Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[route101]

I and many others selfishly hope it's East Kilbride. I don't understand why Shotts was done first - operational reasons have been suggested but the usage figures on EK are far higher, it would appear the customers did not come first in this decision. In terms of stock, I believe 385s are planned but, being a relatively short commuter line, any Scotrail EMUs (or similar, cascaded) would do. A bit concerning to read up thread that the proposal and business case aren't even in the system yet. Hopefully they're in someone's desk drawer ready to be put in the post!

Same here EK has to be priority , amazed at how busy trains are in the middle of day . Ive not heard anything confirming electrification , ive seen CP6 being mentioned . Problem may be stock with the delays to the 385s .

 

[NotATrainspott]

Same here EK has to be priority , amazed at how busy trains are in the middle of day . Ive not heard anything confirming electrification , ive seen CP6 being mentioned . Problem may be stock with the delays to the 385s .

You wait until the track and signalling have been upgraded before you install the wiring (or do it at the same time). For EK, the real upgrade on the horizon is redoubling and adding a second platform at the terminus so that it can go from 2tph to 4tph. This is very likely to happen soon in CP6 for exactly the reasons people have discussed. The case for electrification will be even stronger with extra trains an hour.

 

[InOban]

EK is going to be a lengthy project, even though it is essential, because the route has always been a single track. To create a double track dynamic loop of a useful length will be a major undertaking. I hope that the work begins asap in CP6, but I don't expect it to be completed in that period.

 

[mcmad]

Don't expect any enhancements to start early in CP6. I believe that due to the change in the way projects are to be funded there is a separate process to go through to gain funding. Other than a couple of schemes (Edinburgh sub electrification is one I believe) none have yet got development funding as the government (both of them before anyone says SNPbad) haven't worked out the process.

 

[68000]

To provide an electrified diversionary route during the remodelling of Carstairs, I believe.

Yes, MNSR is upgrading the existing EJ982 shunt to 3 aspect signal for the turnbacks

 

[snowball]

Press release

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds/new-station-footbridge-opens-at-addiewell/

New station footbridge opens at Addiewell

Passengers arriving at Addiewell this morning will have noticed a significant difference in their station with the removal of the old and opening of the new station footbridge.

The new bridge spans 11.7m to connect the platforms and sits 5.6m above the rails to deliver the clearance for running wires to enable the safe electrification of the line. It has been constructed next to the existing bridge and although lifts are not being installed as part of this programme, the design has made provision for this to happen in the future.

With the new footbridge complete and ready to open, a 100t crane was on site over the weekend to remove the 10t cast iron bridge, stairs and supporting columns from the station. It was cut and lifted out in five sections, before being broken up and removed from site.

Pedestrian access was maintained between platforms as the existing footbridge remained open throughout the works during station opening times. The footbridge was only closed at night to enable work on the new bridge – constructed immediately to the west of the old structure.

The project was delivered from a purpose-built site compound established adjacent to the station car park in June 2017 and completed over an eight month period. This project is part of wider work on the Shotts line being delivered by Network Rail ahead of the electrification of the route by 2019.

Kevin McClelland, route delivery director for infrastructure projects, said: “We are reaching the end of route clearance activities on the project where we have cleared structures on the route from being an obstruction to the safe running of the overhead wires which enable electrification.

“This new footbridge at Addiewell will enhance the amenity of the station and the design offers the potential to install lifts in the future to deliver full accessibility”.

The work at Addiewell station was being delivered by contractor Bam Nuttal on behalf of Network Rail.

 

[jopsuk]

"although lifts are not being installed as part of this programme, the design has made provision for this to happen in the future."
The unspoken bit being "in the unlikely event that someone stumps up the money for this and proper surfacing of the platforms"

 

[Altnabreac]

"although lifts are not being installed as part of this programme, the design has made provision for this to happen in the future."
The unspoken bit being "in the unlikely event that someone stumps up the money for this and proper surfacing of the platforms"

Indeed, Given that there is level access from the car park on the eastbound side the best value intervention at Addiewell is likely to platform surface improvements and a new ramped access to the street on the westbound platform. You'd also want to see improvements to the walking route to the Prison and probably a signal controlled safe walking route under the existing railway bridge.

Sure you could deliver all that for less than the cost of lifts and be much more useful to everyone as well. Frankly would have been better to do that than replace the bridge in the first place but I suspect the added hassle of dealing with other landowners, roads authority and planning permission meant they went with the option that was entirely within the control of the railway.

 

[gingertom]

Indeed, Given that there is level access from the car park on the eastbound side the best value intervention at Addiewell is likely to platform surface improvements and a new ramped access to the street on the westbound platform. You'd also want to see improvements to the walking route to the Prison and probably a signal controlled safe walking route under the existing railway bridge.

Sure you could deliver all that for less than the cost of lifts and be much more useful to everyone as well. Frankly would have been better to do that than replace the bridge in the first place but I suspect the added hassle of dealing with other landowners, roads authority and planning permission meant they went with the option that was entirely within the control of the railway.

Is it not simply the old bridge was too low so had to be changed anyway, this solution being the cheapest to achieve the necessary clearances?

 

[InOban]

And it was possibly life-expired?

 

[Class 170101]

I and many others selfishly hope it's East Kilbride. I don't understand why Shotts was done first - operational reasons have been suggested but the usage figures on EK are far higher, it would appear the customers did not come first in this decision. In terms of stock, I believe 385s are planned but, being a relatively short commuter line, any Scotrail EMUs (or similar, cascaded) would do. A bit concerning to read up thread that the proposal and business case aren't even in the system yet. Hopefully they're in someone's desk drawer ready to be put in the post!

I guess as well that the Shotts line didn't require any feeder stations (if it did please tell me) but with electrified lines at both ends I would expect it to be just a matter of wiring it rather also requiring an additional National Grid supply point - these are expensive.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Don't you also get more cascaded DMUs for your money with the Shotts route, with both ends already wired but diesel worked.
Plus Central LL routeing options, freeing up space at Central HL etc.

 

[gingertom]

I guess as well that the Shotts line didn't require any feeder stations (if it did please tell me) but with electrified lines at both ends I would expect it to be just a matter of wiring it rather also requiring an additional National Grid supply point - these are expensive.

if this is indeed the case then surely this will limit how many trains can be operated, and also their top speed? Reminiscent of the Weymouth power supply, or lack of.

 

[takno]

if this is indeed the case then surely this will limit how many trains can be operated, and also their top speed? Reminiscent of the Weymouth power supply, or lack of.

Surely that would depend on how busy the lines on the existing supply are. The shotts line isn't exactly so it shouldn't tax an existing supply unless it was already on the edge, and regenerative braking would reduce the impact even further. Weymouth being third rail would have completely different problems

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I assume there is going to be a neutral section somewhere though?

 

[edwin_m]

I assume there is going to be a neutral section somewhere though?

There would have to be, otherwise if the feeds at the two ends were on different phases there would be a big bang and everything would trip out.

 

[edwin_m]

I guess as well that the Shotts line didn't require any feeder stations (if it did please tell me) but with electrified lines at both ends I would expect it to be just a matter of wiring it rather also requiring an additional National Grid supply point - these are expensive.

Not only expensive but also a long lead time - around five years I think.

 

[Southsider]

Don't you also get more cascaded DMUs for your money with the Shotts route, with both ends already wired but diesel worked.
Plus Central LL routeing options, freeing up space at Central HL etc.

I don't think so. East Kilbride is a far busier line using 10-12 156s during the peak. What you would get are some 158s (Shotts is a mix of 158 and 156, EK is purely 156) which may have been required as scenic stock but I don't know if that scheme is still alive.

 

[Jonny]

Also, if you can wire the gaps then you can get closer to abolishing diesel trains from Glasgow Central.

 

[Altnabreac]

Is it not simply the old bridge was too low so had to be changed anyway, this solution being the cheapest to achieve the necessary clearances?

And it was possibly life-expired?

Yes, the bridge was definitely too low and approaching life expiry. The point I was making was that one possible alternative to providing a new bridge would have been a safe, segregated, DDA compliant walking route under the railway to the other platform via the existing highway with a pedestrian crossing inserted under the narrow bridge.

Something similar has been done at Linlithgow Cricket Club under a narrow bridge to provide a safe walking route under a bridge with no footway.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.9...4!1sH8NL0J5IAmptWSQhrc3iSg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

This would have involved land purchase, highway changes and various other complications like that so I can see why they chose instead to just replace the footbridge. Cost wise I suspect they would have been similar with perhaps the safe walking route a little cheaper but more difficult to organise and with more variables outwith the control of Network Rail.

 

[marks87]

Also, if you can wire the gaps then you can get closer to abolishing diesel trains from Glasgow Central.

Kilmarnock-Gretna Jn. would be the stumbling block to that.

Is that still down for sometime post-2030?

 

[Southsider]

I guess as well that the Shotts line didn't require any feeder stations (if it did please tell me) but with electrified lines at both ends I would expect it to be just a matter of wiring it rather also requiring an additional National Grid supply point - these are expensive.

One end would be fed from Muirhouse Junction presumably. I wonder if it would be possible to provide a second feed from the Neilston branch where the lines cross at Williamwood? It might even be worthwhile providing a connection via the old siding at Clarkston East junction for diversionary purposes.

 

[Altnabreac]

Kilmarnock-Gretna Jn. would be the stumbling block to that.

Is that still down for sometime post-2030?

Kilmarnock - Gretna has never appeared in any official Transport Scotland or Scottish Government list of electrification schemes except one diagram map in the STPR that may have been a misprint. I think it might have been listed in the Network Rail Electrification RUS but that is not an indicator of anything. I suspect electrification south of Kilmarnock and certainly electrification south of New Cumnock would be way off any current agenda and would be likely to be behind lines like Aberdeen - Inverness, Ayr - Girvan and Newcraighall - Tweedbank that also are not in current electrification plans but could be looked at in future.

 

[marks87]

Kilmarnock - Gretna has never appeared in any official Transport Scotland or Scottish Government list of electrification schemes except one diagram map in the STPR that may have been a misprint. I think it might have been listed in the Network Rail Electrification RUS but that is not an indicator of anything. I suspect electrification south of Kilmarnock and certainly electrification south of New Cumnock would be way off any current agenda and would be likely to be behind lines like Aberdeen - Inverness, Ayr - Girvan and Newcraighall - Tweedbank that also are not in current electrification plans but could be looked at in future.

I suppose the only thing that might accelerate it is if there's demand for an electrified diversionary route between Carlisle and Glasgow. But I'm struggling to think of anything that might prompt such demand. Even Lamington was a once in a blue moon event.

 

[gingertom]

I suppose the only thing that might accelerate it is if there's demand for an electrified diversionary route between Carlisle and Glasgow. But I'm struggling to think of anything that might prompt such demand. Even Lamington was a once in a blue moon event.

there's a lot of pressure coming from the Dumfries railway action group for improved connections to the central belt.

 

[takno]

there's a lot of pressure coming from the Dumfries railway action group for improved connections to the central belt.

Nobody's going to notice while they're all stuck down there in Dumfries. If only there was a quick efficient way for them to get to Edinburgh and make their case to the parliament!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Kilmarnock-Gretna Jn. would be the stumbling block to that.

Is that still down for sometime post-2030?

Wouldn’t some redoubling come first ?

 

[380101]

Wouldn’t some redoubling come first ?

Much needed between Barrhead - Lugton and Stewarton - Kilmarnock. Even having this redoubled would make a massive difference to the journey and build in a bit more resilience.

 

[route101]

Maryhill would be logical as its wired at both ends . If theres no stock , keep the 314s and use them on that . With EK and Barrhead you would have to separate electric and diesel or contain the EK stock . No doubt about it EK has poor connections , i feel there should be earlier and later trains .

 

[gingertom]

Nobody's going to notice while they're all stuck down there in Dumfries. If only there was a quick efficient way for them to get to Edinburgh and make their case to the parliament!

Maryhill would be logical as its wired at both ends . If theres no stock , keep the 314s and use them on that . With EK and Barrhead you would have to separate electric and diesel or contain the EK stock . No doubt about it EK has poor connections , i feel there should be earlier and later trains .

there will be stock, as there is an option for a dozen more 385s (if they can ever be made to work). A bit of overkill, yes, but the advantages of operating a uniform fleet in the Glasgow Queen Street area is a significant advantage.