Don't know about steepest, but 1 in 60 for 20 miles is a heck of a long slog heading south out of Inverness.Anyone know the steepest gradient an 88 would face on diesel if it were doing sleeper duties?
Don't know about steepest, but 1 in 60 for 20 miles is a heck of a long slog heading south out of Inverness.Anyone know the steepest gradient an 88 would face on diesel if it were doing sleeper duties?
I think it would be quite a shock if improvement to the EK line wasn't part of CP6.
Hopefully the Almond chord will be approved to, otherwise Edinburgh Gateway will remain a bit of a white elephant for the foreseeable future.
Would electrification have any effect of reopening passenger services on the South Sub?
ScotRail could exercise the option for 10 more 3 car 385s. They would be a good unit for the gradients on the route and ten would cover the diagrams.Not heard any firm plans of the EK line though . Plus what stock will be used ?
The Scottish Government has a completely different outlook and set of priorities from the Westminster government. Investment in rail infrastructure is seen as part of a wider program of social improvement. The Transport Scotland website sets out the case well -Scotland does seem to get a lot of electrification compared to England.
Rail offers vital public services, connecting people with destinations and goods with markets. The Scottish Government’s Scotland’s Economic Strategy focuses public services on improving competitiveness and tackling inequality, to support sustainable economic growth for all.
Rail supports Scotland’s economic competitiveness by:
Transport Scotland will seek to achieve these outcomes through investment in rail infrastructure, station facilities and new technologies.
- offering fast routes to areas of employment for commuters
- linking cities in Scotland and the rest of the UK to help make Scotland a more attractive place for businesses
- facilitating the movement of goods, and of consumers to retailers
- connecting tourists to world-famous activities and destinations
I’d imagine the EK would eventually get 385s, with the stock coming off the Cathcart Circle lines (who will get the 385s originally). It would be a waste to have 318s, 320s or 334s on the EK line. Either 385s or 380s would be ideal.
You are correct but not continuous. Believe it or not once you reach the single section at Culloden it is down hill over the viaduct for southbound trains then 1 in 60 again up to Moy and again from Tomatin up to Slochd Summit.Don't know about steepest, but 1 in 60 for 20 miles is a heck of a long slog heading south out of Inverness.
You think wrong. 1 in 60 out of inverness and up both sides of Slochd.On the HML I think it's 1 in 70.
Prompted by the above post, I see from Google satellite view that Mossend to Garnqueen North Junction is electrified. Was this done as part of wiring to Cumbernauld?
Thanks. I suppose that makes sense as I now see there's a freight terminal there. I had somehow got the idea into my head that the wires ended at Mossend.I believe the wires have been up from Mossend to just south of Gartsherrie South Jn (at least) for ages.
I knew it was much steeper than the 1:100 which other posters were using in their calculations. But thanks.You think wrong. 1 in 60 out of inverness and up both sides of Slochd.
1 in 60 is hardly moderate gradient. Balancing speed for an 88 at the head of a 400 tonne train (including the 88) on a 1 on 60 is 24mph. I suspect that would be a tad's too slow for CS.I knew it was much steeper than the 1:100 which other posters were using in their calculations. But thanks.
Yikes.1 in 60 is hardly moderate gradient. Balancing speed for an 88 at the head of a 400 tonne train (including the 88) on a 1 on 60 is 24mph. I suspect that would be a tad's too slow for CS.
Not that much less than electrifying the whole line. The real big costs are providing the feed, clearing structures and doing signal immunisation - most of which you'd still need to do.Anyone willing to spitball the cost of electrifying only short, steep sections where the 88's relative lack of power on diesel means it will travel below line speed?
Thought so.....Not that much less than electrifying the whole line. The real big costs are providing the feed, clearing structures and doing signal immunisation - most of which you'd still need to do.
CS would probably still use 92s in that case. Cheaper to lease.Not that much less than electrifying the whole line. The real big costs are providing the feed, clearing structures and doing signal immunisation - most of which you'd still need to do.
Not having to train drivers on a new motive power type would be a nice bonus.CS would probably still use 92s in that case. Cheaper to lease.
I believe the wires have been up from Mossend to just south of Gartsherrie South Jn (at least) for ages. Recently in the new Cumbernauld electrification scheme, the wires were extended right through to join up with the Cumbernauld line at the same time.
Scotland does seem to get a lot of electrification compared to England.
Thank god
The timing loads (as per RTT) are 595 tonnes for the full rake, 385 tonnes for the Inverness portion, 350 tonnes for the Aberdeen portion, and 210 tonnes for the Fort William portion. I imagine that the portion weights take into account the possibility of individual portions being cancelled and sent elsewhere, and sleepers being switched between the Fort William and Aberdeen portions. Both the Edinburgh and Glasgow portions have timing loads of 595 tonnes, so there's definitely provision for diverting the full rake to either terminus.Does the Inverness sleeper portion load to 8 mark3s? I think the seated coaches are 32 ton mark2s so you can recalculate 4x40 tons plus 4x32 tons. Load 288 tons.
In that case class 88s could be used on the Fort William portion from Stirling if hire charges fitted financially.The timing loads (as per RTT) are 595 tonnes for the full rake, 385 tonnes for the Inverness portion, 350 tonnes for the Aberdeen portion, and 210 tonnes for the Fort William portion. I imagine that the portion weights take into account the possibility of individual portions being cancelled and sent elsewhere, and sleepers being switched between the Fort William and Aberdeen portions. Both the Edinburgh and Glasgow portions have timing loads of 595 tonnes, so there's definitely provision for diverting the full rake to either terminus.
The 73 has RA6, I believe, and is able to take the sleeper into Oban when necessary. I think the 88 would not. Heavy locos access FW under grandfather rights, with extreme speed limits.In that case class 88s could be used on the Fort William portion from Stirling if hire charges fitted financially.
I'd like to see much more doubling of the HML as without it the benefits of electrification are marginal.Not that much less than electrifying the whole line. The real big costs are providing the feed, clearing structures and doing signal immunisation - most of which you'd still need to do.
There is always something to bugger up a good idea.The 73 has RA6, I believe, and is able to take the sleeper into Oban when necessary. I think the 88 would not. Heavy locos access FW under grandfather rights, with extreme speed limits.