Study to consider Borders Railway extension

[fegguk]

Transport Scotland have now indicated the results of the study due in December 2017 won't be complete until March 2018

 

[eastdyke]

Transport Scotland have now indicated the results of the study due in December 2017 won't be complete until March 2018

A case of 'difficult' news being less easy to publish?

 

[EIKN]

Who knows it could be options . Terminate for now to Hawick.
With again a future extension.
However there IS much talk over a line into keilder Forrest to relieve logging traffic along the A7 and places it goes through.
There was some talk in longtown where lots of signatures for the rail reopening petition are in most shops n believe me there are reams of them .
That there is an idea floated to have some kind of passanger station somewhere in the j
Keilder as a tourist thing . But seems only talk however it if it happens then in apparently longtown station would reopen . ( given carlisle traffic i could see that being a park n ride. There is also to consider Carlisle Airport aims to generate rail journeys .
They ( Stobart ) where involved apparently in being interested in their rail freight ops now to be based at the airport in running the logging trains. and believe me there are so many even between longtow n and Brampton . But you meet a lot on the A7. So this may have a good chance . Weather it would continue to Langholm which I understand was not on the original line but a mere branch . Remains to be seen.
I did think I'd seen track still laid into longtown somewhere... if so it's not hard to reopen .
Finally although much has been said about thin population in the borders there is a fair bit spread out.
We have poor internet and thus fewer employment opportunities. opening that missing link through the new riccarton village and onto Gala... and Edinburgh would give a vital link and choice .
And further it is without doubt a useful diversion for freight or slower trains . Improving journeys on the congested West coast route .
Also I'm surprised they have not earmarked HST 's that Scotrail are buying up. With quicker acceleration more space and comfort and windows more befitting the existing route that alone might stop many capacity woes plus increase usage with the bigger trains.

 

[Altnabreac]

Given Longtown has a population of 3,000 and Cumbria County Council are unlikely to have £500m to contribute to a new railway line it doesn't seem likely that any amount of shop based petitions are going to make a business case.

Perhaps transporting logs by rail 30 miles to a little used airport has some logic to it that I'm not seeing?

South of Hawick = No business case.

 

[47271]

And HSTs on the Borders railway? Maybe for specials here and there, but I can't see them being much use in adding capacity for the closely spaced Midlothian stations.

The only way that HSTs are useful to regular Borders services is through freeing up 158s and 170s to provide extra capacity on the route.

 

[markindurham]

Regarding rebuilding Carlisle-Hawick for through traffic, I suggest that this doesn't start to come into play until both the WCML and the G&SW lines are approaching capacity after as much upgrading as possible

 

[railjock]

Given Longtown has a population of 3,000 and Cumbria County Council are unlikely to have £500m to contribute to a new railway line it doesn't seem likely that any amount of shop based petitions are going to make a business case.

Perhaps transporting logs by rail 30 miles to a little used airport has some logic to it that I'm not seeing?

South of Hawick = No business case.

I agree.

 

[PaulLothian]

Given Longtown has a population of 3,000 and Cumbria County Council are unlikely to have £500m to contribute to a new railway line it doesn't seem likely that any amount of shop based petitions are going to make a business case.

Perhaps transporting logs by rail 30 miles to a little used airport has some logic to it that I'm not seeing?

South of Hawick = No business case.

I also agree, and thought it would be worth doing some simple research; OK, Googling!

(1) Cumbria County Council's current budget consultation notes: "Here in Cumbria since 2011, the Council has made savings of £214million, and we still need to save approximately £70 million by 2022." CCC seems unlikely to be a source of new funding!

(2) Timber traffic: I found this page interesting (https://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-6xjex9) as it explains the variety of directions that harvested timber may travel. Not a simple linear flow, and of course it would need to be transhipped from the lorries that bring it out of the forests, and probably again where the rails run out, adding even more to the costs.

That page notes: "On any day in Kielder some 20 - 30 mechanised units will be working felling and extracting timber, allowing over 1750 metric tonnes to leave the forest for the mills every day of the year."

This will be travelling on either an 8 wheeler (can legally carry about 19T)... or an artic (around 27T). (Source - https://arbtalk.co.uk/forums/topic/64007-timber-lorry-load-dimentions-and-payloads/)

This suggests that 65 (best case) to 90 (worst case) lorries are leaving Kielder Forest a day, in a variety of directions. (I have certainly regularly come across them when traveling down the A68, to the east.) It seems that there are maps available that show volumes leaving in different directions, but so far I have only managed to find references to the Scottish side of the border, rather than the actual maps! While undoubtedly some of these lorries will travel down the A7, that road is generally of a reasonable standard, passes through few communities, and has lower levels of traffic than most other roads of a similar standard.

That's a lunch-break I won't get back again!

 

[DarloRich]

Who knows it could be options . Terminate for now to Hawick.
With again a future extension.
However there IS much talk over a line into keilder Forrest to relieve logging traffic along the A7 and places it goes through.
There was some talk in longtown where lots of signatures for the rail reopening petition are in most shops n believe me there are reams of them .
That there is an idea floated to have some kind of passanger station somewhere in the j
Keilder as a tourist thing . But seems only talk however it if it happens then in apparently longtown station would reopen . ( given carlisle traffic i could see that being a park n ride. There is also to consider Carlisle Airport aims to generate rail journeys .
They ( Stobart ) where involved apparently in being interested in their rail freight ops now to be based at the airport in running the logging trains. and believe me there are so many even between longtow n and Brampton . But you meet a lot on the A7. So this may have a good chance . Weather it would continue to Langholm which I understand was not on the original line but a mere branch . Remains to be seen.
I did think I'd seen track still laid into longtown somewhere... if so it's not hard to reopen .
Finally although much has been said about thin population in the borders there is a fair bit spread out.
We have poor internet and thus fewer employment opportunities. opening that missing link through the new riccarton village and onto Gala... and Edinburgh would give a vital link and choice .
And further it is without doubt a useful diversion for freight or slower trains . Improving journeys on the congested West coast route .
Also I'm surprised they have not earmarked HST 's that Scotrail are buying up. With quicker acceleration more space and comfort and windows more befitting the existing route that alone might stop many capacity woes plus increase usage with the bigger trains.

I am not sure any of this adds up to a business case justifying such vast investment.

 

[markindurham]

I am not sure any of this adds up to a business case justifying such vast investment.

It doesn't, is the bottom line.

 

[The Planner]

That page notes: "On any day in Kielder some 20 - 30 mechanised units will be working felling and extracting timber, allowing over 1750 metric tonnes to leave the forest for the mills every day of the year."

Effectively one train a day, possibly two.

 

[EIKN]

My ideas n thoughts may not be immediately cost effective bit once HS2/3 and Scotland's HS line opens ( why bother when some proper track work at the Airdrie- Glasgow allowing for stoppers to be over taken could realise the potential of the well engineered Airdrie Bathgate line . Double track electric. if loops were added surley they could run 125-140 mph services along there . With cascaded pendilinos or class 91's both capable . My views were looking to the long-term and how it's not just about the little places . But as the previous post said 90 odd lorries is two trains . That is a huge amount of dangerous heavy goods off the roads. Why do you think the keilder link is being mooted in Cumbria . The comments dismissive n slightly sarcastic and disparaging about petitions . Have you forgotten Madge Elliot another tireless campaigners who's similar tactics got that railway in the spot light and built . It can serve as diversion. As tourist route as a line to take the slower transpenine stuff off the run to Glasgow.
It did pretty well for long enough only loosing put to the car . Bit you must be open minded and see that private car ownership with all electric self driving cats may no longer be as attractive commuters on the route tp Carlisle or Edinburgh ( from Hawick for example ) would certainly use the train rather than a heavy winters day having forgot to charge the car . It may be that carcownership declines slightly . So dont write off the future of that route . It is bound to be extended to Hawick though a local councillor intimated plans to do with Riccarton village which is getting bigger . Dont think any is built on THE track bed .
Eventually it might be joined to England. remember rail journeys are very much higher. try keep an open mind as some schemes that you are certain wont happen .
Sometimes do.

 

[PaulLothian]

My ideas n thoughts may not be immediately cost effective bit once HS2/3 and Scotland's HS line opens ( why bother when some proper track work at the Airdrie- Glasgow allowing for stoppers to be over taken could realise the potential of the well engineered Airdrie Bathgate line . Double track electric. if loops were added surley they could run 125-140 mph services along there . With cascaded pendilinos or class 91's both capable . My views were looking to the long-term and how it's not just about the little places . But as the previous post said 90 odd lorries is two trains . That is a huge amount of dangerous heavy goods off the roads. Why do you think the keilder link is being mooted in Cumbria . The comments dismissive n slightly sarcastic and disparaging about petitions . Have you forgotten Madge Elliot another tireless campaigners who's similar tactics got that railway in the spot light and built . It can serve as diversion. As tourist route as a line to take the slower transpenine stuff off the run to Glasgow.
It did pretty well for long enough only loosing put to the car . Bit you must be open minded and see that private car ownership with all electric self driving cats may no longer be as attractive commuters on the route tp Carlisle or Edinburgh ( from Hawick for example ) would certainly use the train rather than a heavy winters day having forgot to charge the car . It may be that carcownership declines slightly . So dont write off the future of that route . It is bound to be extended to Hawick though a local councillor intimated plans to do with Riccarton village which is getting bigger . Dont think any is built on THE track bed .
Eventually it might be joined to England. remember rail journeys are very much higher. try keep an open mind as some schemes that you are certain wont happen .
Sometimes do.

Lots of different points in this; there have also been a number of valid points previously made by respondents.

(1) HS Scotland and using the Airdrie - Bathgate line. There are many sound reasons why mixing frequent stopping trains and high speed services on a two-track railway is not a good idea. However many passing loops you install, there is a time penalty for the stopping train, in terms of slowing, waiting and restarting - although this has slightly less impact if you rebuild stations with loops. I seem to remember reading that an unplanned signal stop can add several minutes to a train's schedule, including slowing to a stop and then accelerating, and presumably roughly the same applies to station stops, whether on the main line or in a loop. The gap between that stopping service and a following high-speed service that wants to keep going at top speed would be large enough that it would impede the following stopping train. Additionally, the number of trains using the route increases as it gets nearer to Edinburgh and Glasgow.

(2) Timber traffic - you have not yet explained how the traffic from Kielder actually gets from the suggested new rail head to the multiple sites across northern England and Scotland where it is processed. Simply moving lorry traffic to start its road journeys from other places may not be productive or any more environmentally friendly.

(3) We do understand that local campaigning is important, and may play a part in any decision to invest millions in a new project, but unfortunately in the modern world, it only plays a very tiny part. In building up a business case, a wide range of factors is taken into consideration. Projections of likely traffic are one of the more crucial issues, and these depend primarily on two questions - local populations and their current and potential patterns of travel, and if freight use is in prospect, sustainable and sufficient levels to justify the additional engineering that may be required.

Not all journeys made by car would automatically transfer to rail, as connectivity at each end of the rail journey is a huge factor. If the public transport journey involves multiple modes of transport, unless these are exceptionally well co-ordinated and timed, it becomes less appealing both from the points of view of time and personal comfort. As an example, I can get to my work by train, but it requires a total of 40 minutes of walking combined with 25 minutes on two connecting trains. I can drive in comfort to work in less than a third of the time, and therefore usually do, despite being in general committed to the principle of using public transport.

(4) At the level of regional strategic planning (which is really what we are talking about here), the question isn't so much what could we do with this railway if we re-opened it, but what are the problems that this area experiences, and what are the best solutions to these problems? These solutions could be multi-faceted: for example, for timber traffic, further restriction of permitted routes, reducing speed limits or loading limits and changes to the style of vehicles themselves could all make a difference. It may be that upgrading buses and bus services locally would allow more comfortable and flexible and therefore more useable (if slightly slower) services than rail would offer.

(5) National strategic planning is about working out which among competing schemes has the best business case to justify spending a limited budget. A cost-benefit analysis of rail-reopening south of Hawick is inevitably going to show a large deficit when compared with almost any other infrastructure project I have heard recently mentioned.

(6) Most people on this forum are fully in favour of rail reopenings where these seem reasonable, but a lot of us do take the broader picture into account, and have among us a huge body of knowledge to support us in doing so. Negative views about proposals are in my experience generally based on reasonable arguments, even if not phrased in the way I would put it! I for one would be delighted to travel by train through the Borders from Tweedbank to Carlisle, having missed the opportunity as the line closed the year before I moved to Scotland.

(7) Despite the fact I don't expect it to reopen in my young grandson's lifetime, let alone mine, I will keep an open mind on the possibility, as you request, but I will need a huge amount of evidence to change my mind!

 

[92002]

What's probably needed for Keilder is a connection across to the WCML at Lockerbie. Much of the traffic goes to the mill there and some onwards to Carlisle Yard. Then by train to Wales.

 

[fegguk]

A local news paper in Hawick has today quoted "a well placed source" as indicating that the Jacobs report into future transport links into the Scottish Borders has concluded that extending the Borders Railway to Hawick is "not viable".

"https://thehawickpaper.co.uk/2018/02/16/the-hawick-paper-friday-16-february/"

 

[David M]

A local news paper in Hawick has today quoted "a well placed source" as indicating that the Jacobs report into future transport links into the Scottish Borders has concluded that extending the Borders Railway to Hawick is "not viable".

Carlisle was always unrealistic but I would argue that Hawick is required as a public service and that viability shouldn't enter into it. Unfortunately, in the 21st century, literally everything is down to money. Had today's attitudes prevailed in Victorian times then we would have no libraries, swimming pools and so on.
If it is based on economics then I would have to agree that Hawick is not viable.

 

[eastdyke]

It wasn't this one then? [The cynic in me is shouting out that the real reason for the 'delayed report' is not just the news therein but (also) the fact that the Selkirkshire (Borders Council) by-election will take place on Thursday, February 22.]
From The Border Telegraph 12th Feb:
http://www.bordertelegraph.com/news..._calls_to_extend_Borders_Railway_to_Carlisle/

LABOUR leader Jeremy Corbyn has become the party's first leader to visit the Borders in over half a century after hitting the campaign trail in Selkirk this morning.

Mr Corbyn, who travelled to the town this morning from Edinburgh with Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard, offered his support to Selkirkshire candidate Scott Redpath ahead of next week's by-election.

The Islington North MP also met with staff at Eildon Housing Assocation at Ettrick Mill, before heading to the town's High Street to chat with locals and grab a slice of Selkirk's famous Bannock cake.

In an interview with the Border Telegraph, Mr Corbyn backed calls by campaigners to extend the Borders Railway from Tweedbank to Carlisle.

He said: "The railway from Edinburgh to Galashiels is great, but personally I would like to see it extended all the way to Carlisle.

"I think it was a catastrophic mistake to close the Waverley Line in 1969, and it needs to be reopened all the way.

"That can become a major spur for economic investment and devlopment across the whole region, and since the closure of Tweed industries, there has to be an investment in long-term sustainable jobs and investment in construction and infrastructure can be a spur to that."

Also standing in the by-election are Trevor Adams (Conservatives), Jack Clark (Liberal Democrats), Barbara Harvie (Green Party), John Mitchell (SNP), Kenneth Gunn (Independent) and Caroline Penman (Independent).

The Selkirkshire by-election will take place on Thursday, February 22.

 

[Bald Rick]

Carlisle was always unrealistic but I would argue that Hawick is required as a public service and that viability shouldn't enter into it. Unfortunately, in the 21st century, literally everything is down to money. Had today's attitudes prevailed in Victorian times then we would have no libraries, swimming pools and so on.
If it is based on economics then I would have to agree that Hawick is not viable.

And if Victorian attitudes prevailed today we'd still be sending 5 year olds up chimneys.

Viability, or put another way, "is it worth doing" has come into almost every new railway project since the Victorian times. The only recent one where it hasn't is .... The borders railway.

 

[JohnR]

And if Victorian attitudes prevailed today we'd still be sending 5 year olds up chimneys.

Viability, or put another way, "is it worth doing" has come into almost every new railway project since the Victorian times. The only recent one where it hasn't is .... The borders railway.

Bear in mind the lines was originally built south of Hawick not because it was viable (it wasnt), but as a result of railway politics, the desire to keep the Caledonian out of its territory, and to provide a route south that did not rely on the NER.

 

[Bald Rick]

Bear in mind the lines was originally built south of Hawick not because it was viable (it wasnt), but as a result of railway politics, the desire to keep the Caledonian out of its territory, and to provide a route south that did not rely on the NER.

Which made it worth doing, and thereby viable in the eyes of the directors of the company. Presumably to avoid loss of revenue and/or to avoid punitive charges from the NER.

 

[markindurham]

Which made it worth doing, and thereby viable in the eyes of the directors of the company. Presumably to avoid loss of revenue and/or to avoid punitive charges from the NER.

The NB and NER were part of the ECJS operation, and as far as I am aware were good partners, as neither really encroached on the other's territory, other than a few small branches. No, I believe that it was more to access Carlisle & the opportunities offered down the West side of the country than anything else. Annoying the Caledonian was a bonus!

 

[JohnR]

The NB and NER were part of the ECJS operation, and as far as I am aware were good partners, as neither really encroached on the other's territory, other than a few small branches. No, I believe that it was more to access Carlisle & the opportunities offered down the West side of the country than anything else. Annoying the Caledonian was a bonus!

It was access to Newcastle via the Border Counties that Hodgson wanted. IN order to achieve it, he swapped running rights from Berwick to Edinburgh for it. So the NER then ran passenger and goods trains right into Edinburgh from Newcastle. The share price of the NBR plummeted and the dividend had to be cut, due to the costs of operating the Border railways.

IN short, those lines through the borders south of Hawick were a millstone round the NBRs neck, they cost over half a million to build, and generated virtually no traffic. Through bookings were refused at Carlisle. It was only saved by the Midland arriving at Carlisle in 1876 - and remember they tried to get out of that as well.

 

[markindurham]

It was access to Newcastle via the Border Counties that Hodgson wanted. IN order to achieve it, he swapped running rights from Berwick to Edinburgh for it. So the NER then ran passenger and goods trains right into Edinburgh from Newcastle. The share price of the NBR plummeted and the dividend had to be cut, due to the costs of operating the Border railways.

IN short, those lines through the borders south of Hawick were a millstone round the NBRs neck, they cost over half a million to build, and generated virtually no traffic. Through bookings were refused at Carlisle. It was only saved by the Midland arriving at Carlisle in 1876 - and remember they tried to get out of that as well.

Yes indeed - but as I said, it (the Border Counties) was very much a branch, running through sparsely populated areas, and as a through Edinburgh-Newcastle service it was never going to compete, speed wise, with the route via Berwick. No wonder the share prices fell; it was a very bad business decision.

Regarding the Carlisle extension, though, as I said, I believe that it was built with the hope of developing through traffic - "If we build it, it will come", as it were. Speculating, with a view to accumulating (profits) was a Victorian tradition, don't forget - as well as being a dig at rivals.

And yes, the Midland did indeed try to back out of building the S & C - which they had initially been forced to propose, thanks to the intransigence of the LNWR, as we all know. The Midland wanted a piece of the Scottish traffic - and of course they did with some success, thanks to their partnerships with the G & SW for Glasgow/West Coast traffic, and the NB for Edinburgh/East Coast traffic. Neither were as quick as the LNW/Caledonian services, but instead relied on providing better passenger comfort etc. to gain custom. The Midland's early withdrawal of 2nd Class & the upgrading of 3rd Class - at lttle or no extra cost - was roundly castigated by other railways, but eventually they all had to follow suit.

 

[backontrack]

I'm not suggesting that the line south of Hawick should be built (though it is an interesting proposal, and does have some sense), but I do want to say that, if it is built, it should be fully double-track and built to mainline standards. There is no point in building a single-track railway with a few passing loops from Hawick to Longtown and Carlisle; it has to be all or nothing, because that way it can have value as a freight and diversionary route too.

The Hawick extension, however, there should be no discussion about. It's pretty much a necessity.

 

[tomatwark]

Just because someone has heard a bit of office gossip, does not mean it is correct.

The paper it was published is the local rag so of course it will be headline news.

Remember we have elections coming up in 2/3 years time and this will a potato in this part of Scotland

 

[eastdyke]

The extension is due to start this month!
(To the Tweedbank car park)
As reported by Radio Borders:
https://planetradio.co.uk/borders/l...-car-park-borders-railway-terminus-tweedbank/

Work is set to start later this month on extending the car park at the Borders Railway terminus in Tweedbank.
An extra 82 spaces are to be created and the plaza area is to be given a makeover to make it more pedestrian friendly.
Scottish Borders Council says it will keep disruption to a minimum during the works which are set to take six weeks and be completed in April.

I suspect that this will be the nearest that it gets to Hawick until the SNP manages to grow the money forest.

 

[A0]

but I do want to say that, if it is built, it should be fully double-track and built to mainline standards. There is no point in building a single-track railway with a few passing loops from Hawick to Longtown and Carlisle; it has to be all or nothing, because that way it can have value as a freight and diversionary route too.

Brilliant - how to make a proposal which is questionable in terms of its viability, completely unviable.

I'm not sure suggestions of 'gold plating' such schemes really help their viability.

I do enjoy threads such as this - the lack of common sense astounds me sometimes.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Brilliant - how to make a proposal which is questionable in terms of its viability, completely unviable.

I'm not sure suggestions of 'gold plating' such schemes really help their viability.

I do enjoy threads such as this - the lack of common sense astounds me sometimes.

Good point - but what would probably help would be, where a single line is being built on a former double track formation, to place the line at one side rather than in the middle so that if / when extra loops or redoubling become necessary they don't have to slew the existing track over.

 

[backontrack]

Brilliant - how to make a proposal which is questionable in terms of its viability, completely unviable.

I'm not sure suggestions of 'gold plating' such schemes really help their viability.

I do enjoy threads such as this - the lack of common sense astounds me sometimes.

I never said that I supported this reopening - only that it would be rather useless to have a single track line trailing through Teviotdale. There's no point in that because it's a compromise that no-one will like; it would be a pretty weak decision not to double it properly because you were scared of a backlash - otherwise, why build it in the first place?

It has to be all or nothing if they do make it - and I think it will end up being nothing.

The benefits of the line are clear - and the largest of these is probably the line's usability as a freight route. These pros are outweighed by the cons; but if you're going to meet the expense of building the line then you may as well sling another track next to it so that it can be more useful.

Apologies - I'm trying to apply logic to a railway discussion. I should have learned not to do that years ago.

 

[EIKN]

And HSTs on the Borders railway? Maybe for specials here and there, but I can't see them being much use in adding capacity for the closely spaced Midlothian stations.

The only way that HSTs are useful to regular Borders services is through freeing up 158s and 170s to provide extra capacity on the route.

That was my point . they have long platforms . perhaps they could use them to stop all this station skipping as the Scotrail HST will have capacity to spare ..
Plus im sure its pheaseible to do a,London first thing arriving in the capital by 930 latest . returning after 6 .
That might be a winner or even just as far as Manchester /Leeds. . going North a,service to Aberdeen/Inverness.