Is Camelon station worth retaining?

[Mingulay]

At the risk of upsetting Falkirk. The number is passengers I see boarding or alightinging at Camelon is rarely more than the fingers of one hand at peak times.

Given the main station is close by as is Larbert and they have another station as well. Is Camelon worth the additional time added to the journey?

They used to stop every second train. But now it's nearly always.

Tin hat on!

 

[Highlandspring]

According to the ORR statistics 132166 people used it in 2016/17...

 

[Chrism20]

The current level of service has been in place since 2000 and followed a good local campaign for the increase.

For the two to three minutes that it would save I doubt it would be worth the hassle of removing some of the stops. It might also do more harm than good and put people off using the train altogether.

 

[Chris Hamilton]

I’ve used it regularly to transfer between trains to/from Cumbernauld and those to/from Stirling.

I wouldn’t describe it as a busy station, but this manoeuvre is very handy, and not possible to complete (without an hours wait) by travelling to Grahamston due to the timings.

 

[Mingulay]

According to the ORR statistics 132166 people used it in 2016/17...

Thanks for that. So simplistic arithmetic. That's on average 363 people a day

It gets about 34 stops from the Dunblane service each way, that's 70 stops on that service alone , so daily average of 5 per train stop. Add the other services It gets. My guesstimate of fingers on one hand looks spot on. Perhaps 3 passengers per train stop

Yes. Granted saves two minutes, but it all helps. One less station to maintain. The town is very well served

 

[jopsuk]

There are 162 stations less used in Scotland, 194 busier.

 

[Mingulay]

There are 162 stations less used in Scotland, 194 busier.

Thank you. That's interesting. I wonder how many of those less used are remote whereas Camelon has a station within 2/3 mins rail travel in each direction in a town with 2 other stations.

My middle names not Beeching (spelling?) no issue with underused remote stations serving communities just saying speeding up the service and not stopping , sometimes for no passengers on or off in a town well served seems not a harsh proposal.

 

[Altnabreac]

There are 6 SIMD datazones within the most deprived 20% of Scotland within 500m of Camelon station.

40% of households in the FK1 4 postcode area (Broadly Camelon, Carmuirs and Tamfourhill) have no access to a car or van compared to a 30% average across Scotland or 25% in Falkirk which is more typical of a non City local authority.

Its around 2km by road to either Falkirk Grahamston or Larbert so well beyond the distance that research shows most people are willing to walk to access a railway station.

So we have an area which has low access to Car transport, low average income and high deprivation. And your plan is to reduce the service and access for this deprived area in order to slightly speed up services to Dunblane which has an almost identical population (around 8000) as Camelon but none of the deprivation.

Sounds a great plan. Go ahead and suggest closure to the powers that be.

In fact, given Dunblane has a much higher level of car ownership and is a similar distance from Bridge of Allan, why not build a bigger car park at Bridge of Allan and get everyone from Dunblane to drive there.

Even fewer stations to maintain.

 

[Mingulay]

There are 6 SIMD datazones within the most deprived 20% of Scotland within 500m of Camelon station.

40% of households in the FK1 4 postcode area (Broadly Camelon, Carmuirs and Tamfourhill) have no access to a car or van compared to a 30% average across Scotland or 25% in Falkirk which is more typical of a non City local authority.

Its around 2km by road to either Falkirk Grahamston or Larbert so well beyond the distance that research shows most people are willing to walk to access a railway station.

So we have an area which has low access to Car transport, low average income and high deprivation. And your plan is to reduce the service and access for this deprived area in order to slightly speed up services to Dunblane which has an almost identical population (around 8000) as Camelon but none of the deprivation.

Sounds a great plan. Go ahead and suggest closure to the powers that be.

In fact, given Dunblane has a much higher level of car ownership and is a similar distance from Bridge of Allan, why not build a bigger car park at Bridge of Allan and get everyone from Dunblane to drive there.

Even fewer stations to maintain.

Thank you

I knew I could count on your support

 

[Stopper]

I think Camelon’s current service of 2tph Edinburgh-Dunblane each way and 1tph Falkirk-Glasgow each way is a pretty fair service. However, the new timetable planned goes a bit overkill with Camelon. It’s due to have 4tph Edinburgh, 2tph Glasgow and 2tph Dunblane. It certainly doesn’t justify anything like that.

 

[Altnabreac]

I think Camelon’s current service of 2tph Edinburgh-Dunblane each way and 1tph Falkirk-Glasgow each way is a pretty fair service. However, the new timetable planned goes a bit overkill with Camelon. It’s due to have 4tph Edinburgh, 2tph Glasgow and 2tph Dunblane. It certainly doesn’t justify anything like that.

You're right. its a more difficult call about whether Camelon justifies a 4tph Edinburgh service. I guess the balance is the journey time cost versus the increased journey opportunities for Cumbernauld - Stirling by changing at Camelon.

Not entirely sure what the correct decision is there as its a borderline one.

 

[Altnabreac]

Thank you

I knew I could count on your support

i look forward to seeing your letter to the Scotsman proposing closure of Dunblane and Camelon stations to save money.

 

[Stopper]

You're right. its a more difficult call about whether Camelon justifies a 4tph Edinburgh service. I guess the balance is the journey time cost versus the increased journey opportunities for Cumbernauld - Stirling by changing at Camelon.

Not entirely sure what the correct decision is there as its a borderline one.

It would be hard to leave Camelon to similar to what it has currently without not having a fixed calling pattern for every service.

That said though, I don’t think Camelon justifies the Stirling links even half as much as Linlithgow and Polmont who had them removed. I also don’t think a likely not very big Stirling-Cumbernauld market demands a changing call at Camelon, especially when Stirling-Croy is 2tph.

If the Stirling/Dunblane services are ever speeded up again, I’m sure Camelon will be the first to go. If there are ever extra Stirling (or possibly regular Alloa) services from Edinburgh, I’m sure Camelon wouldn’t get a call either. So I’d just leave it be at the moment.

 

[Altnabreac]

I think the difficulty in removing Camelon stops from the Stirling services would be creating a reversal for Camelon - Larbert or Camelon - Stirling travellers which would be an even bigger time penalty than for Polmont / Linlithgow travellers. Same applies to Cumbernauld.

So the only alternative to 4tph for Camelon is something like 1tph of the Cumbernauld and 1tph of the Stirling missing Camelon and then you have an uneven interval timetable and a move away from fixed calling patterns that simplify operations.

So I suspect that for the foreseeable future that means Camelon getting all calls except the odd peak time extra and the Chieftain.

 

[Mingulay]

i look forward to seeing your letter to the Scotsman proposing closure of Dunblane and Camelon stations to save money.

I feel certain you would reply in your now familiar prejudiced , mildly sarcastic and self righteous manner .

It would speed services not just for Dunblane and Bridge of Allan, where you feel the Allan Water flows with Champagne , but Stirling and Larbert too.

I fully accept your valid observations in ensuring ALL communities get access to public transport , no question of that , just that there is precious little evidence that the station is used by many , disadvantaged or not , meriting so many calls .

 

[Altnabreac]

I feel certain you would reply in your now familiar prejudiced , mildly sarcastic and self righteous manner .

It would speed services not just for Dunblane and Bridge of Allan, where you feel the Allan Water flows with Champagne , but Stirling and Larbert too.

I fully accept your valid observations in ensuring ALL communities get access to public transport , no question of that , just that there is precious little evidence that the station is used by many , disadvantaged or not , meriting so many calls .

My tone, is as always, mischievous. I am not proposing to close Dunblane or Camelon. In fact I have been involved in opening stations in Scotland and saving others from closure.

Politically there is no appetite to close stations. Even some of the least used in Scotland are unlikely to see closure. If any stations in Scotland are closed in the next ten years it seems to me that only three - Invergowrie, Scotscalder and Georgemas Junction are realistically on the shortlist and they would all be associated with replacement stations at Dundee West and Halkirk respectively.

So given you were proposing closure for a station that serves a relatively deprived community of 8-10,000 people that idea is so far from any sort of practical reality that it is not unreasonable for me to point out the economic and political flaws of your suggestion.

There is a general movement from Transport Scotland / Scotrail towards trying to remove smaller town calls from longer distance services, move towards a more clockface timetable and increase frequencies.

Restricting Camelon to 2tph of the 4tph that run through it would be one possible approach but at the expense of connectivity. its certainly something you could suggest and would not be an unreasonable proposal.

However you have previously stated your opposition to removing Dunblane HST calls in Glasgow - Aberdeen services which are being replaced by a Glasgow - Dundee semi fast. So forgive me if you come over as ever so slightly self interested by simultaneously trying to close down Camelon (not just remove some semi fast calls) to speed your journeys, while opposing any changes that speed up Glasgow - Aberdeen journeys because they might inconvenience you. It's the very definition of hypocrisy.

 

[Mingulay]

My tone, is as always, mischievous. I am not proposing to close Dunblane or Camelon. In fact I have been involved in opening stations in Scotland and saving others from closure.

Politically there is no appetite to close stations. Even some of the least used in Scotland are unlikely to see closure. If any stations in Scotland are closed in the next ten years it seems to me that only three - Invergowrie, Scotscalder and Georgemas Junction are realistically on the shortlist and they would all be associated with replacement stations at Dundee West and Halkirk respectively.

So given you were proposing closure for a station that serves a relatively deprived community of 8-10,000 people that idea is so far from any sort of practical reality that it is not unreasonable for me to point out the economic and political flaws of your suggestion.

There is a general movement from Transport Scotland / Scotrail towards trying to remove smaller town calls from longer distance services, move towards a more clockface timetable and increase frequencies.

Restricting Camelon to 2tph of the 4tph that run through it would be one possible approach but at the expense of connectivity. its certainly something you could suggest and would not be an unreasonable proposal.

However you have previously stated your opposition to removing Dunblane HST calls in Glasgow - Aberdeen services which are being replaced by a Glasgow - Dundee semi fast. So forgive me if you come over as ever so slightly self interested by simultaneously trying to close down Camelon (not just remove some semi fast calls) to speed your journeys, while opposing any changes that speed up Glasgow - Aberdeen journeys because they might inconvenience you. It's the very definition of hypocrisy.

To set you straight again. My observations regarding the HST Dunblane Aberdeen service, was given my meeting with Scotrail management and letters from TS stated that the Aberdeen service from Dunblane would be improved with HST serving Dunblane. It seems I was misled, or misunderstood, or since that meeting the timetable has changed . I have no issue with intercity services skipping Dunblane if its for the wider benefit, just contrary to what I was told .

I think we all want quicker services from all communities, but you seem to distinguish between communities . I dont ! No hypocrisy there .Political reality as you say will preclude closure and in that regard my suggestion was politically flawed as you say. Perhaps we can share common ground on a reduction of stops at Camelon unless evidence of greater demand/use emerges.

 

[Stopper]

Bridge of Allan and Dunblane are neither very big places, or very highly used stations in the context of the E-G central belt commuter area. I don’t think the services need speeding up for the sake of Bridge of Allan or Dunblane, but rather much busier stations such as Larbert and Stirling.

Remember that after Camelon, the two least busiest stations on the Edinburgh-Dunblane line, are infact, Bridge of Allan and Dunblane.

Every station on the line has a purpose, including Camelon, it just happens to be the least busy on a very busy line. There are 4 stations on the line above 1 million passengers per year, Edinburgh, Haymarket, Stirling and Linlithgow. I don’t see any reason why it should be closed, the service is just a bit overkill.

 

[Chrism20]

Is there still free parking at Camelon?

Moving the service to four Edinburgh and two Glasgow an hour may actually work very well. For most of the eastern end of Camelon it's as quick to go to Falkirk High if you can where there is four trains per hour in each direction than it is to Camelon where the frequency is either 25% or 50% depending on the direction of travel.

Parking is chargeable at both Grahamston and High so with four trains an hour to Edinburgh - two of them fast and two an hour to Glasgow the effect could potentially be positive.

 

[Glenmutchkin]

I look forward to one of the erudite contributors to this debate penning a Falkirk dialect equivalent of the Edward Thomas poem Adelstrop in honour of Camelon's deserted platforms.

 

[DuncanS]

If the op can count on one hand the amount of people getting on at Camelon on one hand then I can only assume he is from Fife, is asleep and not actually paying attention or is being deliberately obtuse. Peak time you are looking at plenty of usage of the station every day.

 

[Stopper]

I have only been through Camelon once at peak times as far as I can remember, it was fairly busy but obviously nothing like the sheer passengers numbers at other stations on the line such as Linlithgow and Stirling, and Larbert to a certain extent. During the day it’s never too busy.

I actually agree with the post above about Camelon’s increased service possibly spreading the usage from Falkirk High.
While Camelon’s slow 2tph Glasgow stopper will never ever compete with Falkirk High’s 4tph fast shuttles to Glasgow, the 4tph to Edinburgh (2 slow, 2 semi-fast) may entice some passengers away from High. Especially considering you’re far more likely to get a seat on a service at Camelon.

 

[Highlandspring]

I feel we’re all skirting round the real issue here. Is it Came-lun or Cam-eh-lon?

 

[Glenmutchkin]

My wife's granny bid fae Came-lun and that is the end of the argument.

 

[Stopper]

Came-lun for sure.

 

[Highlandspring]

See I am also in the Came-lun camp but the ScotRail autoannouncer begs to differ.

 

[47271]

It depends how local you are. I'd say Came-lun but most locals say Kem-lun, as in rhymes with Kremlin.

It's like Polmont. Straightforward enough as Paul-mont you'd think. But Pole-mint is right and when I hear anything else it gets on my wick.

I need to find more important things to worry about than the pronunciation of the names of suburbs of Falkirk.

 

[kilonewton]

Camelon (I always think camel-on) is handy for the Mariner Centre. Job done, stays open to all trains.

 

[Chrism20]

It depends how local you are. I'd say Came-lun but most locals say Kem-lun, as in rhymes with Kremlin.

It's like Polmont. Straightforward enough as Paul-mont you'd think. But Pole-mint is right and when I hear anything else it gets on my wick.

I need to find more important things to worry about than the pronunciation of the names of suburbs of Falkirk.

I've quite a few relatives in the Falkirk area and they all pronounce it Kem-lun whilst the majority pronounce Polmont as Po-munt or Po-mont

 

[Hackneyite]

At school in Falkirk (1960s) I made several crude observations: Cam-Lun was for teachers and the aspiring middle class (so could be safely disregarded!), Came-Lun was for children heading for O’levels, Kem-Lin was for (ahem) the rougher sort. (Cam-eh-Lon etc was and is quite simply wrong!)

However, despite linguists pointing out it’s Celtic root - and so Cam-Lun(or Lin)should be no more controversial than Cambuslang, Camlachie etc etc- I detect many educated people in the area moving to Came-Lin!

Now , trains—-