• 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!

East Kilbride/Barrhead electrification updates

Joined
14 Mar 2021
Messages
192
Location
Glasgow
The real horror will the bridge at Clarkston. So many traffic flows converge there and a prolonged job will result major disruption of traffic to and from Glasgow.
This afternoon, I went to the public information event at Thornliebank.

I asked one of the engineers - he told me that there is sufficient clearance at Clarkston Toll bridge for electrification and so they don't plan to replace it. Apart from higher balustrades, it is out of scope.

The public information event was held in a small room. Network Rail, Story and SPL staff were present. Firstbus was not represented, even though the long diversion of bus routes 57 and 57A will have a significant impact over 14 months. East Renfrewshire Council was not represented - there is a lot of public concern about the impact on side streets of additional traffic from unplanned and unofficial diversions.

They displayed a drawing of the rebuilt Thornliebank Road bridge. It will have footpaths on both side of the road. They will remove the existing separate footbridge on the station side of the road. This drawing shows the temporary footbridge too, although they will remove it once the new road bridge is open. There are 6 utilities to divert, including a water main, before they demolish the old bridge in the last weekend of September.

There were raised voices in the room - the relationships between the project and some residents are clearly strained. It seems to me that they should have scheduled this information exercise before they began piling.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Southsider

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2015
Messages
759
This afternoon, I went to the public information event at Thornliebank.

I asked one of the engineers - he told me that there is sufficient clearance at Clarkston Toll bridge for electrification and so they don't plan to replace it. Apart from higher balustrades, it is out of scope.

The public information event was held in a small room. Network Rail, Story and SPL staff were present. Firstbus was not represented, even though the long diversion of bus routes 57 and 57A will have a significant impact over 14 months. East Renfrewshire Council was not represented - there is a lot of public concern about the impact on side streets of additional traffic from unplanned and unofficial diversions.

They displayed a drawing of the rebuilt Thornliebank Road bridge. It will have footpaths on both side of the road. They will remove the existing separate footbridge on the station side of the road. This drawing shows the temporary footbridge too, although they will remove it once the new road bridge is open. There are 6 utilities to divert, including a water main, before they demolish the old bridge in the last weekend of September.

There were raised voices in the room - the relationships between the project and some residents are clearly strained. It seems to me that they should have scheduled this information exercise before they began piling.
That’s a big plus for the project if they don’t have to replace the Clarkston Road bridge (possibly Strawhill Road too?). Other sources of information seemed to suggest otherwise but hopefully the engineer knows his stuff. I went along to one of the drop in sessions during a previous false start and the Network Rail staff knew less about the project than I did.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,901
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
That’s a big plus for the project if they don’t have to replace the Clarkston Road bridge (possibly Strawhill Road too?). Other sources of information seemed to suggest otherwise but hopefully the engineer knows his stuff. I went along to one of the drop in sessions during a previous false start and the Network Rail staff knew less about the project than I did.
Possibly a polyurea underside coating and surge arrestor combination is enough.
 

Southsider

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2015
Messages
759
Possibly a polyurea underside coating and surge arrestor combination is enough.
I’ve posted the diagram somewhere on here,IMG_0112.png electrical clearance isn’t the issue, it’s the pantograph hitting the shoulder of the arch

Edit - found it. It doesn’t mention which of the bridges are a problem in this respect And talks about track lowering.
 
Last edited:

OB23Gone

Member
Joined
22 Aug 2022
Messages
87
Location
Glasgow
Yes Masts have been going up this week upto a mile past Giffnock and more next week. The bridge at Thornliebank will be out for 14 MONTHS. There is a heck of a lot of services to be rerouted and reinstalled. Also some hefty shoring up works to the road on the Manswood side. 1 temporary pedestrian footbridge on ether side will be erected. The bridge itself won't be coming out until around September. There well be a press release, soon, with possibility of a fly through video Clarkston Toll Rail Bridge is basically only having coping work done and Not Coming Out. Track lowering is the option
 

gingertom

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2017
Messages
1,256
Location
Kilsyth
Clarkston Toll Rail Bridge is basically only having coping work done and Not Coming Out. Track lowering is the option
is there sufficient distance from the bridge to the station to get the track back to the correct height or will there be a need for rebuilding the platforms a bit lower too?
 

d9009alycidon

Member
Joined
22 Jun 2011
Messages
842
Location
Eaglesham
is there sufficient distance from the bridge to the station to get the track back to the correct height or will there be a need for rebuilding the platforms a bit lower too?
So in my previous post I had worked out that it is approximately 150m from the bridge to the end of the platform, the current slope is 1:68, so the track drops 2.2m Southerners post indicates that a lowering of 420mm is required (say 0.5m) so a drop of 2.7m. By my calculations that requires a slope of 1:55 from the platform end to the bridge, well within the capabilities of most trains, never mind a modern EMU.
 

gingertom

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2017
Messages
1,256
Location
Kilsyth
So in my previous post I had worked out that it is approximately 150m from the bridge to the end of the platform, the current slope is 1:68, so the track drops 2.2m Southerners post indicates that a lowering of 420mm is required (say 0.5m) so a drop of 2.7m. By my calculations that requires a slope of 1:55 from the platform end to the bridge, well within the capabilities of most trains, never mind a modern EMU.
Sounds like a workable plan. That rise will assist with braking for the station and speed things up going down the hill. Any blocks in place for this work to be carried out? Reckon Thornliebank road bridge is a little bit more pressing.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,793
Location
Glasgow
Sounds like a workable plan. That rise will assist with braking for the station and speed things up going down the hill. Any blocks in place for this work to be carried out? Reckon Thornliebank road bridge is a little bit more pressing.
I thought the whole branch was having a full closure next year for about a month in July/August? I.e. similar to the closure for Barrhead last year.
 

OB23Gone

Member
Joined
22 Aug 2022
Messages
87
Location
Glasgow
Some Mast Hunting Today. Burnfield Road Cottages, There is 1 right at the end of this road, to the left through the trees, at Robslee Drive, can just be seen another. Towards Thornliebank station,again through the trees, there is possibly 5 or 6 that can be seen. From Burnfield Road OB there are none to be seen in either direction. At Giffnock Station the Glasgow platform extension and just past the Office has been Smartly resurfaced. There is 1 mast positioned just beyond the platform end coming from EK.. Church Rd. OB towards Clarkston 7 can be seen in situ. From Clarkston Toll OB back to Church Rd. those 7 masts can be seen but 2 Capped of piles can be seen with 1 mast base and possibly another between the 7
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    689.7 KB · Views: 130
  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    764.6 KB · Views: 127
  • 3.jpg
    3.jpg
    790.5 KB · Views: 130
  • 4.jpg
    4.jpg
    571.9 KB · Views: 127

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,840
Location
Scotland
Possibly silly question, but is it going to be mainly twin-track cantilevers or do they still need to pile on the other side?
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,901
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
Some Mast Hunting Today. Burnfield Road Cottages, There is 1 right at the end of this road, to the left through the trees, at Robslee Drive, can just be seen another. Towards Thornliebank station,again through the trees, there is possibly 5 or 6 that can be seen. From Burnfield Road OB there are none to be seen in either direction. At Giffnock Station the Glasgow platform extension and just past the Office has been Smartly resurfaced. There is 1 mast positioned just beyond the platform end coming from EK.. Church Rd. OB towards Clarkston 7 can be seen in situ. From Clarkston Toll OB back to Church Rd. those 7 masts can be seen but 2 Capped of piles can be seen with 1 mast base and possibly another between the 7
Thanks for the update. Good to see progress
 

gingertom

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2017
Messages
1,256
Location
Kilsyth
Possibly silly question, but is it going to be mainly twin-track cantilevers or do they still need to pile on the other side?
IIRC it's been mentioned that TTCs are preferred, as obviously only one mast is needed, but that mast needs a larger pile to support it. Several things would suggest the use of a single track cantilever, STC or a portal. Ground conditions, signal sighting, the zig zag to accommodate a curve etc.
 

Glaswegian

Member
Joined
30 Sep 2021
Messages
19
Location
Falkirk
IIRC it's been mentioned that TTCs are preferred, as obviously only one mast is needed, but that mast needs a larger pile to support it. Several things would suggest the use of a single track cantilever, STC or a portal. Ground conditions, signal sighting, the zig zag to accommodate a curve etc.
Is it really true that two track cantilevers are preferred? Single track cantilevers seem to be much more common.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,745
Location
Leeds
Is it really true that two track cantilevers are preferred? Single track cantilevers seem to be much more common.
Are you talking about recently electrified lines or ones done in the past? Recently done lines seem to have lots of TTCs.
 

gingertom

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2017
Messages
1,256
Location
Kilsyth
Are you talking about recently electrified lines or ones done in the past? Recently done lines seem to have lots of TTCs.
TTCs seem to be a recent phenomenon. Also piled foundations for the masts seem to be a more recent practice. I used to have not infrequent journeys up and down the M74 and that part of the WCML looked like drilled and concreted was the preferred method. Concrete is still used where piles aren't suitable.
 

Charged up

Member
Joined
22 Oct 2023
Messages
8
Location
South Lanarkshire
I thought the whole branch was having a full closure next year for about a month in July/August? I.e. similar to the closure for Barrhead last year.

post #1692 gives a heads up on the line closure to come in 2025 along the route from Busby jncn to EK station.

This will include no services running to/from East Kilbride for 16 weeks from 01/02/25 to 24/05/25 then another 4 weeks closure from 02/08/25 to 30/08/25. Between those two main periods there will also be successive Sunday closures across the summer.

I'm not sure the options put forward by the project team, a few years ago, about how to deliver these works included such a sustained period of withdrawn rail services. The alternative during the 16 week closure will offer passengers a much poorer, longer road journey during a time of poor weather.

Link to Network Rail Engineering Access Statement [EAS] for 2025 in Scotland.


Hopefully passengers will return after this extended service disruption to fully utilise the greatly enhanced accessibility, upgraded station provision and new passenger facilities. But with little sign of journey time improvements, more efficient train door open/closing operation, electric rolling stock across all EK services, extra capacity or enhanced frequency on the route being delivered from late 2025 this may not be a given.


Latest Scottish Government update on its finances across all capital investment plans and the latest news, quoted below, on the specific East Kilbride rail project delivery and revised timescales. Challenging times ahead for providing funds for future electrification vs all the other SG investment pressures due to a continuing drift in delivery timescales and cost increases.

Project: East Kilbride Rail Enhancement
Business case approved stages: Project is part of the East Kilbride and Barrhead Rail Enhancement scheme. The scheme will make rail services reliable, efficient, and attractive to passengers and support modal shift whilst progressing against the Scottish Government's target to decarbonising the rail network. The OBC outlined that total project cost was estimated to be £100 million to £120 million and that it was estimated to be operational in December 2024. The FBC outlines that total project cost is estimated to be £139.8 million and that it is estimated to be operational in December 2025.

Progress at March 2023: No change to timing since the last report (as outlined at OBC, project is estimated to be operational December 2024).

The total cost of the project is now estimated at £136.8 million which is an increase in that previously reported. This is due to further refinement of the Full Business Case (FBC) cost and additional scope of the Hairmyres Loop extension and accessibility enhancements.

The project went to Transport Scotland's Investment and Decision-Making Board (IDM) in November 2022 and instruction was given to provide further assurance on the programme and the cost. Network Rail is working through providing further details to Transport Scotland and this should be finalised in the coming months. The project will then return to IDM Board prior to being provided to the Minister for Transport for endorsement.

Progress at December 2023: The FBC was approved in June 2023, with funding announced by the Minister for Transport in September 2023. The project is now in construction.

The total cost of the project is now estimated at £139.8 million which is an increase to that previously reported. This is due to further refinement of the cost and additional scope of the Hairmyres Loop extension and accessibility enhancements.

As per the approved FBC, the project is now estimated to be operational in December 2025 which is later than that outlined at OBC. This is due to re-phasing of the delivery of the electrification programme and seeking increased cost and programme assurance from Network Rail.



 
Last edited:

Glaswegian

Member
Joined
30 Sep 2021
Messages
19
Location
Falkirk
Are you talking about recently electrified lines or ones done in the past? Recently done lines seem to have lots of TTCs.
I am probably mainly going by observations of lines electrified in Scotland in the 2010s, so recent but not the most recent.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,745
Location
Leeds

Latest Scottish Government update on its finances across all capital investment plans and the latest news, quoted below, on the specific East Kilbride rail project delivery and revised timescales. Challenging times ahead for providing funds for future electrification vs all the other SG investment pressures due to a continuing drift in delivery timescales and cost increases.

Project: East Kilbride Rail Enhancement

I think that's the same document I linked in post #249 of the Scottish Decarbonisation thread, though the bits I quoted were limited to schemes that may come after EK:

 

Southsider

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2015
Messages
759
I am probably mainly going by observations of lines electrified in Scotland in the 2010s, so recent but not the most recent.
There are still some single track structures, look through the trees and you’ll see a couple with cantilevers already attached.

IMG_0244.jpeg
 

McRhu

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2015
Messages
444
Location
Lanark
As mentioned above and elsewhere, TTCs mean only one pile being needed which must be cheaper and quicker AND lessens the chances of hitting signalling cables, etc. Unfortunately the structures are bulkier and more visually intrusive with more metalwork in the sky. And unless I'm much mistaken, the distance between structures on straight track has been lessened since halcyon MKIII days, so more structures to contend with.
 

sannox

Member
Joined
1 Mar 2016
Messages
396
There were raised voices in the room - the relationships between the project and some residents are clearly strained. It seems to me that they should have scheduled this information exercise before they began piling.

This is unsurprising. The length of closure is very long, a large area is being cut off from bus services, the bus diversions are less than idea and lengthy (10-15 minutes at least to do what is currently 2-3 minutes). The official diversion routes are going to be largely ignored in favour of 'adhoc' diversions though pretty unsuitable roads too and the diversion route isn't great either.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,745
Location
Leeds
And unless I'm much mistaken, the distance between structures on straight track has been lessened since halcyon MKIII days, so more structures to contend with.
The article I've linked this morning (Haymarket-Dalmeny thread, post #400) has this to say on the distance between structures:

Another opportunity to reduce electrification costs is increasing span length to reduce the number of masts. A recent review of the master series OLE has shown that spans of 95 metres are possible which compares with those achievable by the higher-tensioned Siemens Sicat system. Lee advised that spans of up to 80 metres had been achieved for the Haymarket to Dalmeny electrification but ultimately the mean average span would be dictated by the geometry of the track, areas of long straight railway seeing the greatest benefit.
 

McRhu

Member
Joined
14 Oct 2015
Messages
444
Location
Lanark
The article I've linked this morning (Haymarket-Dalmeny thread, post #400) has this to say on the distance between structures:
That's very interesting thank you. I think the MKIIIa maximum distance was 71 metres, so 80 (or wow! 95 metres) is electrification with seven-league-boots on. That should make a very noticeable difference.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,398
That's very interesting thank you. I think the MKIIIa maximum distance was 71 metres, so 80 (or wow! 95 metres) is electrification with seven-league-boots on. That should make a very noticeable difference.
The key is the increased wire tension in all newer systems. Exposed windy locations are still likely to be an issue requiring shorter spans.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
6,497
Location
Between Peterborough & Bedlington
The key is the increased wire tension in all newer systems. Exposed windy locations are still likely to be an issue requiring shorter spans.
Precisely - the EK job (and indeed most of the post-MkIII jobs in Scotland) have used UKMS 100 (11kN Catenary/11kN Contact) or its Series 2 equivalent.
You'd be needing UKMS 125 (12kN Catenary/15kN Contact) to get the larger span lengths.
 

OB23Gone

Member
Joined
22 Aug 2022
Messages
87
Location
Glasgow
Around Thornliebank Station Yesterday in pictures

Around Thornliebank Station Yesterday In pictures Part 2
 

Attachments

  • 1 From the bridge  To Busby Junction.jpg
    1 From the bridge To Busby Junction.jpg
    555.5 KB · Views: 107
  • 2 A closer view from the bridge.jpg
    2 A closer view from the bridge.jpg
    474.9 KB · Views: 104
  • 3 Looking back to Busby Junction and end of run of.jpg
    3 Looking back to Busby Junction and end of run of.jpg
    529.2 KB · Views: 105
  • 4 Side of the bridge not often seen.jpg
    4 Side of the bridge not often seen.jpg
    516.2 KB · Views: 105
  • 5  Approaaching Masts.jpg
    5 Approaaching Masts.jpg
    550.9 KB · Views: 123
  • 6 Bridge Clearance Jepg.jpg
    6 Bridge Clearance Jepg.jpg
    529 KB · Views: 129
  • 7 Blown up Bridge Clearance .jpg
    7 Blown up Bridge Clearance .jpg
    284.1 KB · Views: 128
  • 8 1st mast in the Station.jpg
    8 1st mast in the Station.jpg
    532.6 KB · Views: 116
  • 9 Towards EK 2nd mast.jpg
    9 Towards EK 2nd mast.jpg
    463.7 KB · Views: 102
  • 10 2nd mast in station towards EK.jpg
    10 2nd mast in station towards EK.jpg
    494.5 KB · Views: 97
  • 11 Towards Burnfield Road Cottage's.jpg
    11 Towards Burnfield Road Cottage's.jpg
    511.4 KB · Views: 98
  • 12 Pile at end of Glasgow bound Platform platfirm.jpg
    12 Pile at end of Glasgow bound Platform platfirm.jpg
    492.1 KB · Views: 96
  • 13 Pile 1 in Station.jpg
    13 Pile 1 in Station.jpg
    561.6 KB · Views: 91
  • 14 Soon to change Landscape Bridge & pedestrian footbridge.jpg
    14 Soon to change Landscape Bridge & pedestrian footbridge.jpg
    494.6 KB · Views: 97
  • 15 Some of  Bridge Services to be diverted.jpg
    15 Some of Bridge Services to be diverted.jpg
    488.4 KB · Views: 98
  • 16  Hefty looking Pile.jpg
    16 Hefty looking Pile.jpg
    472 KB · Views: 101
  • 17 Dramatic change soon New Road and Footbridge & Stractural Work.jpg
    17 Dramatic change soon New Road and Footbridge & Stractural Work.jpg
    483.2 KB · Views: 98
  • 18 ALL Change here also.jpg
    18 ALL Change here also.jpg
    469.5 KB · Views: 106
Last edited:

sannox

Member
Joined
1 Mar 2016
Messages
396
From shot 6 there really isn't a lot of clearance in that arch bridge to the top of a 156 unit!
 
Joined
14 Mar 2021
Messages
192
Location
Glasgow
@OB23Gone thank you for these photographs. The last time I went up to East Kilbride, there were piles but no masts, so these were erected quickly, perhaps as a result of the increased pre-fabrication prior to erection.

From shot 6 there really isn't a lot of clearance in that arch bridge to the top of a 156 unit!
You would certainly need a uniquely shaped pantograph to pass underneath that bridge (or a lot of track lowering, which they ruled out).
 

Top