Study to consider Borders Railway extension

[JohnR]

B involves quite a lot of work as this old post by Altnabreac shows:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-railway-extension.145163/page-4#post-2968524

How old is that estimate of £170M-£270M?

I arrived at the £170m figure by using the cost of the line to Tweedbank, and the top end by adding on 66% optimism bias. Considering the existing line involved some house demolition and the work around the A720 Edinburgh by-pass, I think its reasonable that further extensions will be of similar (or even lesser) complexity.

 

[JohnR]

Yes and No.

You can obviously extend the existing half hourly service but assuming the Hawick extension would not be fully double track, adding a further opportunity for single track clashes, 3-5 stations and the current political pressure on skip stopping and part cancellations you'd probably want to increase reliability on the existing line if you were extending it further.

To be honest I'm not sure that extending the dynamic loops will be that helpful, I'd certainly concentrate any spend on the eastern approaches at Waverley, redoubling Calton North Tunnel, 4 tracks through Abbeyhill, double lead at Portobello junction and a full double track alignment from Portobello to Shawfair with new platforms at Brunstane and Newcraighall.

Then you might want to speed up the Borders services to improve Hawick - Edinburgh journey times. A 2tph stopping service to a new 3 platform station at Redheugh would be my preferred way of achieving this.

Current reliability and timings are dictated by the existing dynamic loops. IN order to improve those (vital I would say if you are going to add additional services) then you need longer and more loops. The double lead at Portobello is also vital, I would say. The 4 tracking is probably in the nice to have category, but may be necessary if you are to have your suggested 4th service of fast and semi-fasts.

 

[Highland37]

Out of interest, presumably there would need to be a new DMU order to support any new extension?

 

[JohnR]

Out of interest, presumably there would need to be a new DMU order to support any new extension?

Why? There wasnt one to support the existing railway? I suspect that as more electrification happens (think Stirling-Perth-Dundee) that will release 170s from the semi-fasts to cascade.

 

[Highland37]

Why? There wasnt one to support the existing railway? I suspect that as more electrification happens (think Stirling-Perth-Dundee) that will release 170s from the semi-fasts to cascade.

Because operating a longer distance requires more trains to maintain the current frequency of service. There is already a shortage of DMUs. Adding additional diagrams would not help that.

 

[najaB]

Because operating a longer distance requires more trains to maintain the current frequency of service. There is already a shortage of DMUs. Adding additional diagrams would not help that.

Any potential extension would be opening by the mid 2020s. I doubt there will still be a DMU shortage.

 

[Highland37]

Yes and the 170s will be pretty hammered by then. Opening a new extension can only be as good as its weakest link and given the problems with 158s when the current extension opened, I suggest that not relying on older, well used, units is a good idea. Also, technology and efficiency as well as legislation will have changed quite a lot by then.

 

[najaB]

Also, technology and efficiency as well as legislation will have changed quite a lot by then.

So it's not a new DMU order to specifically support an extension, as the points you raise will apply whether the line is extended or not.

 

[Highland37]

Both will be needed I suggest. I was on the 158 from Inverness to Aviemore yesterday and it was pretty awful and certainly not close to what many other countries are doing with similar routes....

Moderator note: discussion on other matters moved to this thread.

 

[Altfish]

Yes and the 170s will be pretty hammered by then. Opening a new extension can only be as good as its weakest link and given the problems with 158s when the current extension opened, I suggest that not relying on older, well used, units is a good idea. Also, technology and efficiency as well as legislation will have changed quite a lot by then.

Yes, the 170s will be passed their sell by date and ripe for cascading to the north west of England!

 

[railjock]

Yes and No.

You can obviously extend the existing half hourly service but assuming the Hawick extension would not be fully double track, adding a further opportunity for single track clashes, 3-5 stations and the current political pressure on skip stopping and part cancellations you'd probably want to increase reliability on the existing line if you were extending it further.

To be honest I'm not sure that extending the dynamic loops will be that helpful, I'd certainly concentrate any spend on the eastern approaches at Waverley, redoubling Calton North Tunnel, 4 tracks through Abbeyhill, double lead at Portobello junction and a full double track alignment from Portobello to Shawfair with new platforms at Brunstane and Newcraighall.

Then you might want to speed up the Borders services to improve Hawick - Edinburgh journey times. A 2tph stopping service to a new 3 platform station at Redheugh would be my preferred way of achieving this.

You'd then have a 2tph semi fast calling at:
Hawick, Newtown St Boswells, Melrose East / BGH, Tweedbank, Galashiels, Stow, Gorebridge, Eskbank, Newcraighall
and a 2tph stopper calling at:
Redheugh, Newtongrange, Eskbank, Shawfair, Newcraighall, Brunstane, Abbeyhill

That gives you a 4tph service at the two most prominent stations Eskbank and Newcraighall while also improving reliability and journey times.

Interesting. Do you think there is real demand for an Abbeyhill station as the east of Edinburgh is less ‘developed’ than the west. What purpose would it actually serve?

 

[PaulLothian]

Interesting. Do you think there is real demand for an Abbeyhill station as the east of Edinburgh is less ‘developed’ than the west. What purpose would it actually serve?

Handy for the Parliament, and the Royal Train could stop there to load/unload...

 

[Altnabreac]

Interesting. Do you think there is real demand for an Abbeyhill station as the east of Edinburgh is less ‘developed’ than the west. What purpose would it actually serve?

There is reasonable population density round there and there are trip generators such as the Parliament, Holyrood Palace and Meadowbank as well as new housing planned and the commercial centre at Meadowbank that could be developed further.

The Edinburgh Local Development Plan safeguards three station sites at Portobello, Piershill and Meadowbank but I tend to think a wee bit further west at Abbeyhill will be more viable than any of those three sites.

There is potential for both services from east and west to use it with a potential role for freeing up platform capacity by allowing services from the west to run through Waverley and reduce dwell time by turning around at Abbeyhill.

 

[HSTEd]

I can't help but feel there are numerous better uses for the money than building a line through a literal middle of nowhere. Even in Scotland.

You'd probably get much better economics from reopening the Deeside Line below Banchory than going beyond Hawick.

 

[JohnR]

I can't help but feel there are numerous better uses for the money than building a line through a literal middle of nowhere. Even in Scotland.

You'd probably get much better economics from reopening the Deeside Line below Banchory than going beyond Hawick.

Well, the population within 2km of each proposed station on the Banchory line is much higher - and with higher disposable incomes too.

The £550-£850m that it would likely cost to go from Hawick-Carlisle could be used in so many other ways that would deliver more benefits. In no particular order....

Penicuik Railway line
Alloa-Dunfermline
Levenmouth
St. Andrews
Banchory
Fraserborough/Peterhead

 

[railjock]

There is reasonable population density round there and there are trip generators such as the Parliament, Holyrood Palace and Meadowbank as well as new housing planned and the commercial centre at Meadowbank that could be developed further.

The Edinburgh Local Development Plan safeguards three station sites at Portobello, Piershill and Meadowbank but I tend to think a wee bit further west at Abbeyhill will be more viable than any of those three sites.

There is potential for both services from east and west to use it with a potential role for freeing up platform capacity by allowing services from the west to run through Waverley and reduce dwell time by turning around at Abbeyhill.

Perhaps, though I can't see many living there choosing to get the train to Waverley rather than just jump on a bus. Of the ones mentioned I would have thought Portobello would be most viable as it is far enough from the city centre for the train to have some advantages.

 

[Altnabreac]

Perhaps, though I can't see many living there choosing to get the train to Waverley rather than just jump on a bus. Of the ones mentioned I would have thought Portobello would be most viable as it is far enough from the city centre for the train to have some advantages.

Yes it certainly wouldn't generate Abbeyhill - Waverley journeys any more than Haymarket - Waverley does any business. It would more be about extending the City Centre uses eastward and generating travel to Abbeyhill from other areas.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

B involves quite a lot of work as this old post by Altnabreac shows:

https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...-railway-extension.145163/page-4#post-2968524

It's not as bad as Altnabreac thinks, there are no houses on the former alignment at Broomilees Road and there are only two houses on the former alignment at Darnick.

 

[EIKN]

Ma

Yes, the 170s will be passed their sell by date and ripe for cascading to the north west of England!

The you'll get lucky and they might have converted the class 395 Javelin trains to Battery or Bio Diesel . By then.
Would be a nice quick trip unless it's all electrified .

 

[Altnabreac]

It's not as bad as Altnabreac thinks, there are no houses on the former alignment at Broomilees Road and there are only two houses on the former alignment at Darnick.

Yeah, Looks like 2 or at most 3 houses on Lye Road in the way. As I said you'd almost certainly move the A6091 slightly to the south rather than demolish residential property anyway.

But given new level crossings will not be permitted there would be a need for some complex and expensive changes to the A6091 Melrose Roundabout to make it work alongside a new bridge over the railway line.

 

[Ginaro]

But given new level crossings will not be permitted there would be a need for some complex and expensive changes to the A6091 Melrose Roundabout to make it work alongside a new bridge over the railway line.

Looks like the Melrose Roundabout is big enough just now to allow it to be made smaller. But there's also the road at the end of the platform at Tweedbank - difficult to get a bridge up and over in a small space, so more work would need to be done to route traffic around the back via the B6374? And what about the intersection with Broomilees Road - does the railway go above or below it?

 

[fegguk]

For anyone wanting to see what the route looks like from ground level this video play list show most the route from Hawick to Tweedbank. It was shot before the railway opened. Depending on what the transport study says I will probably up date it later in the year with some maps an diagrams.

.

 

[aylesbury]

Extension to Hawick would certainly make a good idea but would onward be viable?

 

[BigCj34]

Extension to Hawick would certainly make a good idea but would onward be viable?

The consensus is a resounding no, given the only settlements on such a route have populations of 2500 and 750.

 

[tomatwark]

If and I think it is probably a big one, the line was extended beyond Hawick, would it run on the same aligment or because of the amount of missing infrastructure would it make sense to reroute it around the town.

 

[railjock]

For anyone wanting to see what the route looks like from ground level this video play list show most the route from Hawick to Tweedbank. It was shot before the railway opened. Depending on what the transport study says I will probably up date it later in the year with some maps an diagrams.

.

Interesting video. In terms of ha potential Hawick station do you think one should be built in the centre where the original one was, though the parking would be limited? Alternatives would be not taking the line into the centre and only building a station on the outskirts ( like tweedbank ) or building both a town centre and an outskirts station like Gala/tweedbank.

 

[fegguk]

There are 2 probable sites for a Hawick station. Near the old station site shown in the video and near the town centre.

Parking could be provided at the old site at a lower level where there is a derelict factory. There is a lot of other parking close to the site.

The other suggested location is at the Lochpark industrial estate where there is parking nearby that could be extended. the site was at one time the engineering sidings. This site would only be worth while if the line went to Carlisle due to the cost of rebuilding the section that crossed the river at a high level to get to it.

Other than more or less following the original route there is more or less no other way of getting it though the town due to the hills and the likely extreme costs of any other route.

 

[BlueFox]

This leaflet came through my door in Carlisle today.



(image shows a leaflet with details of a possible reopened line between Tweedbank and Carlisle)

 

[EIKN]

Got one too. Out of interest how far off Longtown is that freight section.
I was given to understand when the campaign was on with phase 1 , that it ran to longtown ? Can't say I've seen it?.
Might be a useful thing to do a ' Newcraighall' and run as far as Newcastleton. As a shuttle to Carlisle seeing how both are not close to Carlisle centre and driving especially round the Jcn43 entrance into the city that has had roadworks ridiculous as it is since June . They keep moving them .
So getting I to town is a nightmare .
Glad I'm not here full time. Compared to Western Eireann it'scrazy traffic.
But that aside not e eyone has cars buses are not regular .
So a spare 2tph or 4 tph terminating at Newcastleton perhaps two tracks through Longtown as a passing loop . Might be a small step toward the eventual missing link ?.

 

[whitrope]

Its been said several times before on here that no sane business case exists for any extension beyond Hawick if even that . £10/12m per mile to rebuild as a ball park figure to carry fresh air over the Cheviots is never going to happen. Almost a billion pounds with rolling stock. CBR and others are living in cuckoo land. Timber traffic has no viable way of getting from forest to railhead other than by road and most of the business and jobs are in the Kingmoor area of Carlisle so taking people by train to the city centre is 2 miles from where they need to be.