Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[ic250]

Meanwhile billions from Scotland is being spent on HS2.

Except that any extra funding to be spent on HS2 in England is re-apportioned to the Scottish Government through 'Barnett consequentials', so that any mis-match in funding is equitably redistributed. This is exactly what has happened so far in the Crossrail project - nowhere else in the UK (eg not NE England), and not even Wales gets this level of compensatory payments.

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good dose of chippy-ness.

 

[dcsprior]

Except that any extra funding to be spent on HS2 in England is re-apportioned to the Scottish Government through 'Barnett consequentials', so that any mis-match in funding is equitably redistributed. This is exactly what has happened so far in the Crossrail project - nowhere else in the UK (eg not NE England), and not even Wales gets this level of compensatory payments.

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good dose of chippy-ness.

I thought that most of the cost of HS2 would not result in an increase in money allocated via the Barnett formula, as the HS2 project is judged to have benefit to Scotland too? (though a quick Google throws up conflicting answers on this)

 

[Altnabreac]

Except that any extra funding to be spent on HS2 in England is re-apportioned to the Scottish Government through 'Barnett consequentials', so that any mis-match in funding is equitably redistributed. This is exactly what has happened so far in the Crossrail project - nowhere else in the UK (eg not NE England), and not even Wales gets this level of compensatory payments.

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good dose of chippy-ness.

HS2 is classified as a scheme of "National Importance" so does not generate Barnett Consequentials for Scotland (or Wales or Northern Ireland). In my opinion this is a reasonable conclusion, whereas the similarly adjudged Crossrail is a bit more marginal.

Equally however this should mean that money spent in Scotland on High Speed north - south rail should be funded directly by the UK DfT. If the Edinburgh - Glasgow high speed gets the go ahead it will be very interesting to see what sort of funding regime is put in place for it.

In theory Scottish Parliament should only pay for 2 flying junctions and the upper triangle of rail between the 2 city branches. In reality something much more complex, part funded by UK and Scottish governments is likely to be agreed.

 

[Highland37]

Except that any extra funding to be spent on HS2 in England is re-apportioned to the Scottish Government through 'Barnett consequentials', so that any mis-match in funding is equitably redistributed. This is exactly what has happened so far in the Crossrail project - nowhere else in the UK (eg not NE England), and not even Wales gets this level of compensatory payments.

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good dose of chippy-ness.

Em no. Don't let Chippyness get in the way of the facts. The Scottish Government's budget has been cut three times this year but I note no cut to the HS2 budget or the bit Scotland pays for it.

No need to be personal. Just get it right though. Too many chips?

 

[NotATrainspott]

Em no. Don't let Chippyness get in the way of the facts. The Scottish Government's budget has been cut three times this year but I note no cut to the HS2 budget or the bit Scotland pays for it.

No need to be personal. Just get it right though. Too many chips?

Can we keep politics out of this, please? If you trawl through my post history, you'll find out my views on various topics related to Scottish politics, so you'll see that I'm not exactly trying to silence your viewpoint.

I don't know for certain whether HS2 creates Barnett consequentials. I've seen something which suggests that Crossrail did, but since the HS2 plans do directly affect Scotland it seems plausible that they will not exist. That is not a problem so long as high speed rail plans continue to include Scotland. From the perspective of the DfT and the rail industry, HS2 needs to be planned and built from the south first and foremost. If it is then possible for some sections further north to be planned and built in parallel then that is a good thing, but these improvements wouldn't be on the critical path to get HS2 built.

By the way, the Scottish block grant is calculated based on the total sum of spending in England, rather than being portioned according to different departments. If health spending were increased by a billion and transport spending decreased by a billion in England, it would have no consequential effect on the amount in the block grant. This is a good thing: it means the Scottish Government is able to decide to divide up public spending in a different way compared to England (at the moment, the Scottish budget spends a lot more on arts, sports, business programmes etc proportionately than the English one).

 

[Highland37]

I know and glad you recognise that it is not a confirmed fact that HS2= more money to Scotland. It doesn't.

I also don't dispute the need to start at the southern end of HS2 and support the project. There are many, many more important things to spend taxes raised in Scotland on (not railways). I also don't think it is helpful to anyone to have politicians making huge decisions with no control on what their total budget is. Only in the UK...

Don't write long posts on political things if you don't want people to discuss your points.

Nothing personal mind. Where would you spend the billions on that is currently going on HS2? I reckon wires to Perth then Aberdeen followed by gauge enhancement to Inverness.

I travel on the line from Inverness north every day. The 158s are awful trains and no one I know likes them.

 

[najaB]

I travel on the line from Inverness north every day. The 158s are awful trains and no one I know likes them.

Everything is relative. I'd take a 158 every day of the week if it meant I'd never have to use a 142 again. Or a 144.

 

[Southsider]

Where would you spend the billions on that is currently going on HS2? I reckon wires to Perth then Aberdeen followed by gauge enhancement to Inverness.

I travel on the line from Inverness north every day. The 158s are awful trains and no one I know likes them.

On a more parochial note, and I'm sure I'm in a minority of one given its 'iconic' status, I would stop spending money on the Glasgow Underground, quaint as it may be. The only busy bit is city centre to the west end - replace that with a reinstatement of the line to Botanic Gardens and beyond (I know the track has been built on at Kirklee but demolition works wonders!). Further, the underground is criticised for its failure to go east, that can be covered by opening the line through Parkhead to Carmyle, joining to the existing network. Join the two together and you have an east to west link on an alignment not currently served but with large populations along its length. Time for me to get back to reality ..........

 

[adrock1976]

On a more parochial note, and I'm sure I'm in a minority of one given its 'iconic' status, I would stop spending money on the Glasgow Underground, quaint as it may be. The only busy bit is city centre to the west end - replace that with a reinstatement of the line to Botanic Gardens and beyond (I know the track has been built on at Kirklee but demolition works wonders!). Further, the underground is criticised for its failure to go east, that can be covered by opening the line through Parkhead to Carmyle, joining to the existing network. Join the two together and you have an east to west link on an alignment not currently served but with large populations along its length. Time for me to get back to reality ..........

I have previously suggested the reopening of the remaining Glasgow Central Railway from Exhibition Centre to Maryhill Central. This would be a logical route to send any extra services that may run through Central Low Level. Also eastbound, the section from Bridgeton Cross to Carmyle could be reopened, together with reopening London Road station and Glasgow Cross too.

In regards to the underground, I believe that London Underground stock is too large for the tunnels, hence making replacement an extortionate cost. It could be retained for when Scotland's newest formed football team plays at Ibrox, as the stadium is a short walk from Copland Road. However, I'm not sure of the section between Partick and Govan Cross, as that section is a handy method of going from one side of the mighty Clyde to the other. Perhaps a tram system could largely replace the underground, running from Cowcaddens via Queen Street and Central stations, taking over the former Caledonian Railway alignment from near the Clyde Arc bridge to Clydebank, across the Clyde Arc to Pacific Quay and onwards to Govan Cross, Southern General Hospital, Braehead Centre, Renfrew Cross, and Glasgow International Airport.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I know and glad you recognise that it is not a confirmed fact that HS2= more money to Scotland. It doesn't.

I also don't dispute the need to start at the southern end of HS2 and support the project. There are many, many more important things to spend taxes raised in Scotland on (not railways). I also don't think it is helpful to anyone to have politicians making huge decisions with no control on what their total budget is. Only in the UK...

Don't write long posts on political things if you don't want people to discuss your points.

Nothing personal mind. Where would you spend the billions on that is currently going on HS2? I reckon wires to Perth then Aberdeen followed by gauge enhancement to Inverness.

I travel on the line from Inverness north every day. The 158s are awful trains and no one I know likes them.

Remember that the Scottish Government is actually pretty good at planning infrastructure compared to in England, with the exception of London. Transport Scotland are planning improvements up and down the country of all different sizes and timescales, whereas in England there are vast swathes of the country where no one in charge really has any plan for the future at all. Under the Strategic Transport Projects Review (STPR) process the new and enhanced infrastructure to be built over the next few decades has already been identified, meaning it is possible for the entire industry to plan ahead. Network Rail, for example, know that they'll be asked to take wires to Aberdeen and to Inverness in the 2020s.

We really aren't that hard done by when it comes to infrastructure planning and provision, especially because there aren't as many alternative routes which might need to be done in parallel. In England, there are a great number of different electrification projects which could be done in any real order - you could decide to wire up the local network around Bristol and Cardiff without that having any effect on the local network around Sheffield or Nottingham. In Scotland, there's no way to wire to Perth without wiring to Stirling first, and there's no way to wire to Dundee without completing Fife first either.

On top of this, we have Transport Scotland tendering the ScotRail and Caledonian Sleeper franchises in such a way which actually suggests some of the civil servants involved actually use and care about the services. It's more than obvious to most people on this forum and throughout the North that the Department for Transport hasn't really cared about service provision in the North of England or South Wales for a long time, if ever, so it isn't ambitious in seeing just how high-quality the services could be with a little bit of investment. TS has worked to ensure all of the lines in Scotland are improved to the same extent, whether that be through the introduction of the new AT200 fleet around the Central Belt, the introduction of the HSTs on the long distance runs to Aberdeen and Inverness (and between them as well) or the special scenic train initiative for the rural lines.

 

[route:oxford]

Has the speed limit through Winchburgh tunnel increased following the completion of improvement works?

First time in ages I've felt ear pressure on a Scotrail service.

 

[najaB]

Has the speed limit through Winchburgh tunnel increased following the completion of improvement works?

I don't recall seeing speed enhancement listed as one of the outputs. Interesting if it has as I would have expected it to have been highlighted in the publicity.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Yes, the work included linespeed upgrades. The Network Change document can be viewed here.

This Network Change notice outlines Network Rail’s proposal to increase the linespeed on the Up and Down Edinburgh to Glasgow main line (EGM1) through Winchburgh Tunnel. A detailed specification of the scheme is set out in Appendix A to this letter and includes a plan showing where the work is to be done and the parts of the Network and associated railway assets likely to be affected. Network Rail is proposing the change because route clearance activities in the tunnel afford an opportunity to increase the linespeed as detailed in Appendix A.

I don't think the change is anything major.

 

[najaB]

I don't think the change is anything major.

That might be why it wasn't mentioned in any of the publicity - it wasn't a big enough change for passengers to notice.

 

[route:oxford]

That might be why it wasn't mentioned in any of the publicity - it wasn't a big enough change for passengers to notice.

Clearly not.

I mentioned it to friends who commute daily and they also had noticed the swifter progress through the tunnel.

Good news, although having had a rake through the masses of documents relating E-G enhancements I've got no idea what the old and new speed limits are.

 

[najaB]

Clearly not.

I mentioned it to friends who commute daily and they also had noticed the swifter progress through the tunnel.

I suspect a that may be due to perception due to the smoother ride, rather than actually noticing the difference. I'm not sure what the speed limit is through the tunnel but using 65mph vs 60mph the difference is less than a second.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Good news, although having had a rake through the masses of documents relating E-G enhancements I've got no idea what the old and new speed limits are.

The 2009 SA shows that the 4 miles between Newbridge and Winchburgh Jns has limits of 80/90mph instead of the general 100mph limit of the line, with the tunnel itself being 80mph.
It's complicated by having differential limits for MU traffic over some sections.
So the class 170s come down from 100 to 90 to 80 (tunnel), then back to 90 and then 100, over the 4 miles, in each direction.

 

[najaB]

The 2009 SA shows that the 4 miles between Newbridge and Winchburgh Jns has limits of 80/90mph instead of the general 100mph limit of the line, with the tunnel itself being 80mph.
It's complicated by having differential limits for MU traffic over some sections.
So the class 170s come down from 100 to 90 to 80 (tunnel), then back to 90 and then 100, over the 4 miles, in each direction.

Assuming that the tunnel is now 100mph instead of 90mph for MUs, the difference would 0.8 seconds quicker.

 

[route:oxford]

Assuming that the tunnel is now 100mph instead of 90mph for MUs, the difference would 0.8 seconds quicker.

Ok. So on the legacy track passengers would have felt deceleration from 100mph prior to entering the tunnel with entry at 80mph (or 10mph after it had been raining heavily).

Now there is a swift entry at 100mph which explains the ear pressure.

Make sense.

 

[najaB]

Yeah, messed up the maths earlier but the idea is that it's not the transit through the tunnel that people are noticing is faster, it's the whole four mile stretch taking less time. Combined with the ride through the tunnel being smoother.

 

[Observer]

Has the speed limit through Winchburgh tunnel increased following the completion of improvement works?

First time in ages I've felt ear pressure on a Scotrail service.

Ear pressure was common at Winchburgh long before the works took place.

 

[47271]

I can't remember what happened westbound but there always used to be a very definite and noticeable application of power on the 170 at around three quarters of the way through the tunnel eastbound. It felt like it could be an increase from 80 to 100 now that I think about it.

 

[matchmaker]

Ear pressure was common at Winchburgh long before the works took place.

I always had to pop my ears at Winchburgh.

 

[PaulLothian]

Next time I am taking train into Edinburgh, will take my hillwalking GPS device with me to check speeds! Meant to do this yesterday evening but forgot...

 

[47271]

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/basic/STG/2015/08/27/1000

Interested to see two Glasgow departures leave Stirling side by side this morning (both at 0953, one delayed) here. Is this new with the electrification works - there's a lot of new track to the south of the station - or have I been missing something for years?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/basic/STG/2015/08/27/1000

Interested to see two Glasgow departures leave Stirling side by side this morning (both at 0953, one delayed) here. Is this new with the electrification works - there's a lot of new track to the south of the station - or have I been missing something for years?

The auto reporting system isn't terribly clever, so whilst it shows both trains left the station at the same time, all that actually means is that both trains triggered the auto reporting system at the same time.

What has happened is both trains have moved off but the second train (2N54) was then held at the next signal, quite possibly at the end of the platform and passed Larbert Jn, the next functional reporting point, at 1007.5, 4 down.

 

[Railsigns]

The remodelling of Stirling Middle Junction two years ago provided a new Up Passenger Loop to the south, making possible the simultaneous departure of two southbound services from Stirling station.

 

[47271]

The remodelling of Stirling Middle Junction two years ago provided a new Up Passenger Loop to the south, making possible the simultaneous departure of two southbound services from Stirling station.

That makes sense. I only asked because I was aboard 1T10 and was surprised to see the stopper run alongside us for some distance beyond the end of the station.

 

[matchmaker]

The remodelling of Stirling Middle Junction two years ago provided a new Up Passenger Loop to the south, making possible the simultaneous departure of two southbound services from Stirling station.

The new loop can't however be used by trains coming off the Perth lines.

 

[Alan Cook]

Ok. So on the legacy track passengers would have felt deceleration from 100mph prior to entering the tunnel with entry at 80mph (or 10mph after it had been raining heavily).

Now there is a swift entry at 100mph which explains the ear pressure.

Make sense.

Passed through this way, both directions.

It would appear that the speed limit is 90mph through the tunnel.