Okehampton Railway re-opening

[Michael Hodgson]

Quote

 

3 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

0.5tph seems a very odd measure ...... I'm trying to visualise half a train arriving every hour ! ☹️ ....................... if they mean a train every two hours, why don't they say so !

I would take it to mean the booked 6 car set has been replaced by a 3-car set

[Wickham Green too]

More likely a 153 instead of 155.

[KeithMacdonald]

11 hours ago, Reorte said:

Maybe the plan's for a train that splits at Bere Alston :)

 

11 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

.... half of which stops all-stations from Plymouth !

 

Or it stops at half the stations (on alternate days)?

[phil-b259]

9 hours ago, osbornsmodels said:

For the record there is not a single yard of dual carriageway in Torridge District.

No but there is a very good New Build single carriageway (so that means no buildings fronting it, side roads, driveways, field accesses crossroads etc) between Bideford and Barnstable built in the late 1980s. A route which is also much more direct than the old railway line and makes travel between the two by road easy.

 

Although no expert I’m willing to bet that most of the year road is perfectly adequate and doesn’t need to be dual carriageway.

 

 

[009 micro modeller]

46 minutes ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

 

Or it stops at half the stations (on alternate days)?

Is it time for me to revive my ‘sawn-off DMU’ idea that didn’t quite get built for the cake box challenge a few years ago?

[Matt37268]

2 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

 

Or it stops at half the stations (on alternate days)?

Why am I thinking of Jethro and ‘This train don’t stop at Cambourne on Wednesdays?’ 😀

[The Stationmaster]

On 22/09/2023 at 07:55, Not Jeremy said:

Outline business case for Plymouth to Tavistock submitted November 22, outcome awaited.

 

Modern Railways appraisal railways around Dartmoor

 

This image from the Facebook group.

 

 

 

While I support the reconnection of Tavistock - nad have done for all of the 30+ years over which it has been mentioned, discussed, promoted, costed, and never happened - I still wonder about the practicalities of what is being talked about here.

 

The implication of  'Devonport Dockyard accessibility boosted' is that it will gain an hourly service because any greater frequency than that will require double tracking somewhere between St Budeaux and Bere Alston.  Plus the very awkward fact that you can't match Bere Alston - Gunnislake times with Bere Alston -Tavistock running times - it simply doesn't work.  So the frequency of the Gunnislake branch has to be 2 hours with a long layover at Gunnislake in order to fit into the 'main line' paths between Bere Alston and St Budeaux. (unless a secvtion of double track is provided on that 'main line'.

 

I simply cannot see - unless there is a very magical money tree - how Bere Alston can be sensibly altered to do much else.  And the ambition of a separate service on the two routes sounds to me to be  more than somewhat impracticable

 

Interestingly last Saturday I travelled on a 5 car Class 80X worked stopping train from Penzance to Plymouth.  It called at every station except Keyham and  Dockyard and was heavily used due to football in Plymouth.  Passengers joined at every station except Menheniot (and only one joined at St Germans).  Devonport produced quite a good addition to the by then very well loaded train. Presumably we missed Keyham and Dockyard because there was a Gunnislake train a few minutes behind us but obviously the call at Devonport was considered worthwhile (and was justified by the number of passengers who joined there).

 

I note too that in the early stages of the morning and in late afternoons/early evenings Dockyard already has two trains in some hours as it is served by various trains to/from Cornwall.  These trains would seem to suit working hours for those  employed in the dockyard.  Travel into Plymouth would no doubt be better served by local 'bus services.

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

While I support the reconnection of Tavistock - nad have done for all of the 30+ years over which it has been mentioned, discussed, promoted, costed, and never happened - I still wonder about the practicalities of what is being talked about here.

 

The implication of  'Devonport Dockyard accessibility boosted' is that it will gain an hourly service because any greater frequency than that will require double tracking somewhere between St Budeaux and Bere Alston.  Plus the very awkward fact that you can't match Bere Alston - Gunnislake times with Bere Alston -Tavistock running times - it simply doesn't work.  So the frequency of the Gunnislake branch has to be 2 hours with a long layover at Gunnislake in order to fit into the 'main line' paths between Bere Alston and St Budeaux. (unless a secvtion of double track is provided on that 'main line'.

 

I simply cannot see - unless there is a very magical money tree - how Bere Alston can be sensibly altered to do much else.  And the ambition of a separate service on the two routes sounds to me to be  more than somewhat impracticable

 

Interestingly last Saturday I travelled on a 5 car Class 80X worked stopping train from Penzance to Plymouth.  It called at every station except Keyham and  Dockyard and was heavily used due to football in Plymouth.  Passengers joined at every station except Menheniot (and only one joined at St Germans).  Devonport produced quite a good addition to the by then very well loaded train. Presumably we missed Keyham and Dockyard because there was a Gunnislake train a few minutes behind us but obviously the call at Devonport was considered worthwhile (and was justified by the number of passengers who joined there).

 

I note too that in the early stages of the morning and in late afternoons/early evenings Dockyard already has two trains in some hours as it is served by various trains to/from Cornwall.  These trains would seem to suit working hours for those  employed in the dockyard.  Travel into Plymouth would no doubt be better served by local 'bus services.

couldnt they just run Gunnislake as a shuttle from Bere Alston ?

Put in a turnback siding just beyond the Tavistock end of the platform, so that way it remains a single platform operation.

Edited September 26, 2023 by adb968008

[Michael Hodgson]

On 22/09/2023 at 23:15, Matt37268 said:

Why am I thinking of Jethro and ‘This train don’t stop at Cambourne on Wednesdays?’ 😀

They haven't built the station at Cambourne yet. 

The NIMBYs in the posh houses in Harston are still arguing about the line following that route.

[Mallard60022]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

While I support the reconnection of Tavistock - nad have done for all of the 30+ years over which it has been mentioned, discussed, promoted, costed, and never happened - I still wonder about the practicalities of what is being talked about here.

 

The implication of  'Devonport Dockyard accessibility boosted' is that it will gain an hourly service because any greater frequency than that will require double tracking somewhere between St Budeaux and Bere Alston.  Plus the very awkward fact that you can't match Bere Alston - Gunnislake times with Bere Alston -Tavistock running times - it simply doesn't work.  So the frequency of the Gunnislake branch has to be 2 hours with a long layover at Gunnislake in order to fit into the 'main line' paths between Bere Alston and St Budeaux. (unless a secvtion of double track is provided on that 'main line'.

 

I simply cannot see - unless there is a very magical money tree - how Bere Alston can be sensibly altered to do much else.  And the ambition of a separate service on the two routes sounds to me to be  more than somewhat impracticable

 

Interestingly last Saturday I travelled on a 5 car Class 80X worked stopping train from Penzance to Plymouth.  It called at every station except Keyham and  Dockyard and was heavily used due to football in Plymouth.  Passengers joined at every station except Menheniot (and only one joined at St Germans).  Devonport produced quite a good addition to the by then very well loaded train. Presumably we missed Keyham and Dockyard because there was a Gunnislake train a few minutes behind us but obviously the call at Devonport was considered worthwhile (and was justified by the number of passengers who joined there).

 

I note too that in the early stages of the morning and in late afternoons/early evenings Dockyard already has two trains in some hours as it is served by various trains to/from Cornwall.  These trains would seem to suit working hours for those  employed in the dockyard.  Travel into Plymouth would no doubt be better served by local 'bus services.

Argyle 6, Norwich City 2. Crazy game.

P

[Jeremy Cumberland]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Plus the very awkward fact that you can't match Bere Alston - Gunnislake times with Bere Alston -Tavistock running times - it simply doesn't work.  

Doesn't it? What's the anticipated journey time from Bere Alston to Tavistock? I'd have guessed it to be about 20 minutes, the same as to Gunnislake.

 

An hourly service to Tavistock sounds pie in the sky, but I can't see why there shouldn't be a two-hourly service alternating with the two hourly service to Gunnislake. Admittedly, one service would probably need to leave Plymouth 40 minutes after the other, rather than being conveniently spaced at hourly intervals, but that's not much of a problem, surely.

[Mallard60022]

16 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

Doesn't it? What's the anticipated journey time from Bere Alston to Tavistock? I'd have guessed it to be about 20 minutes, the same as to Gunnislake.

 

An hourly service to Tavistock sounds pie in the sky, but I can't see why there shouldn't be a two-hourly service alternating with the two hourly service to Gunnislake. Admittedly, one service would probably need to leave Plymouth 40 minutes after the other, rather than being conveniently spaced at hourly intervals, but that's not much of a problem, surely.

Tavy and Gunni to Plymouth is basically about Travel to work times and crap Roads. Peak time services and Saturday extras for Footy and Shopping plus a couple of late nighters (already are to Gunni), could be a decent target. There must be Travel data for existing (and maybe even prospective) loadings?

Tavy could also be a good Tourist line with occasional Steam in the Summer, as runs to Par Now. 

Popular this year as Steam comes on and off at Taunton (or Bristol). 

Could Gunni become an 'independent' Tramway? Then it's possible to run a shuttle and not be a NR Driver required? Is that what happens in Croydon?

[phil-b259]

36 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

Doesn't it? What's the anticipated journey time from Bere Alston to Tavistock? I'd have guessed it to be about 20 minutes, the same as to Gunnislake.

 

 

The Bere Alston - Gunnislake section was built as a 'light railway' - that means a very twisty curvy line with a very low line speed plus a few ungated level crossings thrown into the bargain.

 

Bere Alston - Tavistock is an ex main line with a pretty straight alignment, no level crossings etc and as such a much higher line speed.

 

Plus trains to Gunislake also need to factor in station duties at Bere Alston wile they reverse (Driver + Guard change ends and operate the ground frame) which is likely to take longer than a 'straight through' service between Plymouth and Tavistock

 

 

Edited September 26, 2023 by phil-b259

[Northmoor]

2 hours ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

Doesn't it? What's the anticipated journey time from Bere Alston to Tavistock? I'd have guessed it to be about 20 minutes, the same as to Gunnislake.

 

An hourly service to Tavistock sounds pie in the sky, but I can't see why there shouldn't be a two-hourly service alternating with the two hourly service to Gunnislake. Admittedly, one service would probably need to leave Plymouth 40 minutes after the other, rather than being conveniently spaced at hourly intervals, but that's not much of a problem, surely.

If Tavistock can't support an hourly service it probably doesn't justify re-opening.  Okehampton got reopened for a lesser service but at least there was a railway and a station to start with (and it still cost an eye-watering amount).  Can you imagine trying to commute from into Plymouth on the 0730, missing it and then having to wait two hours (but never mind, you can get a train to Gunnislake with almost no-one else, in the meantime)?

 

Not an easy sell to the voting public, but on balance the best solution might be to re-open to Tavistock and close Bere Alston - Gunnislake.

[Matt37268]

3 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

They haven't built the station at Cambourne yet. 

The NIMBYs in the posh houses in Harston are still arguing about the line following that route.

Very much aware of that as one of our friends lives in Cambourne. We occasionally get the odd nut job councillor thinking that EWR’s going to involve some sort of GCR style gala that will involve freight trains going past our house every 5 minutes…

However I don’t think we’re on about Cambourne in Cambs… 

[MarcD]

No U in the one in the Duchy. And I'm presuming the one in Cambridgeshire is a bit posher having lived in Camborne.

[adb968008]

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

The Bere Alston - Gunnislake section was built as a 'light railway' - that means a very twisty curvy line with a very low line speed plus a few ungated level crossings thrown into the bargain.

 

ive never heard a 150 scream as much as the low gear climb to Gunnislake… it literally feels like a mountain climb in a 4wh drive.

return trip is a little quiet.

 

Calstock Viaduct has to be one of the best views by rail in this country. According to Roger Farnwworths site the line has periods of 1 in 38, 6 chain radius curves… it certainly felt like that.

I understand several sections of 10mph on those hills too, so no ramping up either.. those ungated crossings.. also come with a stop and whistle sign at Calstock!

Must have sounded great with steam this line.
 

A modern ghost in the machine is the Bere Alston station sign, which is Wessex Trains branding.

 

 

Edited September 26, 2023 by adb968008

[009 micro modeller]

12 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

Plus trains to Gunislake also need to factor in station duties at Bere Alston wile they reverse (Driver + Guard change ends and operate the ground frame) which is likely to take longer than a 'straight through' service between Plymouth and Tavistock

Out of interest I looked at the live departures for Bere Alston and Gunnislake to see what sort of service is provided and there seems to be about 3 minutes difference between arrival and departure times at Bere Alston, which seems a relatively short time considering the reversal. Do all trains go through to Gunnislake or do some terminate at Bere Alston?

 

12 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

Could Gunni become an 'independent' Tramway? Then it's possible to run a shuttle and not be a NR Driver required? Is that what happens in Croydon?

Tramlink is a completely separate, electrified light rail network although obviously some of it uses converted ex-railway routes, so I’m not sure if that’s the best point of comparison here, assuming we’re talking about Gunnislake to Bere Alston being separated off as an independent branch in the event that the through route through Bere reopens. But I am reminded of the Stourbridge Town branch where, as I understand it, you don’t need the same level of training to drive the PPM ultra-light rail vehicles as you would for a main line train, and their introduction seems to have allowed a more frequent service to be introduced. I’m not sure those particular vehicles would be suitable to run a shuttle to Gunnislake though, given the gradients.

[adb968008]

I would imagine costs would be a big part of it.

Bere Alston has a full station site, buildings, platforms, including good yard buildings… just lay track and go.

 

but…

 

Reinstating two platforms would mean a footbridge and lifts for disabled… which is never less than millions.

a PPM or tram solution would mean servicing facilites and segregation from the mainline.. also many millions.

 

for a branch which really couldnt justify it, nice as it is its a low service, 2 car unit that isnt fully loaded.

 

to me, running up from Plymouth and splitting the unit at Bere Alston to go separate directions, and recombining on the return makes sense. If a bigger frequency is needed to Tavistock, install a loop further down the line, and run Gunnislake as a branch with a connecting service.

It would be possible to maintain it with 1 platform if the Gunnislake train entered the platform and had access to a turnback siding to reverse inbetween Tavistock services.

Similarly the loop down the line could be maintained by using a loop and long platform as per  at Penryn, again avoiding needing two platforms, lifts etc.

 

Edited September 27, 2023 by adb968008

[Michael Hodgson]

10 hours ago, Matt37268 said:

Very much aware of that as one of our friends lives in Cambourne. We occasionally get the odd nut job councillor thinking that EWR’s going to involve some sort of GCR style gala that will involve freight trains going past our house every 5 minutes…

However I don’t think we’re on about Cambourne in Cambs… 

It's not posh.  It's new.  It's a still-expanding suburb of Cambridge, all housing estates.  20 years ago there it wasn't there - all former agricultural land.  I think it's now officially considered a town in its own right; it's got a High Street, which you might believe if they took the trouble to build some shops on it, but I understand the land belongs to Morrisons who wouldn't want any competiton with their supermarket.  Population of 12,000 four years ago, but that was before they started buildung West Cambourne.

I'd be very surprised if the new line will see any freight.

[Jeremy Cumberland]

Splitting ought to work, but does not really have any cost saving compared with alternate trains to Gunnislake and Tavistock (both portions need a unit and crew).

 

A shuttle from Bere Alston to Gunnislake might be quite a lot harder:

• Where will the train/tram be shedded?
• Where will the crew be based?
• What platform arrangements are envisaged for Bere Alston?

At the moment, Bere Alston uses the south platform, and there is no scope for a bay on the south side for the Gunnislake train, not that you would really want it on the south side. Perhaps the station could be changed to use the north platform instead, but adding a bay might still be tricky, given the space, and the north platform isn't as good for foot passengers, and perhaps not for car drivers either.

 

Alternate 2-hourly Gunnislake and Tavistock trains look to be straightforward, with no need for additional loops or any change to the single platform at Bere Alston, using the following sequence between Keyham and Bere Alston:

1. Train from Plymouth to Gunnislake.
2. Train from Plymouth to Tavistock. Gets to Bere Alston before the train from Gunnislake to Plymouth arrives. Conceivably the train from Gunnislake could run into the platform before the Tavistock train leaves, to provide a connection, but this adds an extra level of complexity that probably isn't justified.
3. Train from Gunnislake to Plymouth.
4. Train from Tavistock to Plymouth.

The proposed hourly service to Tavistock would require some doubling or a passing loop. Does anyone know where this would be?

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, adb968008 said:

I would imagine costs would be a big part of it.

Bere Alston has a full station site, buildings, platforms, including good yard buildings… just lay track and go.

 

but…

 

Reinstating two platforms would mean a footbridge and lifts for disabled… which is never less than millions.

a PPM or tram solution would mean servicing facilites and segregation from the mainline.. also many millions.

 

for a branch which really couldnt justify it, nice as it is its a low service, 2 car unit that isnt fully loaded.

 

to me, running up from Plymouth and splitting the unit at Bere Alston to go separate directions, and recombining on the return makes sense. If a bigger frequency is needed to Tavistock, install a loop further down the line, and run Gunnislake as a branch with a connecting service.

It would be possible to maintain it with 1 platform if the Gunnislake train entered the platform and had access to a turnback siding to reverse inbetween Tavistock services.

Similarly the loop down the line could be maintained by using a loop and long platform as per  at Penryn, again avoiding needing two platforms, lifts etc.

 

That loop still costs money and needs signalling alterations! 
 

Part of the reason it’s taking so long to progress the Tavistock scheme is that even with lots of extra housing the BCR figures are just on the limit of what HM Treasury considers acceptable. ANY intervention which adds cost pushes the scheme into the ‘unaffordable’ category and signalling changes will do just that.

 

You need to apreciate the choice is not between an ideal or bare minimum scheme it’s a bare minimum or no railway at all choice!

 

Only once the line is up and running (and hopefully proven a success exceeding all predictions in terms of passenger numbers) will the opportunity arise to make further infrastructure investments.

[adb968008]

8 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

That loop still costs money and needs signalling alterations! 
 

Part of the reason it’s taking so long to progress the Tavistock scheme is that even with lots of extra housing the BCR figures are just on the limit of what HM Treasury considers acceptable. ANY intervention which adds cost pushes the scheme into the ‘unaffordable’ category and signalling changes will do just that.

 

You need to apreciate the choice is not between an ideal or bare minimum scheme it’s a bare minimum or no railway at all choice!

 

Only once the line is up and running (and hopefully proven a success exceeding all predictions in terms of passenger numbers) will the opportunity arise to make further infrastructure investments.

Unless the train is a bus, of course its going to need track and signalling, the lines been ripped up eons ago !

 

exactly how bare are you expecting this to be ?

 

one could always get a digger, clear the route and let people walk & cycle, but if locomotion is needed, then so is £.

Edited September 27, 2023 by adb968008

[phil-b259]

6 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Unless the train is a bus, of course its going to need track and signaling ?

 

exactly how bare are you expecting this to be ?

 

one could always get a digger, clear the route and let people walk & cycle, but if locomotion is needed, then so is £.

Literally the cost of laying track back to Tavistock and building a platform there - that’s how bare!

 

Besides it’s not what I (or you) may want that’s important here it’s what HM Treasuary will fund.

 

I wish rail enthusiasts would get their head round that!

 

 

[adb968008]

53 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Literally the cost of laying track back to Tavistock and building a platform there - that’s how bare!

 

still will need signals unless its a wick/thurso operation ?

 

53 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Besides it’s not what I (or you) may want that’s important here it’s what HM Treasuary will fund.

 

I thought Bovis / Kilbride were funding it ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-28943931

 

53 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I wish rail enthusiasts would get their head round that!

 

 

i think we all get it, however isnt what-if discussion allowed  ?

Maybe your in the wrong place for open discussion, if it irritates.

 

I suspect Railway Enthusiasts understand more than most others in society, I’d hate to see this discussion with real normals who expect the wholly impossible… like 125 mph services with a TGV and ask why it cannot go down the A-road.

 

53 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

 

Edited September 27, 2023 by adb968008