Campaign for Tavistock reopening

[whole diary]

[smokey]

Something else about PPM^‡(resolve), on their web site they quote how far can 50 people go on 1 gallon of Fuel and quote Diesel Railcar 2 miles and PPM 15 miles,

Question is, is that a 1, 2, 3 or even 4 car Railcar, in the case of it being a 4 car railcar then 400 people can go 2 miles on a gallon of fuel, where as PPM would move 400 people only 1.875 miles!!!

If it's based on a 2 car Rail car then 200 people can go 2 miles on a gallon of fuel where as PPM can manage 3.75 miles, it's amazing what can be done with figures!
Not such a Rosey concept me thinks.

[Lee]

Tavistock MUST happen, as for buildings in the Way, that didn't stop the NET (Nottingham Trams)
and a Cost of ^6m that's loose change to Mr A Darling.

There's B***** All wrong with MELDON viaduct, the condition of the Viaduct was used as an EXCUSE to close the Line, same was tired with Ribblehead, and that was only Singled as a token to justify the early closure scam.

The two problems mentioned above would not stop Bere Alston-Tavistock reopening. I gave them as examples of why reopening through to Okehampton would be more difficult.

I think you will find that the line over the viaduct was retained as a head shunt for Meldon Quarry traffic, and the rails werent actually lifted until 1990.

When deciding on plans to build the cyclepath over the viaduct, it was considered that (source - Dartmoor Railway) :

the viaduct was structurally stable as it was no longer required to carry rail traffic, and the original cast and wrought iron components were not significantly affected by corrosion.  The relatively recent beams supporting the concrete deck, however, as well as other mild steel strengthening works, were in poor condition.  There were also severe problems with rot in the timber deck.

During the summer of 1996, Carl Bro Group supervised the ^650,000 contract funded by CAMAS Aggregates and British Rail Property Board for the refurbishment of the viaduct.  The works included a new treated softwood deck and handrails (although the original standards remain), repainting, steel work repairs, repairs to the masonry in the abutments, and protection of the piers form scour by the river.  The viaduct will now be incorporated into a footpath and cycle way which gives access to Dartmoor, affording visitors spectacular views of this historic structure.

The BIG thing about going back to TAVISTOCK that everybody seems to be missing is that Bere Alston-Tavistock is a Former DOUBLE TRACK MAIN LINE so bags of room for Both Rail and almost unused Cycle Trail.

This is proven by the section from Meldon Quarry to Okehampton where the railway and cycle path already run side by side.

Lets be clear on one thing - I am NOT trying to put the mockers on this. I fully support (and would love to see) Tavistock line reopening.

I am merely pointing out some of the problems that lie ahead, one of which could be avoided if a reopening campaign is formed quickly, and worked on a joint plan with Sustrans before they decide to go it alone.

[vacman]

I think the reopening of Tavvy-Okehampton should be put on the back burner, the main thing is to get Bere Alston-Tavvy reopened which would be relatively simple, and at ^10m isn't massive money today, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) make that in a week!

[Lee]

I think the reopening of Tavvy-Okehampton should be put on the back burner, the main thing is to get Bere Alston-Tavvy reopened which would be relatively simple, and at ^10m isn't massive money today, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) make that in a week!

Totally agree. My main point is that you will have to move quickly to ensure that both the railway and cyclepath are incorporated in the same plan at the same time.

[Btline]

If you want to do a petition. Do one on the number 10 website (like I did with the Cotswold Line redoubling campaign).

I do not think that just reopening to Tav. is worth it (ie, I can't see it getting consent). Surely the whole route would be better value for money, in terms of construction/labour costs, amount of traffic generated (North Devon), and the possibility for a "climate change proof" line to the West Country.

Why not stick a 153 on the Guin-Bere line? I always feel that putting a "bus" on a branch is almost signifying its closure (they have given up on it)!

Sorry, a spare 153 should be used in Bristol/Trans Wilts!

NB I fully support the Tav. reopening by the way!!!!!!!!

[smokey]

dewarw, I glad you have put the Beeching 2 map up, I've had arguements in the Past saying that IT was planned to finish the Railway at Exeter St David's with no rails west there of.

[Lee]

dewarw, I glad you have put the Beeching 2 map up, I've had arguements in the Past saying that IT was planned to finish the Railway at Exeter St David's with no rails west there of.

Here is a map that gives an indication of what has already been lost (link below.)
http://www.systemed.net/atlas/

[vacman]

Theres one mistake, it shows the fowey branch as being totally closed, it's still open to clay traffic, 2 trains a day I believe??

[Btline]

What about new services to Fowey?

I am glad you like the map. Beeching must have been very stupid and short sighted, if he thought that a busy country like the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) could survive on a rail network like that! London to Plymouth via Bristol only! ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) closed north of Newcastle?

It is interesting to note, however, that the Woodhead route (Sheff. to Manch.) is shown as being kept open.

I suppose this was due to the electrification...

[vacman]

If you want to do a petition. Do one on the number 10 website (like I did with the Cotswold Line redoubling campaign).

I do not think that just reopening to Tav. is worth it (ie, I can't see it getting consent). Surely the whole route would be better value for money, in terms of construction/labour costs, amount of traffic generated (North Devon), and the possibility for a "climate change proof" line to the West Country.

Why not stick a 153 on the Guin-Bere line? I always feel that putting a "bus" on a branch is almost signifying its closure (they have given up on it)!

Sorry, a spare 153 should be used in Bristol/Trans Wilts!

NB I fully support the Tav. reopening by the way!!!!!!!!

The line to Tavvy from Bere alston would be the best thing to do as there are no complications with buildings on the line/missing bridges etc, between tavvy and Okehampton there aren't many town's villiages that would generate much traffic, At Tavvy it's self the old station is now offices and the track bed has been built on, the proposed "new" station was earmarked to be built on the edge of the town with a bus link to the town centre as the track bed has been built on near the old station. Also, I doubt a 153 would be adequate, the morning Gunnislake services are usually a 150 full, a town the size of Tavvy with it's dire roads to Plymouth would probably generate a large amount of traffic!

[Btline]

If you want to do a petition. Do one on the number 10 website (like I did with the Cotswold Line redoubling campaign).

I do not think that just reopening to Tav. is worth it (ie, I can't see it getting consent). Surely the whole route would be better value for money, in terms of construction/labour costs, amount of traffic generated (North Devon), and the possibility for a "climate change proof" line to the West Country.

Why not stick a 153 on the Guin-Bere line? I always feel that putting a "bus" on a branch is almost signifying its closure (they have given up on it)!

Sorry, a spare 153 should be used in Bristol/Trans Wilts!

NB I fully support the Tav. reopening by the way!!!!!!!!

The line to Tavvy from Bere alston would be the best thing to do as there are no complications with buildings on the line/missing bridges etc, between tavvy and Okehampton there aren't many town's villiages that would generate much traffic, At Tavvy it's self the old station is now offices and the track bed has been built on, the proposed "new" station was earmarked to be built on the edge of the town with a bus link to the town centre as the track bed has been built on near the old station. Also, I doubt a 153 would be adequate, the morning Gunnislake services are usually a 150 full, a town the size of Tavvy with it's dire roads to Plymouth would probably generate a large amount of traffic!

No, I meant a 153 on the branch form Bere to Guinn, while a 150 goes to Tav.

Why did they build on the track-bed? How incompetent are the council? General rule: never build on trackbeds, esp if your town is congested!!!!!

[smokey]

Just north of Bere Alston is the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) vandalism, to prevent reopennings it seemed to be BR policy to take out a Bridge and between Bere Alston and Tavistock there is One (under?) bridge missing.

But the Estimated ^6-10million includes replacing this bridge.

On the Old GW^▸ (Great Western) Plymouth-Tavistock line they took out the Walkham Viaduct.

On the Truro-Newquay line bridge out at Blackwater.

Gwinear Road-Helston, bridge gone near Praze, more followed.

Par-Fowey 999 lease on turning tunnel (Cornwall longest) into a road.

Lostwithiel-Fowey track bed lost under enlarged docks.

Barnstaple-Ilfracombe Bridge out between Barnstaple Junc and Town.

Shanklin-Ventnor (IoW) water main  placed under trackbed.

[vacman]

the two bridges missing on the Helston branch are only girder bridges, and the abutments are still there, which are the main structural part of the bridge, to replace one is relatively cheap and simple, also, one of the bridges at Praze was removed because it was VERY low, i.e. only about 8ft!

[Lee]

It is interesting to note, however, that the Woodhead route (Sheff. to Manch.) is shown as being kept open.

I suppose this was due to the electrification...

Woodhead is very much a live issue (link below.)
http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/save_the_woodhead_tunnel

[swlines]

As I understand it, there are signalling issues with PPM^‡(resolve) vehicles sharing lines with conventional trains, as they would have to running into Plymouth.

Not so much signalling issues, but PPMs require a possession to operate in normal service AFAIK^▸ (as far as I know) due to their very light weight and the consequences that could occur with whamming into say, a HST^▸ (High Speed Train)...

Tom