Borders Railway - Now Open

[PaxVobiscum]

I see what you mean, but I was wondering how would the railway reach Langholm from the north. I don't know the area all that well but isn't even more hilly than the old route? The route south would presumably be the old Langholm branch but but how and where would it rejoin the Waverley trackbed north east of Langholm? A completely new section alongside the A7 would not be cheap.

 

[45rpm]

Am I the only person who thinks Tweedbank would be better being called Hawick/Borders Parkway,as that`s that what it basically is? I had a wander around upon arrival from the special on September & there was no sign of any habitation save for a office of some sort about half a mile to the south

 

[47271]

I see what you mean, but I was wondering how would the railway reach Langholm from the north. I don't know the area all that well but isn't even more hilly than the old route? The route south would presumably be the old Langholm branch but but how and where would it rejoin the Waverley trackbed north east of Langholm? A completely new section alongside the A7 would not be cheap.

The A7 gets to about 850ft at the Borders/D&G boundary between Hawick and Langholm, a distance of 23 miles hemmed in by rivers at either end and hills in the middle, and extremely costly to build a brand new railway through. Langholm to Carlisle is a further 20 miles or so with only Canonbie and Longtown of any significance along the way.

The old Waverley route went to over 1,000ft at Whitrope Summit but in more open countryside. Langholm has a population of just over 2,000 versus Newcastleton's 800 or so on the original line, as the main centres of population neither are going to provide enough traffic to justify the project going beyond Hawick.

By way of comparison, and if we're looking for a project of this scale to keep us busy, the same 43 route miles on existing trackbed would allow reconnection of Aberdeen to Ellon, Peterhead and Fraserburgh, a combined population of around 40,000 within those three towns alone.

 

[Altnabreac]

Leaving aside Altnabreacs golden rule of a successful rail reopening©:



I can't imagine how they could include Langholm as part of the route (other than a Park and Ride somewhere) without running up ridiculous costs, which makes me just a wee bit suspicious that Langholm may have been included just to make sure that the BCR is positively homopathic so that extension to Carlisle can be seen off for good.
I do hope not.

Well yes, I know nothing south of Hawick will pass the Golden Rule

I don't think at this stage that anything will be excluded to damage any BCRs. The study will want to look at as many options as possible.

The way an initial STAG appraisal works is to assess the travel needs and then look at a very wide variety of options that might meet those needs.

But it's a long, long way from Hawick to Carlisle, and it would be of no negative impact on the line's capacity to provide a stop somewhere between the two. If so, then where else other than Langholm?

A station at Langholm is not likely to be any less used than some of the others on the Borders Railway, or Lockerbie (which is in a similar position but competing with many other demands on capacity on the WCML).

So broadly what the STAG appraisal will be looking at will be whether the extra business from serving Langholm (population 2,500) rather than Newcastleton (Population 800) will offset any extra costs of a new alignment.

Let's assume that extending just to Hawick is examined independently and given it's own BCR.

There will then need to be a justification for a railway between the Borders and Carlisle. This can only ever be to help speed up journeys from the Borders to England. There isn't much commuting demand to Carlisle and the intermediate population is very small.

So then we have the choice of:
Reopening 40 miles or so of disused alignment from Hawick to Mossband with stations at Newcastleton, Canonbie (for Langholm) and Longtown.
Population served - 4,500 plus 3,000 at Langholm by Park & Ride.
Cost - £400m or so at £10m per mile.
Wider benefits - Faster journeys from central borders to England.

New alignment via Langholm with 20 miles or so of new alignment and 20 miles disused alignment with stations at Langholm and Longtown.
Population served - 6,000.
Cost - £500m or so at £10m per mile for disused alignment and £15m per mile for new alignment.
Wider benefits - Faster journeys from central borders to England.

Now both of these are going to struggle to get a BCR better than 0.20.

But if we really do think that we need new services that speed the journey from the Borders to England then what about this option:

Reopen 40 miles of disused alignment from Galashiels - Symington with stations at Innerleithen, Peebles, Broughton, Biggar,
Population served 15,000
Cost - £400m or so at £10m per mile.
Wider benefits - Faster journeys from central borders to England.
Faster journeys from central borders to Glasgow.
Service from Peebles, Biggar to Edinburgh via WCML

I still don't think it will get anywhere near a positive BCR but I bet it would be a better BCR than reopening south of Hawick.

 

[Altfish]

But if we really do think that we need new services that speed the journey from the Borders to England then what about this option:

Reopen 40 miles of disused alignment from Galashiels - Symington with stations at Innerleithen, Peebles, Broughton, Biggar,
Population served 15,000
Cost - £400m or so at £10m per mile.
Wider benefits - Faster journeys from central borders to England.
Faster journeys from central borders to Glasgow.
Service from Peebles, Biggar to Edinburgh via WCML

I still don't think it will get anywhere near a positive BCR but I bet it would be a better BCR than reopening south of Hawick.

Interesting idea, one problem would be that it does not allow for the Kielder connection for possible log trains.

 

[Ploughman]

Found this on the BBC Cumbria Webpage - Link provided

'Encouraging signs' on Borders Railway extension to Carlisle

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-35101810

An MP has said there are "encouraging signs" that the "fantastic vision" of extending the Borders Railway to Carlisle could be realised.
Calum Kerr made the claim in a piece written for the Campaign for Borders Rail newsletter.
The MP for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk said he believed cross-party and cross-border support was possible.
A feasibility study is already planned into the potential of extending the route beyond its Tweedbank terminus.
The multi-million pound route between Edinburgh and the Borders opened to passengers earlier this year.
Mr Kerr said it had "confounded its critics" by proving "massively popular" and providing a boost to business in the area.
However, he said that there was now and "extremely strong case" for taking the line on through Hawick to Carlisle.
"A dynamic is building over this," said Mr Kerr.
"I believe it is possible to complete this project, though I'm aware that it won't be easy."

 

[Tim R-T-C]

Hmmm... that MP is a neutral source of information isn't he!

The line has been massively popular, but how many of those travelers are tourists or locals giving it a try? They need to wait at least a year to see how many of those travelers stay on the line.

It will be interesting to see what the feasibility study says. Common sense says that there is likely to be far more interest for people in the Borders to be able to get to their capital city and access large amounts of shopping and employment, than getting to a provincial English city (Carlisle) which is much smaller and has relatively limited job offerings.

 

[HowardGWR]

It will be interesting to see what the feasibility study says. Common sense says that there is likely to be far more interest for people in the Borders to be able to get to their capital city and access large amounts of shopping and employment, than getting to a provincial English city (Carlisle) which is much smaller and has relatively limited job offerings.

But the other way around? Folk look further away nowadays.

 

[railjock]

Hmmm... that MP is a neutral source of information isn't he!

The line has been massively popular, but how many of those travelers are tourists or locals giving it a try? They need to wait at least a year to see how many of those travelers stay on the line.

It will be interesting to see what the feasibility study says. Common sense says that there is likely to be far more interest for people in the Borders to be able to get to their capital city and access large amounts of shopping and employment, than getting to a provincial English city (Carlisle) which is much smaller and has relatively limited job offerings.

I agree. Extending to Hawick may happen some day but can't see it ever going to Carlisle.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

But the other way around? Folk look further away nowadays.

There are good Carlisle to Edinburgh services via TPE and the new route is unliklely to be any faster.

 

[The Ham]

There are good Carlisle to Edinburgh services via TPE and the new route is unliklely to be any faster.

Although it depends on how much faster the TPE services are and what the frequency is.

If TPE is only 10 minutes faster but an hourly service; than going via the Boarders railway would still be able to attract passengers if it left 20 to 35 minutes after the TPE service and connected with other services.

Also it could provide a useful divisionary route, either for engineering works and/or for freight. It could also create new freight services (I.e. timber) and new passenger stations to serve new development (I.e. new town).

 

[deltic08]

There are good Carlisle to Edinburgh services via TPE and the new route is unliklely to be any faster.

Carlisle-Galashiels direct will be much quicker.

 

[Altfish]

Although it depends on how much faster the TPE services are and what the frequency is.

If TPE is only 10 minutes faster but an hourly service; than going via the Boarders railway would still be able to attract passengers if it left 20 to 35 minutes after the TPE service and connected with other services.

Also it could provide a useful divisionary route, either for engineering works and/or for freight. It could also create new freight services (I.e. timber) and new passenger stations to serve new development (I.e. new town).

TPE is currently one train every 2-hours

 

[chiltern trev]

Re Carlisle to Edinburgh.

There is at least one train per hour Carlisle <> Edinburgh - either Virgin West Coast or TPE - occasionally both.

The basic service north from Carlisle on the WCML is:
Euston - (Trent Valley) - Carlisle - Glasgow, Virgin hourly
Euston - Birmingham - Carlisle - Glasgow or Edinburgh, Virgin hourly
Manchester Airport - Carlisle - Glasgow or Edinburgh, TPE hourly

 

[kylemore]

Hmmm... that MP is a neutral source of information isn't he!

The line has been massively popular, but how many of those travelers are tourists or locals giving it a try? They need to wait at least a year to see how many of those travelers stay on the line.

It will be interesting to see what the feasibility study says. Common sense says that there is likely to be far more interest for people in the Borders to be able to get to their capital city and access large amounts of shopping and employment, than getting to a provincial English city (Carlisle) which is much smaller and has relatively limited job offerings.

Ok are "Tourists" who travelled on the X95 to the borders discounted from the statistics? No they're part of the mix along with all the other leisure travellers on public transport and just as important in justifying investment as commuters.
When justifying investment in the dualled A9 did the govt ignore the substantial tourist traffic - all the cars, caravans, coaches and only count the "real" traffic?

 

[Tim R-T-C]

Ok are "Tourists" who travelled on the X95 to the borders discounted from the statistics? No they're part of the mix along with all the other leisure travellers on public transport and just as important in justifying investment as commuters.
When justifying investment in the dualled A9 did the govt ignore the substantial tourist traffic - all the cars, caravans, coaches and only count the "real" traffic?

I'm not saying discsount tourists as a block. But tourists coming to see the new line alone are only a short term blip on the figures. The first weeks would doubtless have seen lots of one off trips from people in the general area coming for.an outing but not planning to revisit the route. When a year or so has passed then the fogures will reflect the real long term line use be that leisure or commuter travel.

 

[edwin_m]

I agree. Extending to Hawick may happen some day but can't see it ever going to Carlisle.

Especially as Carlisle isn't in Scotland. Scottish Government would be less inclined to pay for something that takes their citizens to England, and there would be disagreement about who pays for the relatively small part south of the border.

 

[Poolie]

Especially as Carlisle isn't in Scotland.

Carlisle Kingmoor used to be 68A which was a Scottish code !!!!!!

 

[me123]

Especially as Carlisle isn't in Scotland. Scottish Government would be less inclined to pay for something that takes their citizens to England, and there would be disagreement about who pays for the relatively small part south of the border.

If there was a significant demonstration of benefits to the Borders from inbound traffic from England, as well as benefits of connecting the towns to the South (increased housing/job opportunities etc), then I'm sure the Scottish Government would actively consider an extension to Carlisle.

 

[HowardGWR]

If there was a significant demonstration of benefits to the Borders from inbound traffic from England, as well as benefits of connecting the towns to the South (increased housing/job opportunities etc), then I'm sure the Scottish Government would actively consider an extension to Carlisle.

Yes, on that basis the channel tunnel costs should not have been shared as it was clearly only in the interests of........er...

@ME123 I hope you realise i was agreeing with you.

 

[me123]

It's a bit different to the Chunnel, though. There's already a rail link between Carlisle and Edinburgh, and it will remain the fastest link. This isn't about connecting Scotland and England, it's about connecting the smaller towns of the Borders to Carlisle and, through connections, to England. I'm sure England would benefit to some degree, but it's highly likely that any connection would be significantly more beneficial to Scotland in this instance.

If everyone was in agreement, I'm sure they could negotiate something to link Tweedbank - Carlisle. I'd suspect the Scottish Government would be bearing the bulk of the costs, and I think it would be right for us to do so.

If this link was to be faster than the existing route via Carstairs, then it would be a different story. England would benefit from faster journey times to Edinburgh and as such it's not quite as clear cut.

 

[Starmill]

Well the 1553 from Edinburgh was 2 carriages as booked today and left people behind at Edinburgh. Couldn't have fit another person on... still standing on departure from Newtongrange.

 

[railjock]

Well the 1553 from Edinburgh was 2 carriages as booked today and left people behind at Edinburgh. Couldn't have fit another person on... still standing on departure from Newtongrange.

In a perverse way that's a good sign. The 8:04 from Eskbank to fife was quieter than usual. Four coaches. The 15 minute layover at Waverley is a bit frustrating for those going to Haymarket or South Gyle ( me ) though.

 

[clc]

Interesting that the Scotland Route Study forecasts demand to Tweedbank hitting 4tph by 2043.

Page 129: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Scotland-Route-Study-Draft-for-Consultation-Appendices.pdf

And that forecast doesn't factor in a potential extension to Hawick.

I assume most of the line would have to be double tracked.

 

[Pinza-C55]

Just curious....some posters here have asserted that after the "honeymoon period" is over then traffic would fall back to realistic levels.
How should we know when this has happened or the alternative is true, ie that the traffic forecasts were way short of the actuality ?

 

[deltic08]

Just curious....some posters here have asserted that after the "honeymoon period" is over then traffic would fall back to realistic levels.
How should we know when this has happened or the alternative is true, ie that the traffic forecasts were way short of the actuality ?

Are footfall figures available for October and November? If so how do they compare with September?

 

[Altnabreac]

Just curious....some posters here have asserted that after the "honeymoon period" is over then traffic would fall back to realistic levels.
How should we know when this has happened or the alternative is true, ie that the traffic forecasts were way short of the actuality ?

I would say we won't really know that until we see the 2017-18 ORR Station Usage figures in 3 years or so.

Next year's (2015-16) figures we will only see the opening rush and people trying it out.

2016-17 will be the first full year but also the first summer with a number of people still visiting out of novelty.

If the 2017-18 figures show continued growth rather than retrenchment then we can be confident the passenger numbers were unduly pessimistic and it will be a continuing success.

We may get hints sooner as TS will have access to monthly data but we will definitely know by Dec 2018 whatever else anyone publishes.

 

[Pinza-C55]

I would say we won't really know that until we see the 2017-18 ORR Station Usage figures in 3 years or so.

Next year's (2015-16) figures we will only see the opening rush and people trying it out.

2016-17 will be the first full year but also the first summer with a number of people still visiting out of novelty.

If the 2017-18 figures show continued growth rather than retrenchment then we can be confident the passenger numbers were unduly pessimistic and it will be a continuing success.

We may get hints sooner as TS will have access to monthly data but we will definitely know by Dec 2018 whatever else anyone publishes.

So essentially by the time there is enough information to resolve the question we will all have forgotten it and this thread ?

 

[Altnabreac]

So essentially by the time there is enough information to resolve the question we will all have forgotten it and this thread ?

Probably! But for funders and decision makers on extending to Hawick the timings are just right. 3 years data to look at, then make a decision towards the middle of the next Scottish Parliament term (2016-2021) with construction starting in early 2020s That fits well with parliamentary and local government election timetables (May 2021 and May 2022).

People won't want to rush into decisions and other areas (Levenmouth, Ellon, Grangemouth) are ahead in the queue but if growth continues like it has so far that sort of timetable is not unrealistic.

 

[deltic08]

I would say we won't really know that until we see the 2017-18 ORR Station Usage figures in 3 years or so.

Next year's (2015-16) figures we will only see the opening rush and people trying it out.

2016-17 will be the first full year but also the first summer with a number of people still visiting out of novelty.

If the 2017-18 figures show continued growth rather than retrenchment then we can be confident the passenger numbers were unduly pessimistic and it will be a continuing success.

We may get hints sooner as TS will have access to monthly data but we will definitely know by Dec 2018 whatever else anyone publishes.

Septembers figures were published quickly. If TS have figures for subsequent months why are they being withheld? Is there something to hide such as the failure to relay sufficient double track sections and future proof for expansion by building only single track bridgework?

Due to ill health I have yet to have my first trip on the line since reinstatement and not likely to until well into next year during visits to family in Edinburgh. Where do I fit into the statistics as a "novelty visitor" as will most likely have a trip on every visit to Edinburgh as I have done to Glasgow out via Airdrie and back via Falkirk since 2010 just for the ride.