How can the Stranraer line be made more useful/less useless?

[Bletchleyite]

Taking business cash home wouldn’t be presented as an option - it falls foul of all the cash handling regulations / best practices.

There’s all sorts of issues with insurance liabilities too.

I believe some bus drivers do, though in effect the way that works it's their cash. Plus other industries where the staff don't primarily work from a base.

To be honest I can see no reason the line shouldn't just be operated from Ayr entirely, even if that means a slightly later first service and slightly earlier last service. The present operating pattern is from years ago when things were very different. You can't really imagine stabling units at Blaenau Ffestiniog, can you? That would mean redundancies for those who won't relocate though - but as with Beeching if staff and Unions won't be flexible then it's often the only option. Strikes are unlikely to provide much leverage in this sort of context I'd think - public support for major strikes on ScotRail over potentially closing a tiny, barely used branch line that has lost its main purpose is unlikely to be high.

It might even be that in effect making the first and last train free (not publicised, but just never doing revenue on them as those guards would cash in/out at Ayr on those workings), even when the locals got to know about it and so never paid, would cost less than maintaining a building there. I suspect the loadings on those two trains are single figures, and a guard with revenue kit could swap in at Ayr. Put a TVM at Stranraer and the number not paying would reduce as some honest people would still pay in that case, though even that may not be worthwhile given that some would pay on their phones.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I believe some bus drivers do, though in effect the way that works it's their cash.

To be honest I can see no reason the line shouldn't just be operated from Ayr entirely, even if that means a slightly later first service and slightly earlier last service. The present operating pattern is from years ago when things were very different. You can't really imagine stabling units at Blaenau Ffestiniog, can you?

The present pattern is because there are limited educational establishments in Stranraer requiring an early departure from Stranraer which otherwise would require a 50 mile / 1hr 30m taxi journey for the crew from Ayr.

With the railway offering quite reasonable relocation T&Cs of also substantial redundancy terms it’s likely to be an expensive and unpopular move proposing closure.

You also have to be prepared when closing drivers depots for crew shortages, if all the drivers took redundancy you’d have at least a years gap before replacement trainee drivers were qualified at Ayr. Scotrail is not flush with spare drivers at the moment.

For the whole, especially on a network that is heavily subsided regardless of whether you make these changes it’s unlikely to be viewed as worthwhile.

 

[3RDGEN]

To be honest I can see no reason the line shouldn't just be operated from Ayr entirely,

You would be removing secure well paid jobs from a location that struggles with both so it wouldn't go down well with the locals or their policical representatives.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You would be removing secure well paid jobs from a location that struggles with both so it wouldn't go down well with the locals or their policical representatives.

Which then comes down to - is the railway a job creation scheme or a transport service.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Which then comes down to - is the railway a job creation scheme or a transport service.

It’s a transport service but will have political pressures.

However, requiring train-crew to be taxied 50 miles from Ayr to start the first service from Stranraer, an important service for those going to education has high risk written all over it.

 

[3RDGEN]

Which then comes down to - is the railway a job creation scheme or a transport service.

Your not creating jobs because the headcount would be the same or very similar in either location. For ScotRail it's always been about good jobs in low employment areas like Mallaig, Fort William, Kyle of Lochalsh, Wick/Thurso etc, same goes for Inverness depot to some extent.

 

[HSTEd]

How much would a minimum length platform by the line at the base of the pier be?

It would only have to be long enough for local door operation and would only need a single street lamp for lighting.

 

[Brush 4]

Copying BR rationalisation is not learning from history. Instead of reducing the line to the current service level as BR did, they should be promoting the line and increasing the service to match. It worked for the S&C, also threatened with closure at one time. Promote not demote.
All the lines that have had to be de-rationalised. Chiltern. Cotswold, Filton re-quadrupling, Axminster redoubling, Cornwall main line, Swindon to Kemble. Loops and platforms reinstated at various locations. Newquay, Hartlepool, and others.

Not the way forward.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Copying BR rationalisation is not learning from history. Instead of reducing the line to the current service level as BR did, they should be promoting the line and increasing the service to match. It worked for the S&C, also threatened with closure at one time. Promote not demote.
All the lines that have had to be de-rationalised. Chiltern. Cotswold, Filton re-quadrupling, Axminster redoubling, Cornwall main line, Swindon to Kemble. Loops and platforms reinstated at various locations. Newquay, Hartlepool, and others.

Not the way forward.

The key difference is that this line lost its main purpose when the ferries moved.

 

[8ace]

It's very scenic line, a shame that more can't be made of it. Although you are spoilt for choice with those in Scotland.

 

[Brush 4]

The key difference is that this line lost its main purpose when the ferries moved.

All the more reason to promote it, not just give up.

 

[HSTEd]

Copying BR rationalisation is not learning from history. Instead of reducing the line to the current service level as BR did, they should be promoting the line and increasing the service to match. It worked for the S&C, also threatened with closure at one time. Promote not demote.
All the lines that have had to be de-rationalised. Chiltern. Cotswold, Filton re-quadrupling, Axminster redoubling, Cornwall main line, Swindon to Kemble. Loops and platforms reinstated at various locations. Newquay, Hartlepool, and others.

Not the way forward.

Whilst we remember high profile cases of de-rationisalation, far more rationalisation has turned out justified than not.

Maintaining redundant and expensive infrastructure and service patterns forever in case something comes up decades in the future will not serve the railway as a whole.

Stranraer station (now in the middle of nowhere) is extremely unlikely to ever be needed again, and as it stands the railway seems unable to serve any real transport purpose.

Perhaps the line can be saved if an inexpensive town adjacent Stranraer train station can be built and the service cut back. But if it can't be, we have to question what the point of spending all this public money on the railway south of Girvan is.

The sixty or so kilometres of route south of Girvan generate only 34,000 entries and exits per year and no through traffic .

 

[waverley47]

Copying BR rationalisation is not learning from history. Instead of reducing the line to the current service level as BR did, they should be promoting the line and increasing the service to match. It worked for the S&C, also threatened with closure at one time. Promote not demote.
All the lines that have had to be de-rationalised. Chiltern. Cotswold, Filton re-quadrupling, Axminster redoubling, Cornwall main line, Swindon to Kemble. Loops and platforms reinstated at various locations. Newquay, Hartlepool, and others.

Not the way forward.

The Settle and Carlisle has existing tourism potential, and connects into Leeds at one end. The use case is there. Chiltern connects affluent towns into London. The use case is there.

Cornwall, and Axminster, and Filton, and the Cotswolds, and Hartlepool, and Newquay, and every other example of de-rationalisation as you put it, has a use case, and a business case, that has been made, and proven, in order to reach that point.

There is no business case for Stranraer. The bus will always be faster than the train to connect into the ferry, as a simple quirk of geography. The line south of Girvan serves a grand sum total of twenty thousand people, and the whole line has annual passenger numbers of less than 30% of those at Newquay, and less than 5% of those at Hartlepool.


The only real equivalent lines, and even then it's a bit more complicated, would be the middle of the Cumbrian coast (currently costing about £60m just to keep running), the Conwy Valley (just how much money has been spent on keeping that running in the past decade) and Whitby.


The important thing to realise is that this isn't a salting of the earth; nothing is being sold off, and nothing is being closed. In fact, saving money here by singling and rationalising makes closure less likely.

The judgement has been made that the line south of Girvan will never need more than 1tp2h, even in the most optimistic scenario. Honestly, that is a perfectly fair assessment. To run 1tp2h, you don't need sidings at Stranraer, and you don't need loops. Ripping out the very expensive to maintain signalling equipment, and the loops at Glenwhilly and Dunragit, means it's simpler, easier to maintain, and significantly cheaper to keep running.

The entire line is basically kept alive through digging for spares in scrapyards. This project gives it another decade or so before a decision has to be made on its survival.

 

[3RDGEN]

Copying BR rationalisation is not learning from history. Instead of reducing the line to the current service level as BR did, they should be promoting the line and increasing the service to match. It worked for the S&C, also threatened with closure at one time. Promote not demote.
All the lines that have had to be de-rationalised. Chiltern. Cotswold, Filton re-quadrupling, Axminster redoubling, Cornwall main line, Swindon to Kemble. Loops and platforms reinstated at various locations. Newquay, Hartlepool, and others.

Not the way forward.

Problem there is if BR hadn't rationalised them some would have gone completely so wouldn't have been there to expanded again. Without the rationalisation of lines in Scotland they would have closed for ever, the Axminster route could of also been closed without the cuts made by BR.

 

[Carntyne]

Copying BR rationalisation is not learning from history. Instead of reducing the line to the current service level as BR did, they should be promoting the line and increasing the service to match. It worked for the S&C, also threatened with closure at one time. Promote not demote.
All the lines that have had to be de-rationalised. Chiltern. Cotswold, Filton re-quadrupling, Axminster redoubling, Cornwall main line, Swindon to Kemble. Loops and platforms reinstated at various locations. Newquay, Hartlepool, and others.

Not the way forward.

I'm sure there is still capacity to increase the frequency across the day even with it singled.

If passengers want a railway they do need to use it occasionally.

 

[Rescars]

The key difference is that this line lost its main purpose when the ferries moved.

Indeed, but reconnecting the trains to the ferries would be an expensive exercise. Though the construction of the Cairnryan Military Railway clearly shows that it would be perfectly feasible and has previously been achieved very rapidly at a time of national need.

It's very scenic line, a shame that more can't be made of it. Although you are spoilt for choice with those in Scotland.

Maybe further north, but no so in the south west.

When Agricola campaigned northwards during the Roman conquest, he is reputed to have commented on the "trackless wastes" of Galloway. Let's hope his historic observation does not become our current reality!

 

[380101]

Ah, I didn't realise it was a crew depot (I'll be honest, I'm astonished it is!). In that case a building would be required for that purpose, but I'd struggle to justify a staffed booking office - this line, to survive, really needs to keep costs as far down as possible. Having said that if there needs to be a clerk there for that purpose they might as well also sell tickets.

Does it need to be a crew depot? Could some other arrangement be put in place that is cheaper to operate, such as crews booking on by telephone and paying in takings at Ayr or elsewhere? Could it even move to be operated from Ayr when the present crew based at Stranraer retire or otherwise move on? Presumably all this would happen if it did close.

The traincrew at Stranraer is 8 drivers and 7 conductors. The majority of them are late 30s/early 40s and most with young families all from the local area.


The crews book on remotely via telephone like over half the rest of ScotRail depots do.

Despite the doom and gloom suggested by most of the posters on here, the Stranraer line is used more than people think. Certainly the last 3 or 4 times I've worked the route the train leaving Stranraer has been busy with locals and tourists alike.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Indeed, but reconnecting the trains to the ferries would be an expensive exercise. Though the construction of the Cairnryan Military Railway clearly shows that it would be perfectly feasible and has previously been achieved very rapidly at a time of national need.

Maybe further north, but no so in the south west.

When Agricola campaigned northwards during the Roman conquest, he is reputed to have commented on the "trackless wastes" of Galloway. Let's hope his historic observation does not become our current reality!

Even if the military railway was rebuilt it is a long loop around from Girvan compared to the direct A77. The through road coaches Belfast to Glasgow seem to have captured most of what remains of the foot passenger traffic.

On a historical note it always seems curious that the promoters of the railways to Stranraer (from Girvan snd Dumfries) chose to tramp across the moorland rather than take a coastal route. The 'Port Road', in particular, might have had more of a chance instead of having ridiculous stations like Gatehouse of Fleet (6 miles from its namesake)!

 

[35B]

The traincrew at Stranraer is 8 drivers and 7 conductors. The majority of them are late 30s/early 40s and most with young families all from the local area.


The crews book on remotely via telephone like over half the rest of ScotRail depots do.

Despite the doom and gloom suggested by most of the posters on here, the Stranraer line is used more than people think. Certainly the last 3 or 4 times I've worked the route the train leaving Stranraer has been busy with locals and tourists alike.

How busy is "busy". On the other thread, the caption to a linked photo said that 30 passengers on a 2 car Sprinter (capacity 150) was "good news".

 

[HSTEd]

There are apparently five trains each way to/from Stranraer. There were 30,196 entries and exits from Stranraer and 3,878 from Barhill in 2024/25.

Spread over 350 days that is 97 per day total. So each train carries on average ten people south of Girvan and about 9 south of Barhill

 

[35B]

There are apparently five trains each way to/from Stranraer. There were 30,196 entries and exits from Stranraer and 3,878 from Barhill in 2024/25.

Spread over 350 days that is 97 per day total. So each train carries on average ten people south of Girvan and about 9 south of Barhill

What would be interesting would be to know what the peak and minimum loads are - averages often conceal more than they reveal.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Spread over 350 days that is 97 per day total. So each train carries on average ten people south of Girvan and about 9 south of Barhill

I suspect it's not that, though, more likely some trains (e.g. the school train) are quite busy and some are one man, dog and bicycle - hence my suggestion of revisiting the timetable to see if you can design one with a limited number of round trips with a designated purpose for each round trip. You may even be able to lop a trip out if you think it through properly. Also if a smaller number of trips but more direct journeys to more useful places would be preferable, assuming they can be pathed.

Having said that if you look at it it does look like you've basically got morning school/commuter to Ayr, a lunchtime round trip, the one that brings the schoolkids home, the one that brings the commuters home and the late night one which is the unit going to bed. So it might be as targetted as it can be already.

The location of the station is a big issue - ideally you'd take it across the front into the town centre (nothing seems to be in the way of doing that as such), but at least cut it back to the start of the pier. The back of Port Rodie car park would be fairly easy to do and probably a reasonable cheap compromise.

 

[35B]

The location of the station is a big issue - ideally you'd take it across the front into the town centre (nothing seems to be in the way of doing that as such), but at least cut it back to the start of the pier. The back of Port Rodie car park would be fairly easy to do and probably a reasonable cheap compromise.

I hate to say it, but the expenditure would almost certainly be throwing good money after bad - the fundamental issue here is that the demand that sustained the railway has cratered since the ferries moved to Cairnryan. Unless the cost of change was offset by land sales and/or removal of maintenance costs, it's hard to see how the cost could ever seriously be recouped.

 

[NCT]

Even if a peak train carries 40 people, we are talking about a substantial railway carrying bus passenger numbers.

 

[HSTEd]

Obviously hard to do a great comparison since such stations are rarely built nowadays, but what is the cheapest possible station likely to cost?

You could probably have a 5m platform, bus shelter and a streetlight to deal with the passenger loadings.

EDIT: On a related note, what is the busiest station operated using local door methods?

 

[Falcon1200]

The through road coaches Belfast to Glasgow seem to have captured most of what remains of the foot passenger traffic.

It would be interesting to know the present day figures for foot passengers by sea, although no matter what they are they could not possibly justify building a line to serve Cairnryan. All I can say is that, despite having staff travel facilities on Scotrail, the ferries and Northern Ireland Railways, the last time I travelled between Glasgow and Belfast, I flew.

 

[Rescars]

On a historical note it always seems curious that the promoters of the railways to Stranraer (from Girvan snd Dumfries) chose to tramp across the moorland rather than take a coastal route. The 'Port Road', in particular, might have had more of a chance instead of having ridiculous stations like Gatehouse of Fleet (6 miles from its namesake)!

AIUI the topography along the coast is problematic between Tynholm and Creetown, especially between Gatehouse and Carsluith. The commercial rationale for the Port Road was the Irish mail traffic, any business generated locally was seen more as a bonus. The Girvan and Portpatrick Junction creating the route through Barrhill came along much later and was financially challenged from the outset. IIRC it stopped operating a couple of times due to lack of funds before it was eventually absobed by the GSWR.

 

[Killingworth]

The Railway Data website provides some information that may be helpful (although I might question the accuracy of their data for individual loadings on specific trains).

Firstly Glasgow is the most popular destination with 6651 recorded users in 2024/5 with Ayr in second place at 3491 - hardly large numbers over a year. See; https://www.railwaydata.co.uk/odm/gbr/?dest=all&string_out=Stranraer [9555]

Passenger numbers boarding and alighting are also interesting, see; https://www.railwaydata.co.uk/loadings/gbr/?TLC=STR

Most, maybe all, the loads being carried would fit on one bus/coach. That could run twice as often for a fraction of the operational costs of the trains and tracks.

Boris Johnson wanted to build a bridge or tunnel to Ulster. He, and many suggesting that idea, had not looked at a map. They certainly hadn't made a crossing from Stranraer after travelling from Carlisle or Glasgow. In 1950 that was still the easiest way to get to Ireland from Scotland and much of northern England. Since the 1960s increasing numbers have flown. Truckers don't come by train.

 

[Strathclyder]

The entire line is basically kept alive through digging for spares in scrapyards. This project gives it another decade or so before a decision has to be made on its survival.

Which will be closure south of Girvan at the bare minimum if it comes to actual cutbacks/closures going beyond the current 'slimming down'.

As repeatedly noted by yourself and others and as much as it pains me to say it, the current passenger traffic levels south of Girvan could quite easily be catered for by coaches - that is, if the bus/coach companies themselves consider the area such a public transport wasteland that's not worth serving - and the line has been kept going merely by digging through every scrapyard in the land for suitable spares. That rationalizations like we're seeing now haven't happened before now is honestly the most surprising thing.

Safe to say, I'm honestly more than a little pessimistic that the line will survive in anything resembling it's current form beyond 2040. Whether that'll end up being a good or bad thing remains to be seen, but safe to say that you can't count me as one of the optimists here.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which will be closure south of Girvan at the bare minimum.

Electrification and frequency upgrade to Girvan but closure south thereof would probably be a pragmatic solution. Buses (ideally electric) could operate between Girvan and Stranraer/Cairnryan integrated to the timetable. This would probably be better for everyone as an hourly bus would likely be feasible.