A9 dualling - how will Scotrail compete?

[The Pelican]

I think substantial speed upgrades might actually be easier on the railway than the road in this era of national parks- you just need a single track tunnel which cuts off one of the twisty mountain sections. This chart- https://www.railwaydata.co.uk/linefiles/route/?ELR=HGL2 suggests that if you could tunnel between miles 45 and 60- a tunnel of less than 15 miles- (perhaps closing dalwhinnie, or putting it on a branch line from one end) you could substanially reduce the height trains had to reach. Obviously needs a view from above as well, to work out where the slow bits are. The work on the Bergen line in Norway has done lots of bypassing and closing of the slowest parts.

 

[stevieinselby]

Had a week in Grantown recently and saw first hand the amount of work going into dualling the A9 in the Tomatin area (for one) plus the number of express buses (Flixbus, Scotbus or whatever it's called plus another company I didn't catch the name of) currently operating with the road in its present state. How will Scotrail compete time and frequency wise once the work's complete (some years away for the whole road)?

From what I can see, at the moment there are 16 coaches a day between Inverness and Edinburgh, and 25 coaches a day between Inverness and Glasgow.
That compares to 6 trains (~28 carriages) to Edinburgh 6 trains (~23 carriages) to Glasgow.

A train carriage has a slightly higher seating capacity than the coaches typically used, so it looks as though Scotrail are matching the coaches for capacity to Glasgow and exceeding them to Edinburgh – they are typically about 15 to 30 minutes quicker although there is quite a bit of variation, but the coaches beat them hands down on frequency.

I suspect most people would say the train wins on comfort (although that can be subjective, and I haven't been on Ember's coaches so I can't say first-hand how they compare), and being able to sit round a table if you are travelling in a group, get up and stretch your legs, go to the buffet etc, all make the train a more pleasant environment for a journey of 3–4 hours.

One other advantage the train has is that – unusually – it has a better service to some of the smaller towns and villages, where the coaches will go zooming past on the A9 the trains will stop – good luck getting to Blair Atholl or Carrbridge on Ember or Citylink! Heck, the Ember coaches to Glasgow don't even stop at Kingussie, Stirling or Perth (only Broxden) – very much prioritising the speed of end-to-end journeys over passengers wanting to make journeys to/from intermediate stops.

Ember are not that much cheaper than an advance train ticket, which can often be the coach's silver bullet, although if they are free for Scottish concessions then that will help them to fill up (although may not be profitable, I don't know how the Scottish system works). But are they filling up? Looking at bookings for Monday, there are only a handful of coaches that have more than a dozen seats taken. I don't know whether most people will only book much closer to the time of travel than 1½ days ahead, but if the coaches on average remain only a quarter full then it's hard to see that that frequency of service is a good long-term proposition.

 

[GusB]

For me, travelling south to the central belt is going to take half a day, so an extra hour doesn't really make that much difference. In my younger days I'd always opt for the coach because it was much cheaper with student discount and, from an enthusiast's point of view, there was a much wider variety of vehicles on the road than today. There was also a certain "thrill factor", which I probably couldn't cope with these days!

It's not all about the journey from Inverness to Perth.

 

[Noddy]

In recent years the diversion of the Scotrail Edinburgh trains via Stirling has made using the train to destinations in Fife less convenient, and probably lengthened the journey into Edinburgh.

While there probably is a market between Inverness and Fife I’m fairly sure that anyone you gain in Fife you loose to Edinburgh. I lived there a few years back and it always felt horrendous to me: it took around two hours to get to Perth and felt almost as long again to get to Edinburgh while it went via Fife and stopped virtually everywhere.

Assuming there’s not a huge amount you can do on the Highland Mainline itself surely some adjustments could be made south of Perth to try to improve things between Perth-Edinburgh (and Glasgow) would have impacts and returns of investments beyond just Inverness. For example the 10.42 from Inverness takes just over an hour from Perth to Haymarket (1.07) and 1.13 to Waverley with a stop at Stirling. If they could try and get that down to closer to an hour reliably for all long distance trains, it would make both Edinburgh-Stirling-Perth journeys and Edinburgh-Highland mainline journeys more attractive and competitive.

 

[Bald Rick]

The issue here though is that the A9 fully duelled becomes a far more attractive option of taking the car rather than the train. Inverness to the Central Belt would be a journey of slightly over 2 hours give or take the congestion around Perth/Edinburgh/Glasgow while the train won't be getting faster.

That’s extremely optimisitc. It’s 142 miles from Inverness to Stirling via the A9, and there’s quite a few roundabouts to deal with not to mention all the speed cameras.

Not sure the dualling will make that much difference. The road is dead most the year anyway, so anyone wanting to drive will likely be driving anyway.

Exactly. An then, even in tourist season, I struggle to believe that anything less than 95% of those driving cars on the A9 are driving to a place (or for a reason) where they need a car at one end or the other anyway.

I have spent far too much time stuck on the A9 behind a chain of cars that are themselves refusing to overtake a caravan or similar caravans; similarly stuck for hours while an accident is cleared. No doubt dualling will help reduce both incidences.

As an aside, I cannot be the only person who, when getting to a dualled section, overtakes the ‘blockers’ at the start, sails along the dualled section without seeing any other traffic at all, and then meets the back of the next chain of traffic just as the road narrows back to single carriageway. So frustrating!

Well the Perth to Inverness dialling is set to finish in 2035

2025 remember?
I remember thinking from about 2017 how interesting it was going to be to see how Scottish Government would admit to that not being possible. They left it rather late, and managed not to blame themselves for not doing anything!

 

[Railwaycat]

I think rail needs to provide a premium service for both 1st and 2nd class when you have a (future) fast road alternative, and I don't think the 222's can provide it unless the interior is totally reconfigured, which would mean less seats and more tables. We're all enthusiasts, so it's easy for us to discount the fact that the general public just want a frequent, relatively fast and easy to use method of transport - if a train interior is no better than a much cheaper coach then why should they take the train? I don't like modern train interiors and seats - Branson started the rot with the Pendolinos and Voyagers and his seeming belief that people would like an airliner type interior (and would be fine with seats not aligning with windows), and as for the seats in the Azumas...

 

[mmh]

Branson started the rot with the Pendolinos and Voyagers and his seeming belief that people would like an airliner type interior (and would be fine with seats not aligning with windows)

They replaced the Mk3s, which had windows sized for first class to have aligned seats in the same way.

 

[Bald Rick]

We're all enthusiasts, so it's easy for us to discount the fact that the general public just want a frequent, relatively fast and easy to use method of transport - if a train interior is no better than a much cheaper coach then why should they take the train?

Well, we’re not all enthusiasts. It’s important to remember that passenegrs don’t necessarily want what enthusiasts do. Many are simply not bothered about having a table, indeed many actively dislike it (not wanting to sit opposite someone they don’t know, and having to olay foot tennis etc). Many people prefer not to have a window, whether for ease of access to the aisle or other reasons. On Thursday I saw a passenger on an 807 who chose not to sit in her reserved seat (window, forward facing), and moved to a rearward facing ‘window’ seat with a panel rather than a real window.

 

[Class83]

While there probably is a market between Inverness and Fife I’m fairly sure that anyone you gain in Fife you loose to Edinburgh. I lived there a few years back and it always felt horrendous to me: it took around two hours to get to Perth and felt almost as long again to get to Edinburgh while it went via Fife and stopped virtually everywhere.

Assuming there’s not a huge amount you can do on the Highland Mainline itself surely some adjustments could be made south of Perth to try to improve things between Perth-Edinburgh (and Glasgow) would have impacts and returns of investments beyond just Inverness. For example the 10.42 from Inverness takes just over an hour from Perth to Haymarket (1.07) and 1.13 to Waverley with a stop at Stirling. If they could try and get that down to closer to an hour reliably for all long distance trains, it would make both Edinburgh-Stirling-Perth journeys and Edinburgh-Highland mainline journeys more attractive and competitive.

In 2003, the 1740 did Waverley to Perth in 1h12m calling at Haymarket, Inverkeithing and Kirkcaldy. With various other services managing 1h13m-1h15m with additional stops at Markinch and/or Ladybank. There is very little between the routes timewise so it doesn't matter for Edinburgh to Perth/Inverness passengers. Given Stirling is served by Glasgow-Inverness services there's probably more benefit in Edinburgh-Inverness via Fife to improve connectivity Northbound. https://web.archive.org/web/20031002055006/http://www.scotrail.co.uk/route04.pdf

However south of Dunblane (and more so Polmont) via Stirling, or South of Thornton via Fife, the services need to be aligned with the local services to avoid getting stuck behind a stopper.

 

[Noddy]

In 2003, the 1740 did Waverley to Perth in 1h12m calling at Haymarket, Inverkeithing and Kirkcaldy. With various other services managing 1h13m-1h15m with additional stops at Markinch and/or Ladybank. There is very little between the routes timewise so it doesn't matter for Edinburgh to Perth/Inverness passengers. Given Stirling is served by Glasgow-Inverness services there's probably more benefit in Edinburgh-Inverness via Fife to improve connectivity Northbound. https://web.archive.org/web/20031002055006/http://www.scotrail.co.uk/route04.pdf

However south of Dunblane (and more so Polmont) via Stirling, or South of Thornton via Fife, the services need to be aligned with the local services to avoid getting stuck behind a stopper.

Inverness-Stirling is a much bigger market than Inverkeithing and Kirkcaldy combined. Having a regular service between the two cities is going to be better than having an irregular one.

 

[snookertam]

Sorry, I wasnt clear. I meant taking the car.

A car journey between Inverness and the central belt is also unlikely to take 2 hours unless someone has little to no regard for their personal safety (and others’).

 

[Class83]

Inverness-Stirling is a much bigger market than Inverkeithing and Kirkcaldy combined. Having a regular service between the two cities is going to be better than having an irregular one.

Population of Stirling is 49,950 and including Falkirk at 103,380 (including Grangemouth etc.) v Dunfermline 76,210 (inc Inverkeithing), Kirkcaldy 50,370 and Glenrothes 44,760 (inc Markinch) would suggest otherwise, it's difficult to base of current passenger numbers when there is currently no direct service from the Fife stations.

Unless there is some other reason you believe that Stirling<>Inverness has a significantly greater passenger demand that the Glasgow<>Inverness Scotrail services (and LNER) are not catering to.

 

[snookertam]

The railway has a serious problem in that it is caught in a bind of vary powerful interest groups, and a fragmented structure with relationships highly codified and controlled by webs of contracts.

This sort of "contractual paralysis" means that it can't really do much rapidly to bear down on its cost base, even if consensus could be formed on what to do.
Of course the same fragmentation and contractual accounting will make it very expensive to do anything at all, and the capital required to push through that problem doesn't really exist.

Making the Highland line truly attractive compared to Ember on a dual carriageway A9 would require a total reconstruction after all.

I think for a large proportion of the population the train between Inverness and the Central Belt will always be the more attractive option compared to Ember, even if it was free. Just as for some people using their car would be more preferable even if it was the more expensive option compared to public transport.

Not sure what all the fuss is about with this company, and I’d be interested to see their offering when they no longer have such public subsidy behind them.

 

[Noddy]

Population of Stirling is 49,950 and including Falkirk at 103,380 (including Grangemouth etc.) v Dunfermline 76,210 (inc Inverkeithing), Kirkcaldy 50,370 and Glenrothes 44,760 (inc Markinch) would suggest otherwise, it's difficult to base of current passenger numbers when there is currently no direct service from the Fife stations.

Unless there is some other reason you believe that Stirling<>Inverness has a significantly greater passenger demand that the Glasgow<>Inverness Scotrail services (and LNER) are not catering to.

Passenger figures from Inverness to Stirling are just a smidge under 8000, Inverkeithing is 540, and Kirkcaldy is 1000. Stirling also acts as an interchange to the likes of Falkirk (another 1250).

Even back in 2018 when they were running via Fife Kirkcaldy was only 2110 and Inverkeithing was 1350, well down on Stirling at 8330. Going forward there is also the potential for cheaper fares to the south (and for WCML destinations a cross platform rather than cross city change) via a Stirling connection to Lumo trains.

 

[Class83]

Passenger figures from Inverness to Stirling are just a smidge under 8000, Inverkeithing is 540, and Kirkcaldy is 1000. Stirling also acts as an interchange to the likes of Falkirk (another 1250).

Even back in 2018 when they were running via Fife Kirkcaldy was only 2110 and Inverkeithing was 1350, well down on Stirling at 8330. Going forward there is also the potential for cheaper fares to the south (and for WCML destinations a cross platform rather than cross city change) via a Stirling connection to Lumo trains.

So a direct service from Fife at least doubles passenger numbers, doubling the frequency from Stirling made no noticeable difference to passenger numbers, Falkirk is also basically flat. Edinburgh Gateway also has a significant drop (minus 2000) as it was on the 2018 via Fife Services, but not the current route via Stirling, there's a roughly 250 increase at Edinburgh Park which is the equivalent on the Stirling route (but requires a change). Markinch was 1227 now down to 555. Overall it's a loss of about 4000 passengers to the railway network.

Haymarket offers cross platform connections from WCML either via Stirling or via Fife.

 

[Bald Rick]

Just as for some people using their car would be more preferable even if it was the more expensive option compared to public transport.

Absolutely. I am fortunate in that I get the train for free. I have travelled between the central belt and Inverness (and vice versa) dozens of times, only one of which was by train.

 

[Noddy]

So a direct service from Fife at least doubles passenger numbers, doubling the frequency from Stirling made no noticeable difference to passenger numbers, Falkirk is also basically flat. Edinburgh Gateway also has a significant drop (minus 2000) as it was on the 2018 via Fife Services, but not the current route via Stirling, there's a roughly 250 increase at Edinburgh Park which is the equivalent on the Stirling route (but requires a change). Markinch was 1227 now down to 555. Overall it's a loss of about 4000 passengers to the railway network.

Haymarket offers cross platform connections from WCML either via Stirling or via Fife.

You’re forgetting all passenger numbers are down due to covid and the post covid environment. Stirling is still down on 2018-how much lower would they be if the service was halved? Passenger numbers from Fife would have fallen regardless.

Haymarket via Fife doesn’t offer cheap Lumo connections. If you’re talking about a less than 1 hour wait for a connection at Stirling it’s not too bad, a two hour wait starts to get into the realm of look for an alternative method of transport.

 

[Railwaycat]

Well, we’re not all enthusiasts.

'Enthusiast' was maybe the wrong word, but it's easier than putting 'we all like train travel'!
I wouldn't envisage going back to all bays with tables, but it seems that modern stock is short on them. Half the problem for me is the high backed, square topped seats (East Midlands 158's for example) - I find it claustrophobic.

 

[Class83]

You’re forgetting all passenger numbers (including Stirling itself) are down due to covid and the post covid environment. Passenger numbers from Fife would have fallen regardless.

Haymarket via Fife doesn’t offer cheap Lumo connections. If you’re talking about a less than 1 hour wait for a connection at Stirling it’s not too bad, a two hour wait starts to get into the realm of look for an alternative method of transport.

Commuting (Edinburgh/Glasgow) is down significantly from pretty much everywhere, though increased from Covid lows, WFH has had a residual effect. However, to compare more similar routes which have similar service, from Kirkcaldy northbound, Dundee is slightly up from Stirling northbound Dundee is slightly down, but not significantly in either case.

Inverness passengers can connect to LUMO from the Inverness<>Glasgow service. Though LUMO are likely to be targeting the price sensitive passengers who are willing to wait, or will get a coach north of Stirling. The alternative mode of transport exists in the Highland Chieftain.

 

[Noddy]

Commuting (Edinburgh/Glasgow) is down significantly from pretty much everywhere, though increased from Covid lows, WFH has had a residual effect. However, to compare more similar routes which have similar service, from Kirkcaldy northbound, Dundee is slightly up from Stirling northbound Dundee is slightly down, but not significantly in either case.

As I say Stirling numbers are still down, if you halved the number of trains how many would you loose to pick up a relatively small number in Fife.

Inverness passengers can connect to LUMO from the Inverness<>Glasgow service. Though LUMO are likely to be targeting the price sensitive passengers who are willing to wait, or will get a coach north of Stirling. The alternative mode of transport exists in the Highland Chieftain.

As I say a one hour wait is doable, if it was me and faced a two wait at Stirling I’d be looking at easyJet and going very light. Connections only work if they’re relatively frequent and you aren’t going to have to potentially wait for hours. Same applies to Falkirk.

The Highland Chieftain isn’t suitable for anyone who want to travel later in the day.

 

[Snex]

Is there even much demand from Inverness to the central belt, bar Edinburgh / Glasgow? Surely the demand will be the opposite way with people going away for the weekend or what not.

From being up there in the past, a lot of the locals can't stand the city life and find it overwhelming being used to the country. I really don't understand why anyone would want to go to Kirkcaldy either, even people in Fife don't want to go there. The town centre is a ghost town.

 

[CMS1]

As an aside, I cannot be the only person who, when getting to a dualled section, overtakes the ‘blockers’ at the start, sails along the dualled section without seeing any other traffic at all, and then meets the back of the next chain of traffic just as the road narrows back to single carriageway. So frustrating!

No you're definitely not the only one! Only takes a handful of dopes going 20mph below the speed limit to screw up the efficiency of the country's whole road system for everyone

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Feb 2026 ==

In fact, I've often thought the efficiency and capacity of the country's road network could be massively increased overnight by adding a few simple rules, e.g a 70mph minimum speed for the outside lane. Many roads are screwed up by a few incompetent drivers, e.g. the A14 generally has lorries in the inside lane and a long slow chain of cars going about 62mph in the outside lane, due to 1 or 2 drivers who think its acceptable to sit along side the lorries in the outside lane. Perhaps a subject for another thread.

 

[Noddy]

Is there even much demand from Inverness to the central belt, bar Edinburgh / Glasgow? Surely the demand will be the opposite way with people going away for the weekend or what not.

What goes up must come down?

 

[edwin_m]

No you're definitely not the only one! Only takes a handful of dopes going 20mph below the speed limit to screw up the efficiency of the country's whole road system for everyone

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Feb 2026 ==

In fact, I've often thought the efficiency and capacity of the country's road network could be massively increased overnight by adding a few simple rules, e.g a 70mph minimum speed for the outside lane. Many roads are screwed up by a few incompetent drivers, e.g. the A14 generally has lorries in the inside lane and a long slow chain of cars going about 62mph in the outside lane, due to 1 or 2 drivers who think its acceptable to sit along side the lorries in the outside lane. Perhaps a subject for another thread.

In my experience, much more likely to be a truck overtaking another truck, perhaps with a speed margin when they pull out but a change in gradient affects their relative speed so the overtake becomes very slow.

I'm not an A9 user but on similar two-lanes it's unusual for cars to be below 70 unless they are following something slower. It's possible some less alert A9 drivers don't notice the limit going up to 70 on the dualled sections, but that normally just makes them easier to overtake unless they are also trying to pass something else.

 

[A S Leib]

I really don't understand why anyone would want to go to Kirkcaldy either, even people in Fife don't want to go there. The town centre is a ghost town.

I thought St. Andrews would have been the most popular leisure destination in Fife, then Dunfermline (for foreign tourists; less necessarily so for a Saturday afternoon, as there's probably no need to go from Elgin to Fife for a cinema).

 

[Class83]

As I say Stirling numbers are still down, if you halved the number of trains how many would you loose to pick up a relatively small number in Fife.



As I say a one hour wait is doable, if it was me and faced a two wait at Stirling I’d be looking at easyJet and going very light. Connections only work if they’re relatively frequent and you aren’t going to have to potentially wait for hours. Same applies to Falkirk.

The Highland Chieftain isn’t suitable for anyone who want to travel later in the day.

But then Stirling to/from Dundee is broadly the same number of passengers and broadly the same number of trains, why would numbers between Stirling and Inverness have necessarily changed if they had the same service as 8 years ago. Non commuter routes are broadly similar now.

Through passengers from Edinburgh are unlikely to care about the route as the Edinburgh-Perth journey time is the same.

Passengers from Fife are reduced by over 50% as there is no through service, resulting in a net 4000 reduction in passengers.

Is there even much demand from Inverness to the central belt, bar Edinburgh / Glasgow? Surely the demand will be the opposite way with people going away for the weekend or what not.

From being up there in the past, a lot of the locals can't stand the city life and find it overwhelming being used to the country. I really don't understand why anyone would want to go to Kirkcaldy either, even people in Fife don't want to go there. The town centre is a ghost town.

Not hugely, from Inverness; Edinburgh (Waverley+Haymarket) is nearly 100,000, Glasgow (QS and Central) 54,000, Aberdeen 53,000, London 25,000. Various local places, then Perth at 13481. Everywhere else is less than that. So serving the 100k people to/
from Edinburgh is the priority, but neither route is notably faster, so given that fact, losing 4% of your customers from Gateway, Inverkeithing, Kirkcaldy and Markinch to gain 0% from Stirling is an odd choice.

https://www.railwaydata.co.uk/odm/gbr/?dest=all&string_out=Inverness+%5B8649%5D

I thought St. Andrews would have been the most popular leisure destination in Fife, then Dunfermline (for foreign tourists; less necessarily so for a Saturday afternoon, as there's probably no need to go from Elgin to Fife for a cinema).

It probably is, but few (835) buy a train ticket from there to Inverness as it's not a natural routing, via Aberdeen is simplest, but probably part of a longer trip which might be split somewhere. Urban Fife-Inverness is likely Northbound tourism or more likely bidirectional family visit/work travel. The trend is similar for other stations on the Highland Mainline, Aviemore is down significantly from Fife, but flat from Stirling since direct services were shifted.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm not an A9 user but on similar two-lanes it's unusual for cars to be below 70 unless they are following something slower.

I routinely see cars on two lane dual carriageways doing less than 70, often less than 60. It’s a rare weekend trip on the M1 to/from the Midlands that I don’t see a car doing less than 50.

My theory about the A9 is that HGVs are limited to 50mph on the single carriageway sections, whereas on almost all other single carriageways in Scotland they are (or were until very recently) limited to 40mph. There are signs denoting this, however those signs (which you don’t see in England) are, I believe, misinterpreted by many car drivers who think the 50mph applies to them. I suspect some of the less smart Sat nav systems don’t help either.

Because there are speed cameras all along the Single carriageway sections of the A9 between Perth and Inverness, these drivers then tootle along at 48/49mph. Meanwhile the HGVs would normally by bang on 56mph if the road was clear. So, the HGVs (often mulitples) end up behind the muppets doing 48, can’t overtake easily, and it’s a rare driver behind multiple HGVs who are willing to overtake them and a vehicle in front on a single carriageway. So we all have to wait for the dual carriageway - at which point the 48/49ers accelerate to 69 (or in some cases 80+) before braking back down to 48mph when they dual carriageway ends, and the HGVs catch them up again.


One thing I will say is that the A9 seems to be much busier now in summer than it was 8-10 years ago, which I assume is the increase in tourism. I rarely use it in winter.

 

[Noddy]

But then Stirling to/from Dundee is broadly the same number of passengers and broadly the same number of trains, why would numbers between Stirling and Inverness have necessarily changed if they had the same service as 8 years ago. Non commuter routes are broadly similar now.

Through passengers from Edinburgh are unlikely to care about the route as the Edinburgh-Perth journey time is the same.

Passengers from Fife are reduced by over 50% as there is no through service, resulting in a net 4000 reduction in passengers.


Not hugely, from Inverness; Edinburgh (Waverley+Haymarket) is nearly 100,000, Glasgow (QS and Central) 54,000, Aberdeen 53,000, London 25,000. Various local places, then Perth at 13481. Everywhere else is less than that. So serving the 100k people to/
from Edinburgh is the priority, but neither route is notably faster, so given that fact, losing 4% of your customers from Gateway, Inverkeithing, Kirkcaldy and Markinch to gain 0% from Stirling is an odd choice.

https://www.railwaydata.co.uk/odm/gbr/?dest=all&string_out=Inverness+%5B8649%5D

Not really sure what Dundee commuting has to do with it. Inverness passenger figures to the central belt are still down across the board form 2018. Edinburgh very slightly from 89280 to 89000, Glasgow QS much more from 68900 to 51550, Perth from 19650 to 13500. Stirling as we already know is slightly down despite a doubling of frequency. Other longer destinations in Scotland like Aberdeen are also down from Inverness. You simply cannot say we’ve lost 4000 passengers from the Network because you don’t know how many you would have lost anyway from Fife stations and you don’t know how many more you would have lost by not doubling frequency of the Stirling service.

Running Perth-Stirling-Edinburgh is what any ‘Intercity’ train provider would do - only stop at the major towns and cities on route. This route has much faster line speeds and is double track throughout, so a problem in one direction isn’t as likely to cause problems in both directions. Having the service take this risk to act as a Waverley-Haymarket-Edingburgh Gateway-Inverkeithing-Kirkcaldy-Markinch commuter service is an odd choice when providing a long distance service.

 

[HighlandStorm]

Through passengers from Edinburgh are unlikely to care about the route as the Edinburgh-Perth journey time is the same.

But the journey opportunities for points North of Perth on the Highland Main Line to both Edinburgh and Glasgow are much better with the Edinburgh trains all going through Stirling. It's a far better station to change at, and there are a lot more services to Edinburgh and Glasgow for passengers to change on to. Instead of trudging for miles through the coldest station on earth, to some desolate outpost to wait for a 3 car 170 from Aberdeen to Glasgow that's packed to the rafters, there's local electric services at Stirling that have plenty of space. It means you don't need to time things to through trains and gives a good deal more flexibility for travelling to both Edinburgh and Glasgow to/from Inverness.

On the topic of ScotRail competing with Ember - there is a need to get decarbonising the Inter7city network moving. I fear any move to get 222s in gives an excuse to kick the can on this because 222s are much younger than the HSTs. I've done several journeys on Ember in the past few months, but mostly around or a little over an hour - not longer runs. For comfort they are perfectly adequate, plus having power points at every seat and fairly decent WiFi and respectable toilets by bus standards. But, you are not going to have the space you have on a train, however comfortable your coach is. I can get out my laptop and work on a train, yes I can do a few emails on phone or iPad on a coach, but not properly work on something in the way you can on a train.

Will Ember take passengers from ScotRail, yes, but probably not significant numbers, and heavily leaning towards those with ScotGov NECs. CityLink I would suggest has more to worry about, Ember has a much more consistent fleet, you know what to expect, on CityLink on various routes something not much more than a high floor bus without a toilet might rock up. CityLink pretty much gave up on the A96 corridor as a through route, so will be interesting to see if Ember takes people from the train on this route as this is the first time in a long time there has been a credible coach offering between Inverness and Aberdeen.

 

[Class83]

Not really sure what Dundee commuting has to do with it. Inverness passenger figures to the central belt are still down across the board form 2018. Edinburgh very slightly from 89280 to 89000, Glasgow QS much more from 68900 to 51550, Perth from 19650 to 13500. Stirling as we already know is slightly down despite a doubling of frequency. Other longer destinations in Scotland like Aberdeen are also down from Inverness. You simply cannot say we’ve lost 4000 passengers from the Network because you don’t know how many you would have lost anyway from Fife stations and you don’t know how many more you would have lost by not doubling frequency of the Stirling service.

Running Perth-Stirling-Edinburgh is what any ‘Intercity’ train provider would do - only stop at the major towns and cities on route. This route has much faster line speeds and is double track throughout, so a problem in one direction isn’t as likely to cause problems in both directions. Having the service take this risk to act as a Waverley-Haymarket-Edingburgh Gateway-Inverkeithing-Kirkcaldy-Markinch commuter service is an odd choice when providing a long distance service.

The point is it's not commuting, commuter passenger numbers (so journeys to Edinburgh/Glasgow) are down pretty much everywhere, other passenger numbers not so much. Both Stirling and Fife to Dundee, not heavy commuter flows, with roughly the same frequency of trains as 2018 are relatively stable. There's more evidence the change has reduced Fife-Inverness passenger numbers than increased Stirling-Inverness.

The end-end journey time is very similar on either route from Edinburgh-Perth, and that is with 1 stop via Stirling against 3 via Fife, if the Fife route only had one stop, either Inverkeithing (for Dunfermline connecting the 8th City) or Kirkcaldy (it has a better car park) then it's likely Fife would be faster, it's simply much shorter. The previous Fife services were often directional uplift/setdown only to limit commuter use but provide the northbound connectivity.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Feb 2026 ==

But the journey opportunities for points North of Perth on the Highland Main Line to both Edinburgh and Glasgow are much better with the Edinburgh trains all going through Stirling. It's a far better station to change at, and there are a lot more services to Edinburgh and Glasgow for passengers to change on to. Instead of trudging for miles through the coldest station on earth, to some desolate outpost to wait for a 3 car 170 from Aberdeen to Glasgow that's packed to the rafters, there's local electric services at Stirling that have plenty of space. It means you don't need to time things to through trains and gives a good deal more flexibility for travelling to both Edinburgh and Glasgow to/from Inverness.

On the topic of ScotRail competing with Ember - there is a need to get decarbonising the Inter7city network moving. I fear any move to get 222s in gives an excuse to kick the can on this because 222s are much younger than the HSTs. I've done several journeys on Ember in the past few months, but mostly around or a little over an hour - not longer runs. For comfort they are perfectly adequate, plus having power points at every seat and fairly decent WiFi and respectable toilets by bus standards. But, you are not going to have the space you have on a train, however comfortable your coach is. I can get out my laptop and work on a train, yes I can do a few emails on phone or iPad on a coach, but not properly work on something in the way you can on a train.

Will Ember take passengers from ScotRail, yes, but probably not significant numbers, and heavily leaning towards those with ScotGov NECs. CityLink I would suggest has more to worry about, Ember has a much more consistent fleet, you know what to expect, on CityLink on various routes something not much more than a high floor bus without a toilet might rock up. CityLink pretty much gave up on the A96 corridor as a through route, so will be interesting to see if Ember takes people from the train on this route as this is the first time in a long time there has been a credible coach offering between Inverness and Aberdeen.

Not sure what your point is, both Edinburgh and Glasgow have direct services to Highland Main Line Stations, regardless of the route of Edinburgh services south of Perth, no need for anyone to change.