Peninsula Rail Task Force improvement plans

[whole diary]

[trainbuff]

Moderators please feel free to move this thread as I was not sure where to place it. PRTF covers a large area now including the Yeovil line as far as Salisbury.

They have produced an interim report called 'On Track', outlining potential work in preparation for a submission to Government in 2016. It is examining many improvements including a Dawlish Avoiding Line, Northern Route via Okehampton, passing loop(s) on the Yeovil Line and much else. It is 40 pages long and can be found here:-

https://peninsularailtaskforce.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/prtf-final-draft-for-consultation.pdf

Well worth a read in tandem with the Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy.

[JayMac]

One two many letter 'r' in thread title. I know sum us wesscundry folk do frown on grockles and emmets, but we'em not all insular. 

[trainbuff]

Ma 'pologies fur me accent. Tis wat apens wen a 'Janner' types too quickly! Lol. 

[Chris from Nailsea]

One two many letter 'r' in thread title.

Having worked out what I think bignosemac meant, I've amended the title in the original post - but left the spelling unchanged in subsequent posts, purely for context. 

[paul7575]

Surely they've missed the boat though?  The Great Western 'Route Study' (that's replaced the RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy)) has just been published.  That's how NR^» (Network Rail - home page) see the future up to 2043, allegedly. 

What is it that the PRTF are hoping to have an input to?

Paul

[stuving]

Of course, grammatically, "Pensisular" would be correct. It's an adjective, while "Pensisula" is a noun being used as an adjective. At least, that would have been the case in the past - as in the "Peninsular Steam Navigation Company" (and later the "Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company").

These days people seem happy to use the noun even when the adjective exists, and especially so if it is a name. Changing the form of a name seems to worry people, and not only to make an adjective. Plurals involving more than just adding "s" are getting rare to - remember "Germanys"?

[ChrisB]

The Route Study will be updated again within the decade (or two Control Periods to be more precise, I think), so things can change before 2043 is reached

[trainbuff]

Surely they've missed the boat though?  The Great Western 'Route Study' (that's replaced the RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy)) has just been published.  That's how NR^» (Network Rail - home page) see the future up to 2043, allegedly. 

What is it that the PRTF are hoping to have an input to?

Paul

This is the preamble to a 20 year program ask for investment into the railways of the Peninsula and I apologise, I did mean the Great Western Route Study that was mentioned in a post recently.

In June 2016 the full report will ask Government for funding over several control periods to improve services to the far South West. In some ways certain people may say, a bigger achievement in getting Government (of any political persuasion) to realise, that the South West does not begin and end at Bristol!

We can feel very far away here.

Please note that grammatically some words above can be spelt differently. So for completeness and not wishing to offend, alternatives can be seen below, though if I have missed any please feel free to add them! 

Program can be programme
Peninsula can be Peninsular depending on use as previously commented
Apologise and realise can be spelt with a 'z' rather than 's' if one is inclined to American or Canadian English

[JayMac]

Of course, grammatically, "Pensisular" would be correct.

You shure?

[stuving]

Of course, grammatically, "Pensisular" would be correct.

You shure?

Yes! Typographically very challenged, but grammatically fine.

[JayMac]

The link in the OP^▸ (Original Poster / topic starter) was to the final draft of the Interim report.

The actual report has now been published. It can be downloaded via the following link:

http://peninsularailtaskforce.co.uk/prtf-on-track-2/

[Red Squirrel]

Interesting to see that DAL, which up to now has always been the Dawlish Avoiding Line as far as I can remember, is referred to in this report as the 'Dawlish Additional Line' (p29) or the 'Dawlish Alternative Line' (p32). Good. Shame they can't be consistent (it looks more professional which breeds confidence) but either way it should now be abundantly it clear to those who have refused to understand it thus far that any plans for the LSWR^▸ (London South Western Railway) route would supplement, not replace, the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) route.

In terms:

Complementary to that work, the PRTF is assessing the
wider economic benefits of an additional inland route to
supplement the coastal route. These benefits will bring
journey time improvements, reduced disruption, increased
capacity (allowing a higher frequency of local stopping
services), GVA uplift through improved connectivity;
environmental benefits and freight opportunities, reflecting
Network Rail^s Western Route Study which highlights that
additional line capacity may well be needed.

My italics. Probably won't stop twopenny-halfpenny local politicians trying to bang a wedge in for 'divide and rule' purposes, though.

[PhilWakely]

Makes a very interesting read. There was extensive coverage on BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Spotlight South West

I agree with absolutely everything said in the document, but my cynical self suggests that few of their recommendations will see the light of day in our lifetime......
- lower fares;
- better reliability
- faster journeys (100mph average speed Paddington-Plymouth)
- electrification;
- dawlish avoiding line
- okehampton route reopened
- double track east of exeter

[ChrisB]

I thought the PRTF was a pressure group formed by local authorities & this report is effectively a wish list to put said pressure on central Government to continue improvements in the SW. No?

[PhilWakely]

I thought the PRTF was a pressure group formed by local authorities & this report is effectively a wish list to put said pressure on central Government to continue improvements in the SW. No?

Yes!