Glenmutchkin
Member
Even less of a city than Ripon.So, Brechin is not a city?
Even less of a city than Ripon.So, Brechin is not a city?
When you add the cost of doubling at Perth and Usan, both long bridges over water, addition of freight loops and four aspect resignalling, it won't be that much less than reinstatement via Strathmore.I finally understand what a crayonista is. 40+ miles of essentially new railway is supposed to cost less than resignalling and adding loops to an existing railway. Riiiight.
But it is a city as I said before you posted unnecessarily contradicting incorrectly, and not rail served as is Ripon at the moment and both have a cathedral.Even less of a city than Ripon.
Don't be an a**. The main point which you obviously don't get or do get but prefer to ridicule
is the fact that there is life beyond Dundee but unable to get to the central belt without going by a circuitous coastal route via Dundee.
This will never be as quick as a direct, straighter and shorter route via Strathmore for the sake of £750 million for the 52 miles of route from Stanley Junction to Laurancekirk. This is less than the cost of the new Reading station. Yes Jeez, it is hard sometimes to get through to people!
Dundee-Aberdeen served by trains from Edinburgh to Aberdeen with Glasgow-Dundee served by extending Glasgow-Dunblane or Glasgow-Perth trains as it used to be before 1967.
But it is a city as I said before you posted unnecessarily contradicting incorrectly, and not rail served as is Ripon at the moment and both have a cathedral.
But it is a city as I said before you posted unnecessarily contradicting incorrectly, and not rail served as is Ripon at the moment and both have a cathedral.
So what. It can become another rail served settlement just by the fact that a new route could be built passing close by.It's not one of Scotrail's seven cities....
If I've got £750m in my back pocket, I've better places to spend it.
I was replying to the post regarding Ripon, not qualification for reinstatement of a railway.I think that I am inclined to stick with Altnabreac's ideas of what might be worthwhile. I can't recall cathedrals being on the check list.
Sorry to have misunderstood you. I have a morbid fear of compartmentalisation.I was replying to the post regarding Ripon, not qualification for reinstatement of a railway.
No. The cities of Scotland are Glasgow, Edinburgh, Stirling, Perth, Dundee, Aberdeen and Inverness.So, Brechin is not a city?
I assumed that as in England and Wales, a settlement with a cathedral has a charter to make it a city regardless of size and population as granted by King George 3rd.No. The cities of Scotland are Glasgow, Edinburgh, Stirling, Perth, Dundee, Aberdeen and Inverness.
Yes, there are small towns and villages in Angus that aren't rail connected. Yes, if the Strathmore route had been retained it would likely be reasonably well used today. And yes, it would likely be faster than the route via Dundee.The main point which you obviously don't get or do get but prefer to ridicule is the fact that there is life beyond Dundee but unable to get to the central belt without going by a circuitous coastal route via Dundee.
A railway station that has annual usage over three times greater than the entire population of Scotland!This will never be as quick as a direct, straighter and shorter route via Strathmore for the sake of £750 million for the 52 miles of route from Stanley Junction to Laurancekirk. This is less than the cost of the new Reading station.
The Tay Viaduct really doesn't add much to journey times, nor is it a major constraint to timetabling since all trains stop at Perth. Not sure why you're suggesting four-aspect signalling as there's barely any 100mph running, but even so you would struggle to spend more than a couple hundred million on resignalling and some loops.When you add the cost of doubling at Perth and Usan, both long bridges over water, addition of freight loops and four aspect resignalling, it won't be that much less than reinstatement via Strathmore.
Accepted.Sorry to have misunderstood you. I have a morbid fear of compartmentalisation.
Scotland is neither England nor Wales.I assumed that as in England and Wales, a settlement with a cathedral has a charter to make it a city regardless of size and population as granted by King George 3rd.
Scotland is neither England nor Wales.
And the presence or absence of a cathedral is not what determines city status in England and Wales either, nor has it been for quite a while.
Dundee would still be served and so would be Inverness, Aberdeen, Perth and Stirling even though they have less station footfall than Dundee. I can't see your argument against improving the nation's railways. You seem stuck in the 1960s when population was a lot less and the attitude toward railways was road and car is best.Yes, there are small towns and villages in Angus that aren't rail connected. Yes, if the Strathmore route had been retained it would likely be reasonably well used today. And yes, it would likely be faster than the route via Dundee.
But it isn't there, so the costs of re-opening it have to be balanced against the potential gain - and there really isn't much in the gain column that couldn't be achieved at lower cost elsewhere.
A railway station that has annual usage over three times greater than the entire population of Scotland!
The Tay Viaduct really doesn't add much to journey times, nor is it a major constraint to timetabling since all trains stop at Perth. Not sure why you're suggesting four-aspect signalling as there's barely any 100mph running, but even so you would struggle to spend more than a couple hundred million on resignalling and some loops.
So what. It can become another rail served settlement just by the fact that a new route could be built passing close by.
But you are never likely to have a back pocket that big, but Governments do and are likely to reinstate railways to save the planet. I think, and so do others, that this is a winner if they do.
Where would you spend it on transport infrastructure?
On the contrary, I'm very much in favour of improving the railways as I don't drive. As such I'm all for schemes that give a big return on the investment - for example the Almond Chord, Levenmouth Railway, Lentran Long Loop, etc.I can't see your argument against improving the nation's railways.
It's a constraint - any single line section would be. However, it's not a major constraint since all passenger trains call at Perth. What is more of a constraint is the signalling and the lack of freight loops.The Tay viaduct is a constraint to capacity increase according to Network Rail.
Leeds has never been in the oppressive shadow of Ripon. It is more the reverse of that as we are now part of the oppressive Leeds City region that only thinks of Leeds. When it was the West Riding at least the City of Wakefield was more sympathetic to the rest of the county than Leeds is now lauding it over West Yorkshire. Leeds has even stolen Ripon Cathedral as it hasn't one of its own. If it was on wheels it would be in Leeds now!Absolutely. I was born and raised in Leeds, a city that shook off the oppressive shadow of Ripon, despite only having a Parish Church. In those days the RCs didn't count.
What is then?Scotland is neither England nor Wales.
And the presence or absence of a cathedral is not what determines city status in England and Wales either, nor has it been for quite a while.
A railway station that has annual usage over three times greater than the entire population of Scotland!
Only ridiculous in your mind. Reinstating to Peterhead and Fraserburgh would produce more passengers to the central belt and certainly would produce more fish traffic that would not want to or be able to run via Dundee on its way south to England. What then? Just turn it away bearing in mind lorries will be electric and limited duration with just as much air pollution.Any other ridiculous reopenings we'd like to discuss when we're at it? Dumfries-Stranraer is the usual one when we're tired of Strathmore. I quite fancy Dunblane-Crianlarich tonight, it goes through some nice scenery.
If anyone on here wants to campaign for £750m or whatever for a longer distance Scottish reopening that would serve some real regeneration need amongst a decent population, and avoid more wasteful road building, then I'd like to point them in the direction of Dyce to Peterhead and Fraserburgh. It could even follow the original route to please the nostalgists amongst us.
What is then?
That means nothing. What is the distribution? How many travel north to Arbroath, Montrose and Aberdeen, how many travel only as far as Perth and how many into Fife that would not travel if one fast train an hour did not run to Aberdeen?
Reading station has an annual usage of 17M give or take. Which means that, picking an arbitrary metric, it will take a little over fourty years for 750M journeys to derive a benefit from the new station.That means nothing.
If there is such a compelling business case to reduce Glasgow-Aberdeen journey times (and only Glasgow-Aberdeen, as the Forfar route couldn't be used for any other 7 City pair)
Noone would need to consume fish in this world because everyone would be able to afford to eat caviar.Only ridiculous in your mind. Reinstating to Peterhead and Fraserburgh would produce more passengers to the central belt and certainly would produce more fish traffic that would not want to or be able to run via Dundee on its way south to England. What then? Just turn it away bearing in mind lorries will be electric and limited duration with just as much air pollution.
Then there's Dunfermline, whose town council unilaterally declared it a city, and uses that term. Nobody else does, but that doesn't stop them.In Scotland the link between cathedrals and city status never really existed at all and pre reformation cathedrals have existed in many towns such as Brechin, Elgin, Dunblane, Dunkeld, St Andrews, Kirkwall etc. I suspect the presbyterian nature of the Church of Scotland generally meant that diocesan structures were less relevant to Scottish public life than in England.
Both Brechin and Elgin have football clubs with City in their name but they are very much only unofficial cities.
Noone would need to consume fish in this world because everyone would be able to afford to eat caviar.
All I'm trying to do is bring a sense of prioritisation to the discussion. If £750m a year for five years became available for Scottish passenger reopenings or major redevelopments - we wish - then this would need to be distributed wisely and placed to derive the maximum strategic value and regeneration benefits to the largest number of people. So Levenmouth, Glenfarg, Hawick, Penicuik, Buchan Line, maybe St Andrews, and possibly (and I can't believe that I'm saying this) Hawick-Carlisle. But not under any circumstances Strathmore and not Dumfries-Stranraer.
How would you prioritise?