Post HST Highland Mainline Timetable?

[smtglasgow]

The northern part of the HML is actually well-provided with loops – not sure where you’d put in any more – but you're right that any disruption seems to have a knock-on effect all down the line - and sometimes seems to last for the remainder of the day. The worst delays seem to happen on the long single-track section between KIngussie and Dalwhinnie and between Stanley and Dunkeld. Whatever timetable they come up with will struggle to be robust if there are more trains on the line. Are there any places where loops were removed in the past (in the 60s, maybe?) that might provide an easy win?

One other point for any new timetable would be the need for an earlier arrival in Inverness from Glasgow & Edinburgh. I’m in Inverness every few months with work and would love to take the train (I hate the A9 in winter!), but the 10.30 arrival is just too late.

 

[Highland37]

Well provided for? As you say, the slightest problem and there are knock on effects.

I'd put a loop in from Inverness to Perth which would be the best way. The A9 is going to hammer rail traffic. Particularly freight.

 

[smtglasgow]

Doubling the entire HML (not redoubling, so v complex and expensive) isn’t going to happen under any government. Any multi-billion railway expenditure in Scotland in the decades to come will be directed to addressing congestion/freeing capacity in the central belt – sad, but probably correct.

But some limited doubling and dynamic loops (much more than currently planned) together with smart timetabling MIGHT go a long way to providing the capacity needed to increase passenger services and enable more freight. There are so many potential obstacles – tunnels, viaducts, bridges, rocks – right along the length of the line that even modest improvements will be very costly. Taking Tomatin as an example, it’s not ‘just’ the Findhorn viaduct that would need to be rebuilt, there is the shorter viaduct over the old A9 in the village, the need to blast a new route through Slochd and all the small bridges over the burns that flow off the hills.

I agree that the new A9 will be a challenge for freight, in particular for attracting new flows, but I suspect that a more frequent/faster passenger service will hold its own and probably continue to grow. The growth of Inverness and environs is one of Scotland’s success stories, so I’m very conscious that the rail links are not fit for purpose, but we need to be realistic about how we get the necessary improvements.

 

[InOban]

There used to be a station at Murthly, between Stanley Jcn and Dunkeld. I'm sure it had a loop. And there was a loop between Dalwhinnie and Newtonmore, but I can't remember its name. And of course there was double track between Culloden and Daviot.

 

[Millisle]

As far as I can see there are twelve locations on the current single line where crossings existed until after the war. I had not counted them up before. About half of those were additions or reopenings for wartime traffic and closed soon after. Closures during my time using the line, broadly forty years, were Newtonmore, Murthly and Ballinluig, the last being the least desirable as hold ups at Pitlochry and Dunkeld & Birnam are frequent. When Murthly and Ballinluig were in existence D&B was often switched out.
There is an imbalance in provision between the north and south ends of the line in that with the reopening of the loops at Moy and Slochd after closure in 1963 all crossings that have existed between Aviemore and Inverness except Daviot are in use whereas six between Pitlochry and Stanley Junction have been abolished, which is not to say that six are required, but one or two would not go amiss.
The redoubling of Dalwhnnie to Blair Atholl made an immense difference. Countless time seemed to be spent in the loop at Dalanraoch and Dalnaspidal. The financial tide turned and the redoubling to Daviot was cancelled after the formation had already been cleared of vegetation for work to commence.

 

[47271]

Let's not forget that the loops north of Aviemore have been under the control of Inverness power box since the early 1980s and have relatively low direct operating costs.

A reasonable inference to draw from this is that we won't see any further loop reinstatement until manual control is abolished between Stanley and Aviemore.

Also, there's a chance that Dunkeld station may move under the A9 scheme, so that adds another element of uncertainty over the location of loops and resignalling.

My suggestions for reinstatement, purely based on local knowledge and experience of holdups would be Ballinluig, Killiecrankie and Etteridge, with the northermost section of double track restored back to Daviot. To my knowledge there are no loop locations between Aviemore and Daviot not already in use.

 

[Highlandspring]

Aviemore box controls from Kincraig to the 105 mile post just north of Moy using a panel for the remote loops and a frame for the station area.

 

[47271]

Aviemore box controls from Kincraig to the 105 mile post just north of Moy using a panel for the remote loops and a frame for the station area.

Many thanks for that correction, which makes perfect sense when you consider that Aviemore is manually signalled and Kincraig loop is controlled remotely.

The consideration of operating costs remains largely the same I think.

 

[Millisle]

The instatement of the Aviemore scheme dates to June 1979 with manual control at Inverness not abolished until February 1987. I do not think transfer of control thereafter would have been viewed as cost effective.

I very much agree on Ballinluig, Killiecrankie and Etteridge. The Kingussie-Dalwhinnie block is a real time waster. Although much off-set to the former I never thought abolition of Newtonmore too clever.

 

[47271]

The instatement of the Aviemore scheme dates to June 1979 with manual control at Inverness not abolished until February 1987. I do not think transfer of control thereafter would have been viewed as cost effective.

I very much agree on Ballinluig, Killiecrankie and Etteridge. The Kingussie-Dalwhinnie block is a real time waster. Although much off-set to the former I never thought abolition of Newtonmore too clever.

I totally agree that we'd be better off with the Newtonmore loop reinstated, but if it was 'any three' I'd opt for those we've already covered off.

Just for interest, here's a full south to north list of locations that had loops at some point in history but no longer, there are an awful lot, does this agree with your twelve Millisle?

Murthly
Kingswood
Inchmagranachan
Dalguise
Ballinluig
Moulinearn
Killiecrankie
Inchlea
Etteridge
Newtonmore
Balavil
Dalraddy

 

[A Challenge]

On the HST issue - this post has just reminded me that HST's do currently operate to Inverness (to provide timings)

Cl.43 + Mk III stock to Aviemore

 

[Millisle]

Yes, those are the ones. I ought to say that I was using my two favourite railway books of all time:
1 The Register of Scottish Signal Boxes, Alexander & Nicoll,1990
2 Signal Box Register Volume 6: Scotland, Signalling Record Society, 2012:
along with additions from memory.

 

[47271]

Yes, those are the ones. I ought to say that I was using my two favourite railway books of all time:
1 The Register of Scottish Signal Boxes, Alexander & Nicoll,1990
2 Signal Box Register Volume 6: Scotland, Signalling Record Society, 2012:
along with additions from memory.

Perfect, and every one of them could plausibly be the name of a fine single malt whisky to accompany the reading of a list of Scottish signal boxes!

 

[gsnedders]

On the HST issue - this post has just reminded me that HST's do currently operate to Inverness (to provide timings)

But with nine coaches instead of four or five: the acceleration of the much shorter trains will be much quicker!

 

[BRX]

The comments about freight capacity (and competition from the improved A9) have made me wonder if there's a reason a fair amount of freight couldn't be shifted overnight. Or is it the ability of long trains to cross each other that's the main constraint, rather than number of potential free paths?

 

[jingsmonty]

Restoring the double track to Daviot (or to the current loop to Moy) would be hugely beneficial - we regularly lose time crossing trains at Moy).
As has been said already, redoubling of the whole line will never happen, but inserting loops would help - would hope they would be proper 'dynamic loops' & not the short ones we have at Moy, Tomatin, Slochd & Carrbridge...these require trains to come to a stand, as opposed to passing each other at speed...often with resulting further loss of time climbing up steep gradients from a stand (although HST should help with this).
One point I've raised before is the numerous stretches of 'SP' differential speeds on HML, which the HSTs can't use...I would hope that work (probably nothing physical, just possibly survey work) to change this to 'MU' speed boards..would have a significant benefit for not much outlay

The northern part of the HML is actually well-provided with loops – not sure where you’d put in any more – but you're right that any disruption seems to have a knock-on effect all down the line - and sometimes seems to last for the remainder of the day. The worst delays seem to happen on the long single-track section between KIngussie and Dalwhinnie and between Stanley and Dunkeld. Whatever timetable they come up with will struggle to be robust if there are more trains on the line. Are there any places where loops were removed in the past (in the 60s, maybe?) that might provide an easy win?

One other point for any new timetable would be the need for an earlier arrival in Inverness from Glasgow & Edinburgh. I’m in Inverness every few months with work and would love to take the train (I hate the A9 in winter!), but the 10.30 arrival is just too late.

Has this been done by any chance? I'm only asking as my 170 seemed to scream into Aviemore from the north last week and I almost thought we were going to miss the stop before the brakes kicked in.

 

[Bald Rick]

One point I've raised before is the numerous stretches of 'SP' differential speeds on HML, which the HSTs can't use...I would hope that work (probably nothing physical, just possibly survey work) to change this to 'MU' speed boards..would have a significant benefit for not much outlay

Generally, SP is used where the restrictions are caused by what's underneath the sleepers, so unlikely to be cheap.

 

[oldman]

I came across this on the consultant's own website. I don't understand the reference to the 'second phase of improvements' - I thought the second phase was the introduction of an hourly HST timetable which was past the business case stage. Is there in fact a third phase envisaged for after 2019?

24 April [2017] - Global professional services consultancy WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff has been awarded a contract to assess route speed improvements on the Highland Main Line.The appointment by Transport Scotland will see the consultants produce a business case for rail plans to improve connectivity between Inverness and the Central Belt of Scotland.
...
“Our role will be to outline a business case for the planned journey time improvements, improved capacity and more efficient freight operations making sure that any changes to the existing line are justifiable.

“The project will be important in assessing how these changes will reduce travel times for passengers, so we look forward to seeing how our part in this will help support the next phase of improvements.”
...
This project forms part of the second phase of the Highland Main Line upgrade. The first phase delivered two additional rail services which have reduced the journey time on the train line by an average 6 minutes.

 

[InOban]

What the HML needs is not several more loops but probably just two more longer dynamic loops. After all, an hourly service means that a train in one direction will meet one in the other every thirty minutes. But it is 40+ minutes from Perth to Blair Atholl, and at least as long from Aviemore to the N end of Culloden viaduct. The southern loop should start just north of the bridge over the Tay at Dalguise and continue to pitlochry, but the the northern one is trickier; there are a number of high embankments after Aviemore.

 

[Mark62]

I don't see what the uproar is about. The only stations in question are Blair Atholl, Dalwhinnie and Newtonmore. The latter two don't even have usage above 10,000 p/a - Dalwhinnie has been in decline for years, with usage figures showing just ~2500 last year.

Given services will be hourly on that line anyway, there's no reason why Dalwhinnie and Newtonmore should benefit from extra services when usage is as scarce as it is with the current service frequency. There was even a study conducted into whether Newtonmore should close, given the close proximity and better bus frequency to neighbouring Kingussie.

How do you stimulate passenger growth without providing a better service.
It's easy to say there is no public demand when there's no service.
Anyway even if "only" 2500 travel a year so what? The trains are publicly funded so havemt people a right to expect a public service? It's not just about making rail companies even richer .
Or
It shouldn't be.
The public pay and they have a right to expect a service.
Using the rational of low take up then all local NHS hospitals would be closed.
Let's face they don't save enough lives to be allowed to continue
If that rational was used in the NHS then imagine the uproar. But when it comes to the railways it's open season on passengers.
You can't run a social service effectively as a business. It's a contradiction in terms.

 

[najaB]

How do you stimulate passenger growth without providing a better service.
It's easy to say there is no public demand when there's no service.

It's also easy to say there's no public demand when there's no public to demand it. Have you looked at how few homes there are in the area surrounding Dalwhinnie Station?

Using the rational of low take up then all local NHS hospitals would be closed.
Let's face they don't save enough lives to be allowed to continue.

Only because you're using the wrong metric. It's better to measure reduction in morbidity than mortality, time to treatment, or total cost per patient seen.

When it comes to lightly-used stations the measure should be "Can the people who use this station get a better (ie. more frequent, shorter travel time, more useful journey opportunities) by closing the station and providing a dedicated bus service?"

 

[jingsmonty]

Generally, SP is used where the restrictions are caused by what's underneath the sleepers, so unlikely to be cheap.

As far as I know, the SP boards were put up without any work being carried out (around about 2013/14? Not 100%sure though), but there's been a lot of track replacement work carried out recently, so hopefully this is connected.
HST shouldn't be too rough on the track (RA5) - technically it could use the MU boards North & West of Inverness (as per the Rule Book), where the track is definetly not to the same standard as HML!

 

[47271]

The draft timetable has been put out to consultation via Hitrans and Tactran. I don't have a copy but it's been described to me in some detail.

Taking the big positive for starters, the last northbound service leaves Edinburgh a full 80 mins later than now at 9pm and runs all stations Perth to Inverness arriving 0023.

First trains are pretty much as they are now.

Two trains in each direction per day don't stop at Kingussie, including what is presently the 0650 Inverness-Edinburgh, which becomes the 0701 Inverness-Queen Street.

There are two evening departures from Waverley within an hour of each other, the existing 1740ish (1739) which is all stations Perth to Inverness, and an 1846 which misses the minor stops.

Generally not the drama that some were predicting a few months ago.

 

[BRX]

A 9pm dep from Edinburgh - handy for connections from the south. In theory you could leave London at 4.30pm (if there were a nicely timetabled connection) and be in Inverness the same day.

 

[najaB]

A 9pm dep from Edinburgh - handy for connections from the south. In theory you could leave London at 4.30pm (if there were a nicely timetabled connection) and be in Inverness the same day.

Well, same railway day at least.

 

[jingsmonty]

A 9pm dep from Edinburgh - handy for connections from the south. In theory you could leave London at 4.30pm (if there were a nicely timetabled connection) and be in Inverness the same day.

I like the idea of a later departure from Edinburgh - that will be very useful for the punters. Hoping as well that some of the trains will miss out minor stops south of Perth, think this is due to some extra trains that were added a few years ago in the paths usex by some semi-fast services.

 

[Highland37]

Is the draft timetable available for viewing anywhere?

 

[JohnR]

Is the draft timetable available for viewing anywhere?

Also, what about the timetables for Edinburgh/Glasgow - Aberdeen?

 

[47271]

My understanding is that you can obtain draft timetables from Hitrans/Nestrans/Tactran. Failing that try Scotrail, Transport Scotland or even your MSP, local authority or community council. HML is definitely out there for consultation at the moment, I don't use Aberdeen trains so haven't been in touch about those.

 

[jingsmonty]

My understanding is that you can obtain draft timetables from Hitrans/Nestrans/Tactran. Failing that try Scotrail, Transport Scotland or even your MSP, local authority or community council. HML is definitely out there for consultation at the moment, I don't use Aberdeen trains so haven't been in touch about those.

Great information & thanks for that! I will definetly try & have a look (of particular interest, as I'll be working on the trains..!).
My understanding is that the Inverness timetable (HML & Aberdeen) is starting May 2019, with some HST services running to current timetable from winter 2018?