Great Western Coffee Shop

From the FGW website :

15:50 Exmouth to Paignton due 17:13
This train has run short formed with 2 carriages.This is due to an earlier train fault.

17:19 Paignton to Exmouth due 18:46
This train will run short formed with 2 carriages.This is due to an earlier train fault.

They have spare stock (142's) and crew must be trained by now so why not use them?  ??? A 142 is better than short formed.

2v3 is nothing major, i've been on that train 1v3.

Choas!

That one may be okay but what happens if the school trains are one carriage.

I thought all Devon MEtro were currently booked 2 car

There is a couple of 153's that attach/deattach to the busy services, but the 153's often end up running by themselves.

Complain enough and it might change with any luck...

Doesn't directly affect me just when I have been oh holiday there a couple of times and have noticed it.

Not sure what this Devon metro tosh is, but...

The 'Triangle (of doom)' as better known is a difficult one as some parts of the route need extra capacity at x whilst need very little at y.

Apparently the name has been used for promotion purposes in the past.

Not seen any promotions!

Feel free to direct me to em  ;D

I am told that it was in a newspaper a while back. Unfortunately I dont have a link , but I will check further when I have a moment.

Here is a quote from this very forum :

Hi

I noticed on the Devon Council Web site, They have something called the Devon Metro Project.

http://www.devon.gov.uk/gsasearchresults.htm?q=devon+metro+project&search=Search...&requiredfields=devon&advanced=&as_epq=&as_eq=&as_oq1=&as_oq2=&as_oq3=&as_filetype=devon

It has some nice report and interest figures, but I noticed they never talk about re-instating Cullompton railway station or Okehampton Station.

When they Talk about Capacity issues between Exeter Central and St Davids Railway Station, why just they don't terminate trains at Central Using Platform 1.

Guy

Also, direct link to .pdf at http://www.devon.gov.uk/eldf-devonmetroappraisal.pdf


I would guess that the answer is "because it means that passengers arriving on the terminating train who are connecting on to other long distance destinations would have an extra change and an extra wait, which would lead to a significant drop off in their custom".   Can anyone confirm this?

A similar question might be asked about terminating trains that are inbound to Edinburgh Waverley at Haymarket, and on the TransWilts there's been the question at the north end - "Chippenham or Swindon?" and at the south end "Warminster or Salisbury"?   There's an excellent (negative) case against terminating short if you look at Dilton Marsh to Salisbury traffic; there's a surprisingly high potential flow from what's now a station set between two major housing / commuter areas to the biggest place in the council area, but the wait at Warminster on many services is pretty discouraging, with four of the nine Monday to Friday trains requiring a change there, and in three cases there not being an ongoing connection for over 45 minutes. Northbound it's a bit better; in 4 cases the wait is only about 25 minutes, and the other 5 are shorter or through trains.

it's a really interesting operational point turning trains round at through stations. Ideally I agree that trains should trminate at stations where there are the most onward connections so Exeter St Davids, Swindon, Westbury, Salisbury.

Idealy you want a trminating train to stop unload and then proceed in teh same direction to a turnback siding.

However the problem is that we lack the infrastructure to take the trains through the station to a siding so they are not occupying platform space turning round.

A good example of where this works is Cardiff where you gt up to 3 trains waiting on paltform 1 the one nearest the middle is loading and the others draw forward to load in turn.

The other way of doing it is to run teh stock to another destination Thus some Exemouth trains go through to Barnstable or Paignton, and you get is it Great MAlvern Brighton or some such which is series of service tagged together. The problem with that is if there is a problem with the stock you inconvinience a large number of people on differrent legs of the service. If it run as 2 or three separate trains you only use one leg. Unofrtunately though there is not enough stock to do that.

The other way of doing is to termante one stop past your main station.  A classic example being the Eastbound S Bahn service from Dresden along the Elbe which serves Bad Schandau but terminates just before the Czech border at Schona whcih is a tiny place with two open platforms and a turnback siding. I know I've changed there coming from Decin on railbus with a Schoneswockende ticket it's a long story but because it was originaly Germany you can do a lot of Czech lines in Eastern Bohemia with a German ticket.

What about terminating the Salisbury's at Andover,  although that would require addtional track work at Andover to use the third paltform from the West and depart to the West. Plus it would require more stock run to Andover as opposed to turning round at Warminister.

Also as far as the Trans Wilts you are stuck with Daft not wanting to admit that they dropped a clanger when they specified the FGW franchise and dropped the service levels compared to Wessex.

 

Salisbury station is "good" as it stands for some further trains terminating from the West.  And if you look at the station map on the National Rail site, it shows 4 platforms ... 2,3,4 and 6.  Platform 1 remains in situ as a through track / siding and I would have thought it could take trains again without too much hassle (did I read that this was going to happen somewhere?).   Platform 5 is a west facing bay / terminal platform which is sometimes used for stabling stock.  I would have thought it's quite a good candidate for terminating and starting passenger trains as appropriate from / to the Westbury and Yeovil Junction lines.

When talking about joining up services, the "candidates" as Salisbury are the hourly Romsey via Romsey and Southampton stoppers, and the TransWilts service.  This would give a some very interesting services such as regular airport service direct from Swindon, Chippenham, Trowbridge, Warminster, Westbury and Melksham.  Two issues exist with this idea - the fact that the services to be linked and deep into different franchise territories, and timetabling across a service of main lines having to co-ordinate the bay platform at Swindon (eased pressure from 2016?), the single track from Thingley junction, the single track through Chandler's Ford, and the lack of a terminating bay at Romsey.

Andover is an interesting thought that's a new one on me.   Initial reactions - "where's the traffic" and "the two ideas above seem more practical and useful" ... but then again I've never before thought about Andover in this way, and you may have something.  Grateley and Andover serve the military areas in South Wiltshire at Ludgershall and Tidworth, after all, and there's gong to be heavy traffic for Lyneham from 2013, which the TransWilts runs quite close to.

Yes, I have noticed incoming terminators at the east end of Salisbury from Waterloo   ;)

Yes,  you did read it.   Platform 1 was listed as an NR Discretionary Fund item, however between the 2010 Wessex route plan and the 2011 update it seems to have been cancelled, without any explanation at all - being unusually marked as 'project complete'.  I suspect that when push came to shove there wasn't the need for it just yet, but all it seems to require is full (ie passenger quality) signalling at the London end - I was told a while back that they thought its main use would be for starting morning peak services towards London, saving the double shunt to get from the depot to P2... 

In principle, with P1 reinstated, Salisbury could be a far more flexible station than Southampton, because it could be operated with P1 and P4 used for most though services, and the island used for services terminating and reversing, like at Southampton.  Having terminating services in the middle of the layout avoids any crossing moves - and as a bonus P5 and P6 would also be available.

Paul 

back onto Devon specifically exeter, i think that the problem is actually at st davids because the west of england line only connects to platforms 1 and 3 ... there is one solution which doesnt involve a major relay....  remember the  Penryn passing loop could something like this work? remember 3 tracks used to run between platforms 3 and 1

possible plan

I am new so bear with me. I have looked at the pocket timetables for 2019 which do not seem to be any different to now. Can someone please tell me what has happened to the proposed Devon Metro (and new services to Cornwall) as I understood they would still come in in January even though the 802's would not use an accelerated timetable until May..


If there is a Devon Metro thread elsewhere, please move this post.

Welcome to the forum!

So many subjects interact with each other that it's difficult to know what to post where - but we're a very welcoming place and if it feels the best place to post, it probably is.  And one or two of our team can merge / split topics as they run so that make for a good searchable archive later on, and keep all discussions on a topic together.  Anyway - enough of the technicalities ...

January 2019 public timetable changes have been put on hold - and I wouldn't like to bet on any particular new date just at present.   That hold is on all changes.   Newly timed long distance trains from London to the West Country (and elsewhere) were planned such that they leave paths for other more local trains to run in between them, thus a new timetable for local trains.  If the long distance trains are still running to the old timings, the local ones cannot run to the new, as the railway doesn't have boundless capacity - in fact it's getting pretty full in places.

You may ask "could there be a January 2019 AND a later timetable change".    That's not happening ...

a) There aren't enough timetable planners to work it out and check it

b) It would mean two rather than one set of changes to the local services - and each time there's a change, there's always someone who has a good use for the existing times - however peculiar - and will be pretty put out by the changes

c) Extra trains haven't been rolling in to the Devon and Cornwall area as quickly as would have been hoped. Delays on "Castle class" conversions, delays on Crossrail, delays in being able to run substitute trains into Portsmouth Harbour so that the 158s can be sent to Exeter ...

There will be a few January changes - mostly in operational / working timetables.   For example, St Phillip's Marsh won't have any HSTs to service and IETs will be running up Filton Bank, the remaining stabling lines at Old Oak will be gone ...

I cannot see capacity being a problem, may shortage of rolling stock, as there is no increase in the Exmouth branch. There are already the Paignton - Newton abbot services. The overtaking at Dawlish Warren would have to stop but this would improve timings and the locals could follow the expresses improving connections for Teignmouth and Dawlish. There would be slightly worse for Paignton but with a half hour service not that bad.

Two coach trains could operate, every half hour, until more stock becomes available. I know all the 150/1's have gone.

I'll leave it for others to answer for Devon track capacity, etc.     On a technicallity, 150/126 was still around last week and I believe is still with us for a few more months.  Delight to have it on the 17:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central (20:47) last Tuesday - 9th October.  Think there might be a second one around too - not sure; most have gone.

There is no more capacity on the Exmouth branch.  The only thing to do to make it more frequent than the current 30min interval service would to be to add an additional crossing loop between Topsham and Exmouth.  No chance. :P

Elsewhere, Exeter St.Davids station is already becoming a capacity constraint.  If you add additional services there would have to be a lot more platform sharing, and that is frowned upon at present due to the risks involved.  Can be cured by adding mid-platform signals.  No chance. ::)

I make no appologies concerning my negative comments about capacity improvements.  Seen it all tried before and fall apart because its put in the too difficult (and expensive) box.

Edit to add: I think in a past life I was once asked to look at capacity on the Exmouth branch and came up with the idea of having two parallel single lines betwen Topsham and Exmouth and removing (saving) a set of points at Topsham in turn.  Cheaper first cost than a new crossing loop, and less long term ongoing maintenance and renewal liability and hence cost.  Now then, what happened to that idea..... ::)

The Devon Metro does not include, at the moment, extra capacity on the Exmouth line which would require another passing loop. All the Exmouth trains would go to Paignton giving the half hour service to Paignton. The Barnstaple service every hour would run to East sidings (I think the name should be changed to Morrisons) to reverse.

Example times could be Barnstaple-Exeter Central arrives at xx.10 at St Davids then to Exeter Central, with time to tip out, then empty to Morrisons to reverse. Paignton- Exmouth arrives at St Davids at xx.15 and xx45 leaves at xx.20 and xx.50. Waterloo departs as now xx.25. It would maintain the existing connections.

The times are tight but I believe it is all computer controlled, or advised, now.

Some good points there, but, the signalling at Exeter is not computer controlled, its a manually controlled (but electrical) system.  One of the big constraints is the Red Cow level crossing at St.Davids.  This already gets closed for significant times each day and adding to that won't help at all.  You can fiddle with train timings quite a lot but end up with the same result.  Ultimately its track/signalling/platform capacity that becomes the biggest constraint.

Still the same crossing closures as now for the Waterloo and Barnstaple services.

I agree about the crossing but it's about time it was replaced by a bridge that could rise alongside the tracks using railway land and the car park crossing the tracks at a suitable height North of the existing crossing.

Exeter is expected to grow by about 20,000 people in the next ten years to 140,000. Paignton (pop.50,000) and Torquay (66,000) have become commuter towns for Exeter.

Maybe so. These things can take a surprising length of time to come to fruition though, even when there is a compelling case: https://goo.gl/maps/zENN4D5BuyC2

How interesting. Did it really work out cheaper? I appreciate that the current Exe Estuary trail is mostly built (I think) on what was railway land acquired for a possible second track, but I'm thinking of having to add another track over the River Clyst bridge between Topsham and Exton, as well as several underbridges where the railway crosses lanes and streams.

Well I did say in a past life!  Can't remember now what the state of the bridges were at that time.  Possibly talking of at least 40 years ago :o

Well I did say in a past life!  Can't remember now what the state of the bridges were at that time.  Possibly talking of at least 40 years ago :o
[/quote]

Ha ha - fair enough, S&TE! Interesting that increasing capacity for the Exmouth branch was on anyone's radar ~40 years ago. My memory (which goes back about that far) is of first generation DMUs grinding up and down the branch much less full than today and little (or no?) Sunday service.

Until the 1960s (AIUI) the branch was double from Exmouth Junction to Topsham and then single from Topsham to Exmouth (with a goods loop at Lympstone [Village]) although there was clearly enough land in railway ownership to double-track Topsham to Exmouth (never implemented) at the cost of widening some underbridges. Since then, Exmouth Junction to Topsham has been singled (with the new platforms at Digby and Newcourt taking up half of the old double track formation), and most of the line from Topsham to Exmouth now has the Exe Estuary trail alongside it on the previously "spare" land.

Consequently options for increasing trains-per-hour are limited, and would presumably need a passing loop at Lympstone Village and a passing loop (or even full redoubling) between Digby and Exmouth Junction. There is room for a second track on the viaduct at Lympstone Village station but squeezing in a second platform might be the (expensive) challenge.

That's how I see it, anyway. What do others think?

 

Sounds a good proposal that would work, but for timetable robustness I would go with your double track section idea.  However, such a sensible proposal would, of course, get entirely bogged down in the NR GRIP process and never see the light of day :P

Welcome from me, also! I watch the Devon Metro news more carefully since I moved to within 3 miles of Tiverton Parkway. From the answers already given, we can see that any change to a railway is always a frustrating slow matter, and like the wings of the butterfly starting a hurricane, the smallest thing can cause major headaches elsewhere. The good news is that the general direction seems to be forward,even with all the snags along the way.

Is there any mileage in persuading Exeter Chiefs to part-fund a loop/turn-back between Digby and Sowton and Newcourt?

[imghttp://(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4604/25592516047_85868b938b_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/EZwkoF)Exeter Train depot february 2018 (https://flic.kr/p/EZwkoF) by Robert (https://www.flickr.com/photos/revupminster/), on Flickr][/img]

Image of extended Exeter Depot that is under construction.
I thought I would try an image relevant to the Devon Metro. Passed through Exeter yesterday and they are still levelling the site. Image is looking from the NW. Level crossing to left out of image.

(http://)(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4575/38295549254_b7710a1ce1_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/21m3GAA)Exeter new depot (https://flic.kr/p/21m3GAA) by Robert (https://www.flickr.com/photos/revupminster/), on Flickr

Another image from SE

The idea has been kicked into touch.

They could at least try. Surely not too big a job to tackle.

The proposed Riviera stadium and music events centre at Nightingale Park (ex refuse tip) is up for planning permission soon. This is within 200yds of the proposed Kingskerswell  Station (I would call it Riviera Way (Torquay)) and the developers said they would make a contribution.

This might make it happen yet the cost seem to be spiralling out of control for two platforms and some ramps just as Marsh Barton's cost have.

I've been thinking about this idea as I trundle past twice a day.....

I think the problem with having the turn-back / loop *between Digby & Sowton and Newcourt* is that it doesn't help to solve the capacity constraint on the single line between Topsham and Exmouth Junction. The problem with having the loop _at_ Digby is that there is no room - the platform takes up the space of the lifted 2nd track. The problem with having the loop _south_ of Digby is that it is too close to the existing loop at Topsham and so doesn't help with capacity.

The current service is 2 trains per hour (tph) in each direction on the single line. This makes full use of the exisiting capacity because it takes trains ~ 13 minutes to go from Topsham to Exmouth Junction (and it will take slightly longer if the proposed station at Monkerton between Digby and Polsloe Bridge gets built).

The only way to run more trains on this section is to have a loop, but to maintain regular services it must, by symmetry, be somewhere that is  ~7 minutes north of Topsham. so the new loop really has to be north of Digby, between Digby and the proposed station site at Monkerton. Of course it would be even better for timetable resilience to re-double all the way to Exmouth Junction, but this would cost more, not least because Polsloe Bridge and Monkerton would then need two platforms rather than one.

So perhaps a plan could be:

(1) Install a loop between Digby and the proposed station site at Monkerton, and upgrade the signalling so that the line in one of the platforms at Topsham is reversible. This allows a 4 tph service to Tophsam. Alternate southbound trains would continue to Exmouth as currently, while the others would turn-back at Topsham. Thus Digby could have 4tph to Exeter, 4tph to Topsham and 2tph to Exmouth. This requires upgraded signalling, some pointwork and a short section of new loop line.

(1a) (optional) beef up timetable resilience by re-doubling all the way from the new loop in (1) to Exmouth Junction. Amongst other things, this has the advantage of preventing southbound trains at Exmouth Junction from blocking the Up Waterloo line while they await access to the branch. It would, however, require station upgrades as well as new track and an upgrade of Exmouth Junction.

(2) (possibly later) Install a loop at Lympstone Village so that all 4 tph to Topsham from stage (1) can run to Exmouth.

Newton Abbott to Paignton closed until 1600, 11 November for some track laying. Cannot be much.

(http://)(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7872/46381955974_da47947179_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2dEBDA7)Exeter Depot 14 February 2019 (https://flic.kr/p/2dEBDA7) by Robert (https://www.flickr.com/photos/revupminster/), on Flickr

Very slow progress at Exeter Depot with only the steelwork for one shed.

158 in the background. Another seemed to be working the Newton Abbot -Paignton shuttle. I boarded one at 14.10

No news of the Devon Metro start unless an expert here knows different..

Split off from http://gwr.passenger.chat/22704 as the subject powered its way away from Turbos to Barnstaple / edit by Grahame



It seems a lot of people have learnt the hard way. Maybe GWR should look at running a shuttle Newton Abbot to Paignton train, separate from the normal Exmouth - Paignton.

Could something like that emerge with the nascent Devon Metro?

2014-2016 there was the occasional shuttle worked the Cardiff-Paignton train that would otherwise have been sat idle. It's possible, surely better than making people wait forever for a train.

The occasional shuttle was replaced by two train an hour Exmouth-Paignton but not at clockface times because of non stopping St Thomas, Starcross, stuck at Dawlish Warren or St Davids  for 10+ minutes to get an even interval down to Exmouth.

It's why it is still not promoted as Devon Metro service as nothing is.

Yes, but were talking about would it be better to reintroduce the shuttle!

If your going to have three trains an hour with two to Exmouth and one to Newton Abbot you cannot have them every 20 minutes so something else would have to give. Maybe GWR and XC would stop there express services which would not go down well in the third and fourth largest towns in Devon.

Not so sure if you set the hourly all-stations off from Paignton 20 minutes after the bigger-stations-only train:

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/tqb20.jpg)

As even in this sort of exercise, it is ruled by single line sections and I have taken the Exeter - Exmouth timings from the current National Rail timetables.  They could (in theory) be shifted / drifted uniformly in the hour to give timings elsewhere on the runs that would fit better with other services, but of course you would get customer backlash at stations with just an hourly service if you shift services by more than a couple of minutes.

However ... talking "single line sections" again, there is another - a pinch point just to the south of Newton Abbott where just a single track to Paignton has been deemed sufficient at some point in the past, and a train heading south from Newton Abbott 5 minutes before a train heads north from there is perilously close to a conflict every 20 minutes and a seed of unreliability.  Add in that a freight train failure at Alnmouth resulting in a Cross Country service being late could (and probably would) knock the whole delicate thing off pattern ... and grumbles from passengers at Exeter St Davids about a reversal that has a three minute delay hidden within it, and you get a confirmation it's not all a bed or roses.

P.S. - The showing of timings in the early hours is not a proposal for 24 hour service, but rather timings from a datum. I am all in favour of the 24x7 railway which is what the passengers want, even if the powers-that-be are now very quiet and looking to backtrack on the idea (later starts on Sunday morning next year? - YUK!).  From midnight to 6 a.m., an hourly service would be perfectly reasonable IMHO.

I think this thread needs splitting as it has digressed significantly from a review of the new Barney line trains.

However, keeping the digression going. The new two-trains-an-hour service between Paignton and Exmouth makes it virtually impossible to get direct trains in either direction between Polsloe Bridge and Starcross or Dawlish Warren. It now requires either a 30 minute wait at St Davids or a walk along the seawall from the Warren to Dawlish - unless you wish to spend the whole day at the Warren.

Done - old thread at http://www.passenger.chat/22704

I still think the Paignton Metro service should stop at all stations to Exeter St James Park then reverse via the Morrison's siding. These trains spend more time on the main line and more likely to be delayed so need a decent lay over time to recover.

Exmouth should be served by Barnstaple trains with initially a shuttle to make up the half hour service from St Davids and then hopefully at a later date from Okehampton.

In the longer term a Cullompton- Axminster service to complete the Metro Lines.

Metro interchange passengers should be encouraged to change at Central and those wanting express trains at St David's

Thread now split.

If you have 2 trains an hour from A to O via major stations at E and I ... and need to serve B, C, D ... F, G, H, ... J, K, L M and N hourly then to keep the major stations more or less half hourly, you have to share out the intermediate stops - meaning that certain journeys between pairs of those intermediate stations will involve a changes / approx 30 minute wait.  

I would suspect that passenger numbers between consonant stations are relatively small - and that's because that's because the demand for those journeys is not high; people will want to go from their residences at the smaller stations to the cities, seasides, and funfairs served by the bigger vowel ones.

The sample timetable I put above fixed that if we're looking at a 20 minute service for part of the line ... the slow train starting from the end of the line with three trains per hour just 20 minutes after the fast, but then arriving at the far end 30 minutes after.   In the reverse direction, a start 30 minutes apart leads to a 20 / 40 split at the far end which is plugged by the extra train on that part of the line.

What's the point of fast trains on a Metro service.  The fast train from Paignton gets to St Davids quicker but then is held there for anything between 10-12 minutes for a path down to Exmouth. If maybe the train was held at Central where most want to go it might be an improvement.

Also St Thomas, in a good position, is under utilised because it's such an user unfriendly station. If it had lifts and a half hour service it would be better used.

Why would anything have to give? Newton Abbot has 3 platforms, Paignton's Platform 2 could easily see more use, as could Goodrington sidings. Having a shuttle services between Paignton to Newton Abbot would not affect express services so I don't get why that was brought that up?  Newton Abbot is also due to have some extensive work carried out soon, so why couldn't a bay platform be created opposite platform 1, or remove part of the car park and have it at the far end of Platform 3?

Provision at Newton Abbot has been made for a new platform opposite Platform 1 if the new exit ever gets built. They probably regret getting rid of the old platform 4.

Just as they regret at Paignton the removal of the scissors crossover. Paignton, Torquay, and Torre (except for schoolchildren) were never really imagined as commuter stations but that is what they have become since the jobs are in Exeter.

The few local trains that use platform 1; only one goes down the sidings to reverse; the rest shunt back wrong road usually as another train leaves platform 2, then shunt back into platform 2. All departures from Paignton leave from platform 2.

Not sure where / how the question was in there about connections through to Paignton on my suggestion ...

Express trains at :20 and :50 off EXD to Plymouth would make for services at :02, :29 and :50 for Paignton, the last being a 5 minute change into the shuttle. So 27, 21 and 12 minute gaps off EXD.

Arrivals back into EXD at :25 and :55 would likewise give three services per hour, :11, :25 and :46 giving gaps of 14, 21 and 25 minutes.

I would agree (from limited personal use) that the stopping of only 1 train per hour at St Thomas, looking at the area around it, reduces demand.  Not sure if an increase in services wouls result in new rail users or just the abstraction of journeys by people who currently use Central and St Davids.

I note extra infrastructure suggestions.  Sadly, it's very much easier to and cheaper to remove facilities than to re-install them ... and it needs a very heavy business or political case and a deep pocket, not just a regret at previous removal to take them forward.

That's interesting ? I didn't know there used to be a scissors crossover at Paignton. Where exactly was it, and when was it removed?

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50503883053_079c9cf978_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jWRAUn)Paignton (https://flic.kr/p/2jWRAUn) by Robert (https://www.flickr.com/photos/revupminster/), on Flickr

Removed 1988 leaving a facing crossover North of the Torbay Road level crossing. There is a picture of it in Branch Line to Kingswear by Middleton Press

Thank you!

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/49654444882_c28365568f_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2iDN1wE)St James Park station with train 143 x 2 (https://flic.kr/p/2iDN1wE) by Robert (https://www.flickr.com/photos/revupminster/), on Flickr

Informed that work on cutting back the embankment started last week at Exeter St James Park to lengthen the platform this week when the line is closed to renew Exmouth Junction trackwork to raise the line speed.

I hope to find a picture of the work during the week.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50536548886_dc3b9c6e17_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jZK2jo)St James Park extension (https://flic.kr/p/2jZK2jo) by Robert (https://www.flickr.com/photos/revupminster/), on Flickr

St James Park by raymondindevon

Work also going on this half term to extend platform at Lympstone Commando.

That sounds ominous!

Government report re levelling up Britain. Infrastructure Strategy

Page 41 Reopening of Cullompton and Wellington. New station in Edginswell.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/938049/NIS_final_web_single_page.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0KHNKpHdLTgSZPenh-GH8uqlzxkJyJ2h1ncs52V30Xqy6ZUk_ZBEFBt6Q (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/938049/NIS_final_web_single_page.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0KHNKpHdLTgSZPenh-GH8uqlzxkJyJ2h1ncs52V30Xqy6ZUk_ZBEFBt6Q)

Also on Spotlight tonight reopening of Okehampton line.

Page 41:

I have heard whispers in other places of work being carried out with a view to a service from May 2021.

Page 16 December Modern Railways moots the idea of summer 2021. On a rumour front platform 2 at Exeter St Davids could be used to reverse such a service.

Platform 2 was the home of the Okehampton train in the olden days. That was also the platform for the erstwhile Paddington-Exeter sleeper coach. Oh dear I am showing my age!

Just as well the Paignton service has resumed every half hour as I drove past Torre station about 820am and there was a line of schoolchildren about 400 yards long two abreast  along the narrow Newton Road pavement. There must have been about 200 of them, no masks, no social distancing.

The two grammar schools have a very wide catchment area.

Two units 165134/132 were working this service today. Here at Paignton 0830. Same problem as 143's as the guard cannot pass through the units; although I think the guard would need a hazmat suit today. This is probably a short term solution to the school run.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51021296693_2a2492d7fb_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJztXc)165134 and 132 at Paignton 08.30 10 march 2021 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJztXc) by Robert (https://www.flickr.com/photos/revupminster/), on Flickr

^This school run train on it's return had to be split at St David's as 2x 165/166s cannot operate on the Exmouth branch. Read it on another site. 12m longer than 2x150s

A 166 is running the training train, saw it on Dawlish cams as 5Z46 Paignton to Exeter. goes back to Paignton as 5Z47 then to Crediton 5Z48.

It was 166211 which ran to Crediton and back to Exeter depot.

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51263276200_8ce87b62a5_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2m6XG2E)166211 5Z48 Paignton crediton at 18.12. 150 as 5Z29 shunting  to Platform 2 (https://flic.kr/p/2m6XG2E) by Robert (https://www.flickr.com/photos/revupminster/), on Flickr

Saturday, busiest day of the week and every train bar one, on the Barnstaple run, is two car.

I wonder if the trains are carrying bottled water. They did last summer.

Currently today the three North Devon line Diagrams are:-

A three car 158,
a 2 car 158 + 2 car 150
and a 2 car 165.

Both Oketon Diagrams are a 150 set as bkd.

158 +150 was added at St David's 10.40 on it's way to Exeter Central as 2R83 so had two trips from Barnstaple as a two car. Have they found extra for Paignton Exmouth which started out as all 2 cars?

Bad day again down here. Only one 3 car train operating Paignton -Exmouth leaving six as 2 car including the school train; maybe the boys will be gentlemen and let the girls have the train. Paignton second train was cancelled being reversed early at Newton Abbot.
Barnstaple has a 2 car as well.

It feels like a race to the bottom ... at least your trains (or most of them) are running.   Ironically, for once the Westbury to Swindon service is behaving itself though past recent experience is that can change at very short notice.


EDIT - half an hour later - I shouldn't have spoken.


Next train after 16:23 is 18:37.   Next train after 17:36 is 18:44.  The 17:36 is one of the three out of 18 that GWR have prioritised to run if they possibly can.  No alternatives suggested or provided its yet.

Tuesday only 2 shortforms but today back to Monday and 5 shortforms including the school train.

Think I'm seeing at least 3.
Believe there were 4 short forms first thing, but now down to three possibly.
Also short form on the Penzance - Cardiff.
Also on the Portsmouth - Cardiff.
Also on the Gunnislake branch.

Falmouth branch loses one run 1300 - 1400 with staff shortages.

Paignton
2F06 166204
2F07 150247/48
2F08 150219
2F09 150243
2F10 150216
2F11 150233  arrives as 2T07 (school train)
2F12 166217
Barnstaple
2R80 158750 2 car

Gunnislake is always 2 car

15/19 150s in use. I know they keep a spare at Long Rock or Laira for Cornwall. Still 3 not used and why they need the turbos. Two turbos today. Often 4 and very occasionally 5 turbos down here. The 2 car turbos are really only suitable for Okehampton or late evening.

Devon Live reports that Edginswell station has been given the "go ahead".  Good news given that there was some relatively recent umming and ahhing about it's future but the article doesn't really give much detail about timescales or indeed what getting the "go ahead" actually means in the process.  It does however cover decisions made on a couple of access issues.
The article can be found on the link below.


https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/new-torquay-railway-station-gets-8908752

Edginswell has it's own thread. Money is the problem. The £13/14m stashed away is now not enough. Torbay reckon they are £10m short.
Money is also affecting platform 2 extension at St David's, new entrance at Newton Abbot, and lifts at Torquay.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=21542.15

Entirely happy for admins to move it onto this thread, it would make sense.

Too much history to be lost in the Devon Metro thread.

No easy answer to satisfy all - not a merge nor a shift.  It might be sensible to comment in BOTH threads with a note in one of the directing readers of one or other thread across.

Just to clarify, I meant I was okay with moving my post on Edginswell Station from the Devon Metro to the Edginswell thread.... I just didn't spot it in time.  On reflection though, perhaps a mention on both threads may have been a good idea.