Slim I would imagine. It's never been really backed by Edinburgh Council and who wants to increase the time to get to Tweedbank/North Berwick/Dunbar. Not convinced of any significant demand to/from there either.Going slightly off topic, but I wonder what the chances of the station being reinstated at Abbeyhill when/if this work happens?
Slim I would imagine. It's never been really backed by Edinburgh Council and who wants to increase the time to get to Tweedbank/North Berwick/Dunbar. Not convinced of any significant demand to/from there either.
I agree but wouldn't extending services from the west just make congestion on the three lines through the east tunnels as bad as now with two lines.If it were going to reopen it would have to be as a terminus station for trains from the west rather than as a stop on services to the east. I can see value to an Abbeyhill station but I'd agree it seems unlikely ever to happen.
I agree but wouldn't extending services from the west just make congestion on the three lines through the east tunnels as bad as now with two lines.
My interpretation of the proposed track layout shown in the route study (page 61) was that the new third line would be predominantly for up (eastbound) services, it would only have quite limited use if heading towards the station.Yes, it would free up overall capacity at the main station by reducing platform dwell time at the expense of using up capacity in the eastern throat. Depends on where the capacity is most needed and how much extra capacity the third line gives you through the Calton tunnels as to whether it is a goer or not.
The diagram on that page also indicates that the new third line would also merge into the current two lines at Jocks Lodge rather than run all the way to Portobello.My interpretation of the proposed track layout shown in the route study (page 61) was that the new third line would be predominantly for up (eastbound) services, it would only have quite limited use if heading towards the station.
[if unaware others please refer to Altnabreac’s earlier post #538 to find the route study and diagram.]
Really? Do you know where about would the buffers have been?When were platforms 5 and 6 converted for motorail? Apparently the original buffer stops have been excavated and are now visible.
Really? Do you know where about would the buffers have been?
This photo from the early 1970s ( just as rationalisation was starting ) shows that there were 4 tracks out of the east end of Waverley as far as Portobello East junction. One challenge in any re-instatement to 3 or 4 lines is that slow trains coming on or off the Sub, Millerhill or Borders line would still need to cross the fast lines.
Neither is financially viable imo. The old Lothian Lines used to go over but that alignment is now a major road.So what is best. Over or Under?
I don't think a double lead junction is in any plans as yet. Even upping the speed on the current single lead would be a good start.A double lead junction would be a good start before anyone starts worrying about Grade Separation.
I don't think a double lead junction is in any plans as yet. Even upping the speed on the current single lead would be a good start.
Neither is financially viable imo. The old Lothian Lines used to go over but that alignment is now a major road.
Another good way of seeing it is to follow the link and click on the “side by side” option...https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=16.752666672269502&lat=55.9471&lon=-3.1048&layers=10&b=7 is probably the best way to view what was there and is there now. Just change the transparency to see the roads replace the rail lines.
I think the general consensus is that there isn't much chance of passenger services returning to the South Sub any time soon. If and when Abbeyhill junction is reinstated (which at the same time, would recreate the South Sub route in its original form) , there might be a possibility of the station being reinstated.I live beside the sub split for Millerhill and Portobello, Could there be a possibility of making the single track to Portobello a double as there appears to be room for it? Besides, what are the chances of some passenger use around the sub,and are there any plans for more freight round the sub?