edwin_m
Veteran Member
I'd say yes and no to that.Interestingly lots of people on the forum (and David Spaven off it) are upset that the business case for Borders Rail wasn’t destroyed by making it much more expensive with extra double track, semi fast services to use up more terminal capacity, more work on the existing network at Portobello junction, electrification and more rolling stock.
In reality these things can be addressed incrementally post opening and seeking to fix all of these in advance would have guaranteed it never happening.
In particular it seems very short-sighted to build a brand new overbridge as single track on a section that would logically be doubled if the service was enhanced. Making a new bridge big enough for either doubling or electrication costs very little more unless there is some unusual site constraint. I'd say doubling of certain sections is more likely than electrification, as a frequent enough service to justify electrification is impossible without more double track, but as far as I'm aware the clearance for electrification has been provided but that for double track hasn't.
There are other cases where it is indeed possible to add more infrastructure later if the route needs it, without huge amounts of extra cost and disruption. For example underbridges can often be built for single track and widened later if needed.