Borders Railway - Now Open

[Starmill]

The real problem is the truly awful Richmond seating. The Chapman seats are less bad but still grotty. Some of the units (other than the Inverness ones) have an area still marked out as First Class too and it has very odd 2+1 seating which is amusing!

 

[Beebman]

I made a return journey yesterday to Tweedbank. I returned to Waverley on the 1228 which was 2x2 car but everything else was just a single 158. I overheard a couple of people on the platfirm at Tweedbank complaining about the car park being full.

 

[me123]

Whilst the crowding is obviously not a great advert for the line, it's really encouraging to see high levels of usage from the outset. For a line where the costs are envisaged to outweigh the economic benefits, it's great to see that people are benefiting, and here's hoping it continues and delivers strong economic growth for the Borders. In the long term, I can see this line being vital in growing the economy of the South East, bringing jobs and investment to the Borders, and bringing housing to the area which is now in a prime position for commuting to the capital.

 

[Altfish]

I had a trip on the line today with my 82-year old father!
We travelled up from Manchester Airport on the 0725 and arrived at Edinburgh slightly late just after 1100.
Made our way to platform 3 for the 1125 to Tweedbank, a 2-car unit awaited, we got seats 15-minutes before departure, but on departure people were standing. People were left at the early stations and the overcrowding only sorted itself at Galashiels. We arrived at Tweedmouth to be greeted by the steam special in the other platform.
We were planning to get off at Galashiels on the way back but fearing the overcrowding and my Dad having to stand for an hour we decided to come straight back. As it happens it was pretty full but there was an odd seat and no standing that I noticed.

An enjoyable day all in.

 

[Railsigns]

Made our way to platform 3 for the 1125 to Tweedbank, a 2-car unit awaited, we got seats 15-minutes before departure, but on departure people were standing. People were left at the early stations and the overcrowding only sorted itself at Galashiels. We arrived at Tweedmouth to be greeted by the steam special in the other platform.

You were misrouted at Portobello?

 

[geoffk]

I was on the Borders line end of last week. The positives are line speeds of mostly 70 to 85 mph, with high-speed turnouts for the various loops and platforms a decent length. The negatives include reduced double track which means that the half-hourly Scotrail service uses all the line's capacity from day 1.

Future double-tracking has been compromised as several road bridges are built to single track standard, even where there is otherwise no obstacle to doubling the line. Examples are at Heriot and Fountainhall and, more serious, at Falahill, where the realigned A7 crosses at an acute angle in a concrete “box” and where future doubling would require major reconstruction.

The new line makes much use of concrete for bridges and both concrete and steel for stations, not really in keeping with the rural surroundings, where use of local building materials, to match the surviving station building at Stow, would have been preferable.

There are plenty of examples of safety over-kill, e.g. the huge concrete walls on the A7 at Falahill, which appear to be intended to withstand a nuclear attack, and the intrusive steel fencing 5 or 6 feet high, although post and wire fences have thankfully been used along the rural part of the line. The Tweed viaduct near Galashiels is now a shared railway/footpath, divided lengthwise by one of these unsightly high steel fences. For these reasons the line will not blend into the landscape as readily as older railways have done.

Having said all that, it's a great achievement and only the Robin Hood line in England (outside London) comes anywhere near.

 

[Altnabreac]

Future double-tracking has been compromised as several road bridges are built to single track standard, even where there is otherwise no obstacle to doubling the line. Examples are at Heriot and Fountainhall and, more serious, at Falahill, where the realigned A7 crosses at an acute angle in a concrete “box” and where future doubling would require major reconstruction.

The single track south of Gorebridge is unlikely ever to be a big problem. Even if extended as a semi fast to Hawick, 2tph will be quite sufficient.

The structures between Gorebridge and Shawfair are more likely to need doubling to provide capacity for 4tph north of Gorebridge. The Hardengreen viaduct would probably be the biggest job along with some station reconstructions.

 

[overthewater]

I thought the Hardengreen viaduct was doubled track? If not that would be rather short sighted.

 

[Altnabreac]

I thought the Hardengreen viaduct was doubled track? If not that would be rather short sighted.

I've not been down the line yet but my understanding is that the new bridge under the A720 is double tracked but Hardengreen viaduct is single track only.

Certainly this image seems to suggest so:
https://waverleyline.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/hardengreen-viaduct/

Apart from that there aren't any other major new structures between Shawfair and Gorebridge so future doubling would be simply a case of adding 3 new platforms and possibly a turnback siding at Gorebridge.

Would be interested in thoughts of people who've been to stations at Eskbank / Newtongrange / Gorebridge about how the platforms have been positioned with regard to possibly adding a 2nd track / platform in future?

The other issues would potentially be any signalling / cabling / equipment rooms on the opposite formation and positioning of the single track on double width structures like Lothianbridge viaduct.

However Livingston North showed that even short sighted building of platforms on the second track formation will not prevent a railway with a good business case from expanding in future.

 

[geoffk]

Newtongrange appears to have provision for a second track and platform. There are houses to the west of the line but also a strip of land between two fences - don't know who owns it. To do the same at Gorebridge would seem to require some excavation and building of a retaining wall.

Hardengreen Viaduct is certainly single track and, looking at the high-speed in-cab video, it doesn't look wide enough for two tracks.

 

[Hadders]

I base this only on the truly shocking worn out and filthy condition of the stock (365s I think) they use and I've seen occasionally between King's Cross and Cambridge. I don't think I've ever experienced quite such a generally negligent attitude to the passenger environment on a pricey express service.

Blimey, the 365's are generally in good condition given the pounding they take day in day out. I dread to think what you'd think of some of the inner suburban stock in London.

 

[NotATrainspott]

There is passive provision for 4tph to Gorebridge, which accounts for the possibility of a second platform at Newtongrange. If you're designing a railway from scratch single-track sections aren't as much of a problem as they are on existing ones.

 

[Hadders]

I travelled from Edinburgh to Tweedbank and back on Monday. I took the 1124 from Edinburgh which was a 2 car 158. It was full although no standing that I saw although little scope for passenger growth without increasing the number of carriages to people having to stand.

There was some evidence of the novelty factor with some passengers staying on at Tweedbank to travel straight back. I'd agree about the (free) car park at Tweedbank - appeared to be full when I was there.

 

[Altfish]

You were misrouted at Portobello?

Freudian slip.:roll:


Regarding the single line sections. I have read all the complaints about them but noticed that the stations that were already open (Brunslane and Newcraighall) are single platform.

 

[geoffk]

Most of the line between Portobello and Newcraighall has a second track which is not used by the Tweedbank service, hence only one platform at Newcraighall and Brunstane. The other track is evidently used by traffic to/from the ECML at Monktonhall Jn and the South Surburban line (e.g. freights avoiding Waverley) but I'm not familiar enough with the layout to comment in detail.

 

[iain-j]

Freudian slip.:roll:


Regarding the single line sections. I have read all the complaints about them but noticed that the stations that were already open (Brunslane and Newcraighall) are single platform.

In the case of Brunstane that's because the other line leaving Portobello Junction is a single line onto the "sub" and the current platform sits where historically the second line of the Waverley route went through. at some point in the 80's it was singled.
This link illustrates it better
https://www.railscot.co.uk/imageenlarge/imagecomplete.php?id=5866

With Newcraighall I can only assume it was a cost decision as it took quite a lot of effort to get Crossrail running in Ediburgh. Trains arriving at Newcraighall from Edinburgh currently have to cross over the tracks to the other side to access the platform. Hopefully when work gets done on Portobello junction the two sides of the Niddrie/Portobello triangle that are single line will be doubled and this will allow for second platforms at both stations.
The NLS Maps Page gives a nice comparison of the Old Waverley route compared to the current line
http://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/sidebyside.cfm#zoom=16&lat=55.9388&lon=-3.0990&layers=170&right=BingHyb
Upon Previewing this post I noticed a reply has been posted so I hope this helps compliment that posters reply.

 

[Pinza-C55]

Regarding the overcrowding being possibly due to "the novelty factor" I suppose the other possibility is that, as with the Alloa branch, the demand has been severely underestimated ?

 

[najaB]

Regarding the overcrowding being possibly due to "the novelty factor" I suppose the other possibility is that, as with the Alloa branch, the demand has been severely underestimated ?

Not by this much, this soon. There aren't that many more people living in the Borders than there were five or ten years ago.

 

[PHILIPE]

Regarding the overcrowding being possibly due to "the novelty factor" I suppose the other possibility is that, as with the Alloa branch, the demand has been severely underestimated ?

Similarly in South Wales when Ebbw Vale route re-opened. The original 2 carriages per train are not enough now.

 

[me123]

According to BBC, there's been 23,500 journeys in the first 10 days of the Borders Railway. Given the line was predicted to have 650,000 pax pa, if this level of ridership is sustained we're looking at significantly more journeys than predicted. By simply multiplying up the numbers, we could be looking at 857,750 pax pa, which is about 30% greater than predicted - admittedly this is an unscientific approach that won't account for natural variation in numbers, but encouraging nonetheless.

The article also points out that passengers on the new line could simply be commuters who were traveling to Newcraighall P&R now boarding the train earlier.

 

[NotATrainspott]

If I'm not mistaken, the first real opportunity for more carriages to be permanently allocated to the Borders Railway will be around 2020 or so. Abellio have signed the rolling stock contracts on the basis that further electrification after Shotts isn't yet confirmed, so if lines like East Kilbride, Barrhead or Maryhill are done very soon after Shotts the DMUs for these lines will not already be confirmed for use by another operator. If the passive provision for 4tph to Gorebridge were activated the total capacity available could increase without requiring more scenic 158s, as the shorter Gorebridge runs could be done by any DMU.

 

[Carntyne]

It will die down shortly, its still going to be very popular and over the expected numbers tho, as with every other Scottish reopening.

 

[Altnabreac]

If I'm not mistaken, the first real opportunity for more carriages to be permanently allocated to the Borders Railway will be around 2020 or so. Abellio have signed the rolling stock contracts on the basis that further electrification after Shotts isn't yet confirmed, so if lines like East Kilbride, Barrhead or Maryhill are done very soon after Shotts the DMUs for these lines will not already be confirmed for use by another operator. If the passive provision for 4tph to Gorebridge were activated the total capacity available could increase without requiring more scenic 158s, as the shorter Gorebridge runs could be done by any DMU.

Not quite. Scotrail will have additional DMU stock available as of December 2016 once the Edinburgh - Glasgow via Falkirk line is electrified.

This comes from 321s taking over 380 duties and 380s being used for Edinburgh - Glasgow services until the new AT200s arrive.

Now some of this is intended for strengthening other routes but some could be used on Borders services if they were significantly overcrowded.

As of 2017 and 2018 more routes are electrified (Dunblane, Shotts, Alloa and the AT200s arrive.

No DMUs go off lease until Dec 2018 so more strengthening is possible.

Post 2018 the Franchise has plenty of flexibility as the HSTs arrive and a large number of DMUs become surplus. Some of these are on flexible leases that can run up to 2025 or can be returned to Leasing Co sooner if not required.

So really any stock shortages are only a problem for the next 14 months and by December 2016 they should have a better idea of long term demand on Borders Rail.

 

[Pinza-C55]

Not by this much, this soon. There aren't that many more people living in the Borders than there were five or ten years ago.

There weren't that many people living in the Alloa area compared to the feasibility study. They simply got it wrong.

 

[me123]

So, visited Tweedbank for a wee while earlier today. Some observations.

I traveled South in the late morning. The 2 car 158 was over 50% full most of the way to Galashiels, with quite a few staying on until Tweedbank. Healthy loading for the time of day I would say, and quite a reassuring load. That said, quite a large number of people were clearly traveling as tourists and "for the novelty", so there is a question as to how long this load can be sustained. Existing stations at Brunstane and Newcraighall were lightly used.

Going North was a slightly different picture, with us slowly picking up more people heading back to the Capital. Quite a lot of travel within the Borders and Midlothian which a fantastic sign. Probably reached just over the 50% again by the time we got to Waverley, again a reasonable load for the time of day. I think this train was more people using the line as they would normally, and this time I can see this level being sustained as the service continues.

The Car Park at Tweedbank had no spaces, so locals are using the service. Indeed, there were signs pointing to an overflow facility, although I didn't see where or how full that was. There is some scope to expand that car park, but it's a bit disappointing that a larger facility wasn't provided given that Tweedbank was designed to serve The Borders as a whole.

Scenery... well it's not that's the line's unattractive, it's got some really lovely views as you travel and is a very picturesque line. As a "Great Scenic Rail Journey of Scotland"... well it's no WHL or Kyle Line, or even HML (which isn't in this group). I do wonder if selling it in the same ilk could leave some feeling a bit disappointed? Not that I was; it just wasn't quite the scenic ride that I'd expected given the marketing.

I walked to Melrose, which isn't the best walk. It looks quite an inviting path as you get off the train, and I made the 2 mile walk in less than an hour, but as you approach the small town the pavements become narrower, with overgrown bushes and trees forcing you to step onto the fast road. You can connect onto the X62, which does offer good connections onto the trains, but I'm not aware of any obvious marketing to this effect, or any through ticketing being available which is a shame.

I didn't have long to spend, but Melrose is an absolutely lovely town with fantastic cafes and pubs, lovely little shops, beautiful architecture and a quaint feel. The Abbey (or ruins thereof) looked stunning and I wish I'd had time to visit. Rugby fans could perhaps enjoy a game at the small local RFC. I think you could quite easily spend a day here, and I'd recommend Melrose for anyone traveling all the way to Tweedbank looking to spend a few hours in the Borders.

Very positive thoughts overall.

 

[Bald Rick]

There weren't that many people living in the Alloa area compared to the feasibility study.

Yes there were. 500 new houses not proposed at the time of the feasibility IIRC. say 1000 people, many if whom may have been attracted specifically by the prospect of the new train service and therefore more likely to use it?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Yes there were. 500 new houses not proposed at the time of the feasibility IIRC. say 1000 people, many if whom may have been attracted specifically by the prospect of the new train service and therefore more likely to use it?

While I don't doubt that's true, that doesn't look to me sufficient to account for the extent of underestimating usage. Checking on Wikipedia, the population of Alloa is around 19000. I imagine the catchment area of Alloa station is larger than that, but let's use 20000 as a ballpark.

1000 new people adds 5% to that. Let's say your hypothesis about being attracted by the train service is true, and these new residents therefore use trains twice as much on average as existing residents. That means 10% more journeys than anticipated.

But from Wikipedia:

Passenger use of the new railway station has greatly exceeded forecasts and since re-opening the service has been improved by increasing evening and Sunday frequencies from two-hourly to hourly and by adding the peak hour service to Edinburgh in 2009. In its first year the station was used by 400,000 passengers, against a forecast of 155,000.[4]

That 400K figure is somewhat contradicted by the passenger usage figures on the same page, which say 0.336 million in 2008/9. I'm not sure what's going on there - maybe the station opened during the accounting year so 0.336M isn't for the full year? But whichever of those figures you use, it seems actual demand was at least twice what was estimated. On those figures, I find it hard to argue with Pinza-C55's statement that 'They simply got it wrong.'

 

[Altnabreac]

While I don't doubt that's true, that doesn't look to me sufficient to account for the extent of underestimating usage. Checking on Wikipedia, the population of Alloa is around 19000. I imagine the catchment area of Alloa station is larger than that, but let's use 20000 as a ballpark.

1000 new people adds 5% to that. Let's say your hypothesis about being attracted by the train service is true, and these new residents therefore use trains twice as much on average as existing residents. That means 10% more journeys than anticipated.

But from Wikipedia:



That 400K figure is somewhat contradicted by the passenger usage figures on the same page, which say 0.336 million in 2008/9. I'm not sure what's going on there - maybe the station opened during the accounting year so 0.336M isn't for the full year? But whichever of those figures you use, it seems actual demand was at least twice what was estimated. On those figures, I find it hard to argue with Pinza-C55's statement that 'They simply got it wrong.'

Alloa is an interesting one. The modelling predicted a certain level of demand for travel to Glasgow and Edinburgh which I believe was not far off reality (though still a little underestimated).

I believe however that most of the discrepancy was in Alloa - Stirling demand which modelling predicted would mostly stay on buses but a combination of competitive pricing and worsening road congestion has helped rail to gain a much bigger share of this than expected by the modelling.

The equivalent in the Borders will be if we start seeing demand for Gorebridge - Eskbank demand for shopping, College etc on top of the Edinburgh commuting demand.

I suspect that hyper local traffic will be trickier for rail to gain here as Lothian Buses is both more frequent and more competitively priced than other bus companies.

I expect there may well still be some Borders - Midlothian demand that may well not have been captured by the modelling.

 

[me123]

I expect there may well still be some Borders - Midlothian demand that may well not have been captured by the modelling.

On my trip (admittedly just a single snapshot), I saw that this was the case. Borders-Midlothian journeys and vice versa were definitely a small but nevertheless significant proportion of the journeys made on the line as a whole. More impressive was the demand within the Borders, on my return trip quite a lot of people travelled Tweedbank - Galashiels and Stow which I wasn't expecting, given the strong local bus market that's well established.

The Midlothian to Edinburgh market seemed to be quieter than I'd expected, but that was more than made up for by a huge number of people traveling all the way to/from the Borders.

 

[Bodiddly]

I travelled out on the 15.53 on Monday afternoon. It was so busy I got off at Newcraighall and got the next service back to the Waverley. I wasn't standing all the way to Tweedbank. As a staff member travelling on a free pass, I can't sit in a seat while there are fare paying passengers standing.
I will wait a few weeks and wait for the initial furore to die down before trying again.