Borders line (Scotland) electrification news and updates

[AndrewE]

Agreed: BEMUs are the future. There are two strategic decisions needed now for future GB electrification programmes:

1. What range should BEMUs have off the wires? (i.e. operating range in all conditions, without over-draining batteries). This determines what the spacing needs to be between islands of electrification. I note that the 802207 trial suggested that a BEMU based on the 802 with "all three GUs were replaced by batteries, a return run of 135 km off wire was feasible e.g. York to Scarborough."
2. At what rate should BEMUs recharge? Should they recharge at the limits of OHLE contact wires (i.e. 7.5MW), which might mean more expensive batteries to accept that charging rate? Or at a slower rate, which would require longer lengths of OHLE in every island of electrification?

Getting back on topic, there is a real risk that the four and a half miles of electrification being planned for the 30-mile Borders Line will prove in future to have been unnecessary.

but until something is done there will still be DMUs running into Waverley from this line. Things might well change as batteries and charging capabilties and systems develop, but I would say go with what works now (it's not an immature technology) and get rid of some more diesel emissions in the city centre.
The next time stock needs renewing will be the time to see what has emerged and move to whatever has become the most cost- and energy-efficient system by then. For now just forget the bionic duckweed, hydrogen and other subsidy-farming rubbish (see the last paragraph of https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnv6e5l588jo "A house built on sand") and implement a sensible BEMU scheme asap.

 

[philthetube]

In principle I agree. There are exceptions.

One thing that is often misunderstood is the oower supply requirements. Ultimately a fleet of BEMUs needs roughly the same amount of power as a fleet of EMUs. So the power supply you need for electrification you still need for BEMUs too, The benefit is that you can make use of soare capacity in existing power supplies in some cases, which is more difficult to do with straight electrification.

Sorry this is probably me being thick.

Are you saying that they can decide to electrify the bits of the line where there is spare supply or something else?

 

[Bald Rick]

Sorry this is probably me being thick.

Are you saying that they can decide to electrify the bits of the line where there is spare supply or something else?

I’m saying that whilst some parts of the electrified network are at the limit of power supply, some parts have capacity to spare. Therefore battery trains that are in their charging phase on parts of the existing electrified network with spare capacity are less likely to need expensive power supply upgrades.

 

[The exile]

I’m saying that whilst some parts of the electrified network are at the limit of power supply, some parts have capacity to spare. Therefore battery trains that are in their charging phase on parts of the existing electrified network with spare capacity are less likely to need expensive power supply upgrades.

But in terms of not yet electrified sections of the rail network, it is also true that there are areas where the grid supply itself can cope with much higher demand without expensive upgrade (for example, because power hungry industries have closed down / reduced their power demand), whereas there are others which can't. BEMUs might mean that there is no need to draw power from particularly overstretched parts of the grid - at least not immediately.

 

[philthetube]

I’m saying that whilst some parts of the electrified network are at the limit of power supply, some parts have capacity to spare. Therefore battery trains that are in their charging phase on parts of the existing electrified network with spare capacity are less likely to need expensive power supply upgrades.

got you, thanks

 

[themiller]

A question that’s in my mind is that now that electrification (part) is authorised and presumably in planning, how would the future extension to Hawick or beyond affect the proposed supply point at the current end of the line? If it‘s a trickle charged battery, could this feed to Hawick or would the kit require to be relocated to the new end? Or would it be cheaper to install a full conventional feeder which would be able to feed south from Tweedbank?

 

[waverley47]

A question that’s in my mind is that now that electrification (part) is authorised and presumably in planning, how would the future extension to Hawick or beyond affect the proposed supply point at the current end of the line? If it‘s a trickle charged battery, could this feed to Hawick or would the kit require to be relocated to the new end? Or would it be cheaper to install a full conventional feeder which would be able to feed south from Tweedbank?

That's immaterial.

It's not a trickle charger feeder, it's a normal, albeit slightly smaller than average feeder. If it were to be extended which it won't be, then it could feed to any extension. But it won't be extended, so there's no issue there.

The electrification isn't in planning, it's happening; the feeder station is being built, the line is closed over weekends in March for piling works.

The rolling program in scope includes a rolling program of planning, which means that there are already detailed wiring diagrams drawn up for a lot of lines. These feeder stations were ordered in 2019.

 

[themiller]

That's immaterial.

It's not a trickle charger feeder, it's a normal, albeit slightly smaller than average feeder. If it were to be extended which it won't be, then it could feed to any extension. But it won't be extended, so there's no issue there.

The electrification isn't in planning, it's happening; the feeder station is being built, the line is closed over weekends in March for piling works.

The rolling program in scope includes a rolling program of planning, which means that there are already detailed wiring diagrams drawn up for a lot of lines. These feeder stations were ordered in 2019.

Thanks for that. I’ve not been keeping up to date with this one but I thought I caught a suggestion up thread regarding batteries at Tweedbank - must try to keep current with this one rather than scanning.

 

[Bald Rick]

how would the future extension to Hawick or beyond affect the proposed supply point at the current end of the line?

It’s not a question that is going to need answering!

 

[Mr. SW]

For those interested, here is a link to Open Infrastructure Map showing power lines across the the world. Here is southern Scotland.

Open Infrastructure Map

Open map of the world's electricity, telecoms, oil, and gas infrastructure, using data from OpenStreetMap.

openinframap.org

Galashiels and Hawick are marked. If you zoom in to Gala, you can see the course of the power cables adjacent to Tweedbank Station, so careful with that auger, then.

 

[Nottingham59]

but until something is done there will still be DMUs running into Waverley from this line.

Of course something should be done: order BEMUs with a range of 100 miles off the wires. There are plenty of examples in Europe to follow.

 

[The exile]

Of course something should be done: order BEMUs with a range of 100 miles off the wires. There are plenty of examples in Europe to follow.

BEMUs are going to be ordered - there’s not much point in any of this wiring if they aren’t!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The electrification isn't in planning, it's happening; the feeder station is being built, the line is closed over weekends in March for piling works.

Realistically, although a longish drive from Preston, a car journey would allow me to photograph progress much better.

The rolling program in scope includes a rolling program of planning, which means that there are already detailed wiring diagrams drawn up for a lot of lines. These feeder stations were ordered in 2019.

Absolutely beautiful music to my ears.

 

[AndrewE]

Of course something should be done: order BEMUs with a range of 100 miles off the wires. There are plenty of examples in Europe to follow.

but I was replying to @Nottingham59 who was debating what should be done and what the best option might be... I said just do something now and get some more diesels out of Waverley !

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Counted ten piles installed on the east side of the line this morning around Bowland.

 

[gingertom]

Counted ten piles installed on the east side of the line this morning around Bowland.

that's progress- I'll take that.

 

[SJDCornwall]

I know this is strictly off of subject but surely down south of england there are suitable areas of non electrified railway that could be supplied with suitable bemu stock now so that emissions can be reduced and real life type expeirience railway useage gained without masses of money being spent. I watched this line coming to life 10 years ago thanks to the internet and his line should be used as an real life example as to what can be achieved

 

[Western Gaffer]

I know this is strictly off of subject but surely down south of england there are suitable areas of non electrified railway that could be supplied with suitable bemu stock now so that emissions can be reduced and real life type expeirience railway useage gained without masses of money being spent. I watched this line coming to life 10 years ago thanks to the internet and his line should be used as an real life example as to what can be achieved

Surely there are already BEMU trials in England that will be generating such real life experience, for example:

GWR Class 230 Information, Movements & Discussion.

Whilst there is a separate thread specifically for the Greenford Battery Trial, I thought I would start a more general information, movements & discussion thread for the GWR Class 230. Possibly 3 units (numbers n/k at this time) will be moving to Reading TCD in the latter half of this month...

www.railforums.co.uk

Ideas for future battery-electric (BEMU) units based on GWR Class 230 technology

Longer term, what's the plan, is it to just prove the system works, and that its robust enough to become the basis for further development, with it trialed on other lines operated by GWR, Or just a one off, As GWR already own other 230 stock, might we see a couple of other demonstrators, that...

www.railforums.co.uk

and the earlier Borderlands trial (not just in England!)?

 

[The exile]

I know this is strictly off of subject but surely down south of england there are suitable areas of non electrified railway that could be supplied with suitable bemu stock now so that emissions can be reduced and real life type expeirience railway useage gained without masses of money being spent. I watched this line coming to life 10 years ago thanks to the internet and his line should be used as an real life example as to what can be achieved

GWR are in the preliminary stages of a major stock procurement (don’t hold your breath, though). It would be very surprising if BEMUs didn’t feature. Various “top up facilities” would presumably then come as part of the package.

 

[ajwffc]

The electrification isn't in planning, it's happening; the feeder station is being built, the line is closed over weekends in March for piling works.

just closed on Sundays but the last one to Tweedbank on the Saturday and the first two to Edinburgh on the Monday are buses

 

[fegguk]

There are works compounds a Tweedbank, Winston Road in Galashiels close to the main substation and one at Bowland where the wires will end with stacks of piles. Each site populated with white vans and pickups.

 

[Scotrail344Lad]

Okay
Thanks

 

[Nottingham59]

BEMUs are going to be ordered - there’s not much point in any of this wiring if they aren’t!

Yes, but the point some people may miss is that BEMUs with a range of 100 miles will still have 40 miles of charge left after the 30 mile trip to Tweedbank, and back. Without having to recharge at all.

 

[The exile]

Yes, but the point some people may miss is that BEMUs with a range of 100 miles will still have 40 miles of charge left after the 30 mile trip to Tweedbank, and back. Without having to recharge at all.

Yes, but while you don’t build all your plans round the worst case scenario, they have to be well towards that end of the continuum or you’re asking for trouble.

 

[waverley47]

Yes, but the point some people may miss is that BEMUs with a range of 100 miles will still have 40 miles of charge left after the 30 mile trip to Tweedbank, and back. Without having to recharge at all.

Right yes, but this wiring was ordered back in the mists of time, and the range of battery units was far more uncertain. The next steps of wiring was something I was working on back in 2015, while we had the Levenmouth BCR up and running; the feeder stations were ordered in 2018!

 

[John R]

Yes, but the point some people may miss is that BEMUs with a range of 100 miles will still have 40 miles of charge left after the 30 mile trip to Tweedbank, and back. Without having to recharge at all.

Isn’t that assuming they have managed to be fully charged by the time they leave the wires? Which may not be the case, depending on how quickly they can recharge as well as draw enough current to run under the wires.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Mar 2026 ==

Also, is that 100 mile range the absolute maximum, or the target range in normal service? If it’s the former, and under normal conditions you want to keep it between 20 and 80% charged, then the effective range is actually about 60 miles.

 

[hwl]

Yes, but the point some people may miss is that BEMUs with a range of 100 miles will still have 40 miles of charge left after the 30 mile trip to Tweedbank, and back. Without having to recharge at all.

After 100miles of use they will need a very long section of running under the wires or a long time in an electrified terminus station to recharge.
"You can't have your cake and eat it too" very much applies in this situation.

The current Scotrail plan is an excellent compromise between battery capacity, recharge times /rates and minimising ageing effects from stressful duty cycles.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

After 100miles of use they will need a very long section of running under the wires or a long time in an electrified terminus station to recharge.
"You can't have your cake and eat it too" very much applies in this situation.

The current Scotrail plan is an excellent compromise between battery capacity, recharge times /rates and minimising ageing effects from stressful duty cycles.

There going to have to be very specific to potential BEMU suppliers about what they want out of the trains given they've pre ordained the limits of electrification rather than sought an optimised solution in conjunction with the rolling stock supplier.

 

[Nottingham59]

After 100miles of use they will need a very long section of running under the wires or a long time in an electrified terminus station to recharge.

From Newcraighall to Waverley and back is at least 28 minutes under the wires, allowing 2 minutes turnaround. I guess the big question is: how long will the BEMUs currently being procured for Scotrail take to absorb 60 miles of charge?

For comparison, the Stadler Flirt Akku claims "Charging time under overhead line" at 15 minutes. https://www.stadlerrail.com/en/solutions/rolling-stock/mainline-flirt-akku

There going to have to be very specific to potential BEMU suppliers about what they want out of the trains given they've pre ordained the limits of electrification rather than sought an optimised solution in conjunction with the rolling stock supplier.

Or they just live with the overprovision that is baked into the current electrification programme. It all adds redundancy, I suppose.

The current Scotrail plan is an excellent compromise between battery capacity, recharge times /rates and minimising ageing effects from stressful duty cycles.

Yes it was - at the time that the plan was developed. But as far as I can see, it did not have any provision for flexibility if battery performance improved after those calculations were done. Where were the break points in the plan to say that, for instance, the Tweedbank OHLE could be curtailed to just two miles, if future BEMUs would routinely take enough charge in the 11 minutes from Galashiels to Tweedbank and back?


But that's water under the bridge. What concerns me is that the rail industry seems to be making the same mistake today - despite the rapid development of battery technology, and the expectation that battery performance will continue to improve manyfold within the lifetime of any electrification scheme being specified today. And that's performance in both total capacity, which will increase the distance needed between islands of electrification, and recharge speed, which will reduce the length of OHLE need at each island to fully recharge a battery without degrading it.

 

[NotATrainspott]

There's a trade-off where the shorter the electrified sections are, the more power draw will be required. If 100% of it is electrified then each train only needs to draw its instantaneous power requirement from the grid via the feeder stations. If only 10% is electrified, then for that 10% of the time it'll draw 10x its normal power draw. The rest of the time, it'll sit idle. This only goes away when the tracks are busy enough, but then you're likely better off with proper wiring. If such a large part of the overall cost and complexity of the scheme is the grid connection, then going for a much larger connection that is only used a fraction of the of the time might not be that sensible.

Batteries are an incredibly interesting and novel capability but they are unlikely to be as transformative for rail as they have been for cars. Private cars benefit from the fact that most of the time they are unused and basically wasted. This waste is where you can experiment with new ideas, and deliver huge efficiency gains. Trains (and other commercial vehicles like long distance trucks and aircraft) are used far more intensely, and so we have already optimised them far more heavily. It's why long haul aircraft are going to be so hard to electrify: a modern high-bypass turbofan in cruise for 10+ hours isn't far off the efficiency you'd get by burning fuel for electricity. The money needed to electrify them can't come from fuel savings alone. There's definitely opportunity for enhancement, but it's not going to be as transformative as it can be with cars.

So salami slicing a few hundred metres of wiring off the scheme and/or holding back a few years to wait for marginally better batteries seems like a false economy to me. The benefit of batteries is that they allow us to apply the 80-20 rule to electrification. We can get 80% of the benefit with 20% of the wiring, and we can avoid spending 80% of the cost on the most difficult 20% of the route kilometres. Given that the Borders line was built for electrification clearances anyway, it'll make little overall difference to the cost to shave a few more off. We may as well just replicate the wiring pattern we see up in Fife where we do have more and more expensive legacy infrastructure problems (including old semaphore signalling in places).