Borders Railway 10 years on

[och aye]

There's an article marking the 10th anniversary to the day that the line was opened to passengers. It doesn't feel that long ago, but "time flies" I guess.

The impression I have is that the line has been a success, or in some cases from reading the article a victim of its own success with overcrowding and operational issues.

With the announcement of electrification works getting the green light, hopefully the reliability and capacity issues will be resolved over the next few years.

Borders Railway: The region that got its railway back

How has the first decade of the Edinburgh to Tweedbank line gone - and what does the future hold?

www.bbc.co.uk

Ten years have passed since the transport scene in the Scottish Borders was transformed.

On 6 September 2015 the first passenger services ran on the new rail line between Tweedbank and Edinburgh.

Three days' later, the Queen officially opened the route on the day she became Britain's longest-serving monarch.

 

[styles]

There's an article marking the 10th anniversary to the day that the line was opened to passengers. It doesn't feel that long ago, but "time flies" I guess.

The impression I have is that the line has been a success, or in some cases from reading the article a victim of its own success with overcrowding and operational issues.

With the announcement of electrification works getting the green light, hopefully the reliability and capacity issues will be resolved over the next few years.

Borders Railway: The region that got its railway back

How has the first decade of the Edinburgh to Tweedbank line gone - and what does the future hold?

www.bbc.co.uk

It's my local line now and plenty of people in speak to say they weren't positive about it... until it opened, now they love it.

I certainly find it handy for heading into town and the services run quite early and late so it's handy coming back from late night events as well as getting to some Waverley for earlier connections at Waverley.

Reliability has been an issue, though anecdotally some of this is related to single track plus passing loops I believe.

 

[Llandudno]

It's my local line now and plenty of people in speak to say they weren't positive about it... until it opened, now they love it.

I certainly find it handy for heading into town and the services run quite early and late so it's handy coming back from late night events as well as getting to some Waverley for earlier connections at Waverley.

Reliability has been an issue, though anecdotally some of this is related to single track plus passing loops I believe.

Is reliability any worse than anywhere else on the rail network…?

XC/Northern etc…?

 

[GordonT]

Is reliability any worse than anywhere else on the rail network…?

XC/Northern etc…?

It has the benefit of being a relatively self-contained line of route and so doesn't often have to contend with the repercussions of messes generated elsewhere in the network.

 

[70014IronDuke]

It's my local line now and plenty of people in speak to say they weren't positive about it... until it opened, now they love it.

I'm sure if millions of ££££ were thrown into reopening *bery*stw*th to C*rm*th*n then local people would be positive about it. That would not make it necessarily 'a good thing'.

Don't get me wrong, personally I'm very happy that the current Border's Line has been reopened, but the BBC article quoted, IMO, is shockingly poor. It almost reads like a PR puff piece written by RailFuture, possibly even worse.

Indeed, I'm surprised forum readers, many of whom are quick to slam press articles for technical errors in regular rail stories, have not attacked it.

The two journalists, at the most fleetingly possible mention, write:

"Not everyone, of course, is a fan - particularly of its price tag." - except they then totally fail to even mention a single number, nor any criticism of the investment outlay whatsoever.

Worse still, they then merrily talk of extending the line TO CARLISLE with some seemingly professional comment, yet again, not one single price tag mentioned nor any simple comparison regarding the population comparisons. Eaually poor, or of any travel patterns, between the populations served by the current line versus that of the massively longer extension to Carlisle.

Anyone O-level geography student could tell from a glance at the map that the good folk of Newcastleton are most unlikely to suddenly take up commuting to Edinburgh (or Carlisle) in any meaningful numbers were the line to be extended.

Amateur 'journalism' at best (though I'm not necessarily blaming the two journalists themselves, it's the editor who should take the real blame).

 

[styles]

I'm sure if millions of ££££ were thrown into reopening *bery*stw*th to C*rm*th*n then local people would be positive about it. That would not make it necessarily 'a good thing'.

Ok but many people do consider it a good thing.

Don't get me wrong, personally I'm very happy that the current Border's Line has been reopened, but the BBC article quoted, IMO, is shockingly poor. It almost reads like a PR puff piece written by RailFuture, possibly even worse.

Indeed, I'm surprised forum readers, many of whom are quick to slam press articles for technical errors in regular rail stories, have not attacked it.

The two journalists, at the most fleetingly possible mention, write:

"Not everyone, of course, is a fan - particularly of its price tag." - except they then totally fail to even mention a single number, nor any criticism of the investment outlay whatsoever.

Except this bit where they mention the price tag?

Built at a cost of nearly £300m, the project saw 30 miles of new railway constructed along with seven stations

Worse still, they then merrily talk of extending the line TO CARLISLE with some seemingly professional comment, yet again, not one single price tag mentioned nor any simple comparison regarding the population comparisons. Eaually poor, or of any travel patterns, between the populations served by the current line versus that of the massively longer extension to Carlisle.

There is no price tag for that, but as the article mentions, there is funding set aside for a readability study.

They link to this further article about that from February where it was announced UK gov has committed £5m, and Scottish gov has a while committed £5m if UK gov would fill the gap: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c05mlp43gnqo

Anyone O-level geography student could tell from a glance at the map that the good folk of Newcastleton are most unlikely to suddenly take up commuting to Edinburgh (or Carlisle) in any meaningful numbers were the line to be extended.

Amateur 'journalism' at best (though I'm not necessarily blaming the two journalists themselves, it's the editor who should take the real blame).

BBC aren't there to say whether it'll happen or not though, that's the point of the feasibility study.

Fwiw I agree that it probably won't happen and wouldn't deliver the benefits of e.g. the existing line.

Could they dig deeper into the feasibility of extending to Carlisle? Probably. But it's factual to say a readability study has funding set aside, and assuming that study happens, it'll be a lot more in depth than a few days research by a BBC travel correspondent with much bigger fish to fry

 

[Bald Rick]

Interesting about the price, the oft quoted £300m. It was nearly 50% more than that when all costs for the reopening of the line are £300m is a construction price at a specific cost date and AIUI does not include the inflation cost rises later in the project before completion).

Allowing for inflation, the cost of the line in current prices is around £700m. Still pretty cheap for a main line to be fair, but then it was largely open country, on a long protected route, with relatively few neighbours to annoy. (I once spoke to the community engagement chap for the project. He knew every affected neighbour personally).