridge OVER the Countess Roundabout and then put the A303 in a cutting beyond where the road goes past Stonehenge, a viaduct over the top of Winterbourne Stoke and the rest is a simple dual carriageway job, including the ineptly designed & seriously flawed Ilminster bypass and the A358 to Taunton.

Anyway let's get back to topic.

Briefly off-topic still, agree 100% with that, especially about the Ilminster Bypass, the road that ended the construction of 3-lane bi-directional roads in Britain for good. By chance, my move from London to Cornwall coincided with the opening of this monster (by fifteen minutes) and it was so immediately obvious with its crescent shape it was an accident or twenty waiting to happen even after the (almost unenforced 50 mph speed limit was brought in.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

It's actually quite a bit quicker to avoid the Ilminster bypass during the summer months and use the old road or get off the 303 altogether and use the back roads instead.

 

[The Ham]

It's actually quite a bit quicker to avoid the Ilminster bypass during the summer months and use the old road or get off the 303 altogether and use the back roads instead.

...or just do the drive at night and avoid the traffic all together. Even leaving Basingstoke/Truro between 6 and 7 there tends not to be that much traffic to contend with.

We also have the added bonus of not having to entertain a child, as they sleep if we do the drive then.

 

[21C101]

Last time I went down it in the peak, I used satnav with live traffic info which diverted me round the troublespots with short alternative routes.

I was fascinated that I hadn't found them all myself from map looking, and equally fascinated at how little traffic was on them, with 99% of people queuing in long jams where the dual carriageways ended.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Anyway, I think now would be a good time to return this thread to topic, before we get a rollocking from a mod.

 

[Busaholic]

Anyway, I think now would be a good time to return this thread to topic, before we get a rollocking from a mod.

OK, OKehampton. Apart from being a good campaign slogan IMO, as they used to say when cinemas showed films round and round again, is this where I came in?

 

[Olaf]

The alternative routes all failed to attain high enough BCRs for any of them to get the go-ahead under normal funding schemes, however the DfT is to review the work around the BCRs to see if their scope can be extended:

Government may review report into alternative routes at Dawlish
http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...iew-report-into-alternative-routes-at-dawlish
- 2014-10-17

Extending the scope of the BCR analysis is unlikely to push any of them much closer to a factor of even 1.0, but the exercise may be able to find a case for external funding, in conjunction of the current Western Route Study, and Regional Growth funds etc.

 

[Rapidash]

It's good that they are thinking about reviewing the review. I doubt it will change the decision, but one can only hope. :P

 

[D1009]

Extending the scope of the BCR analysis is unlikely to push any of them much closer to a factor of even 1.0, but the exercise may be able to find a case for external funding, in conjunction of the current Western Route Study, and Regional Growth funds etc.

Not sure whether anyone's picked up on this:

http://www.benbradshaw.co.uk/all-party-parliamentary-group-on-south-west-rail/

The Secretary of State for Transport, Patrick McLoughlin, came this afternoon to a meeting of the All Party SW Rail Group, which I chair. He said he recognised the particular transport challenges we face in the Westcountry.

MPs and Peers from across Devon and Cornwall raised a range of issues including the need to address the vulnerability of the line at Dawlish, speeds, capacity and reliability throughout the region, the importance of branch lines and of upgrading the Waterloo to Exeter line. We also told him electrification should not end at Bristol but should be extended into our part of the region. Other rail issues raised included overcrowding and the need for better rolling stock.

There was also discussion of the importance of improving the A303. On this, the Secretary of State said he was “cautiously optimistic” progress would be able to be made.

On Dawlish, he acknowledged, in response to a question from me, that the cost benefit analysis produced on the alternatives needed to be changed because they don’t fully take into account the wider economic benefits of providing an additional line. This was particularly important because the cost benefit produced for the current consultation judges all the additional route options as “unaffordable”. A number of MPs and Peers raised this and I cited the example in Scotland where the old line between Edinburgh and Galashiels in the Borders is being reopened where the cost benefit is less than an additional line avoiding Dawlish would produce. Mr McLoughlin promised to get back to me on this point.

He also held out the prospect that further electrification would be considered in the next long term planning period (known as CP6). In my view, there is no reason why electrification shouldn’t be extended at least as far as Exeter.

The Minister stressed the benefits of the region “speaking with one voice” on its transport priorities, which is one of the reasons I initiated this group in the first place.

MPs and Peers attending were:
Lord Berkely
Ben Bradshaw MP
Baroness Dean
Andrew George MP
Gary Streeter MP
Anne-Marie Morris MP
Hugo Swire MP
Richard Gibson, CrossCountry
Dilip Sinha, Office of Rail Regulation
James Sloan, Political Consultant, DODS
Alison Seabeck MP
Hazel Phillips, Passenger Focus
Oliver Colvile MP
Sir Nick Harvey MP
Lord Teverson
Sheryll Murray MP

 

[Busaholic]

I see Cross Country were there, so presumably SWT and FGW were invited too. Why weren't they represented? Are they not allowed to express a view which could be construed as in any way 'political' i.e. you tell us where to run trains and will us the means and leave the rest to us? If so, it speaks volumes about the crass position we've allowed ourselves to get into with railways, if anything getting crasser.
I know Ben Bradshaw is only the chair, but being MP for the very marginal seat of Exeter might mean that as long as electrification gets to that city then he'll be satisfied, as his last comments may have indicated.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

On Dawlish, he acknowledged, in response to a question from me, that the cost benefit analysis produced on the alternatives needed to be changed because they don’t fully take into account the wider economic benefits of providing an additional line. This was particularly important because the cost benefit produced for the current consultation judges all the additional route options as “unaffordable”.

So, as many people have often suggested, change the rules until you get the answer you want. Fix the numbers to ones which the audience / treasury will find acceptable. Blows all of the arguments about objectivity in the scheme development process out of the water (so to speak).

 

[John S2]

So, as many people have often suggested, change the rules until you get the answer you want. Fix the numbers to ones which the audience / treasury will find acceptable. Blows all of the arguments about objectivity in the scheme development process out of the water (so to speak).

Standard cost/benefit analysis is not appropriate when discussing rail alternatives to the Dawlish route. The reasons are quite simple: (1) we can be certain that the line will be closed again at some point due to the weather, although the odds are against anything as severe as last winter happening again this coming winter (2) this stretch of line will eventually end up in the sea due to sea level rise. These reasons make the Dawlish situation completely different to an assessment about alternatives or additions to the road or rail network in locations where the current route will definitely remain.