At least the Government has everything under control, by wanting to introduce larger lorries on the roads.
I’m sure the bridge that has been struck has sufficient clearance for the Siemens eHighway electrification system that will be installed on all roads within the next 5 years.
Not just to you, but all making this point: how often does this situation occur, and is spending >£1bn on a new railway really a more effective method of mitigating it than putting a bollard in the road to enforce a 6'6" width restriction? The bridge in question is located between 2 bridges with easy clearance, one of which is over the railway that the lorry could easily have accessed by following the same road for about a mile.
I don't know the area, but it would seem to be a fairly exceptional set of circumstances that there is no or very little road transport available, and for every other time trains are disrupted a short hop in a coach is going to be far preferable than a slow trundle round the wrong side of Dartmoor and 2 reversals. Not to mention the impact on passengers of stuffing Plymouth and Exeter St. David's up with reversing trains, or further delaying trains by diverting those not stopping at Taunton via Yeovil. A brand new line just screams 'Trains are the best', rather than the measured statement 'how do we provide effective public transport at good value to those funding it'.
A width restriction, and preliminary height warnings like laser detection and a chain shield prior to the first arch would cost far, far less to install and maintain than the new line. That and increase the fine + penalty points for striking any bridge.
Why would it be a “slow trundle” through Okehampton? Surely the line speed on a brand new £1 billion railway would be quite high, possibly higher than the route via Dawlish. What about the slow trundle over the single line on a severely damaged bridge?
Long distance trains would only ever reverse at times such as this when the other line is closed. The rest of the time, only a Plymouth - Exeter local service via Okehampton would need to run. Perhaps this could be reduced in frequency when diversions are in place.
Nothing wrong with that, as long as they introduce lorry drivers with bigger/some brains
Not possible since all the freight drivers with bigger/some brains are currently sat in Class 66s.
But I suppose we'll get the cheapest (on paper) rather than the best solution, much like "Smart Motorways", which have been proven to be not at all "smart" (and are still being built on the M6 in Staffs/Cheshire as I write).
The sum total of works on these “Smart” motorways is the installation of a purple tube along the central reservation and removal of the hard shoulder to make all journeys fatal.
Blame the fragmentation brought about by privatisation. In BR days there would be one person totally in overall charge
Fragmentation down there isn’t even as bad as it is in some other parts of the country, with only GWR, XC and Network Rail to deal with.
Also over-simplification of station and depot layouts and of junctions, mostly to save money.
Exactly, when the desired movements in times of disruption have been rendered impossible.
Rather than a “balanced” view of resiliency, why not take a “resilient” view of what infrastructure is necessary, which includes the full length of the line from Okehampton to Bere Alston.