Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[92002]

What you say makes sense but the paper quoted above links East Kilbride and Barrhead in a single project leaving Kilmarnock out on its own.

Considering they are branches of the same line that would be sensible. However both wil be authorised as separate schemes.

 

[Class 170101]

Only other option is cascaded DMUs like 170s and 158s

Many have just been cascaded out. Can't see them coming back to be honest, more pressing shortfalls elsewhere.

 

[route101]

The Rumour mill says that East Kilbride should be no 1, since the passenger numbers make the project add up. Then Kilmarnock with perhaps Kilmarnock to Barassie as an add on. Probably Dunblane to Perth as no 3, then the Edinburgh Sub.

With the change next week from CP5 to CP6 all should be revealed. Behind the scenes work is underway on East Kilbride for the next control period.

Hopefully good news for EK , thought all we were getting was more 156s . Wonder what units the branch will get >

 

[385001]

Shotts line electrification completed on time and on budget says Network Rail.

https://www.networkrailmediacentre....ectrification-completed-on-time-and-on-budget

Thursday 4 Apr 2019

Shotts line electrification completed on time and on budget
Network Rail has completed the £160m electrification of the Shotts Line on time and on budget.

Delivery of the Scottish Government-funded project to upgrade the line between Edinburgh and Glasgow creates a fifth electrified route between Scotland’s largest cities.

A central part of the Scottish Government’s rail strategy, electrification has the potential to transform the passenger experience on the line, reducing journey times and adding capacity, on comfortable, efficient and more reliable electric trains.

The investment was made to add resilience and capacity into the network to cater for projected growth in passenger numbers from towns such as Livingston and West Calder into Edinburgh in the east and from Cleland and Shotts into Glasgow in the west.

The project team worked more than 1 million hours to install the 1,400 masts that have been erected to carry the 223 kilometres of overhead wires needed to electrify the line.

Major modifications have also been carried out at 17 bridges – including the removal of some and demolition-reconstruction of others - along the route to create enough space for the new overhead lines.

As well as improving the railway, these reconstructed bridges have significantly enhanced the roads infrastructure across North Lanarkshire and West Lothian.

The project also upgraded or extended platforms at nine stations, delivered step free access at West Calder and completely redeveloped two stations; Breich and Livingston South.

Delivered on programme, the project enables:

• The introduction of modern, electric trains from May
• More seats on services between Glasgow Central and Edinburgh
• A reduction in noise and better air quality for those who live and work near the railway.

Michael Matheson Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Infrastructure and Connectivity said:

“Today’s announcement is further proof of Scottish Government commitment to Scotland’s Railways. This £160m investment in the Shotts line will be genuinely transformational, enabling new, longer and faster trains and providing a better travelling experience for passengers all along this route for many years to come.

“As well as improving connectivity between North Lanarkshire and West Lothian, the investment will both stimulate growth in passenger numbers and make it easier for people from these communities to connect to employment, education and leisure opportunities in our largest cities.”

Iain McFarlane, Network Rail route delivery director for infrastructure projects, said:

“We are delighted to have completed this project on time and on budget as it will help to deliver additional capacity and journey time improvements to support both passenger and freight growth.

“Electrification is transforming travel across the central belt of Scotland – increasing the number of seats, reducing journey times and cutting emissions by introducing more modern and greener trains to the route.

“We appreciate that this work has at times been inconvenient for those travelling on the route However, we are confident that the longer-term benefits that the work enables will prove to be worthwhile.”

 

[deltic08]

Shotts line electrification completed on time and on budget says Network Rail.

https://www.networkrailmediacentre....ectrification-completed-on-time-and-on-budget

That is because it was infill, all plainline and few bridges to raise. Other infill electrification could be the same.

 

[najaB]

That is because it was infill, all plainline and few bridges to raise. Other infill electrification could be the same.

Is this so?

 

[68000]

There are a few crossovers on the route and the article says 17 bridges needed amendment

 

[AndrewE]

There are a few crossovers on the route and the article says 17 bridges needed amendment

but "amendment" could be as simple as just putting higher pointed coping stones on the parapets.

 

[68000]

but "amendment" could be as simple as just putting higher pointed coping stones on the parapets.

Actually the NR article states 'Major modifications have also been carried out at 17 bridges – including the removal of some and demolition-reconstruction of others - along the route to create enough space for the new overhead lines.'

 

[InOban]

Scotrail have also tweeted a clip of the first 385 running the route during the night.

The NR piece specifically refers to fact that the rebuilding of several bridges enhanced the road network - ie narrow bridges which were a bottleneck were replaced by new wider ones. The project timescale was dictated by the fact that these bridges had to be tackled in sequence so that there were always alternative routes. It's called planning,

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Scotrail have also tweeted a clip of the first 385 running the route during the night.

The NR piece specifically refers to fact that the rebuilding of several bridges enhanced the road network - ie narrow bridges which were a bottleneck were replaced by new wider ones. The project timescale was dictated by the fact that these bridges had to be tackled in sequence so that there were always alternative routes. It's called planning,

You named that tune in one. I just hope we keep the rolling programme going

 

[gingertom]

Actually the NR article states 'Major modifications have also been carried out at 17 bridges – including the removal of some and demolition-reconstruction of others - along the route to create enough space for the new overhead lines.'

there's around 20 on the EK line, a few will be ok as they're relatively new builds but many will need major surgery or replacement.
There's a similar number between Dunblane and Perth, with many level crossings and Hilton Tunnel.
Only 4 between Muirhouses jnc and Barrhead.

 

[deltic08]

There are a few crossovers on the route and the article says 17 bridges needed amendment

Crossovers are still classed as plainline as far as electrification goes.

Is this so?

How many non electrified junctions were electrified then not including crossovers?

 

[deltic08]

Actually the NR article states 'Major modifications have also been carried out at 17 bridges – including the removal of some and demolition-reconstruction of others - along the route to create enough space for the new overhead lines.'

Only 17. As few as that. Do we know the percentage of each? Complete removal is obviously cheaper than reconstruction.

 

[deltic08]

there's around 20 on the EK line, a few will be ok as they're relatively new builds but many will need major surgery or replacement.
There's a similar number between Dunblane and Perth, with many level crossings and Hilton Tunnel.
Only 4 between Muirhouses jnc and Barrhead.

Hilton tunnel could be wired whilst Perth is shutdown for remodelling. Even track lowering if need be.
How many bridges to EK will need to be demolished for widening to double track? This shouldn't be lumped in with electrification costs.

 

[Clansman]

It would be nonsensicle not to perform infrastructural works in the Moncrieffe tunnel during Perth's remodeling. I imagine it'd be a similar job to Glasgow Queen Street's - full station* and tunnel closed for a single block of time and be done with it thereafter.

It will be a hell of a blockade though. Interesting to see how Network Rail and ScotRail navigate this in future - along with the so called Forth Bridge question.

 

[deltic08]

It would be nonsensicle not to perform infrastructural works in the Moncrieffe tunnel during Perth's remodeling. I imagine it'd be a similar job to Glasgow Queen Street's - full station* and tunnel closed for a single block of time and be done with it thereafter.

It will be a hell of a blockade though. Interesting to see how Network Rail and ScotRail navigate this in future - along with the so called Forth Bridge question.

Ah, yes I forgot it is called Moncrieffe tunnel not Hilton tunnel as it goes through Moncrieffe Hill. Despite bimodes, this tunnel should have roof supports fitted even though it may be years until connected by wires.

 

[najaB]

It would be nonsensicle not to perform infrastructural works in the Moncrieffe tunnel during Perth's remodeling.

Even if they don't decide to prepare for electrification (which they almost certainly will) it's an old tunnel that probably hasn't seen major work in a while (I know they did some minor work in 2014-ish). This would be a chance to replace the ballasted track with concrete slab, shotcrete the walls and renew the signalling cables.

It will be a hell of a blockade though. Interesting to see how Network Rail and ScotRail navigate this in future - along with the so called Forth Bridge question.

It won't be easy. Presumably trains will turn at Gleneagles to the south, and thinking big picture, could this be an opportunity to open Bridge-of-Earn as an experimental station in the style of Workington North? The Forth Bridge will be several orders of magnitude more complex than Perth.

 

[mcmad]

When is this Perth remodelling happening that has now appears as a done deal? Last I heard was that it'd been kicked into CP7 in terms of actual delivery

 

[route101]

there's around 20 on the EK line, a few will be ok as they're relatively new builds but many will need major surgery or replacement.
There's a similar number between Dunblane and Perth, with many level crossings and Hilton Tunnel.
Only 4 between Muirhouses jnc and Barrhead.

Ones in EK are 50s i think , look higher than the older ones .

 

[Altnabreac]

Only 17. As few as that. Do we know the percentage of each? Complete removal is obviously cheaper than reconstruction.

Public road bridge complete rebuilds E-W were (from memory)
Murieston Road, Livingston
Brucefield West, Livingston
Parkhead Bridge, Polbeth
A71, West Calder (very big job)
Addiebrownhill Road
Rashiehill Road, Breich
A706 Breich (another tricky one)
Benhar Road, Shotts (Including widening for Local Authority)
Station Road Shotts
Biggar Road, Cleland

The other 7 were all farm / accommodation bridge replacements, again they were all rebuilt, they were mainly narrower cheaper bridges although the one at Hartwood is of the same scale as the public road bridges.

On top of those 17 is four new footbridges at West Calder, Addiewell, Fauldhouse and Cleland and the ten bridges that needed extra coping etc.

The only bridges removed and not replaced were two old station footbridges at Breich and Hartwood and technically the Parkhead Bridge was rebuilt in a slightly different location and the old one wasn’t removed until about 18 months after the new one was built but in reality it was a replacement as well.

 

[Clansman]

Even if they don't decide to prepare for electrification (which they almost certainly will) it's an old tunnel that probably hasn't seen major work in a while (I know they did some minor work in 2014-ish). This would be a chance to replace the ballasted track with concrete slab, shotcrete the walls and renew the signalling cables.

It won't be easy. Presumably trains will turn at Gleneagles to the south, and thinking big picture, could this be an opportunity to open Bridge-of-Earn as an experimental station in the style of Workington North? The Forth Bridge will be several orders of magnitude more complex than Perth.

Workington North certainly is an approach which I reckon could work with Bridge of Earn.

The transport links Perth presents to the A9 and M90 really is the only advantage ScotRail have for contingency planning of services during the inevitable blockade - and opening Bridge of Earn would allow it to serve as a direct base for onward bus transport to Dundee and Perth - it's extremely well situated to do so anyway. The chord could provide the oppertunity to connect two existing services onto the one diagram; for example, a service could run through from Glasgow to Bridge of Earn, then form the next service through to Edinburgh without the need for reversal - and vice versa from Edinburgh to Bridge of Earn, and onto Glasgow. And in doing so allowing two birds to be killed by one stone by taking the oppertunity to test demand from Bridge of Earn with such a once off high Intercity frequency.

As for the Forth Bridge, I'm baffled as to how that'll transpire. I remember seeing something about a tram network somewhere abroad where there was a need not to have wires in a certain area - and a solution was found whereby the tram would drop its panto and maintain power for the duration of the non-wired section. Whether this was down to a special battery pack or something else, I have no idea, but could such an approach be possible in this case?

 

[hwl]

As for the Forth Bridge, I'm baffled as to how that'll transpire. I remember seeing something about a tram network somewhere abroad where there was a need not to have wires in a certain area - and a solution was found whereby the tram would drop its panto and maintain power for the duration of the non-wired section. Whether this was down to a special battery pack or something else, I have no idea, but could such an approach be possible in this case?

Seville batteries and trams supplied by CAF along with charging stations every stop.
Isn't the Forth Bridge issues some what around the clearance if the pantograph horns are live, if with a new pan head design the horns are insulating them problems solved/reduced?

 

[najaB]

The chord could provide the oppertunity to connect two existing services onto the one diagram; for example, a service could run through from Glasgow to Bridge of Earn, then form the next service through to Edinburgh without the need for reversal - and vice versa from Edinburgh to Bridge of Earn, and onto Glasgow.

I hadn't considered a chord - I was assuming that they would reverse at Hilton Jn, but a chord does make more sense and doesn't look like it would be too hard in the grand scheme of things. It could also be useful after the tunnel closure as well to provide additional services from Fife to Glasgow.

 

[najaB]

Isn't the Forth Bridge issues some what around the clearance if the pantograph horns are live, if with a new pan head design the horns are insulating them problems solved/reduced?

We've had this discussion a few times already - there isn't a simple solution.

 

[Class83]

As for the Forth Bridge, I'm baffled as to how that'll transpire. I remember seeing something about a tram network somewhere abroad where there was a need not to have wires in a certain area - and a solution was found whereby the tram would drop its panto and maintain power for the duration of the non-wired section. Whether this was down to a special battery pack or something else, I have no idea, but could such an approach be possible in this case?

I'm increasingly thinking that if the idea of 385s with a battery for short stretches could replace 170s/158s, then replacing the HSTs in 10 years time with limited bi modes, able to maintain say 50mph on diesel for a bit. Then electrifying the 'difficult' and visually obtrusive bits could just be avoided. Though HST replacement may require full bimodes (800/802s) as I'm not sure Network Rail will manage to electrify everything south of Inverness by 2030.

 

[Class 170101]

Even if they don't decide to prepare for electrification (which they almost certainly will) it's an old tunnel that probably hasn't seen major work in a while (I know they did some minor work in 2014-ish). This would be a chance to replace the ballasted track with concrete slab, shotcrete the walls and renew the signalling cables.

It won't be easy. Presumably trains will turn at Gleneagles to the south, and thinking big picture, could this be an opportunity to open Bridge-of-Earn as an experimental station in the style of Workington North? The Forth Bridge will be several orders of magnitude more complex than Perth.

I think Glasgow to Aberdeen services will be diverted via Fife and not serve stations between Glasgow and Dundee so how many services will terminate at Gleneagles? Not sure many will unless Dunblane services are extended but that requires electrification to reach Gleneagles (or north there of) first.

 

[najaB]

I think Glasgow to Aberdeen services will be diverted via Fife and not serve stations between Glasgow and Dundee so how many services will terminate at Gleneagles?

Alloa - Kinkardine is freight only, so that means finding paths across the Forth Bridge, last I heard they were in short supply.

 

[Highlandspring]

Alloa - Kinkardine is freight only

Incorrect, the line is signalled to passenger standards. The is no restriction on running passenger trains via Culross.

 

[najaB]

Incorrect, the line is signalled to passenger standards. The is no restriction on running passenger trains via Culross.

I'm not disputing the signalling but it's a goods line according to the sectional appendix.