Borders Railway - Now Open

[Railsigns]

AFAIAA I believe that there will be provision at Tweedbank to run round an engine?

Nope.

 

[Altnabreac]

Yes, rather than cancelling a complete run to/from Tweedbank it would, in my opinion, be sensible to see if it is possible to run a part route ScotRail service to/from Gorebridge.

AFAIAA I believe that there will be provision at Tweedbank to run round an engine?

Not in current plans. I suspect provision of such would be one of the issues for a feasibility study to look at.

 

[Chris125]

I doubt a run-round loop on it's own would make much difference to a steam service as the (45mph?) restriction when running tender-first may dictate that such trains return behind a diesel - this may well explain why they're considering a turntable.

Chris

 

[oldman]

Rather than fantasizing about steam trains pounding up to Fala (which I would love to see), would it not be more useful to plan a tourist bus connecting with the ordinary trains to link to Melrose and Abbotsford. Properly marketed, with integrated ticketing, it could be quite successful.

But not as photogenic, so unlikely to interest politicians.

 

[mrmartin]

I don't agree with people that it's ok to cancel services randomly. If you've got a half hourly timetable, it should be that. As soon as you start this slippery slope of punching holes in it, you ruin a certain level of confidence in it.

It would be very annoying to half to wait in the rain for 30 mins because of a tourist train. And just because its on Saturday doesn't make any difference - people still work on a Saturday.

To be honest this is really showing how short sighted the Scottish Govt have been here when on opening day it already looks like there isn't enough capacity to run the desired services due to the single track nature of the line.

 

[Techniquest]

I don't agree with people that it's ok to cancel services randomly. If you've got a half hourly timetable, it should be that. As soon as you start this slippery slope of punching holes in it, you ruin a certain level of confidence in it.

Quite so. FGW in my area (at least, if not in other areas too) have got a very poor customer satisfaction score, with little confidence in the promised services being delivered on a regular basis. I'm sure Borders Railway won't want that to happen straight off the bat!

And just because its on Saturday doesn't make any difference - people still work on a Saturday.

This in particular is a big point for me, just because a significant number of people don't work weekends, and have the benefit of every Bank Holiday off work, doesn't mean everyone does. Said people would be stuffed without all of us in retail, catering, transport and other service industries!

To be honest this is really showing how short sighted the Scottish Govt have been here when on opening day it already looks like there isn't enough capacity to run the desired services due to the single track nature of the line.

Simple solution there, don't run the tourist steam services then! OR have them run but as a normal service train so everyone can benefit.

Hopefully they sort it out before opening of the Borders Railway!

 

[najaB]

To be honest this is really showing how short sighted the Scottish Govt have been here when on opening day it already looks like there isn't enough capacity to run the desired services due to the single track nature of the line.

I think a largely single-track railway with passive provision for doubling, is better than no railway at all.

 

[Chris125]

It would be very annoying to half to wait in the rain for 30 mins because of a tourist train. And just because its on Saturday doesn't make any difference - people still work on a Saturday.

We are almost certainly talking about a handful of trains a week running off-peak during the summer season, the affect on people going to and from work would be negligible and easily outweighed by the tourism benefits.

Chris

 

[Altnabreac]

We are almost certainly talking about a handful of trains a week running off-peak during the summer season, the affect on people going to and from work would be negligible and easily outweighed by the tourism benefits.

Chris

Also commuters very quickly adapt to the timetable provided and know to leave earlier or later if the service is occasionally but regularly replaced by a steam train. The passengers likely to be inconvenienced are casual leisure visitors who turn up on the day and don't wish to pay for the premium service.

You just need to work out if there wil be more of them on any given train than on your steam special.

 

[deltic08]

Also commuters very quickly adapt to the timetable provided and know to leave earlier or later if the service is occasionally but regularly replaced by a steam train. The passengers likely to be inconvenienced are casual leisure visitors who turn up on the day and don't wish to pay for the premium service.

You just need to work out if there wil be more of them on any given train than on your steam special.

This is unbelievable incompetence. If steam trains were wanted by the Scottish Government then the infrastructure should have been designed accordingly and not squeezed in as an afterthought. I fear for the success of this project by political ignorance and interference. Organising a "party" in a brewery comes to mind and they want independence?

 

[mrmartin]

Also commuters very quickly adapt to the timetable provided and know to leave earlier or later if the service is occasionally but regularly replaced by a steam train. The passengers likely to be inconvenienced are casual leisure visitors who turn up on the day and don't wish to pay for the premium service.

You just need to work out if there wil be more of them on any given train than on your steam special.

Is it going to be always at the same time if it's just a handful though? They may want to tie it in with certain events so may vary it through the summer.

I'm not so sure in your assertion that people 'very quickly' adapt, especially when it's not year round. I guess most just assume the train leaves wherever at :22 and :52 for example, and returns from edinburgh at :14 and :44. If randomly there's no train are they going to automatically assume that it's the steam train which has taken the path?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

We are almost certainly talking about a handful of trains a week running off-peak during the summer season, the affect on people going to and from work would be negligible and easily outweighed by the tourism benefits.

Chris

I'm not sure. What is the benefit of this railway? I think primarily it is to allow people in the Borders access to the Edinburgh (and wider Scottish) labour market. Also, will allow people access to cheaper housing in the borders and commute in to Edinburgh. And conversely the other way round. I don't think it's worth ruining the timetable for these trains.

There's already going to be a huge tourist impact from the 'normal' services - I don't think putting a special steam train so people can hang around galashields for a couple of hours and jump back on later again is going to be that much more.

Conversely, if I'm wrong and the tourist train specials are really successful, it's likely they will put more on. And at that point it's not a handful.

Obviously if there was capacity for both that would be great and no-one would complain but there isn't. A half hourly clockface timetable is great and a brilliant marketing point which will attract people to it. As soon as you add some small print then it loses the appeal in my eyes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think a largely single-track railway with passive provision for doubling, is better than no railway at all.

Again, that's true. It's just so frustrating that the original plans to my knowledge had far more double track provision. Most of the track hasn't even been laid yet and it's already causing a problem! Seriously short sighted thinking in my eyes.

 

[clc]

. It's just so frustrating that the original plans to my knowledge had far more double track provision. Most of the track hasn't even been laid yet and it's already causing a problem! Seriously short sighted thinking in my eyes.

Things changed. The economy tanked, public spending was slashed and the original plan was no longer affordable. If they hadn't value engineered the project it wouldn't be getting built.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

No; there's also Tweedbank.

Thanks for that. I should have said "intermediate" new stations, as obviously I was aware of the situation at the terminal of Tweedbank.

 

[92002]

I don't agree with people that it's ok to cancel services randomly. If you've got a half hourly timetable, it should be that. As soon as you start this slippery slope of punching holes in it, you ruin a certain level of confidence in it.

It would be very annoying to half to wait in the rain for 30 mins because of a tourist train. And just because its on Saturday doesn't make any difference - people still work on a Saturday.

To be honest this is really showing how short sighted the Scottish Govt have been here when on opening day it already looks like there isn't enough capacity to run the desired services due to the single track nature of the line.

So the solution then would be don't bother opening Borders Railway and don't provide more steam trains. I think not.

As for spending more cash to feed your whim. On the already marginal cost project - dream on.

It's not about having your and eating it. Real life is just not so black and white. It's all about compromise.

 

[Altnabreac]

Is it going to be always at the same time if it's just a handful though? They may want to tie it in with certain events so may vary it through the summer.

I'm not so sure in your assertion that people 'very quickly' adapt, especially when it's not year round. I guess most just assume the train leaves wherever at :22 and :52 for example, and returns from edinburgh at :14 and :44. If randomly there's no train are they going to automatically assume that it's the steam train which has taken the path?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I'm not sure. What is the benefit of this railway? I think primarily it is to allow people in the Borders access to the Edinburgh (and wider Scottish) labour market. Also, will allow people access to cheaper housing in the borders and commute in to Edinburgh. And conversely the other way round. I don't think it's worth ruining the timetable for these trains.

There's already going to be a huge tourist impact from the 'normal' services - I don't think putting a special steam train so people can hang around galashields for a couple of hours and jump back on later again is going to be that much more.

Conversely, if I'm wrong and the tourist train specials are really successful, it's likely they will put more on. And at that point it's not a handful.

Obviously if there was capacity for both that would be great and no-one would complain but there isn't. A half hourly clockface timetable is great and a brilliant marketing point which will attract people to it. As soon as you add some small print then it loses the appeal in my eyes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Again, that's true. It's just so frustrating that the original plans to my knowledge had far more double track provision. Most of the track hasn't even been laid yet and it's already causing a problem! Seriously short sighted thinking in my eyes.

You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. No one is going to make a business case to invest another £50m in double track infrastructure to allow 2-3 specials a week.

The proposed layout is all we are getting and all that can be justified. The business case was marginal south of Gorebridge but a combination of political imperative (only Scottish Mainland local authority without a railway station) and clever parliamentary drafting (Midlothian only line forbidden by the Act of parliament) has ensured we got a line built right through to Tweedbank.

Now we nearly have the line the question is what services to run on it.

Currently proposed is half hourly in the day with hourly in the evenings. This is probably more services than initially required but sensibly allows for future housing and commuting growth.

Then along comes the local tourism partnership proposing a semi-regular steam special. At best this will justify small infrastructure investments: longer platforms at key stations (already agreed to be provided at Gala and Tweedbank), run round loop and turntable at Tweedbank (proposed for investigation).

The question now I should this service run in place of one of the half hourly regular services?

Now it will be unlikely to affect your core commuter market as it will run in te middle of the day, possibly weekends only but maybe in the week as well.

We just need to examine our business case model and see how many passengers will be inconvenienced versus the extra ones carried.

The Scotrail ITT covers the proposed specials so no need for compensation payments, just a decision on which option generates more leisure passengers and more for the Borders economy.

 

[dcsprior]

Is it going to be always at the same time if it's just a handful though? They may want to tie it in with certain events so may vary it through the summer.

I'm not so sure in your assertion that people 'very quickly' adapt, especially when it's not year round. I guess most just assume the train leaves wherever at :22 and :52 for example, and returns from edinburgh at :14 and :44. If randomly there's no train are they going to automatically assume that it's the steam train which has taken the path?

I thought that different summer/winter timetables were quite common in many parts of the country, why would they not work here? I don't think that a half-hourly service is frequent enough that people are likely to go without checking timetables first in any case.

I'm not sure. What is the benefit of this railway? I think primarily it is to allow people in the Borders access to the Edinburgh (and wider Scottish) labour market. Also, will allow people access to cheaper housing in the borders and commute in to Edinburgh. And conversely the other way round. I don't think it's worth ruining the timetable for these trains.

Why does there need to be only one benefit? I can think of a few:

• In terms of numbers of passengers, I expect most people will benefit north of Gorebridge - with the trains picking up passengers who're already served by Lothian Buses and/or within a 40-minute drive of central Edinburgh.
• The knock-on benefit for those who live too far from the new line for it to be the best option for them, but who who live along the roads and bus routes that will hopefully be made quieter by the above; I fall into this group.
• Opening the Edinburgh labour market to the borders, and the Borders housing market to Edinburgh, as you mention.
• Tourism

Based on the above mix, if the special heritage tourist trains can be added whilst still having 2tph leaving Waverley, turning every fourth one back at Gorebridge (in a consistent way throughout the summer timetable) then I'd imagine the benefits would outweigh the drawbacks.

Again, that's true. It's just so frustrating that the original plans to my knowledge had far more double track provision. Most of the track hasn't even been laid yet and it's already causing a problem! Seriously short sighted thinking in my eyes.

But if the choice is between getting something now, or nothing...

 

[fegguk]

........

Based on the above mix, if the special heritage tourist trains can be added whilst still having 2tph leaving Waverley, turning every fourth one back at Gorebridge (in a consistent way throughout the summer timetable) then I'd imagine the benefits would outweigh the drawbacks....

As there is only 2tph capacity you can't turn a train back at Gorebridge as it will block one of the loop lines north of Gorebridge while it waits an hour to substitute for the missing train coming North that its intended to replace. The trains that are half and hour behind it need to pass here. It's not due to make it's return for another hour because its essentially replacing the train that would have left Tweedbank at the same time these trains are passing here. The 4tph at Gore bridge is a passive provision ie the current arrangement does not stop future additional infrastructure being built to provide it.

see the other thread noted above.

I think we have to assume there is no new public money available to provide infrastructure capacity specifically for these trains. Unless one of the franchise bidders saw fit to include this in their bid, which given the costs and competitive nature of the process may be unlikely carrot to dangle in front of the decision makers. The bidders may have some room for being creative but either way 1 or 2 trains each way would need to go to make way for the steam services.

Personally I think leaving out a mid morning and mid afternoon train will not be much of an issue.

The bottom line is the railway that has been built is all we could get for the money they were willing to spend. Although there were alternative proposals these now can't happen easily.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Time-lapse video of track laying at Bowshank Tunnel:- http://vimeo.com/104638053?from=outro-embed

Spot the early morning rabbit !

 

[PaxVobiscum]

RailScot has a photo of another set of points installed, this time at Tweedbank terminus.

I wonder if all the point work will be installed before the ordinary track is started.

 

[najaB]

I wonder if all the point work will be installed before the ordinary track is started.

I guess it's a bit like painting a room - you do the edges first and then fill in the plain wall.

 

[Fozzie49]

All pointwork will be installed prior to plain line installation. This is required to allow CWR train to progress from Millerhill end to unload.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Another photo on RailScot, this time showing sleepers laid at Shawfair. Looks almost like complete track, and a great sight to see after the long wait.

 

[Photohunter71]

I don't know if it's been mentioned here before,but on Sunday I took a dodge past Millerhill from the Musselburgh end and took the new access road which I found strange being so used to the former road route.Anyway,what I found baffling me was why couldn't they use a spur from the former electrification yard instead? I know there's a builders yard there too,but 1) was the land adjacent to the elecrification depot not development negotiable?
2) would it have made the project more expensive?
3) will there be any possibility of using the Gilmerton line in the future?,much of it remains.
4) possibilities of reinstating the Loanhead/Penicuik line?
5) other than the EMu depot and the goings on with the borders line and the proposed energy development,,will the other sidings at Millerhill be removed and put up for sale since I very rarely see any locomotives or freight stock there these days.
Many thanks!

 

[fegguk]

I don't know if it's been mentioned here before,but on Sunday I took a dodge past Millerhill from the Musselburgh end and took the new access road which I found strange being so used to the former road route.Anyway,what I found baffling me was why couldn't they use a spur from the former electrification yard instead? I know there's a builders yard there too,but 1) was the land adjacent to the elecrification depot not development negotiable?
2) would it have made the project more expensive?
3) will there be any possibility of using the Gilmerton line in the future?,much of it remains.
4) possibilities of reinstating the Loanhead/Penicuik line?
5) other than the EMu depot and the goings on with the borders line and the proposed energy development,,will the other sidings at Millerhill be removed and put up for sale since I very rarely see any locomotives or freight stock there these days.
Many thanks!

I think one of the reasons was need to have a station serving the Shawfair development.

The above route would have gone under the city bypass at a more acute angle, therefore would have been more expensive, though I doubt more than the chosen one given the extent of new line and roads required. it would also have enable direct access to the ECML something not readily possible with the line being built.

 

[Photohunter71]

Ahhh,Thanks! I had thought it was to keep costs low.I couldn't for the life of me figure out how it wasn't possible to route the line via the old electrification depot.But thanks for shedding some light on the matter. Meantime if anyone is visiting the sub loop,Duddingston road West will be closed for 6 weeks on the 11th for the Bridge works. They were already digging it away when I passed yesterday evening.

 

[jeemac]

Ahhh,Thanks! I had thought it was to keep costs low.I couldn't for the life of me figure out how it wasn't possible to route the line via the old electrification depot.But thanks for shedding some light on the matter. Meantime if anyone is visiting the sub loop,Duddingston road West will be closed for 6 weeks on the 11th for the Bridge works. They were already digging it away when I passed yesterday evening.

This whole area is underrun with old mine-workings, and I think I read somewhere that this was a factor in the exact choice for the route of that section of the new line.

 

[DunsBus]

Had a look at Heriot last Sunday. Work on the pedestrian underpass between Heriot Way (the old B709) and the A7 is now underway, with a temporary pedestrian link being provided between these points until the underpass is completed. The old station building and platforms have been obliterated and the former level crossing has been removed and excavated, officially turning Heriot Way into a cul-de-sac; a turning head is being constructed to the west of the former level crossing.
Sleepers have also been spotted at the site.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

A load of nearly 10 kms of nice new CWR travelled north on the ECML yesterday Fri 5th Sept). I can only guess that it was destined for the Borders route.

It was carried on flat waggons which had a central secure anchor for each stack of rail on one waggon, and adjacent waggons which held the ends on flexing cargo straps. (I regret that I don't know any terminology for the transport of rail which is longer than its conveying vehicle).

 

[swt_passenger]

A load of nearly 10 kms of nice new CWR travelled north on the ECML yesterday Fri 5th Sept). I can only guess that it was destined for the Borders route.

It was carried on flat waggons which had a central secure anchor for each stack of rail on one waggon, and adjacent waggons which held the ends on flexing cargo straps. (I regret that I don't know any terminology for the transport of rail which is longer than its conveying vehicle).

I think normally just referred to as a long welded rail delivery train. I think on the most up to date version most of it is formed of modules fitted on normal container flats, except for the chute unit on the end. Found a youtube video from Cowans Sheldon, their factory is in Gateshead...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yQDlgmyoGPY

 

[thealexweb]

Will the new terminus of the Borders Railway still count as in the central belt of Scotland? I am just curious if and how far south the Central Scotland Rover will be valid for travel.