Ah, Bemmy - understood, and I agree.

Bemmy. With respect, my comment which you remarked upon was about the existing Gunnislake line, rather than the non-existant Tavistock line. We seem to have our points crossed (maybe a catch point ha ha - sorry terrible).

A few other thoughts on the Tavistock reopening idea.

1. The councillors citing the Derriford requirement for commuters (which is a negative, given that the railway could not go anywhere near) are forgetting all the positive benefits of the line reopening, which are:-

     a) Being attached to the National & International Railway Network, hence those of
        us who live in the area but are not as insular as the councillors would be able to
        travel anywhere with 'the car' going no further than the Station Car Park.
 
     b) For those people who work at the new shopping mall and the increasingly busy
         University, it would be fine, as these are a very short walk from the station.

     c) For all the tourists from all over Britain and beyond who wish to visit Tavistock
         and Dartmoor (knowing Tavistock was recently 'Market Town of the Year') the
         ability to travel the whole way by rail would be a major boost.

     d) For all those young people who are away at university or who work 'up country'
         and want to visit family at weekends and holidays, this would be a major
         improvement.
     
     e) The Luddites who fail to see the benefits of reconnecting Tavistock to the
         Network also seem to underestimate the great relief of congestion that would
         benefit the quality of life that Tavistock values. Traffic has become a major
         problem in Tavistock in recent years - not the quiet sleepy place it was when I
         first worked there in 1977. 

     f)  I wonder if Tavistock councillors realise the huge negative impact of travelling by
         rail from (say) London on a comfortable, warm HST^▸ (High Speed Train) with catering facilities, only
         to have to use an incredibly slow and cramped bus service to Tavistock on a dark
         wet night, or to have to fork out for an incredibly expensive taxi, or to have a
         family member or friend drive a round 30 miles to pick one up. No wonder
         friends who come down from London or Brighton invariably come by car. Now - is
         that environmentally desirable?

     g) Perhaps in answer to the Derriford Dilemma, if First (who run the buses as well as
         the trains in the area) were to lay on a shuttle bus service out to the Derriford
         area from Plymouth Station (the route mostly includes bus lanes) which actually
         co-ordinated with the trains, then problem solved.   

     h) Finally - apropos the existing service to Gunnislake - would it not be possible for
         FGW^▸ (First Great Western) to operate one extra late service on Friday evenings (only) for people
         coming down for weekends: when I worked in London and liked to do just this,
         there was never a train to Gunnislake to meet the train at Plymouth - too late -
         so one had to take a taxi or get a lift. It rather spoilt the point of using the train.
         Likewise, one later train on a Sunday, to arrive in Plymouth in time for the last
         direct Paddington service would be useful too. If there is currently little or no
         demand, it is almost entirely due to the fact that at the moment it is much more
         convenient to do the whole journey by car.

     ANY VIEWS?   
         

Some very interesting responses - thanks everyone. It rather looks on the balance of argument that 'Open Access' is preferable to franchise domination of certain areas.

I've seen trains in Brighton station of four different franchises at one time. Perhaps some kind soul from First would explain what issue they have with SWT^▸ (South West Trains) operating beyond Exeter (apart from paths - or is that the main issue?).

It would be a vote-winner in this increasingly environmentally conscious age (note: young people especially interested) for the Government to invest in increasing rail capacity rather than supressing demand - but I have read that this appears to be the government's policy from other sources. Is this simply a daft government policy, or just a daft government (....draw your own conclusions please!!!)

Yes, 'Plymothian' is quite right - there is a track - one might call it a long siding - stretching right through the Marsh Barton area almost to Sainsbury's. The track bed beyond the existing track to Sainsbury's (just a couple of hundred yards) is still unimpeded so in theory one could end the line there, hence having passengers shopping there on foot instead of by car (ha ha - will wonders never cease?) and perhaps more plausibly, deliveries by rail to Sainsbury's and other commercial customers. At least there would be no need to build a station on or even near the main line. 

I think this line was until recently for the MAF site which has now disappeared. Am I right?

Many years ago there was a regular service from Brighton to Plymouth and vice versa. Until Brighton sheds closed, it was a steam-hauled affair operated with 'West Country' and 'Battle of Britain' class Bulleid pacifics. This service was truncated to finish at Exeter following the closure of the Southern route to Plymouth via Okehampton, but continued in that format for some years, usually hauled by a Class 33 after steam bowed out of the service in 1967.

I know a number of people who live in West Devon but need to travel to Brighton frequently, apart from Service personnel from the Royal Navy and Royal Marines who have to cross between Portsmouth and Plymouth. The services offered at present on the railway system are slow and meandering, involving at least one change and usually two or three. The route takes one often via Clapham Junction which of course makes the journey much longer than one routed along the south coast (Plymouth/Exeter/Salis bury/Southampton/Brighton) which is now almost impossible because British Rail so foolishly and short-sightedly singled the Southern main line west of Salisbury and demands for paths are so intensive now.

Perhaps with the instatement of a 'dynamic' passing loop at Axminster (due to happen soon???) it may just be possible to bring back this lamented service, though owing to SW Trains rather counter-productive deal with NR^» (Network Rail - home page), it would presumably have to be operated by First or Virgin.

It would be very interesting to hear the views of other FGWCS users.

Thank you very much, Lee Fletcher!

Continuation re Tavistock.

'Onthecushions' quotes the huge and unnecessary costs involved in the Wealden scheme - might I suggest it is not so much NR^» (Network Rail - home page) (who would doubtless prefer to keep costs down) but the insidious European Commission? (Perhaps I am wrong).
   Anyway, back to the Tavistock line. Well, of course when it closed originally it should have been 'mothballed' - I think with the steep rise in Tavistock's population in the '80s and '90s, which still continues, the line could easily have reopened 10 years ago, but I have to say the local councillors and others do nothing but talk. In the meantime, every day there is a continuous and exceptionally wasteful procession of traffic heading to and from Plymouth, as there is no other practical means of transport (the bus journey is inexorably slow).    
    I am quite sure a reinstated line for Tavistock would get plenty of use, especially if there were incentives such as comfortable coaches and perhaps a breakfast car (now that would be popular). Given a maximised track layout at Bere Alston, the suggested Gunnislake shuttle could terminate on one side, while there could be a passing loop for the 'main' line, allowing a doubled up service for peak times. I think there is enough room at Bere Alston for the shuttle to be accorded a servicing facility.
    The objection within Tavistock, of course, is the heavy tag of extra housing involved in the reinstatement scheme, but I am quite sure there are other sources of funding possible. Perhaps the Councillors and others should take a look at the amazing Welsh Highland Railway, or the Ebbw vale reinstatement, to get a broader view. With the housing market the way it is, the new housing/new railway scheme could end up as a damp squib anyway. 
    Fundamentally, it needs someone to take charge with a bit of drive and initiative.
 
 

    Very interesting to read all the comments on Tavistock reopening. I live in Gunnislake (!) and use the train sometimes (usually good unless the driver forgets to turn up) but I work in Tavistock, so I am very interested in the idea of the short length of track from Bere Alston to Tavistock being reinstated. The cost estimate sounds exhorbitant, but look at any transport scheme today and it is always expensive. If there were to be a public/private partnership where a volunteer scheme to help at least to do the groundwork was an option, it could save ^, but there would have to be some sort of reward for the volunteers, like discount fares.
    For those who have not walked the disused line, it is pretty overgrown and would need some robust preparation - nothing insurmountable though. The tunnel (Shillamill) is in remarkably good condition considering it is 40 years since the line closed, and certainly did not leak when I last walked through it. It still has ballast and a drainage system inside it. The impressive viaduct to the north of the tunnel is also very fine, but will need some repointing and the reinstatement of dressed stonework which has fallen from the parapet; reinstating the use of the viaduct will mean at least some use of scaffolding, which of course is quite expensive.