Expansions for Scotland's rail network proposed

[mcmad]

I've not seen any detail of how the Leven branch would fit into the timetable. Theres little layover time at Thornton for the current Fife Circle trains to allow the existing clockface timetable to remain without additional units and increased dwell times somewhere en route, not to mention the increased crossing moves over the main line.

 

[najaB]

Theres little layover time at Thornton for the current Fife Circle trains...

If it was up to me I wouldn't extend Fife Circle trains. I'd go with a couple of AM/PM direct Edinburgh trains and an all-day Leven-Inverkeithing shuttle (into a new platform 3 at Inverkeithing).

 

[mcmad]

How would that be any better than the current situation of a bus to Kirkcaldy/Thornton and train from there?

Not sure there is physically room for a platform 3 at Inverkeithing, hill on the down side, water on the up side. Could turn on the stub of the Rosyth branch I suppose.

 

[NotATrainspott]

If it was up to me I wouldn't extend Fife Circle trains. I'd go with a couple of AM/PM direct Edinburgh trains and an all-day Leven-Inverkeithing shuttle (into a new platform 3 at Inverkeithing).

That would tank the business case, which would need to rely upon a reasonably easy extension of an existing service.

Transport Scotland's reticence to put forward the scheme may well be due to the complexity of actually getting it done in the current timetable. It may have to wait for other changes, like that Inverkeithing-Halbeath bypass line, when the timetable can be ripped up and then totally rethought with extra services.

 

[Clansman]

Is it just me or does the demand for Leven, as well as 2018 service increase, make Inverkeithing to Halbeath an absolute must for going forward?

Fife is going to be jam packed in a few years to come unless there's some sort of major infrastructure enhancement in order to aid the number of services the line will see from 2018.

 

[najaB]

Not sure there is physically room for a platform 3 at Inverkeithing, hill on the down side, water on the up side. Could turn on the stub of the Rosyth branch I suppose.

Sorry, I meant Kirkaldy not Inverkeithing. It appears that there's an old bay platform that connected to the existing loop so the work would basically consist of reconnecting and reconditioning it.

 

[Clansman]

Sorry, I meant Kirkaldy, not Inverkeithing. It appears that there's an old bay platform that connected to the existing loop so the work would basically consist of reconnecting and reconditioning it.

If Inverkeithing to Halbeath was ever constructed, then that would free up some paths from Intercity services to allow additional services to run through Kirkcaldy and into Leven. Without that chord, your idea of running a shuttle from Leven to Kirkcaldy would be a decent business case should line capacity be a major blockade in any plans.

 

[och aye]

£1.5bn price tag for a rail link to the capital

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/15bn-price-tag-rail-link-10820019

Demand for a direct rail link between Perth and Edinburgh is gaining in momentum.

The city rail hub could become a key point for both passenger and rail freight if the direct route to the capital was reinstated.

Mike Robinson, chief executive of the Royal Scottish Geographical Society, also sits on the Perth City Development Board and ScotRail’s stakeholder advisory group – contacts which could prove vital to bolster inter-city travel.

He pointed out that it takes less time to travel to Glasgow – 59 miles from Perth and one hour by train – than the capital, closer at 43 miles away but 80 minutes by train.

 

[Photohunter71]

£1.5bn price tag for a rail link to the capital

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/15bn-price-tag-rail-link-10820019

Just shows my ignorance as I thought there already was a line to Perth!

 

[Mordac]

Just shows my ignorance as I thought there already was a line to Perth!

It's a bypass through mid-Fife IIRC.

 

[Clansman]

Although I'm a fan of the proposal - with a price tag like that, it's an absolute non-starter unless the business case is sound in every way possible.

 

[Clansman]

Just shows my ignorance as I thought there already was a line to Perth!

Technically there is, but not a direct one anyway.

It's a bypass through mid-Fife IIRC.

The line would run from Halbeath and pretty much follow the M90 through Kelty and Kinross, before heading straight to Glenfarg and joining the existing line at Bridge of Earn.

But with that figure, I can only assume that it also includes the chord from Inverkeithing to Halbeath in order to further minimise the journey time from not having to manoeuver around Rosyth and Dunfermline.

 

[Mordac]

Technically there is, but not a direct one anyway.



The line would run from Halbeath and pretty much follow the M90 through Kelty and Kinross, before heading straight to Glenfarg and joining the existing line at Bridge of Earn.

But with that figure, I can only assume that it also includes the chord from Inverkeithing to Halbeath in order to further maximise the journey time from not having to manoeuver around Rosyth and Dunfermline.

An interesting goal there. Do the proposers really like being on trains?

 

[Clansman]

An interesting goal there. Do the proposers really like being on trains?

Christ sake, no another error!

To be fair, the journey time is pretty maximised as it is

 

[Ginaro]

Does anyone know whether doubling the section from Ladybank to Perth would much difference to journey times?

The line would run from Halbeath and pretty much follow the M90 through Kelty and Kinross, before heading straight to Glenfarg and joining the existing line at Bridge of Earn.

Following the M90 seems like it would be a lot of work between junctions 3 and 4 - might be easier to go via the old line from Cowdenbeath passing east of Kelty and between the M90 and Loch Leven. But then what do you do at Kinross - squeeze in next to the M90 near the old alignment? Has there ever been a map of this proposed line produced anywhere?

 

[Clansman]

Does anyone know whether doubling the section from Ladybank to Perth would much difference to journey times?

Yes, but only primarily between Perth and Newburgh, due to the tight curves between Newburgh and Collessie - although the latter might be able to see a minor increase.

Bridge of Earn to Newburgh could easily support 100mph operation if the line was lifted and doubled up. One of the barriers affecting journey times between Perth and Edinburgh is the rolling stock at ScotRail's disposal. You've got 90mph limited 158s and 170s which have crap acceleration, running on 60mph max lines for a chunk of the journey.

With the £1.5b price tag, I guess it begs the question as to what could be done with the existing route before turning to a new route as the last resort. For example (proposals aside), if you look at the rolling stock, in theory, Perth to Edinburgh would be a perfect route for the Voyagers in every way possible. Along with a new cord from Halbeath to Inverkeithing and doubling Ladybank to Perth, it goes to show that there is still room for improvement on the existing line in order to cut journey times to Perth down significantly, which can save you the better part of £1.5b.

It's whether or not the Scottish Government deems a new route to be more cost effective and beneficial as a whole, than investing in the current infrastructure further - and in this case, a new route via Kinross would probably be the best solution in the long term, albeit mighty expensive.

Following the M90 seems like it would be a lot of work between junctions 3 and 4 - might be easier to go via the old line from Cowdenbeath passing east of Kelty and between the M90 and Loch Leven. But then what do you do at Kinross - squeeze in next to the M90 near the old alignment? Has there ever been a map of this proposed line produced anywhere?

I only really meant following the principle places the M90 passes, rather than following that motorway turn for turn.

Kinross would require a tunnel of a good mile or two long, due to the limitations of trying to squeeze through the old site as a result of the M90.

 

[snowball]

Kinross would require a tunnel of a good mile or two long, due to the limitations of trying to squeeze through the old site as a result of the M90.

I'm not familiar with the area but looking at various maps I get the impression that a lot of the development SE of M90 J6 is quite recent, and that until recently a route close to the M90 in that area, west of the previous railway, would have been a real possibility.

Glenfarg is another difficult area with the M90 on (or at the south end, just east of) the former railway alignment for 3 to 4 km in very hilly territory.

 

[overthewater]

This was postaged in another thread which might be helpful:

http://www.railmaponline.com/UKIEMap.php?lat=56.31934&lng=-3.07114&zoom=12

 

[snowball]

Also useful is SABRE Maps,

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/

where you can look at an area on, say, old OS 1:25000 maps and then overlay current mapping, using a slider to control the relative visibility of the old and current maps.

 

[Clansman]

I'm not familiar with the area but looking at various maps I get the impression that a lot of the development SE of M90 J6 is quite recent, and that until recently a route close to the M90 in that area, west of the previous railway, would have been a real possibility.

Glenfarg is another difficult area with the M90 on (or at the south end, just east of) the former railway alignment for 3 to 4 km in very hilly territory.

Again, going from Glenfarg to Bridge of Earn would require a bit of tunnelling.

The Borders Railway, for example, is ~15 miles longer, yet only cost around 1/5 of the calculated cost for the direct line to Perth. It's pretty evident that a fair chunk of the £1.5b is down to tunnelling and not being able to follow the original line sites in most locations.

As far as mapping goes, may I add that the most up to date aerial ones available were taken in 2006 - there have been major housing projects in Kinross, Kelty and Bridge of Earn since then, and much more in the works, which will no doubt influence the route that a new line would take.

For example, here's the latest Bridge of Earn & Kintillo aerial photographs, taken 2006, compared with how it looks today. The developments around the area emphasise the need for councils to safeguard these sites if this new line is going to go ahead. Kinross and Kelty are very much in the same boat also.

Red - Completed housing developments
Yellow - Housing developments currently under construction
Blue - Completed reconstructed road
Grey - Fenced off areas or areas which will inevitably be utilised - which may influence the cost of a new rail link.
Orange - Site of the closed station and junction leading onto the original line

 

[Altnabreac]

Yes, but only primarily between Perth and Newburgh, due to the tight curves between Newburgh and Collessie - although the latter might be able to see a minor increase.

Bridge of Earn to Newburgh could easily support 100mph operation if the line was lifted and doubled up. One of the barriers affecting journey times between Perth and Edinburgh is the rolling stock at ScotRail's disposal. You've got 90mph limited 158s and 170s which have crap acceleration, running on 60mph max lines for a chunk of the journey.

With the £1.5b price tag, I guess it begs the question as to what could be done with the existing route before turning to a new route as the last resort. For example (proposals aside), if you look at the rolling stock, in theory, Perth to Edinburgh would be a perfect route for the Voyagers in every way possible. Along with a new cord from Halbeath to Inverkeithing and doubling Ladybank to Perth, it goes to show that there is still room for improvement on the existing line in order to cut journey times to Perth down significantly, which can save you the better part of £1.5b.

It's whether or not the Scottish Government deems a new route to be more cost effective and beneficial as a whole, than investing in the current infrastructure further - and in this case, a new route via Kinross would probably be the best solution in the long term, albeit mighty expensive.



I only really meant following the principle places the M90 passes, rather than following that motorway turn for turn.

Kinross would require a tunnel of a good mile or two long, due to the limitations of trying to squeeze through the old site as a result of the M90.

I'd imagine that you'd broadly follow the M90 on the east side from Inverkeithing to Halbeath then crossing over and staying to the west side from there to Kinross.

I doubt any of the previous route would be reused. It would be entirely new alignment and north of Kinross would need quite a long new tunneled alignment.

I'm a big fan of this idea and would love to see it come forward but I think the price tag is such that it won't have a business case for just Perth and Inverness services.

Although it would add more cost and complexity my feeling is that a new crossing of the Tay from Bridge of Earn to Errol would allow Edinburgh - Aberdeen services to use the new route and improve the business case. That might need to be a 2nd phase but you could help out the business case by allowing for it.

 

[47271]

Reinstatement of the Glenfarg route combined with a Tay crossing at St Madoes would be transformational for inter city rail in Scotland. But with price tags like those quoted here, and that's without the Tay crossing, I can't see it happening at any time in the next 20 years or so.

While we're waiting for that, the best thing they can do for a good chunk of the Scottish population is sort out Ladybank-Hilton by doubling as much of it as possible, get linespeeds up and provide Newburgh and Bridge of Earn with stations. This should have been a priority ten years ago, it's woeful that we have three of Scotland's main centres of population - Edinburgh, Perth and Inverness - relying for their rail connection on an uninterrupted 15 mile stretch of single track.

 

[Altnabreac]

Reinstatement of the Glenfarg route combined with a Tay crossing at St Madoes would be transformational for inter city rail in Scotland. But with price tags like those quoted here, and that's without the Tay crossing, I can't see it happening at any time in the next 20 years or so.

While we're waiting for that, the best thing they can do for a good chunk of the Scottish population is sort out Ladybank-Hilton by doubling as much of it as possible, get linespeeds up and provide Newburgh and Bridge of Earn with stations. This should have been a priority ten years ago, it's woeful that we have three of Scotland's main centres of population - Edinburgh, Perth and Inverness - relying for their rail connection on an uninterrupted 15 mile stretch of single track.

I'd like to think that the Scottish Government could grab the vision of completely transformational change for Scottish Intercity Rail and run with it, despite the high costs, as they have done for example with the A9 dualling where the business case may not have quite matched up to the political and transformational benefits from making a strategic investment in the whole country.

Probably no funding available in the next 5 years but I could see it happening in the period 2024-2029 with the right political backing and vision.

 

[JohnR]

Reinstatement of the Glenfarg route combined with a Tay crossing at St Madoes would be transformational for inter city rail in Scotland. But with price tags like those quoted here, and that's without the Tay crossing, I can't see it happening at any time in the next 20 years or so.

While we're waiting for that, the best thing they can do for a good chunk of the Scottish population is sort out Ladybank-Hilton by doubling as much of it as possible, get linespeeds up and provide Newburgh and Bridge of Earn with stations. This should have been a priority ten years ago, it's woeful that we have three of Scotland's main centres of population - Edinburgh, Perth and Inverness - relying for their rail connection on an uninterrupted 15 mile stretch of single track.

The East Coast Main Line to Aberdeen has a stretch of single track too.

 

[Altnabreac]

The East Coast Main Line to Aberdeen has a stretch of single track too.

Although of course there are more advanced plans to do something about that issue.

 

[Clansman]

I'd imagine that you'd broadly follow the M90 on the east side from Inverkeithing to Halbeath then crossing over and staying to the west side from there to Kinross.

I doubt any of the previous route would be reused. It would be entirely new alignment and north of Kinross would need quite a long new tunneled alignment.

I'm a big fan of this idea and would love to see it come forward but I think the price tag is such that it won't have a business case for just Perth and Inverness services.

Although it would add more cost and complexity my feeling is that a new crossing of the Tay from Bridge of Earn to Errol would allow Edinburgh - Aberdeen services to use the new route and improve the business case. That might need to be a 2nd phase but you could help out the business case by allowing for it.

Having a new link from St. Maddoes (better location than Errol) to Bridge of Earn would be a transformational move if Bridge of Earn to Inverkeithing was ever built. Reason being St. Maddoes is a better location is that the turn into Barnhill is right next to the Tay, so it would require less track than diverging off at Errol, as well as lining up near enough perfectly to cross over the existing line and rejoin the newly built one whilst maintaining full speed.

Another problem worth pointing out is where the junction will be located in the Bridge of Earn area. As I've highlighted above, there's a long straight section which would be perfect for a new station and junction, but as that area looks to be a key target for housing projects, that would push the junction further East, requiring a tighter turn onto the new line if the area isn't purchased or safeguarded by Perth & Kinross Council. Given the fact that the new line would follow on the west side of the M90, it's not an ideal situation to be in to have to cross over it towards the east in order to head back into Bridge of Earn.

 

[47271]

The East Coast Main Line to Aberdeen has a stretch of single track too.

It has, but Usan-Montrose isn't 15 miles long and doesn't lead to 20 minute plus delays when the timetable gets out of synch. Even a loop at Newburgh would be a big step forward on what we have at the moment.

To be completist about single line sections in Scotland, we also have Perth-Barnhill to add to our list!

 

[gsnedders]

It has, but Usan-Montrose isn't 15 miles long and doesn't lead to 20 minute plus delays when the timetable gets out of synch. Even a loop at Newburgh would be a big step forward on what we have at the moment.

To be completist about single line sections in Scotland, we also have Perth-Barnhill to add to our list!

Don't I remember seeing some talk about doing something about Perth–Barnhill given the age of the bridge?

 

[najaB]

To be completist about single line sections in Scotland, we also have Perth-Barnhill to add to our list!

Perth-Barnhill? You don't know you were born. If you want to talk about single-line sections that can really mess up the timetable you'd be hard-pressed to beat Clachnaharry - Muir of Ord. It might not be a lot of trains, but it can result in very long delays.

 

[Clansman]

Don't I remember seeing some talk about doing something about Perth–Barnhill given the age of the bridge?

The only proposal I've heard were rebuilding the old locomotive turn back line which sits between the bridge and the station - to allow doubled track right up to the bridge in a Culloden style operation.