EGIP electrification

[HSTEd]

It depends how high speed they want it, and what route they take.... they could go for Shinkansen esque operation with an intermediate station near Falkirk opr Bathgate, or they could go for a via Carstairs line if they want to lock in a West Coast HS2 extension route.

 

[clc]

My understanding is they propose to build 40 miles of new UIC Gauge high speed line south of the M8 with line speeds of over 200mph, and that new city centre stations would not be required initially.

 

[Scotrail84]

Whatever it is called, I don't see any problem with running a modified evening/Sunday E&G service via Airdrie or Carstairs with appropriate advance notice and possibly some adjustment to the slower service on the route in question. In fact even with the original full EGIP this would be necessary for a disruptive possession on certain parts of the Falkirk High route.

Crew route knowledge would be an issue with that.

 

[Scotrail84]

I'm sure new drainage & slab track were installed around then.

Roughly around the same time as haymarket south tunnel?

 

[clc]

.

The one thing it doesn't mention is the new Edinburgh - Glasgow High Speed Line due to open around 2025. As this is planned to have a 2-3 tph service Transport Scotland did not want a 6tph service on the Falkirk line which would have to be cut back. Politically its much easier to reduce capacity by cutting train lengths once the new HS route opens than by reducing frequencies.

Interestingly though it is likely that the axed Dalmeny Chord will have to be revisited as part of the high speed plans in order to rebalance services on the four tracks into Waverley's western approaches as phase 1 of the high speed line will use existing tracks from Wester Hailes into Waverley.

I get the impression you have inside knowledge of the Edinburgh-Glasgow HSR project. Any other titbits you can share? Likely cost for example?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Crew route knowledge would be an issue with that.

Initially yes, but if this was going to be taking place over 12months or more, then surely it would be worth holding a scheme of route-learning in the build-up? If your drivers don't have route knowledge but you know they're going to need it, then you have time to train them on it.

 

[Altnabreac]

I get the impression you have inside knowledge of the Edinburgh-Glasgow HSR project. Any other titbits you can share? Likely cost for example?

I'm not an insider but I do keep my ears open...

A good public domain summary is here: http://nearyou.imeche.org/docs/scot...ns/high-speed-rail-scotland-17th-jan-2013.pdf

Costwise £2-3Bn sounds about right but bear in mind this is phase one from Edinburgh City Bypass to outskirts of Glasgow so no stations to pay for (except parkways?), no tunnelling and no demolition.

That means only classic compatibles from HS2 plus local high speed rolling stock for E-G services (395 alikes?).

Getting 400m long European Gauge trains into city centre stations will take longer, cost more and require a lot of Dft input too.

 

[PaulLothian]

Costwise £2-3Bn sounds about right but bear in mind this is phase one from Edinburgh City Bypass to outskirts of Glasgow so no stations to pay for (except parkways?), no tunnelling and no demolition.

Rather reminiscent of something I have read about the early development of the American road system - building a short stretch of smooth and well-constructed road to replace the existing dirt-tracks, sited halfway between two towns, in the hope that the locals would appreciate the benefits and stump up for the rest...

 

[Altnabreac]

Rather reminiscent of something I have read about the early development of the American road system - building a short stretch of smooth and well-constructed road to replace the existing dirt-tracks, sited halfway between two towns, in the hope that the locals would appreciate the benefits and stump up for the rest...

Something like that. More to do with Barnett consequentials and regional versus national infrastructure. At the moment each extra £100 DfT spend on England & Wales rail schemes generates a Barnett consequential of say £10 for the Scottish Government (it's not exactly that but I don't have the figures to hand so near enough).

However each £100 spent on "National Projects" like HS2 does not generate any Barnett consequentials. In theory though this means "National Projects" in Scotland are paid for by UK treasury, not Scottish Government. In practice most "National Projects" are in or leading to London.

Now a cross border HS project will be classified as a "National Project" but it's easy for DfT to say the Scottish bit of it is local. Stations, City Centre spurs etc that are expensive.

If however you build the (cheapish) section actually needed for local HS services in advance so they are up and running before HS2, then you can prove the expensive new stations and spurs are only required as part of the "National Project".

 

[clc]

I'm not an insider but I do keep my ears open...

A good public domain summary is here: http://nearyou.imeche.org/docs/scot...ns/high-speed-rail-scotland-17th-jan-2013.pdf

Costwise £2-3Bn sounds about right but bear in mind this is phase one from Edinburgh City Bypass to outskirts of Glasgow so no stations to pay for (except parkways?), no tunnelling and no demolition.

That means only classic compatibles from HS2 plus local high speed rolling stock for E-G services (395 alikes?).

Getting 400m long European Gauge trains into city centre stations will take longer, cost more and require a lot of Dft input too.

Cheers for the link. It seems an eye watering amount for what it delivers. Surely it would be more sensible to go for an upgrade of the Carstairs line to 140mph which would give most of the benefits for much lower cost?

 

[Altnabreac]

Cheers for the link. It seems an eye watering amount for what it delivers. Surely it would be more sensible to go for an upgrade of the Carstairs line to 140mph which would give most of the benefits for much lower cost?

In the absence of HS2 down south the sensible thing was the full EGIP upgrade. This project makes sense only as part 1 of a full High Speed, European Gauge London - Scotland railway.

It's much easier to promote the value of connecting two ends together. The gap is just waiting to be filled...

 

[clc]

In the absence of HS2 down south the sensible thing was the full EGIP upgrade. This project makes sense only as part 1 of a full High Speed, European Gauge London - Scotland railway.

It's much easier to promote the value of connecting two ends together. The gap is just waiting to be filled...

But if that link doesn't happen (which is a very strong possibility) we've wasted billions. I imagine a Carstairs upgrade and 140mph trains could deliver 30 mins Glasgow-Edinburgh journey time and improvements for cross-border services for a lot less expense.

 

[HSTEd]

But if that link doesn't happen (which is a very strong possibility) we've wasted billions. I imagine a Carstairs upgrade and 140mph trains could deliver 30 mins Glasgow-Edinburgh journey time and improvements for cross-border services for a lot less expense.

How do you plan on pathing that through the horrendous mass of Glasgow Suburban services?

You can certainly run 140mph to Carstairs but beyond that point things get a lot more iffy. It also does not build capability to accept double decker trains later on.
This way it can form an integral part of any later High Speed line to Scotland, if you just upgrade the line all that work ends up scrapped later on.
And 30 minutes is quite conservative... with correct rolling stock you could make the 25 minute mark with a dedicated line.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

According to the Network Rail web site, they have put the main EGIP electrification (Edinburgh-Glasgow via Falkirk High) out to tender.
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.c...-electrification-work-out-to-tender-1dd1.aspx

The project will include156 single track kilometres of electrification works and remodelling and platform extension work at Waverley, Queen St, Croy, Falkirk High, Polmont and Linlithgow.
A new Edinburgh Gateway interchange station will also be constructed at Gogar as part of the project and a new depot created at Millerhill in Edinburgh.
Contracts will be awarded in early 2014 with construction expected to commence next summer. Network Rail is committed to completing the main E-G electrification works in 2016

Does the Millerhill depot mean that the Newcraighall line will be wired?

 

[Railsigns]

Does the Millerhill depot mean that the Newcraighall line will be wired?

It's already wired.

 

[Eagle]

Does the Millerhill depot mean that the Newcraighall line will be wired?

It was wired when it reopened to passengers in 2002. I'm not sure which service it was originally intended to be an extension of, but for the first few years it operated Newcraighall–Bathgate with 156s (Bathgate wasn't wired at the time). Ironically it was the electrification works on the Bathgate branch that caused it to switch to the diesel Fife Circle service.

 

[Railsigns]

It was wired when it reopened to passengers in 2002.

It was wired long before then. The line through Millerhill Yard was electrified at the same time as the ECML to Edinburgh.

 

[Aictos]

Any idea when Newcraighall will see EMUs in regular services rather then the Fife Circle DMUs?

Its a shame the Fife Circle isn't already wired up, the Forth Bridge can be overcome with the same technology that the Haymarket tunnels and Core between Kentish Town and Farringdon have got.

Also, I doubt it but is it feasible for the reopened Waverley route to be wired up or least be prepared to be wired up in the future?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It's already wired.

So it is.

 

[snowball]

Also, I doubt it but is it feasible for the reopened Waverley route to be wired up or least be prepared to be wired up in the future?

The single track is being centralised under arched bridges to ensure headroom for future wires.

 

[D365]

The single track is being centralised under arched bridges to ensure headroom for future wires.

Worthwhile doing another Paisley, perhaps?

 

[Altnabreac]

I'm not certain but I seem to remember even before Newcraighall trains were linked to Fife circle the branch couldn't be worked by electric trains.

I believe the platform at Newcraighall is on too steep a gradient to be used for terminating trains (as a reopened line, but would be ok with grandfather rights).

Instead the trains have to pull into a flat siding and then reverse there and I understand the siding isn't electrified.

 

[tom1649]

I'm not certain but I seem to remember even before Newcraighall trains were linked to Fife circle the branch couldn't be worked by electric trains.

I believe the platform at Newcraighall is on too steep a gradient to be used for terminating trains (as a reopened line, but would be ok with grandfather rights).

Instead the trains have to pull into a flat siding and then reverse there and I understand the siding isn't electrified.

Class 322s have worked to Newcraighall in the past. See this link for details: http://www.rages.org.uk/downloads/Rag16.PDF

 

[Altnabreac]

Class 322s have worked to Newcraighall in the past. See this link for details: http://www.rages.org.uk/downloads/Rag16.PDF

Indeed, but as diverted North Berwick trains those were not reversing at Newcraighall and thus would be fine.

I think the problem is only with drivers leaving the cab to change ends. A brake failure could in theory lead to a runaway.

This shot shows the (unwired) reversing siding on the opening day of the service in 2002.

 

[tom1649]

Indeed, but as diverted North Berwick trains those were not reversing at Newcraighall and thus would be fine.

I think the problem is only with drivers leaving the cab to change ends. A brake failure could in theory lead to a runaway.

This shot shows the (unwired) reversing siding on the opening day of the service in 2002.

This is not so. The article linked above says the 322s were providing a shuttle service between Edinburgh and Newcraighall with buses doing the rest of the journey to North Berwick.

 

[Altnabreac]

This is not so. The article linked above says the 322s were providing a shuttle service between Edinburgh and Newcraighall with buses doing the rest of the journey to North Berwick.

Sorry I misread that bit, assumed the trains were avoiding the line at Mussleburgh but working through to the ECML. I seem to vaguely remember that was the closure due to mine working subsidence near Prestonpans? Whole line was shut for a while.

However the article gives no details about how the service was worked. As a one off engineering replacement service it could have reversed in Millerhill Yard (due to lack of freight trains due to the ECML closure) or it could have involved double manning so that cabs on the train were not left unattended while the train was reversed. Equally it may be that a short term derogation was permitted from the rules.

It is still my understanding that regular workings are not permitted to reverse from the platform at Newcraighall and as you can see the reversing siding is unwired.

 

[edwin_m]

In the last few years there has been a RSSB study into safety issues with trains calling or reversing at stations on gradients and the broad conclusion is that there aren't any. I think the limits have now been removed from the relevant standards.

 

[Altnabreac]

In the last few years there has been a RSSB study into safety issues with trains calling or reversing at stations on gradients and the broad conclusion is that there aren't any. I think the limits have now been removed from the relevant standards.

Interesting thanks, Newcraighall isn't going to get any electric trains until wires make it to Tweedbank and Fife Circle though. Maybe 2025 or so?

 

[jnty]

Any idea when Newcraighall will see EMUs in regular services rather then the Fife Circle DMUs?

Its a shame the Fife Circle isn't already wired up, the Forth Bridge can be overcome with the same technology that the Haymarket tunnels and Core between Kentish Town and Farringdon have got.

Also, I doubt it but is it feasible for the reopened Waverley route to be wired up or least be prepared to be wired up in the future?

The intention is to link Fife Circle services with Borders services when the line opens, presumably to avoid using up very limited terminal capacity from the East at Waverley. Seems like it introduces a risk of transmitting delays between two mainly isolated routes though especially considering the Borders line will be mostly single track, so it'll be interesting to see whether it stays that way. I suppose if the worst comes to the worst there'll be contingency plans for splitting the two services to preserve punctuality on the unaffected one.

One assumes Newcraighall services will be subsumed into Borders services as the Borders line is essentially going to be an extension of the turnback siding, so I can't see services going electric for the time being; the wires are there for freight (although even that pretty much never uses them now.) However, as mentioned earlier, passive provision for electrification is included in the project spec so while it's not an immediate ambition it's certainly not out of the question.

I believe the platform at Newcraighall is on too steep a gradient to be used for terminating trains (as a reopened line, but would be ok with grandfather rights).

Instead the trains have to pull into a flat siding and then reverse there and I understand the siding isn't electrified.

I've not heard that reasoning before: that's not to say it wasn't originally the case, but the justification for it I hear now that it allows terminating passenger trains to get out of the way of trains between Millerhill and the South Suburban Line (used by freight to bypass Waverley.) There aren't that many trains a day which do that nowadays, so often passenger trains don't use the siding at all to reverse (whether they're booked to or not) - so it can't be a safety thing any more.

 

[Altnabreac]

I've not heard that reasoning before: that's not to say it wasn't originally the case, but the justification for it I hear now that it allows terminating passenger trains to get out of the way of trains between Millerhill and the South Suburban Line (used by freight to bypass Waverley.) There aren't that many trains a day which do that nowadays, so often passenger trains don't use the siding at all to reverse (whether they're booked to or not) - so it can't be a safety thing any more.

Was something I heard at a CRAG meeting back when the line opened rather than ever saw in an official source. Sounds like if it ever was true the new RSSB research has negated it anyway.