• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Could the Borders railway feasibly be extended to Hawick or even Carlisle?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/borders-railway-5-years-on.208939

I'm a big fan of the Borders Railway - a journey on it is always enjoyable, and for a nice day out, Stow is a lovely destination. I'm really glad to see such positive coverage.

I have serious doubts about the viability of taking it to Carlisle, but I think Hawick is feasible, and I hope it gets there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

DorkingMain

Member
Joined
25 Aug 2020
Messages
692
Location
London, UK
I'm a big fan of the Borders Railway - a journey on it is always enjoyable, and for a nice day out, Stow is a lovely destination. I'm really glad to see such positive coverage.

I have serious doubts about the viability of taking it to Carlisle, but I think Hawick is feasible, and I hope it gets there.

Main problem with taking to Carlisle is that Hawick to Carlisle is a whole lot of nothing inbetween. If there were several places en route that would benefit, it would make sense. But it's the best part of 50 miles of track just to plug it into a station that already exists.

The big shame with the Borders Railway is how conservative they were with the (re)construction. There wasn't really much thought given to adding future capacity.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
Main problem with taking to Carlisle is that Hawick to Carlisle is a whole lot of nothing inbetween. If there were several places en route that would benefit, it would make sense. But it's the best part of 50 miles of track just to plug it into a station that already exists.

The big shame with the Borders Railway is how conservative they were with the (re)construction. There wasn't really much thought given to adding future capacity.

Agree on both points.

I help to look after the bothy near the site of Riccarton Junction station, and as you say, the whole area is pretty empty and wild. Besides the very modestly sized town of Hawick, there's not much there at all, and I can't see there being enough demand for local travel to/from Carlisle to make it justifiable. Edinburgh to Carlisle journey times will be too long to be competitive with the WCML, there probably won't be much demand for extra freight capacity, and is there really much need for a diversionary route? Yes, the WCML has been closed on a couple of occasions, but Carlisle to Newcastle and the G&SW provide alternative routes into Scotland if needed.

And yes, the line should have had a lot more double track from the start, and the lack of it creates an expensive problem in the future, if traffic picks up any more.
 

37201xoIM

Member
Joined
29 Apr 2016
Messages
334
If / when HS2 makes the capacity situation tighter (still!) over Beattock, query whether that might sway the argument regarding through freight, perhaps.

Also yes, very little settlement south of Hawick, but an awful lot of trees currently being taken out by road... clearly not enough alone to come close to a business case, but taken together with other factors and a need for serious modal shift to tackle the climate emergency...?

And yes, those peep-hole overbridges are bloody awful!
 

mcmad

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2015
Messages
977
More sensible to upgrade the GSW and send any freight via the GSW into Glasgow rather than sending up the Borders line to Edinburgh and then back across to Glasgow.
 

DB

Guest
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
5,036
Agree on both points.

I help to look after the bothy near the site of Riccarton Junction station, and as you say, the whole area is pretty empty and wild. Besides the very modestly sized town of Hawick, there's not much there at all, and I can't see there being enough demand for local travel to/from Carlisle to make it justifiable. Edinburgh to Carlisle journey times will be too long to be competitive with the WCML, there probably won't be much demand for extra freight capacity, and is there really much need for a diversionary route? Yes, the WCML has been closed on a couple of occasions, but Carlisle to Newcastle and the G&SW provide alternative routes into Scotland if needed.

And yes, the line should have had a lot more double track from the start, and the lack of it creates an expensive problem in the future, if traffic picks up any more.

Possibly the biggest mistake was building new structures to single line width. That will be massively expensive to do anything about.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
If / when HS2 makes the capacity situation tighter (still!) over Beattock, query whether that might sway the argument regarding through freight, perhaps.

If that position arises, then it would surely be better to build a new line to where the freight needs to go, ie Glasgow, rather than somewhere it doesn’t. Indeed, if a new line is built, it would be better to build it for high speed, giving benefit to passenger trains, leaving the extra capacity on the WCML for freight.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
Possibly the biggest mistake was building new structures to single line width. That will be massively expensive to do anything about.

Surely additional capacity will be by providing more carriages on the same trains? What possible justification will there ever be for a more frequent service than the current track arrangements could not cope with?
 

DB

Guest
Joined
18 Nov 2009
Messages
5,036
Surely additional capacity will be by providing more carriages on the same trains? What possible justification will there ever be for a more frequent service than the current track arrangements could not cope with?

The point is that the cost of double teack structures wouldn't have been that much more than single track, but widening them later would be massively expensive.

Single track lines obviously severely limit capacity, and could easily become a constraint in future - especially if it ever becomes a through route again, unlikely as that seems at the moment.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
I guess at the time the additional money was not available, for something unlikely to be used for many years hence.

Is the current track configuration really likely to be a constraint, even if the through route was reinstated in 50 years time? Is there really ever going to be a train more than every half hour on this line? Really?
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
The point is that the cost of double teack structures wouldn't have been that much more than single track, but widening them later would be massively expensive.
It's true that passive provision isn't massively expensive, but on a project that was struggling to justify its cost that might have been the proverbial last straw. And, really, how likely is it that the line is going to be unable to handle levels of traffic in the foreseeable future?
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
To answer the thread question (which we’ve actually done before), that depends on. Your definition of feasible.

Feasible engineering-wise? Yes.

Feasible in any rational socio-economic analysis? Never.
 

fgwrich

Established Member
Joined
15 Apr 2009
Messages
9,250
Location
Between Edinburgh and Exeter
I guess at the time the additional money was not available, for something unlikely to be used for many years hence.

Is the current track configuration really likely to be a constraint, even if the through route was reinstated in 50 years time? Is there really ever going to be a train more than every half hour on this line? Really?

In some areas, sadly Yes. The formation from the Edinburgh South Bypass through Eskbank to Gorebridge has rather been "value engineered" with large structures like Hardengreen Viaduct and the refurbished Lothianbridge viaduct all designed to a single track formation only. Heading further down the line, the layout at Gala won't allow double track through there ever again either; At Gala itself, the platform is forced between the trackbed and a main road, further down the rebuilt road bridge on the former station site is built to single track width only, and the viaduct just passed the Asda building is single track as well. A fair chunk of the first section of single track of the Borders has been laid out with the track running down the centre of the former double track trackbed - Very similar to British Rail's rationalisation actions in the 1970s.

It's not just passenger services though which could theoretically run down the Borders - a large amount of the forests in the Borders are due for harvesting over the next few years, which could generate a lot of timber traffic. Ok, by using the current Borders Railway, they would have to go 3 sides of a square if the timber was heading to Chirk. But it would be better to have it go by Rail than by the lorryload.

Thankfully ScotRail has just uploaded a cab view, so you can see the formation from the cab for yourself - Google clearly hasn't been updated yet, as it shows a double track railway disappearing into the fields at Eskbank.

 

FQTV

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2012
Messages
1,067
Or to rephrase “ everything is possible with enough time money and political will”

Or to rephrase once again, nothing is possible with current political will, but politics is also fickle, and economics is not itself political; economics is mostly about confidence.
 

yoyothehobo

Member
Joined
21 Aug 2015
Messages
550
If there had never been a line through to Carlisle in the past, no one would be suggesting it now.
 

NorthOxonian

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
5 Jul 2018
Messages
1,483
Location
Oxford/Newcastle
How does an extension fit the famous Altnabreac criteria?
  • Population of 10,000+: Hawick 14k, Carlisle 75k (urban). The largest intermediate settlement is Longtown - just 3,000 people live there.
  • 60 minutes (75 at a push) journey time of a major employment centre: No, the current line takes 60 minutes end to end, an extension to Hawick/Carlisle would go well above this. Hawick - Carlisle might be under 60 minutes, but the latter isn't a properly major employment centre.
  • Extant or mainly unobstructed trackbed: No - the viaduct over the river Teviot is an example of missing infrastructure on the route.
  • Ability to extend an existing service so more terminal capacity is not required: Yes, on the northern end, not so much on the southern end.
  • Regeneration Potential of a deprived area: Somewhat - the area served by the route is more deprived than average but not by that much. Hawick is mainly 2nd quintile, as is Carlisle.
So there isn't much of a case for either the extension to Hawick or the full Carlisle route. The other test is to look at rival public transport options - how are loadings on the X95 parallels this route?
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
How does an extension fit the famous Altnabreac criteria?
  • Population of 10,000+: Hawick 14k, Carlisle 75k (urban). The largest intermediate settlement is Longtown - just 3,000 people live there.
  • Regeneration Potential of a deprived area: Somewhat - the area served by the route is more deprived than average but not by that much. Hawick is mainly 2nd quintile, as is Carlisle.
So there isn't much of a case for either the extension to Hawick or the full Carlisle route. The other test is to look at rival public transport options - how are loadings on the X95 parallels this route?

Last time I looked, Carlisle already had a railway station With regular services to Edinburgh (and Glasgow, London, Manchester, Birmingham....)

I’m not sure providing a different, longer route to Edinburgh is going to do anything for the economic prosperity of the city.
 

adrock1976

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
4,450
Location
What's it called? It's called Cumbernauld
Turning the suggestions for reinstatement to Carlisle on its head, has anybody ever thought about the feasibility of connecting to Berwick upon Tweed instead?

Berwick has a Scotland postcode (TD), and is a reasonably sized town for that region, and gave its name to the county of Berwickshire. Also, Stow, Galashiels, Tweedbank, and Hawick are allocated the TD postcode.
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
4,179
Turning the suggestions for reinstatement to Carlisle on its head, has anybody ever thought about the feasibility of connecting to Berwick upon Tweed instead?

Berwick has a Scotland postcode (TD), and is a reasonably sized town for that region, and gave its name to the county of Berwickshire. Also, Stow, Galashiels, Tweedbank, and Hawick are allocated the TD postcode.

Unless the quantity of mail bags that need to be conveyed to & from Stow, Galashiels, Tweedbank and Hawick is sufficient to justify building a railway to Berwick to convey them, I am unsure what the postcode has got to do with the likelihood of an economic stream of passengers for such a route? Postcodes are for the convenience of the Royal Mail rather than any indication of passenger demand.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
Complete non starter IMHO.

But I'm a bit confused by the criticism of the single track sections - is the line through the Borders ever going to require much more than a half hourly six coach train? I could see the need for additional services in Midlothian (possibly permitting the Tweedbank services to skip some stops), but how much better than a half hourly train do people expect the line to need at the Borders end?

Turning the suggestions for reinstatement to Carlisle on its head, has anybody ever thought about the feasibility of connecting to Berwick upon Tweed instead?

Berwick has a Scotland postcode (TD), and is a reasonably sized town for that region, and gave its name to the county of Berwickshire. Also, Stow, Galashiels, Tweedbank, and Hawick are allocated the TD postcode.

It tends to come up every time we discuss extending the Borders line, yes.

The line has been built on significantly in places (Rotary Way etc) and IIRC the chord at Tweedmouth was in the wrong direction (e.g. Kelso towards Alnmouth, so avoiding Berwick altogether)

Plus I'd argue that the TD postcode covers the Tweed valley, rather than it being a "Scottish" or "English" postcode - postcodes are often pretty independent of other geographical boundaries - hence places like Tiree nominally being part of "Paisley" - postcode boundaries are no basis for rail demand!
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,262
Turning the suggestions for reinstatement to Carlisle on its head, has anybody ever thought about the feasibility of connecting to Berwick upon Tweed instead?

Berwick has a Scotland postcode (TD), and is a reasonably sized town for that region, and gave its name to the county of Berwickshire. Also, Stow, Galashiels, Tweedbank, and Hawick are allocated the TD postcode.
Of course it’s been thought of before. Even surprisingly officially, IIRC from earlier threads.

But as said the Postcodes are fairly irrelevant, indeed TD is not just a “Scotland” post code, it extends into Northumberland. But much of the best rail route to Berwick (ie via Cornhill) is still firmly in Northumberland.

Personally I just cannot see the Scottish government ever building or contributing significantly to a railway in Northumberland.
 

Whistler40145

Established Member
Joined
30 Apr 2010
Messages
5,911
Location
Lancashire
How much of the track bed is still intact and is there a strong business case for reopening South of Tweedbank?
 

ian1944

Member
Joined
13 Dec 2012
Messages
501
Location
North Berwick
Plus I'd argue that the TD postcode covers the Tweed valley, rather than it being a "Scottish" or "English" postcode - postcodes are often pretty independent of other geographical boundaries - hence places like Tiree nominally being part of "Paisley" - postcode boundaries are no basis for rail demand!

Certainly not in Tiree.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
How much of the track bed is still intact and is there a strong business case for reopening South of Tweedbank?

That depends on your definition of strong.

I don’t think a business case has actually be formally attempted. Not least because it will make the existing Borders line business case (officially poor value for money, ie the Scottish economy would have been better off without it) look like a sure fire winner.

The business case would be absolutely horrendous.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,416
It's not just passenger services though which could theoretically run down the Borders - a large amount of the forests in the Borders are due for harvesting over the next few years, which could generate a lot of timber traffic. Ok, by using the current Borders Railway, they would have to go 3 sides of a square if the timber was heading to Chirk. But it would be better to have it go by Rail than by the lorryload.
The timber could go out overnight couldnt it? I assume the line is controlled from a 24hr signalling facility so only possessions would be an issue.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
The issue with shifting lumber is: where do you load it? Near the harvesting? Or a convenient railway location?

As is being demonstrated perfectly on the far north line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top