Jump to content
 

Barnstaple line upgrade


Kris

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

I thought the Southern had spent some considerable sums on lengthening loops etc, but stopped halfway along when they got a polling agreement with the GWR for traffic to barnstaple?

That was actually the GWR and the L&SWR, hence the disincentive to invest in the line after 1910.

 

The figure actually spent in the 1960s at Cowley was around £340,000, which I am told, adjusted for inflation, is now around £4.6m.

 

The amount being spent this financial year, therefore (£9.3m) does appear to be the largest amount in any single financial year for over 100 years. Part of that spend will be achieved during the current 16 day blockade of the line, and remainder will be spent during a 5 day blockade in March next year, when further plain line renewals will be done in the Salmon Pool to Yeoford area and in the Chapleton area. Finally, at the very end of March, there is a weekend blockade to complete track renewals in the Umberleigh area. It's a huge amount of work on a single 'branch' line, and a massive statement of faith in it's future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

This is definitely good news for the line although 16 days is a long time to be shut! I realise it's a quicker way to do things in the fact that posession does'nt need handing back on several occasions.

Which section is being worked on in this blockade? I noticed there's still jointed bullhead track around Lapford...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Thanks for that update, Captain - obviously my memory playing a few tricks!

 

Will the works allow for an uplift in the speed limits to reduce journey times, and allowing a better frequency? Been a while since I travelled on the line, but I know those have been aspirations for a while.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

There are longer term aspirations to reduce journey time, these may be realised bit by bit, depending on what sections of renewal make sense to increase the speed on. There are also upgrades to two of the level crossings planned in a couple of years, which should also help with this.

 

The current worksites are around Lapford (quite right, Rich!) and between Eggesford and a point to the south of Portsmouth Arms.

 

In March 2013, the worksites will be Salmon Pool to Yeoford area and in the Chapleton area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The word upgrade appears to be a little misleading as this project appears to be basically track replacement with no additional loops etc in the same way as my favorite TOC discribed some basic interior maintenance to a fleet of it's DMU's a couple of years ago.

 

Maybe they should apply sandite to the respective managements teams to help reduce all this spiin!

 

XF

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Renewing p-way on secondary lines should always be regarded as a major improvement - a serious investment in the route's future. Without that, any cosmetic works, or even adding in a loop here or there, must be regarded as no more than tinkering, and significant linespeed improvements would be out of the question, while restrictions might become inevitable. NR is doing something of the utmost importance here.

 

There is little enough Southern Railway mileage left beyond Exeter - this work is excellent news.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Quite agree with Ian although technically - in accounting terms - renewing track is not 'investment' unless it involves speed or other upgrades (and even then it is only partially investment - and part renewal) but as far as rural lines are concerned it still represents commitment, and that's no bad thing nowadays.

 

Looking at this subject has had me thinking when I last travelled over this line and as far as I can work out it was a on a through dmu from Ilfracombe which then ran up from Exeter via Salisbury and Basingstoke before turning up to Reading; good job it was Cross-Country set.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The word upgrade appears to be a little misleading as this project appears to be basically track replacement with no additional loops etc in the same way as my favorite TOC discribed some basic interior maintenance to a fleet of it's DMU's a couple of years ago.

 

Maybe they should apply sandite to the respective managements teams to help reduce all this spiin!

 

Of course it's an upgrade, Xerces. Let's be realistic here:

 

- how often do you get new loops added to (essentially) rural branch lines (and don't mention Falmouth, because that was a special case, paid for by the County Council!)

- this is not some minor or routine relaying job, this is over 9 miles of relaying in virtually one hit, using one of the most hi-tech pieces of kit available in the UK currently

- the end game here is line speed increases, which is an upgrade by virtually anyone's standards

 

You are welcome to try to apply some Sandite to my person, but I can confidently predict the outcome if you do!

 

 

Edit - some of us have been working a very long time to get this done, and it's not particularly heartening to see someone who should know better just throw cold water on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

While it was in a different era, it is nearly 30 years ago that I was asked - at very short notice - to be Project Manager for the route closure between Eridge and Tunbridge Wells (Grove Junction). The principal justification for the closure was the Civil Engineer's estimated costs for renewing the track - already in very poor order, and subject to several previous renewal deferrals, no doubt. Renewals are very expensive - and on secondary routes to be avoided at all cost, leaving funds for the more glamorous parts of the network.

 

While route closures are now a rarer event, the wholesale renewal in prospect here - rather than spot-resleepering etc, or whatever other cheap short-term solution is now favoured - means a better service can be contemplated, and future planning for the route can proceed on a firm basis.

 

I am also very sorry to note that Captain Kernow, whose role in the positive developments in the South West is pivotal, feels slighted by remarks in this thread. As I have said in another thread recently - those not directly involved in the industry simply do not understand the significance of the efforts made to get such works authorised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

If you wanted to reach Ilfracombe you need to rebuild a fairly large river bridge! Not to mention recover the route from a popular cycle path. Nonetheless I always felt the Ilfracombe (and Bideford) closures were perhaps a little premature and hasty.

 

Significant rebuilding of the line is welcome news indeed. Bartnstaple has languished for too long as an extended siding with old track and lower speeds than it might have. Shorter journey times will be welcomed but are unlikley to result in the saving of a train as it wiull still take the greater part of an hour each way. An hourly service with a cross at Eggesford seems to match the demand quite well. With little intermediate traffic any prospect of something more is off in the distant future.

 

Does all this work affect the link to Okehampton and if so how? That needs to be supported and maintained to full NR standards; it might yet at some future time revert to having a full passenger service

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Of course it's an upgrade, Xerces. Let's be realistic here:

 

- how often do you get new loops added to (essentially) rural branch lines (and don't mention Falmouth, because that was a special case, paid for by the County Council!)

- this is not some minor or routine relaying job, this is over 9 miles of relaying in virtually one hit, using one of the most hi-tech pieces of kit available in the UK currently

- the end game here is line speed increases, which is an upgrade by virtually anyone's standards

 

You are welcome to try to apply some Sandite to my person, but I can confidently predict the outcome if you do!

 

 

Edit - some of us have been working a very long time to get this done, and it's not particularly heartening to see someone who should know better just throw cold water on it.

 

Thank you however when I require a lecture what I should know better i will ask !

 

To clarify my point I am not throwing cold water on the work that has been done however it is basically replacing old infrastructure with the modern equivalent in the same as when replace an old car with a new one we upgrade by default. The issue behind my point is I wish more work was been done another platform at Barnstaple for instance and even the ability to run longer through trains from London. Waterloo!

 

I fully support your aims however my issue is with big companies that give a false impression that they are doing when in fact the option to do nothing is more that maintenance I think the Barnstaple branch is perfect example if nothing is done the continues to deterioate until the service is either seriously impaired or has to be withdrawn/replaced by buses.

 

In related issue I hope the service from Plymouth to Tavistock finally happens. My view that this is either an upgrade of service or a remedy to the folly of transport polices in the 1960's who cares as long as it does happen.

 

XF

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The folly - if it was one at the time - was to sever Okehampton - Bere Alston. Not perhaps the topic at hand here and well-discussed elsewhere but given the work in hand on the Barnstaple line and the investment to support it then it makes sense to retain connections to at least secondary line status (as opposed to a headshunt or stop-and-get-permission) to maintain the option on one day rejoining that section with a revived Plymouth - Tavistock line.

 

Most of us here will be very well aware of the ongoing difficulties around the sea wall and of how useful an inland route would be at times. The almost universal use of HST / Voyager / Sprinter units on the route means that even with reversals trips over the L&SWR route would not take a great deal longer than they do via the GW now and would probably be quicker than bussing from St. Davids to Plymouth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Thank you however when I require a lecture what I should know better i will ask !

Well, I'll keep my tweed jacket and lecturer's notes handy then, just say the word!

 

To clarify my point I am not throwing cold water on the work that has been done however it is basically replacing old infrastructure with the modern equivalent in the same as when replace an old car with a new one we upgrade by default.

And I appreciate the point you are making here, but the 'basic maintenance/deep it running' option does not have to include full scale re-laying and re-ballasting. There have been less-involved works in the past, but most have not been planned with higher speeds in mind, in the way that this one is.

 

The issue behind my point is I wish more work was been done another platform at Barnstaple for instance and even the ability to run longer through trains from London Waterloo!

 

Well, with my enthusiasts hat on, that would be nice to see, but in terms of keeping the line efficient and cost effective to operate, the remaining infrastructure does not currently require an additional platform, unless it was used for charter stock and the like. If/when there is a business case for a sufficiently frequent service to warrant additional infrastructure, then we will see, but for the moment, we need to keep the trains working without having long, unproductive lay-overs at the terminus.

 

my issue is with big companies that give a false impression that they are doing when in fact the option to do nothing is more that maintenance I think the Barnstaple branch is perfect example if nothing is done the continues to deterioate until the service is either seriously impaired or has to be withdrawn/replaced by buses.

Apart from the fact that this massive amount of money on track works is a sure sign of faith in the future of this line from a high level, it is absolutely not a case of 'nothing is being done' on this line. FGW and the local user groups (eg. Tarka Rail Association, Friends of Crediton Station) have put a lot of money into the stations and facilities, and the TRA and the Devon & Cornwall Community Rail team have worked so well with FGW that passenger numbers have more than doubled in the 6 years between 2005 (circa 250,000 journeys) to 2011 (512,000 journeys).

 

I don't call that 'doing nothing!'...

 

In related issue I hope the service from Plymouth to Tavistock finally happens. My view that this is either an upgrade of service or a remedy to the folly of transport polices in the 1960's who cares as long as it does happen.

I agree that there were many stupid and short-sighted decisions taken in the 1960s and even the 1970s, and it's been a great feeling to be associated with recent schemes to reverse a small number of them.

 

But... there comes a point, in my view, when you have to draw a line under what has gone before and consider the current 'status quo' to be the new baseline. I wouldn't see the reopening to Tavistock as a mere 're-instatement of what has gone before', as if the good inhabitents of any given place are somehow entitled to have something back, that Dr Beeching 'so unfairly' took away. No, this is a different era, a generation or two has grown up in these places without a rail service, so any move to provide one now is, in vitually everyone else's eyes, an 'upgrade' or 'enhancement' (and crucially, that includes those parties who would be responsible for funding said schemes - they are obviously not motivated by nostalgia for the golden age of steam...!

 

But yes, it would be excellent if/when it happens...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...