Highland Chieftain schedule

[Liam]

Presumably this "fast" service from Edinburgh to Dundee (which wouldn't even stop at Perth) wouldn't have time to stop at a small place like Kinross either? Is the plan to build a "new" line through Kinross without anything stopping? Or, if you'd have a separate "local" service, where are the paths over the Forth Bridge for all of these new journeys?

It could be run as an extension of the hourly Edinburgh-Cowdenbeath service which would create a new (regular) service from Dunfermline and Cowdenbeath to Perth and Dundee. But then it would be a slow service and with the additional stops at Kelty, Kinross, Milnathort, Glenfarg (and maybe Bridge of Earn and Invergowrie too) would mean Perth-Edinburgh might still be quicker via Ladybank or Stirling.

The trackbed both North and South of the Glenfarg tunnels is now the M90 and part of it has quite recently been built on in Kinross (Junction Road).

Dundee-Edinburgh via Leuchars is shorter than via Perth and Kinross anyway and there is no real need to remove services from the Tay Bridge, it's not that busy, there was even talk of singling it a while back.

 

[najaB]

...the Tay Bridge, it's not that busy, there was even talk of singling it a while back.

How far back and how serious were the talks? It's currently signalled as a single track across the high girders and I can't see any significant savings would be made by lifting one track as the structure would still need just as much maintenance.

 

[Liam]

How far back and how serious were the talks? It's currently signalled as a single track across the high girders and I can't see any significant savings would be made by lifting one track as the structure would still need just as much maintenance.

I'm not sure how serious, but it was in the last 10 years. The track would have been placed along the centre line of the bridge, to reduce the side to side movement when a train passes over.

 

[najaB]

I'm not sure how serious, but it was in the last 10 years. The track would have been placed along the centre line of the bridge, to reduce the side to side movement when a train passes over.

I suspect it was further back than 10 years - the current refurbishment project is getting on for that length of time.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Lets be ambitious and make it a 150mph line with Javelin type trains. I'm not sure how much extra saving 150mph would give you on a 29 mile line compared with 100mph running but assume it will be around 10 minutes.

Further benefits would ensue if you linked the planned Glasgow-Edinburgh HSR line to the Fife line/Edinburgh Gateway as you could then also run high speed services from Glasgow to Dundee and Aberdeen via the new Edinburgh-Perth route.

And yes I believe Altnabreac's suggested bridge over the Tay would mean high speed services to Dundee and Aberdeen would bypass Perth Station.

Given the original line appears to have been engineered to avoid the worst gradients, my guess is that a 150mph route would be able to use about 25 yards of the original alignment. That's why I asked if it was one reason why it was chosen for closure in the first place. I suspect even 90 mph on the original alignment might be difficult to achieve.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Talk of a route through Kinross is going off at a bit of a tangent from discussion about the Chieftain as I think it'd need to continue running via Falkirk and Stirling (regardless of any alignments through Fife).

Yes, the thought had crossed my mind. A Kinross route would be faster, but a stop there would not make up for the loss of a Stirling stop.

That's it - there were three routes and they kept the two that served Kirkcaldy and Falkirk/Stirling, so the route via Kinross was deemed surplus to requirements.

Fair enough - I was just seeking some background, which nobody seems to know. Fundamentally, I wanted to know if the original Kinross route was considered a main-line, or a mere secondary or tertiary route - or suffered from, eg subsidence, which meant, in effect, that going via Ladybank involved no meaningful time loss.

It's not a long bit of single track, and it only sees one service each hour in each direction for most of the day, so I'd suggest that there are bigger bottlenecks to worry about.

I am only going on what others have said in here - from memory, a traincrew member. 14 miles, I think - wrote. Seems pretty long to me - but if it's only 1 TPH, I guess that's manageable.

 

[najaB]

I am only going on what others have said in here - from memory, a traincrew member. 14 miles, I think - wrote. Seems pretty long to me - but if it's only 1 TPH, I guess that's manageable.

Perth to Barnhill is half a mile if that. Are you perhaps thinking of Ladybank to Greenhill Hilton (pardon the brainfart!)?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Here's a good picture courtesy of RailScot.

 

[Class 170101]

If This happened you could get Journey time enchantments for Dundee to Edinburgh Service Routing them via Perth (Dundee to Edinburgh Scotrail reckons is 1hr 20,

Sounds like magic is required rather than solid materials
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

thanks. I find this intriguing. What I mean is, how could BR justify closing this line, the shortest route to Perth from Edinburgh? Was it the main line previously? If so, I'd have thought there would have been howls of protest. It looks as if it were a tough route to work - was the line speed low, or did it suffer from subsidence, or what?

Another point in favour of re-opening the direct line to Perth: folks in here have been insisting that the Ladybank route needs redoubling, or at least additional loops. Restoring the direct line would alleviate this need, surely?

Re-doubling or loops would be cheaper than restoring the route via Kinross.

Did it serve anywhere of significance? If I'm reading the maps correctly then it seems that Kinross would be the only place to have really lost out on its rail service to Edinburgh upon closure of that line. If there was a strong political will to use part of the route to build the M90 then I can see why it was closed, and traffic between Perth and Edinburgh going via either Ladybank or Stirling.

Of course in hindsight it'd be a very useful route, but then it's easy for us to say that safe in 2016, in a time where the railways are being taken seriously again.

Kirkcaldy would lose out if Inverness services were diverted via this Kinross route. However Dunfermline could gain. However the route via Dunfermline I would imagine is busier now with other services than it was when the Kinross route closed. Would there be as much of a journey time saving following stoppers around the loop via Dunfermline?

 

[Hearadh]

Still off topic from the original thread I'm afraid; but the Glenfarg route was rather a tortuous line to work following the equally twisty A90 road. Also Kinross, the only sizeably place of habitation between Cowdenbeath and Hilton Jct. some 50 years ago, had a population of approx. half of today's figures. I remember this line when classes 26 & 24 in multiple ruled the roost.

 

[70014IronDuke]

Perth to Barnhill is half a mile if that. Are you perhaps thinking of Ladybank to Greenhill Hilton (pardon the brainfart!)?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Here's a good picture courtesy of RailScot.

No, not the Perth bit. I was talking about the bit between Ladybank and (I thought) Bridge of Earn. I don't know the line (been over it, but probably sleeping) - I was only going on what another poster had written.

Nice photo - I assume that is looking approximately south-east - with Perth station out of sight?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Re-doubling or loops would be cheaper than restoring the route via Kinross.

Perhaps I should have been clearer: saving on new loops (or re-doubling) could be considered as one factor in a number of factors to add to any business case for re-opening via Kinross.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Still off topic from the original thread I'm afraid; but the Glenfarg route was rather a tortuous line to work following the equally twisty A90 road. Also Kinross, the only sizeably place of habitation between Cowdenbeath and Hilton Jct. some 50 years ago, had a population of approx. half of today's figures. I remember this line when classes 26 & 24 in multiple ruled the roost.

This seems to answer my query - in other words, it was a main line (hence the sue of 2 x Type 2 power), but a slow one. So the diversions when it closed probably did not result in significant additional time added.

 

[47271]

Kinross has a population of 4k. Kelty, the other main town on the old Glenfarg route, has 6k. If Cowdenbeath and Dunfermline want a direct London service then one of the Aberdeen ones can be diverted. I'm not dismissing Glenfarg in the long term, but if we're using the acceleration by half an hour of an 8 hour plus journey to miss stops at Stirling (90k) and Falkirk (50k or so with Grangemouth) as a major argument for reinstatement then we won't get very far. Doubling or partial doubling of Ladybank-Hilton will improve Scotrail Edinburgh-Perth timings, build operational resilience and allow a station at Bridge of Earn for a fraction of the cost.

However, they could take a leaf out of the Borders' book and build a case based on economic regeneration for Kelty and Kinross, neither of them are especially thriving at the moment, with a view to extension on to Perth, fancy Tay crossings etc, in the longer term. The built over section of trackbed is north of Kinross so the only obstacle provided by the M90 to this scheme is a weakened business case because transport links by road to Edinburgh are really very good already!

Just an idea to help move things in the right direction, but I think the Chieftain will be trundling round Falkirk and Stirling for quite some time to come.

 

[nitten_travell]

Yes I think that is certainly the case. I use it often and everyone prefers the HSTs to the suburban 170s. They can't come soon enough. Three years seems a long way off.

Is the Chieftain usually busy north of Edinburgh? I've an open ticket to Inverness with a booking on a Scotrail service but would prefer the Chieftain and wonder if I should try to get a reservation or just turn up and hope for a seat.

 

[najaB]

Is the Chieftain usually busy north of Edinburgh? I've an open ticket to Inverness with a booking on a Scotrail service but would prefer the Chieftain and wonder if I should try to get a reservation or just turn up and hope for a seat.

In my experience it is a bit busy as far as Stirling, but you should be fine from there on.

 

[47271]

In my experience it is a bit busy as far as Stirling, but you should be fine from there on.

Exactly that, and another load more tips out at Perth.

The only things I would say against the Chieftain versus Scotrail is that it can be prone to delay south of Edinburgh so if your business in Inverness is time sensitive build in a cushion for late running.

You'll also get more faffing passengers unfamiliar with rail travel than on Scotrail: large luggage, fretting over reservations and yittering into mobiles.

And the coffee is 70p more per cup!

 

[Clansman]

Is the Chieftain usually busy north of Edinburgh? I've an open ticket to Inverness with a booking on a Scotrail service but would prefer the Chieftain and wonder if I should try to get a reservation or just turn up and hope for a seat.

Usually full until Stirling and Perth so be prepared to make a reservation if possible unless your content with sticking your head out of the retractable window for at least an hour

As already said, only thing against the Chieftain is that it is prone to delays around Edinburgh and also between Falkirk and Dunblane due to peak time services from Glasgow.

It could be run as an extension of the hourly Edinburgh-Cowdenbeath service which would create a new (regular) service from Dunfermline and Cowdenbeath to Perth and Dundee. But then it would be a slow service and with the additional stops at Kelty, Kinross, Milnathort, Glenfarg (and maybe Bridge of Earn and Invergowrie too) would mean Perth-Edinburgh might still be quicker via Ladybank or Stirling.

The trackbed both North and South of the Glenfarg tunnels is now the M90 and part of it has quite recently been built on in Kinross (Junction Road).

Dundee-Edinburgh via Leuchars is shorter than via Perth and Kinross anyway and there is no real need to remove services from the Tay Bridge, it's not that busy, there was even talk of singling it a while back.

You could just divert the Edinburgh-Perth services onto the new line and run all stops, it's not like there would be masses of stops on the line anyway if it reopened: Perth-Bridge of Earn-Abernethy-Newburgh-Kinross-Kelty-Dunfermline-Haymarket-Edinburgh. It would also free up space on the Ladybank-Inverkeithing line for more Dundee services which might add the option of the "fast" service some people in the thread were on about. There would be no need for Intercity services to even stop at the stations to Perth other than to cut out Inverkeithing and to instead call at Dunfermline only as the other stops would be served by the Edinburgh-Perth service. I would imagine though that the service would be at least 20 minutes quicker than via Ladybank and Stirling though. To speed up journey times you could even vary the calls on the service like what sometimes happens on Aberdeen-Glasgow services when they would call at Dunblane instead of Gleneagles (and vise versa)

Lol, I'm getting ahead of myself and the proposal for the line hasn't even been brought back to parliament yet

 

[Altnabreac]

You could just divert the Edinburgh-Perth services onto the new line and run all stops, it's not like there would be masses of stops on the line anyway if it reopened: Perth-Bridge of Earn-Abernethy-Newburgh-Glenfarg-Kinross-Dunfermline-Haymarket-Edinburgh. It would also free up space on the Ladybank-Inverkeithing line for more Dundee services which might add the option of the "fast" service some people in the thread were on about. There would be no need for Intercity services to even stop at the stations to Perth other than to cut out Inverkeithing and to instead call at Dunfermline only as the other stops would be served by the Edinburgh-Perth service. I would imagine though that the service would be at least 20 minutes quicker than via Ladybank and Stirling though. To speed up journey times you could even vary the calls on the service like what sometimes happens on Aberdeen-Glasgow services when they would call at Dunblane instead of Gleneagles (and vise versa)

Lol, I'm getting ahead of myself and the proposal for the line hasn't even been brought back to parliament yet

Much as I hate to inject reality there are a couple of issues here:

Firstly the Glenfarg line diverged immediately after Bridge of Earn so any new line wouldn't serve Newburgh or Abernethy. Equally it probably wouldn't serve Bridge of Earn as the current reopening is proposed for a new development at Oudenard, east of the old station.

Secondly any new line would not have a station at Glenfarg. This would be both because it would need to take a new (tunnelled) route to avoid the M90 and because Glenfarg does not have sudficient population to justify a station.

You also miss out Kelty for some reason, the place on your route with the largest population!

My view is that the only stations would be a new M90 Parkway station somewhere near Kinross services and a new Dunfermline Parkway station around Halbeath where the line crosses the Fife Circle.

 

[Triumph]

Perhaps it is because a GNER crew are lodging overnight, and they want to reduce time payments?

A Newcastle crew work the Chieftain between Edinburgh & Inverness plus the ECS working for Fuel then lodge overnight and work the morning one back.

 

[najaB]

Just in case anyone else was as confused by Triumph's post as I was, it should have been:

Perhaps it is because a GNER crew are lodging overnight, and they want to reduce time payments?

A Newcastle crew work the Chieftain between Edinburgh & Inverness plus the ECS working for Fuel then lodge overnight and work the morning one back.

 

[scotsman]

Perhaps it is because a GNER crew are lodging overnight, and they want to reduce time payments?

A Newcastle crew work the Chieftain between Edinburgh & Inverness plus the ECS working for Fuel then lodge overnight and work the morning one back.

That's not quite true. A Newcastle driver takes it from Newcastle to Inverness with an Edinburgh guard. The catering crew are all based in Inverness.

One of the regular guards who used to work the service regularly is from Sunderland but lived in Edinburgh, which might explain some of the confusion.

 

[backontrack]

Much as I hate to inject reality there are a couple of issues here:

Firstly the Glenfarg line diverged immediately after Bridge of Earn so any new line wouldn't serve Newburgh or Abernethy. Equally it probably wouldn't serve Bridge of Earn as the current reopening is proposed for a new development at Oudenard, east of the old station.

Secondly any new line would not have a station at Glenfarg. This would be both because it would need to take a new (tunnelled) route to avoid the M90 and because Glenfarg does not have sudficient population to justify a station.

You also miss out Kelty for some reason, the place on your route with the largest population!

My view is that the only stations would be a new M90 Parkway station somewhere near Kinross services and a new Dunfermline Parkway station around Halbeath where the line crosses the Fife Circle.

Hmm. If Newburgh, Abernethy and BoE/Oudenard were served by new stations between Perth and Ladybank, then which trains would stop at them? Would you have a new Edinburgh-Perth-Dundee stopping service?

In an ideal world:

-New mainline built between Perth and Inverkeithing with stops, as you say, at the M90 at Kinross and Halbeath
-Halbeath station provides interchange with Fife Circle
-Edinburgh-Aberdeen services on ScotRail move (for the most part) to the Kinross route, leaving XC and EC (and some ScotRail) trains running via Leuchars
-Dundee stoppers from Edinburgh are rerouted to St Andrews
-A spur is built off the Fife Circle linking Cowdenbeath to Kelty, where Cowdenbeath terminators now terminate
-ScotRail Edinburgh-Inverness services all run via Kinross
-Oudenard, Newburgh and Abernethy served by EDB-PTH stoppers, which run to a clockface timetable (which is probably impossible, but will be helped by the line through Kirkcaldy losing Inverness and Aberdeen services (though not all of the latter)

Of course, all of this is dependent on the Kinross route being an electrified, high-speed route - otherwise there's no point on moving ABD trains away from Leuchars and the only point of the line is for Inverness trains - which are sped up, and stop at Kinross and Halbeath.

Point 3 is a difficult thing to work out. Do all of the XC services move, or is it half-and-half? There are also other things cluttering this, too - the stations at Edinburgh Gateway, between Ladybank and Perth, and, to a lesser extent, Dundee West/Ninewells (which will essentially replace Invergowrie). Of course Point 1 has to come about before any of this can happen, and I suspect that Point 5 will not happen at all. Cupar and Leuchars also lose services to Dundee and Aberdeen (they definitely need to retain these services at the peaks), and I also think that any kind of clockface timetable between Inverkeithing and Ladybank would prove to be unattainable.

Then, there's one more elephant in the room - Levenmouth. Are there any services that terminate at Kirkcaldy/Markinch that we can extend? Probably not. I guess that new services can run in the place of the INV/ABD services that have moved to the Kinross Line, but those paths will be needed by Perth services. Can they alternate or something?

And there'll be an almighty bottleneck at the Forth Bridge.

 

[Clansman]

Much as I hate to inject reality there are a couple of issues here:

Firstly the Glenfarg line diverged immediately after Bridge of Earn so any new line wouldn't serve Newburgh or Abernethy. Equally it probably wouldn't serve Bridge of Earn as the current reopening is proposed for a new development at Oudenard, east of the old station.

Secondly any new line would not have a station at Glenfarg. This would be both because it would need to take a new (tunnelled) route to avoid the M90 and because Glenfarg does not have sudficient population to justify a station.

You also miss out Kelty for some reason, the place on your route with the largest population!

My view is that the only stations would be a new M90 Parkway station somewhere near Kinross services and a new Dunfermline Parkway station around Halbeath where the line crosses the Fife Circle.

Well, you get the jist of it. Forgot all about the tunnel that would be needed at Glenfarg. I would however disagree when you say that you think there should only be the stations that you listed. I would say, that as someone who used to live in Perth, the local population is fairly big, and having stations at Bridge of Earn/Oudenard, Abernethy, Newburgh and Kelty would be popular amongst the locals, and vital for generating revenue on the route. Especially the way the roads are layed out between Bridge of Earn and Kelty (country roads), getting to Perth/Dunfermline/Edinburgh would be at least 10 minutes quicker via rail. I do agree about the Dunfermline Parkway station though.