Scottish HLOS for CP6 (2019-24)

[InOban]

The advantage of using Low Level is that it distributes passengers across several stations all the way west to Partick (University) and Jordanhill. Not everyone is heading to the city centre, and it is greatly to the advantage of Glasgow as a potential location for a business HQ if the business area can be enlarged.

 

[clc]

I really fail to understand the obsession with diverting the Shotts trains (and just about anything else people can come up with) into the Low Levels? The Shotts expresses have done a brilliant job at linking Central to Edinburgh with a regular and usable fast service, and the slow services are slow enough. Why slow them down even further sending them into the bowels of the low level station? Unless, of course, you can come up with a viable alternative as to what the capacity in Central is going to be used for.
.

The answer to that question is: Glasgow-Edinburgh HSR, which will have a 4tph frequency.

 

[me123]

The advantage of using Low Level is that it distributes passengers across several stations all the way west to Partick (University) and Jordanhill. Not everyone is heading to the city centre, and it is greatly to the advantage of Glasgow as a potential location for a business HQ if the business area can be enlarged.

That's all very true, until you realise that there's no capacity through Partick, so running more trains through the low level will currently mean that everything is terminating in the city centre anyway. Maybe you get as far as Anderston before the train has to turn back, but to be honest you could walk to Anderston in a few minutes from the High Level anyway. The same could be said of Argyle Street station.

Without capacity at Partick (which isn't forthcoming), diverting things to Central Low Level only serves to either slow trains down or create capacity in the High Level, so unless you can justify for what you are creating capacity, I'm not keen on the idea of diverting everything.

I think we'd be much better off thinking big - small solutions like 4-tracking Hyndland (but not Partick) won't solve any problems. A much more expensive but practical solution like a North-South tunnel is what is really needed.

The answer to that question is: Glasgow-Edinburgh HSR, which will have a 4tph frequency.

Which is how many years down the line? It's good to be forward thinking about these things, but that's not a reason to divert the trains until such a project gets going. And besides, demand elsewhere will likely rise and almost certainly need more paths into Greater Glasgow, so your 4tph into Central will I reckon get taken up by suburban services before the HSR gets going.

Diverting things to the low level doesn't really solve the overall problem of capacity - it just inconveniences people and shifts problems elsewhere.

 

[clc]

Build a link from Cardonald to Jordanhill with station at QE Hospital (this was a STPR option) and divert some Ayrshire/Inverclyde services that way to link up with the Shotts/Lanark/extra A2B services. That would remove 10tph from Central High Level and give direct connections to several major employment sites. Much cheaper than building a north south tunnel though admittedly not as beneficial.

 

[Altnabreac]

Which is how many years down the line? It's good to be forward thinking about these things, but that's not a reason to divert the trains until such a project gets going. And besides, demand elsewhere will likely rise and almost certainly need more paths into Greater Glasgow, so your 4tph into Central will I reckon get taken up by suburban services before the HSR gets going.

Diverting things to the low level doesn't really solve the overall problem of capacity - it just inconveniences people and shifts problems elsewhere.

As well as Glasgow - Edinburgh HSR there are a number of other potential services looking for space at Glasgow Central over the next few years.

The Scotland Route Study appendix for 2043 services has:

4tph to East Kilbride (increase of 2tph)
3tph to Kilmarnock (increase of 1tph)
2tph to Wemyss Bay (increase of 1tph)
2tph to Largs (increase of 1tph)
1tph to Kilwinning (increase of 1tph)
4tph to Neilston (increase of 2tph)
4tph to Newton (increase of 2tph)

Throw in 4tph tram train to Glasgow Airport and 4tph HSR and you are looking at an additional 18tph into the High Level station.

Now you can't create all of that capacity by diverting to low level and not all of it is needed straight away anyway but it seems at least plausible that some of those 18tph increase will be needed in the next 5 years (EK?) and if the long term plan is needed to be a larger scale creation of capacity it may make sense in the short term to just divert something like the slow Shotts services to LL for a few years.

 

[Southsider]

I really don't know enough about it so this may not be at all viable but my understanding from the above is that there are insufficient turn back options for trains travelling East to west before the Partick / Hyndland bottleneck. My recollection is that the line to Botanic gardens at the top of Byres road branched off in the Stobcross tunnel and is still intact, beyond to Kirklee is built on. Could this not provide a turn back and a relatively low cost option to a busy part of the west end?

 

[gsnedders]

I really don't know enough about it so this may not be at all viable but my understanding from the above is that there are insufficient turn back options for trains travelling East to west before the Partick / Hyndland bottleneck. My recollection is that the line to Botanic gardens at the top of Byres road branched off in the Stobcross tunnel and is still intact, beyond to Kirklee is built on. Could this not provide a turn back and a relatively low cost option to a busy part of the west end?

You'd have to introduce conflicting movements at Exhibition Centre: you'd have to use the current eastbound platform to access the tunnel (or potentially reintroduce a new branch-only platform to the north of the existing eastbound platform, though you'd still have conflicting movements by the eastern end of the station for westbound services, and you'd have to replace all the existing OHLE for that platform), so you probably wouldn't gain much in way of capacity.

 

[FS-2-11]

The Scotland Route Study appendix for 2043 services has:
...
4tph to Newton (increase of 2tph)

What we had before until I think the mid/late 1980s: two via Queen's Park and two via Maxwell Park which, along with two Cathcart Circle services per hour in each direction, meant 4tph on the western side of the Circle.

 

[och aye]

In terms of new/reintroduced lines for CP6, here's a list of what I'd like to see the following if the money is available:

• Borders Railway: extention to Hawick
• Levenmouth: reintroduction of line to Leven
• Electrification to Stirling/Alloa
• New stations: Reston, East Linton, Inverness Airport/Dalcross

I've probably missed a few stations. I believe that most of what I've mentioned is supposed to happen during this period, so fingers crossed they get the final seal of approval from Transport Scotland.

If there's any scope for future studies during this period looking ahead to CP7, I'd like to see ones for:

• Ellon/Peterhead & Fraserburgh route
• Midlothian: Penicuik, Straiton, Loanhead etc.
• St Andrews

Again, I'm probably missing a few worthy schemes, but I'm sure that would be enough to keep TS busy and productive.

 

[Clansman]

In terms of new/reintroduced lines for CP6, here's a list of what I'd like to see the following if the money is available:

• Electrification to Stirling/Alloa
• Inverness Airport/Dalcross

Already happening. Due to be completed in 2018-2019.

 

[och aye]

Already happening. Due to be completed in 2018-2019.

Cool.

In that case, lets hope there's enough money for Levenmouth and Hawick and they can do some of the other projects mentioned for CP6 instead then.

 

[Clansman]

Cool.

In that case, lets hope there's enough money for Levenmouth and Hawick and they can do some of the other projects mentioned for CP6 instead then.

St. Andrews and Levenmouth should be top of the list for CP7, for sure.

As for CP6, I think the following are all realistic, and an absolute must:

Perth
Complete redevelopment of the station
Moncrieffe tunnel lowered to support electrification works
Removal of all the track on southbound approach and completely relayed to allow a much quicker approach/departure from the station to the tunnel
Depot built next to the newly relayed track at the Friarton
Rebuilding of the rail bridge and doubling of the line between Perth and Barnhill
Electrification clearance preparations throughout - for potential electrification in CP7
Line clearance works between Hilton Jn and Newburgh for potential dueling in CP7

Dundee
Redevelopment of station once the new building is completed
Electrification clearance preparations throughout, southbound to Perth - for potential electrification in CP7.

Glasgow & Strathclyde
Completion of Queen Street Redevelopment
Redevelopment of Motherwell station
Electrification of East Kilbride line
Electrification of Maryhill line

Montrose & Usan
Relaying of the track between Usan and Montrose to allow greater speeds and smoother running
Dueling of the single track section between Usan and Montrose and the rebuilding of the rail bridge on approach to the latter

Highland Mainline
Platforms at Dunkeld & Birnham relayed to appropriate height
Platform 2 at Kingussie relayed to appropriate height
Platforms at Dalwhinnie relayed to appropriate height

Far North Line
Construction of a passing loop at Lentran

New Stations
Reston
East Linton

 

[clc]

St. Andrews and Levenmouth should be top of the list for CP7, for sure.

As for CP6, I think the following are all realistic, and an absolute must:

Perth
Complete redevelopment of the station
Moncrieffe tunnel lowered to support electrification works
Removal of all the track on southbound approach and completely relayed to allow a much quicker approach/departure from the station to the tunnel
Depot built next to the newly relayed track at the Friarton
Rebuilding of the rail bridge and doubling of the line between Perth and Barnhill
Electrification clearance preparations throughout - for potential electrification in CP7
Line clearance works between Hilton Jn and Newburgh for potential dueling in CP7

Dundee
Redevelopment of station once the new building is completed
Electrification clearance preparations throughout, southbound to Perth - for potential electrification in CP7.

Glasgow & Strathclyde
Completion of Queen Street Redevelopment
Redevelopment of Motherwell station
Electrification of East Kilbride line
Electrification of Maryhill line

Montrose & Usan
Relaying of the track between Usan and Montrose to allow greater speeds and smoother running
Dueling of the single track section between Usan and Montrose and the rebuilding of the rail bridge on approach to the latter

Highland Mainline
Platforms at Dunkeld & Birnham relayed to appropriate height
Platform 2 at Kingussie relayed to appropriate height
Platforms at Dalwhinnie relayed to appropriate height

Far North Line
Construction of a passing loop at Lentran

New Stations
Reston
East Linton

Nothing for Edinburgh? The east coast establishment won't be amused!

 

[Highland37]

Good list Clansman!

What about more double track sections on the HML and gauge clearance for larger containers on freight trains? I am really concerned that the A9 is going to kill freight north of Perth.

What is the issue with the track south of Perth Station?

 

[och aye]

Nothing for Edinburgh? The east coast establishment won't be amused!

Jokes aside, what could be realistically be done (needed?) for the East coast ahead of other projects across the country?

Reopen Gullane perhaps? - OK, I know I said jokes aside.

 

[clc]

Jokes aside, what could be realistically be done (needed?) for the East coast ahead of other projects across the country?

Reopen Gullane perhaps? - OK, I know I said jokes aside.

The Scottish Govt tends to ensure that Glasgow and Edinburgh receive similar levels of transport infrastructure investment. In recent years Glasgow has had new motorways, electrification of suburban lines and funding for the subway upgrade, while in Edinburgh there's been FRC, Borders Rail, Edinburgh Gateway and Haymarket.

Worthy Edinburgh projects in CP6 would be Dalmeny Chord for improved access to Edinburgh Airport and the Edinburgh Suburban Enhancement Programme.

 

[Carntyne]

There's no danger that the Borders should be getting extended when there are still a couple of route looking to be reopened at all. More doubling if anything.

 

[Mordac]

Jokes aside, what could be realistically be done (needed?) for the East coast ahead of other projects across the country?

Reopen Gullane perhaps? - OK, I know I said jokes aside.

Four track the approach to Waverley, new platform at Dunbar to eliminate trains having to go on the wrong line to call there. Remodelling of Carstairs junction so Edinburgh bound trains don't have to slow to a crawl. Should I go on? I can think of a few other schemes given enough time..

 

[Carntyne]

Four track the approach to Waverley, new platform at Dunbar to eliminate trains having to go on the wrong line to call there. Remodelling of Carstairs junction so Edinburgh bound trains don't have to slow to a crawl. Should I go on? I can think of a few other schemes given enough time..

Dunbar and Carstairs are already in the plan. Electrification of the sub is to provide a diversionary route so the approach can be sorted too I thought?

 

[Mordac]

Well IMO the most important thing to do would be to build a high speed by-pass of the WCML from Carstairs to Gretna. But maybe that'll have to wait for CP7, to link up better with HS2. That would of course benefit both coasts.

As for what else could be done on the East Coast, there's EARL, the Dalmeny Chord, electrifying and dualling the borders line... Not saying all of this is wise use of money at the moment, btw.

 

[Clansman]

Good list Clansman!
What is the issue with the track south of Perth Station?

The track south of the station on the approach to the Moncrieffe tunnel is mainly old carriage sidings. The approach used to be quad back in the day, but now it's only duelled most of the way - resulting in all services travelling South having to run at reduced speed due to the congested junction section under St. Leonards Bridge.

On the whole the entire track on that stretch is just remnants of a steam age layout which needs ripping up and starting again to ensure greater speeds, and also the creation of the new stabling depot at the Friarton by the time the wires are ready to come North of Dunblane. In the next 5 years, these works are pretty much inevitable.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Four track the approach to Waverley, new platform at Dunbar to eliminate trains having to go on the wrong line to call there. Remodelling of Carstairs junction so Edinburgh bound trains don't have to slow to a crawl. Should I go on? I can think of a few other schemes given enough time..

There are plans to four-track Prestonpans to Drem. This is vital for future capacity improvements on the ECML stoppers as they're already running as six car and their frequency is much too low for the possible demand.

 

[MarkRedon]

There's a very well written argument for the Levenmouth reopening in today's Scotsman. The article has been written by Allen Armstrong, who is Secretary of the Levenmouth Rail Campaign.

Armstrong notes that:

Part of the problem has been the inability of the authorities to see that this is not simply a transport issue and doesn’t just impact on Levenmouth. This is the single transformational development that would help regenerate an area battered by economic and social storms for four decades. It matches completely the Scottish Government’s demands for “inclusive growth” and a Fairer Scotland. And in terms of geography it would help provide access for employment and cheaper housing costs for the overheated west side of Edinburgh, particularly when the City Deal takes effect.

Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/transp...-of-rail-depends-on-levenmouth-line-1-4433211

 

[clc]

There's a very well written argument for the Levenmouth reopening in today's Scotsman. The article has been written by Allen Armstrong, who is Secretary of the Levenmouth Rail Campaign.

Armstrong notes that:

Read more at: http://www.scotsman.com/news/transp...-of-rail-depends-on-levenmouth-line-1-4433211

It's probably now a £100m scheme and with so many other important projects competing for funding plus the work carried forward from CP5 it's hard to see it getting the go ahead in CP6. Maybe in CP7.

 

[najaB]

It's probably now a £100m scheme...

I agree it's a lot more expensive than it would've been if it had been done ten years ago, but I need to be convinced that rehabilitating five miles of extant track will cost a third as much as the thirty-five mile long Borders Railway.

 

[clc]

I agree it's a lot more expensive than it would've been if it had been done ten years ago, but I need to be convinced that rehabilitating five miles of extant track will cost a third as much as the thirty-five mile long Borders Railway.

The updated STAG appraisal put the capital cost at £91.1M at 2015 prices - see page 15:

http://www.lmrc-action.org.uk/webs/397/documents/LevenmouthSTAGExecutiveSummaryFinal.pdf

 

[najaB]

The updated STAG appraisal put the capital cost at £91.1M at 2015 prices...

I know. I just don't believe it. Either the Borders Railway was massively over budget and they hid the overruns or Levenmouth reinstatement is being platinum plated. I mean, £20M a mile for rehabilitating an extant railway?!

 

[Senex]

Dunbar and Carstairs are already in the plan. Electrification of the sub is to provide a diversionary route so the approach can be sorted too I thought?

But does the Carstairs plan envisage doing the job properly by going back to the old alignment, or is it to be a half-baked "improvement" on the present alignment that will still leave a pretty low-speed junction?

 

[InOban]

Do you mean the old embankment you can see diverging to the south some distance before Carstairs? When was that abandoned?

 

[najaB]

Do you mean the old embankment you can see diverging to the south some distance before Carstairs? When was that abandoned?

A bit of Googling suggests it was abandoned as early as 1860 - http://www.scottish-places.info/features/featurefirst17515.html