Expansions for Scotland's rail network proposed

[najaB]

My prediction is that trains will still be crossing a single line viaduct between Usan and Montrose in 20 years time!

I don't doubt this, the only question is if that will be the only route between Aberdeen and the south?

 

[d9009alycidon]

And where did I say I'd be relegating Dundee to a regional stopping route? Was it on a regional stopping route before 1967? Or did it have express trains to both Glasgow and Edinburgh?

Services on the Glasgow/Edinburgh - Dundee/Aberdeen corridor(s) prior to 1967 were very much along pre-nationalisation lines, from Glasgow (Buchanan Street) services went to Dundee (originally Dundee West) and to Aberdeen via Forfar, all on ex LMS metals, services from Edinburgh ran up the coast on the ex LNER route as per today, from Kinnaber Junction the line was LMS (Caledonian) with the LNER having running powers inherited from the NBR. It did make total sense in the cash strapped 1960s for the Strathmore line to be closed and the Glasgow to Dundee and Aberdeen services consolidated. The "Friockheim Diversion" is an interesting proposal, although a certain preserved line would want to retain their tenancy at Bridge of Dun, while welcoming a main line connection.

 

[HaggisBotherer]

Railway enthusiasts can wish as hard as they like, but the likely returns from reinstating the Strathmore line (or variations thereon via its many branches) are never likely to cover the cost of the reinstatement. I predict with confidence that it'll never happen.

If there's a desire to increase capacity, resignalling the current route to allow closer headway between trains and reinstating loops to allow faster trains to pass (like the northbound one at Montrose, which was only taken out 10-12 years ago) would be just as effective and cost far less.

In the bigger picture of train times between Edinburgh and Glasgow/Perth and Aberdeen, I suspect that the effect of the short section of single line between Usan and Montrose is pretty negligible.

 

[47271]

I don't doubt this, the only question is if that will be the only route between Aberdeen and the south?

Sorry, I should've been clearer and said ALL trains will still be crossing a single line viaduct!

Just my view mind...

 

[matchmaker]

The Strathmore main line closed to through traffic in 1964. The latest timetable I have dates from 1953 an generally has trains timed 60 minutes from Stanley Jn to Kinnaber Jn with one 4 minute stop at Forfar, taking 117 minutes in total from leaving Perth to arriving Aberdeen.

They were using A4s on the 3 hour Glasgow - Aberdeen services via Forfar until 1966.

 

[Morayshire]

In the bigger picture of train times between Edinburgh and Glasgow/Perth and Aberdeen, I suspect that the effect of the short section of single line between Usan and Montrose is pretty negligible.

I seem to recall that the potential time saving was around 2-3 minutes. Can't find the source for that at the moment though.

 

[clc]

In the bigger picture of train times between Edinburgh and Glasgow/Perth and Aberdeen, I suspect that the effect of the short section of single line between Usan and Montrose is pretty negligible.

Aren’t the main time savings from skipping stops, which Scotrail can only do if they run additional services, which is why the additional capacity is needed?

 

[najaB]

I seem to recall that the potential time saving was around 2-3 minutes. Can't find the source for that at the moment though.

That sounds about right for any service that has to wait for the single line section, perhaps a little more if there's disruption.

 

[Morayshire]

That sounds about right for any service that has to wait for the single line section, perhaps a little more if there's disruption.

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/new...aul-would-only-cut-journeys-by-a-few-minutes/

A £218 million plan to cut rail journey times will result in “mere seconds of improvement” across Tayside and Fife, a new report has revealed.

The planned upgrade of the line at at Usan near Montrose now faces being scrapped, a decade after it was first mooted.

The single track stretch was identified as a reason for uncompetitive Dundee to Aberdeen rail journey times as far back as 2003.

The one-and-a-half mile section of single track between Usan and the South Esk viaduct at Montrose Basin, means that at certain times trains have to slow down and wait for others to pass.

The promise to dual it was included in proposals to cut journeys between Aberdeen and Edinburgh by 20 minutes which were first unveiled by the SNP in 2008.

However, a meeting of the Transport Scotland reference group overseeing the project has now heard the planned £218m investment will only scrape a two-minute improvement.

Transport Scotland’s head of rail Bill Reeve spoke to the city deal committee in Aberdeen on Friday where he revealed the much touted improvements around Montrose Basin had been found to offer no time benefits.

The meeting heard the massive piece of Angus infrastructure has been effectively binned.

North East region Scottish Conservative MSP Liam Kerr said the government had “over-promised and under-delivered” to the people of Angus.

“A decade of promises will result in mere seconds of improvement across Tayside and Fife,” he said.

“There clearly was little to no work done on what we would actually get for £200 million.

“Further, much of what is being proposed sounds like the kind of upgrades that Network Rail should be doing as a matter of course.

“I will be tabling questions at parliament immediately to get to the bottom of this fiasco.”

It is understood the group will now consider looking at alternative approaches to determine whether there could be a better return for investment.

A Transport Scotland spokesman said: “This key route connecting Aberdeen with the Central Belt is already benefiting from significant investment.

“Today’s meeting was an opportunity to brief the Aberdeen City Region Deal Joint Committee on the findings of the rail report commissioned by the reference group.

“In addition, the consensus across the group was that further work is required to identify the maximum possible benefits achievable for the £200m available. While it is too early to say what the outcomes of that will be, all within the reference group remain committed to dedicating the time and resource necessary to reach the right solution as soon as is practicable.”

Mr Reeve said a “revolution in rail” expected by next year would reduce journey time,s pointing to new high speed intercity trains and improvements elsewhere in the country.

The £218m improvement works – first unveiled by the SNP in 2008 – were announced again on the same day as the UK Government’s £250m Tay Cities Deal in 2016.

At the time then infrastructure secretary Keith Brown said the cash injection would involve “infrastructure improvements, double tracking at key pinch points, and other opportunities to improve journey times to the central belt and on to London”.

He said the package would be “providing an economic boost to the cities and communities of the north-east.”

Think this was the source of the 2 minutes claim.

 

[scosutsut]

Sorry if this has been covered before but East Lothian Council are currently consulting on public transport on the region and have two specific sub sections of rail based questions.

One was about the potential of a Blindwells station (new town between Prestonpans and Longniddry) which I know has been mooted before - potentially as a replacement for Prestonpans.

The other, which I've not seen before is the reopening of the Haddington branch. This is interesting as by my completely unskilled observations the trackbed appears largely intact (the A1 outside Haddington being the main alteration to it and loss of the old station platform to an industrial estate)

This could be an interesting way to increase capacity for the intermediary stations on the North Berwick line (an acknowledged long term issue with housing growth)

This is on the grand assumption that paths out of Waverley could be provided, as the branch would take traffic off the ECML at Longniddry.

Obviously I appreciate a council wishlist is quite a considerable way from an actionable reality, but how achievable does that one sound?

 

[Steamysandy]

I live in Longniddry. The Haddington branch track bed is a recognized footpath/ cycle way and is complete to the New Haddington bypass.
The final section into Haddington is there but a new bridge would be required at the bypass and I suspect the new extended hospital would also cause problems.In addition there would have to be car parking which I suggest would rule out the original station site.
Incidentally my son is a presenter on the community radio station ( East Coast FM) located on the old station site.
Blindwells would be on the site of the one time coal loading plant for the former open cast minewhich was well recorded in the eighties

 

[scosutsut]

The survey did ask how much would you use a town centre station with varying degrees of car parking provisioning and then the same sequence of questions about an out of town station - which would cure the parking issue at the expense of the utility of the station for town centre access and potentially simplify reinstatement by allowing you to avoid the A1/hospital/old station dilemmas.

Providing an additional hourly path could be sought from Waverley as far as the branch you could provide 2tph service to all stations up to Longniddry, 1tph to the two respective branches. To get Drem to 2tph you could amend the Dunbars but it's probably small enough to say 1tph would suffice?

As a Haddington based commuter who currently drives to Wallyford P&R I have a vested interest in this one. Won't get my hopes up though!

 

[backontrack]

One was about the potential of a Blindwells station (new town between Prestonpans and Longniddry) which I know has been mooted before - potentially as a replacement for Prestonpans.

I think that Prestonpans is large enough to warrant its own station (after all, the new Blindwells stop wouldn't be too much closer to Prestonpans than Wallyford is).

The Haddington branch is an interesting idea.

 

[JohnR]

I seem to recall that the potential time saving was around 2-3 minutes. Can't find the source for that at the moment though.

The redoubling was never about time saving though (except in the minds of a fevered few politicians). Its about capacity. This section limits the capacity for trains from Aberdeen to go south. It limits expansion of freight services to Scotlands 3 largest city. And it causes delays when services are running late.

 

[JohnR]

It's the logical conclusion. Why open up a new route that's faster if you're not going to send the express services that way?

I'm not even going to entertain an argument that tries to invoke pre-1967 as a valid comparison to today.

You say that reopening Strathmore will guarantee Dundee will be relegated to a stopping services. I say that future service patterns wont be determined by whether it is built - but by the market demand and political decisions. I see no reason why the 1tph express Dundee-Perth-Stirling-Glasgow service wont continue.

 

[Steamysandy]

The survey did ask how much would you use a town centre station with varying degrees of car parking provisioning and then the same sequence of questions about an out of town station - which would cure the parking issue at the expense of the utility of the station for town centre access and potentially simplify reinstatement by allowing you to avoid the A1/hospital/old station dilemmas.

Providing an additional hourly path could be sought from Waverley as far as the branch you could provide 2tph service to all stations up to Longniddry, 1tph to the two respective branches. To get Drem to 2tph you could amend the Dunbars but it's probably small enough to say 1tph would suffice?

As a Haddington based commuter who currently drives to Wallyford P&R I have a vested interest in this one. Won't get my hopes up though!

The two big problems are firstly that to get to the previous station a new bridge at the bypass would be needed and secondly fitting more trains into the section between Waverley and Longniddry given that priority seems to be given to Inter city services

 

[backontrack]

You say that reopening Strathmore will guarantee Dundee will be relegated to a stopping services. I say that future service patterns wont be determined by whether it is built - but by the market demand and political decisions. I see no reason why the 1tph express Dundee-Perth-Stirling-Glasgow service wont continue.

Indeed.

 

[backontrack]

Actually, I beg your pardon, I only looked at the best Glasgow-Aberdeen times as of now. Doing it from north to south, with the 1245 departure from Aberdeen you get 2h27m with stops at only Montrose, Arbroath, Dundee, Perth and Stirling. So dropping Montrose and Arbroath could get you to maybe 2h20m.

Anyway, my earlier point was that the gains made by running direct from Perth to north of Montrose would have to be pretty spectacular to justify dropping Scotland's fourth largest centre of population, as well as Arbroath and Montrose, from the route. I think that this thread has reached that conclusion a number of times before, but it was interesting to have a look at what was achieved via Strathmore at best in the sixties.

You would want to have a few stops, too - Blairgowrie, Alyth, Forfar, Brechin - but it's still an interesting suggestion.

 

[d9009alycidon]

The two big problems are firstly that to get to the previous station a new bridge at the bypass would be needed and secondly fitting more trains into the section between Waverley and Longniddry given that priority seems to be given to Inter city services

To allow some relief on the ECML, it might be possible to reinstate four tracks from the old Monktonhall Junction (just to the east of the Esk Viaduct) then upgrade the Millerhill loop lines to allow passenger traffic in conjunction with the Portobello Junction upgrade. Stopping services form North Berwick (or Haddington) would provide additional services through Newcraighall and Brunstane with as already been suggested additional platforms at these stations. (EDIT to add) Mussleburgh station would be relocated on the loop line, slightly to the south of the existing station. If the Shawfair development really took off there would also be the possibility of a Shawfair East station being built. As a lower cost option for Haddington, how about a Parry people mover connecting with the existing North Berwick Services at Longniddry.

 

[Put Kettle On]

then upgrade the Millerhill loop lines to allow passenger traffic in conjunction with the Portobello Junction upgrade. Stopping services form North Berwick (or Haddington) would provide additional services through Newcraighall and Brunstane with as already been suggested additional platforms at these stations. (EDIT to add) Mussleburgh station would be relocated on the loop line, slightly to the south of the existing station.

I simply cannot see any benefit of this , through Millerhill is yard working , with stop boards & hand points . Also speed is 20 MPH on & off ECML at Monktonhall , with a 30 MPH max . There is also the issue of any infrastructure trains , when shunting block off whole yard . At weekends , infrastructure trains stable before & after duty sometimes in 3 of the 4 through lines . Time wise alone , Musselburgh would lose out .
As an aside , I feel that Network Rail has boxed themselves into a corner concerning Millerhill . From the space that was once there , what is now being taken up by the Scotrail depot , & the incinerator & other developments on former yard land , there is little space left for any potential rail use .
In other posts in this thread , mention is made of capacity for freight . What is this freight of which you speak ? . I am aware there is some mail , intermodal , Grangemouth tank traffic , cement , some car transport , steel & infrastructure . But that is about it . There seems to be little effort , & less willingness , certainly no one championing for more , but , on the other hand , there now seems to be a lack of freight paths available in a now passenger orientated railway .

 

[Class83]

You say that reopening Strathmore will guarantee Dundee will be relegated to a stopping services. I say that future service patterns wont be determined by whether it is built - but by the market demand and political decisions. I see no reason why the 1tph express Dundee-Perth-Stirling-Glasgow service wont continue.

The difficulty is more likely to be express paths out of Glasgow Queen Street, currently there is 1 Aberdeen and 0.5 Inverness per hour. So either the Strathmore or Dundee express may be limited to alternating with the Inverness trains. Scotrail should be in the business of running trains between where their passengers either are or want to be. So bypassing Dundee to save a few minutes for Aberdeen passengers, at what is likely to be a significant cost is unlikely to fly. A fully doubled, electrified line via Stirling, Perth and Dundee is much more sensible.

 

[deltic08]

Railway enthusiasts can wish as hard as they like, but the likely returns from reinstating the Strathmore line (or variations thereon via its many branches) are never likely to cover the cost of the reinstatement. I predict with confidence that it'll never happen.

If there's a desire to increase capacity, resignalling the current route to allow closer headway between trains and reinstating loops to allow faster trains to pass (like the northbound one at Montrose, which was only taken out 10-12 years ago) would be just as effective and cost far less.

In the bigger picture of train times between Edinburgh and Glasgow/Perth and Aberdeen, I suspect that the effect of the short section of single line between Usan and Montrose is pretty negligible.

Diddling about adding loops here and there and resignalling would probably cost more than reinstating Strathmore. Long stretches of high speed running between Perth, Dundee and Montrose are not possible due to curvature and sections of single track and can never match the times of routing Glasgow-Aberdeen services through Strathmore so get those fingers out and bite the bullet TS and reinstate this route.

Reinstating from Perth as far as Forfar would allow 100mph or even 125mph. A new line from Forfar to just short of Laurencekirk following the A90 could be built to high speed also adding Brechin City to the National rail map. Electrifying at the same time would allow a sub 2 hour journey from Glasgow to Aberdeen stopping only at Stirling, Perth, Forfar and Stonehaven and a second train per hour stopping at other intermediate stations in 2 hours 15 minutes, faster than the fastest via Dundee. Perth-Aberdeen via Strathmore would be about 90 miles do doable in a little over an hour.

Any freight from west of the Pennines in England to the northeast of Scotland would route this way unhindered by gradient or speed restriction except through Stirling. At the moment, we don't know what the speed restriction through Perth will be for through freight on the route to Stanley Junction.

 

[marks87]

Diddling about adding loops here and there and resignalling would probably cost more than reinstating Strathmore. Long stretches of high speed running between Perth, Dundee and Montrose are not possible due to curvature and sections of single track and can never match the times of routing Glasgow-Aberdeen services through Strathmore so get those fingers out and bite the bullet TS and reinstate this route.

Reinstating from Perth as far as Forfar would allow 100mph or even 125mph. A new line from Forfar to just short of Laurencekirk following the A90 could be built to high speed also adding Brechin City to the National rail map. Electrifying at the same time would allow a sub 2 hour journey from Glasgow to Aberdeen stopping only at Stirling, Perth, Forfar and Stonehaven and a second train per hour stopping at other intermediate stations in 2 hours 15 minutes, faster than the fastest via Dundee.

Any freight from west of the Pennines in England to the northeast of Scotland would route this way unhindered by gradient or speed restriction except through Stirling. At the moment, we don't know what the speed restriction through Perth will be for through freight on the route to Stanley Junction.

Oh well that seals it then - through express services from Aberdeen to Glasgow should definitely be taken away from Dundee (population 148,270) so that Forfar (population 14,048) can have them instead.

Jeez...

 

[najaB]

Diddling about adding loops here and there and resignalling would probably cost more than reinstating Strathmore.

I finally understand what a crayonista is. 40+ miles of essentially new railway is supposed to cost less than resignalling and adding loops to an existing railway. Riiiight.

 

[InOban]

It would be interesting to know what proportion of the passengers on an Aberdeen train are travelling beyond Montrose. With the economic recovery of the Dundee region, when compared to Aberdeen, I would suggest that,on its own, Aberdeen could not sustain an hourly service, so you would be trading speed against frequency.

To return to the real world. The problem, as I see it, is that there are well established formulae which will predict the rise in revenue resulting from a reduced journey time, and these are used in constructing your business case. However all over Scotland we have infrastructure which can accommodate the timetable on a good day, but is not resilient when things go wrong. Whether it's the single track extremities of the Glasgow electric network, or the congested junctions at Hyndland, Newbridge or Haymarket East, or the WCML through Cambuslang, or Usan, there seems no way of constructing a robust business case for improvement. The only timesaving will result from a reduction in the pathing allowances inserted to keep delays to a minimum.

To return to Usan. I'm not a civil engineer, but I see no difficulty in doubling the formation as the line descends towards Ferryden. However it then, still dropping, crosses the A92 and then over to the ex-island on a long series of high brick arches - if you look on the Satellite view on Google maps you can see their shadows. Only as it reaches the Esk viaduct does the track level out. I suspect these arches are also listed. Now reducing the single track section by about half would bring substantial benefits, assuming NR would allow the doubling to start on a gradient, and indeed on a curve. But enough to make a positive return?

 

[najaB]

Now reducing the single track section by about half would bring substantial benefits, assuming NR would allow the doubling to start on a gradient, a d indeea curve.

I've always thought the same.

Really thinking outside the box, are there any historic examples of a double track deck being built on bridge supports that previously carried a single track deck? I would imagine that using modern materials and construction techniques a double-track deck could be built that weighs no more than a Victorian-era single track. One thing that might keep it in the world of pure fantasy is dealing with the moment induced by the weight of the train being cantilevered out from directly above the supports.

 

[Glenmutchkin]

Reinstating from Perth as far as Forfar would allow 100mph or even 125mph. A new line from Forfar to just short of Laurencekirk following the A90 could be built to high speed also adding Brechin City to the National rail map. Electrifying at the same time would allow a sub 2 hour journey from Glasgow to Aberdeen stopping only at Stirling, Perth, Forfar and Stonehaven and a second train per hour stopping at other intermediate stations in 2 hours 15 minutes, faster than the fastest via Dundee. Perth-Aberdeen via Strathmore would be about 90 miles do doable in a little over an hour.

Brechin City is a football team, not a population centre.

 

[clc]

Short answer: no.
Long answer: not very likely.

You're looking at something like 20km of essentially new railway (the formation hasn't been maintained for a long time) from Arbroath to so costs would have to come in well under £10m/km - doable, but that's just the actual construction costs. Looking at satellite images it looks like the original route has been built on in places, plus I've no idea what state the bridge over the Esk is in - a new one could add £5-10M by itself.

Perhaps it could be built as single track to bring down the cost? It could carry the northbound Express services, and maybe one of the southbound express services or whichever permutation of express and freight services it was possible to timetable?

What would be the likely cost per km of a single track line?

 

[deltic08]

Oh well that seals it then - through express services from Aberdeen to Glasgow should definitely be taken away from Dundee (population 148,270) so that Forfar (population 14,048) can have them instead.

Jeez...

Don't be an a**. The main point which you obviously don't get or do get but prefer to ridicule is the fact that there is life beyond Dundee but unable to get to the central belt without going by a circuitous coastal route via Dundee.

This will never be as quick as a direct, straighter and shorter route via Strathmore for the sake of £750 million for the 52 miles of route from Stanley Junction to Laurancekirk. This is less than the cost of the new Reading station. Yes Jeez, it is hard sometimes to get through to people!

Dundee-Aberdeen served by trains from Edinburgh to Aberdeen with Glasgow-Dundee served by extending Glasgow-Dunblane or Glasgow-Perth trains as it used to be before 1967.

 

[deltic08]

Brechin City is a football team, not a population centre.

So, Brechin is not a city?