Improving the Exeter area

[Irascible]

Really the Taunton to Axminster service would probably benefit from commuter-style stock with short dwell and convenient doors.

I don't think it really matters - other than Cullompton-Tiverton Parkway the stations are still a reasonable distance apart. Everything is always going to be stopping at both ends of Wellington bank though, whatever it is had better be reliable & have some good acceleration...

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Devon's Tarka rail line breaks passenger records

Devon's Tarka rail line tops 800,000 journeys in one year, making it a "victim of its own success".

www.bbc.co.uk

The Tarka rail line has broken all of its passenger records by seeing more than 800,000 journeys in one year.
The North Devon train line, operated by Great Western Railway (GWR), goes from Exeter to Barnstaple.
However, the Tarka Rail Association (TRA) said the hourly service was now reaching passenger capacity and had become "a victim of its own success".
GWR said it would continue to look at short-term solutions while lobbying for longer-term improvements.

'Highest passenger growth'​

The TRA, set up in 1977, is one of the oldest rail user groups in the UK.
It was originally formed to save the line from being another victim of railway closures, but said it was now facing the new challenge of coping with the sheer number of passengers.
Tim Steer, joint vice-chair of the association, said the line was reaching capacity on key college and leisure services.
Most recent official figures on the line for 2022/23 showed 844,000 journeys had been made.
Mr Steer said the record-breaking figures meant the line was showing the highest percentage in passenger growth in south-west England.

Campaigning for modernisation​

However, Mr Steer said the trains were not big enough or regular enough to cope.
He said: "At peak times, we are seeing three-carriage GWR trains leaving Barnstaple full and standing, and this is making challenges for communities along the line who are finding there is no capacity for them to get on board."
The TRA said it was campaigning for modernisation to the existing infrastructure, for more carriages to be added to the trains, to have two services per hour and for the trains to be faster.
A spokesperson for GWR said: "We share the Tarka Line Association's aspiration for improvement, and are only too aware of the challenges faced on the busiest trains on the line.
"Unfortunately, we cannot run more trains without significant and costly improvements to the infrastructure; and we cannot run longer trains without either extensive modifications to platform lengths, or to the trains themselves."

Shame GWR can’t take on some of the 159s freed by SWR’s axing of many Yeovil/Westbury and all Bristol services, as these do have SDO. Sixes probably overhang some loops anyway.

The single line will obviously prevent more than 1tph running.

 

[HSTEd]

Fixing the tarka line is going to be an interesting challenge if anyone ever tries.

I suppose with signalling modernisation you could move the Crediton crossovers to the actual divergence point of the Okehampton and Tarka lines and get a little more flexibility in the layout with a several mile dynamic loop.
But you are probably going to need at least one or maybe two new loops to get half hourly, whcih is probably what the Tarka Line needs long term.

 

[embers25]

The article says GWR can't run longer trains without significant infrastructure improvements but dud they not run 4 coach pacers or at least sprinter plus pacer combos?

 

[yorkie]

The article says GWR can't run longer trains without significant infrastructure improvements but dud they not run 4 coach pacers or at least sprinter plus pacer combos?

A 3-car 158 is longer than a 4-car pacer, isn't it?

 

[embers25]

Ah that would explain it.

 

[geoffk]

The article says GWR can't run longer trains without significant infrastructure improvements but dud they not run 4 coach pacers or at least sprinter plus pacer combos?

I think they tried a 4-car 150 recently on the morning peak service (80m long against 69m for a 3-car 158). I assume a 4-car 158 wouldn't fit some platforms.

 

[Meerkat]

I think they tried a 4-car 150 recently on the morning peak service (80m long against 69m for a 3-car 158). I assume a 4-car 158 wouldn't fit some platforms.

Do the platforms matter that much - is there no SDO?
Just use it as an excuse to close some of the tiny stations.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The second platform at Barnstaple will effectively be a loop with the right timetabling and it can be built relatively cheaply - as a terminus compliant access can be made without the need for lifts etc.. Reinstating a second platform and loop at an intermediate station runs into the complications and expense of providing access in line with modern regulations. Barnstaple to Umberleigh and Coleford Jcn to Copplestone were originally double-track, so maybe there is space for loops there away from the stations, but they are a bit off-centre. Portsmouth Arms, very roughly halfway between Barnstaple and Eggesford would be ideal for a loop - maybe the little-used station should be sacrificed for the greater good?

 

[Ashley Hill]

Do the platforms matter that much - is there no SDO?
Just use it as an excuse to close some of the tiny stations.

SDO isn’t available on the units that currently work on the line and local door operation isn’t practical for some of the busier stations. Loops at Portsmouth Arms and Morchard Road would provide the extra paths but would be unrealistically expensive. Then add the cost of providing those loops and signalling them.

 

[HSTEd]

SDO isn’t available on the units that currently work on the line and local door operation isn’t practical for some of the busier stations. Loops at Portsmouth Arms and Morchard Road would provide the extra paths but would be unrealistically expensive. Then add the cost of providing those loops and signalling them.

Okehampton service requirements are likely to drive upgrades to the signalling in the long run. I believe its a train staff held at Crediton signal box at the moment?
If you moved the Crediton crossovers to the actual point of divergence I think you might be able to get away with a half hourly service with only a single all-new loop. Resignal the whole line (including Okehampton)

 

[William3000]

Indeed - Exeter Central is crying out for better infrastructure.

I’ve always wondered whether Exeter Central could be upgraded to a 5-platform station by reinstating the through lines and incorporating scissor crossings like the ones that exist at Cambridge. The existing platforms can handle 14 coaches and I think platform 2 could be extended to 15 without losing the bay. Admittedly the scissor crossing probably takes out 2 coach spaces but that would still leave 13 coach lengths - enough for 5 or 6 car trains easily. If longer trains were necessary then platforms could be extended removing platform 1 bay which is rarely used.

 

[zwk500]

I’ve always wondered whether Exeter Central could be upgraded to a 5-platform station by reinstating the through lines and incorporating scissor crossings like the ones that exist at Cambridge. The existing platforms can handle 14 coaches and I think platform 2 could be extended to 15 without losing the bay. Admittedly the scissor crossing probably takes out 2 coach spaces but that would still leave 13 coach lengths - enough for 5 or 6 car trains easily. If longer trains were necessary then platforms could be extended removing platform 1 bay which is rarely used.

The problem with a platform sharing or back-to-back arrangement would be signal checking trains up the bank from Exeter St Davids. Not to mention the maintenance costs of scissors for what is not an especially busy station in terms of services.
I suggested a 3-Platform layout (all long enough for the longest IET and fully reversible) before but that didn't seem to get much support from others.

 

[Brush 4]

Reinstating one or both of the centre roads would increase flexibility by providing stabling space for 1 perhaps 2 units. One would probably be enough, allowing space for any staff platform that might be needed. I presume points on gradients are no longer allowed unless already there, therefore, a connection only from the east end.

Amazing that loco hauled trains were split and rejoined there several times a day, with reversals on the 1 in 37 bank. Light engines all over the place. BR rationalisation strikes again......

 

[RPI]

Two things that would vastly improve Exeter Central, make the up Waterloo bi-directional with a crossover at the East end, reinstate points at St Davids so that trains on the Down Waterloo can access platform four as used to be the case, a crossover at St Davids to allow trains to depart platform three onto the Up Waterloo, the latter would probably need to be in the platform at St Davids.

 

[REVUpminster]

Exeter Central has at the moment has 5 trains in any one direction per hour. Eastbound London, Exmouth (2) and two terminators. Westbound All though trains. St David's, Paignton (2), Okehampton and Barnstaple. That's an average of 12 minutes between trains.

What it needs is stock that enables good entry and exit for passengers such as the 150s and 165/6s and the terminating trains need quick emptying or probably in future extended to Axminster or an increase in service to Exmouth.

The thing Exeter Central needs is an escalator from the eastbound platform straight up to Queen Street. Plenty of room.

 

[dk1]

Exeter Central has at the moment has 5 trains in any one direction per hour. Eastbound London, Exmouth (2) and two terminators. Westbound All though trains. St David's, Paignton (2), Okehampton and Barnstaple. That's an average of 12 minutes between trains.

What it needs is stock that enables good entry and exit for passengers such as the 150s and 165/6s and the terminating trains need quick emptying or probably in future extended to Axminster or an increase in service to Exmouth.

Devon CCs plan for the Devon Metro is that Barnstaple trains will extend to Axminster each hour providing a half-hourly service with SWR. There is already a daily service operated by GWR to Axminster in readiness for further expansion.

 

[REVUpminster]

Devon CCs plan for the Devon Metro is that Barnstaple trains will extend to Axminster each hour providing a half-hourly service with SWR. There is already a daily service operated by GWR to Axminster in readiness for further expansion.

That one train GWR provide replaced a SWR train, but I agree it is the council plan to extend Barnstaple or Okehampton trains to Axminster. A problem in the meantime is creating a half hour service to Barnstaple at least in the peaks.

 

[fgwrich]

Sadly, the much needed extra services to Axminster won't happen until a new loop is added near Whimple, Honiton Loop extended and extra stock materialises from somewhere, though all parties seem to agree what's needed, there's still no funding.

Of course, one of the biggest (and potentially most expensive) problems in that area is the M5 bridge at Pinhoe - another frustrating and shortsighted case of building the infrastructure as cheaply as possible and now potentially permanently limiting that section to single track. Had that been built wider than it is, you could easily reinstate the double track to the eastern edge of Feniton, around the A303 bridge and before you hit the slewed single track section into Honiton.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Of course, one of the biggest (and potentially most expensive) problems in that area is the M5 bridge at Pinhoe - another frustrating and shortsighted case of building the infrastructure as cheaply as possible and now potentially permanently limiting that section to single track. Had that been built wider than it is, you could easily reinstate the double track to the eastern edge of Feniton, around the A303 bridge and before you hit the slewed single track section into Honiton.

No doubt that would cost a small fortune to widen. Absolute short sightedness of the time.

 

[REVUpminster]

Of course, one of the biggest (and potentially most expensive) problems in that area is the M5 bridge at Pinhoe - another frustrating and shortsighted case of building the infrastructure as cheaply as possible and now potentially permanently limiting that section to single track. Had that been built wider than it is, you could easily reinstate the double track to the eastern edge of Feniton, around the A303 bridge and before you hit the slewed single track section into Honiton.

They could probably live with that short stretch as single track (think Royal Albert Bridge) and as and when ram, dug by hand from within a shield, a second single tunnel next to the existing tunnel without interfering with the road structure.

 

[zwk500]

They could probably live with that short stretch as single track (think Royal Albert Bridge) and as and when ram, dug by hand from within a shield, a second single tunnel next to the existing tunnel without interfering with the road structure.

Rebuilding the bridge will certainly be cheaper than digging a tunnel by hand under a bridge abutment.

 

[Wychwood93]

No doubt that would cost a small fortune to widen. Absolute short sightedness of the time.

Apologies for being off-thread. In contrast to this is the A350 just south-west of Chippenham where passive provision was made to easily extend it to a dual-carriageway without major works. The bridge in the link sees Chippenham to the left and Thingley Jn to the right. Note the as yet unused infrastructure item!

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.co.uk

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Apologies for being off-thread. In contrast to this is the A350 just south-west of Chippenham where passive provision was made to easily extend it to a dual-carriageway without major works. The bridge in the link sees Chippenham to the left and Thingley Jn to the right. Note the as yet unused infrastructure item!

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.co.uk

Not the only instance on the A350 in Wiltshire - the similarly-proportioned underbridge beneath the Kennet & Avon Canal just south of Melksham also provides passive provision for dualling.

 

[Xavi]

No doubt that would cost a small fortune to widen. Absolute short sightedness of the time.

The adjacent local single track Langaton Lane road bridge under the M5 was built to A road standard at enormous expense just in case it would be necessary in the future. It is now a no through road with the area under the M5 often used for parking.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

The adjacent local single track Langaton Lane road bridge under the M5 was built to A road standard at enormous expense just in case it would be necessary in the future. It is now a no through road with the area under the M5 often used for parking.

It shows the transport priorities of the '70s doesn't it - the rail bridges on the Exmouth branch over the M5 and A379 link-road were also built as single-track precluding redoubling to Topsham.

 

[RPI]

What a pity. Let’s hope they all dig deep in 2024 and start the ball rolling.

Unfortunately the current hourly service on the West of England line doesn't really work as it is, without doubling the number of trains

 

[fgwrich]

Unfortunately the current hourly service on the West of England line doesn't really work as it is, without doubling the number of trains

Or the infrastructure too. I use the line often and (although a small thread divert coming) it really can be a pain at times. Tisbury is often a source of delays, Templecombe is frustrating (a cheap solution to a problem continued by Network Rail in the late 00s), as is Axminster / Honiton and Pinhoe. Any additional loops or double track in any of those stretches would at least help to alleviate some of the problems the West of England line regularly faces, as well as Devon Metro and services into Waterloo.

Speaking of delays, it's been noticed on various groups over on Facebook that SWR has started to turn around the Waterloo - Exeter's more regularly in the bay at Exeter Central now - something that used to be fairly rare now seems to be becoming a regular sight.

 

[louis97]

Axminster / Honiton and Pinhoe.

Unfortunately since the opening of Cranbrook Station there is no slack in the timetable where it matters now. The construct of the timetable means any delay (for example temporary speed restrictions) to a train off the single line at Pinhoe is transfered to the next up train. You then get the same situation at Tisbury. A loop at Whimple would allow you to add a small amount of extra time in the timetable with trains passing there more reliably. Any journey time increases however are a bit of an awkward subject, even if it does allow the service to be more reliable.

 

[Nucker]

Any journey time increases however are a bit of an awkward subject, even if it does allow the service to be more reliable.

There are lots of talks about extending the Barnstaple/Okehampton lines to cover the extra service, but surely (in the medium term future) it would make sense to create a new hourly service, that would run between Axminister and Taunton (maybe extending to Bristol?). Then, the new Wellington & Cullompton services get regular services that go to EXC, and places on the WoE line get an frequency increase. You could in fact have the Waterloo services skip Fention, Whimple, Cranbrook, and maybe Pinhoe. This obviously would require the passing loop at Honiton, and probably some extra rolling stock (project churchward?) and staff.

It shows the transport priorities of the '70s doesn't it - the rail bridges on the Exmouth branch over the M5 and A379 link-road were also built as single-track precluding redoubling to Topsham.

This may be a stupid question, but surely this only makes redoubling expensive. Surely a new bridge can be raised, and the old one lowered, overnight, minimising disruption. Or perhaps with just closing a couple outer lanes? At worst, you could close the road for a day, at a particularly quiet time of season, surely that wouldn't be catastrophic.