Scotrail Franchise - Abellio

[Blindtraveler]

I always thought opening borders without a dedicated fleat of new units was daft, and whilst it ran over budget and got scaled back not wiring it was equally silly.

 

[Clansman]

I always thought opening borders without a dedicated fleat of new units was daft, and whilst it ran over budget and got scaled back not wiring it was equally silly.

Not duelling and electrifying the line killed the long term financial and operational benefits of the line. I wasn't around when it was axed, nor have I travelled on it since it reopened, but every time I see a packed Tweedbank bound 158 at Waverley with passengers having to wait for the next service - then I know commuters on this line are still suffering.

It's appalling how these opportunities weren't even planned!

 

[WatcherZero]

Lot higher spec was planned but Transport Scotland wanted it to be built private sector led with private finance not by NR on what they considered should be an adequate (fixed) budget of £230m, shopped around but couldn't find any company willing to build it within that cost envelope so had to go back to NR who said yes we can do it (for £294) but we are going to have to despec it to keep it within that very tight budget. Essentially you can say it came down to a choice between breaking their budget target and doing it well or delivering a sub standard product within budget.

To be fair its not too hard to see why TS were so keen to keep it to their initial budget and not let costs creep, the initial business case assessment had come in at a rather weak 1:1 however that relied on some new housing estates being built, the final BCR came in at a pathetic 0.5:1 or for every pound spent they expected to generate benefits of 50p. In the event the terminus was wildly more popular than predicted though most of the other stations matched or performed poorly against projections. This could suggest either they wildly underestimated tourist potential or the early years are going to be a big blip from short term enthusiast demand, I understand after the first year demand has tailed off some.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Tell me about it!

And appologies to whoever I'll upset here but the Scottish Govd really dont seam all that good at new projects, the proof being above and also in the seamingly endless delays to the Forth Crossing!

 

[najaB]

...and also in the seamingly endless delays to the Forth Crossing!

I only remember one major slip to the schedule and that was driven by weather.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Nasty roomer just now that its opening has been delayed again.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Nasty roomer just now that its opening has been delayed again.

It almost certainly has, but this is again due to adverse weather conditions. A crane that should have taken 15 days to dismantle has taken more like two months because work has to stop any time the wind picks up.

No government could make the bridge continue on schedule with these conditions due to modern H&S laws. The only solution is to move the opening date artificially forward and then you've got the possibility of it opening ahead of schedule. Ultimately it doesn't make a difference to users of the bridge; it'll be ready only when the contractor can finish it.

 

[najaB]

Nasty roomer just now that its opening has been delayed again.

Ah, I see. That would be a shame. Is it the bridge itself or the connecting road network? I only ask because the last time I travelled that way the bridge looked largely complete.

 

[mcmad]

Not convinced by the claims of weather delay. There are still a lot of works ongoing on the Fife side approach roads that would never be ready for a May opening so its more smoke and mirrors.

 

[najaB]

Not convinced by the claims of weather delay.

There's no doubt that time was lost due to poor weather - we did have an atypical run of storms over the last year and a bit. If they were responsible for all of the delay is debatable however. As you pointed out, progress on the road network has seemed glacial at times.

 

[JohnR]

Not convinced by the claims of weather delay. There are still a lot of works ongoing on the Fife side approach roads that would never be ready for a May opening so its more smoke and mirrors.

I'm sure no one could have predicted that it sometimes gets a bit windy in the Firth of Forth. Its never happened before...

 

[Blindtraveler]

And we have had a pritty tame winter this year really, Im with the smoke and mirrors brigade here, shambolically broken mirrors at that!

 

[me123]

A large crane in the middle of the Firth of Forth is probably much more sensitive to strong winds than most of us. It could be a light gust to you walking down Princes Street, but to a crane lifting heavy pieces of metal to a significant height in the middle of the Firth of Forth, the effects are likely to be much more severe.

Then again, Scotland's not exactly known for its temperate climate so maybe the timescale was a bit optimistic.

 

[Carlisle]

And we have had a pritty tame winter this year really, Im with the smoke and mirrors brigade here, shambolically broken mirrors at that!

True, also work on reopening the northern section of the Settle line was actually ahead of schedule due to the quiet, mild winter

 

[Agent_c]

It almost certainly has, but this is again due to adverse weather conditions. A crane that should have taken 15 days to dismantle has taken more like two months because work has to stop any time the wind picks up.

No government could make the bridge continue on schedule with these conditions due to modern H&S laws. The only solution is to move the opening date artificially forward and then you've got the possibility of it opening ahead of schedule. Ultimately it doesn't make a difference to users of the bridge; it'll be ready only when the contractor can finish it.

The people writing the schedule didn't realise Scotland is Windy?

 

[jagardner1984]

Serious question re Borders rail and usage predictions

In terms of Cost Benefit Analysis, has there ever been a project of reopening a station or line where usage has NOT significantly exceeded expectations ?

I feel like I read quite a lot about how X or Y is unaffordable because it would reduce the Cost / Benefit too much, and also that yet again usage has massively exceeded expectations and there was now an issue of overcrowding or insufficient capacity on a project only finished a few years ago.

Surely we should be building capacity for at least the next 10-15 years of demand, rather than virtually immediately be having to rework infrastructure on a now live railway. The comparative costs for doing so are, I would assume, considerably higher.

Is there a certain logic, when feeding into large communities with limited or no rail service, that, "If we build it, they will come ..." ?

 

[Mordac]

Serious question re Borders rail and usage predictions

In terms of Cost Benefit Analysis, has there ever been a project of reopening a station or line where usage has NOT significantly exceeded expectations ?

I feel like I read quite a lot about how X or Y is unaffordable because it would reduce the Cost / Benefit too much, and also that yet again usage has massively exceeded expectations and there was now an issue of overcrowding or insufficient capacity on a project only finished a few years ago.

Surely we should be building capacity for at least the next 10-15 years of demand, rather than virtually immediately be having to rework infrastructure on a now live railway. The comparative costs for doing so are, I would assume, considerably higher.

Is there a certain logic, when feeding into large communities with limited or no rail service, that, "If we build it, they will come ..." ?

There was a feature about this on Today's Railways a few months ago. I'll see if I can find it and update later.

 

[Altnabreac]

Serious question re Borders rail and usage predictions

In terms of Cost Benefit Analysis, has there ever been a project of reopening a station or line where usage has NOT significantly exceeded expectations ?

I feel like I read quite a lot about how X or Y is unaffordable because it would reduce the Cost / Benefit too much, and also that yet again usage has massively exceeded expectations and there was now an issue of overcrowding or insufficient capacity on a project only finished a few years ago.

Surely we should be building capacity for at least the next 10-15 years of demand, rather than virtually immediately be having to rework infrastructure on a now live railway. The comparative costs for doing so are, I would assume, considerably higher.

Is there a certain logic, when feeding into large communities with limited or no rail service, that, "If we build it, they will come ..." ?

Usage of Borders Rail in Midlothian has been lower than expected for one. Its only really Tweedbank that has greatly exceeded predicted numbers.

Equally if you look at the Larkhall opening the figures were slightly above predicted for Larkhall but well below predicted for Chatelherault and Cherryton.

There was a good piece of work done by Transport Scotland a few years ago:
http://www.transport.gov.scot/research/j372238-00.htm

Overall there is a lot of uncertainty in this sort of modelling and externalities such as house building rates, bus price competition, leisure usage etc can greatly impact on your assumptions.

Borders Rail is able to accommodate a high level of growth within the existing infrastructure provision by lengthening services once more DMU units become available. Most services are 2 cars long with some 4 car peak services. Platforms are 6 cars in length and could be extended to 8 car lengths for much less money than it would cost to provide sufficient track capacity for a 4tph service.

So there is perfectly adequate infrastructure for Borders Rail already and the likely enhancements would be in order:

1. Train lengthening to 6 car services
2. Improvements to Portobello junction and Brunstane double tracking / new platform (not on the new section)
3. Platform extensions to allow 8 car services
4. New turnback in Midlothian to allow 2tph Midlothian service as well as 2tph Borders semi fast service

None of those interventions need any more double track provision on the newly constructed section of line but between them would greatly increase the capacity of the line. So those saying extra double track should have been built "just in case" would be better to wait for simpler interventions such as these to be complete.

Equally extension southwards to Hawick would not involve any more capacity being needed on the existing section so can still be delivered within that requirement.

 

[Carntyne]

If it ran as a three or six car railway, with more reliable stock then the line would be fine. It's not that busy.

 

[najaB]

The people writing the schedule didn't realise Scotland is Windy?

Of course they did. But it's next to impossible to accurately account for the correct number of days in the schedule.

Pad the schedule too much and you end up with workers sitting idle while waiting for materials/items with long lead times. Don't put enough padding in and you end up with overruns.

While this winter was mild, the previous couple have been anything but.

 

[Marklund]

Of course they did. But it's next to impossible to accurately account for the correct number of days in the schedule.

When any politician makes claims and trumpets they've delivered on time and in budget, they have to take the flack when it's not.

All I'm hearing is excuses. You should be standing as a candidate

 

[Chrism20]

I live on the waterfront in Edinburgh and can see the bridges from my living room.

We haven't had a sustained period of bad winter weather in Edinburgh in years. There have been the odd day or two at a time but there has been nothing sustained.

Also wasn't the existing bridge reopening brought forward last winter due to favourable weather which meant the padding that had been put into the schedule wasn't needed?

 

[Blindtraveler]

Exactly!

Its my fault partly but I fear this has gone a little OT, shall we return to another Scottish Govd disaster, i.e the current Scotfail?

 

[cf111]

To be honest I think ScotRail are doing OK all things considered. I haven't noticed a massive amount of train failures or anything like that this year so far, an improvement on 2016 where things seemed quite patchy. I would say that the trains are noticeably dirtier inside however. Most of my travel is Inverness to Aberdeen/Edinburgh/Thurso.

The 158 refurbishment, now that they seem to have fixed the issue with the power sockets, is very welcome.

 

[InOban]

Re predicted vs actual traffic. Anyone know the predicted/actual traffic at Edinburgh Gateway?

 

[Carntyne]

, i.e the current Scotfail?

What "Scotfail"? Melodramatic nonsense.

 

[Blindtraveler]

So nobody is allowed an opinion? I personally think its a mess but far be it from me or anyone to chritisize?????????

Re predicted vs actual traffic. Anyone know the predicted/actual traffic at Edinburgh Gateway?

Iv only visited once and unlikely to do so again and that was on a Sunday but I think theres less users than we were told would use it and anyone else Iv spoken to says its always quiet when they pass through but maybe it will pic up? The fact that you could walk to the airport from there as aposed to taking the tram maybe doesnt help but I awate the first quarter numbers with interest.

 

[InOban]

Quite a long walk!

 

[Altnabreac]

Re predicted vs actual traffic. Anyone know the predicted/actual traffic at Edinburgh Gateway?

I suspect it will be quite low levels of traffic for a few years. It's real value comes in opening up access to the International Business Gateway development area and providing a Glasgow _ Edinburgh Airport link once Dalmeny Chord opens.

 

[mcmad]

Has Dalmeny chord been re-announced?