Improving the Exeter area

[devon_belle]

Picture this. Exeter PSB is being rebuilt and so now is the time to enact and make provision for various changes to the infrastructure in the area.

What short and long term improvements would you make to the Exeter area (everywhere covered by Exeter signal box), in terms of track and signalling?

• I would build a new track and a new single-sided platform in the void at Exeter Central, with scissors between the tracks to split up two of the platforms and provide 6 platforms total.
• I would - if useful - reinstate the unplatformed track between P1 and P3 at Exeter St Davids, for use by freight and ECS to avoid them clogging up the approach to the station when platforms are occupied.
• I would reopen a westbound bay at Taunton for passenger use, which would take Axminster-Taunton trains serving the new Wellington and Cullompton stations rather than running Axminster-Barnstaple.
• I would also reinstate quadrupling (or at least tripling) of the line between Taunton and Cogload, to avoid queues in that area. I don't think it's necessary to reinstate all the way to Norton Fitzwarren.
• (Long term) I would relocate Exeter depot and replace Red Cow level crossing with a bridge, so that a new island platform can be built parallel to P6, giving new P7 and P8. This would no doubt need major changes to the throats of the station.

I have fewer ideas for other parts controlled by Exeter PSB. Interested to hear what people think would be useful!

 

[Ashley Hill]

• Install a facing crossover and signalling to allow terminating down services at Taunton to go straight into P4,5 and 6.
• Reinstate P4 at Newton Abbot.
• Reinstate Aller Jct and four track to Newton Abbot.
• East end depot entrance/exit for flexibility.
• Rebuild Cowley Bridge for extra tracks.
• Four track Cowley to St Davids.
• Redouble Cowley - Crediton.
• New pointwork to allow trains from Exeter Central the option to use P4 again.

 

[30907]

• Install a facing crossover and signalling to allow terminating down services at Taunton to go straight into P4,5 and 6.

Agree

• Redouble Cowley - Crediton.

Agree (give or take the actual junction).

• New pointwork to allow trains from Exeter Central the option to use P4 again.

Possibly. Not sure about the rest.

Splitting the platforms at Central, Dovey Jn style, would make sense, though I don't think you need the complication of an extra platform with all the access implications.

 

[uglymonkey]

Put another loop on the exmouth line ( or put the double track back to Topsham to increase capacity. Platform 4 back at Central.

 

[Irascible]

DO we really need four tracks to Cowley? could you do it with three reversable? that'd not eat quite so much of Riverside yard.

 

[Ashley Hill]

DO we really need four tracks to Cowley? could you do it with three reversable? that'd not eat quite so much of Riverside yard.

My thinking is that trains from Barnstaple and Okehampton often wait for access to St Davids due to up trains leaving P3. Another line would allow direct access to P1/2. On the up it would an extra track would free up station capacity and also allow units from the east end entrance/exit road off the depot (see above) to reverse.

 

[zwk500]

My thinking is that trains from Barnstaple and Okehampton often wait for access to St Davids due to up trains leaving P3. Another line would allow direct access to P1/2. On the up it would an extra track would free up station capacity and also allow units from the east end entrance/exit road off the depot (see above) to reverse.

Do you need to 4-track for that or could you not just add some additional crossovers to permit the simultaneous move?

 

[Ashley Hill]

Do you need to 4-track for that or could you not just add some additional crossovers to permit the simultaneous move?

It would allow anything for P1 or 2 to be routed via the extra line instead of being checked down or held outside. The trouble is that bringing the extra down line right to St Davis would mean knocking down a brewery and that must never happen.

 

[zwk500]

It would allow anything for P1 or 2 to be routed via the extra line instead of being checked down or held outside. The trouble is that bringing the extra down line right to St Davis would mean knocking down a brewery and that must never happen.

but you could eliminate that conflict without the extra line by converting the facing crossover between the mains to a scissors (or by moving the facing crossover north and installing a conventional trailing crossover) and then moving the P3 turnout from the P1/2 lead to the Up Main (or even maintain that link with an additional couple of point ends). no need for additional lines or brewery destruction.
Very roughly:

Ideally you'd remove Red Cow to east the horizontal alignment but there are options to move the points around to keep them clear of the crossing if it is retained.

Resignalling Taunton for full bi-di with Facing and trailing crossovers would be my first target for any renewal of Exeter PSB area. 4-track to Cogload isn't really needed or even that helpful, I'd have thought the best gains might come from speeding up loop entry and exit speeds west of Exeter.
If you had the money to put a central reversible in at Exeter Central and took the opportunity to get rid of the bay for conflict-free centre turnback and clean runs up the bank that'd be good, and there's also the possibility to build out the north end of St David's P1 and put the centre line back down, leaving a south end bay only connected to the SWR line and smoother flows through that side of the station, however the risk of running away on the gradient or not getting sufficient run up on departure might put paid to that idea.

 

[Ashley Hill]

but you could eliminate that conflict without the extra line by converting the facing crossover between the mains to a scissors (or by moving the facing crossover north and installing a conventional trailing crossover) and then moving the P3 turnout from the P1/2 lead to the Up Main (or even maintain that link with an additional couple of point ends). no need for additional lines or brewery destruction.

Yes,that would work nicely.
The bay at Central has proved invaluable during disruption at St Davids. It and the reversible allow trains to turn back.

 

[zwk500]

The bay at Central has proved invaluable during disruption at St Davids. It and the reversible allow trains to turn back.

Yes, but by having a central reversible line you'd still have the turnback facility, but this time without disrupting down traffic on departure and it'd be the same length as the other platforms.

 

[geoffk]

Put another loop on the Exmouth line ( or put the double track back to Topsham to increase capacity. Platform 4 back at Central.

Agree in principle but the platform at Digby is built on the empty track bed, while two major roads, one the M5, now pass underneath the line and rail overbridges would need to be rebuilt. Doubling from Exmouth Junction up to a point just short of Digby would be beneficial but it would require a second platform at Polsloe Bridge (my local station), which is poorly located for access from the street. The old platform is gradually disappearing into the jungle. Relocation of the station the other side of the road bridge has been mentioned but it's all down to money. A new track and platform between the two remaining tracks at Central would allow Barnstaple and Okehampton trains to terminate without the need to run up to Exmouth Jn to turn back (although some of them serve St. James park on match days). This would require access from the footbridge, including a lift.

 

[devon_belle]

there's also the possibility to build out the north end of St David's P1 and put the centre line back down, leaving a south end bay only connected to the SWR line and smoother flows through that side of the station, however the risk of running away on the gradient or not getting sufficient run up on departure might put paid to that idea.

That's a really interesting idea. Would a runaway be at more risk of colliding with the buffers as opposed to derailing on the tight curves? Could this be avoided by extending out P3 instead?

 

[zwk500]

That's a really interesting idea. Would a runaway be at more risk of colliding with the buffers as opposed to derailing on the tight curves? Could this be avoided by extending out P3 instead?

No idea where the risk would be least, but in theory there's nothing preventing building out 3 instead of 1, although it would potentially cause issues with speeds on/off the GWML especially at the southern end of the station. Mind you, if there's enough money for this sort of thing then there might be enough to rebuild the bridge over the River immeidately south of the station to allow the alignment to 1/3 to be eased slightly.

 

[Class172]

Agree in principle but the platform at Digby is built on the empty track bed, while two major roads, one the M5, now pass underneath the line and rail overbridges would need to be rebuilt. Doubling from Exmouth Junction up to a point just short of Digby would be beneficial but it would require a second platform at Polsloe Bridge (my local station), which is poorly located for access from the street. The old platform is gradually disappearing into the jungle. Relocation of the station the other side of the road bridge has been mentioned but it's all down to money. A new track and platform between the two remaining tracks at Central would allow Barnstaple and Okehampton trains to terminate without the need to run up to Exmouth Jn to turn back (although some of them serve St. James park on match days). This would require access from the footbridge, including a lift.

Perhaps a minimal intervention would involve converting Exmouth Jct to double lead, then having a small section of double track that merges back in before Polsloe Bridge, which would save Exmouth-bound trains sat blocking the mainline whilst waiting for a late service from Exmouth.

You could even go for a Penryn-style solution, which would negate having to build a completely new platform at Polsloe, just a restoration and extension of the existing portion of the platform that isn't currently used.

 

[Snow1964]

I tend to be in the third track camp, particularly so trains from Crowley Bridge can run parallel.

I would also look at all the points /turnouts, and try and raise the line speed, these days most passenger trains can comfortably brake at 7%g (and rather more in an emergency), so got to think in terms of trains approaching platforms at nearer 60mph than 25-40mph. When previous layout was designed many trains were much slower, but nowadays no point in wasting extra minute crawling when been running at 100-110mph

Regarding 4 tracking, I tend to think 3 tracks with central one reversible sorts a lot of the congestion, can be used as dynamic loops assuming the junctions at the end are not stupidly slow, there is virtually nothing that is restricted to below 60mph anymore so this should be minimum junction speed (unless space is too tight). For clarity loops outside the running lines on one side only should go, they were hangover from unfitted slow freights. Modern freight should not need to sit and wait.

At Exeter Central would consider a through track at country end that allows outer end of platforms (bit under the multi-arch bridge) to be used for turning and holding trains during disruption, without blocking the through route. Can't see any reason to hold a train in western end and platform call on other (outer) end so don't think scissors crossovers needed, just simple central track bypassing half the platform. Is anything longer than 5 or 6 cars likely to be turned there.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

In the current climate, the only likely project is the abolition of Crediton SB and the restoration of the former Coleford Junction to create a double-track section from the currently independent Barnstaple and Okehampton lines. The former down platform at Yeoford would have to be reinstated, however, plus all the level-access requirements, so it is not straightforward. Signalling could also be provided at Eggesford to avoid the faffing around with the token and level-crossing and a second platform at Barnstaple has been mooted.

 

[devon_belle]

Reinstate P4 at Newton Abbot.

Which one is (was [would be]) P4? Are you suggesting a bay platform on the former up main opposite the Teign Valley bay?

 

[geoffk]

On a website titled "The Signalbox" I found the following (due in 2026) "Exeter PSB, Crediton, Exmouth Junction and Paignton boxes to close, area to be controlled from Thames Valley Regional Operations Centre at Didcot." Is this now out of date?

 

[devon_belle]

Mind you, if there's enough money for this sort of thing then there might be enough to rebuild the bridge over the River immeidately south of the station to allow the alignment to 1/3 to be eased slightly.

Given that the platforms are quite long, I suppose cutting a little off the Southern end to ease such alignments would be acceptable if a bridge replacement wasn't on the cards. Provided the P3 bay and P2½ through was still long enough to be useful.

 

[zwk500]

On a website titled "The Signalbox" I found the following (due in 2026) "Exeter PSB, Crediton, Exmouth Junction and Paignton boxes to close, area to be controlled from Thames Valley Regional Operations Centre at Didcot." Is this now out of date?

I believe the document those dates have been taken from is several years and lots of versions out of date now.

 

[devon_belle]

Is a more up-to-date version available?

 

[zwk500]

Is a more up-to-date version available?

Not publicly, I don't think. The plans have changed too many times and NR has gone through varies phases of centralisation and delegation to the regions that any single document is likely to be out of date before it is even published by NR, if one could even be compiled at all.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Which one is (was [would be]) P4? Are you suggesting a bay platform on the former up main opposite the Teign Valley bay?

Platform 4 was where the car park now is opposite P3.

 

[devon_belle]

Platform 4 was where the car park now is opposite P3.

So, are you proposing reinstating the through platform (the former 'up main') or just an Exeter-facing bay?

 

[Bartsimho]

I'd think about moving all the Plymouth and Cornwall stuff into Exeter for a centralised South Western Signal Box.

Re-create Coleford Junction, Platform on the Tarka line for Yeoford and 2 junctions between the Tarka and Dartmoor lines to make it a 2 track section from Coleford to Crediton rather than 2 single tracks to improve capacity. (Also look at doubling Crediton to Cowley Bridge Junction in the future).

Taking a bit of the Bodmin and Wenford Railway and adding a regular service platform at Bodmin General to run a service from the Town itself not just Bodmin Parkway.

 

[devon_belle]

If I may expand upon my original answer, I would like to add turnback facilities at Teignmouth, Dawlish Warren and Marsh Barton (if they do not already exist), in anticipation of future breaches of the Dawlish sea wall (Teignmouth and Dawlish Warren) and/or Exe Estuary sea wall (Marsh Barton). I think it is important that a provision is made for shuttle service to serve the parts of this line which are still safe to use in the event of another breach.

 

[zwk500]

I'd think about moving all the Plymouth and Cornwall stuff into Exeter for a centralised South Western Signal Box.

That's a bit beyond the original brief for this thread but I think you're not too far off what NR are currently thinking of doing.

Re-create Coleford Junction, Platform on the Tarka line for Yeoford and 2 junctions between the Tarka and Dartmoor lines to make it a 2 track section from Coleford to Crediton rather than 2 single tracks to improve capacity. (Also look at doubling Crediton to Cowley Bridge Junction in the future).

Would this actually increase capacity where it's needed though?

Taking a bit of the Bodmin and Wenford Railway and adding a regular service platform at Bodmin General to run a service from the Town itself not just Bodmin Parkway.

No, would be very silly. Massive cost and operational problems for minimum benefit.

If I may expand upon my original answer, I would like to add turnback facilities at Teignmouth, Dawlish Warren and Marsh Barton (if they do not already exist), in anticipation of future breaches of the Dawlish sea wall (Teignmouth and Dawlish Warren) and/or Exe Estuary sea wall (Marsh Barton). I think it is important that a provision is made for shuttle service to serve the parts of this line which are still safe to use in the event of another breach.

A fair amount of work has been done on preventing another breach, but there are already turnbacks at the Plymouth end of Teignmouth and Dawlish Warren, allowing trains to return back to Plymouth. The signalling presumably would allow for a train from Exeter to terminate at Dawlish Warren and shunt across if needed. Exeter St Thomas has a crossover that could be used for turnbacks, so not sure if moving that to Marsh Barton is really needed. https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/exeter

 

[devon_belle]

A fair amount of work has been done on preventing another breach, but there are already turnbacks at the Plymouth end of Teignmouth and Dawlish Warren, allowing trains to return back to Plymouth. The signalling presumably would allow for a train from Exeter to terminate at Dawlish Warren and shunt across if needed. Exeter St Thomas has a crossover that could be used for turnbacks, so not sure if moving that to Marsh Barton is really needed. https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/exeter

Whoops, I'd forgotten about Teignmouth and Exeter St Thomas. You're right there's probably no point moving it to Marsh Barton. I guess something could run to Starcross and return, if some sort of block working was arranged? Better than no train service.

I hope the works prevent another breach, but the future spells only increasing stresses on the sea wall. Given the popularity of Devon metro routes I do not think the section should be totally cut off again if a breach does occur.

 

[Ashley Hill]

So, are you proposing reinstating the through platform (the former 'up main') or just an Exeter-facing bay?

The through platform.

Would this actually increase capacity where it's needed though

It would free up Crediton.