Surely the case is now much stronger for Bere Alston - Tavistock - Okehampton!

[takno]

If you look at anywhere with a comprehensive railway network, you'll find that people travel in all directions by train. Kent, Sussex, Yorkshire. The 1960's obsession with turning everything into a dead end branch line really doesn't reflect the way people actually travel.

It doesn't, and in this case it would be better if it had been kept open, but the reality of it is that it's a long way from Okehampton to Plymouth and there aren't many people in between. Without spurious arguments about sea walls nobody would ever consider this. Reopening Stratford to Cheltenham probably has a stronger case

 

[yorksrob]

It doesn't, and in this case it would be better if it had been kept open, but the reality of it is that it's a long way from Okehampton to Plymouth and there aren't many people in between. Without spurious arguments about sea walls nobody would ever consider this. Reopening Stratford to Cheltenham probably has a stronger case

In the context of re-integrating Tavistock and Okehampton into the railway passenger network, it makes sense to have them on one through route, rather than two branch lines.

 

[daodao]

In the context of re-integrating Tavistock and Okehampton into the railway passenger network, it makes sense to have them on one through route, rather than two branch lines.

Why? Linking Tavistock and Okehampton by rail, as distinct from having them as branch line termini, can only be justified if there is an adequate business case, which as others have argued on this thread, is highly unlikely. Such a case can only be based on local benefits for these 2 small towns - it would be too roundabout as a through route from Exeter to Plymouth, and have long stretches of single track. As Okehampton looks towards Exeter and Tavistock towards Plymouth as the nearest major cities, these benefits are likely to be sparse.

 

[Gathursty]

Why? Linking Tavistock and Okehampton by rail, as distinct from having them as branch line termini, can only be justified if there is an adequate business case, which as others have argued on this thread, is highly unlikely. Such a case can only be based on local benefits for these 2 small towns - it would be too roundabout as a through route from Exeter to Plymouth, and have long stretches of single track. As Okehampton looks towards Exeter and Tavistock towards Plymouth as the nearest major cities, these benefits are likely to be sparse.

I think it is still worth asking residents of Okehampton/Tavistock if they would visit vice versa more often if a rail link was built. Us lot on this forum certainly do not represent those two towns and neither does Westminster nor people who come up with cost-benefit ratios.

 

[BrianW]

I think it is still worth asking residents of Okehampton/Tavistock if they would visit vice versa more often if a rail link was built. Us lot on this forum certainly do not represent those two towns and neither does Westminster nor people who come up with cost-benefit ratios.

Residents of anywhere would say they would like a bus every 10 mins to everywhere at no cost, and still not use it

 

[uglymonkey]

No cost ? was that mentioned? How does that work then?

 

[BrianW]

No cost ? was that mentioned? How does that work then?

You're right that 'no cost' was not mentioned. I was trying, and clearly failed miserably, to make the point that 'asking residents of Okehampton/Tavistock if they would visit vice versa more often if a rail link was built' is not likely to produce a particularly helpful response. How 'truthful' are people likely to be about their future use of this railway? It costs them nothing to give the answer they imagine the person asking is wanting. It's like a petition- it is less trouble, and more 'polite' to just sign.

 

[Ashley Hill]

There were plenty of naysayers on this forum and others who said reopening Okehampton would be a waste of time as nobody would use it citing reasons like the steep hill or lack of parking,how wrong you all were!!!!
Tavistock needs its railway. Filling the gap between the two could offer a circular service and an alternative route in case of failures,possessions or sea wall issues.

 

[Mark J]

Lots of people live at Tavistock, lots live at Okehampton, lots live at Crediton.

Railways are supposed to run between places where people live.

Wasting your time on here with such an argument.

For a rail forum, some very funny attitudes exist towards line/service reopenings by some. Some of which are more akin to a pro-road forum.

Many of whom, I suspect who live in areas with regular trains every half hour, or less. However, begrudge those who want services reinstated to their area, even if at a far less frequency.

There were plenty of naysayers on this forum and others who said reopening Okehampton would be a waste of time as nobody would use it citing reasons like the steep hill or lack of parking,how wrong you all were!!!!
Tavistock needs its railway. Filling the gap between the two could offer a circular service and an alternative route in case of failures,possessions or sea wall issues.

I personally believe the whole route between Okehampton and Bere Alston, via Tavistock should be reopened. It is a distance of around 20 miles total.

There are ways and means of making it a viable route and sorting out the previously mentioned issue of reversing at Plymouth.

 

[The Ham]

There were plenty of naysayers on this forum and others who said reopening Okehampton would be a waste of time as nobody would use it citing reasons like the steep hill or lack of parking,how wrong you all were!!!!
Tavistock needs its railway. Filling the gap between the two could offer a circular service and an alternative route in case of failures,possessions or sea wall issues.

As I've pointed out before, once you've got a there and back branch at each end (Okehampton and Tavistock) the additional costs for running a through service (not including the cost of building the line, extra milage costs or the maintenance of the track) don't increase.

It's then a question of does the extra passengers heading to the "wrong" city cover the maintenance costs and other extra milage costs from the fares. As if it does then the amount of subsidy required doesn't change. It's then just a case of doors the extra cost to build it make sense (unlikely a lot of reopenings, where the subsidy is likely to increase).

Arguably, though, with the running costs covered from passengers then the wider benefits would then only be needed to cover the construction costs.

 

[yorksrob]

Wasting your time on here with such an argument.

For a rail forum, some very funny attitudes exist towards line/service reopenings by some. Some of which are more akin to a pro-road forum.

Many of whom, I suspect who live in areas with regular trains every half hour, or less. However, begrudge those who want services reinstated to their area, even if at a far less frequency.

Indeed. There's definitely an "I'm alright Jack" mentality amongst some rail users.

One only has to look at the success of the Borders line to see that for travel between towns in rural areas, there is considerable demand.

The railway network in Devon is never going to be as comprehensive as that in Kent, for example, however we could at least aim to give people in its towns a bit of a choice of direction to travel.

 

[30907]

One only has to look at the success of the Borders line to see that for travel between towns in rural areas, there is considerable demand.

I've only been on that line once, admittedly, but the traffic was almost entirely to and from Edinburgh. Exactly as with Okehampton and (hopefully) Tavistock and their respective cities.

 

[yorksrob]

I've only been on that line once, admittedly, but the traffic was almost entirely to and from Edinburgh. Exactly as with Okehampton and (hopefully) Tavistock and their respective cities.

Well, it's likely to be, given that it only goes to Edinburgh.

 

[HSTEd]

As I've pointed out before, once you've got a there and back branch at each end (Okehampton and Tavistock) the additional costs for running a through service (not including the cost of building the line, extra milage costs or the maintenance of the track) don't increase.

It's then a question of does the extra passengers heading to the "wrong" city cover the maintenance costs and other extra milage costs from the fares. As if it does then the amount of subsidy required doesn't change. It's then just a case of doors the extra cost to build it make sense (unlikely a lot of reopenings, where the subsidy is likely to increase).

Arguably, though, with the running costs covered from passengers then the wider benefits would then only be needed to cover the construction costs.

I very much doubt that a Tavistock-Exeter or Okehampton-Plymouth traffic will cover the marginal costs of that line, let alone defray the capital cost.

You'd be spending hundreds of millions to capture that traffic, and I doubt journey times between Okehampton and Plymouth would even be vey attractive given how appallingly slow the Tamar valley line is. It's 24 minutes just for Plymouth to Bere Alston, you would not be far off half way to Exeter in that time!

 

[The Planner]

I very much doubt that a Tavistock-Exeter or Okehampton-Plymouth traffic will cover the marginal costs of that line, let alone defray the capital cost.

You'd be spending hundreds of millions to capture that traffic, and I doubt journey times between Okehampton and Plymouth would even be vey attractive given how appallingly slow the Tamar valley line is. It's 24 minutes just for Plymouth to Bere Alston, you would not be far off half way to Exeter in that time!

This bit is often forgotten or quietly ignored. Just because you re-open a bit of railway, doesn't mean the bits either side are fit for purpose.

 

[simonw]

Wasting your time on here with such an argument.

For a rail forum, some very funny attitudes exist towards line/service reopenings by some. Some of which are more akin to a pro-road forum.

Many of whom, I suspect who live in areas with regular trains every half hour, or less. However, begrudge those who want services reinstated to their area, even if at a far less frequency.


I personally believe the whole route between Okehampton and Bere Alston, via Tavistock should be reopened. It is a distance of around 20 miles total.

Just because it's a railway forum doesnt mean that all posters believe that rail is the answer to every transport problem.

Given the repair/replacement costs of the Meldon viaducts, I can think of a, significant number of rail projects id rather the money was spent on.

 

[BrianW]

Just because it's a railway forum doesnt mean that all posters believe that rail is the answer to every transport problem.

Given the repair/replacement costs of the Meldon viaducts, I can think of a, significant number of rail projects id rather the money was spent on.

I, for one, agree. The 'rail industry' is not helped by unquestioning and unswerving support, especially when there are other calls upon limited funds beyond and between more deserving projects, like the NHS and Social care.

 

[Irascible]

Just because it's a railway forum doesnt mean that all posters believe that rail is the answer to every transport problem.

There is also the general assumption that because there was a line there once, it was solving a problem and thus it should be put back as it was. In this case the LSWR wanted to get to Plymouth - their reason for it disappeared quite rapidly. If you're going to build a new main line between Exeter & Plymouth, would you really build it via Okehampton...

Given the repair/replacement costs of the Meldon viaducts, I can think of a, significant number of rail projects id rather the money was spent on.

Just in Devon, even. I suspect a new viaduct might pay for an entire line to Bideford ( not that that is one I'm proposing, I think changing to a bus might still be quicker... there's a dead straight A road from the station to Bideford ). I suspect even a brand new bridge across the Taw parallel to the road bridge, and a line to Braunton would probably come in less than a new viaduct.

 

[RPI]

Would be nice to reopen every railway, but Tavistock to Okehampton is way down the pecking order, Tavistock to Plymouth definitely, but the bit in between? If that sort of money we're available it would be better spent redoubling Salisbury to Exeter

 

[yorksrob]

This bit is often forgotten or quietly ignored. Just because you re-open a bit of railway, doesn't mean the bits either side are fit for purpose.

Although it's worth bearing in mind that in this case, the Okehampton end has recently had a lot of improvement works.

 

[The Planner]

Although it's worth bearing in mind that in this case, the Okehampton end has recently had a lot of improvement works.

Its still an 18 mile single line with one train in steam with a 25 minute run time. It can't do more than 1tph in each direction without a load more work. So you are either rebuilding Coleford Jn and all that entails and/or doing more on the Okehampton branch itself which will be signalling, loops/redoubling etc. If its going to be the miracle route for when Dawlish falls into the sea, it still needs work. As I said, its not just building the missing bit.

 

[paul1609]

Bere Alston to Plymouth is not a slow crawl. Bere Alston to Gunnislake is!

Plymouth to St Budeaux where the trains wait on Weston Mill Viaduct to cross over to the up line for the WW2 Emergency Ammunition Connection to the ex SR line is just over 3 miles. Its scheduled for 11 mins down and 13 mins up. The Ex Southern Line through the Plymouth Suburbs has long since been built over.

Its still an 18 mile single line with one train in steam with a 25 minute run time. It can't do more than 1tph in each direction without a load more work. So you are either rebuilding Coleford Jn and all that entails and/or doing more on the Okehampton branch itself which will be signalling, loops/redoubling etc. If its going to be the miracle route for when Dawlish falls into the sea, it still needs work. As I said, its not just building the missing bit.

Its only the bit between Coleford Junction and Okehampton that has been rebuilt. Coleford to Crediton is something like 40 mph with old jointed track.
I walked up the line between Okehampton Station and Meldon Viaduct a couple of months ago even by heritage railway standards the track is totally shagged with the bullhead rail at or under the minimum wear height. The sleepers are rotten and the drainage is all blocked by undergrowth. The attached photo is near to the up distant board for Okehampton Station.
I seem to remember that the Barnstable Line just north of Cowley Bridge Junction is the most vunerable railway in the SW to flooding because of its proximity to the river Yeo, probably not a route youd look to use for adding climate related resillience.

 

[Ashley Hill]

Plymouth to St Budeaux where the trains wait on Weston Mill Viaduct to cross over to the up line for the WW2 Emergency Ammunition Connection to the ex SR line is just over 3 miles. Its scheduled for 11 mins down and 13 mins up. The Ex Southern Line through the Plymouth Suburbs has long since been built over.

Trains only get held at Weston Mill and St Budeaux VR by delayed mainline services. Part of the timings given also includes time for dealing with the Train Staff at St Budeaux.

 

[paul1609]

Trains only get held at Weston Mill and St Budeaux VR by delayed mainline services. Part of the timings given also includes time for dealing with the Train Staff at St Budeaux.

In theory maybe but the reality is practically every Gunislake train waits at the Signal protecting St Budeaux Junction. Nearly every Gunislake train arrives at St Budeaux station 1 to 2 minutes late and gets the train staff. It doesnt matter because the time lost can be regained during the generous 3 mins reversal time at Bere Alston or the even more generous running time between Calstock and Gunnislake but the route from Plymouth to St Budeaux is not fast by any stretch of the imagination and theres little that can be done to improve it.

 

[Ashley Hill]

but the route from Plymouth to St Budeaux is not fast by any stretch of the imagination and theres little that can be done to improve it.

Its only slow because there is 3 intermediate stations which are close together so little chance of much acceleration between stations. Do you apply your logic to mainline stopping services between Saltash and Plymouth too?

 

[yorksrob]

In theory maybe but the reality is practically every Gunislake train waits at the Signal protecting St Budeaux Junction. Nearly every Gunislake train arrives at St Budeaux station 1 to 2 minutes late and gets the train staff. It doesnt matter because the time lost can be regained during the generous 3 mins reversal time at Bere Alston or the even more generous running time between Calstock and Gunnislake but the route from Plymouth to St Budeaux is not fast by any stretch of the imagination and theres little that can be done to improve it.

It's a two track section that's hardly over used. If the route towards Tavistock became much busier in future it might be worth installing a double track turn out but it's not exactly Borough Market junction as it is.

 

[30907]

Well, it's likely to be, given that it only goes to Edinburgh.

Of course. But you claimed

One only has to look at the success of the Borders line to see that for travel between towns in rural areas, there is considerable demand.

That claim is what I was querying.

However, its a different prospect to building the route through mid-Devon. Fundamentally, the bit in the middle is a bit of a loss leader that makes the overall whole more useful. The section between Bentham and Giggleswick on the Little North Western probably doesn't generate much traffic of itself, but it makes the whole route vastly more useful than just having a branch to Bentham and the line through Settle.

Carnforth-Bentham would never exist as a branch - it only exists at all because of the significant through traffic between the Yorkshire stations and Lancaster etc.
Your analogy again is flawed - it only works if there is a significant flow between Exeter and Plymouth which the line would cater for (all year round); it partially works if Exeter-Tavistock and Okehampton-Plymouth are significant flows, and neither is.

 

[bramling]

How many people do you think want to travel from Okehampton to Plymouth using a route consisting of a transit of empty moorland before an achingly slow crawl through the Tamar valley?

Where is this idea coming from of Bere Alston to Plymouth being a slow crawl? The Gunnislake section is for sure, however the rest is former main line.

 

[paul1609]

Where is this idea coming from of Bere Alston to Plymouth being a slow crawl? The Gunnislake section is for sure, however the rest is former main line.

It's not really, beyond Tavistock it was very much a speed restricted route following the contours of the river valley. The double track approach to Plymouth through Ford has been lost under building and the viaducts removed having been closed along with the through line. The Gunnislake trains use a single lead junction to a connection that was originally to allow ammunition trains from the Southern Route to access the dockyard system. This junction conflicts with the single line section over the Albert Bridge on the GWR mainline which has also been lengthened due to a landslip. On the other side the junction is constrained by Weston Mill Viaduct over the dockyard.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

It's not really, beyond Tavistock it was very much a speed restricted route following the contours of the river valley. The double track approach to Plymouth through Ford has been lost under building and the viaducts removed having been closed along with the through line. The Gunnislake trains use a single lead junction to a connection that was originally to allow ammunition trains from the Southern Route to access the dockyard system. This junction conflicts with the single line section over the Albert Bridge on the GWR mainline which has also been lengthened due to a landslip. On the other side the junction is constrained by Weston Mill Viaduct over the dockyard.

Nope, the WW2 junction at St. Budeaux was double-track and fully upgraded in 1964 to allow closure of the Southern route through Devonport (King's Rd.) which was regarded as a duplicate route. The Plymouth to Brighton, Waterloo News and Eastleigh through services used it 1964-7, as well as local trains. It was only rationalised when the line to Bere Alston was singled in 1970 and all the signalling on the Gunnislake branch abolished. The single line for the RA Bridge does not start until the north end of St. Budeaux Ferry Road station, well clear of the junction