• 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!

Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

MadMac

Member
Joined
13 Jun 2008
Messages
955
Location
Moorpark, CA
Question will be whether it's worth increasing it beyond 100mph, especially when ScotRail's safety-case is based on 100mph maximum and they're unlikely to get that much in way of gains from >100mph running on most of the network.
Also, that Perth-Dundee section has a lot of automatic half-barrier crossings which are limited to 95 MPH. Going to 100 MPH means going to full barriers, CCTV etc and signalling which is expensive.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Also, that Perth-Dundee section has a lot of automatic half-barrier crossings which are limited to 95 MPH. Going to 100 MPH means going to full barriers, CCTV etc and signalling which is expensive.

Point of order, AHBs are good for 100mph (but not any higher).
 

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,627
Dunblane to Perth is already 90mph for most of it and 100mph from Whitemoss Crossing to the Earn viaduct. What does make a difference is the traction. An HST out of Dunblane is up to 90 in jig time, a 170 you've no chance until the falling gradient into Gleneagles. I can't see an EMU or bi mode beating that time wise, but much more efficient of course
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,693
Location
Scotland
The best way to improve journey times has been said many times before inclusing below, improve your minimum speeds not your maximum speeds.
Especially if you target speed differentials. For example, if you could increase the speed limit on a quarter mile of track by 20mph, then improving the approach speed from 30mph to 50mph at a station where most trains stop isn't going to have as big an impact as replacing a bridge with a 60mph limit with one with a speed limit of 80mph on a line that is 100mph either side.

Though, naturally, it would be ideal to replace the 60mph bridge with a 100mph one so that trains don't have to slow down at all!
 

Southsider

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2015
Messages
750
Tree cutting still happening on the EK line overnight despite the lockdown. Some more technical looking guys out and about today, one in a Network Rail van and the others in contractor’s vans, never noticed the name though.
The vans belong to Amco Giffen. A google search suggest they specialise in infrastructure projects.
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,595
The vans belong to Amco Giffen. A google search suggest they specialise in infrastructure projects.

Someone mentioned there was drainage works . If theres advanced plans on EK wiring , id thought NR would of been out already.
 

CEN60

Member
Joined
17 Dec 2018
Messages
266
The Amco Vans mentioned above are more likely to be related to works other than Electrification - more likely structure maint. or drainage as also mentioned above. For the record the Consultant looking at the electrification scheme for EK is WSP.
 

mcmad

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2015
Messages
977
The plans for wiring EK aren't much more that a few sketches other than a couple of places where significant work is thought necessary.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
6,477
Location
Between Peterborough & Bedlington

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
2,544
Location
North West
I wonder whether there is much talk about electrifying the lines to Anniesland via Maryhil, East Kilbride or Barrhead / Kilmarnock. Further south towards Stranraer or Carlisle via Dumfries seem unlikely though.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
2,544
Location
North West
Some sort of prep work for East Kilbride is going on at the moment, AIUI.

It will be good if that does happen. I am particularly surprised that the Maryhill line has evidently not been looked at, as it could be a useful diversionary route.
 

alangla

Member
Joined
11 Apr 2018
Messages
1,178
Location
Glasgow
It will be good if that does happen. I am particularly surprised that the Maryhill line has evidently not been looked at, as it could be a useful diversionary route.

AIUI it has, but there’s a low aqueduct under a canal that causes a bit of a problem. Given the trains, in normal times, largely carry fresh air, it’s going to be difficult to justify outside of an event like the 2016 Queen Street closure.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,717
Location
Glasgow
I wonder whether there is much talk about electrifying the lines to Anniesland via Maryhil, East Kilbride or Barrhead / Kilmarnock. Further south towards Stranraer or Carlisle via Dumfries seem unlikely though.

The EK line is to get electrified, can't remember about Barrhead/Kilmarnock. Queen Street-Maryhill-Anniesland would be logical given the line beyond is electrified as is the approach to Queen Street.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Some sort of prep work for East Kilbride is going on at the moment, AIUI.

Surveys etc, it’s in early stages of design. By no means a commitment to delivery, but I’d say it’s likely. I still think it would be perfect for battery trains though.
 

Scotrail314209

Established Member
Joined
1 Feb 2017
Messages
2,346
Location
Edinburgh
I’m surprised that they haven’t electrified their Maryhill line as part as EGIP. It’ll allow 385s to be diverted into the Low Level in the event of issues in the high level. Also it would allow more suburban diesel workings to transfer over to EMUs.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,439
Location
Yorkshire
If anyone wishes to make any proposals/suggestions for additional electrification schemes please feel free to create a new thread (if there isn't one already) in the Speculative Ideas section :)
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,225
Location
Bolton
There were three electrification schemes identified explicitly in 2016, East Kilbride & Barrhead, Kilmarnock & Barassie and Maryhill. The Scottish Government's recent Programme for Government namedrops the first of these. If they were progressing work on anything else, they'd have namedropped that too.

The 'Rolling Programme of Electrification' idea is still mentioned. From a political perspective I think we can see that it will continue along these lines, but slowly.

Maryhill is an attractive idea for a small scheme where there's not much capital available, but as far as I understand it would release only two DMUs, and for a route which is very far from busy.

I have heard almost nothing about Dunblane to Dundee via Perth, although I understand remodeling at Perth and significant tunnel works are required here. The Borders Railway seems unlikely to be a priority for now with just 2tph. The Edinburgh Suburban line is often mentioned, but given the big problems with the idea of a local service along it again would have limited benefits.
 
Last edited:

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,208
The electrification of the Sub isn't for passenger use except for diversions. It's to allow electric haulage of freight via the ECML to Mossend. It's predicated on the construction of a new feeder at Curriehill. This has to be jointly planned by NR and the Grid, since a traditional feeder uses only one of the three phases and so unbalances the supply. (However I have seen proposals for small solid state feeders which use all three phases)
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,595
Surveys etc, it’s in early stages of design. By no means a commitment to delivery, but I’d say it’s likely. I still think it would be perfect for battery trains though.

Still not being offcially announced.
 

Southsider

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2015
Messages
750
Surveys etc, it’s in early stages of design. By no means a commitment to delivery, but I’d say it’s likely. I still think it would be perfect for battery trains though.
It’s quite a climb to East Kilbride with lots of stops along the way; is battery technology there yet?
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
It’s quite a climb to East Kilbride with lots of stops along the way; is battery technology there yet?

Absolutely! Hills are irrelevant. It’s power output and battery capacity that is important. Power output is whatever the train can do, and an electric train doesn’t care where the electrons come from - OLE or battery.

Re battery capacity, the amount of energy needed to lift a 3 car Class 380 / 385 the 130metres from Muirhouse to East Kilbride, over and above the energy needed to propel it on level track, is about 200MJ, assuming 85% electrical efficiency of the train. To put it in context, a standard Tesla S has nearly twice that in its 625kg battery pack.

And it’s downhill on the way back ;)
 

Rick1984

Member
Joined
23 Aug 2012
Messages
1,030
You think the way to go would be to electrify lines and have short breaks on difficult sections with trains using batteries to transverse.

Probably not as simple as that but seems a sensible way around problem areas
 

Scotrail12

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
834
Electrifying EK is in the works as others have said. I definitely feel that the EK line would seriously benefit from electrification (and also 4tph in future). EK was my last proper train journey before lockdown and from what I gathered then, the DMU service is totally inadequate. Was reasonably busy but not excessively although I was travelling at the beginning of a Thursday afternoon. I can imagine that those services would be packed during the peaks.

Not seen anything about Maryhill but I don't think it would change much with only 2 units to be released (I think it's usually a 2 coach 158 on that route). Wasn't busy when I went on it a few months ago, only 2 or 3 others in the carriage. I just don't know if it would be worth it in the long run.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
6,477
Location
Between Peterborough & Bedlington
An interesting potential electrification bulletin here... (taken from New Civil Engineer; relevant text in italics)

Arup secures Scottish rail junction improvement work

Network Rail has appointed Arup to deliver engineering services for its planned Portobello Junction Enhancement project in Edinburgh to bolster the reliability of services to the Scottish Borders and beyond.
Arup’s work on the project has been valued at just under £800,000, which is below the £1M price tag anticipated by Network Rail at tender stage, but there is a further £23M of work that could be added.
According to Campaign for Borders Rail chair Simon Walton, the junction is the single most pressing improvement that can be made to the Borders Railway as it is currently a bottleneck that has caused delays since the Borders Railway opened in 2015.
The contract is for multi-disciplinary design services including engineering feasibility studies and engineering assessment of the Portobello project with four further options that could be added.
The options being considered include renewal and remodelling of Niddrie South Junction as part of the Portobello Junction Enhancement and has been valued at £1.5M; improvements at Millerhill that are also worth £1.5M; a £5M scheme for Edinburgh Suburban Line Electrification and Re-signalling; and work worth £11M to £15M for the Scotland East to England Connectivity programme.
 

92002

Member
Joined
27 Mar 2014
Messages
1,124
Location
Clydebank

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,693
Location
Scotland
The complete renewal really should be done by a grade separated junction. To avoid conflicting moves.
Yes, it should be a grade separated junction, but if you had that kind of money would it be best spent here, at Carstairs, on the Almond Chord or at Greenhill?
 

92002

Member
Joined
27 Mar 2014
Messages
1,124
Location
Clydebank
Yes, it should be a grade separated junction, but if you had that kind of money would it be best spent here, at Carstairs, on the Almond Chord or at Greenhill?

Probably none of the above.

Business cases have already failed for all three. Portobello junction would need to be similarly assessed.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
6,477
Location
Between Peterborough & Bedlington
£800,000 doesn't buy much in a junction replacement. The replacement of Portobello Junction will be many £Ms. The money quoted may just cover the design, but not much else.

The complete renewal really should be done by a grade separated junction. To avoid conflicting moves.
Indeed; the £800k is quoted for Portobello Jn, the whole of Portobello Jn and nothing but Portobello Jn so help me God.

NCE state that a further £23m of work could be added, of which £5m includes electrification & re-signalling of the Edinburgh South Sub.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top