Proposal for public sector bidders in Scotland

[47271]

If there's no impact on ScotRail itself, at least the profits would go back into ScotRail or the economy rather than to Nederlandse Spoorwegen, as long as it's able to offset the cost of actually bringing ScotRail back into the public sector in the first place, then surely it's worth the effort for that reason alone?

Yes, so long as the reality satisfies all that you say here, then I'm all for it.

My starting point on it may be slightly different from some in that I've never had a particular problem with Abellio. I neither like or dislike them, but as a near daily passenger I've found them no better or worse than First. Those who work for Scotrail, or have seen their service deteriorate over the past two years, might feel differently.

 

[Clansman]

Yes, so long as the reality satisfies all that you say here, then I'm all for it.

If only...

My starting point on it may be slightly different from some in that I've never had a particular problem with Abellio. I neither like or dislike them, but as a near daily passenger I've found them no better or worse than First. Those who work for Scotrail, or have seen their service deteriorate over the past two years, might feel differently.

Can't say I disagree with this.

 

[Altnabreac]

That would be pretty amazing, since a large number of the trains only stop at Falkirk, Polmont and Linithglow - unless you were thinking that Haymarket isn't Edinburgh...

By Intermediate stations I don't mean that 50% of passengers are making Falkirk - Linlithgow journeys.

My understanding is that if you look at all the journeys on the Edinburgh - Glasgow Queen Street services then it looks something like this:

Group A - 40% passengers:
Glasgow Queen St - Haymarket / Edinburgh

Group B - 50% passengers:
Croy - Glasgow
Croy - Haymarket / Edinburgh
Falkirk - Glasgow
Falkirk - Haymarket / Edinburgh
Polmont - Glasgow
Polmont - Haymarket / Edinburgh
Linlithgow - Glasgow
Linlithgow - Haymarket / Edinburgh

Group C - 10% passengers:
Intermediate journeys / Going through to somewhere else.

Those numbers are not exact and not recent but a few years ago I had some involvement in a project looking at related issues and they were something around that ballpark.

So the point is that each of the intermediate flows is relatively small but together Group B adds up to more passengers than those making the end to end journey.

6tph service is only of any help to Group A. Faster end to end journeys by running non stop are only of use to group A. If you have to slow down journey times or lose clockface timetabling for intermediate stations to deliver that 6tph service then it may be you are making things worse for Group B which is bigger than Group A.

I haven't had any involvement in recent timetable / business case work for EGIP so I don't know if this is still the case but certainly when EGIP decisions were being made this is the sort of thing that needs to be taken into account. Headline journey times from Edinburgh - Glasgow are important and we all want to see more and faster services, but it does need people to step back and actually look at where demand is generated.

 

[43183]

Group A - 40% passengers:
Glasgow Queen St - Haymarket / Edinburgh

Group B - 50% passengers:
Croy - Glasgow
Croy - Haymarket / Edinburgh
Falkirk - Glasgow
Falkirk - Haymarket / Edinburgh
Polmont - Glasgow
Polmont - Haymarket / Edinburgh
Linlithgow - Glasgow
Linlithgow - Haymarket / Edinburgh

Group C - 10% passengers:
Intermediate journeys / Going through to somewhere else.

I travel Edinburgh to Glasgow on a fairly regular basis, and that's more or less what I would estimate.

 

[InOban]

Central Scotland - not just Falkirk etc but also Stirling and Dunblane - have become very popular for commuting because different members of the same household can hold down jobs in Edinburgh and Glasgow, and indeed move jobs between both cities without moving house. The case for Airdrie to Bathgate included the same journey pattern, but I don't know how much Bathgate to Glasgow or Airdrie to Edinburgh traffic has developed.

 

[InOban]

I'm not sure I agree with your bolding. Last resesrch I saw was that >50% of the users on Falkirk High line were from Intermediate stations and there are a lot of high value business travellers and commuters in there.

By comparison I believe a decent chunk of the Edinburgh - Glasgow is leisure usage. So I'm unconvinced that purely focusing on the end to end journey times and frequency generates the best BCR.

Even HSR looks likely to consider intermediate stations. There is more to the central belt than Edinburgh and Glasgow.

I certainly don't agree with HHs bolding. Real world journeys start somewhere in EDI or Glasgow and end somewhere in the other city. The time spent on the train may well be a small part of that. For example, I've never understood why the Croy/Falkirk high trains don't call at Edinburgh Park, so that drivers could leave their cars there and take the train. The difficulty of getting into Waverley or Haymarket results in car users taking the easy option of driving the whole way (particularly now the roadworks are completed).

It is unfortunate that Glasgow lacks an equivalent to Edinburgh Park.

Over distances like E to G, it's frequency that's important.

 

[HH]

Over distances like E to G, it's frequency that's important.

That was the point I was making...

On the other point, regardless of the number of commuter journeys, the WEBs are more driven by business journeys than commuting and business journeys are overwhelmingly E-G.

 

[InOban]

Edinburgh Park is a major business district.

 

[47271]

I've never understood why the Croy/Falkirk high trains don't call at Edinburgh Park, so that drivers could leave their cars there and take the train.

It might be called Edinburgh Park, but there's nowhere to park.

 

[InOban]

I know. Bonkers.

 

[dcsprior]

It might be called Edinburgh Park, but there's nowhere to park.

I know. Bonkers.

Indeed. There is a Park and Ride just the other side of the city bypass, but it's served by busses rather than trains. If there's a desire to tempt people away from cars (at least for the most polluting/congesting part of their journey) then train is surely far more appealing than bus?

Sent from my C6603 using Tapatalk

 

[47271]

Indeed. There is a Park and Ride just the other side of the city bypass, but it's served by busses rather than trains. If there's a desire to tempt people away from cars (at least for the most polluting/congesting part of their journey) then train is surely far more appealing than bus?

Sent from my C6603 using Tapatalk

Arguably Ingliston P&R is a better service for those approaching from the west since at least it's served by the tram rather than buses.

As I recall Edinburgh Park was only ever intended as a station for inbound travel and tram interchange, and that the subject of Edinburgh-Glasgow shuttles not stopping there was quite contentious right from the start. It might be okay with quicker acceleration from the electrics soon, but the thought of the 170s chugging away from yet another intermediate stop isn't an appealing one.

 

[HH]

What was intended for Edinburgh Park, and what is most apposite now, are not necessarily the same thing.

Equally, what produces the best BCR isn't necessarily that which advantages the most people; i.e. sometimes some intermediate journeys are sacrificed for a greater economic advantage. Anyone who understands even the basics of passenger demand forecasting understands this.

 

[och aye]

The three things from descoped EGIP that were a shame to lose were Dunblane electrification, which was only postponed 12 months, Dalmeny Chord, which I am fairly certain will happen anyway in CP6 and Greenhill Junction remodelling, which likewise is still in the medium term upgrade plans.

Do you think the Abbeyhill turnback (potential station) could happen in CP6?