Edinburgh Suburban loop question.

[Photohunter71]

Now that there is a drive on to electrify the line and with the Borders line due to take revenue from next September,what are the chances of integrating the Sub loop as a passenger carrying line with stations along the loop?

Edinburgh is due for some unprecedented rapid expansion which would make the case for more lines to either re-open or be constructed.

I have seen some plans for the extensions for the street-train network from its current York place to the airport route. Surely now there should be calls for a type of Edinburgh Crossrail network as the City sees massive new building programmes in and around the outskirts.

 

[Altnabreac]

Now that there is a drive on to electrify the line and with the Borders line due to take revenue from next September,what are the chances of integrating the Sub loop as a passenger carrying line with stations along the loop? Edinburgh is due for some unprecedented rapid expansion which would make the case for more lines to either re-open or be constructed. I have seen some plans for the extensions for the street-train network from its current York place to the airport route.Surely now there should be calls for a type of Edinburgh Crossrail network as the City sees massive new building programmes in and around the outskirts.

The fundamental problem with re-opening the south sub is a lack of capacity between Waverley and Haymarket especially on the south lines.

There is also a pinch point at Portobello Junction although upgrading the single lead junction there could help.

If more Haymarket capacity could be created (probably by reviving the Dalmeny Chord project) the question is then would you use it for the south sub or something else with a better business case?

Even if you squeeze 1-2tph is that enough to run a viable service on the south sub to compete with buses? 1tph would be no good for encouraging takeup and 2tph is probably not enough. You'd want at least 4tph to give a useful public transport network.

One option as you say is to consider tram train with street running along Princes Street, however with the south sub carrying heavy freight traffic and possibly being electrified in the medium term at 25KV you've got multiple issues to resolve there including:

• Availability of Dual Voltage trams;
• Crashworthiness standards for tram trains / freight operations;
• Grade separating a new connection from south sub to the tram lines which are on the wrong side at Haymarket for easy connection;
• Public / politicians wariness of investing more in trams given previous fiasco and probable preference for completing to Leith before contemplating further tram investment.

Even if you solve all these issues there is still the question of journey times, as the south sub runs east west while most travel demand is north south so journey times are an issue as well.

This is why south sub comes up frequently but has never made progress. Not saying it will never happen but there are difficult questions to resolve that no one has found the answer to yet.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Is there really much demand for travel between the points which could be served by travel on the loop? Morningside - Cameron Toll - Brunstane? Perhaps, but it would be a very long way to get to/from the City Centre. Now, if the new infirmary had been built on the site of Astley Ainslie Hospital, if you were wondering about re-opening the line that runs right next to the Royal Infimary, then a station there might get some substantial use; with trains running right through from Fife or Dunblane, then I could imagine a Hospital Station being viable.

The fundamental problem with re-opening the south sub is a lack of capacity between Waverley and Haymarket especially on the south lines. . . . . there is still the question of journey times, as the south sub runs east west while most travel demand is north south so journey times are an issue as well.

This is why south sub comes up frequently but has never made progress. Not saying it will never happen but there are difficult questions to resolve that no one has found the answer to yet.

Indeed.

 

[Photohunter71]

Interesting replies,and I would agree that the Royal infirmary site idea would have been fantastic,sadly the hospital PFI at the time bought the land at little France for a bargain basement price.As I work for the NHS across from Astley Ainslie at the Royal Ed,I know that Astley Ainslie is being binned and some of the patients there are already transferred to Liberton/Royal Victoria near the Western General and we will be getting the rest once our site has been totally revamped. I believe housing will go up in the former Astley site,(believe me,I'd love one there! right by the tracks!) However,I see of the sub not much other than the steel/alcan and nuke waste,and of the Gorgie line nothing uses that!! Surely if capacity were improved it would be worth considering.

 

[matchmaker]

I think another problem may be that there was (at least in relatively recent times) no real useage of suburban rail in Edinburgh, compared to Glasgow for example.

 

[route:oxford]

The fundamental problem with re-opening the south sub is a lack of capacity between Waverley and Haymarket especially on the south lines.

It's a big problem.

The route from Carlisle has a similar problem. The number of times I've sat gazing at derelict garages just outside Haymarket for 10 mins or so due to platform capacity issues. (The service still arrives on time though).

My ideal would be a twin bore tunnel with new underground platforms at Haymarket and Waverley for the Carlisle route. Too expensive to be practical though.

 

[edwin_m]

One option as you say is to consider tram train with street running along Princes Street, however with the south sub carrying heavy freight traffic and possibly being electrified in the medium term at 25KV you've got multiple issues to resolve there including:

• Availability of Dual Voltage trams;
• Crashworthiness standards for tram trains / freight operations;
• Grade separating a new connection from south sub to the tram lines which are on the wrong side at Haymarket for easy connection;
• Public / politicians wariness of investing more in trams given previous fiasco and probable preference for completing to Leith before contemplating further tram investment.

Even if you solve all these issues there is still the question of journey times, as the south sub runs east west while most travel demand is north south so journey times are an issue as well.

The Rotherham tram-train should have sorted the first two within the next couple of years - the dual-voltage trams are already being built.

Maybe some scope for a street running tram branch near Haymarket to pick up the Sub without an expensive new structure?

The wariness issue and the journey times are however less easy to deal with. For it to be worth doing the journey time on the indirect route from the suburban stations round to Princes Street would need to be competitive with the more direct bus routes.

 

[NotATrainspott]

It's a big problem.

The route from Carlisle has a similar problem. The number of times I've sat gazing at derelict garages just outside Haymarket for 10 mins or so due to platform capacity issues. (The service still arrives on time though).

My ideal would be a twin bore tunnel with new underground platforms at Haymarket and Waverley for the Carlisle route. Too expensive to be practical though.

Would there be enough space to grade-separate the Suburban line connection to the southern Haymarket lines? With a chord at Slateford it could be possible to send all Carstairs and Shotts trains that way, with the existing line closed or preferably converted to be the start of a tram line to south west Edinburgh.

 

[Taunton]

This one came up in Edinburgh in the 1970s as well and I got peripherally involved. I think it's come around in the intervening time as well. Basically :

The South Suburban "circle" is one of those alignments which fascinate observers with circular train routes, which of course do not represent end to end flows at all. They are a nuisance to operate because there is nowhere sensible like a normal end of line to recover from delays.

There has always been limited capacity each side of Waverley, and limited through platforms there as well, with no space between the walls for more. These are well used by long distance services.

Even if a 20-minute service could be squeezed in on that section, it would be competing on the south side through Newington and Morningside, where most potential users are, with a bus service on much more direct roads of such frequency that there is always a bus in sight.

This particular "circle" is actually very squashed east-west, quite the opposite orientation you want for a routing where the main station (Waverley) is in the middle of the north side. As someone who has (when younger and fitter!) walked many times from Newington to Waverley, I reckon could have given any long-way-round train service a good run for its money.

 

[Class 170101]

The fundamental problem with re-opening the south sub is a lack of capacity between Waverley and Haymarket especially on the south lines.

There is also a pinch point at Portobello Junction although upgrading the single lead junction there could help.

If more Haymarket capacity could be created (probably by reviving the Dalmeny Chord project) the question is then would you use it for the south sub or something else with a better business case?

Even if you squeeze 1-2tph is that enough to run a viable service on the south sub to compete with buses? 1tph would be no good for encouraging takeup and 2tph is probably not enough. You'd want at least 4tph to give a useful public transport network.

One option as you say is to consider tram train with street running along Princes Street, however with the south sub carrying heavy freight traffic and possibly being electrified in the medium term at 25KV you've got multiple issues to resolve there including:

• Availability of Dual Voltage trams;
• Crashworthiness standards for tram trains / freight operations;
• Grade separating a new connection from south sub to the tram lines which are on the wrong side at Haymarket for easy connection;
• Public / politicians wariness of investing more in trams given previous fiasco and probable preference for completing to Leith before contemplating further tram investment.

Even if you solve all these issues there is still the question of journey times, as the south sub runs east west while most travel demand is north south so journey times are an issue as well.

This is why south sub comes up frequently but has never made progress. Not saying it will never happen but there are difficult questions to resolve that no one has found the answer to yet.

Why the need to run to Haymarket? How about instead using the London end bays at Edinburgh and run a service between Edinburgh and Motherwell via the South Suburban Lines, Shotts and Holytown (or to Glasgow Central)

 

[170401]

Why the need to run to Haymarket? How about instead using the London end bays at Edinburgh and run a service between Edinburgh and Motherwell via the South Suburban Lines, Shotts and Holytown (or to Glasgow Central)

Very few people West of Slateford would be enticed by the extra 20 minutes or so to get to Waverley and the numbers actually wanting to go to South sub stations would be nowhere near enough to actually warrant the resources of a regular service. likewise as others have said, the South sub stations are very well serviced already by more direct bus routes.

The only likely hope for services over the South sub will come from tram trains, possibly coming from Newcraighall or further and transferring to road somewhere around Gorgie, although even that seems like a stretch of the imagination as far as business cases go.

The South sub really is an answer looking for a question, their are far better projects out there looking for the funding. Sadly though, I believe that political will and constant belly rumbling from a vocal minority is going to see something come of this route in time and it will be an even bigger white elephant than the trams fiasco.

 

[Taunton]

Sadly though, I believe that political will and constant belly rumbling from a vocal minority is going to see something come of this route in time and it will be an even bigger white elephant than the trams fiasco.

Surely not possible :roll:

 

[edwin_m]

Why the need to run to Haymarket? How about instead using the London end bays at Edinburgh and run a service between Edinburgh and Motherwell via the South Suburban Lines, Shotts and Holytown (or to Glasgow Central)

Even though more have been added and even more are planned the East End bays are pretty busy too. Possible a couple more could be built towards the north side but it still leaves the issue of the two-track exit through the tunnels and the flat junctions beyond.

 

[Scotrail84]

Even though more have been added and even more are planned the East End bays are pretty busy too. Possible a couple more could be built towards the north side but it still leaves the issue of the two-track exit through the tunnels and the flat junctions beyond.

Are there not plans to re-double Calton North and South tunnels as part of increasing capacity for the borders opening? Also I belive a major remodelling of Waverley East end is in the pipeline too.

 

[Photohunter71]

Are there not plans to re-double Calton North and South tunnels as part of increasing capacity for the borders opening? Also I belive a major remodelling of Waverley East end is in the pipeline too.

Really?!! That sounds interesting! And with the proposed Reston and East Linton stations in the plans,the tracks will certainly have to be redoubled.Shame the Abbeyhill triangle wasn't fully re-instated.

 

[edwin_m]

I was advised by someone that should know, that the South tunnel had some geological problems and has been shored up with concrete which prevents the second track being restored.

 

[Photohunter71]

Ahh,that's not so good. However if capacity were to be increased,they'd have to spend money on stabilising measures.

 

[och aye]

Ahh,that's not so good. However if capacity were to be increased,they'd have to spend money on stabilising measures.

I imagine that would cost a fair amount to do! hock:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Really?!! That sounds interesting! And with the proposed Reston and East Linton stations in the plans,the tracks will certainly have to be redoubled.Shame the Abbeyhill triangle wasn't fully re-instated.

Are they not laying track at the Abbeyhill turnback?

 

[Photohunter71]

From what I was led to believe, the track at Abbeyhill was only going so far, but things change! My understanding was that the triangle wasn't going to be re-instated according to what I was told by Transport Scotland.

 

[ahhhh]

I used to wonder about the south sub as a circular tram train route, but I'm increasing convinced by the arguments against. However, joining the existing tram line at Haymarket and heading west instead of east would provide the residents of the south side direct access to Edinburgh Park and the airport, and would attach more residential areas to the current tram service. I'm assuming that the platforms at Morningside etc could be lowered?

 

[PaulLothian]

Over forty years ago, long before the current Edinburgh trams were thought of, a friend and I spent some time devising a reasonable scenario for their reintroduction. This involved use of the Sub, not as a circular passenger route, but as a useful segregated connection between street-running sections. We considered street running south from the east end of Princes Street, down the Bridges as far as Newington Station, where the line would fork giving access to the Sub in both directions.

In those days, we planned to use the east route as it stands, but continuing the tram route down to Musselburgh, with new stations for communities along the way. My friend, who was training as an architect, reckoned this would strongly support urban regeneration in what was then a very deprived area of the city (and is only now being redeveloped). This was long before the development of out-of-town shopping centres! Nowadays, we would route the line from Cameron Toll via the Royal Infirmary, probably terminating at Fort Kinnaird retail park.

A further split on this route at the Royal Infirmary could allow on-street running across the south side of the city, picking up the A701 and terminating at the Straiton Shopping Centre, potentially providing a new and exciting way to get your IKEA flat-pack home!

The west route used the Sub to Morningside, with on-street running to reach Oxgangs. It could make sense for this route also to split, the western branch using the Sub to reach Slateford, and then using the relatively wide roads in that area to terminate at Edinburgh Park. (This is a later addition to our first draft, as Edinburgh Park did not exist at that time, being mostly boggy fields!)

Of course, all of this was based on the rest of the network being built. We recognised this made a lot of traffic on the Newington-Bridges axis, and a line down Leith Walk was an essential part of the plan, and preferably a line in the direction of Barnton using the west part of the Caley line to Leith.

I am fairly sure we had other sections in mind, largely using old rail alignments we explored that no longer exist, but I don’t have detailed memories. I remember sections of the old Lothian Lines that appeared to allow grade-separated junctions for the master plan…

Sadly, the Sub as a whole appears to be a poor solution for the actual problem – how to travel quickly between Edinburgh’s outer suburbs by public transport.

 

[Photohunter71]

To be electrified by 2019 according to NR proposals.I still say there would have been some scope for passenger use. Maybe also incorporate using the Glimerton line to Loanhead and Penicuik and then on via West Linton,Biggar and connecting with Moffat? (Mind you,a wee spur from the WCML would easily link Moffat.)