Expansions for Scotland's rail network proposed

[d9009alycidon]

If there was the will to ship the fish by rail, then I would think that the Tesco model would be more suitable, with the fish being packed into containers at Peterhead, transshipped to rail at Aberdeen then to a distribution site in the south.

 

[47271]

I dont think anyone here is saying that the first priority for reopening should be Strathmore. Several of your suggestions would certainly rank higher on my list, for example. I've said that the business case for Strathmore would need to be based on providing extra capacity, providing a diversionary route when necessary and providing new journey opportunities. Its not a lot different to the case for the Okehampton route. I'd say it was a stronger case than Hawick-Carlisle, and probably for the same cost, for example. This "not under any circumstances" mentality is as dogmatic as the "we must rebuild X at any cost".

There is 163,000 tonnes of fish landed at Peterhead every year - the volume is growing as well. Most of it is destined for UK markets well to the south of Aberdeen - even south of Glasgow. There is no reason why, a share of that traffic shouldnt be on the rails. Except theres no capacity for it. So thousands of HGVs each year travel for hundreds of miles transporting fish to market. Crackers.

I think all of that's fair, although I'm sure that encouraging transport of fish by rail is a much larger subject than simply reopening the Buchan Line and increasing capacity between Perth and Aberdeen.

Continuing the theme of prioritisation, bear in mind that I said 'not in any circumstances' to Strathmore in the context of £750m a year over five years, which of course in itself is a pie in the sky figure.

 

[JohnR]

If there was the will to ship the fish by rail, then I would think that the Tesco model would be more suitable, with the fish being packed into containers at Peterhead, transshipped to rail at Aberdeen then to a distribution site in the south.

Indeed, refrigerated containers are the way to go. But theres no space for the trains.

 

[najaB]

Indeed, refrigerated containers are the way to go. But theres no space for the trains.

If you mean in the timetable from Aberdeen heading south, the problem is a lack of places to let passenger services pass freights. A few loops would soon fix that as there's not that great a speed difference between passenger and freight services, especially if they 67-haul the fish services.

 

[Put Kettle On]

There is 163,000 tonnes of fish landed at Peterhead every year - the volume is growing as well. Most of it is destined for UK markets well to the south of Aberdeen - even south of Glasgow. There is no reason why, a share of that traffic shouldnt be on the rails. Except theres no capacity for it. So thousands of HGVs each year travel for hundreds of miles transporting fish to market. Crackers.

If there was the will to ship the fish by rail, then I would think that the Tesco model would be more suitable, with the fish being packed into containers at Peterhead, transshipped to rail at Aberdeen then to a distribution site in the south.

We have now transgressed from unrealistic reopenings , to unrealistic freight traffic .

The transport of fish is a time sensitive one , & although it involves a lot of HGV traffic , it is loaded once , travels one journey to market or processing plant then offloaded . A lot is managed by DFDS , using sub contract haulage , thus controlling transport cost , & a ready supply of suitable vehicles .

Using rail would still involve road transport , double handling , road to rail , then rail to road , costing time & money , & risking damage claims for loss of product quality .

That is after having found willingness & suitable paths , both of which are in short supply .

It would be good to see more freight traffic moved by rail , but the reliance on road transport , & the revenue it provides in road fund licence & fuel duty , let alone the practicality of sidings , double handling etc , pathing issues , & lack of willingness & fighting their corner see rail freight at a disadvantage .

 

[d9009alycidon]

If you mean in the timetable from Aberdeen heading south, the problem is a lack of places to let passenger services pass freights. A few loops would soon fix that as there's not that great a speed difference between passenger and freight services, especially if they 67-haul the fish services.

If you were to attract the conveyance of fish to rail, you would have to provide a reasonably high speed service, just like before when the fish trains were given priority

 

[najaB]

If you were to attract the conveyance of fish to rail, you would have to provide a reasonably high speed service, just like before when the fish trains were given priority

Refrigerated containers make all the difference, after all the fish currently make their way south by road*. And I'm not talking about shoving a freight into a loop for an hour and forgetting about it as happens with some buik services.

*Chuckling to myself at the image of a HGV being driven by a flatfish (Halibut Guided Vehicle).

 

[Bald Rick]

I’d never heard of the Strathmore line before. To be fair it probably does have a better case than some other lines often suggested on these pages, such as Carlisle - Tweedbank, Dumfries to Stranraer, Tulloch to Dalwhinnie, and dare I say in another part of the country Aberystwyth to Carmarthen.

But then that’s like saying that Brechin City have a better chance than Stenhousemuir of winning the Champions League in the next 5 years.

 

[najaB]

I’d never heard of the Strathmore line before. To be fair it probably does have a better case than some other lines often suggested on these pages, such as Carlisle - Tweedbank, Dumfries to Stranraer, Tulloch to Dalwhinnie, and dare I say in another part of the country Aberystwyth to Carmarthen.

Indeed. It's one of those lines that managed to hold on tragically close to long enough for it to have been reprieved. And there's a strong case for reopening Arbroath-Friockheim-Kinaber as a way of bypassing Usan-Montrose, which then helps the case for Bridge-of-Dun to Stanley Junction.

But it's way down the list after things like Levenmouth, Almond Chord, Greenhill remodelling, Lentran long loop, etc.

 

[Glenmutchkin]

But then that’s like saying that Brechin City have a better chance than Stenhousemuir of winning the Champions League in the next 5 years.

Such a shame that there is not a 'Like' button.

 

[Bald Rick]

And there's a strong case for reopening Arbroath-Friockheim-Kinaber as a way of bypassing Usan-Montrose,

If there isn’t a strong case to spend a small fraction of the cost of a new line by doubling at
Usan, there certainly isn’t a strong case for reopening Arbroath - Kinaber. Sorry.

 

[najaB]

If there isn’t a strong case to spend a small fraction of the cost of a new line by doubling at
Usan, there certainly isn’t a strong case for reopening Arbroath - Kinaber. Sorry.

Oh, I meant strong in the "if doubling Usan is totally off the table at any cost" world.

It was one of the options considered and the main reason it was discounted was cost rather that a technical shortcoming.

 

[deltic08]

Reading station has an annual usage of 17M give or take. Which means that, picking an arbitrary metric, it will take a little over fourty years for 750M journeys to derive a benefit from the new station.

Aberdeen station gets almost 4M a year. Let's be generous and say that half of them are going to stations between Perth and Glasgow. That's 350 years for 750M journeys to benefit.

The point being that there's an order of magnitude difference between the impact of Reading Station v the Strathmore route so bringing up the former in support of the latter is, well, classic crayonista.

I don't follow your drift. Are you trying to tell me that because more people use Reading station in a year than Strathmore would then Reading station will be paid for quicker? But Reading already had a very good station so £800million was spent replacing almost like for like. The viaduct and grade separated junction to the west of Reading could have been built without a new station at a lot less. Strathmore does not have a railway line but spending £750m to provide one when it is needed is a vast improvement in communication, inclusivity and connectivity to that area.

What if I had quoted £550 million replacing the roof and improvements to the fabric at Kings Cross. What would be your reply then?

I repeat, the coastal route via Dundee will never be a high speed route and to spend £millions to make it one would be better spent on a more direct route between Stanley Junction and Laurencekirk. There would be no need for doubling at Perth and Usan to increase capacity either. That is not being a crayonista and is just ignorance on your part as you cannot make an argument against reinstatement unless you know the footfall distribution data, not just numbers, and the results of a feasibility study.

 

[deltic08]

I think all of that's fair, although I'm sure that encouraging transport of fish by rail is a much larger subject than simply reopening the Buchan Line and increasing capacity between Perth and Aberdeen.

Continuing the theme of prioritisation, bear in mind that I said 'not in any circumstances' to Strathmore in the context of £750m a year over five years, which of course in itself is a pie in the sky figure.

Prioritisation is the problem. I suppose it will go on BCR.

Who said £750m a year over five years? £750m is the whole figure based on Bald Ricks £15m/mile for 52 miles.

 

[najaB]

Are you trying to tell me that because more people use Reading station in a year than Strathmore would then Reading station will be paid for quicker?

No, the payback period is exactly the same. I'm saying that Reading Station is a red herring - it has exactly zero relevance to the viability of reinstating the Strathmore route, being a project on a completely different scale.

Bringing up another project is only useful if it's similar in purpose, scope and scale as it allows direct comparisons and extrapolations to be made. Reading Station is none of the three and only reason I can see to mention it was as a distraction.

 

[Altnabreac]

Reopening Strathmore has zero chance of happening.

Reopening would need support from organisations such as Transport Scotland, TACTran, Local Authorities, Scotrail, Network Rail, Transform Scotland, SAPT or Railfuture.

Precisely no one thinks it’s a good idea.

It doesn’t connect any towns to their nearest major city, it has marginal time savings on a limited selection of some of the less busy city pairs in Scotland, it costs a huge amount of money and serves an area with little deprivation (rural Angus) while worsening services to a city in need of regeneration and investment (Dundee).

Any further discussion really ought to be in a dedicated thread in the Speculative Ideas forum. In general the purpose of this thread has been to discuss possible schemes that are actively under discussion by actual railway organisations in Scotland.

 

[JohnR]

Reopening Strathmore has zero chance of happening.

Reopening would need support from organisations such as Transport Scotland, TACTran, Local Authorities, Scotrail, Network Rail, Transform Scotland, SAPT or Railfuture.

Precisely no one thinks it’s a good idea.

It doesn’t connect any towns to their nearest major city, it has marginal time savings on a limited selection of some of the less busy city pairs in Scotland, it costs a huge amount of money and serves an area with little deprivation (rural Angus) while worsening services to a city in need of regeneration and investment (Dundee).

Any further discussion really ought to be in a dedicated thread in the Speculative Ideas forum. In general the purpose of this thread has been to discuss possible schemes that are actively under discussion by actual railway organisations in Scotland.

I believe Railfuture are in favour of it, and some local councillors in Angus have suggested it.

I think we got onto the Strathmore route because we were discussing the Usan doubling scheme, and if we dont do that, what are the other options. I think we can conclude that other options are more expensive and dont provide the same level of benefits. So lets get on and double the line at Usan.

 

[edwin_m]

Refrigerated containers make all the difference, after all the fish currently make their way south by road*. And I'm not talking about shoving a freight into a loop for an hour and forgetting about it as happens with some buik services.

*Chuckling to myself at the image of a HGV being driven by a flatfish (Halibut Guided Vehicle).

Presumably fish is part of the supermarket (c)hub-and-spoke distribution network so goes via the same distribution centres as everything else. Any scope for a backhaul on the existing container trains to feed into Daventry?

 

[ainsworth74]

There has been a fair amount of off-topic chat on this thread recently and I have tidied some of it up in the hopes that we might get back onto a more focused discussion on potential re-openings in Scotland. Please do ensure that your posts remain on topic (as per the Forum Rules). If there is something that you wish to discuss that isn't relevant to the topic at hand then by all means start a new thread to discuss it with a link back to this thread for context.

Further off-topic postings are liable for deletion without further warning.

Thanks,
ainsworth74

 

[Put Kettle On]

Well
That seemed to stop this thread in its tracks for a bit .

But , moving swiftly on

Has any mention ever been made of the reinstatement of the chord from the Lanark branch , to Carstairs . I believe there have been various rumblings in past , but is there anything more recently .

Looks like the original alignment is no longer available , due to fairly recent builds of housing on it .
This would not prevent it ever from happening , as there is space available to move it ( open fields ) ,
to a new alignment .
Signalling should not be overly difficult , as the Down line was signalled as bi directional , & used for trains to & from the former Ravenstruther Coal loading facility .
This would then open up Wishaw , Carluke & Lanark with direct services to Edinburgh .
Even using every second train to run this service , the other continuing to arrive from & return to Glasgow as present .

 

[alangla]

I know the 100 etc bus covers the Biggar etc area to Lanark, but is there really much of a market for Lanark- Edinburgh? P&R with better and more reliable services at Carstairs might be more cost effective.

One that occurred to me today- is it worth looking at reopening Glasgow Green station?

 

[MadMac]

Has any mention ever been made of the reinstatement of the chord from the Lanark branch to Carstairs. I believe there have been various rumblings in past , but is there anything more recently?

Signalling should not be overly difficult, as the Down line was signalled as bi directional & used for trains to & from the former Ravenstruther Coal loading facility.

When it comes to signalling, there's no such thing as "not overly difficult". Not sure what technology's there just now - Lanark Junction was relay-based and Carstairs was solid state interfaced to the original trackside relay-based equipment, but the bi-directional only extended, IIRC, to Ravenstruther itself. In any event, its big money for relatively little potential.

 

[Put Kettle On]

No , trains could & did travel from the Up line , onto Dn line & travel in an up direction towards & into coal terminal .
Signalling interfaces at present .

Any matter , was not proposing this , merely asked a question if any updates .

 

[Bald Rick]

Prioritisation is the problem. I suppose it will go on BCR.

Who said £750m a year over five years? £750m is the whole figure based on Bald Ricks £15m/mile for 52 miles.

For clarity, “my” £15m a mile is what the Borders line cost, at outturn prices, during its construction from 2013-2015. Notewithstanding that much of it was single track, this is remarkably cheap by any measure.

The current going rate for most new double track railways in open country now is £30m-£40m/mile. Oxford-Bicester was around £30m/mile in roughly the same timescale as Borders, and that didn’t need much land or major earthworks. East West Rail is rather more than this range.

Also, business cases must use predicted cash prices for construction, which on average means mid-point in the construction schedule. If the Scottish Government was to take complete leave of its senses and instruct feasibility on the Strathmore (or any other line) tonight, mid point of construction would be around 2025. Given construction price inflation generally runs ahead of RPI, it would be reasonable to assume a rate of £40m-£50m a mile.

Anyone got a spare £2bil?

 

[clc]

Some extracts from the STPR Final Report:-

23 – RAIL SERVICE ENHANCEMENTS BETWEEN ABERDEEN AND THE CENTRAL BELT

A.233 This intervention supports the objectives to improve public transport competitiveness between Aberdeen and the Central Belt and provide enhanced opportunities to move freight by rail. It would involve:

• Recasting of the passenger timetable on the Aberdeen – Dundee – Edinburgh / Glasgow corridors to provide express and stopping services;

• Providing one express train per hour to Glasgow (two hour fifteen minute journey time);

• Providing one express train per hour to Edinburgh (two hour journey time); and

• No stops at intermediate settlements for express services (except Dundee).

A.234 Phase 1 would include line speed improvements, additional loops to allow passing of freight trains, and upgraded signalling along the entire length of the line to reduce headway times. The intervention would also require more powerful rolling stock. Phase 2 would involve the removal of the single track at Usan, including a new bridge over Montrose Basin.

A.235 The passenger enhancements could be optimised to also benefit freight operations. It is envisaged that this would include:

• Provision of bi-directional signalling along the route to reduce the impact of engineering works on the route (permitting the route to remain open for freight throughout the day and week);

• Increased length of freight loops (allowing longer freight trains); and

• Removal of speed limits that are below 75 mph for freight trains.

A.237 This intervention would help to reduce journey times between Aberdeen and the Central Belt by around 20 minutes, the majority of which would be delivered under Phase 1.

A.241 Costs for the passenger service enhancement are estimated to be in the range £100m - £250m for the Phase 1 passenger improvements, and a further cost of £100m - £250m for Phase 2. The additional freight improvements are estimated to cost £50m - £100m.

A.242 The deliverability of the intervention is considered technically and operationally feasible. The crossing over the Montrose Basin at Usan would potentially impact negatively on the local environment, and will need to be planned with care. However, this component if constructed would provide operational efficiencies and remove the only single track section of the East Coast Main Line. The physical works do not use any untried construction, although localised issues requiring increased technical capabilities to overcome might arise as the design process progresses. There are a large number of structures along the route for improvement, including under and over-bridges, viaducts and tunnels. All will need to be checked to determine the need for suitable upgrade to allow envisaged line speed and freight gauge enhancements. Additional loops will also be needed to allow freight trains to be passed.

Pages 120 - 122 - https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/26366/j11260a.pdf

I note that the target journey time of 2h15m for Aberdeen-Glasgow was based on stopping at Dundee only. If current thinking is that Perth and Stirling will also be served by the express service then I guess the target now would be around 2h20m?

Perhaps the outcome will be that the £200 million available will be spent on the Phase 1 improvements (line speed improvements, additional loops, upgraded signalling) and Phase 2 (Montrose-Usan) will be deferred indefinitely.

 

[47271]

My £750m was an imaginary annual budget (I qualified it with 'we wish') available for five years to try to bring some sense of prioritisation to those who seemingly would have us restore to service every disused line in Scotland.

I first plucked it out of the air on Wednesday evening as a cost to reopen Buchan on the basis that it's a long distance line that would follow its original route but isn't a complete non starter as a idea, and then I went on to try to get our most enthusiastic restorer to tell us what their order of prioritisation would be...

 

[clc]

Question S5W-23122: Linda Fabiani, East Kilbride, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 13/05/2019

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide a progress update on the enhancements to the East Kilbride rail corridor.

Answered by Michael Matheson (14/05/2019):

There is continuing growth on the East Kilbride line and some peak journeys on this route regularly appear in the list of top ten overcrowded ScotRail services.

We are making investments now to help with this. Successful electrification of Edinburgh to Glasgow routes now allows the redeployment of diesel trains so ScotRail will provide more than 1,000 extra weekday seats for East Kilbride services from 20 May 2019. However, existing limitations in track layout, capacity and access to stations means there are limits to the length and frequency of trains which can run on this route, and we know that more needs to be done to help make rail travel an attractive choice.

That is why we have now agreed to provide up to £24.8 million to Network Rail to progress the major development work required. This will help determine the right long-term solution and will focus on providing enhanced connectivity (more frequent services), improved accessibility to stations, better transport integration, with improved park and ride facilities and active travel provisions. Our aim, whilst delivering this, is to move towards a carbon free journey from home to destination for communities along the route, by considering electrification.

We anticipate that the development work will take approximately 18 months, with recommendations to the Scottish Government on a package of major infrastructure investment to follow.

https://www.parliament.scot/parliam...&ReferenceNumbers=S5W-23122&ResultsPerPage=10

 

[JLUK144]

As someone who uses trains on the Glasgow South Western regularly, I find the lack of definites in that statement disappointing. The doubling and electrification of the line is continually considered to be in the ‘near future’. It would be a damn sight better if Holyrood managed to give us a proper date for future improvement works - say 2021 for doubling and 2022 for electrification - instead of this ‘in the near future’ nonsense. The doubling and electrification of the Glasgow South Western could potentially see the rebirth of the line as it would be used as a diversionary route for Pendolinos and TPE’s rolling stock.

 

[takno]

As someone who uses trains on the Glasgow South Western regularly, I find the lack of definites in that statement disappointing. The doubling and electrification of the line is continually considered to be in the ‘near future’. It would be a damn sight better if Holyrood managed to give us a proper date for future improvement works - say 2021 for doubling and 2022 for electrification - instead of this ‘in the near future’ nonsense. The doubling and electrification of the Glasgow South Western could potentially see the rebirth of the line as it would be used as a diversionary route for Pendolinos and TPE’s rolling stock.

It would probably better for keeping the electrification teams together and working purposes as well, but if you keep doing things in a sensible order and actually plan ahead then you can't announce every single little development 30 times. How, as a politician, are you going to look proactive if you don't sit on everything for a year until every ounce of publicity has been wrung from it?

 

[hexagon789]

It would probably better for keeping the electrification teams together and working purposes as well, but if you keep doing things in a sensible order and actually plan ahead then you can't announce every single little development 30 times. How, as a politician, are you going to look proactive if you don't sit on everything for a year until every ounce of publicity has been wrung from it?

They could be extremely proactive and get on with it...