Kilmarnock Oil Depot

Status
Not open for further replies.

kylemore

Member
Joined
28 Aug 2010
Messages
934
Today I spotted a rake of VTG Tanks at the Kilmarnock Oil Depot. I haven't seen any rail traffic here for years.
Does anyone know anything about this?
Is it a one-off or is it to be regular?
60021 was the loco providing haulage.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

380101

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Messages
798
Today I spotted a rake of VTG Tanks at the Kilmarnock Oil Depot. I haven't seen any rail traffic here for years.
Does anyone know anything about this?
Is it a one-off or is it to be regular?
60021 was the loco providing haulage.

It's a fairly regular diagram, and has been for a long time. Weekly I think. It runs via Barrhead.
 

kylemore

Member
Joined
28 Aug 2010
Messages
934
It's a fairly regular diagram, and has been for a long time. Weekly I think. It runs via Barrhead.

First time I've seen it - I thought the sidings were mothballed so good to see regular use. Thanks for info.
 

Argosy

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2011
Messages
193
I'm trying to remember, was this the service that derailed and caught fire a few years back?

Yes. The immediate cause of the derailment was the collapse of the bridge (known as Bridge 88, just south of Stewarton) that followed the catastrophic structural failure of its east and centre main girders.

Heavy corrosion had so significantly weakened these main girders that they were no longer able to carry the loading from trains that were permitted to run over the bridge.
 

kylemore

Member
Joined
28 Aug 2010
Messages
934
p.s. in railway parlance, the siding is Riccarton, not Kilmarnock!

Thanks for that - was there not some suggestion that this short branch be converted to passenger use to a new P+R station at the Retail Park there?
 

380101

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Messages
798
Thanks for that - was there not some suggestion that this short branch be converted to passenger use to a new P+R station at the Retail Park there?

Been suggested a few times over the last few years. Not a realistic plan in my view. The existing station being at the top of the town serves the rail needs well. Most of the users of the retail park drive in from out of town - usually from somewhere without a rail link. It's also no good for trains coming from Dumfries/Carlisle and would add even more time onto an already slow service due to the single track sections. It's a non starter in my opinion.

The new build Kilmarnock college will increase the use of the station massively once it opens.
 

Argosy

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2011
Messages
193
Been suggested a few times over the last few years. Not a realistic plan in my view. The existing station being at the top of the town serves the rail needs well. Most of the users of the retail park drive in from out of town - usually from somewhere without a rail link. It's also no good for trains coming from Dumfries/Carlisle and would add even more time onto an already slow service due to the single track sections. It's a non starter in my opinion.

The new build Kilmarnock college will increase the use of the station massively once it opens.

Not so.

The idea of a station at Queens Drive (on the Riccarton branch) is an excellent one as it is right beside the A77.

There are only two problems.

1. Kilmarnock terminators stop in the bay platforms 1 & 2 and thus this would require turning P3 into a very high use platform (unlikely and would block the station).

2. The Rail Muppet Society aka Rail Futures keep forgetting that since this idea was first proposed - probably about 10 years or so ago now (I worked on it for SPT) they have built a swish new sports arena, completely kyboshing any hope of accommodating a car park and station.

Thus it is an excellent idea.....but overtaken by events and fails to address the Kilmarnock capacity issue.

So in the end, it is a non starter, but for not quite the reasons you suggest!
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,041
2. The Rail Muppet Society aka Rail Futures

Like all organisations, they have their faults and their share of oddball members, but without their influence over the years I believe you would be looking at a different railway today and probably much less railway than we have.
 

Altnabreac

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2013
Messages
2,385
Location
Salt & Vinegar
Not so.

The idea of a station at Queens Drive (on the Riccarton branch) is an excellent one as it is right beside the A77.

There are only two problems.

1. Kilmarnock terminators stop in the bay platforms 1 & 2 and thus this would require turning P3 into a very high use platform (unlikely and would block the station).

2. The Rail Muppet Society aka Rail Futures keep forgetting that since this idea was first proposed - probably about 10 years or so ago now (I worked on it for SPT) they have built a swish new sports arena, completely kyboshing any hope of accommodating a car park and station.

Thus it is an excellent idea.....but overtaken by events and fails to address the Kilmarnock capacity issue.

So in the end, it is a non starter, but for not quite the reasons you suggest!

If a new Kilmarnock station with access to the A77 and opportunity for a Park & Ride is what is required (and I agree it could have value) then surely a new Hurlford station is a much better option than Queens Drive?
 

380101

Member
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Messages
798
Not so.

The idea of a station at Queens Drive (on the Riccarton branch) is an excellent one as it is right beside the A77.

There are only two problems.

1. Kilmarnock terminators stop in the bay platforms 1 & 2 and thus this would require turning P3 into a very high use platform (unlikely and would block the station).

2. The Rail Muppet Society aka Rail Futures keep forgetting that since this idea was first proposed - probably about 10 years or so ago now (I worked on it for SPT) they have built a swish new sports arena, completely kyboshing any hope of accommodating a car park and station.

Thus it is an excellent idea.....but overtaken by events and fails to address the Kilmarnock capacity issue.

So in the end, it is a non starter, but for not quite the reasons you suggest!

I see it as a non starter from a drivers point of view who works trains into Kilmarnock on an almost daily basis - and from a private view of someone who semi regularly uses the retail park area. The only way for me to get there is by car as there is no station close by my home area. Nearest is Ayr which is 8 miles away.

The bulk of the road users on the A77 have most likely driven past at least Ayr, Prestwick or Troon so have already dismissed the idea of travelling to Glasgow by train.

The re-doubling between Barrhead and kilmarnock (and electrification + more new EMUs) would need to be progressed before you could realistically look at improving services to/from Kilmarnock in a bid to lure commuters out of the car.

Current rush hour trains on the Kilmarnock line are crush loaded most days - and almost at the point where some guards and drivers should really refuse to work the train due to safety ie; unable to leave cabs/access door panels (usually a service that calls at Barrhead).

Major investment is needed and I don't see it coming in enough chunks to keep up with demand. Central belt and up will swallow most of the near term future funds, as announced later week.
 

Argosy

Member
Joined
28 Feb 2011
Messages
193
If a new Kilmarnock station with access to the A77 and opportunity for a Park & Ride is what is required (and I agree it could have value) then surely a new Hurlford station is a much better option than Queens Drive?

Why? The advantage of Queens Drive was that there was land available. It is also very close to the A77. Hurlford is further away plus exit from it from a traffic point of view might have been more difficult.

It's all academic anyway, because the land earmarked has been put to other use.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Like all organisations, they have their faults and their share of oddball members, but without their influence over the years I believe you would be looking at a different railway today and probably much less railway than we have.

Eccentricity one can almost cope with but as one senior railwayman once remarked "going round drawing silly little lines on maps wont get us a re-opened railway".

In Scotland it is particularly irritating as these people never consult with anyone about their plans so when they make announcements it all appears as some mega project that would eat up the complete GDP of the UK. I wonder if in fact they are more at home on Sodor.

Some of the ideas have merit but they work in a world where they forget that only a very tiny percentage of journeys for most people out of the cities is by rail, that rail is very pricey to use unless you book umpteen months in advance and that many lines sadly should simply not have been built so why perpetuate re-opening them. They don't get some of the drivers that effect the economy and some are so big that they are unlikely to change.

We sadly live in a society that with regard to planning is very short term, often based around terms of office and of course so many alignments have been built over it is crazy to try and re-instate them.
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,041
Eccentricity one can almost cope with but as one senior railwayman once remarked "going round drawing silly little lines on maps wont get us a re-opened railway".

There was a senior railwayman once, who kept secret the fact that he was a closet member of the "Railway Conversion League" until two weeks AFTER he retired.

I wonder how much damage he did to the industry while they were paying him?

On that basis, am I expected to distrust all senior railwaymen?
 

Altnabreac

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2013
Messages
2,385
Location
Salt & Vinegar
Why? The advantage of Queens Drive was that there was land available. It is also very close to the A77. Hurlford is further away plus exit from it from a traffic point of view might have been more difficult.

It's all academic anyway, because the land earmarked has been put to other use.

Because a station at Hurlford could have a 2tph service whereas one at Queens Drive would be somewhere between 1tph and 1tp2h.

The draft Scotland Route Study shows the long term aspiration for services at Kilmarnock to be:
1tph Glasgow - Kilmarnock - Troon - Ayr.
1tph Glasgow - Kilmarnock - New Cumnock
1tph Glasgow - Kilmarnock - (1tp2h extended to Dumfries and Carlisle)

The first service can't call at either station. The second and third can easily run to Hurlford but only the non Carlisle extended versions of the 3rd could provide a service to Queens Drive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top