Borders Railway - Now Open

[Altfish]

I can't put a positive spin on this. All that single track on mostly double track bed Shame on the Scottish Government / Transport Scotland.

It's called value engineering, the scheme would have never got off the ground if it had been to a higher specification. Be grateful for what we have.

 

[fegguk]

Had the value engineering approach been taken more seriously in 1968 the line would never have closed North of Hawick. The ideal is often the enemy of the good.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Check out those guard rails protecting structures eg at 00:15 to 00:27

 

[Pinza-C55]

It's called value engineering, the scheme would have never got off the ground if it had been to a higher specification. Be grateful for what we have.

Not arguing with the single track if it keeps costs down but building single track over or under bridges is just silly cost cutting.

 

[HowardGWR]

Check out those guard rails protecting structures eg at 00:15 to 00:27

I did but I can't understand what you are saying - could you expand please?

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Check out those guard rails protecting structures eg at 00:15 to 00:27

I did but I can't understand what you are saying - could you expand please?

Check out:
A feeble and unnecessary pun (the terms 'guard rails' and 'check rails' are often confused)

:
An acknowledgement of the above

those guard rails protecting [newly built or refurbished railway] structures:
A reference to http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=117035]this thread also currently active on the Infrastructure & Stations forum, and of which some at least of those reading this will be aware. 4 sets of guard rails can be seen in the linked 4' 44" video.

eg 00:15 to 00:27:
An example, in elasped time, of where the guard rails might be seen in the video

HTH
(Hope this helps)

 

[HowardGWR]

Check out:
A feeble and unnecessary pun (the terms 'guard rails' and 'check rails' are often confused)

:
An acknowledgement of the above

those guard rails protecting [newly built or refurbished railway] structures:
A reference to http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=117035]this thread also currently active on the Infrastructure & Stations forum, and of which some at least of those reading this will be aware. 4 sets of guard rails can be seen in the linked 4' 44" video.

eg 00:15 to 00:27:
An example, in elasped time, of where the guard rails might be seen in the video

HTH
(Hope this helps)

Sadly no PV. I understood all that you have just explained before you have explained it, but I don't understand what was your point. Perhaps you were not making one, in which case I was trying to read into what was not there. Apologies.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

My last try:

Perhaps someone will recall if there were any such precautionary trackwork measures on bridges on the original Waverley route; a cursory look at old photographs and films of likely places has failed to find any. Trap points abound and check rails can be seen on curves but I have not so far been able to find evidence of any guard rails on this part of the Waverley route.

This is, for me at least, an interesting contrast of safety standards between then and now. For some, used to the older standards, the new arrangements might appear 'over engineered' - not that I am suggesting they actually are.

 

[edwin_m]

My last try:

Perhaps someone will recall if there were any such precautionary trackwork measures on bridges on the original Waverley route; a cursory look at old photographs and films of likely places has failed to find any. Trap points abound and check rails can be seen on curves but I have not so far been able to find evidence of any guard rails on this part of the Waverley route.

This is, for me at least, an interesting contrast of safety standards between then and now. For some, used to the older standards, the new arrangements might appear 'over engineered' - not that I am suggesting they actually are.

Guard rails are a standard precaution on underbridges and viaducts where the parapet isn't considered solid enough to prevent a derailed train going off the edge. They are likely to be a reasonably practicable means of preventing a minor derailment becoming a major disaster.

I don't know how long they have been used, but I suspect a long time.

Your comment about trap points should I think refer to catch points (used to derail divided trains rolling back down a gradient, whereas trap points derail trains exiting loops and sidings when not signalled to do so).

 

[Ploughman]

A friend of mine has this comment about the You Tube clip -
Is it just me, or is all that ‘riot fencing’ utterly depressing?
..and why plant all those trees just to have to cut them down when leaf fall becomes a problem?
.. and as for the modern method of having one standard tubular pole for speed restriction signage and then not trimming the top off. Obviously aesthetics is not a word in the Network Rail manual, or Highways authorities these days either.

 

[ADRboy]

A friend of mine has this comment about the You Tube clip -
Is it just me, or is all that ‘riot fencing’ utterly depressing?
..and why plant all those trees just to have to cut them down when leaf fall becomes a problem?
.. and as for the modern method of having one standard tubular pole for speed restriction signage and then not trimming the top off. Obviously aesthetics is not a word in the Network Rail manual, or Highways authorities these days either.

The plants picked are ones which don't shed leaves. Fences do look brutal just now.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Your comment about trap points should I think refer to catch points (used to derail divided trains rolling back down a gradient, whereas trap points derail trains exiting loops and sidings when not signalled to do so).

No, it was indeed trap points on sidings I was meaning. The photos and films of the Waverley line I was looking at earlier today had trap points, but no catch points (though considering how heavily graded other parts of the line were I imagine there were some catch points used in places on the line).

 

[Pinza-C55]

No, it was indeed trap points on sidings I was meaning. The photos and films of the Waverley line I was looking at earlier today had trap points, but no catch points (though considering how heavily graded other parts of the line were I imagine there were some catch points used in places on the line).

If there were Catch Points they would have to have Catch Point signs in case Wrong Line working was in force eg during engineering works.

 

[QueensCurve]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Altfish View Post
It's called value engineering, the scheme would have never got off the ground if it had been to a higher specification. Be grateful for what we have.
Not arguing with the single track if it keeps costs down but building single track over or under bridges is just silly cost cutting.
Pinza-C55 is offline Report Post Reply With QuoteNot arguing with the single track if it keeps costs down but building single track over or under bridges is just silly cost cutting.

Both positions have an elephant of truth in them.

It is true that the best option for reopening the route was to select the adopted mix of single and double track.

It remains true that it might have been sensible to make passive provision for later conversion to double track - and electrification come to that.

 

[snowball]

It remains true that it might have been sensible to make passive provision for later conversion to double track - and electrification come to that.

Passive provision for electrification has been made, in that any new bridges will certainly have the headroom (as do virtually all new bridges over railways), and that where the line is single and goes under an old arched bridge, it has been aligned under the centre of the arch.

 

[Pinza-C55]

Passive provision for electrification has been made, in that any new bridges will certainly have the headroom (as do virtually all new bridges over railways), and that where the line is single and goes under an old arched bridge, it has been aligned under the centre of the arch.

Passive provision for electrification isn't the same as passive provision for doubling. If you have a new single track bridge and you wish to electrify it "as is" you simply electrify it, job done. I would suggest that for a single track railway to justify the cost of electrification then it would need to be carrying a lot of passengers - so many in fact, that it would warrant doubling. In that case old bridge + centre single track is a false economy because you may need to slew the single track, lay a 2nd track, electrify AND rebuild the bridge.

 

[HowardGWR]

Passive provision for electrification isn't the same as passive provision for doubling. If you have a new single track bridge and you wish to electrify it "as is" you simply electrify it, job done. I would suggest that for a single track railway to justify the cost of electrification then it would need to be carrying a lot of passengers - so many in fact, that it would warrant doubling. In that case old bridge + centre single track is a false economy because you may need to slew the single track, lay a 2nd track, electrify AND rebuild the bridge.

I think they knew that, but decided to take the risk that the New Waverley would not be as successful as we here would hope. Thanks to Pax Vobiscum for further post.

 

[clc]

Both positions have an elephant of truth in them.

It is true that the best option for reopening the route was to select the adopted mix of single and double track.

It remains true that it might have been sensible to make passive provision for later conversion to double track - and electrification come to that.

Would it have been a mammoth undertaking to make provision for double tracking?

 

[Railsigns]

Would it have been a mammoth undertaking to make provision for double tracking?

Yes; a truly enormous tusk.

 

[najaB]

Yes; a truly enormous tusk.

Please, gentlemen, could we not derail this thread with a lot of irrelephant puns.

 

[edwin_m]

Please, gentlemen, could we not derail this thread with a lot of irrelephant puns.

Tusk, tusk.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Would it have been a mammoth undertaking to make provision for double tracking?

Yes; a truly enormous tusk.

Please, gentlemen, could we not derail this thread with a lot of irrelephant puns.

Quite - this thread has become a little woolly now.

 

[HowardGWR]

Quite - this thread has become a little wooly now.

Woolly? Nevertheless a mammoth contribution.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Woolly? Nevertheless a mammoth contribution.

Yes - 'woolly' and I'm a wally

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Never let it be said that dour Scotsmen have no sense of humour.

 

[edwin_m]

The Waverley should have been rebuilt as a trunk route.

 

[Railsigns]

The Waverley should have been rebuilt as a trunk route.

Not on your Nellie.

 

[Class 170101]

baaaa to the lot of you :P

 

[HowardGWR]

baaaa to the lot of you :P

Baaaa?

'Squeak' would have been more effective. We don't like them you know.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Baaaa?

If I may be so bold as to make reference to the Specsavers advertisment where an elderly couple decide to eat their cheese sandwiches on a pleasure beach ride seat rather than a park bench....."What sort of a wheel formation was that"..