Washout at Dawlish

[stewartingram]

Can I just comment that once again, this is RMWeb at its best? Good inside factual info, lots of pictures from everyone, sensible discussion around the subject, etc etc. Andy Y's monster creation is still alive and kicking!

 

Thanks to everyone for their input, and for those involved at the front, well done & thanks.

 

Stewart

[Oldddudders]

Comparabilities between Liverpool-Norwich and Paddington-Penzance are limited in scope. I suggest that few people travel throughout on the former, but probably the majority do a shorter portion of the journey, as I did a few months back, from Manchester to Nottingham. The business isn't particularly time sensitive, runs to 4 cars, doesn't offer 1st class.

 

FGW's service, on the other hand, is a prestige HST, with fewer stops en route, is very time sensitive, and many customers are travelling beyond Exeter. So adding minutes there, plus all the reliability issues that you've obviously read in Stationmaster's recent contribution, make reversal at Exeter unattractive. The journey time from there to Plymouth via Okehampton would be unlikely to be less than now, so arrival in Plymouth is later, where Cornish passengers have to sit through another reversal before heading over the Tamar. We might just have added 20-30 minutes to the journey into that County.

 

So, for £umpteen million investment in avoiding Dawlish, FGW ends up with a slower service with built-in reliability factors worse than now. It all makes the M4-M5-A30 etc sound a bit more attractive, which is the last thing anyone wants.

[RJS1977]

Just thinking it's a shame the Dawlish webcam got turned off .... would have been very interesting to watch now!

 

Edit - just seen it's coming back! https://www.dawlish.com/thread/details/33574

Edited February 8, 2014 by RJS1977

[Pete 75C]

Just thinking it's a shame the Dawlish webcam got turned off .... would have been very interesting to watch now!

 

Edit - just seen it's coming back! https://www.dawlish.com/thread/details/33574

 

That is good news. Amazing how you miss something so simple... Direct link:

http://www.dawlishbeach.com/

[Clive Mortimore]

With all respect to the guys who make and have made their living on our railways but I am a bit confused regarding the comments about reversing of trains. As a passenger who's planned route is blocked for whatever reason the thought of an alternative diversionary route where the train has to reverse, allowing me to stay in the same seat reading my Railway Modeller, sounds a lot better than de-training and then en-busing to then de-bus to en-train on a second train to finish my journey. Two trains surely means two crews and two reversals at the stations being connected by the fleet of busses (each with its own driver). Doesn't it also mean that the time table is up the swanie already? The bustituion never makes up the time it takes to unload and reload the great unwashed from one form of transport to the other.

 

Another downside, have you ever tried to read the Railway Modeller with the student and his backpack crushed next to you on a bus seat.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Clive Mortimore

[Oldddudders]

With all respect to the guys who make and have made their living on our railways but I am a bit confused regarding the comments about reversing of trains. As a passenger who's planned route is blocked for whatever reason the thought of an alternative diversionary route where the train has to reverse, allowing me to stay in the same seat reading my Railway Modeller, sounds a lot better than de-training and then en-busing to then de-bus to en-train on a second train to finish my journey. Two trains surely means two crews and two reversals at the stations being connected by the fleet of busses (each with its own driver). Doesn't it also mean that the time table is up the swanie already? The bustituion never makes up the time it takes to unload and reload the great unwashed from one form of transport to the other.

 

Another downside, have you ever tried to read the Railway Modeller with the student and his backpack crushed next to you on a bus seat.

Clive - our carp is about the entire service running daily via Okehampton. Having that route as a (very expensive) Plan B is just fine, of course, but deeply unlikely unless new sources of government finance are suddenly discovered. Something secure but much closer to Dawlish is my bet.

[ZiderHead]

So, for £umpteen million investment in avoiding Dawlish, FGW ends up with a slower service with built-in reliability factors worse than now. It all makes the M4-M5-A30 etc sound a bit more attractive, which is the last thing anyone wants.

 

I haven't seen many suggestions that the Tavistock line should replace the coastal route, but provide a diversionary route when the coastal route is inevitably interrupted and provide additional local services.

 

Far from increasing journey times by 30mins, in the case of a 2 week closure on the coast it would reduce journey times by almost 2 weeks!

[Mod6]

Just wondering if it's time to split this topic.

 

My interest and I sure that of many others, is in the civil engineeering aspect and of how some of the most experienced railwaymen in the world are going to get the railway working again. Also sympathy with the plight of those whose lives have been affected. I am much less interested in the discussion about possible alternatives routes.

 

So, one thraed for 'civils' and another for 'alternative routes'?

 

Just a thought. Mods?

 

Trevor.

  

I'm not sure there should be any thread separation... talk of diversionary routes is at least still relevant to the thread title. Loosely, maybe, but it is still relevant. Most threads seem to veer all over the road like a teenager in a Renault Clio, and this one is no different. Just try and skim past any posts that don't interest you. Just my humble opinion.

I think Lifeboatman sums up our position quite well. Going back over 30-odd pages separating them as Trevor suggests is a lot of work, and in any case there are enough readers who are interested in both/all facets of this topic who would be inconvenienced if they had to go through two or more threads instead of just one.

 

As Lifeboatman suggests, just skip over any posts that don't interest you.

[Dunsignalling]

FGW's service, on the other hand, is a prestige HST, with fewer stops en route, is very time sensitive, and many customers are travelling beyond Exeter. So adding minutes there, plus all the reliability issues that you've obviously read in Stationmaster's recent contribution, make reversal at Exeter unattractive. The journey time from there to Plymouth via Okehampton would be unlikely to be less than now, so arrival in Plymouth is later, where Cornish passengers have to sit through another reversal before heading over the Tamar. We might just have added 20-30 minutes to the journey into that County.

 

BUT: That only holds if you do it all the time. If it is only a diversionary route, the reversals wouldn't take as long as bus transfers.

 

I've never seen an HST to bus transfer completed in less than 10 minutes and its usually more like 15. Unless the bus then goes all the way it will take another 10-15 to transfer them all back again further down the line.

 

On top of this, there is the time involved in getting buses through city traffic between stations and the trunk roads. 

 

The problem with the modern insistence on maximum utilisation of assets being the norm (a phenomenon by no means confined to the railway) is that it leaves little or no capacity to deal with the sort of thing that is going on at present. It never seems to occur that if something is worked at 25% less than what it could do if thrashed, it will probably last 25% longer!  

 

Similarly, the Environment Agency flogged off (for scrap) all the old drag-line machines that used to be seen stationed along the Somerset rivers. "They don't get used every year, so look at the annual savings we can make," thought the bean counters, "The boss will get a 'K' and we'll all be comfortably retired by the time the brown stuff hits the whirly thing and more than wipes them out."   

 

John

Edited February 8, 2014 by Dunsignalling

[Etched Pixels]

Network Rail video - I didn't previously know the line at Bridgewater was tidal ...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b9X-FT1MXrQ

Edited February 8, 2014 by Etched Pixels

[Gary H]

I haven't seen many suggestions that the Tavistock line should replace the coastal route, but provide a diversionary route when the coastal route is inevitably interrupted and provide additional local services.

 

Far from increasing journey times by 30mins, in the case of a 2 week closure on the coast it would reduce journey times by almost 2 weeks!

While its a nice thought, with the greatest of respect I think the argument is that to have a circa 400 million pound new railway used as just a diversionary / 'as and when'  route just wont stand up to the folk holding the purse strings!

Especially when it would still have to be maintained, inspected, staffed and basicly run like any other route in the meantime. It just doesn't make sound financial sense from where Im sitting.

 

edit typo.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Gary H

[Gary H]

Network Rail video - I didn't previously know the line at Bridgewater was tidal ...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=b9X-FT1MXrQ

That'l be all the signal cables, signalling power supply cables, location cabinets totally screwed then!

Soul destroying.............

[Siberian Snooper]

It seems all this talk of diversionary routes is fairly academic at the moment until they pump out Somerset, so that trains can actually access Devon. The local news has said that trains are terminating at Bristol and Castle Cary, one assumes that it is easier to turn trains back at these locations than at Bridgewater.

 

The placing of the containers at Dawlish is ongoing and is hoped to be completed before the next high tide. All workers at sea/beach level are required to wear the normal protective wear plus a harness to be clipped on to saftey cables and a life jacket.

 

Best of luck to all those working in such arduous conditions in Devon and Somerset.

 

SS

[Lady_Ava_Hay]

. Something like the artificial reef off of Bournemouth beach. At least that would have a return on investment for the Dawlish locals.

 

This reef has been closed for some time. It was ineffective anyway as was suggested at the time. The company that built it has gone into receivership. The Council have once again got egg on their face with a succession of unpopular and unsuccessful projects of which this 'reef' was one.

 

It is plainly ridiculous to build these reefs around the English coastline which is mostly shallow and tidal. Very little of our coastline is actually receiving the ocean swell needed for the best surfing waves. North Devon is the exception as are some beaches in North Cornwall. Dawlish is protected from ocean swell as it faces South East. All this damage has been caused by exceptional weather which may or may not become normal; nobody yet knows.

 

Pacific atolls have reefs that come up quickly from very deep water to very shallow so ocean swell which is basically a very long wave pattern and trips it up. Tidal range is very low so near all of the energy of the wave is expended on the reef so little gets into the lagoon behind. None of our coast is like that.

[The White Rabbit]

There is now an online petition to reinstate the Exeter - Okehampton - Tavistock - Plymouth line at http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/60302. Shame about the grammatical and spelling mistakes, they give a very bad impression even before you start thinking about the problems & practical challenges of reinstatement, many of which have already been pointed out and discussed. 

[Dagworth]

http://www.theguardian.com/global/2014/feb/08/storms-lash-coast-uk-long-term-costs

 

 

By March next year, a multimillion pound flood prevention project under way around Dawlish will have received only a third of the funding it had been due in 2010. The Dawlish Warren and Exmouth beach management scheme was established to "help to reduce tidal flood risk to nearly 3,000 properties and the main railway into the south-west", says an Environment Agency document from November 2013.

Under the previous government, it would have received £2.7m in the coming financial year. But annual flood defence spending fell by 15% under the coalition's spending plans and the latest schedule for the Dawlish scheme, published on Thursday, shows that just £900,000 will be spent by March 2015.

[JohnR]

 

So, for £umpteen million investment in avoiding Dawlish, FGW ends up with a slower service with built-in reliability factors worse than now. It all makes the M4-M5-A30 etc sound a bit more attractive, which is the last thing anyone wants.

 

No, FGW ends up with a route which it can use when bad weather makes the Dawlish route impassible. No one has suggested that FGW be required to route all Plymouth services via Okehampton. Now you might argue whether it is worth it for the perhaps one week a year that it might be needed for that purpose, but the passengers may well find it preferable for their train to reverse on those occaisions.

 

At the moment, not having that backup option is also making the M4-M5-A30/A38 very attractive.

[ZiderHead]

While its a nice thought, with the greatest of respect I think the argument is that to have a cica 400 million pound new railway used as just a diversionary / 'as and when'  route just wont stand up to the folk holding the purse strings!

Especially when it would still have to be maintained, inspected, staffed and basicly run like any other route in the meantime. It just doesn't make sound financial sense from where Im sitting.

 

The cost to reinstate is largely irrelevant if the revenues stack up to pay for it. The planned Bere Alston to Tavistock reinstatement is being taken seriously so presumably the numbers work out for that - and that is only providing extra local services between Tavistock and Plymouth.

 

It doesn't seem unreasonable that reinstating the remaining ?16 miles to Oakhampton could make financial sense when you take into account the revenue from extra local services, savings on road improvements and savings on lost revenue from occasional but catastrophic closures to the costal route.

[Catkins]

As someone who hasn't been affected by the poor weather of the past three months, and not living near the west or south west, I would like to put my thoughts up here.

1- I feel that all the staff from NR are doing a sterling job in exceptionally harsh conditions, and I thank them.

2- There has been mention of reopening the former LSWR route, I would like to see it reopened as an additional line - but then I would like to see Lincoln, Boston, Spalding and March all reconnected by rail - I can see the possibilities for tourist traffic with a line across Dartmoor.

3- If the LSWR route were to be reopened and used as a diversionary route, I would feel much happier with the associated reversals, or even a change of trains, than I am with the idea of a substitute bus - if I want to use a bus I'll pay bus fares!

4- I think that, in a grand long term plan, there is the capacity for both the GW mainline via Dawlish and the sea wall, and the LSWR across Dartmoor.

[Titan]

One thing I notice is that the foundations of the wall do not seem to have been undermined - it appears that it was the ancient sandstone wall that collapsed under the onslaught. I suspect a modern reinforced concrete wall built on the existing foundation and perhaps given a sandstone cladding to preserve the appearance, would be substantially stronger. How replacing the entire wall in this manner compares economically I don't know, but it is something that should at least gain a few decades in the ongoing battle.

[Dagworth]

One thing I notice is that the foundations of the wall do not seem to have been undermined - it appears that it was the ancient sandstone wall that collapsed under the onslaught. I suspect a modern reinforced concrete wall built on the existing foundation and perhaps given a sandstone cladding to preserve the appearance, would be substantially stronger. How replacing the entire wall in this manner compares economically I don't know, but it is something that should at least gain a few decades in the ongoing battle.

CK said earlier in the thread that they had spent millions reinforcing the foundations a while back, that work has done exactly what it was designed to do.

 

Andi

[298]

I haven't seen many suggestions that the Tavistock line should replace the coastal route, but provide a diversionary route when the coastal route is inevitably interrupted and provide additional local services.

 

Reading between the lines in this article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26068375 , from the paragraph headed "too important", Christian Woolmar had better be careful what he wishes for as the justification for a "Dawlish Avoider" can only come from NOT rebuilding future damage, which means one bad storm and it's game over. So do you build a new alignment along the Teign Valley and include a "Dawlish Parkway" station, or abandon that area completely in favour of reopening through Okehampton, and make Torbay only accessible from Plymouth via Newton Abbot...? I doubt three lines could be supported, and the economies of reopening the LSWR route shouldn't affect those who live on the opposite coast.   

[Gerald Henriksen]

The cost to reinstate is largely irrelevant if the revenues stack up to pay for it. The planned Bere Alston to Tavistock reinstatement is being taken seriously so presumably the numbers work out for that - and that is only providing extra local services between Tavistock and Plymouth.

 

It doesn't seem unreasonable that reinstating the remaining ?16 miles to Oakhampton could make financial sense when you take into account the revenue from extra local services, savings on road improvements and savings on lost revenue from occasional but catastrophic closures to the costal route.

 

But that is the whole point, the revenue doesn't stack up.

 

Devon County Council is paying to have the Bere Alston service run, is hoping expension to Tavistock will reduce what they have to pay, is looking at paying to have the Okehampton service run, and pays for part of the service on the GWR line.

 

In other words, rail service in Devon is already receiving significant government subsidy because service can't pay its own way. 

 

So now you want them to pay even more to run a service connecting Tavistock and Okehampton when there likely insufficient demand for it, and more importantly no money available to subsidize it every year?

[Ogauge83A]

http://antony-christie.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/dawlish-seawall-repairs-8th-february.html

[Captain Kernow]

CK said earlier in the thread that they had spent millions reinforcing the foundations a while back, that work has done exactly what it was designed to do.

 

Andi

Exactly. The foundation strengthening has been doing what it was designed to do, for the last 10+ years, and that is protecting the wall. If that work hadn't been done, I suspect that we would have lost a significant portion of the entire wall on both the Dawlish and Teignmouth sections...