Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[St Rollox]

Looking at the history of Scottish Electrification since the Blue Train in 1960 it must work out at about 10 miles a year.
Would that be about right.

 

[clc]

Are SPT right to be concerned?

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/f...0828n.22550260

Fears for future of six Glasgow train stations

The Queen Street to Anniesland line, via Possilpark and Maryhill, will be the only stretch of track not electrified north of the Clyde in the Greater Glasgow area, leading to transport bosses questioning its viability.

The route was due for electrification as part of the wider Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement Programme (EGIP), but was removed when the Scottish Government amended the scheme to cut costs.

The line runs from Queen Street, with stations at Ashfield, Possilpark & Parkhouse, Maryhill, Gilshochill, Summerston and Kelvindale, and was only completed in 2005 as part of a £35 million project. It joins the main intercity route near Cowlairs junction.

The line was threatened under the original EGIP plan to allow extra services to operate in and out of Queen Street Station.

However, following pressure from local politicians and the Evening Times Save Our Stations campaign, assurances were given that the line would remain open, and when the additional services were removed from EGIP it appeared to be safe.

But transport bosses fear the latest proposals leave the line isolated and vulnerable.

A report for SPT councillors to be considered this week states: "The revised proposals now raise a more serious concerns on the future of this line, as is has been excluded from any electrification.

"This line would be the only section of non-electrified route north of the Clyde in the SPT network and therefore have limitations as to the type of rolling stock, performance of the line and hence major effect on patronage."

SPT is raising the concerns with Transport Scotland and asking for the line to be electrified to guarantee its future.

It is also suggested the line be connected to the North Clyde line, which would mean services wouldn't terminate at Anniesland and passengers could be able to continue to Hyndland and Partick without changing trains.

Jim Coleman, SPT chairman said: "SPT supports the electrification of Scotland's railways but these latest plans don't stack up.

"The proposals will disadvantage many local networks vital to our economy and we don't yet know the true cost of the changes, nor do we have full detail on how disruption to services will be managed.

"The exclusion of the Maryhill line from electrification could potentially isolate that area from the rest of the network.

"I am very concerned about the future of that route and the passengers who depend on it."

Politicians who campaigned to save the line last year were concerned that it may be at risk once again.

Patricia Ferguson, MSP for Maryhill and Springburn, raised questions when it was previously discovered the EGIP works would mean the line could be closed off at the city end, adding 30 minutes to the journey time.

She said: "This is extremely worrying. We had reassurances from the minister about the future of the line.

"The current proposals seem to throw that into question.

"I will be seeking urgent meeting with the minister.

"This is a well used line with growing numbers of passengers."

Local people spoke out against the previous threat of closure and Glasgow City Council leader Gordon Matheson opposed closure.

Last year he was given an assurance from Transport Minister Keith Brown that services in the north of the city would not be damaged by the EGIP plan.

A plan to revamp Queen Street station as part of a £650 million project to electrify the Glasgow to Edinburgh rail line has also been questioned by city transport bosses.

SPT believe that with High Speed Rail plans only seven years behind the EGIP completion, then a full scale station redevelopment is unnecessary.

The initial EGIP plan would have seen more trains running on the line with an increased frequency between Queen Street and Edinburgh.

When that was abandoned, and the programme costs slashed from £1.2 billion to £650m, the plan was to run fewer but longer trains.

To accommodate eight carriage trains it is proposed to lengthen the platforms at the station, meaning extending out into the concourse area and extending the station towards George Square.

There are concerns that with plans for more shops in the station there will be less room for passengers and the concourse will be even more congested at busy times that at present.

SPT said that one platform can already take eight carriages and the others can take seven, which would reduce overcrowding at peak times.

In a report to councillors SPT assistant chief executive, Eric Stewart, said: "The inclusion of a whole scale redevelopment of Queen Street Station would be questionable if High Speed Rail were to come into place only seven years after the redevelopment."

Jim Coleman, SPT chairman, said: "I see no logic to the planned overhaul of Queen Street and how this will fit with a longer term commitment to a high speed rail network.

"The level of chaos this will cause just a few years before further big changes are potentially necessary just doesn't make sense."

A Transport Scotland spokesman said: "The redevelopment of Queen Street will transform the passenger experience, enabling existing platforms to be extended to accommodate longer trains.

"The improvements are essential to meet passenger demand on the Edinburgh/Glasgow via Falkirk High route, which we expect to exceed available capacity by the end of this decade. Including the redevelopment of Queen Street will future proof capacity on this critical route.

"High Speed rail is a longer term objective and, when introduced, will add to the opportunities for travel between Edinburgh and Glasgow and meet future passenger growth."

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The Scottish Government has said it will continue with 100 stkm of electrification annually after EGIP, so I would have thought Anniesland's turn will come.
In any case, the West Highland line will not be electrified, nor the Aberdeen/Inverness services. so the Anniesland service will not be the only diesel service out of Queen Street.
The services could be interworked.

 

[Altnabreac]

This is all about politics and not about railways. The Maryhill line is not under threat and everything SPT say is scaremongering nonsense.

That said this sort of scare tactics may help bump Maryhill up the list for post 2019 electrification ahead of East Kilbride or Kilmarnock. Given SPT allegedly represent all of Strathclyde and are not meant to be just an arm of Glasgow City Council any benefit is at best neutral at a Strathclyde level.

If anything electrification is more likely to cause a potential threat to services as the 07.10 Arrochar & Tarbert to Queen St service interworks with the Anniesland service but will have to remain a diesel train. Not sure if it is part of West Highland diagram or a Maryhill one?

 

[jopsuk]

Just because a service currently interworks doesn't mean it always has to. Timetables and diagrams can be, and will be, changed.

 

[clc]

During a debate at Holyrood the other day Keith Brown stated "The budget for the Edinburgh to Glasgow improvement programme is currently about £650 million, although we want to do some additional work on the programme that might take it over that figure."

Does anyone know what this additional work is?

Brown's comments are at 24381: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/28862.aspx?r=8623&mode=pdf

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Does anyone know what this additional work is?

Is it maybe the Shotts route electrification?
I don't think this was in the initial plan.
It would mean all the Scotrail eastbound services from Glasgow Central would be electric and eligible for diversion to LL.

 

[clc]

Is it maybe the Shotts route electrification?
I don't think this was in the initial plan.

I don't think so as Shotts electrification is separate from EGIP going from Transport Scotland's website:http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/files/images/Rail/rail-elec.jpg
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Perhaps it's the Finnieston Turnback, I assume this would be needed if they want to divert Whifflet services via Central Low Level.

 

[Altnabreac]

I don't think so as Shotts electrification is separate from EGIP going from Transport Scotland's website:http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/files/images/Rail/rail-elec.jpg
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Perhaps it's the Finnieston Turnback, I assume this would be needed if they want to divert Whifflet services via Central Low Level.

Abbeyhill turnback is another possibility. Other option is possibly retaining some elements of the junction improvements at Greenhill. These were in the original spec and I believe they help speed up Stirling and Aberdeen services and Network Rail are currently investigating ways to improve Aberdeen journey times so maybe they have suggested putting it back in the EGIP programme?

 

[clc]

Abbeyhill turnback is another possibility. Other option is possibly retaining some elements of the junction improvements at Greenhill. These were in the original spec and I believe they help speed up Stirling and Aberdeen services and Network Rail are currently investigating ways to improve Aberdeen journey times so maybe they have suggested putting it back in the EGIP programme?

Might another possibility be a cheaper version of the Almond Chord? According to Railfuture closure of the Winchburgh tunnel will cost the SG up to to £½m per day totalling up to £45m in compensation payments to Scotrail. They claim the chord could be built without the grade separated junction, before the tunnel closes, for around £30m. They say Network Rail has already completed most of the design work and is already buying the land required: http://www.railfuture.org.uk/dl642

 

[Photohunter71]

I noticed the post also included provision for the Edinburgh sub loop,that's fine for turnarounds with EMU's but is it necessary when they've got cabs at both ends? It may be worthwhile for Mossend diversions for container freight,but not much freight goes around the sub these days,the cement,Alcans,Nuclear waste and that's about your lot! Surely if they can open stations on the sub it would make the case for electrification much stronger,either that or work to attract more freight via that route,but most of the freight comes via the WCML.

 

[Eagle]

I've always thought the idea of opening a station or two on the sub line and running a Waverley–Haymarket–Gorebridge service that way would be a good idea, once the Borders line has bedded in.

 

[edwin_m]

With the WCML pretty much full the ECML is the only option to carry extra Anglo-Scottish freight, which will mostly be intermodals going to terminals that are either electrified already (Mossend) or likely to be (Grangemouth). However getting a freight through Waverley has probably gone from difficult towards impossible now that some of the non-platform roads have been lifted to make space to put platforms on the others. Hence it makes sense to electrify the south sub as an alternative freight route through Edinburgh, along with electrifying the Shotts line and gauge clearing the ECML.

 

[Photohunter71]

With the WCML pretty much full the ECML is the only option to carry extra Anglo-Scottish freight, which will mostly be intermodals going to terminals that are either electrified already (Mossend) or likely to be (Grangemouth). However getting a freight through Waverley has probably gone from difficult towards impossible now that some of the non-platform roads have been lifted to make space to put platforms on the others. Hence it makes sense to electrify the south sub as an alternative freight route through Edinburgh, along with electrifying the Shotts line and gauge clearing the ECML.

Thanks for your post! I wasn't aware the WCML was near or at capacity! Here's hoping we do see more freight on the ECML and round the Sub loop!

 

[YorkshireBear]

Thanks for your post! I wasn't aware the WCML was near or at capacity! Here's hoping we do see more freight on the ECML and round the Sub loop!

It is certainly getting there especially due to the slowness of diesel hauled freight over Shap. They also want to move the WCML North from 24 freights per day to 48. Not going to be easy, and diverting that many in the case of line closures will be even harder!

 

[Photohunter71]

Hadn't heard about the double number of freight movements as you pointed out! But that is going to cause a few headaches here and there as you indicate.Surely then there is a strong case for the full route of the Waverley line to be relaid and doubled and that could ease some strain? Other than that,the possibility of 4 lane lines on the ECML,(difficult and nigh on impossible in some areas due to structures such as Royal Border Bridge etc)

 

[YorkshireBear]

Hadn't heard about the double number of freight movements as you pointed out! But that is going to cause a few headaches here and there as you indicate.Surely then there is a strong case for the full route of the Waverley line to be relaid and doubled and that could ease some strain? Other than that,the possibility of 4 lane lines on the ECML,(difficult and nigh on impossible in some areas due to structures such as Royal Border Bridge etc)

It is long term, so up to 2030 but it is still going to cause headaches! Especially post HS2.

 

[HSTEd]

A future high speed rail line to Scotland would eliminate the concern and the Waverley route would make no difference since it would still load the Carlisle area to the gills.

 

[YorkshireBear]

A future high speed rail line to Scotland would eliminate the concern and the Waverley route would make no difference since it would still load the Carlisle area to the gills.

Very much so, the desire to make the WCML North a very very busy freight corridor only helps with the case for a HS line on to Scotland.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It is certainly getting there especially due to the slowness of diesel hauled freight over Shap. They also want to move the WCML North from 24 freights per day to 48. Not going to be easy, and diverting that many in the case of line closures will be even harder!

Does anyone know where the bottlenecks are and if so if they could be gradually debottlenecked over the next 10-15 years- passing loops, reinstating this and that etc?

If diesel haulage over Shap and Beatock are part of the issue can they not mandate use of electric haulage - OK I understand tha tcould not happen overnight?

 

[HSTEd]

Shap Base Tunnel!

But yeah, short of a mass electrification programme so that all lines are electrified as fast as possible this will remain a major issue.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Does anyone know where the bottlenecks are and if so if they could be gradually debottlenecked over the next 10-15 years- passing loops, reinstating this and that etc?
If diesel haulage over Shap and Beatock are part of the issue can they not mandate use of electric haulage - OK I understand tha tcould not happen overnight?

NR has been trying to mandate electric haulage for quite a while, but the TOCs don't like it.
Somewhere they threaten there will be no 60mph diesel paths north of Preston.
The recent DRS Class 88 order might be a start for more electric haulage.
I think the long term idea is that at least 2 (maybe more) dynamic loops are built over the fells (ie 4-track sections).
One would extend either side of Shap and the other at Beattock.
They would come as part of a "Linking HS2 to Scotland" plan.
It appears in some of the HS2 planning scenarios.

 

[YorkshireBear]

NR has been trying to mandate electric haulage for quite a while, but the TOCs don't like it.
Somewhere they threaten there will be no 60mph diesel paths north of Preston.
The recent DRS Class 88 order might be a start for more electric haulage.
I think the long term idea is that at least 2 (maybe more) dynamic loops are built over the fells (ie 4-track sections).
One would extend either side of Shap and the other at Beattock.
They would come as part of a "Linking HS2 to Scotland" plan.
It appears in some of the HS2 planning scenarios.

Yes that is what is currently being given heavy consideration. I think mandate electric haulage which by 2033 i hope we will have achieved! And also HS2 seperate route will help enormously. Dynamic Loop will allow Regional services and lots and lots of freight.

 

[Scotrail84]

Thanks for your post! I wasn't aware the WCML was near or at capacity! Here's hoping we do see more freight on the ECML and round the Sub loop!

Is the sub not route restrictive for container services due to tight curves and low bridges at newington, morning side etc?

 

[edwin_m]

Is the sub not route restrictive for container services due to tight curves and low bridges at newington, morning side etc?

Any restrictions like that could be sorted out much more cheaply and easily than, for example, building more loops on the WCML.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Any restrictions like that could be sorted out much more cheaply and easily than, for example, building more loops on the WCML.

ECML may need more loops to accept more freight though due to the very long sections so it is hard to say which is best. (both :P )

 

[Scotrail84]

Any restrictions like that could be sorted out much more cheaply and easily than, for example, building more loops on the WCML.

If you have been round the sub then you would have seen the amount of work that needs to be done. Not cheap I'm afraid.

 

[Gadget88]

I've always thought the idea of opening a station or two on the sub line and running a Waverley–Haymarket–Gorebridge service that way would be a good idea, once the Borders line has bedded in.

The question is will they open that station for trains from the Glasgow end maybe via Dalmeny but looks unlikely.

 

[clc]

Could Glasgow Airport get a rail link after all? (Funded by local authorities)

http://www.bq-magazine.co.uk/scotland-november-2013/hope-for-airport-rail-link-go-ahead/

 

[WatcherZero]

Gone slightly overbudget in the final business case.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...vement-programme-cost-rises-by-90m.1390836275

Cost of renovating Queen Street station has gone from £49 million to £120m as the scope has been expanded to include longer platforms, complete track remodelling and integration with Buchanan Galleries shopping centre.

Falkirk electrification cost is down by a fifth to £248m

Total EGIP budget cost up from £650 million to £741.5 million.