Future demand for services bypassing Glasgow

[Clansman]

A few members including myself have raised this topic more often than not on a fair few threads, including one I made ages ago about the viability of reintroducing services from central and the north of Scotland down the WCML via Cumbernauld, and thus bypassing Glasgow.

However, taking a step back and looking at it more generally, isn't this the missing link when it comes to what can be done to improve connectivity, journey times, and overcrowding caused by the inevitable need for passengers to traverse Glasgow or pile into Edinburgh?

By taking a step back, I'm not neccessarily talking about particular services (ie the Clansman that I raised the issue of a while back), but more so how the Cumbernauld to Motherwell corridor can be better utilised to aid such issues as those listed above.

I raised on another thread recently about how many reservations were made for Carlisle when LNER services north of Edinburgh ran direct during diversions, as well as others noting the extent to which the need to traverse Glasgow often resorts many a passenger to go via Edinburgh when it would have otherwise have been quicker to do the former.

Say at a minimum, you could time a service from somewhere in the central belt (Stirling/Perth/Dundee) to Carlisle at least 3 or 4 times a day to connect the Scottish IC services with the WC, TPE, and SW ScotRail services at Carlisle, to what extent would you say this would be a well utilised corridor in the eyes of passengers?

An hour and a half or thereabouts from Carlisle to Stirling, linking up the south west communities directly with the central belt and increasing frequencies to make such journeys (either directly on ScotRail or changing at Glasgow using existing services), as well as speeding up possible journey times and connectivity to London, the Midlands, and the south west of England.

Surely in a decade or so this is essential to at least mitigate ever increasing demand for interchanging at Glasgow and Edinburgh (spreading it to Carlisle and Stirling/other central belt stations instead) from England and the south west of Scotland?

 

[computerSaysNo]

I think this is a good idea at the service level mentioned (4 services each way, per day) and I think starting back from Dundee means it would have the biggest benefit to the highest number of people. However, I think the service should only be run if a bi-mode train can be used, or a full electric train once Stirling to Dundee is wired; otherwise there is going to be a substantial amount of diesel running under the wires.

Is the new West Coast operator ordering any 5-car bi mode trains? Would a service (5 car) Dundee - Perth - Stirling - various stations around Glasgow - Lockerbie - Carlisle then 10 car towards Euston work?

 

[krus_aragon]

Is the new West Coast operator ordering any 5-car bi mode trains?

Yes, thirteen of them (and ten 7-car electrics).

Would a service (5 car) Dundee - Perth - Stirling - various stations around Glasgow - Lockerbie - Carlisle then 10 car towards Euston work?

That might be a bit of a stretch with what's currently ordered: those thirteen units will be quite busy with Chester, North Wales, and Shrewsbury services.

 

[computerSaysNo]

This might be a bit of a stretch but we've guessed that Transport Scotland will be ordering bi modes in the next franchise, to replace the HSTs. What are the chances of these being specified to be "compatible with the West Coast trains", so that a ScotRail unit may run to Carlisle and couple to a West Coast unit for the remainder of the journey?

Or is this asking for trouble (delays, service reliability etc)?

 

[d9009alycidon]

Hmmmm! preserved 87 or 86 with two coaches off Carlisle about 20:50 (no need to switch to a 26 at Mossend now) - Hellfire!

 

[krus_aragon]

This might be a bit of a stretch but we've guessed that Transport Scotland will be ordering bi modes in the next franchise, to replace the HSTs. What are the chances of these being specified to be "compatible with the West Coast trains", so that a ScotRail unit may run to Carlisle and couple to a West Coast unit for the remainder of the journey?

Or is this asking for trouble (delays, service reliability etc)?

Sounds like the West Coast Joint Stock reborn!

 

[Clansman]

This might be a bit of a stretch but we've guessed that Transport Scotland will be ordering bi modes in the next franchise, to replace the HSTs. What are the chances of these being specified to be "compatible with the West Coast trains", so that a ScotRail unit may run to Carlisle and couple to a West Coast unit for the remainder of the journey?

Or is this asking for trouble (delays, service reliability etc)?

Think that would be a step or two too far.

Ideally you'd be looking at ScotRail units from another fleet to rotate with; such as whatever replaces the 156s in the south west. Either that or displaced 385s or even IC7 stock. A dedicated fleet wouldn't be justified for this corridor.

 

[Meerkat]

Is there spare capacity between Carlisle and Carstairs?

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes, thirteen of them (and ten 7-car electrics).

That might be a bit of a stretch with what's currently ordered: those thirteen units will be quite busy with Chester, North Wales, and Shrewsbury services.

And none of the new trains are planned to operate north of Preston.

 

[edwin_m]

I raised on another thread recently about how many reservations were made for Carlisle when LNER services north of Edinburgh ran direct during diversions

Might this just be because passengers heading for London are quicker changing at Carlisle and getting a direct train from there? The time-consuming bit of the LNER diversion is when it turns eastwards to Newcastle, a long slow run that doesn't get it any closer to final destination.

It seems to me that not many people would benefit from a Glasgow avoiding service. For anywhere north or east of Stirling the journey time will be about the same via Edinburgh, including those going to WCML stations as far south as the West Midlands which have Edinburgh trains at least every two hours. From west, south and much of the area south-east of Glasgow it's easier to get to Central than to make an interchange at Cumbernauld or Motherwell. And with poor interchange to the main Edinburgh-Glasgow routes many east of Glasgow would still find it easier to head for Edinburgh or continue to transfer between Glasgow stations.

Take out all those groups and I think you have very limited demand. It's probably just people travelling between the immediate vicinity of Motherwell and Cumbernauld (or driving to those stations) and the western side of England, and between Stirling or further north and a similar area of England who want a through journey or for whom the times of connections aren't convenient.

 

[Clip]

But i would bet that most people on these services from both south and north would really want to go to Glasgow

 

[Bald Rick]

I quite enjoy the dash across Glasgow, it’s a lovely city. Always a chance to have a swift one somewhere en route too.

 

[ccityplanner12]

The twenty-two platforms of Glasgow stand as a key flaw in Scotland's railway planning. It seems Glasgow is thought of in a similar way to how SNCF must think of Paris: If a place has a train to Glasgow, then it is optimally connected to everywhere else that has a train to Glasgow. Unfortunately, Central and Queen Street are exactly the wrong distance from each other: they are beyond acceptable walking distance, & while they are (almost) connected by an underground line, the short distance means that the one-stop ride on the Subway is no quicker than walking, particularly considering that another ticket must usually be purchased.
One might assume that it was always this way: Glasgow having one set of terminals for the south, & another for the north, Highland-England passenger volume not being great enough to warrant special consideration. However this was not the case.
The core of the Caledonian Railway infrastructure, when viewed on a map, seems to be designed for trains to bypass Glasgow by way of Coatbridge. The Mossend route is built to as high an infrastructure standard, if not one higher than, the Cambuslang route. 4 service patterns for long-distance trains stand out:

1. Left at Motherwell, via Uddingston, Cambuslang and Rutherglen, into Central (which nearly everything from the south does today)
2. Right at Motherwell, via Mossend and Coatbridge Central, into Buchanan Street (of questionable use as Buchanan Street only had 6 platforms. The modern equivalent since the St Rollox alignment was closed would augment this with a right turn at Sighthill to enter Queen Street by way of Springburn, best avoided as this probably isn't the best use of capacity in the narrow tunnel)
3. Right at Motherwell, via Mossend, Coatbridge Central and Cumbernauld, missing Glasgow entirely (plenty of trains used to do this, now next to none)
4. Right at Glenboig into Buchanan Street (now via Springburn into Queen Street. Believe it or not, some of these reverse to platforms [8/9] so as not to use up tunnel capacity)

The network clearly wasn't designed for only one of these to get nearly all the traffic, with such intensive use of Central and Queen Street as it suffers today. The current daytime service pattern through Perth and Stirling is as follows:

• 2tph Dunblane – Stirling – Grahamston – Waverley
• 1tph Alloa – Stirling – Queen Street
• 1tph Stirling – Queen Street
• 1tph Aberdeen – Dundee – Stirling – Queen Street
• Approx. ⅓tph Highland Main Line – Stirling – Queen Street
• Approx. ⅓tph Highland Main Line – Markinch – Waverley
• 1 daily service England – Waverley – Falkirk Grahamston – Stirling – HML

Last time I was in the area, I noticed that connections between trains weren't much of a focus for the timetable, which as a result had large heavy-duty interchanges like Stirling and Perth sitting mostly unutilised.
The Highland trains are probably pretty much immobile due to serving a region reliant largely on single-track, but the lowland trains could be jigged around a little (recovery time moved to another location & similar small changes) to provide better connection opportunities. Here is an exercise table for Stirling in the Up direction only:

• Dunblane trains moved a few minutes later to arrive before & depart after Dundee trains. This would connect Dunblane to Glasgow and Gleneagles to Edinburgh.
• Alloa trains also moved a few minutes later to arrive before & depart after HML – Stirling – points south intercity trains. This would connect Alloa to Edinburgh while also providing a connection to Queen Street, allowing those trains to go somewhere else instead, such as perhaps England via Mossend.

Even if Mid-Scotland is crying out for such changes, perhaps there is a problem at the Beattock-facing end. It is somehow both four-track yet not four-track at the same time, with intercity trains leaving Glasgow Central having to run on a track crossed by city-bound suburban roads in 5 separate locations (Rutherglen, Uddingston, Motherwell, Shieldmuir and Law). On the way in it's 3 locations of occurrence, which to make matters worse are mostly different locations (Lanark, Motherwell and Newton). It seems odd, then, that "international" trains which serve both of Scotland's metropolises are habitually routed this way, while "domestic" services are kept separate on the Falkirk High line. Now that the latter is electrified, & the ECML uses Hitachi IEPs (with the best level of acceleration of any intercity train to my knowledge), it would make sense for that to be the mainline, because the environs of Motherwell aren't the jack of all trades they try to be.

 

[edwin_m]

The core of the Caledonian Railway infrastructure, when viewed on a map, seems to be designed for trains to bypass Glasgow by way of Coatbridge. The Mossend route is built to as high an infrastructure standard, if not one higher than, the Cambuslang route.

I suspect this reflects the perceived importance in Victorian times of the upper classes who would travel in private coaches from England directly to the shooting estates in the Highlands. There was also a need for the Caledonian and later the LMS to provide through services in competition with the East Coast route. This persisted after nationalization but eventually BR re-shaped services to encourage those passengers to go via Waverley. By doing this, through services could serve one of the larges cities on the route rather than missing it, and anyone with no convenient through train could at least make their connection within the same station.

So I don't think the existence of a historic main line necessarily suggests it is worth restoring the Victorian service pattern in today's conditions. It has indeed left us with something of a mess around Motherwell, for which Transport Scotland has proposed a bypass of the Glasgow suburbs as a solution. I think the reason to route CrossCountry and the one remaining LNER service via Motherwell is to provide that city with through links to north-eastern England as well as Edinburgh. The service that runs via Falkirk High does so because its main purpose is to link Edinburgh and Glasgow and that is the fastest route between the two cities.

 

[Esker-pades]

Instead of having direct InterCity stuff, could one put in a more local Stirling - Motherwell service (Larbert, Cumbernauld, Greenfaulds, Coatbridge Central, Whifflet)? It would replace the current Hamilton Loop extensions to Cumbernauld. It could also go slightly further north or south.

 

[Clansman]

I quite enjoy the dash across Glasgow, it’s a lovely city. Always a chance to have a swift one somewhere en route too.

Pizza Crolla is an essential pitstop I must admit. Guess we look on the bright side to such interchanges!

Instead of having direct InterCity stuff, could one put in a more local Stirling - Motherwell service (Larbert, Cumbernauld, Greenfaulds, Coatbridge Central, Whifflet)? It would replace the current Hamilton Loop extensions to Cumbernauld. It could also go slightly further north or south.

You'd be completely excluding Lockerbie and the likes of Dumfries/Gretna/Anna journey connections. To me that would be the bulk demand of such services when excluding IC connections beyond Carlisle.

 

[Bald Rick]

Pizza Crolla is an essential pitstop I must admit. Guess we look on the bright side to such interchanges!

If you have enough time for Pizza, then Pizza Punks is the one to go for.

However, if you have, say, half an hour between trains, then one of the Shilling Brewing Co., the Pot Still, or the Bavaria Brauhaus (for an Augusteiner). The latter is slightly off route, but only by minute or two, it just means you have to drink your litre Mass a bit quickly!

 

[Clansman]

If you have enough time for Pizza, then Pizza Punks is the one to go for.

However, if you have, say, half an hour between trains, then one of the Shilling Brewing Co., the Pot Still, or the Bavaria Brauhaus (for an Augusteiner). The latter is slightly off route, but only by minute or two, it just means you have to drink your litre Mass a bit quickly!

How could I not mention Pessano, while we're at it!

Will take your suggestions! I'm not a Glasgow native so only rely on what's on Buchanan street or the odd place that I've discovered over the years when I'm in Glasgow. Certainly doesn't come close to the likes of Manchester with similar station connections. Though I guess I'm biassed because I'm Scottish.

Least it makes the interchanges more barable! If anything it's a pleasure. Though for many I doubt it's such a thing, hence this thread (to keep this relevant before the mods dig out their polis uniforms )

 

[Esker-pades]

Pizza Crolla is an essential pitstop I must admit. Guess we look on the bright side to such interchanges!


You'd be completely excluding Lockerbie and the likes of Dumfries/Gretna/Anna journey connections. To me that would be the bulk demand of such services when excluding IC connections beyond Carlisle.

No - they'd be a change away at Motherwell.

 

[gazthomas]

I would say Central and Queen Street are pretty close together when you compare some of the ridiculous London Underground interchange there are (read Kings Cross St Pancras for the uninitiated!)

 

[route101]

Paesano is good.
Only good chippe in the City Centre is merchant chippy near High St station. Blue lagoons , smells greasy and off.

Shilling is good if pricey.7

Would be good to see services up to Stirling from the WCML , TPE if they had more trains or avanti if more 800s .

Funny how the xc services from Aberden via WCML disppeared overnight

 

[JonathanH]

Funny how the xc services from Aberden via WCML disppeared

There was no option for them to continue when Cross Country services were concentrated on the ECML.

Would be good to see services up to Stirling from the WCML , TPE if they had more trains or avanti if more 800s .

It is difficult to see how an extra path could be justified over the northern part of the WCML to allow direct services to Stirling and beyond, not least given that the most recent addition, to allow trains to run to Liverpool has generated an additional train to Glasgow and the extra path from London is being used for Blackpool.

 

[scotrail158713]

I would say Central and Queen Street are pretty close together when you compare some of the ridiculous London Underground interchange there are (read Kings Cross St Pancras for the uninitiated!)

Yep. Google Maps estimates it at a 6 minute walk - I’ve done it a couple of times and it took me about that (walking at a leisurely pace as well).

 

[Clansman]

Yep. Google Maps estimates it at a 6 minute walk - I’ve done it a couple of times and it took me about that (walking at a leisurely pace as well).

Can be sprinted in 2 minutes if one is in a rush to catch the last train home!

It is difficult to see how an extra path could be justified over the northern part of the WCML to allow direct services to Stirling and beyond, not least given that the most recent addition, to allow trains to run to Liverpool has generated an additional train to Glasgow and the extra path from London is being used for Blackpool.

Blackpool-London paths wouldn't affect the idea of this thread as no-one is proposing running any further south than Carlisle.
Can't see what else is justifying another path at the moment.

 

[edwin_m]

Can be sprinted in 2 minutes if one is in a rush to catch the last train home!


Blackpool-London paths wouldn't affect the idea of this thread as no-one is proposing running any further south than Carlisle.
Can't see what else is justifying another path at the moment.

The northern WCML is pretty full, with 3TPH in most hours running fairly close together so that freight can get as far as possible before having to drop into a loop to be passed by the next flight of passenger services. This service links Carlisle every hour and Lockerbie every two hours with Edinburgh, from where northward connections are possible without having to cross Glasgow. HS2 proposes to up that to 4TPH including two 30min apart, which could nearly halve the freight "window". Transport Scotland has ideas of a stopping service to serve a couple of new stations south of Carstairs, but even if some way was found to run this the passengers would overwhelmingly be heading for Glasgow or Edinburgh not Stirling or beyond.

So I think the best you can hope for is a Motherwell-Stirling (or beyond) shuttle which would provide some extra links. However I know this was looked at a few years ago under a very optimistic set of assumptions, and was difficult to justify given the expected number of passengers using it.

 

[d9009alycidon]

There always has been a cross Glasgow link, the City Union Line, so if the Gorbals Junction - Langside Junction link was reinstated, you could extend the Carlisle Glasgow stoppers (via Kilmarnock) to Falkirk or Stirling using additional Scotlail mini HSTs, think there might be room to squeeze in a station at Saltmarket, would need the Garngad spur to include Cumbernauld

 

[VT 390]

Would the best solution )if better services avoiding Glasgow are needed) be to have a service at least hourly from Motherwell to Stirling or further and stop more or all WCML services at Motherwell?

 

[cle]

I see no demand for this really, unless London is involved. So a Clansman-type service, running from Stirling to Motherwell (calls at both and Cumbernauld), Lockerbie, Carlisle and fast stops to London, maybe just Preston and Crewe. Early departing Inverness etc.

To Carlisle alone is not worthwhile, it's a nowhere place and people don't want to change on very long journeys like this, and Manchester alone might not be enough demand. As it would be split with Lancs and Liverpool, and other places. Birmingham you're into flying distances - perhaps Birmingham via Manchester, but that's slow.

A second daytime Highland service seems like a great thing to push for, and this routing is obvious.

 

[JonathanH]

A second daytime Highland service seems like a great thing to push for, and this routing is obvious.

The existing Highland service (and indeed the train from Stirling and a lot of the trains from Aberdeen) use rolling stock that would otherwise be spare until needed for a late morning trip to London.

Realistically, an out and back trip to Inverness from London (or even Manchester) during the day wouldn't be the best use of rolling stock - spending eight hours north of Motherwell - is there even a spare path on the Highland Line for it? It would either need to run as a one-off (like the Liverpool to Glasgow services) or would leave a gap in the clockface timetable to Edinburgh or Glasgow.

A worthy aim maybe but difficult to see how you fit in such a 'special services particularly as it is expected that there won't be continued use of diesel trains (or bi-modes) on the WCML north of Crewe [1] once the Voyagers are gone and 397s cover all TPE workings.

[1] not allowing for Golborne to Carnforth / Oxenholme, Carlisle to Gretna, Carstairs to Glasgow Central etc.

 

[cle]

This is the speculative area, so I think going into 'unit-level' stock limitations seems to defeat the purpose! There are paths on the HML - Scotrail have a lot of plans to increase capacity and services in time.

And yes I'd see it as a one off, like the Chieftain. No integration with any clockface stuff.

And I wouldn't think that no diesels on the WCML will be a hard and fast rule. There will be substitutions, future route changes and of course, freight.