Washout at Dawlish

[Clive Mortimore]

The problems at Dawlish and in Somerset cannot be blamed on anyone. This winter across the Northern Hemisphere there has been an extremely exceptional climatic deviation to the norm. The Jetstream has for some reason I do not (or doubt I ever will) understand has shifted southwards. North America has seen record cold temperatures owing to the Polar Vortex. Parts of Western Europe have seen the heaviest rain fall since records began along with some of the strongest Atlantic storms. We can only afford to plan and build for the exceptional not the extremely exceptional.

 

For the fourth time this winter the River Chelmer here in Little Waltham has been up to my friend's front door, I hope the sand bags prevent water from entering her house overnight. Likewise I hope that the storm predicted for tonight does not cause any more damage at Dawlish.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Clive Mortimore

[JohnR]

some facts: 1 It is not acceptable to reverse trains twice to get to Penzance. 2. There are no big revenue earning centres of population on the other route. 3.Paignton, Torquay, Newton Abbot and Totnes must remain connected to London for political reasons. These three reasons alone are why the Okehampton route will never be considered unless our country develops anything like a smidgeon of interest in Green issues. Ironically in a perverse way I think that this incident at Dawlish is the final nail of any chance of restoring Okehampton or Tavistock to the main network.

 

The proposal is that the Okehampton route is used for diversions when the Dawlish route is out of action - and not as a permanent switch.

[Re6/6]

More troubles up the line.

 

BBC Spotlight picture HST very slowly traversing The Levels

 

Edited February 7, 2014 by Re6/6

[Etched Pixels]

 We don't do 'back of a fag packet' in NR.

 

At least not since FGW changed livery ;-)

 

Your updates and insight are much appreciated btw.

[NXEA!]

some facts:1 It is not acceptable to reverse trains twice to get to Penzance.2. There are no big revenue earning centres of population on the other route.3.Paignton, Torquay, Newton Abbot and Totnes must remain connected to London for political reasons.These three reasons alone are why the Okehampton route will never be considered unless our country develops anything like a smidgeon of interest in Green issues. Ironically in a perverse way I think that this incident at Dawlish is the final nail of any chance of restoring Okehampton or Tavistock to the main network.

1. It is if Dawlish becomes impassable. Better to have two reversals and half an hour dolloped onto the journey time than no train at all if this becomes a regular occurrence.

 

2. I refer you to the Waverley project again. Galashiels has a population of 15,000 Eskbank for Dalkeith is 15,000, Newtongrange, 5000, Gorebridge 5000. These are the only reasonably populated places along the route. On the Meldon route, Okehampton has 7000, Tavistock has almost 30,000. If the Waverley can sustain around 45,000 people, (Stow has a population of 1000, Tweedbank 2,000, couldn't get the statistics for Shawfair) why is the LSWR route with a population of 40,000 including Bridestowe, Lydford and Sampford so unworkable, when it can double function as a diversionary route too, as well as opening up Dartmoor for tourism?

 

3. No one is advocating severing (well, I'm not anyway) Totnes, Dawlish and Newton Abbot from the network, more a second route is needed for resilience. The GWR route would obviously remain top dog, but the SR as a back-up when Dawlish is incapacitated. However, I think running a through service to Penzance via the SR in times of trouble serving Plymouth, St Austell, Truro and the rest of Cornwall is just as important as keeping the Dawlish route operable. It's not the end of the world if HST's were diverted temporarily via the SR in times of adverse weather that Newton Abbott and Totnes had a connecting train to Plymouth to get to London. That's what a second route would be for, not to divert traffic away from South Devon in times of normality.

Edited February 7, 2014 by NXEA!

[Legend]

some facts:

1 It is not acceptable to reverse trains twice to get to Penzance.

2. There are no big revenue earning centres of population on the other route.

3.Paignton, Torquay, Newton Abbot and Totnes must remain connected to London for political reasons.

These three reasons alone are why the Okehampton route will never be considered unless our country develops anything like a smidgeon of interest in Green issues. Ironically in a perverse way I think that this incident at Dawlish is the final nail of any chance of restoring Okehampton or Tavistock to the main network.

What's wrong with reversing trains? Modern trains are multiple units , they can change direction in the duration of a normal station stop.

Dawlish sea wall has always been an issue in bad weather. The reinstatement of the line there can be nothing but a temporary sticking plaster. It is not the long term cure. There needs to be a new route into Plymouth and Cornwall. To me reinstating a line that is already substantially there , the LSWR route makes perfect sense , and yes it will cost money, but that's what's needed to keep Plymouth and Cornwall connected to the network. Keep the Dawlish route for Paignton and Torquay , albeit with likely disruption from future weather,but route the Plymouth and Penzanze trains through the LSWR route

[Gerald Henriksen]

What would be the (back of a fag packet) cost of either of the inland diversions against the current proposal to re-instate the existing route

Nobody here has any idea.

 

Without knowing how much land needs to be obtained, the geology of the land, the political factors that will influence location, future indications of water levels, etc. there is now way to choose a route let alone guess at the cost.

 

If an alternate to the Dawlish sea wall is needed then someone will need to spend the money to have a study done to work out the route that is the best compromise.  The old GWR route may be a good starting point, but a lot has changed in the intervening years.

 

THEN build a VERY substantial new sea wall, in front of the existing one by several metres, which would have the dual purpose of protecting both the existing railway and the town of Dawlish ?. A breakwater further out to sea may also be required.

A new sea wall several metres out from the existing wall will eliminate the little beach that Dawlish has, and despite the decrease in tourism over the years that is likely politically unacceptable.

 

 

Something substantial needs to be done, NOW. This could be done and completed over the coming summer if fingers where extracted. Where is our engineering prowess these days?, I'm sure (somewhere) we still have it.

Why?

 

Doing something NOW as you call it is the absolute worst thing that could be done, you end up with an equal chance of making things worse.

 

Far better to take the time to study things, run simulations, and figure out what will work and what won't work.

 

Human history is full of well meant attempts at controlling water that have either made things worse or simply shifted the problem slightly (either down stream, or down coast).

 

I'm also surprised at the seeming lack of forward contingency planning for such events by our railway owners & operators.

What evidence do you have for a lack of planning?

 

You can plan all you want, but until something actually happens you can't know exactly what you need, where the supplies will be, where the equipment will be, and as this case has shown if the weather forecast will allow you to do what you have planned for.

 

At the end of the day, water is one of the more powerful forces on this planet and the damage it can do isn't always considerate enough to allow for quick repairs.

 

And then you can include the politics, which can make the best plans impossible.

[Gerald Henriksen]

What's wrong with reversing trains? Modern trains are multiple units , they can change direction in the duration of a normal station stop.

Dawlish sea wall has always been an issue in bad weather. The reinstatement of the line there can be nothing but a temporary sticking plaster. It is not the long term cure. There needs to be a new route into Plymouth and Cornwall. To me reinstating a line that is already substantially there , the LSWR route makes perfect sense , and yes it will cost money, but that's what's needed to keep Plymouth and Cornwall connected to the network. Keep the Dawlish route for Paignton and Torquay , albeit with likely disruption from future weather,but route the Plymouth and Penzanze trains through the LSWR route

 

Between Plymouth and Exeter the GWR line serves over 250,000 people - saying sorry but you can't have reliable rail service is simply not an option.

 

Telling the people of Cornwall and Plymouth that sorry, but you will have to accept a substantial increase in your travel times because we really, really want to reinstate service on an unviable line is unacceptable.

 

If it is decided a "safer" alternative is needed to the current sea wall line then it will have to be a new line that doesn't introduce slower service to Cornwall / Plymouth and still offers service to the major population in south Devon.

[hayfield]

The news has just said we have had the wettest winter in memory. And certainly I cannot remember so many storms so close together. We have been told that with Global Warming our climate would get wetter. I have no idea if what we have and will be getting in the way of winter storms is global warming or just the natural course of events with weather patterns constantly changing.

 

In addition to the above, funding for coastal protection must have been reduced during the recession and the pressure of some groups campaigning for the reinstatement of coastal erosion or just provision for wildlife must have taken their toll. Closing alternative route(s) into Cornwall now looks very short sighted

 

Perhaps this is a wake up call to all those in both government and public service to re-think their approach in protecting public assets and also protecting properties in residential and commercial areas at risk. Lets hope those in need of help receive it soon, and live in hope attitudes to public transport will change from those who hold the purse strings

[royaloak]

Apparently the next storm has arrived in Plymouth with driving rain and high(ish) winds, it is currently from a South Westerly direction so not too bad for Dawlish but if it swings around to a Southerly (or even worse a South Easterly) then they will take another hammering!

[The Stationmaster]

What would be the (back of a fag packet) cost of either of the inland diversions against the current proposal to re-instate the existing route THEN build a VERY substantial new sea wall, in front of the existing one by several metres, which would have the dual purpose of protecting both the existing railway and the town of Dawlish ?. A breakwater further out to sea may also be required. Something substantial needs to be done, NOW. This could be done and completed over the coming summer if fingers where extracted. Where is our engineering prowess these days?, I'm sure (somewhere) we still have it.

 

Don't say we can't afford it - we are one of the richest countries in the world (so I an told !!). Time the "Lords" and "Sirs" who govern us started to earn their keep, over-paid and mega bonus bankers also.

 

I'm also surprised at the seeming lack of forward contingency planning for such events by our railway owners & operators. When I worked in the Gas industry we had (and hopefully still have) in place all the procedures and resource locations / requirements etc for serious incidents, right up to loosing gas supplies complete area networks. We never lost a network, but had a few large town loss of supply incidents. The forward planning came into play immediately, supplies reinstated ASAP in all cases. Money was no object back then in such incidents.

 

Re Dawlish, I'm certainly not complaining re the management & men at the incident, rather those at very senior level (incl Government) who seem only to deal in cutting & saving ££££.

 

Brit15

I've already posted some 'estimates' twice in this thread basing them on the most recent available numbers from the Waverley restoration (outturn cost likely to be c.£10 million per mile) and CTRL aka HS1 (actual cost =£84 million per mile but rather misleading applying that figure)

 

I tried to give a rough idea of likely comparative costs in post No 260 on page 11 of this thread (linked below I hope) but it is very difficult to make any sort of accurate assessment in view of the amount of unknowns regarding the infrastructure on the LSWR route and the extent of development since the war on the GWR 1936 route.  But in both cases the numbers are well into hundreds of millions of £s

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/81949-washout-at-dawlish/page-11

[Peter Kazmierczak]

I don't think we can overly blame those in the 1960s for closing the SR Exeter - Plymouth route. In that period there was a real danger of NO railways in the far west and the obvious and sensible choice - despite a lengthy sea wall section - was the WR route.

 

Maybe in the next 20/25 years the GW pre-war inland diversion will be built. But with all the current infrastructure problems around the country, who knows? Doubtless we'll all just get through the present problems and then conveniently forget about them until the next time......

[figworthy]

It is surely unreasonable for EH (or anyone else) to object to something being restored for its original purpose. Look at the canals.

 

Ed

 

There have been a few problems there caused by quangos.

 

Adrian

[The Stationmaster]

2. I refer you to the Waverley project again. Galashiels has a population of 15,000 Eskbank for Dalkeith is 15,000, Newtongrange, 5000, Gorebridge 5000. These are the only reasonably populated places along the route. On the Meldon route, Okehampton has 7000, Tavistock has almost 30,000. If the Waverley can sustain around 45,000 people, (Stow has a population of 1000, Tweedbank 2,000, couldn't get the statistics for Shawfair) why is the LSWR route with a population of 40,000 including Bridestowe, Lydford and Sampford so unworkable, when it can double function as a diversionary route too, as well as opening up Dartmoor for tourism?

 

 

A look at Google maps shows something called the A30 which runs past Okehampton and the northern edge  of the Moor and it is dual carriaigeway with grade separated junctions all the way from the end of the motorway right into Cornwall.  In contrast the A7 linking Galashiels northwards is a far worse road - the simple comparison is that the road links out of North Devon are somewhat better than those out of the Border Country towards Edinburgh.  Plus of course the Scottish Govt thinks differently about rail re-openings from the rest of Britain and it receives the money to enable it to do so  thinks in part to the Barnett formula.

 

Okehampton is going to get an improved train service running on more days of the year but does the rest of the North Devon cast and the north side of the Moor justify a new rail route when it already has relatively good access to the Motorway network?

[JohnR]

Between Plymouth and Exeter the GWR line serves over 250,000 people - saying sorry but you can't have reliable rail service is simply not an option.

 

Telling the people of Cornwall and Plymouth that sorry, but you will have to accept a substantial increase in your travel times because we really, really want to reinstate service on an unviable line is unacceptable.

 

If it is decided a "safer" alternative is needed to the current sea wall line then it will have to be a new line that doesn't introduce slower service to Cornwall / Plymouth and still offers service to the major population in south Devon.

 

 

But no one is telling them they cant! The Okehampton route would be used in case of bad weather by trains to/from London etc to gain access to Cornwall. The rest of the time it would function as a local route, serving a not inconsiderable local population with plenty of tourist potential.

 

No one is proposing we cut off the south devon line.

[AngryMeerkat]

Just a question for those suggesting this route should be closed, the repairs will only be temporary, open another railway line, or whatever hair brained schemes are being touted......

 

This line has been there for what, 120 years? How can it not be fit for purpose if it has survived the harshest conditions known to man for that long?

 

People are forgetting these storms aren't a normal annual event, they are a VERY RARE OCCURANCE. We haven't had storms like this for at least 30 years, if ever. Yes they are showing the weak points in our man-made engineering feats, but man will NEVER win against nature.

 

I'm sure NR and it's engineers and planners are well aware of what's needed here, and have been for some time. But actually doing those repairs/upgrades costs money, and money is a swear word during times of recession. The good thing is they will know what is needed to create a medium term fix to get trains running, tied in with a long term fix to solve the issue for the next 100 years. I'm sure the army could have trains running in 3 days, using bridges designed by their specialist QinetiQ contractor (based in Christchurch, and suppliers of at least one railway bridge over the river Stour), but their temporary fix would have to be ripped up to create the permanent fix, leading to yet more delays.

 

How about we all listen to what Captain Kernow and the other industry guys on here are telling us instead of trying to offer half baked solutions without the industry knowledge?

 

Mark

[Vanders]

This line has been there for what, 120 years? How can it not be fit for purpose if it has survived the harshest conditions known to man for that long?

 

120 years in geological terms isn't even a blink of the eye. Entire villages have disappeared into the sea well within 100 years.

 

man will NEVER win against nature.

 

That's kind of the point that's being made.

[Gerald Henriksen]

But no one is telling them they cant! The Okehampton route would be used in case of bad weather by trains to/from London etc to gain access to Cornwall. The rest of the time it would function as a local route, serving a not inconsiderable local population with plenty of tourist potential.

 

No one is proposing we cut off the south devon line.

 

Perhaps then you should re-read message 512, which I was replying to, where the suggestion was:

 

1) route all Cornwall and Plymouth traffic over the former LSWR line.

 

2) keep the GWR line through Dawlish for Torbay traffic.

 

No mention of the people of Totnes, but it certainly wasn't a suggestion to re-open the  LSWR as a backup.

[NXEA!]

A look at Google maps shows something called the A30 which runs past Okehampton and the northern edge of the Moor and it is dual carriaigeway with grade separated junctions all the way from the end of the motorway right into Cornwall. In contrast the A7 linking Galashiels northwards is a far worse road - the simple comparison is that the road links out of North Devon are somewhat better than those out of the Border Country towards Edinburgh. Plus of course the Scottish Govt thinks differently about rail re-openings from the rest of Britain and it receives the money to enable it to do so thinks in part to the Barnett formula.

 

Okehampton is going to get an improved train service running on more days of the year but does the rest of the North Devon cast and the north side of the Moor justify a new rail route when it already has relatively good access to the Motorway network?

Point taken about the roads in the Borders and I respect anyone's opinion, but if poor roads were an excuse to build railways, why has East-West rail got funding committed, which (as someone who admittedly doesn't know the area well) I suspect has a half-decent road network around the line in question. Why was Alloa re-opened with a population of only 15,000 and has the A91 and is only 20 minutes drive from the A/M876 reconnected? Why was the Robin Hood line reopened? Because they all have merit and reasons to be served by the rail network, roads aside. Whether it's for an hourly passenger to Stirling/Nottingham or cross-country freight and regional stoppers, they are being reopened for a purpose regardless of what the road network may be like locally. Okehampton and Tavistock are served by decent A roads, but if that's the case why are Devon County Council and FGW going to run more services to Okehampton as you say? And why is Tavistock being reopened? Because the traffic is there and they think it can and will work and pay it's way. And *if* the bean-counters at DafT had common sense, with investment going into these two places not very far apart, why not link them and give a whole economic boost to Dartmoor and the tourism there, as well as boosting the whole of Devon and Cornwall with a second rail link. We can't deny the climate change that's going on at the moment, there's no use burying heads in the sand so to speak. We need another rail link in addition to a stronger Dawlish. I'm sorry Mike, I genuinely respect your opinion and viewpoint as a railwayman, but I must say that I disagree and think towns like Okehampton and Tavistock deserve to be put back on the map regardless of local road networks, and if more money was spent and joined the two projects up, it would answer the pleas of every MP and resident in Devon and Cornwall right now. Edited February 8, 2014 by NXEA!

[simdmuk]

" If this railway is so vital then we should fix it in days, not weeks (this was done back in the 50's). If we can manage without it for months then I would suggest we don't need it at all."

 

Have you seen what needs to be repaired and in what conditions ??

 

 

 

"As for Dawlish, that is a different problem. Interestingly, none of the people who I have seen interviewed on TV as affected by the storms have had a Devon accent"

 

I lived in Dawlish since I was 2 years old and even after 20 years of living there only had a small twang of an accent !  . My parents who still live there today after some 50 years dont have one jot of a devonian accent !!!

 

 

 

Ed

[Gerald Henriksen]

Point taken about the roads in the Borders and I respect anyone's opinion, but if poor roads were an excuse to build railways, why has East-West rail got funding committed, which (as someone who admittedly doesn't know the area well) I suspect has a half-decent road network around the line in question.

Population (and hence rail journeys)

 

Why was Alloa re-opened with a population of only 15,000 and has the A91 and is only 20 minutes drive from the A/M876 reconnected?

From what I can find online to relieve pressure on the Forth Bridge, plus of course of government willing to spend money on rail.

 

Why was the Robin Hood line reopened?

Population. Nottingham at 730k, Mansfield 100k, plus others at 30k, 43k, 25k.

 

Okehampton and Tavistock are served by decent A roads, but if that's the case why are Devon County Council and FGW going to run more services to Okehampton as you say?

Can't find anything online quickly, but DCC (Devon County Council) is willing to put up the subsidy.

 

And why is Tavistock being reopened?

2 reasons. First, the A386 can't be widened to handle the increase traffic as Tavistock has turned into a commuter town for Plymouth, and secondly an effort to reduce the subsidy currently being paid by DCC to operate the service to Bere Alston by increasing ridership.

 

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/sites/default/files/DCC - Tavistock Railway - Publication Version.pdf

 

 

Because the traffic is there and they think it can and will work and pay it's way.

But they aren't paying their way, they are being subsidized by DCC.

 

In other words, its not just the capital cost of putting the track back in place, but also the annual costs of running the trains and maintaining the track that the fares don't cover.

 

that I disagree and think towns like Okehampton and Tavistock deserve to be put back on the map regardless of local road networks, and if more money was spent and joined the two projects up, it would answer the pleas of every MP and resident in Devon and Cornwall right now.

 

But they are coming back onto the map, though not in the way that you may want, but they are doing so because local government is willing to pay for that every year.

 

But, towns with low populations - Tavistock 11,600 / Okehampton 5,700 - are always going to have troubles with being on the rail network unless the taxpayer is willing to pay for them to have that connection.

 

 

[Pete 75C]

Apologies if this link has been posted before. I've only just spotted this on the BBC News website:

How do you fix the Dawlish problem?

Seems to cover a lot of what has been discussed on here, but without the bluster and emotion.

[skipepsi]

One thing mentioned a lot is the state of local roads but a lot of the people I work with are struggling to run a car let alone save up to buy a newer one that they trust for long journeys. I know the average wage is £26,000 but that means a lot of people earn a lot less.

[Mallard60022]

How is the area this morning? The news says the higher winds later today are turning Southerly.

P

[Coombe Barton]

Brigham Coastguards forecast phenomenal waves http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26096286