Expansions for Scotland's rail network proposed

[Altnabreac]

While of course this doesn't win any votes, the most important benefit to Hawick-Carlisle that I can see is taking freight out of the WCML and adding an alternate route to Edinburgh. Would have been very useful during #Lamington.

High Speed Rail Scotland is much more likely to be fulfilling this role in future, although by the reverse method of leaving WCML to freight by removing all passenger trains.

 

[edwin_m]

A new route to Edinburgh would be of little use to freight. What's left of the coal traffic is concentrated to the west, intermodal and traffic going further north is generally routed to or via Mossend and to run these via Edinburgh would mean having to use one of the busy E&G routes.

 

[TheKnightWho]

There is only one problem with Hawick - Carlisle.

Lets assume that the potential swayed voters are those who might use the service. Given Hawick - Carlisle will be used by almost nobody then it will generate almost no political benefit as hardly anyone will use it.

Now this isn't quite true as voters like to see investment in "their area" even if they don't use said facilities. Research shows investment in schools in an area is popular even with those who don't have kids etc.

But investing in a railway that turns out to be virtually empty and loss making may actually be counterproductive. I suspect we'll see a STAG appraisal funded which will identify strong potential for Tweedbank - Hawick and point out the fundamental flaws with Hawick - Carlisle business case.

I'm not so sure - I do think any line that linked the two would need to use a new alignment that went via Longtown and Langholm at the Carlisle end, which together would net you 5,300 people. It's the 23 miles from Hawick to Langholm that's the issue.

 

[Altnabreac]

I'm not so sure - I do think any line that linked the two would need to use a new alignment that went via Longtown and Langholm at the Carlisle end, which together would net you 5,300 people. It's the 23 miles from Hawick to Langholm that's the issue.

Longtown is too close to Carlisle. Langholm too far from the line.

There is no intermediate population business case.

It can only be based on Borders - England demand which is extremely unlikely to generate enough passengers to even cover operating costs never mind half a billion to reopen it.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Longtown is too close to Carlisle. Langholm too far from the line.

There is no intermediate population business case.

It can only be based on Borders - England demand which is extremely unlikely to generate enough passengers to even cover operating costs never mind half a billion to reopen it.

Reopening does not mean the exact alignment.

 

[Altnabreac]

Reopening does not mean the exact alignment.

OK. So you are now proposing 21 miles of brand new alignment following a narrow, steep sided river valley, rising steeply to 260m (no derogations here as you want to justify the business case by diverting freight traffic), crossing the Newcastleton Hills and River Tweed Sites of Special Scientific Interest and either demolishing a large swathe of central Langholm (or bypassing the town through an expensive tunnel with an out of town station) in order to serve a population of 2000 people.

There is optimism and there is insanity. Reopening the Waverley line from Hawick to Carlisle will have a bad business case. Building a new line from Hawick to Langholm will have a ridiculously bad business case.

 

[TheKnightWho]

OK. So you are now proposing 21 miles of brand new alignment following a narrow, steep sided river valley, rising steeply to 260m (no derogations here as you want to justify the business case by diverting freight traffic), crossing the Newcastleton Hills and River Tweed Sites of Special Scientific Interest and either demolishing a large swathe of central Langholm (or bypassing the town through an expensive tunnel with an out of town station) in order to serve a population of 2000 people.

There is optimism and there is insanity. Reopening the Waverley line from Hawick to Carlisle will have a bad business case. Building a new line from Hawick to Langholm will have a ridiculously bad business case.

I think you overestimate the use of the old alignment. I'd also disagree that following the A7 would be enormously expensive - I can identify one place where there would probably be a need for a tunnel, but we also have to take into account the fact that steep gradients are not the anathema to a good railway that they used to be. If a sub-60 time to Carlisle and a sub-75 time to Edinburgh could be achieved for Hawick, I really can see the line getting some good use. Particularly if some VTWC trains use the route: Hawick, Galashiels and Eskbank would all have potential to be served.

The idea that half of Langholm would have to be demolished just isn't the case, either.

 

[Mordac]

High Speed Rail Scotland is much more likely to be fulfilling this role in future, although by the reverse method of leaving WCML to freight by removing all passenger trains.

All of them, even the Lockerbie ones?

 

[Altnabreac]

All of them, even the Lockerbie ones?

Almost certainly! For interesting constitutional reasons the initial phase is likely to rejoin the WCML north of Lockerbie.

A Cross Border high speed line would need to be a Westminster Hybrid Bill (probably with a Sewell motion at Holyrood as well). Westminster time for bills is limited and it's unlikely there would be the appetite for another HS bill in the medium term.

However lines wholly within and between Scottish stations can be the subject of only a Holyrood bill. Thus the initial stages of a WCML based High Speed line would be likely to be consented in Scotland and would have to have a junction north of Lockerbie but before the climb to Beattock commences.

This all assumes the WCML route is the one chosen in the consultation later this year but I'm fairly confident it will be.

 

[Altnabreac]

The new Cabinet Secretary for the Rural Economy and Connectivity will include the Transport brief amongst their responsibilities.

With Fergus Ewing MSP (representing Inverness & Nairn) promoted to this new position it seems likely to be good news for Highland Main Line improvements, Aberdeen - Inverness upgrade, Dalcross station reopening and the Lentran Loop.

On the other hand I wouldn't expect to see any money diverted to rail schemes from the A9 or A96 dualling programmes anytime soon.

Transport Minister (the more junior position) is yet to be announced but previous Transport Minister Derek Mackay has been promoted to Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Constitution so it will definitely be a new face.

 

[backontrack]

The new Cabinet Secretary for the Rural Economy and Connectivity will include the Transport brief amongst their responsibilities.

With Fergus Ewing MSP (representing Inverness & Nairn) promoted to this new position it seems likely to be good news for Highland Main Line improvements, Aberdeen - Inverness upgrade, Dalcross station reopening and the Lentran Loop.

On the other hand I wouldn't expect to see any money diverted to rail schemes from the A9 or A96 dualling programmes anytime soon.

Transport Minister (the more junior position) is yet to be announced but previous Transport Minister Derek Mackay has been promoted to Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Constitution so it will definitely be a new face.

Great news! Derek Mackay never did seem to care about the Lentran Long Loop®, he only regarded it as an 'interesting' proposal.

 

[clc]

Humza Yousaf is the new transport minister. I've no idea what his priorities might be.

 

[backontrack]

Humza Yousaf is the new transport minister. I've no idea what his priorities might be.

Not so promising...

 

[clc]

Not so promising...

How come?

 

[backontrack]

How come?

A Glasgow MSP.

 

[Altnabreac]

Humza Yousaf is the new transport minister. I've no idea what his priorities might be.

EK / Barrhead electrification would probably be more up his street

I suspected the job would go to Humza. Transport Minister seems to be seen as a post for up and coming talent and is fairly self sufficient from the Cabinet Secretary. He's someone tipped for the top who could be a future First Minister.

I suspect Fergus Ewing will be tasked with concentrating on the Farming bit of the brief although he'll make sure to get involved with anything on the A9 and A96.

Humza may be more the face of central belt rail developments and High Speed Rail.

 

[me123]

A Glasgow MSP.

And what's wrong with Glaswegians?

 

[backontrack]

I was hoping for someone more northerly...

 

[Class 170101]

And what's wrong with Glaswegians?

Its probably the same (perceived) mentality as in England. All Scottish transport money will be spent in the Central Belt just as all English transport money is spent in London.

 

[Altnabreac]

Its probably the same (perceived) mentality as in England. All Scottish transport money will be spent in the Central Belt just as all English transport money is spent in London.

Very true, A9, A96 and Aberdeen Bypass are all in the central belt...

Whinging teuchters.

 

[clc]

I was hoping for someone more northerly...

The Scottish Government's Infrastructure Plan for the next 10-15 years suggests that the north will be getting a high share of transport investment:

Aberdeen - Inverness improvements - £250m - £500m.
Highland Main Line - £200m - £600m.
Aberdeen - Central Belt - Phase 1 - £100m - £250m; Phase 2 - £100m - £250m; additional freight improvements - £50m - £100m.
A9 Dualling - £3 billion
A96 Dualling - £3 billion
A82 Improvements - £250m - £500m


You could almost say it's going to be a golden era of transport investment for the north, which will likely receive more spending per head of population than the Central Belt over the period.

 

[cf111]

The Scottish Government's Infrastructure Plan for the next 10-15 years suggests that the north will be getting a high share of transport investment:

Aberdeen - Inverness improvements - £250m - £500m.
Highland Main Line - £200m - £450m.
Aberdeen - Central Belt - Phase 1 - £100m - £250m; Phase 2 - £100m - £250m; additional freight improvements - £50m - £100m.
A9 Dualling - £3 billion
A96 Dualling - £3 billion
A82 Improvements - £200m

You could almost say it's going to be a golden era of transport investment for the north, which will likely receive more spending per head of population than the Central Belt over the period.

Everything south of the Black Isle is "the south" to me

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The Scottish Government's Infrastructure Plan for the next 10-15 years suggests that the north will be getting a high share of transport investment:

Aberdeen - Inverness improvements - £250m - £500m.
Highland Main Line - £200m - £600m.
Aberdeen - Central Belt - Phase 1 - £100m - £250m; Phase 2 - £100m - £250m; additional freight improvements - £50m - £100m.
A9 Dualling - £3 billion
A96 Dualling - £3 billion
A82 Improvements - £250m - £500m


You could almost say it's going to be a golden era of transport investment for the north, which will likely receive more spending per head of population than the Central Belt over the period.

I don't dispute that those figures are high and do appear to reflect a high level of overall transport investment. However, the disparity between spending on roads and spending on rail is obvious. On those figures about 80% of spending will be on roads. But we know that spending on road capacity usually does far more long term harm than good: The good caused by the speed increases and reduced congestion in the roads that are being improved almost always gets outweighed by the resultant increased congestion, slower speeds, and less reliable journeys on all the feeder roads caused by the induced traffic, even before you start thinking about the pollution and environmental issues. I therefore don't think 'golden era for transport investment' is a particularly apt description for what's likely to happen.

 

[Altnabreac]

I don't dispute that those figures are high and do appear to reflect a high level of overall transport investment. However, the disparity between spending on roads and spending on rail is obvious. On those figures about 80% of spending will be on roads. But we know that spending on road capacity usually does far more long term harm than good: The good caused by the speed increases and reduced congestion in the roads that are being improved almost always gets outweighed by the resultant increased congestion, slower speeds, and less reliable journeys on all the feeder roads caused by the induced traffic, even before you start thinking about the pollution and environmental issues. I therefore don't think 'golden era for transport investment' is a particularly apt description for what's likely to happen.

golden era of transport investment for the NORTH

You missed the point clc was making. Whether you agree with the proposed mix of investment between rail and road is irrelevant, the point was that there is a high level of transport investment planned in the north of Scotland over the next 5-10 years compared to that in the central belt.

Personally I'd like to see more investment in rail and especially the Inverkeithing - Halbeath direct route built and extended to Perth / St Madoes.

But I think it is unarguable that the north of Scotland is doing well in investment per head of population terms with the proposed schemes. Arguably it hasn't done as well in the past so that may be a reasonable adjustment.

 

[sng7]

Although I agree more rail spending is good if you look at that list one of the largest projects is the A9 dualling which at the end of the day will improve safety and save lives so whilst Rail Investment is good making the A9 safer is more important in my opinion.

 

[Steveman]

Although I agree more rail spending is good if you look at that list one of the largest projects is the A9 dualling which at the end of the day will improve safety and save lives so whilst Rail Investment is good making the A9 safer is more important in my opinion.

The A9 deserves every penny spent on it.

 

[edwin_m]

I don't dispute that those figures are high and do appear to reflect a high level of overall transport investment. However, the disparity between spending on roads and spending on rail is obvious. On those figures about 80% of spending will be on roads. But we know that spending on road capacity usually does far more long term harm than good: The good caused by the speed increases and reduced congestion in the roads that are being improved almost always gets outweighed by the resultant increased congestion, slower speeds, and less reliable journeys on all the feeder roads caused by the induced traffic, even before you start thinking about the pollution and environmental issues. I therefore don't think 'golden era for transport investment' is a particularly apt description for what's likely to happen.

This becomes less and less true the lower the population density. So while I'd agree for London and probably also the Central Belt, it's much more questionable for the North.

 

[sprinterguy]

The A9 deserves every penny spent on it.

Agreed. I'm unfamiliar with the A96, but certainly the A82 and A9 have been crying out for this level of investment for years. The supposedly "temporary" traffic lights at Pulpit Rock on the A82 which endured for thirty five years were a long standing joke and thankfully have now been removed and the road widened as part of these improvement works. Further improvements to the tedious, fiddly alignment along the shores of Loch Lomond between Tarbert and Inverarnan will be very welcome.

These are major arterial routes which are surely far more relevant to a far greater number of users than the sparse railway network north of the central belt, particularly for freight hauliers in an area where rail freight is virtually non-existent.

(Apologies, I know this post isn't really rail related)

 

[47271]

The A9 deserves every penny spent on it.

Oh yes, I live very close to it and I know how badly it needs to be improved. It's not just outright end to end speed and safety on the open road, crucial though they are. 10-15 minutes in a huge queue waiting to make a right turn on to it in the summer is what tests my patience to the limit, no wonder people go and have accidents...

 

[och aye]

It appears Keith Brown is still going to be calling the shots as Infrastructure is still in his brief.