Dawlish sea wall collapse

[edwin_m]

Signalling is reported to have been restored between Plymouth and Newton Abbot yesterday evening. I do however share your concerns as signalling centres become further and further removed from the areas that they control as efficiencies are continually sought from further consolidation.

No doubt there is a local interlocking at Newton Abbot so there would only be TDM links between there and Exeter, just a few cables to reinstate across the breach and hopefully protected against future damage either from the sea or from any accidents during reconstruction.

If it had been more modern technology then the control and indications could have been diverted via any suitable digital data link including one set up for the purpose over someone else's telecommunications network.

 

[Chrisgr31]

There is a lot of bandwagoning going on. I'm not saying it wouldnt be nice to have another route with more services, of course it would. But it's hardly the 'MUST DO' people are suggesting.

Perish the thought, you wouldn't have people seeking to use a few recent incidents on the Brighton Mainline to advance the cause of BML2.............Oh!

 

[LateThanNever]

Presumably it's not beyond the realms of possibility to build a modern up to date structure but perhaps cosmetically dressed in stone to remain in keeping with the landscape.

I have to say, having grown up in Kent (where we have a lot of sea walls) such structures tend to have a much longer slope at the bottom end, and a much curvier top to deflect the waves, than seems to be the case with Dawlish.

The difference is, as I understand it, the railway was actually built mostly on the beach which is why the cliffs are behind it. Because of the currents in the Exe estuary (together with perhaps rising sea levels) there is gradually less and less beach and an increasingly large sandbank in the middle of the bay between Exmouth and Dawlish..

 

[Bantamzen]

I can give one example of where this approa has worked: Pen-y-clip viaduct (near Penmaenmawr on the North Wales coast line) was originally built as an emankment with sea wall, but it couldn't stand up to the weather. It was rebuilt as a viaduct, to let the waves come through underneath and crash against the big mountain of granite behind it instead.

That's not to say, of course, that what works for Pen-y-clip will definitely work for Dawlish, but there is a precedent.

Would the houses directly behind the line scupper a viaduct plan, with the argument that a viaduct would simply let much of the energy in the waves pass underneath & potentially damage a sea wall directly beneath those houses? Whatever the solution, it's going to be a tricky job as a new wall is going to have to put up with some seriously strong wave patterns in the future.

Oh and you can't really blame certain quarters in the South West from playing up the potential losses for the region. They are hardly going to tell Westminster that it's no big deal & risk works taking longer than needed leaving them with no direct rail service for many months or even years. It's going to be a months long job as it is, the last thing you do is encourage a government on an austerity path to put things off by seeking "alternatives" by road. And I'm sure FGW might be quite keen to restore the route ASAP, and maybe even seek an diversionary line to help keep direct services running. Imagine how London might react if a major part of their transport infrastructure was crippled even for a couple of days......, oh wait.....

 

[Starmill]

According to station usage figures there are approx 6m station entry and exits pa on all lines west* of Exeter St Davids. Let's be favourable to the case and say a third of them are for trips that both start and finish west of Newton Abbot inclusive. So 4m trips pa are 'across the breach'.

At a cost to the economy of £1-2m per day, the lower end of the scale represents c£400m pa.

So this means each single trip across the breach generates £100 to the local economy.

Really?

Equally, it could be argued that the breach is stopping Cornwallians and Plymouthians heading east to spend their hard earned cash in the rest of England, so they have to spend it in at home instead, thereby boosting the local economy

I find it a little tiresome that everybody thinks they can second guess these figures like this. If you question the credibility of the sources used by the media, presumably you have even less with which to question the figures.

This is not a specific gripe at Bald Rick, but '£100 a trip' is nonsense. There are lots and lots of reasons besides 'money spent on ice creams' why the severing of a transport link might cause economic loss. What about the effect on businesses? At present, extended journeytimes and disruption mean that firms with parts located either side of the breach will have to make different choices. Yes, there will be loss of visitors which means loss of some consumer expenditure but what about The Multiplier? There will be lost fare revenue from people who choose not to travel. What about the effect of the uncertainty of re-opening, and what about long-term decisions made about the integrity of transport access to this part of the South West. Small businesses particularly are averse to uncertainty. What effect will this have on future investment? I have no idea how the figures were calculated, but what about the government and lost tax revenue? There are just so many variables it IS difficult to measure, but transport is knitted deep into the structure of our economy such that I think there can be little doubt that the losses will be significant - how could it be anything different?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A spokesman for Visit Cornwall on Radio 5 Live this morning seemed to be playing down the effect of losing the rail connection, saying only 6% of tourists arrive by train anyway.

There is much more to this than tourism! :x

 

[Goatboy]

I think it's time NRES either stopped providing itinieries or updated them to reflect the bus arrangements. I have a journey next week and NRES is still thinking I'll be on the train.

 

[sor]

FGW seem to be suggesting that the timetables have not yet been finalised, there's a hoo-hah (including by a prominent Exeter Labour MP) on Twitter because FGW have taken the advance tickets off sale as they don't know what trains/replacement services will be running yet.

 

[starrymarkb]

BBC Spotlight report that the down platform at Dawlish may need to be removed after damage to the foundations

 

[Zoidberg]

BBC Spotlight report that the down platform at Dawlish may need to be removed after damage to the foundations

Indeed. From the Network Rail website at: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/improvements/dawlish/

Work is ongoing to demolish the most damaged platform at Dawlish station itself, prior to rebuilding.

 

[SussexMan]

Does anyone know the time interval between the last train which passed Dawlish and when the collapse happened?

 

[starrymarkb]

Does anyone know the time interval between the last train which passed Dawlish and when the collapse happened?

Line was closed at 15:15 by NR - posts else where suggest last few moves were ECS (143s to Exeter and fully fueled 153s sent west)

 

[dave55uk]

I see on the BBC News website (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26068375) an old railway map that shows there was a line from Lydford which joined the GWML just East of Plymouth. If an alternative route, via Okehampton and Tavistock, was to be re-used, the use of the line from Lydford to the GWML would obviate any need for reversal at Plymouth. I'm guessing though that the trackbed has long since gone.

 

[Goatboy]

I see on the BBC News website (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26068375) an old railway map that shows there was a line from Lydford which joined the GWML just East of Plymouth. If an alternative route, via Okehampton and Tavistock, was to be re-used, the use of the line from Lydford to the GWML would obviate any need for reversal at Plymouth. I'm guessing though that the trackbed has long since gone.

It's still there and remarkably intact inc tunnels and viaducts. It's now a cycle trail and the line from Marsh Mills to Plym Bridge has been relaid by a heritage railway.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I see on the BBC News website (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26068375) an old railway map that shows there was a line from Lydford which joined the GWML just East of Plymouth.

The railway station of Lydford was on the line from Marsh Mills to Launceston and was not closed until 1968.

 

[Johnuk123]

Surely with a couple of crossovers rapidly installed each side of the gap at Dawlish you could easily run a shuttle from Penzance and Paddington.

Everybody could climb down a ladder onto the beach.

Then everybody onto a tractor and trailer ride or boat when the tides in to the other train - easy can't understand why nobody hasn't thought of this before.

Would certainly make it a unique trip, would probably be really popular especially in a force 9.

 

[starrymarkb]

The difference is, as I understand it, the railway was actually built mostly on the beach which is why the cliffs are behind it. Because of the currents in the Exe estuary (together with perhaps rising sea levels) there is gradually less and less beach and an increasingly large sandbank in the middle of the bay between Exmouth and Dawlish..

Indeed, there is so much sand at the Mouth of the Exe now that the Lifeboat couldn't get out at low tide. They've had to build a new station with a tractor launch on the beach

 

[krus_aragon]

It is v weak sandstone very easily eroded by sea not granite.

Quite right. And the residents of Dawlish will surely expect a breakwater/sea wall somewhere to protect their houses. I was only thinking of the feasibility of a viaduct for the railway, and hadn't considered the hinterland.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Would the houses directly behind the line scupper a viaduct plan, with the argument that a viaduct would simply let much of the energy in the waves pass underneath & potentially damage a sea wall directly beneath those houses? Whatever the solution, it's going to be a tricky job as a new wall is going to have to put up with some seriously strong wave patterns in the future.

On that train of thought, we'll need a new sea wall at Dawlish anyway. So the subsequent question is: should we put the railway back on top of it?

 

[Ian Miller]

On that train of thought, we'll need a new sea wall at Dawlish anyway. So the subsequent question is: should we put the railway back on top of it?

The Railway definately needs to go back. Long term perhaps they could kill two birds wirh one stone and build a tidal lagoon http://www.tidallagoonswanseabay.com/ Protecting both the Dawlish coast towns and recooping their expenditure in the productoon of renewable energy.

 

[47802]

The Railway definately needs to go back. Long term perhaps they could kill two birds wirh one stone and build a tidal lagoon http://www.tidallagoonswanseabay.com/ Protecting both the Dawlish coast towns and recooping their expenditure in the productoon of renewable energy.

This is why I think a new line to Newton Abbot would be preferable over the Okehampton route, then the Dawlish route could be closed and any sea defence work could be carried out without the need to maintain a Victorian railway as well. Yes Dawlish would lose its train service and possibly Teignmouth although that could stay as a single track branch from Newton Abbot if it was felt to be justified.

 

[yorksrob]

The coastal towns and railway have a symbiotic relationship. Dawlish and Teignmouth don‘t lose out from the need to maintain the railway. If anything, the area probably has better maintained and monitored sea defences because of the railway.

 

[47802]

The coastal towns and railway have a symbiotic relationship. Dawlish and Teignmouth don‘t lose out from the need to maintain the railway. If anything, the area probably has better maintained and monitored sea defences because of the railway.

yes and that's my point there may be significant cost savings on sea defences if those sea defences didn't have to include maintaining a mainline Victorian railway, which could be taken into consideration when looking at the cost of an alternate line to Newton Abbot

 

[yorksrob]

yes and that's my point there may be significant cost savings on sea defences if those sea defences didn't have to include maintaining a mainline Victorian railway, which could be taken into consideration when looking at the cost of an alternate line to Newton Abbot

Fair point, although I wonder who would have to bear those costs if the railway wasn‘t there. I‘m guessing that NR will be footing a fair chunk of the bill at the moment, which could leave the local authority with an increase in costs if it were taken away.

 

[455driver]

I see the ill informed (IE dont have a clue) wibblers are on one today!

So you actually think that if the Okehampton route was put back that-

1/ NR wouldnt have to pay their bit to keep the seawall up to scratch.
2/ journey times via Okehampton (or whatever route) would be comparable to the current Dawlish route.
3/ there is actually any money available to build a new route.
4/ building a tidal barrage (of whatever type) wont significantly affect the sands/currents on the whole estuary probably meaning the beaches at Dawlish and Teignmouth would disappear.
5/ there is the political will to actually do anything about the problems rather than just talk about them.
6/ in a couple of months when the seawall is rebuilt, trains are running and everything is back to normal any talk of opening new routes etc will be a distant memory.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I see the ill informed (IE dont have a clue) wibblers are on one today!

So you actually think that if the Okehampton route was put back that-

1/ NR wouldnt have to pay their bit to keep the seawall up to scratch.
2/ journey times via Okehampton (or whatever route) would be comparable to the current Dawlish route.
3/ there is actually any money available to build a new route.
4/ building a tidal barrage (of whatever type) wont significantly affect the sands/currents on the whole estuary probably meaning the beaches at Dawlish and Teignmouth would disappear.
5/ there is the political will to actually do anything about the problems rather than just talk about them.
6/ in a couple of months when the seawall is rebuilt, trains are running and everything is back to normal any talk of opening new routes etc will be a distant memory.

But our resident know-it-all knows best of course, and can put us all right

 

[Ian Miller]

Sorry I think my post may have been misinterpreted.

When I say the railway needs to go back. I mean it needs to go back as it is now. 2 lines in its current place serving: Newton Abbot- Teignmouth -Dawlish - Exeter. The Okehampton line although a nice to have, is not the answer.

Getting between those towns is an absolute nightmare by road, especially at peak times and in the holiday season. The railway provides a necessary quick and regular services to locals and visitors.

However the ongoing costs and works associated with stabilising the cliffs can't go on for ever it's ridiculous. Nor can it be left for nature to take its natural course.

Now many people have been suggesting breakwaters similar to that which we have in Plymouth. My reason for suggesting the tidal power lagoon was that if you are going to build a sea defence that screws up the current aquatic harmony you may as well get something out of it.

 

[47802]

I see the ill informed (IE dont have a clue) wibblers are on one today!

So you actually think that if the Okehampton route was put back that-

1/ NR wouldnt have to pay their bit to keep the seawall up to scratch.
2/ journey times via Okehampton (or whatever route) would be comparable to the current Dawlish route.
3/ there is actually any money available to build a new route.
4/ building a tidal barrage (of whatever type) wont significantly affect the sands/currents on the whole estuary probably meaning the beaches at Dawlish and Teignmouth would disappear.
5/ there is the political will to actually do anything about the problems rather than just talk about them.
6/ in a couple of months when the seawall is rebuilt, trains are running and everything is back to normal any talk of opening new routes etc will be a distant memory.

1. I'm no expert on sea defences but if was significantly less costly to provide sea defences without the line being there then maybe that should be considered, admittedly I think you could only really consider that option if a new line to Newton Abbot was chosen rather than the Okehampton route.

5/6. Yes that might well happen, but I think there will be more pressure now and the South West is important to both Liberal and Tory,

2. How do you actually know that?. If we consider the Okehampton option and the existing lines were upgraded to max possible speeds and the new sections of track were possibly built to different alignments if there was a speed benefit, depending of course on cost.

 

[The Planner]

Which is why I cannot fathom the amounts of money suggested for re-opening the line that are going about, how can anyone put a ball park figure on it when nothing is known about requirements or spec?

 

[455driver]

So first of all you advocate rebuilding the Okehampton line but now you are saying it will be on a new, faster alignment!
Make your mind up! :roll:

The Okehampton line was always a slow line and to try and do anything else with it just wont work, have a look at a topographical map to see why!

 

[user15681]

Sea containers have been filled with sand/rubble and put up against the end of the broken sea wall as breakers to prevent any more damage. NR saying all workers having to wear additional safety equipment, including life jackets.

 

[47802]

So first of all you advocate rebuilding the Okehampton line but now you are saying it will be on a new, faster alignment!
Make your mind up! :roll:

The Okehampton line was always a slow line and to try and do anything else with it just wont work, have a look at a topographical map to see why!

I'm not really advocating anything I'm simply saying options need to be considered, which might include AS IS, and all I'm saying that for the missing section of route you could consider existing alignment or whether an alternate faster alignment would be possible for all or some of route, I accept the Okehampton route wouldn't be particularly fast but then neither is the current route. It also depends whether you want the Okehampton route to be a backup route with mainly a local service reinstated and the ability to say cope with say one diverted fast train each way per hour, or the primary route for Express Services. I personally think a new line to Newton Abbot would be preferable, but think the likely outcome will be AS IS with promise of extra money for sea defences, or leave the problem until after the next election