Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

66C

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2013
Messages
62
I'm only picking up little bits from those in the know. I imagine it will be released by TS. Think the bimode invitation is to go out in October. The Fife upgrade by 2022 as far as I can remember
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

66C

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2013
Messages
62
There was an odd thing with local electrification stretching out from Aberdeen among other places and a gradual infilling of the gaps. Engineer's are eager to start banging piles in
 

CEN60

Member
Joined
17 Dec 2018
Messages
111
Which will be why Hitachi are making much battery EMU noise at the moment. I don't usually go in for trainset fantasy talk, but anything other than a follow on Class 385 order would be madness when you see the reliability statistics in Roger Ford's section of Modern Railways.



The Forth and Tay Bridges don't present a particular problem to electrify, beyond listed building consent. The viewing platform plan for the Forth Bridge navigated that despite proposing a frankly hideous structure be bolted to the side of the bridge (though I did hear a whisper that despite currently being out to tender, it's not going ahead).

The primary concerns were the electrification of the route at Edinburgh Airport and the Kinghorn Tunnel which did need track lowering (slab track and rigid overhead conductor was the assumed plan as per other projects in Scotland).

On what basis do you think that it not a problem to electrify the Forth Bridge. Well known in the railway industry that the Forth is a huge issue for electrification - hence all the talk of battery technology!
 

Philip Phlopp

Established Member
Joined
31 May 2015
Messages
2,787
On what basis do you think that it not a problem to electrify the Forth Bridge. Well known in the railway industry that the Forth is a huge issue for electrification - hence all the talk of battery technology!
Technically, it's not really more of a challenge than some of the other structures which have been successfully electrified across the network in recent years, particularly the Cardiff Intersection which has similarly limited clearances and the same issues with steelwork that the Forth Bridge also has. Cardiff Intersection, whilst it arguably could have been rebuilt, I suppose, has the added complication of a live railway running above the electrification, complete with signalling system and it's soon to be electrified itself, so electrical current management was a key issue there.

There's also all manner of newer technologies which now exist and are in routine use, particularly surge arresters/diverters, newer insulating contact wire covers and polymer coatings for steelwork, all of which reduce flashover risk and allow much reduced clearances. The newer design of OLE systems, particularly Series 1, reduces the live envelope of conventional catenary which can eliminate an issue or two by gaining the extra few mm needed to obtain the necessary clearances.

The bridge itself will need a bespoke OLE system making use of (probably all) those components and technologies. I would expect the biggest issue will be split between testing such a system (laboratory time is inevitable for this) and agreeing on the aesthetics of such a system such that it is acceptable to the planning authorities and UNESCO.
 

Brissle Girl

Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
896
and agreeing on the aesthetics of such a system such that it is acceptable to the planning authorities and UNESCO.
When you look at the scale of the structure, which is itself all metal girders, it is hard to see how the addition of some electrification gubbings would have any meaningful impact on the aesthetics. Though I'm sure that won't stop those august bodies pouring all over the plans and adding a few millions to the overall cost somehow.
 

matchmaker

Member
Joined
8 Mar 2009
Messages
1,038
Location
Central Scotland
NR are starting work between Stirling and Dunblane on 20th July, with work due to carry on until July 2021. I suspect a lot of it will be involved in the modernisation of Cornton level crossing. A works compound is to be set up beside the crossing in the land formerly occupied by the Stirling Trailer Centre.
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
2,817
There's no point in Curriehill being in hand unless they they are going to electrify the Sub. It's needed to allow electric haulage of freight from the east coast ports to Mossend via the ECML.
 

mcmad

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2015
Messages
726
Is Curriehill not needed to support an increased shotts timetable along with being part of the wider capacity increase on the ECML?

There is little ECML freight that could be electric hauled end to end even if the operators were interested in doing it
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
2,817
I'm not aware of any plans to increase the Shotts services beyond the present 2/hr. No capacity at Haymarket for one thing.
I think that there will be some encouragement for the freight TOCs to acquire electric, or electrodiesel locos
 

CEN60

Member
Joined
17 Dec 2018
Messages
111
There's no point in Curriehill being in hand unless they they are going to electrify the Sub. It's needed to allow electric haulage of freight from the east coast ports to Mossend via the ECML.
I am no expert - but having had a little involvement on SUB Electrification Feasibility in the past & Tendering for Portobello (unsuccessfully!!) If you don't electrify the Sub then when Portobello is disrupted there is no way of getting electric stock into Waverley or Haymarket I believe (unless you loco haul it into Waverley).
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
2,817
I had forgotten that aspect. When major work is required at either end of Waverley the sub can be used to bring trains in from the other end. However all the WCML trains are electric only. Admittedly most of the ECML services will be bimodes.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
4,887
Location
ECM1 79m 34ch
I had forgotten that aspect. When major work is required at either end of Waverley the sub can be used to bring trains in from the other end. However all the WCML trains are electric only. Admittedly most of the ECML services will be bimodes.
The only ones which won't be are LNER 801/2s, and ScotRail's own 385s on Dunbar/North Berwick services. (You could also add Cally Sleeper, when diverts via the ECML are going on)
 

NotATrainspott

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2013
Messages
3,021
After EK/Barrhead and Maryhill, TS are going to have to get used to the idea of spending a lot of money on electrification without it having any major effect on services. For instance, wiring from Dunblane to Perth is only directly going to be able to help a Glasgow-Perth stopper, and one which doesn't then bother extending to Dundee at that.

The single biggest justification for the south sub for passenger services is that it simplifies the works required at the eastern end of Waverley. If it isn't done, then at all times an electrified route will need to remain in operation through the station throat, or the 385 fleet will be screwed. I'm sure it'll be possible to provide one in normal times, to allow a limited number of direct services and/or a loop-and-back via Haymarket and the South Sub. Not allowing early morning/late evening blockades of the entire eastern end of Waverley might be ruinous.

Once you have a desire to wire up most of the network, you'll end up having to wire up fairly marginal bits too. An unelectrified South Sub (and City Union line) may as well be lifted if the rest of the network is all wired up. They're in far too core a location for it to be sensible to rely on alternative means of providing electric trains (bi-modes, batteries).
 

alangla

Member
Joined
11 Apr 2018
Messages
891
Location
Glasgow
If it was a temporary block on the east end of Waverley or if Millerhill depot was unavailable, surely it would be possible to park sufficient 385s at Stirling, Bathgate, Cadder, Eastfield etc to run the service? Not viable long term obviously, but for a few weeks? IIRC, 380s have been serviced at Bathgate during Waverley engineering work in the past.
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
6,066
There's no point in Curriehill being in hand unless they they are going to electrify the Sub. It's needed to allow electric haulage of freight from the east coast ports to Mossend via the ECML.
Is Curriehill not needed to support an increased shotts timetable along with being part of the wider capacity increase on the ECML?
There is little ECML freight that could be electric hauled end to end even if the operators were interested in doing it
If you are wiring for ECML freight (future potential) is there any future potential for electric freight on the ECML especially north of Newcastle given the number of Class 1 >100 mph paths wanted by East Coast - two or three, XC one, TPE one per hour, First Group 4/5 per day and Class 2 services between Newcastle and Morpeth / Chathill and between Dunbar / North Berwick and Edinburgh. Is there actually any room for Class 4 and Class 6 Freight?

I actually doubt there is much room except overnight on this section so would there be any value in wiring the subs?

For discussing the Freight itself go here
 
Last edited:

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
50,037
Location
Yorkshire
Just a gentle reminder that this thread is for Scottish electrification updates.

Any ideas/suggestions (whether that is regarding electrification or any other topic) must be posted in the Speculative Ideas forum section please.

Many thanks :)
 

66C

Member
Joined
8 Sep 2013
Messages
62
Are the Portobello upgrade through signalling and wiring of Millerhill and the Edinburgh sub not all interconnected. Not sure if there is enough power to allow diversion of the Pendolinos via Shotts during the Carstairs rebuild.
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
6,066
Are the Portobello upgrade through signalling and wiring of Millerhill and the Edinburgh sub not all interconnected. Not sure if there is enough power to allow diversion of the Pendolinos via Shotts during the Carstairs rebuild.
Surprised that a Pendolino or two hasn't been this way already? They seemed to be used for testing power draw on newly wired lines elsewhere
 

385001

Member
Joined
27 Nov 2017
Messages
211
Location
Edinburgh
It is in hand - all linked to Portobello Remodelling & Edinburgh Sub Electrification
The latter looking less likely as TS still don't see a benefit to it I believe.
So Network Rail is keen to electrify the Sub but Transport Scotland is reluctant to pay for it?

I had a walk along the route of the Sub earlier this week and I agree with @InOban.

We've discussed all this before. The remaining issues are tree clearance, improved fencing, and parapets. I'll be down in Edinburgh in a couple of weeks and take a few pics.
Unfortunately, I can't see the current nice bridge on Braid Avenue surviving although I was surprised by how low the track is below the pavement level on Myreside Road and Colinton Road.

I've attached photos if anyone is interested. Newington to Braid Avenue so far. More to come.
002 - Old Newington Station.jpg003 - Old Newington Station.jpg004 - Old Newington Station.jpg005 - Mayfield Road.jpg006 - Mayfield Road.jpg007 - Blackford Avenue.jpg008 - Blackford Avenue.jpg009 - Braid Avenue.jpg010 - Braid Avenue.jpg011 - Braid Avenue.jpg
 

Top