Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[Bald Rick]

This is an engineering services contract - ie design, not delivery.

 

[NotATrainspott]

The complete renewal really should be done by a grade separated junction. To avoid conflicting moves.

It only needs to be if the lack of grade separation were the constraining factor on rail services here. It doesn't appear to be. More troublesome is the very low speed (15mph) and the single track constraints down to Shawfair. That results in bad reliability and timekeeping, and thus low capacity.

The big change planned for this area is the three-tracking of the approach to Waverley. It appears possible to add a third track all the way to Portobello Jn if required on existing railway-owned land. That could deliver a good chunk of the benefit of grade separation by allowing a Borders Railway train to take the southernmost track out of Waverley and stay on it while ECML services go back and forth on the northern two. It's not as much of a problem to have no grade separation in the station throat.

 

[route101]

Electrifying EK is in the works as others have said. I definitely feel that the EK line would seriously benefit from electrification (and also 4tph in future). EK was my last proper train journey before lockdown and from what I gathered then, the DMU service is totally inadequate. Was reasonably busy but not excessively although I was travelling at the beginning of a Thursday afternoon. I can imagine that those services would be packed during the peaks.

Not seen anything about Maryhill but I don't think it would change much with only 2 units to be released (I think it's usually a 2 coach 158 on that route). Wasn't busy when I went on it a few months ago, only 2 or 3 others in the carriage. I just don't know if it would be worth it in the long run.

The overcrowding for me was the services in the hour before 5 or after 6 , 1847 was often a 2 car.

 

[railjock]

It only needs to be if the lack of grade separation were the constraining factor on rail services here. It doesn't appear to be. More troublesome is the very low speed (15mph) and the single track constraints down to Shawfair. That results in bad reliability and timekeeping, and thus low capacity.

The big change planned for this area is the three-tracking of the approach to Waverley. It appears possible to add a third track all the way to Portobello Jn if required on existing railway-owned land. That could deliver a good chunk of the benefit of grade separation by allowing a Borders Railway train to take the southernmost track out of Waverley and stay on it while ECML services go back and forth on the northern two. It's not as much of a problem to have no grade separation in the station throat.

I assume any extra track would have to go, pretty slowly. around the Abbeyhill loop?

 

[59CosG95]

The big change planned for this area is the three-tracking of the approach to Waverley. It appears possible to add a third track all the way to Portobello Jn if required on existing railway-owned land. That could deliver a good chunk of the benefit of grade separation by allowing a Borders Railway train to take the southernmost track out of Waverley and stay on it while ECML services go back and forth on the northern two. It's not as much of a problem to have no grade separation in the station throat.

The tight overbridge beneath the junction of the A1 (London Rd) & Meadowbank Terrace would beg to differ...
As @railjock says, adding a 3rd (or even 4th) track east from Edinburgh would require reinstatement of the Abbeyhill Loop - which would be detrimental to ECML fast services. If Borders Railway trains were to be rerouted via Abbeyhill, a diveunder beneath the ECML just east of Craigentinny would indeed be required. However, North Berwick/Dunbar trains could just as easily be rerouted that way instead, without the requirement to massively alter Portobello, but with the added cost for electrifying the loop. It does however add an incentive to re-open the closed stations at Abbeyhill & Piershill...

 

[InOban]

I had assumed that when a reinstated Abbeyhill line met the main line at Jock's Lodge it would cross on a viaduct and then descend to run on the S side of the formation, which is built for 4 tracks - there are tracks only under the North span of the next road bridge.

 

[InOban]

And regarding the wiring of the Sub, there are, I think, 10 road Bridges and a canal bridge between Niddrie and Craiglockart. All already have clearance for OHLE.
However the eight West of Cameron Toll, and the canal bridge, will all need new parapets. And a glance on Google maps will show you the amount of vegetation clearance that will be needed as the line runs behind largely upmarket housing, which which will also need improved fencing.
On the other hand, the line speed does not need to be above 60mph, so there may be savings there.

 

[NotATrainspott]

The tight overbridge beneath the junction of the A1 (London Rd) & Meadowbank Terrace would beg to differ...
As @railjock says, adding a 3rd (or even 4th) track east from Edinburgh would require reinstatement of the Abbeyhill Loop - which would be detrimental to ECML fast services. If Borders Railway trains were to be rerouted via Abbeyhill, a diveunder beneath the ECML just east of Craigentinny would indeed be required. However, North Berwick/Dunbar trains could just as easily be rerouted that way instead, without the requirement to massively alter Portobello, but with the added cost for electrifying the loop. It does however add an incentive to re-open the closed stations at Abbeyhill & Piershill...

That's why NR plan to lay track on the Abbeyhill loop. It may be less than ideal given the curves, but this is a place where trains already come to a stand to await a platform. Having the option of sending some trains via this loop, even if they're a little bit slower, could make a big difference to timetabling and even reverse the journey time increase.

 

[christopherrfc]

improvements to east kilbride and barrhead line to include double of tracks and electrification

https://publicaccess.glasgow.gov.uk...s.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=QBCECBEX0WY00

 

[Brissle Girl]

The reports appear slightly contradictory, in that in one place it only talks about electrifying the line to East Kilbride, but further down it talks about possible rolling stock on both lines being 380s or 385s. Unless they are considering hybrid units for Barrhead of course, but in that case why bother doing either.

 

[stuu]

The reports appear slightly contradictory, in that in one place it only talks about electrifying the line to East Kilbride, but further down it talks about possible rolling stock on both lines being 380s or 385s

They are both types of EMU?

 

[Brissle Girl]

That's the contradiction. If they are only mentioning the line to EK then those units could not run to Barrhead.

 

[macka]

In the document EIA SCREENING EK-B FINAL VERSION 27052, page 5:

The project has been split into route sections for design/delivery, as shown in Table 1 below and in Appendix A. Routes 1, 2 and 5 are proposed to be electrified. Routes 3 and 4 are proposed to be electrified and double-tracked.

1 and 5 covers the entire route from Larkfield Jn to Barrhead with 2, 3 and 4 covering the EK line, so both Barrhead and EK are due to be electrified.

 

[Brissle Girl]

In the document EIA SCREENING EK-B FINAL VERSION 27052, page 5:

1 and 5 covers the entire route from Larkfield Jn to Barrhead with 2, 3 and 4 covering the EK line, so both Barrhead and EK are due to be electrified.

Thanks for the clarification!

 

[66C]

I heard the engineers had planned to wire to Barrhead first as there were fewer problems with over bridges on this section. East Kilbride will take a little longer due to difficulties with track lowering drainage and the rebuilding of the overbriges plus the double tracking from Busby to East Kilbride. Also a problem in the Crossmyloof Pollokshields area gaining clearance under the bridges.

 

[66C]

The electrification depot should be moving from Cadder to Greenloaning shortly with stage one of the work proceeding from Dunblane to Auchterarder. Possibly to wire up to Russells Highland Spring Depot.

 

[59CosG95]

The electrification depot should be moving from Cadder to Greenloaning shortly with stage one of the work proceeding from Dunblane to Auchterarder. Possibly to wire up to Russells Highland Spring Depot.

That's news to me! Although, if works progress to Auchterarder as you say, that's a little bit further than the new Highland Spring sidings at Blackford. Wonder how they're going to wire Gleneagles too...

 

[route101]

I heard the engineers had planned to wire to Barrhead first as there were fewer problems with over bridges on this section. East Kilbride will take a little longer due to difficulties with track lowering drainage and the rebuilding of the overbriges plus the double tracking from Busby to East Kilbride. Also a problem in the Crossmyloof Pollokshields area gaining clearance under the bridges.

Is the bridge at Crossmyloof not high enough for wires?

 

[Brissle Girl]

Out of curiosity, there are relatively few services that terminate at Perth from the Dunblane direction, and with no bimodes either, what would be the purpose of electrifying Dunblane to Perth at this stage? Is it to extend some of the Dunblane terminators to Perth - if so that's quite a long extension of those services.

 

[route101]

Out of curiosity, there are relatively few services that terminate at Perth from the Dunblane direction, and with no bimodes either, what would be the purpose of electrifying Dunblane to Perth at this stage? Is it to extend some of the Dunblane terminators to Perth - if so that's quite a long extension of those services.

Freight to Highland spring?

 

[Clansman]

There's no justification for wires at Perth under the current circumstances. Taking into account the service patterns that will be in place by the end of the current ScotRail franchise, the starting gun for Perth getting wires will most definitley come from any one of the following conditions being met;

• Wires going all the way through to Dundee in the same period (allowing for 1tph to convert to a full regular EMU operation)
• Conversion of all I7C services to bi-mode operation (allowing for 3tp2h to utilise the wires)
• Wires already being installed in Fife (allowing for at least 1tph to convert to a full regular EMU operation)
• Provision of new EMU services, or extension of existing Dunblane terminating services from Edinburgh and Glasgow at a rate enough to satisfy a 1tph EMU frequency
• Demand and benefit for EMU stabling flexibility and/or Blackford freight exceeding the cost of work involved in investing in wires earlier than ScotRail's ability to provide any of the above

 

[gsnedders]

Out of curiosity, there are relatively few services that terminate at Perth from the Dunblane direction, and with no bimodes either, what would be the purpose of electrifying Dunblane to Perth at this stage? Is it to extend some of the Dunblane terminators to Perth - if so that's quite a long extension of those services.

Mostly because it's a necessary first step to heading further north? The reason to do it in preference to Fife is that the Fife Circle is going to be exceptionally difficult.

 

[InOban]

Maybe the freight facilities grant included a contribution to wiring. Certainly allowing the trains to be hauled by, say, 88s throughout would be a nice bit of greenwashing (given that transporting water in PET bottles isn't at all green).

 

[Tobbes]

Mostly because it's a necessary first step to heading further north? The reason to do it in preference to Fife is that the Fife Circle is going to be exceptionally difficult.

Is the difficulty of the Fife Circle the Forth Bridge? Or is it something else?

 

[ScottDarg]

Maybe the freight facilities grant included a contribution to wiring. Certainly allowing the trains to be hauled by, say, 88s throughout would be a nice bit of greenwashing (given that transporting water in PET bottles isn't at all green).

That assumes they would actually use 88's. Grangemouth was electrified and an electric loco (Class 88) has only ever hauled a train under those wires once.

 

[gsnedders]

Is the difficulty of the Fife Circle the Forth Bridge? Or is it something else?

Both that and several of the tunnels (I believe many of the tunnels along the coast are very tight).

 

[Tobbes]

Both that and several of the tunnels (I believe many of the tunnels along the coast are very tight).

Many thanks - any thoughts, @Bald Rick ?

 

[Bald Rick]

Many thanks - any thoughts, @Bald Rick ?

Not my specialised subject.

 

[66C]

I did ask about wiring the Forth Bridge and the engineers didn't foresee any major problems with this. I mentioned bi-modes for this and got a sigh and a no. I think Dunblane Auchterarder is a relatively easy bit. Design and planning work is ongoing north to Perth and at some point in time onwards to Dundee.
NR have recently purchased land at Greenloaning for the electrification depot to be set up and the move is on to clear the site at Cadder for the HST stabling sidings.

 

[66C]

Transport Scotland funded the Blackford alterations and provision of the south connection to Russells freight terminal. Russells are currently building the terminal. The traffic will be initially from the neighbouring Highland Spring plant to Daventry and with the aim of acquiring additional traffic to the terminal. Russells website had a drawing of two roads in the depot under an electric overhead gantry crane.