Borders Railway - Now Open

[route:oxford]

Thanks, very strange decision. Surely it made sense to keep the 'express' route and build the Dolphinton branch ( a minor rural branch ) around it.

Perhaps the majority of services split/joined at Carstairs and with the opening of the branch line the opportunity was taken to review the layout.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Perhaps the majority of services split/joined at Carstairs and with the opening of the branch line the opportunity was taken to review the layout.

Even if not, Carstairs was a busy interchange for passengers and parcels, so I guess it would not have been a popular move for many services to bypass it.

However:

Indeed, it would also be an opportunity to remodel the Carstairs area and create a much more straightforward and useful track layout too, . . . .

I don't think anyone could argue that the current track arrangements around Carstairs are easy to understand!

Exactly this. It's an operational mess, with high speed trains passing round a tight curve at 15mph on a reverse cant through 2 neutral sections and crossing 2 facing lines.
What a mess it's become. (Just as this thread has wandered away from the Borders Railway!).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What a mess it's become. (Just as this thread has wandered away from the Borders Railway!).

It has not really "wandered away" from the idea of this thread. What happened was people were looking at a continuation onwards of this line from Tweedbank sometime in the future. There were two differing thoughts on this matter. Continuation only as far as Hawick and a far more ambitious suggestion of full line continuation to Carlisle, which then gives the raison d'etre for Carstairs and its junctions as a topic of discussion for the full line route.

 

[PaulLothian]

Today's Scotsman on-line:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/borders-railway-start-date-delayed-by-three-months-1-2824805

PASSENGERS are not now expected to start using the Borders Railway until September 2015 - three months later than previously thought.


Network Rail, which is building the Edinburgh-Tweedbank line, has confirmed the date, explaining that training for ScotRail train drivers on the 30-mile route will be required after construction is completed in June 2015.

David Simpson, the firm’s Scotland route managing director, told The Scotsman last November that even finishing the work by that date was “challenging”.

Major work is due to start next month on the scheme, which has suffered a series of delays, while the cost has soared to £350 million.

The Scottish Government’s Transport Scotland agency, which is in charge of the project, still hopes “to have the railway in place” by the end of 2014.

David Spaven, author of Waverley Route: The Life, Death and Rebirth of the Borders Railway, said: “Network Rail has been put under undue pressure by Transport Scotland to deliver the project in super-fast time, for political reasons.

“But transforming 30½ miles of abandoned line of route, 121 bridges and two tunnels into a fast, safe and sustainable transport link is a very substantial engineering task - in fact the longest rail re-opening project in modern British history.

“The key point is that the Borders Railway is coming, and late summer 2015 looks like a reasonable and robust target for the start of train services.”

 

[tbtc]

I'm a bit confused by the idea that nobody had previously considered the need for a period of staff training, but then (as a Scot) I'm confused by the idea of September being "late Summer" in Scotland - it's usually all over after T-In-The-Park

 

[tomatwark]

Once again the Scottish Government promise a date without listening to the professionals.

It is all ready starting to sound like the Edinburgh Trams again.

I hope they do get this open, as it helps people living on the A7 corridor, but will probably not use it except to try when it opens.

The part of the borders I live in is 30 miles from Tweedbank, and by the time I had driven there I would be 3/4 of the way to Edinburgh, so for the mid borders it is a bit of a white elephant.

If they reopened Reston station on the ECML I would use that however as I have to go in the wrong direction to get to Berwick.

As for the line opening further south I can't see how they can get past Melrose without knocking a chunk of the old town down to redirect the bypass with sits on the old formation.

Tom

 

[tbtc]

The part of the borders I live in is 30 miles from Tweedbank, and by the time I had driven there I would be 3/4 of the way to Edinburgh, so for the mid borders it is a bit of a white elephant

This is why I wish they'd stop referring to it as the "Borders" railway - it's no use for Peebles/ Coldstream etc

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If they reopened Reston station on the ECML I would use that however as I have to go in the wrong direction to get to Berwick.

John Lamont, MSP, was in favour of the reopening of Reston station, which at one time had a junctional link from the ECML with the Berwickshire Railway which saw rail traffic down to St Boswells then onwards via the Waverley line. However flooding was a problem on the southern reaches of the branch line.

 

[PaulLothian]

More from the Scotsman
http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/borders-rail-link-could-cut-530-000-road-trips-1-2820819

Published on Tuesday 5 March 2013 12:00

THE new Borders rail line is set to cut car journey numbers by more than half-a-million every year, according to a new report.

The latest analysis of the business case for the £300 million project to reopen the Waverley route from Edinburgh to Tweedbank, near Galashiels, calculated the rail link will boost tourism and cut road accidents due to fewer car journeys.

In all, it was estimated the value of the new line’s benefits would be 30 per cent more than the cost of the venture.

The study said that despite delays in housebuilding projects along the route, the opportunity to commute by train to Edinburgh will increase the appeal of living in the Borders and Midlothian and ease pressure on the Capital.

The report said the project was still on course to meet its objectives of improving access between the Scottish Borders, Midlothian and Edinburgh, fostering social inclusion, preventing population decline in the Borders and encouraging people to switch from cars to public transport.

It said: “The opening of the railway is forecast to reduce the number of annual car trips along the route approximately by 530,000.”

The lower traffic level on the roads is expected to prevent approximately 360 accidents over the next 60 years, saving around £4.6m.

The report said the railway would also benefit the 21 per cent of the population in the Borders who do not have a car.

The Borders and Midlothian together comprise a population of nearly 200,000 without direct access to a railway, in contrast to the Highlands, with a population of 220,000, which has 58 stations.

The report estimated the Borders rail link will see 647,136 return journeys on the 35-mile route in its first year of operation, 2015. That figure is lower than previous estimates, but the report said a development of 4000 houses at Shawfair had stalled due to the recession, with work only due to begin later this year at the earliest, removing around 60,000 journeys from the projections for the first five years.

Rail consultant and author David Spaven, who has long campaigned for the reopening of a Borders rail route, said the projections were probably an underestimate of likely rail traveller numbers.

He said: “There has been a tendency to be over pessimistic about the number of passengers who will use the new railway and we know from experience that many rail reopening schemes have done enormously better than forecast.

“Because of the limits of modelling, it probably doesn’t pick up on what the railway can do in terms of tourism – with the massive number of tourists in Edinburgh looking for other things to do, there is scope for attracting them to Sir Walter Scott country – Tweedbank is just a mile from Abbotsford. I doubt whether that has been factored in.”

Mr Spaven also said it was easy to overlook the benefits which the project would bring to Midlothian.

“When you look at the level of development already happening and planned to happen in Midlothian, it is putting enormous pressure on the roads into and within Edinburgh. Having a train service every half hour from Gorebridge, Newtongrange, Eskbank and Shawfair will offer a civilised alternative to congested roads.”

A Transport Scotland spokesman said: “We are delivering a railway for the people of the Borders for the first time in over 40 years.

“It will create up to 400 jobs during construction and will also help the population of Midlothian and the Scottish Borders, who are less well represented in the higher-earning professions, to gain access to employment in sectors with higher average wages helping to increase social mobility with the undoubted benefits that will bring for both the local and wider Scottish economy.”

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Some of the comments on this article on the Scotsman website I find quite puzzling. I can understand criticism of the delays, the ill-fated competitive tendering process and so on, but quite why there should be such virulent opposition to the reopening itself is a mystery to me.

 

[cle]

If it is popular, is there any scope for increasing frequencies and/or extending either towards Hawick through Melrose, or a spur to Selkirk which with a population of 5-6k might justify something as a railhead? Not sure.

Hawick is the bigger settlement, and passing Melrose and St Boswells adds to the case and catchment. But a new line from Selkirk to Hawick would be more direct and serve more people.

 

[joeykins82]

It's the "I won't personally benefit and therefore I don't want to see any of my tax money go near it and no I'm not interested in a discussion about the wider benefits or implications" brigade

 

[fegguk]

Despite the efforts of the doubters the project is now well underway as a trip along the A7 now clearly shows it is no longer a dismantled railway but is one undergoing reconstruction.

Vegetation has been cleared and the route of the line is beginning to look like a building site. Mine remediation works are ongoing and public access to foot paths alone the line towards the Northern end have been closed. Major excavation and other works will start at the end of April together with work to temporarily divert the city bypass.

We will now just need to wait a few years to see whether it succeeds or fails in its objectives. Then those who have had their opinions proven will be able to say I told you so. I for one will be wishing it every success. Extension of the line will only happen if that’s the case.

People in the Borders are beginning to believe the railway will be completed and starting to understand how it might benefit them, support for the project is increasing as a result, though it won’t serve or please everybody.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Some of the comments on this article on the Scotsman website I find quite puzzling. I can understand criticism of the delays, the ill-fated competitive tendering process and so on, but quite why there should be such virulent opposition to the reopening itself is a mystery to me.

I think that the project itself has generally been well received on this thread. Where reservations have been voiced concerns the onward line connection to Hawick and to the even longer connection through to Carlisle.

 

[railjock]

I think the project would be better if they were to confirm that trains would run beyond Waverley to Haymarket, South Gyle and Gogar interhange. That would at least allow the Edinburgh Crossrail service to still exist.

 

[John07]

Some of the comments on this article on the Scotsman website I find quite puzzling. I can understand criticism of the delays, the ill-fated competitive tendering process and so on, but quite why there should be such virulent opposition to the reopening itself is a mystery to me.

The Scotsman comments attract a range of petrolheads and mental defectives. They will oppose anything to do with public transport. They were vitriolic about the dinburgh Tram project even before it got into trouble. I wouldn't take much account of such comments.

 

[tbtc]

I think the project would be better if they were to confirm that trains would run beyond Waverley to Haymarket, South Gyle and Gogar interhange. That would at least allow the Edinburgh Crossrail service to still exist.

What's the plan? To terminate the Borders services at Waverley? And the Fife Circle services that currently run through to Newcraighall would terminate at Waverley too?

 

[railjock]

What's the plan? To terminate the Borders services at Waverley? And the Fife Circle services that currently run through to Newcraighall would terminate at Waverley too?

Not totally clear. All of the official publications refer to travelling to Waverley. To extend to the fife circle, as the current cross-rail service from Newcraighall does, could cause problems due to knock on effects of any delays I imagine.

 

[tbtc]

Not totally clear. All of the official publications refer to travelling to Waverley. To extend to the fife circle, as the current cross-rail service from Newcraighall does, could cause problems due to knock on effects of any delays I imagine.

Good point - now that there's no stand alone Bathgates (post electrification etc), there's no short distance DMUs from the Haymarket direction that you could run the "Borders" service through to (without causing potential for the disruption that you mention).

 

[lancastrian]

This is why I wish they'd stop referring to it as the "Borders" railway - it's no use for Peebles/ Coldstream etc

Good point!

 

[railjock]

This is why I wish they'd stop referring to it as the "Borders" railway - it's no use for Peebles/ Coldstream etc

Most of the passengers will be from Midlothian I imagine anyway so Borders Railway is a bit of a misnomer. No idea why they couldn't just call it the Waverley line.

 

[Railsigns]

Good point!

Is it?

The West Highland Line doesn't serve every part of the West Highlands;
The West Coast Main Line doesn't serve the whole of the west coast;
British Rail didn't serve the whole of Britain;
Arriva Trains Wales doesn't serve every part of Wales;
Northern Ireland Railways doesn't serve every part of Northern Ireland,

and so on. So why should the Borders Railway be expected to serve every part of the Borders region to be worthy of the name?

 

[martinsh]

The West Coast Main Line doesn't serve the whole of the west coast;

In fact the WCML doesn't serve ANY of the west coast, except a very small bit just north of Lancaster !

 

[Railsigns]

In fact the WCML doesn't serve ANY of the west coast, except a very small bit just north of Lancaster !

It doesn't even serve that bit - it just passes through.

 

[tbtc]

Most of the passengers will be from Midlothian I imagine anyway so Borders Railway is a bit of a misnomer. No idea why they couldn't just call it the Waverley line.

I reckon the money will be in the Dalkeith area - the Gala end of the route should be a lot quieter, but that's the easier bit to sell to the politicians/ media

Is it?

The West Highland Line doesn't serve every part of the West Highlands;
The West Coast Main Line doesn't serve the whole of the west coast;
British Rail didn't serve the whole of Britain;
Arriva Trains Wales doesn't serve every part of Wales;
Northern Ireland Railways doesn't serve every part of Northern Ireland,

and so on. So why should the Borders Railway be expected to serve every part of the Borders region to be worthy of the name?

The way that the line is presented, it suggests that its going to benefit "the Borders" - see various press releases about "reintroducing trains to the Borders", "reconnecting the Borders" etc etc.

 

[Liam]

Good point - now that there's no stand alone Bathgates (post electrification etc), there's no short distance DMUs from the Haymarket direction that you could run the "Borders" service through to (without causing potential for the disruption that you mention).

Of course soon after the Borders line opens the only non electrified lines out from Edinburgh will be towards the Forth Bridge and Borders. (assuming no delays of course.......)

 

[Railsigns]

The way that the line is presented, it suggests that its going to benefit "the Borders" - see various press releases about "reintroducing trains to the Borders", "reconnecting the Borders" etc etc.

Sounds reasonable enough to me. Personally, I get more annoyed at the dishonest naming of road schemes, such as the "Replacement Forth Crossing" that will in reality be an Additional Forth Crossing, and referring to the M74 Extension as "The Missing Link" when the motorways that it links were already linked before it was built.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Much as this annoys us all, it seems to be the case with much media reporting of all types to use these types of "generalisations" which will go over the heads of the majority of the readership.

It is only when the keen eyes of the RailUK forums membership see them that this slovenly reporting is seen for exactly what it is......:roll:

 

[YorkshireBear]

Sounds reasonable enough to me. Personally, I get more annoyed at the dishonest naming of road schemes, such as the "Replacement Forth Crossing" that will in reality be an Additional Forth Crossing, and referring to the M74 Extension as "The Missing Link" when the motorways that it links were already linked before it was built.

Why exactly is it additional?

The current one is i believe failing, and before long will no longer be able to take heavy traffic. This will prelude it then not being able to take any traffic....

 

[Liam]

Why exactly is it additional?

The current one is i believe failing, and before long will no longer be able to take heavy traffic. This will prelude it then not being able to take any traffic....

The current one will be retained. They are closing it, replacing all the corroded cables, fixing everything else thats wrong with it, then using as a bus lane. I really wish I was joking. It will be a slip road for Ferrytoll Park and Ride.