GusB
Established Member
It would be useful if you could actually post a link (and a quote) from that source
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Aberdeen - Inverness £170m Upgrade
- Thread starter Altnabreac
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Some news regarding Dalcross station.
www.strathspey-herald.co.uk
Full steam ahead for airport railway station plan in Highlands
New railway station next to Inverness Airport could be open by late 2022
Does anyone know if the passing loop is necessary for timetable improvements or is it possibly being included so that trains can turn there more easily (Inverness-Airport shuttles)?
GusB
Established Member
It has been so long since this improvement programme began, I've nearly forgotten what the improvement programme was all about!
I may be havering, and I'm more than happy to be corrected, but wasn't the loop at Dalcross supposed to enable a 30-minute Inverness to Elgin schedule?
Like yourself, I am hazy on the details now, but that does ring a bell. And Inverness - Elgin does make more sense than Inverness - Dalcross.
Deltic1961
Member
- Joined
- 30 May 2018
- Messages
- 645
Is it worth spending any more money?
I live in Dyce and see HSTs going past with literally a handful of people on them. Government are subsidising just now but it won't last forever. They spent the £330 million or so on the A2i already and literally nobody is using the rail service and with the government position on Covid those passengers aren't returning any time soon.
I live in Dyce and see HSTs going past with literally a handful of people on them. Government are subsidising just now but it won't last forever. They spent the £330 million or so on the A2i already and literally nobody is using the rail service and with the government position on Covid those passengers aren't returning any time soon.
jfowkes
Established Member
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2017
- Messages
- 1,271
Covid won't last forever. In the particular case of Dalcross, Covid will probably be over before there's a single spade in the ground.
As horrible as Covid is, pandemics are relatively short term events. The long term problems are climate change and air pollution, so the long term trend still needs to be more rail use.
CEN60
Member
- Joined
- 17 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 299
There are currently no plans to turn trains back at the proposed station at Dalcross.
Class 170101
On Moderation
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 8,664
More to the point it will be the debts from Covid that will last much much longer and the consequences for all including the railways that will last much longer.
GusB
Established Member
With all due respect, didn't you decide a couple of years ago that you were fed up with the rail service and that you'd be getting the bus from now on? If so, why are you still whining about the rail service?
Wynd
Member
My own understanding concerning the double track from Aberdeen North end to the new Junction at Hutcheon street is that many many moons ago when the Denburn St tunnel was singled, the floor collapsed. I understand the Den Burn still runs underneath the floor of the tunnel. So to fix this issue the floor of the tunnel was raised considerably.
That as I understand it is the back story.
Going forwards this tunnel is going to be a point of contention for a few reasons.
As discussed the Scottish Government strategy for electrifying out to Inverurie is well known and has been factored in to the earthworks on A2I upgrades.
However. The feasibility study that was conducted for re-opening the Formartine and Buchan highlighted that for Pathing and an hourly or half hourly service to Ellon and beyond, the Denburn tunnel becomes a serious bottleneck.
The study highlights the cost of this would be borne by the F&B, which is one reason the cost of this project was exaggerated beyond all reasonable proportions to an astronomical £350m even though much of the line is fully intact only being closed and lifted in IIRC 1977.
Then there is the freight loading gauge issue and fitting wires in to a tunnel that never had it considered.
Given its a cut and cover one wonders if its altogether easier to just cut it out altogether.
Then you have Aberdeen City Council in the mix and the less said about them the better.
Someone mentioned Alford, which has recently appeared on a Railscot linked article as a candidate for reopening along with Deeside. Add that in to the mix and the pathing at the North End of Aberdeen station demands drastic changes in the layout. Re opening 8&9 in the Joint wont cut it.
Anyway, back on topic. The A2I upgrade is a fantastic improvement, no more waiting at Dyce for the Northbound, and has made the jouney considerably smoother. Then then there is Kintore which is very welcome.
That as I understand it is the back story.
Going forwards this tunnel is going to be a point of contention for a few reasons.
As discussed the Scottish Government strategy for electrifying out to Inverurie is well known and has been factored in to the earthworks on A2I upgrades.
However. The feasibility study that was conducted for re-opening the Formartine and Buchan highlighted that for Pathing and an hourly or half hourly service to Ellon and beyond, the Denburn tunnel becomes a serious bottleneck.
The study highlights the cost of this would be borne by the F&B, which is one reason the cost of this project was exaggerated beyond all reasonable proportions to an astronomical £350m even though much of the line is fully intact only being closed and lifted in IIRC 1977.
Then there is the freight loading gauge issue and fitting wires in to a tunnel that never had it considered.
Given its a cut and cover one wonders if its altogether easier to just cut it out altogether.
Then you have Aberdeen City Council in the mix and the less said about them the better.
Someone mentioned Alford, which has recently appeared on a Railscot linked article as a candidate for reopening along with Deeside. Add that in to the mix and the pathing at the North End of Aberdeen station demands drastic changes in the layout. Re opening 8&9 in the Joint wont cut it.
Anyway, back on topic. The A2I upgrade is a fantastic improvement, no more waiting at Dyce for the Northbound, and has made the jouney considerably smoother. Then then there is Kintore which is very welcome.
CEN60
Member
- Joined
- 17 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 299
In the early days of the A2I Project an report on "track doubling" thru' the Tunnels was prepared and submitted to Network Rail - bottom line Modern stock & electrification was not feasible without massive track lowers thru' the tunnels, which from an engineering (and cost) point of view are not preferable (or possible in some locations) - I know this because I had some involvement with the report!
Wynd
Member
Ah OK, that's interesting. The not preferable is understandable, but the not possible is more intriguing.
What makes the project not possible?
Nothing is impossible to those willing to invest a sufficient amount of capital - either human or financial. Since Network Rail has plenty of the former and only limited amounts of the latter, one can surmise that it would just be too expensive.
CEN60
Member
- Joined
- 17 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 299
Wynd
Member
Thanks for the clarification.
Agreed capital is a limited resource, and its great that the North East is getting some more spend per the title of this thread.
Looking forwards the Denburn and Hutcheon st Tunnels are going to be back on the agenda sooner or later, if you are in the camp that Rail will grow again in the future and isn't doomed!
If the cost is so high, surely cutting them out and bridging the roads/premises above with new structures may need to become an option?
It sounds as though a double track W12 electrified line just wont fit.
Was this kind of suggestion considered as part of the study?
Agreed capital is a limited resource, and its great that the North East is getting some more spend per the title of this thread.
Looking forwards the Denburn and Hutcheon st Tunnels are going to be back on the agenda sooner or later, if you are in the camp that Rail will grow again in the future and isn't doomed!
If the cost is so high, surely cutting them out and bridging the roads/premises above with new structures may need to become an option?
It sounds as though a double track W12 electrified line just wont fit.
Was this kind of suggestion considered as part of the study?
CEN60
Member
- Joined
- 17 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 299
Removing the cover was not considered within the report (from what I remember) - it was purely an assessment of proposed rolling stock & electrification clearances. Track Lowers were considered, tightening up the sixfoot (ie gap between tracks) to less than standard & also converting the track into slab track (as this drastically reduces the clearance required to the tunnel) was also considered (all from memory - it was a few years ago now)
Deltic1961
Member
- Joined
- 30 May 2018
- Messages
- 645
I am getting the bus, and it's a good reliable service. More concerned about spending more public money on a rail system that is going to have greatly reduced passenger numbers for some considerable time.
It's the "big city" commuter networks that will see long-term drops in passenger numbers (or at least low growth in numbers) due to increased homeworking. I'm not sure how much that applies to the Aberdeen-Inverness route.
Wynd
Member
Is this in Aberdeen? I ask because if its a choice between bus and rail both in the city and shire, one is the embodiment of fast and reliable and one is the antithesis of that.
backontrack
Established Member
The loop at Dalcross is a welcome addition - hopefully alongside the Lentran Long Loop, which looks as if it's finally in the works. I can't shake the feeling, however, that more doubling on the Highland Mainline would be more valuable for Inverness customers than a station & loop at Dalcross...
Network Rail have submitted plans to The Highland Council for a station at Inverness Airport (Dalcross)
www.scottishconstructionnow.com
Network Rail submits plans for new station at Inverness Airport
Revised plans a double platform railway station at Inverness Airport have been submitted to the Highland Council.
www.scottishconstructionnow.com
Revised plans a double platform railway station at Inverness Airport have been submitted to the Highland Council.
Proposals drawn up by BAM Nuttall and AECOM on behalf of Network Rail, include a footbridge, lift, car parking, bus drop off zone and waiting shelters at Dalcross near the new town of Tornagrain.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
The footway is rather narrow on what looks like quite a fast road - https://goo.gl/maps/kkWFAwikQmNdaNxW6
Also if you have to build two flights of stairs and two lifts anyway, adding a cross-span probably doesn't add much more cost. Not having to touch the existing structure reduces risk.
Oh, I thought the bridge was being updated as part of the station plans.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
Looking on Google it appears to be a recently-built road and bridge, so I assume there is no need to change it. If others know better then please post!
It may well be. The Dalcross Station project goes back a long way, in the early phases they had proposed upgrading/replacement of the road bridge. I guess things have moved on since then on the road side of things.
Stathern Jc
Member
The bridge was built around 10 years ago as part of an upgrade and diversion of the road to the airport well clear of the end of the runway, and to encourage traffic to join the A96 at a roundabout rather than the awkward junction near Castle Stuart. I think I recall mention of improved radar etc to enable the airport to operate in poor weather, and I thought scope for larger planes too but little sign of that as yet. The old single track road was right by the end of the runway where there were traffic lights.
Looking at the plans I was surprised to see that there is space for double tracks and platforms beneath. I'd assumed the platforms would start at the bridge and run eastwards.
Compared with the earlier approved plan for a halt type single platform this is a pleasing improvement, the benefits of a loop in the 15 miles between Inverness and Nairn are obvious.
One of the drawings with the application at https://wam.highland.gov.uk/wam/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=QKNUSIIHGQN00 shows the platforms as 160m long, should be enough for a 2+5 HST and more.
Looking at the plans I was surprised to see that there is space for double tracks and platforms beneath. I'd assumed the platforms would start at the bridge and run eastwards.
Compared with the earlier approved plan for a halt type single platform this is a pleasing improvement, the benefits of a loop in the 15 miles between Inverness and Nairn are obvious.
One of the drawings with the application at https://wam.highland.gov.uk/wam/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=QKNUSIIHGQN00 shows the platforms as 160m long, should be enough for a 2+5 HST and more.
Last edited:
For the benefit of anyone who, like me, didn't know what/who Norboard is, they produce manufactured wood products. There was a trial this year of moving raw timber to the mill (near Dalcross) by rail.
Timber moved by rail for first time in a decade
A trial has been running in the Highlands moving tonnes of wood from Caithness south to Inverness.
www.bbc.com
They also move some product to market by rail.
- Status