Okehampton Railway re-opening

[Jeremy Cumberland]

Just now, phil-b259 said:

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

What's the existing signalling? Is Bere Alston to Gunnislake a separate section? How are the points worked at Bere Alston?

 

It's hard to see how the existing signalling at Bere Alston (whatever it is) could still be used when there is also a line to Tavistock. I can't see how the line could be worked effectively without two trains approaching Bere Alston at the same time.

 

As I mentioned earlier, any plan that involves 1 train per hour to Tavistock will need some doubling or a passing loop, and this of course will need signalling.

[adb968008]

23 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

What's the existing signalling? Is Bere Alston to Gunnislake a separate section? How are the points worked at Bere Alston?

 

It's hard to see how the existing signalling at Bere Alston (whatever it is) could still be used when there is also a line to Tavistock. I can't see how the line could be worked effectively without two trains approaching Bere Alston at the same time.

 

As I mentioned earlier, any plan that involves 1 train per hour to Tavistock will need some doubling or a passing loop, and this of course will need signalling.

Theres a ground frame at Bere Alston operated by the train crew.

No signals on the line, single line operation.

[corneliuslundie]

So there would need to be proper signalling for two trains on the route at once.

Or make it "tram train" driving on sight?

But who would get out to operate the ground frame for the junction ;points?

Jonathan

[009 micro modeller]

47 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

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

Originally I thought it sounded like that was the idea (Gunnislake line equivalent stations in brackets) - the train from Inverness (Plymouth) goes to Georgemas Junction (Bere Alston), then to Thurso (Gunnislake), then back to Georgemas (Bere Alston), and then finally to Wick (Tavistock), though you could do Tavistock first and then Gunnislake, presumably, or even Plymouth-Tavistock-Gunnislake-Tavistock (again)-Plymouth. But if that’s all done by one train it doesn’t sound like it will provide the frequency needed (it might even reduce it from what exists now, on some parts of the route).

[adb968008]

12 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

Originally I thought it sounded like that was the idea (Gunnislake line equivalent stations in brackets) - the train from Inverness (Plymouth) goes to Georgemas Junction (Bere Alston), then to Thurso (Gunnislake), then back to Georgemas (Bere Alston), and then finally to Wick (Tavistock), though you could do Tavistock first and then Gunnislake, presumably, or even Plymouth-Tavistock-Gunnislake-Tavistock (again)-Plymouth. But if that’s all done by one train it doesn’t sound like it will provide the frequency needed (it might even reduce it from what exists now, on some parts of the route).

That would, as the current set up the train is only a few minutes at Gunnislake before it heads back.

 

For example today, 1228 from Plymouth arrives Gunnislake 1314, departs 1319 and arrives back at 1404.

That is followed by the 1428, arriving at 1514, departing 1519… and so one.

 

However Bere Alston departs 1454 arrives back 1537.. so thats a 43 minute round trip to Gunnislake.

 

adding a 7 mile roundtrip spin to Tavistock will add at least another 30mins+ to the current schedule (whats the line speed proposed ?) , i’m not sure Tavistockians would be keen about a 45 minute spin to Gunnislake included in their journey.

 

I’m not sure how distinct services could run without a loop, and to me running the branch as a branch makes sense (As Tavistock looks the bigger fish in this pond). But if funds really are so low, maybe you could run as a 4 car and split / combine at Bere Alston and run two hourlies as they are today ?

 

 

 

Edited September 27, 2023 by adb968008

[Mallard60022]

14 hours ago, Northmoor said:

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.

The whole point of retaining Gunnislake is the Tamar is in the way of Bere Alston!

P

[adb968008]

15 hours ago, Northmoor said:

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.

Okehampton has a fast A road, dual carriage way to Exeter, and its a lot further out from Exeter.

its a lovely sprightly run at a high line speed over jointed rail track

But Okehampton is smaller than Tavistock.

 

Tavistock is closer to Plymouth, larger in population but the road is definitely not as good.

to me, and my untrained eye, Tavistock looks a better proposition and suspect at an hour from Portsmouth it’ll do well.

What was the rational behind dumping Tavistock but keeping Gunnislake it seems a very strange spur to have been retained ?

 

 

 

Edited September 27, 2023 by adb968008
Big oops in the navy

[Mallard60022]

9 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

That would, as the current set up the train is only a few minutes at Gunnislake before it heads back.

 

For example today, 1228 from Plymouth arrives Gunnislake 1314, departs 1319 and arrives back at 1404.

That is followed by the 1428, arriving at 1514, departing 1519… and so one.

 

However Bere Alston departs 1454 arrives back 1537.. so thats a 43 minute round trip to Gunnislake.

 

adding a 7 mile roundtrip spin to Tavistock will add at least another 30mins+ to the current schedule (whats the line speed proposed ?) , i’m not sure Tavistockians would be keen about a 45 minute spin to Gunnislake included in their journey.

 

I’m not sure how distinct services could run without a loop, and to me running the branch as a branch makes sense (As Tavistock looks the bigger fish in this pond). But if funds really are so low, maybe you could run as a 4 car and split / combine at Bere Alston and run two hourlies as they are today ?

 

I think that has been mooted before and sounds OK but for the need of double Crews.

At least you know the site and workings, but some on here pontificating from the leafy suburbs in the south east , have little idea of the demographics and topography involved. 

It's the damn Tamar and really poor roads that are the barriers to those in this part of Cornwall accessing Plymouth, the main source of Employment for the region.

Phil

[Mallard60022]

1 minute ago, adb968008 said:

Okehampton has a fast A road, dual carriage way to Exeter, and its a lot further out from Exeter.

its a lovely sprightly run at a high line speed over jointed rail track

But Okehampton is smaller than Tavistock.

 

Tavistock is closer to Portsmouth, larger in population but the road is definitely not as good.

to me, and my untrained eye, Tavistock looks a better proposition and suspect at an hour from Portsmouth it’ll do well.

What was the rational behind dumping Tavistock but keeping Gunnislake it seems a very strange spur to have been retained ?

 

 

 

Wrong Dockyard dude!

[Mallard60022]

2 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Okehampton has a fast A road, dual carriage way to Exeter, and its a lot further out from Exeter.

its a lovely sprightly run at a high line speed over jointed rail track

But Okehampton is smaller than Tavistock.

 

Tavistock is closer to Portsmouth, larger in population but the road is definitely not as good.

to me, and my untrained eye, Tavistock looks a better proposition and suspect at an hour from Portsmouth it’ll do well.

What was the rational behind dumping Tavistock but keeping Gunnislake it seems a very strange spur to have been retained ?

Retaining Gunnislake was/is simply access across the Tamar. It was gonna sut circa 1964 BUT the authorities realised that a huge number of people in Cornwall still worked in the Dockyard. 

Tavistock was then a small Town and there were far fewer Cars. Bere Alston was reachable from Tavy by Car and Bus. HIndsight is great, but the closure of the SR route beyond Bere to Tavy, via the WR at St Boodow, was VERY short sighted indeed.

[Matt37268]

3 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

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.

I didn’t say it was posh, but I’m certainly well aware of Cambourne springing up rather recently having been a semi resident of Cambridge since 2008 and a permanent resident since 2012. 

[Mallard60022]

6 minutes ago, Matt37268 said:

I didn’t say it was posh, but I’m certainly well aware of Cambourne springing up rather recently having been a semi resident of Cambridge since 2008 and a permanent resident since 2012. 

Camborne or Cambourne?

[adb968008]

38 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

Wrong Dockyard dude!

Omg…

 

Whats the punishment for that in the Navy ?

 

🤩

[009 micro modeller]

50 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

That would, as the current set up the train is only a few minutes at Gunnislake before it heads back.

 

For example today, 1228 from Plymouth arrives Gunnislake 1314, departs 1319 and arrives back at 1404.

That is followed by the 1428, arriving at 1514, departing 1519… and so one.

 

However Bere Alston departs 1454 arrives back 1537.. so thats a 43 minute round trip to Gunnislake.

 

adding a 7 mile roundtrip spin to Tavistock will add at least another 30mins+ to the current schedule (whats the line speed proposed ?) , i’m not sure Tavistockians would be keen about a 45 minute spin to Gunnislake included in their journey.

 

I’m not sure how distinct services could run without a loop, and to me running the branch as a branch makes sense (As Tavistock looks the bigger fish in this pond). But if funds really are so low, maybe you could run as a 4 car and split / combine at Bere Alston and run two hourlies as they are today ?

 

 

 

Could you do a 2-hourly service Plymouth to Tavistock, with the same unit doing a return trip from Tavistock to Gunnislake in what would otherwise be a layover period in Tavistock? Although obviously this falls apart  if the idea is to increase the Plymouth-Tavistock service to hourly. Not really knowing the area, is it likely that people from Gunnislake who currently travel to Plymouth for shopping etc. (because that’s where the train goes to) would want to go to Tavistock instead?

[009 micro modeller]

39 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

Retaining Gunnislake was/is simply access across the Tamar. It was gonna sut circa 1964 BUT the authorities realised that a huge number of people in Cornwall still worked in the Dockyard. 

Tavistock was then a small Town and there were far fewer Cars. Bere Alston was reachable from Tavy by Car and Bus. HIndsight is great, but the closure of the SR route beyond Bere to Tavy, via the WR at St Boodow, was VERY short sighted indeed.

I thought it was related to the narrow roads being unsuitable for buses. Though looking at the map there now seem to be quite a few (including to Tavistock, not via Bere) but is the issue that they don’t provide access to Plymouth?

[Jeremy Cumberland]

Just now, 009 micro modeller said:

Could you do a 2-hourly service Plymouth to Tavistock, with the same unit doing a return trip from Tavistock to Gunnislake in what would otherwise be a layover period in Tavistock?

No. You could do Plymouth - Gunnislake - Tavistock - Plymouth (or Plymouth -Tavistock - Gunnislake - Plymouth) as a 2-hourly service if Bere Alston - Tavistock - Bere Alston can be done in less than 30 minutes, but you can't do the double-Thurso thing to either destination.

 

Perhaps a more viable "no signalling" option would be alternate services to Gunnislake and Tavistock on a 3-hourly frequency with the pattern:

1. Keyham to Gunnislake to Keyham
2. Keyham to Tavistock to Keyham

But what use is a 3-hour service? Northmoor didn't like even a 2-hour service:

15 hours ago, Northmoor said:

If Tavistock can't support an hourly service it probably doesn't justify re-opening. 

 

[Reorte]

7 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I thought it was related to the narrow roads being unsuitable for buses. Though looking at the map there now seem to be quite a few (including to Tavistock, not via Bere) but is the issue that they don’t provide access to Plymouth?

Possibly well out of date because it's over a quarter of a century since I lived in the area, but quite a lot of the local bus services were on small buses not all that much bigger than minibuses. There were double deckers between Plymouth and Tavistock (I went to and from school on them), but not on the smaller surrounding roads.

Edited September 27, 2023 by Reorte

[Mallard60022]

14 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Omg…

 

Whats the punishment for that in the Navy ?

 

🤩

To be transferred to the Field Gun Team, nude version.

P

[Mallard60022]

10 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I thought it was related to the narrow roads being unsuitable for buses. Though looking at the map there now seem to be quite a few (including to Tavistock, not via Bere) but is the issue that they don’t provide access to Plymouth?

Basically yes.

[Mike_Walker]

At present, the whole line from St. Budeaux to Gunnislake is one section.  There is a Stop board at the end of the platform at St. Budeaux (Victoria Road) where the driver takes a train staff.  This is used by the conductor to unlock and operate the ground frame at Bere Alston in both directions and the driver then gives it up once again at St. Budeaux.  This is done in conjunction with phone calls and release from Plymouth Panel.

 

The only way to provide a service with one unit and no additional signalling etc. would be to run to Tavistock with a side trip to Gunnislake either on the Down or Up journey but would those travelling to or from Tavistock appreciate being forced to make the side trip which, as mentioned above, takes the thick end of 3/4 hour.  It is a conundrum which is causing a lot of head scratching at both NR and GWR - there is simply no easy or cheap answer.

 

Incidentally, the line was the site of one of the longest SPADs on record.  A train arrived at Bere Alston and the conductor walked up to the cab window holding out a hand for the staff.  The driver looked mortified and said "Oh s**t!"  A Stop board is regarded as a signal and passing it without complying with its instructions is a SPAD.

[adb968008]

53 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

Could you do a 2-hourly service Plymouth to Tavistock, with the same unit doing a return trip from Tavistock to Gunnislake in what would otherwise be a layover period in Tavistock? Although obviously this falls apart  if the idea is to increase the Plymouth-Tavistock service to hourly. Not really knowing the area, is it likely that people from Gunnislake who currently travel to Plymouth for shopping etc. (because that’s where the train goes to) would want to go to Tavistock instead?

St Budeaux is where the line splits off from the mainline, after that its single track up to Bere Alston, and a reverse to Gunnislake.

 (Think Maidenhead, Bourne End and Marlow).

Plymouth to St Budeaux is the mainline ..9 minutes.

St Budeaux to Bere Alston is quite fast.. 13 minutes.

its the Bere Alston to Gunnislake part that slows it down… 20 mins each way.

 

i’d imagine if Tavistock was built to similar line speed as the Lower section, an hourly to Tavistock would definitely be possible, though it would probably need a second unit and pass between Plymouth and St Budeaux, but it would also preclude Gunnislake services in the current one line operation without some extra infrastructure.

 

Money will be needed if Gunnislake is to remain open and do an hourly to Tavistock.

 

Looking at Wiki Gunnislake, Calstock and Bare Alston produces c100k passengers between the 3… Gunnislake being half that number (c50k).

Population of Tavistock is c10k*, Gunnislake 5k*, Bere Alston 2k*, 

(Okehampton btw has 6k*, and today produces 50k* passengers).

 

That would in my head suggest Tavistock may produce c100k, but maybe more taking proximity and poor roads to Plymouth.
 

The developers are reported to put £14m on the table, here in London thats the cost of a turnback siding on another little used branchline at one of Londons least used stations…. (ridiculous money imo but yes I know), So to me that should be at least comparable to the same at Bere Alston… in which case you need to find the money for 6 miles of track, on an existing formation thats neither overgrown or nor been built on,  and a 2 coach platform.. to me that would solve it.

 

by Comparison, Okehampton cost £40m for its 13 mile single track line to be renovated.*.. which includes passing Yeoford station (open station but wrong line/ no platform) and Sampford Courtney (new station closed 2019).

 

* wiki

 

Edited September 27, 2023 by adb968008

[Jeremy Cumberland]

17 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

This is used by the conductor to unlock and operate the ground frame at Bere Alston in both directions and the driver then gives it up once again at St. Budeaux.

What's the arrangement when the train's on the Gunnislake branch. Can the frame be left set either way?

[Mike_Walker]

12 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

St Budeaux is where the line splits off from the mainline, after that its single track up to Bere Alston, and a reverse to Gunnislake.

 (Think Maidenhead, Bourne End and Marlow).

 

Not exactly.  It's two sections, Maidenhead to Bourne End protected by No Signaller Token (NST) working and Bourne End to Marlow with a Train Staff.  There is a Ground Switch Panel at Bourne End and motorised points with point indicator signals.  The GSP is operated by the traincrew in co-operation with the signaller at the TVSC.  This allows a two train service in the peaks with one train shuttling from Bourne End to Marlow and the other to Maidenhead - there are two platforms at Bourne End.

 

5 minutes ago, Jeremy Cumberland said:

What's the arrangement when the train's on the Gunnislake branch. Can the frame be left set either way?

In theory, yes.  But...  You would still need some signalling to prevent a second train entering the station when the first is already in the station or on the other line.  Just saying they are timetabled sometime apart isn't acceptable, any train can run out of course.

[phil-b259]

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

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

 

 

 

No it doesn't - please remember there are no signals on the entire line to Gunnislake at present. The only signalling equipment is a single ground frame at Bere Alston which is unlocked by the St Beaudux - Gunnislake token.

 

If you want to put in any form of passing loop that needs a reliable electricity supply, telecommunications links, additional token machines etc all of which is relatively expensive given the line has no signalling on it at present whatsoever.

 

Incidentally the Maidenhead to Marlow branch is similar - no signals and a traincrew operated ground frame at Bourne end (though it does have an extra token exchange point as the two platforms allows Marlow - Bourne End to be operated separately from the Maidenhead - Bourne End section.

 

(BTW What prevents this setup being used at Bere Alston is the need to provide an expensive ramped footbridge in to cross the tracks of the Tavistock extension to access a second platform for trains to Gunnislake)

 

 

[adb968008]

6 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

 

(BTW What prevents this setup being used at Bere Alston is the need to provide an expensive ramped footbridge in to cross the tracks of the Tavistock extension to access a second platform for trains to Gunnislake)

 

 

already said this doesnt need to be the case… a turnback siding just beyond the station would mean a single platform could suffice. 
 

 

Edited September 27, 2023 by adb968008