ScotRail announces new direct Edinburgh-Ayr service

[Blindtraveler]

The other side off the coin I've heard is that 170 401-170 424 (Scotrails 1st gen turbos) will have retb radios fitted in cabs where the mitrac screens should be to enable them to work WHL services. I've no idea if turbos are permitted to run on this line due to their RA.

If this were to happen then electric traction looks likely for and services south to Newcastle.

On side note x/c voyagers run mostly under wires down to Leeds then again at Birmingham etc.

I shouldnt think clearing them would be too much bother however would they cope? Not exactly the best things on the rails when it comes to hills? Losing end doors would be a bit sad too on this line. Personal prefference would be that there cascaded to Kilmarnock, Stranrar and Newcastle/Carlisle via Dumfries where there design and layout would be better suited? ↲

 

[NotATrainspott]

On side note x/c voyagers run mostly under wires down to Leeds then again at Birmingham etc.

This is mostly because so much of the XC network is away from the wires that there is no logic in having electric-only services yet as they would more or less just be fractions of the ICWC and ICEC networks - Birmingham to Manchester/Scotland or Leeds to Edinburgh via Newcastle. Since the whole point of XC is that services go through Birmingham towards the south or south west, where the wires are few and far between. On the other hand, the Edinburgh-Newcastle services by ScotRail would be entire services done totally under the wires at all points. Unless the Newcastle services were extended over the Forth Bridge, any other westward extension would be under the wires as well so electric stock would be just as suitable. I appreciate that there are other diagrams which are also diesel-totally-under-wires on other routes, such as ICEC or ICWC, that is mostly because they require diesel trains anyway for similar routes and there are no more available electric trains to do the job.

 

[londonboi]

so how does this work does the train pull into Glasgow central then the driver changes ends etc and train head out to ayr. Is there not a way they could run the train through without having to "turn around" at Central

 

[adrock1976]

so how does this work does the train pull into Glasgow central then the driver changes ends etc and train head out to ayr. Is there not a way they could run the train through without having to "turn around" at Central

There are two options that would avoid a reversal at Glasgow Central.

1) Run the service from Larkfield Junction to Shields Junction bypassing Glasgow Central. Obviously, an alternative would have to be provided Paisley to Central and Central to Carstairs so as not to cause too much inconvenience.

2) Electrify the City Union line combined with reopening Cumberland Street and Glasgow Cross stations, with a new station at West Street. This service could then be diverted from Shields Junction onto the City Union line and run to Edinburgh via Bellgrove, Airdrie, and Bathgate. These aspirations form part of the Glasgow Crossrail proposals that have been in the pipeline for the last 40 years or so.

With option 2) above, there would still be alternative services to Glasgow Central anyway, as the Ayr - Edinburgh services already share with other frequent services around the Glasgow area.

In peace

Adam

 

[NotATrainspott]

so how does this work does the train pull into Glasgow central then the driver changes ends etc and train head out to ayr. Is there not a way they could run the train through without having to "turn around" at Central

Yes.

A non-reversing Ayr-Edinburgh service is one of the ideas made theoretically possible to a greater or lesser extent by the Glasgow Crossrail proposals. Either there is a tunnel between Central and Queen Street, allowing the normal Ayr-Glasgow Central and Glasgow Queen St-Edinburgh services to be combined, or by using the City Union line to send trains via Glasgow Cross onto either the North Clyde/Airdrie-Bathgate line or up to Cowlairs and via Falkirk to Edinburgh. The former has the advantage that it can directly replace existing services without disadvantaging people who use them but at a several billion pound cost, while the latter would cost very little but would either require additional services or the redirection of existing ones which would inconvenience many of the passengers.

 

[clc]

When Glasgow-Edinburgh HSR starts running it will be possible to get from Ayr-Edinburgh up to an hour faster than with this service so I do wonder if there'll be a need for it in the long term.

 

[edwin_m]

I can't see 170s being used on Edinburgh-Newcastle locals. Quite apart from the DMU scarcity issue, they are only 100mph units and underpowered so they only really reach their top speed downhill and with a following wind. EMUs, especially if upgraded to 110mph or 115mph, would have a much better chance of keeping ahead of the next fast train.

 

[Altnabreac]

When Glasgow-Edinburgh HSR starts running it will be possible to get from Ayr-Edinburgh up to an hour faster than with this service so I do wonder if there'll be a need for it in the long term.

As HSR will run into Central in theory you can run a regular reversing Ayr - Edinburgh over the High Speed Line.

The station throat issue and potential performance pollution may count against it though.

 

[tbtc]

Good news. Manages to link two sides of the country properly for the first time without needing extra stock.

Also, it manages to take a little pressure off the Falkirk High services, by encouraging more people from south of Glasgow to use a service via Central (in the way that recent changes to the Shotts/ Carstairs lines have made it more attractive to use Central - and the "A2B" has meant some other passengers taken away from the Falkirk High route).

I suppose we don't know whether this service will be stopping at Paisley etc too (given the revised stopping patterns of Ayrshire services).

Plus, it gives Edinburgh its first rail link to a Scottish Airport (Prestwick)?

Only downside is crossing between the lines at Central, but hopefully this can be accommodated okay.

 

[Blindtraveler]

I had forgotten the Prestwick call. Ideal stopping patern would really be Paizley, Irvine, Prestwick Airport and Ayr, give the unattractive timing of the service from Edinburgh.↲

 

[clc]

Try booking from 19 May on the National Rail site and you'll see where it stops.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Try booking from 19 May on the National Rail site and you'll see where it stops.

Or see here and here.

 

[Altnabreac]

I had forgotten the Prestwick call. Ideal stopping patern would really be Paizley, Irvine, Prestwick Airport and Ayr, give the unattractive timing of the service from Edinburgh.↲

Looks to be a bit of a mishmash. Between 5 and 14 stops south of Glasgow with journey times varying between an excellent 2 hours 10 minutes and a sluggish 2 hours 45. Still it's a start and hopefully they can develop the timetable over time.

 

[Searle]

You know it isn't, if your comments on this thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=91496, were in any way true and you had used the Railsail tickets to get to Northern Ireland from Brighton.

Detective harz on the case :roll: