Active rail campaigns across the area we cover

[whole diary]

[Red Squirrel]

Politics.

That's the only issue.

It's taken 20 years for the Portishead line to progress from its first feasibility report to the point where Network Rail agrees that it's feasible. This is so far beyond ludicrous, it can only be policy.

Off topic, but lest we forget...

Crossrail was first proposed in 1946

Well that rather touches a nerve. I can see that 80 years (I think it was first mooted in 1941) is rather a long gestation period. To be fair, though, can we really compare an £18BN project involving 24 trains per hour running through a 21km tunnel under the capital city, with what is essentially a new set of points and a couple of sheets of wet and dry?

[CyclingSid]

Will all this be "at risk" with this administration's need to repay its borrowed votes up North. With talk of changing the Treasury funding rules are we in new territory?

[grahame]

Will all this be "at risk" with this administration's need to repay its borrowed votes up North. With talk of changing the Treasury funding rules are we in new territory?

Probably yes, new territory.

I neglected to note the link in my previous post ... it's at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50925321

Headeline reads "oh dear" for the South West ...

The Treasury is reportedly planning to rewrite rules governing public spending in a move that may benefit areas in the Midlands and North of England.

... but then perhaps there's good news for the South West ...

The changes, reported by the Times, would make it easier for cash to be allocated to projects outside of London and the South East.

It goes on

Current rules require government to allocate cash to projects that promise the biggest economic benefits.

Those projects tend to have most impact in areas with more people and businesses.

But under the new plans, reported on Friday, investment decisions would be made with a focus on reducing inequality between northern and southern England, rather than promoting overall economic growth across the country.

It will affect decisions made about projects ranging from rail improvements to investment in scientific research.

The South West seems gloriously unmentioned in the article. Whether it's good or bad news for us is clear and I get the feeling that we're the forgotten region - from the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) at least.

[Rhydgaled]

... in truth wouldn't a bus do the job equally as well and for a fraction of the cost?

There is a simple answer to that question, which applies in all circumstances: No.

Comparing a train service to a bus service is like comparing an apple with a washing machine. Both are useful, and both have their place, but they belong to different categories.

In many respects a bus would not, could not, do the job of a medium-long distance services as well as a train. However, there are cases where the train would be slower than the bus (even though the train would still be better than the bus in other respects). Even on routes where the train is faster than a bus, the benifits of the train might not be sufficient to justify the much higher costs of trains versus buses.

For example, the railway between Carmarthen and Pembroke Dock takes a rather slow route via Tenby compared to the trunk road which has bypassed every major settlement on the route. As a result a non-stop bus would likely be faster than the train, even if the train only stopped at Tenby and Whitland.

More importantly, a bus is almost never faster than a car journey. A train can be, but is not always. The Carmarthen-Aberystwyth line is an example of this, if it is built but still slower than the car, all the train would do is abstract revenue from the bus service. The benifits of reinstating that particular railway are therefore tiny unless the linespeed can be improved enough to attract modal shift away from car.

[ellendune]

Bad new for Devizes from Paul Clifton on Twitter

[Mark A]

If only Westbury had been built with four platforms...

Mark

[WSW Frome]

However, re-opened stations for Wellington and perhaps, Cullompton still seem to be "proceeding."

[grahame]

More at https://news.railbusinessdaily.com/findings-of-devizes-station-feasibility-study-released-today/

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/devizes

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Devizes-Gateway-Interim-Feasibility-Study.pdf

A preferred site for the station has been identified and plans drawn up which meet key stakeholder requirements. Cost advice is that the station could be delivered for circa £52.2m to £65.7m, including Westbury platform 0 (Option 1).

Economic analysis results show Poor Value for Money (VfM) for all the timetable options considered when medium COVID passenger demand recovery is assumed. This reflects the findings of the initial SOBC, with the combined operating costs and capital costs over the appraisal period exceeding the revenues and benefits in present value terms.

[RichardB]

However, re-opened stations for Wellington and perhaps, Cullompton still seem to be "proceeding."

Yes, plans for Wellington and Cullompton stations are progressing.  Here's an update re Cullompton from January.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/cullompton-railway-station-would-give-8075450