Edinburgh electrification

[MacCookie]

I struggle with it's usefulness for the airport. You will need to change onto a tram something you can do at Edinburgh Park anyway.

Extra capacity maybe. The non-stop service needs to pass a slower service somewhere so that will enable it. However if lets say the Edinburgh - Glasgow service that stops a Linlithgow and Polmont was diverted. The time penalty would force Edinburgh - Linlithgow passengers onto the now quicker Stirling train so the diversion will almost certainly cause more losers than winners.

How long will it take between Haymarket and Winchburgh Junction via Gogar verses via Newbridge Junction?

Ewan

 

[PaulLothian]

Also interesting to know if planners are factoring in the proposed station for Winchburgh, strongly featured in the local area plan. Will have to think about this more, but alternating Dunblanes via Gogar and Edinburgh Park, and similar for E-G stopping services could work. Might be better, except at off-peak times, if only the Dunblane services served Winchburgh, with onward connections to Glasgow at Linlithgow.

 

[Failed Unit]

How long will it take between Haymarket and Winchburgh Junction via Gogar verses via Newbridge Junction?

Ewan

Normally about 20 minutes more, but that is with a reversal so it could be a little as 5 minutes penalty if a cord existed and the trains could carry on a reasonable speed over it (and rejoining at Winchburgh). The line speed would also need to be raised on the Winchburgh branch.

If the sole point of this work is for a stop at Gogar it is a total waste of money as no-one benefits. If the work will provide a stop at Winchburgh then this is a good thing. I am not sure if an Electric diversion route is that important now considering that you now have 2 alternative routes to Glasgow so DMU's could cope with Linlithgow, Polmont, Falkirk and Croy if a diversion is needed.

I will have to look at the scope of the works in more detail, but the press only seem to say it is so the Linlithgow route can stop at Gogar for connections to the tram, which I always think what a waste of money when they already use Edinburgh Park!

 

[route101]

Yeah Edinburgh Park> Tram> Airport connection sounds good (Tram Completion permitting) Ive done that Dalmeny diversion before and recall waiting there for a while.

 

[Aictos]

Just been thinking on the Edinburgh to Glasgow electrification, I think Glasgow Queen Street to Edinburgh is being electrified but what about Glasgow Central to Edinburgh via Shotts, is that being done as part of the Edinburgh/Glasgow Electrification Programme?

 

[jopsuk]

Has to be hoped- otherwise it'll be an anomaly, the only one out of four routes between the two running diesels.

 

[me123]

It would make sense to electrify the Shotts line. There's been talk about it as part of electrifying the non-electrified branches in Glasgow.

One of the "benefits" would be to re-route it to the Low Level station to free up some capacity in the main station upstairs, although I think most people who use the route would fail to see how it benefits them in any way - it's likely to have a longer journey time and more stops.

 

[PaulLothian]

...what about Glasgow Central to Edinburgh via Shotts, is that being done as part of the Edinburgh/Glasgow Electrification Programme?

I think that won't happen any time soon. I remember it as about Phase 4 of the plan. Which is unfortunate, as it is unlikely at present to take substantial traffic off the roads; even with its newish 'express' services', the journey time from West Lothian to GLC is longer than the A-B line's planned times.

 

[tbtc]

It would make sense to electrify the Shotts line. There's been talk about it as part of electrifying the non-electrified branches in Glasgow.

One of the "benefits" would be to re-route it to the Low Level station to free up some capacity in the main station upstairs, although I think most people who use the route would fail to see how it benefits them in any way - it's likely to have a longer journey time and more stops.

Shotts would be one of the first ones on my list of Lines To Electrify - its already wired at each end, so there'd be no disruption to passengers in Edinburgh/Glasgow, plus it could integrate a lot better with the Low Level services to Bellshill etc. Plus there'd even be scope for morning/evening services to run Hamilton - Motherwell - Shotts - Edinburgh/ return, to give a direct EMU to more of Lanarkshire (if the East Coast/ XC services stop)

Much better to wire up these "gaps" than embark on new projects

 

[me123]

Whifflet's another one like that; electrified at both ends. There's also talk of diverting that to the low level, and that would probably be more readily accepted; it makes operational sense and wouldn't impact too much on the journey time.

Also, looking at future growth on the line, 3 car trains for all services would be likely to meet the demand for some time to come: I remember reading that 3 or 4 carriages are going to be needed on that line in the not-too-distant future, and putting Turbostars on the job might be a bit absurd! Electrifying and having 318s/320s operate services alongside other Argyle Line duties would solve that problem as well.

 

[route101]

Ha with a lot services moving over to Glasgow Low Level is there enough capacity . I would keep the Shotts in the High Level.

 

[me123]

So would I. It makes sense to keep them upstairs, because of the longer journey times involved.

But integrating the Whifflets into the Argyle Line timetable and running them into the Low Level is a good idea IMO, and it would free up valuable platform space at Glasgow Central. The issue with that would be Partick; it's already full up. So you'd need to start turning services back somewhere. The Kelvinhaugh turnback on the North Clyde Line (which seems almost certain to go ahead soon for the rerouted Cumbernauld services) will help, but it might be difficult to turn back Airdrie and Edinburgh services there (which are/will all be scheduled to run through to the Western suburbs). Perhaps improving turnback facilities on the Argyle Line at Anderston/Exhibition Centre would be a good investment for the future.

 

[MacCookie]

Normally about 20 minutes more, but that is with a reversal so it could be a little as 5 minutes penalty if a cord existed and the trains could carry on a reasonable speed over it (and rejoining at Winchburgh). The line speed would also need to be raised on the Winchburgh branch.

They're not going to make trains reverse at Dalmeny! As for it taking five minutes longer, you do realise that via the Dalmeny Chord, it's almost a mile shorter than via Newbridge Junction?

If the sole point of this work is for a stop at Gogar it is a total waste of money as no-one benefits.

It's not.

If the work will provide a stop at Winchburgh then this is a good thing.

Winchburgh Station is not dependant on EGIP and AFAIA, it's not committed.

I am not sure if an Electric diversion route is that important now considering that you now have 2 alternative routes to Glasgow so DMU's could cope with Linlithgow, Polmont, Falkirk and Croy if a diversion is needed.

It's not a diversionary route, although it does provide that. Plus, ScotRail wouldn't have DMUs available to run a diesel service between Edinburgh and Glasgow as the units would have been replaced by EMUs.

I don't know the ins and outs of what is currently being designed, but I think that there are a number of members on scot-rail who have been involved.

Regards,
Ewan
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think that won't happen any time soon. I remember it as about Phase 4 of the plan. Which is unfortunate, as it is unlikely at present to take substantial traffic off the roads; even with its newish 'express' services', the journey time from West Lothian to GLC is longer than the A-B line's planned times.

STPR proposed phasing:

Phase 1 is EGIP; Phase 2 is the rest of the Central Belt (mostly
Glasgow and West of Scotland); Phase 3 is Edinburgh to Perth and
Dundee; Phase 4 is Dunblane to Aberdeen; Phase 5 is Perth to
Inverness. So, by the time you get to Phase 4, some of the route has
already been electrified.

Regards,
Ewan

 

[PaulLothian]

Electrifying the Shotts line could allow stopping Edin - Glasgow services to divert north after Holytown, and pick up alternate Whifflet paths. Slight saving on platform space at GLC.

Would need the 'express' services to stop at Holytown and existing intervening stops to GLC.

 

[Aictos]

When Perth via Stirling and Dundee via Ladybank gets wired up, will we also see the route between Ladybank and Perth as well as Perth to Dundee via Invergowie electrified as well?

What are the actual timescales for these works?

Finally when Inverness and Aberdeen get wired up, will we see the route between the two via Dyce also wired up?

 

[MacCookie]

When Perth via Stirling and Dundee via Ladybank gets wired up, will we also see the route between Ladybank and Perth as well as Perth to Dundee via Invergowie electrified as well?

Phase 3 is Edinburgh to Perth and Dundee via Fife. Phase 4 is Dunblane to Aberdeen via Perth and Dundee.

What are the actual timescales for these works?

Long term! Phase 1 by 2016, Phase 2 by 2018. Beyond that will depend on the availability of finance.

Finally when Inverness and Aberdeen get wired up, will we see the route between the two via Dyce also wired up?

Again, read what I wrote above.

Phase 4 could go beyond Aberdeen (I can't remember what the recommendation was off hand), but there's no mention of Aberdeen to Inverness.

Ewan

 

[Aictos]

Good to see Scotland is ramping ahead with electrification unlike England and Wales, thanks for the notes above though

 

[dalmahoyhill]

to answer the original post written eons ago.

I did read a report into opening the Edinburgh Surburban line for passengers. I think it was done by Halcrow and i cannot remember where i read it. Perhaps on the Transport Scotland website.

The conclusion was the economics did not stack up and the deal clincher was capacity. There were not enough additional paths in through Haymarket.

I would be very surprised if the surburban line gets electrified, its only used for freight and they are all 66's. I think they call always put diesels on for diversionary running.

A new chord at Dalmeny makes sense, Edinburgh park out to Newbridge is nearly saturated, the chord give more operational flexibility.
I think the Gogar station is an EARL light option. I is supposed to operate as a second interchange hub to take the pressure off haymarket. people would alight and use the trams (if they every run) and other public transport to get to other parts of Edinburgh. Obviously i cannot see it being of any use for anyone heading into Edinburgh. I just think Haymarket needs a big redevelopment to increase through capacity, more stairs onto platforms and multiple entrances.

 

[Failed Unit]

But people on the lines from Linlithgow and Bathgate would use Edinburgh Park.

Looking at the work going on I am not so sure any sidings in Haymarket will be wired up. I think the gantries are there for possition purposes but we will see. They probably will need to wire Haymarket for Egrip but at the moment I don't think they are.

 

[dalmahoyhill]

I would guess the Gogar station and Edinburgh Park stations would be complimentary, both designed to serve the airport and the business parks

I travelled to glasgow on monday and they have started stringing cables on the Forth bridge track catenary towers by Murrayfield. I assume its early start work for the glasgow Edinburgh electrification?

I also know from my work that the design of refurbishment works to Haymarket N tunnel has just been completed. Not sure when the construction works start. There is bulging and voids behind the masonry that needs repairing before electrification commences.

I understand that clearance is a problem in the tunnel. I would expect the usual solution of underpinning the walls and lowered slab will not be feasible. The tunnel cannot be closed for any length of time due to the sheer amount of traffic. Perhaps they will consider a roof mounted rail system as fitted to the central mound tunnel. I thought that was quite an ingenious solution.
I would imagine clearance in the Cowlairs/ Queen Street tunnels will be similar and the severn tunnel for the great western electrification.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
i would agree that the shotts line should be somewhere on the list for electrification (especially as i live on it and use it regularly). Its only about 25 miles from Mid Calder Junction through to Carfin. A short bit of infill.

Transport Scotland had it as a low priority in their future planning doc (cant remember the exact name of it). Patronage levels are low (it is all relative) compared to other central belt lines and it predicted low growth. Still anecdotal from my travels, patronage is fine, there are just not many people using it to travel from West Lothian to glasgow and vice versa. The new fast services I am hope will help drive up demand.

The thing is the scale of electrification being proposed in scotland and even the Great Western line, and in Manchester releases a cascade effect. If you electrify main lines it leaves little infills on lesser lines and then the economics stack up to electrify the rest. I am sure one the Manchester-Preston electrification goes ahead then other local lines become economically viable to electrify.

I have read that the Dof T is considering electrifying blackpool and windermere as well due to the cascade effect.