Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[Stopper]

Assuming you meant wouldn’t surprise above?

To make a business case for Almond Chord then of course you’re going to need more services. If you spend a few hundred million pounds on Almond Chord it won’t be to just improve reliability of existing services.

I think 2tph extra on E-G via Falkirk High is a likely first priority for that extra capacity.

But it’s likely that Almond Chord will
A - create more than 2tph of extra capacity
B - need more than 2tph extra to run to justify the (expensive) business case.

If you look at the Scotland Route Study 2043 Indicative frequency pattern you can see that an extra 2tph to Bathgate is one of the services proposed.

It also proposes an extra 1tph via Carstairs. I happen to think it’s more likely this would be something like a Motherwell to Edinburgh via Shotts service rather than Carstairs.

Yes I meant wouldn’t surprise. I think another 2tph from Edinburgh turning back at Bathgate might be a good shout for extra capacity. Many people will say another 2tph to Stirling as well but I think if that ever happens it would be replacing the current 2tph Cumbernauld paths.

 

[XC90]

I wish SR would introduce hourly or even 2 hourly Glasgow Motherwell carluke carstairs haymarket edinburgh services. This would save the walk to QS or the shotts route. This could be done in 52mins I reckon.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Yes I meant wouldn’t surprise. I think another 2tph from Edinburgh turning back at Bathgate might be a good shout for extra capacity. Many people will say another 2tph to Stirling as well but I think if that ever happens it would be replacing the current 2tph Cumbernauld paths.

I think that's the idea of the 6tph service. You'd need a redesign of Bathgate station for terminating services. Once you've added another platform in the depot area, it's not unreasonable to consider making it a through platform rather than a bay. The stations between Airdrie and Bathgate will need more frequency without slowing down end-to-end services so extending a Bathgate stopper over would be ideal. At that point you've got a stopper from Glasgow to Airdrie, and a stopper from Edinburgh to Airdrie. Join the two of them up, with a pause to let a semi-fast overtake, and everyone is happier than today.

 

[Stopper]

I think that's the idea of the 6tph service. You'd need a redesign of Bathgate station for terminating services. Once you've added another platform in the depot area, it's not unreasonable to consider making it a through platform rather than a bay. The stations between Airdrie and Bathgate will need more frequency without slowing down end-to-end services so extending a Bathgate stopper over would be ideal. At that point you've got a stopper from Glasgow to Airdrie, and a stopper from Edinburgh to Airdrie. Join the two of them up, with a pause to let a semi-fast overtake, and everyone is happier than today.

I don’t think it’s necessary yet, but by the time the Almond Chord is built there’s a chance it will be.

If new services have to be found to push the Almond Chord through then it probably comes second only too 6tph on the E-G.

 

[CEN60]

Are you allowed to say if Grade Separation applied both ends of the Almond Chord.

There were multiple options - including grade separation at both ends. (The Winchburgh end was quite complex as I recall - a bit like a puzzle with wet spaghetti)

 

[Stopper]

Both ends would be nice, but Winchburgh isn't essential since probably only 2tph will be coming from the Newbridge direction. On the Almond side, the traffic will be much more evenly split meaning grade separation is required.

 

[CEN60]

Both ends would be nice, but Winchburgh isn't essential since probably only 2tph will be coming from the Newbridge direction. On the Almond side, the traffic will be much more evenly split meaning grade separation is required.

There were some outrageous "flat" options looked at for Winchburgh also - "NR60 H" Switches 100mph turnouts as I recall !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (just what you want in a cutting with a canal above it!!

 

[EMU303]

Slightly off topic and maybe this has been covered in the previous 125 pages, so apologies in advance if so..... If the chord means more trains stopping at Gateway then can the price of a tram ticket from there to the airport be looked at - £6 single or £8.50 return, which I believe applies to any distance to/from the airport? To encourage more people to take the train/tram to/from Gateway when using the airport then a "short hop" fare for the tram is necessary? Seems crazy to charge the same price for say Airport - Haymarket on the tram versus the brief journey from Airport - Gateway.. ?

 

[Stopper]

There were some outrageous "flat" options looked at for Winchburgh also - "NR60 H" Switches 100mph turnouts as I recall !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (just what you want in a cutting with a canal above it!!

yeah, obviously Winchburgh will need to be upgraded from single-lead to flat anyway.

Slightly off topic and maybe this has been covered in the previous 125 pages, so apologies in advance if so..... If the chord means more trains stopping at Gateway then can the price of a tram ticket from there to the airport be looked at - £6 single or £8.50 return, which I believe applies to any distance to/from the airport? To encourage more people to take the train/tram to/from Gateway when using the airport then a "short hop" fare for the tram is necessary? Seems crazy to charge the same price for say Airport - Haymarket on the tram versus the brief journey from Airport - Gateway.. ?

The Airport tram should be cheaper anyway but I doubt it will be reduced unless there is some exceptional agreement made with the Airport. There’s no doubt it will become a lot busier though, at least 2 trains per hour on the E-G (Glasgow, Falkirk, Linlithgow, Polmont, Croy (Cumbernauld) traffic), 2 Dunblanes per hour (Stirling, Larbert/Falkirk are traffic) and possibly the Chieftain are much more attractive than every second Fife Circle service, and a bunch of irregular semi-fasts up north. The usage will more than double, probably triple, in the space of a few years once that happens.

 

[Altnabreac]

yeah, obviously Winchburgh will need to be upgraded from single-lead to flat anyway.




The Airport tram should be cheaper anyway but I doubt it will be reduced unless there is some exceptional agreement made with the Airport. There’s no doubt it will become a lot busier though, at least 2 trains per hour on the E-G (Glasgow, Falkirk, Linlithgow, Polmont, Croy (Cumbernauld) traffic), 2 Dunblanes per hour (Stirling, Larbert/Falkirk are traffic) and possibly the Chieftain are much more attractive than every second Fife Circle service, and a bunch of irregular semi-fasts up north. The usage will more than double, probably triple, in the space of a few years once that happens.

Agreed athough some of that will probably be offset by some abstraction from Edinburgh Park which is likely to lose at least 2tph and possibly all 4tph from the Winchburgh direction.

 

[Stopper]

Agreed athough some of that will probably be offset by some abstraction from Edinburgh Park which is likely to lose at least 2tph and possibly all 4tph from the Winchburgh direction.

If you say, for example, 8tph go via Almond (6tph shuttles, and 2tph Stirling or Cumbernauld/new service) and 2tph go via Newbridge (Stirling or Cumbernauld/new service) then it’s likely that Park would recieve 6tph overall (8tph if Bathgate sees a 2tph increase). Gateway would probably see 2tph shuttles and 2tph of the other service as well as 2tph Fife and 2tph Perth/Dundee which would also add up to 8tph.

Park is certainly better located, but it doesn’t quite justify it’s 8tph at the moment, the only reason it gets 4tph via Winchburgh is because Linlithgow/Polmont services are separated from Larbert/Stirling onces.

I think Park will keep the Cumbernauld service as the one that goes via Newbridge, as it’s clear Gateway is more of a priority in terms of EGIP than Park is, and the Cumbernauld seems to have replaced the Dunblane train as the diddy service ScotRail can shove around and cancel whenever anything goes wrong. Although there’s an argument they may rather have the Dunblane service run with a ‘clearer path’. Ideally the Cumbernauld service would be binned and a more necessary, attractive service would be run in it’s place.

Having trains from Glasgow (shuttles, not stoppers through Airdrie), Stirling, Falkirk, Larbert, Linlithgow etc could potentially boost numbers north of 500,000 a year I reckon. Park may dip slightly but from what I’ve seen recently there are a larger amount of passengers on the A-B services at Park than there are on the SDA ones.

 

[alangla]

Alternatively you could just stop maybe 2TPH from the E&G at Park. Presumably you’d want the Croy service to stop as the Cumbernauld services the other stops. Whether it’s path able and whether it’s politically acceptable to slow that service by a few minutes I don’t know, but I suspect there’s a good market at Park from the west.

 

[route101]

Assuming you meant wouldn’t surprise above?

To make a business case for Almond Chord then of course you’re going to need more services. If you spend a few hundred million pounds on Almond Chord it won’t be to just improve reliability of existing services.

I think 2tph extra on E-G via Falkirk High is a likely first priority for that extra capacity.

But it’s likely that Almond Chord will
A - create more than 2tph of extra capacity
B - need more than 2tph extra to run to justify the (expensive) business case.

If you look at the Scotland Route Study 2043 Indicative frequency pattern you can see that an extra 2tph to Bathgate is one of the services proposed.

It also proposes an extra 1tph via Carstairs. I happen to think it’s more likely this would be something like a Motherwell to Edinburgh via Shotts service rather than Carstairs.

Would it go via Hamilton i take it ? Make a call there .

 

[route101]

I wish SR would introduce hourly or even 2 hourly Glasgow Motherwell carluke carstairs haymarket edinburgh services. This would save the walk to QS or the shotts route. This could be done in 52mins I reckon.

Is it not already 2 hourly ?. XC services can be busy now , maybe but unlikely we may get another LNER SERVICE

 

[Altnabreac]

Would it go via Hamilton i take it ? Make a call there .

That's an option or it could start from Motherwell, or even come from Wishaw or Lanark.

 

[snookertam]

I'd suggest the first priority once the Almond Chord creates additional capacity (or rather if...) might be for an extra train each hour calling all stations to Kirknewton - where it goes afterwards isn't really an issue - seems a bit of an anachronism that suburban stations like those only have an hourly service to the city centre.

 

[Stopper]

Alternatively you could just stop maybe 2TPH from the E&G at Park. Presumably you’d want the Croy service to stop as the Cumbernauld services the other stops. Whether it’s path able and whether it’s politically acceptable to slow that service by a few minutes I don’t know, but I suspect there’s a good market at Park from the west.

The E-G shuttles won’t stop at Park, they would have done long before now. Plus I’d suspect all of the shuttles to go via Gateway as the Almond chord is being built mainly for them among other reasons too. The Cumbernauld service would still stop at Park if it went that way, but if it continues to cart around fresh air it won’t be viable to keep it running post-Almond chord.

 

[Stopper]

I'd suggest the first priority once the Almond Chord creates additional capacity (or rather if...) might be for an extra train each hour calling all stations to Kirknewton - where it goes afterwards isn't really an issue - seems a bit of an anachronism that suburban stations like those only have an hourly service to the city centre.

I’d agree they deserve more than hourly but all of those stations are in areas of Edinburgh with pretty good bus services except for Kirknewton which is a tiny village. It’s hard to path services between Haymarket and Midcalder Jn but I suspect the rumoured Motherwell-Edinburgh via Shotts service may call at these stations in the future.

 

[Ginaro]

Slightly off topic and maybe this has been covered in the previous 125 pages, so apologies in advance if so..... If the chord means more trains stopping at Gateway then can the price of a tram ticket from there to the airport be looked at - £6 single or £8.50 return, which I believe applies to any distance to/from the airport? To encourage more people to take the train/tram to/from Gateway when using the airport then a "short hop" fare for the tram is necessary? Seems crazy to charge the same price for say Airport - Haymarket on the tram versus the brief journey from Airport - Gateway.. ?

A bus/tram ticket is the same whether you're going one stop or many, but the higher price of the tram to/from the airport is due to the airport charging buses and trams an access fee, source: https://twitter.com/CllrChasBooth/status/1070788401656418305

 

[CollyTheTank]

Just read a report that suggested that 25.3% of Scottish railtrack had been electrified.

It did however date back to late 2014, prior to Edinburgh - Glasgow, Stirling/Alloa/Dunblane lines, and Shotts line between Holytown and Mid Calder.

Does anyone have an up to date percentage on Scotland’s electrified lines, and whether more is planned - ie Stirling to Perth, East Kilbride, and Edinburgh South Suburban, or others.

 

[scotrail158713]

AFAIK East Kilbride is the next line intended for electrification. However there seems to be something holding it up.
I think, ideally, they want the Fife Circle wired, but the Forth Rail Bridge is a problem.

 

[hexagon789]

AFAIK East Kilbride is the next line intended for electrification. However there seems to be something holding it up.
I think, ideally, they want the Fife Circle wired, but the Forth Rail Bridge is a problem.

There are a few solutions to the Forth Bridge I can think of, but electrifying Glasgow-EK/Barrhead/Kilmarnock is easier and probably more needed in the short term.

 

[route101]

AFAIK East Kilbride is the next line intended for electrification. However there seems to be something holding it up.
I think, ideally, they want the Fife Circle wired, but the Forth Rail Bridge is a problem.

NR are clearing the vegetation for a survey of the EK line

 

[385001]

Interesting article in The Courier today speculating about future electrification for Tayside and Fife as well as other improvements.

First time I've seen mention of a strategic review. 15-year investment plan hoped for by the spring.

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/new...tions-between-east-and-west-coast-rail-lines/

Lines could be electrified to improve connections between east and west coast rail lines
by Paul Malik
© DC Thomson
Railway lines in Tayside and Fife could be electrified to connect better with the West Coast mainline, rail chiefs have suggested.

ScotRail boss Alex Hynes and public finance minister Kate Forbes were among representatives at a discussion on the problems facing the country’s rail infrastructure at an SNP fringe event on Tuesday.

Rail Delivery Group, which hosted the event, is calling for an overhaul of the country’s network – including stripping outmoded “Victorian” regulations and improving ticketing options.

There are currently on average only two trains a day between Fife and Scotland’s biggest city Glasgow.

Mr Hynes said it was hoped a strategic review of the country’s railways would be ready by the spring. He said more needed to be done to improve the network, including improving frequency of trains to Fife and the East Coast line north of Edinburgh.

When asked how ScotRail intended to improve connectivity between towns on the east coast, in particular between Fife and Glasgow, Mr Hynes said a 15-year plan for the future was nearing completion.

“We are very fortunate that as well as the operations, maintenance and renewal budget going up by 20% over the next five years, the Scottish government also has a £200 million a year budget for rail enhancements,” he said.

“We are currently studying what infrastructure we need to put in place west of Edinburgh Waverley, Aberdeen, Inverness and the West Highland line to improve the service further.

“We know the job is not yet finished. We want more electric services in Scotland and we would like to move round more of the country at a mile a minute.

“Our ambition is that by the spring we will set out a 15-year investment plan for Scotland’s railway, which doesn’t just set out decarbonisation plans but also delivers speed, frequency – no matter where you are in the country.”

Ms Forbes said that without fully devolved powers of transport, accountability over the country’s rail network would always be “half-baked”.

She said: “(With devolved control) we will be able to make decisions on where and how we invest in our railways and how to ensure there is one line of accountability on our railways.

“At the moment it is a half-baked measure, with partial responsibility in Scotland and partial responsibility south of the border.

“There’s huge potential for railways and wider transport policy if we have all the powers of control within our grasp.”

Infrastructure is currently the responsibility of Network Rail, while the rail service is delivered by Abellio, which is responsible for running ScotRail.

A report into the UK rail network featured as part of the Queen’s Speech yesterday, with the announcement of a white paper to deliver the findings of the Williams’ review.

UK transport secretary Grant Shapps said passengers deserved a punctual, modern and reliable railway.

“Our priority is ensuring we have reliable trains which run on time, delivering the outstanding services communities across the country rely on,” he said.

The Williams Rail Review, a root and branch review of Britain’s railways, was commissioned by former transport secretary Chris Grayling in September 2018.

It was established to look at the structure of the whole rail industry and the way passenger rail services are delivered.

 

[clc]

It’ll be interesting to see how much of the £200 million a year enhancements budget is spent on electrification.

 

[Chris125]

88001 worked the inaugural services between Grangemouth / Daventry.

I captured it returning South through Coatbridge Central this afternoon but it was running on diesel. Image on Facebook shows it did have the pan up at Camelon at least when arriving this morning.

After this first run went wrong, how much use have the wires down to Grangemouth actually had since being turned on?

 

[mcmad]

Ms Forbes said that without fully devolved powers of transport, accountability over the country’s rail network would always be “half-baked”.
She said: “(With devolved control) we will be able to make decisions on where and how we invest in our railways and how to ensure there is one line of accountability on our railways.
“At the moment it is a half-baked measure, with partial responsibility in Scotland and partial responsibility south of the border

I see the SNP are still pushing the line but can't explain what they are missing as at the moment they do make "make decisions on where and how we invest in our railways" but don't want to take the accountability when it goes wrong.

 

[InOban]

Because the size of the Scottish budget, particularly capital spending, is fixed in relation to the UK - the Scogov has no borrowing powers. Because of the political paralysis in London, there are no new schemes anywhere.

 

[JamesT]

Because the size of the Scottish budget, particularly capital spending, is fixed in relation to the UK - the Scogov has no borrowing powers. Because of the political paralysis in London, there are no new schemes anywhere.

That's not entirely correct, the Scottish Government has limited borrowing powers for capital spending and to cover shortfalls - https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-17-02702/

 

[Highland37]

Yes there are limited borrowing powers but not the same as the UK Government has, for example.