Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[Southsider]

I don’t know much about East Kilbride and it’s ease of electrification or otherwise, but Maryhill has both Maryhill Road and Balmore Road to be rebuilt. The latter is having works on the water main done after a wrangle between Scottish Water, Glasgow City Council and Network Rail about who was responsible for the bridge, and the water main. If what that main supplies is what I’ve been told, diverting that water main whilst rebuilding the bridge won’t be trivial.

Electrification of East Kilbride should be relatively straightforward but, as has been pointed out above, it may need doubling of the single track sections to allow four trains per hour. There’s also the question of how it would be fed from the grid.

 

[alangla]

I don’t know much about East Kilbride and it’s ease of electrification or otherwise, but Maryhill has both Maryhill Road and Balmore Road to be rebuilt. The latter is having works on the water main done after a wrangle between Scottish Water, Glasgow City Council and Network Rail about who was responsible for the bridge, and the water main. If what that main supplies is what I’ve been told, diverting that water main whilst rebuilding the bridge won’t be trivial.

Those roadworks on the bridge at Possilpark & Parkhouse station seem to have been there for years. I’ve never seen anything actually happening there. The irony, of course, is the Scottish Water used to be based in the business park directly across the road!

 

[Class 170101]

Electrification of East Kilbride should be relatively straightforward but, as has been pointed out above, it may need doubling of the single track sections to allow four trains per hour. There’s also the question of how it would be fed from the grid.

Could it be fed from the existing Cathcart Circle and Neilson branches where the East Kilbride Line crosses them?

 

[MadMac]

Could it be fed from the existing Cathcart Circle and Neilston branches where the East Kilbride Line crosses them?

I'll gladly bow to the superior knowledge of others, but I would imagine that it's theoretically possible, subject to the existing system being able to handle the additional load.

Some notes re East Kilbride:

1) There was a 1974 track plan in the BR Glasgow Signalling Drawing Office when I worked there showing track alterations for electrification.
2) Some readers may remember a 1980s proposal to close the Neilston line beyond Whitecraigs, close the East Kilbride line from Busby Junction (near Pollokshaws West) - Clarkston and connect the remaining part into the Neilston line, wiring it with the equipment recovered from beyond Whitecraigs.
3) Again from the 1980s, there was a plan seriously looked at to build a new station under East Kilbride town centre and close the existing terminus.

 

[Southsider]

I'll gladly bow to the superior knowledge of others, but I would imagine that it's theoretically possible, subject to the existing system being able to handle the additional load.

Some notes re East Kilbride:

1) There was a 1974 track plan in the BR Glasgow Signalling Drawing Office when I worked there showing track alterations for electrification.
2) Some readers may remember a 1980s proposal to close the Neilston line beyond Whitecraigs, close the East Kilbride line from Busby Junction (near Pollokshaws West) - Clarkston and connect the remaining part into the Neilston line, wiring it with the equipment recovered from beyond Whitecraigs.
3) Again from the 1980s, there was a plan seriously looked at to build a new station under East Kilbride town centre and close the existing terminus.

I can remember that plan. It would have followed the line of an old siding from Muirend to Williamwood Golf Club. Contrary to popular belief it never actually connected to the East Kilbride line (that came from the other direction) but stopped a few yards short and was used to store football specials while games were played at Hampden. A short section of track on this alignment could provide a cheap and useful diversionary route as well as a possible means of feeding power to the EK line.

 

[Class 170101]

A short section of track on this alignment could provide a cheap and useful diversionary route as well as a possible means of feeding power to the EK line.

Why would track be required? Surely just an electrical link between the two branches would suffice?

 

[MadMac]

I can remember that plan. It would have followed the line of an old siding from Muirend to Williamwood Golf Club. Contrary to popular belief it never actually connected to the East Kilbride line (that came from the other direction) but stopped a few yards short and was used to store football specials while games were played at Hampden. A short section of track on this alignment could provide a cheap and useful diversionary route as well as a possible means of feeding power to the EK line.

What I think they had in mind was an embankment that went off to the right not far past Clarkston - I have no idea if it ever even had any railway on it, but it looks like it was put there with one in mind. See this view.

 

[MadMac]

Why would track be required? Surely just an electrical link between the two branches would suffice?

True. I was just illustrating that electrification to EK has been talked about for a long time.

 

[Southsider]

Why would track be required? Surely just an electrical link between the two branches would suffice?

Not required as you say, just an easy, available option.

 

[deltic08]

Not required as you say, just an easy, available option.

When four trains an hour are introduced to EK, two diesel trains could travel via Busby Jnc and two electric trains via Williamswood on a relaid chord. Only double this bit and leave the rest of the branch single line as it remains two diesel trains per hour. Only electrify from the chord to EK and this way would save money but still provide EK with some electric trains.

 

[clc]

When four trains an hour are introduced to EK, two diesel trains could travel via Busby Jnc and two electric trains via Williamswood on a relaid chord. Only double this bit and leave the rest of the branch single line as it remains two diesel trains per hour. Only electrify from the chord to EK and this way would save money but still provide EK with some electric trains.

Would the cost of the new chord be significantly less than the cost of electrifying Busby Junction-Williamwood?
The main problem with your suggestion is you’d be running 4tph to EK without doubling any of the existing single track. There’s also the question of whether running an extra 2tph between Central and Williamwood would scupper any chance of the remainder of the Neilston branch going to 4tph.

 

[Southsider]

Would the cost of the new chord be significantly less than the cost of electrifying Busby Junction-Williamwood?
The main problem with your suggestion is you’d be running 4tph to EK without doubling any of the existing single track. There’s also the question of whether running an extra 2tph between Central and Williamwood would scupper any chance of the remainder of the Neilston branch going to 4tph.

I wouldn’t see it as instead of but as well as electrifying from Busby junction.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I don't see that chord happening. It may be possible, sure, but unless it's going to deliver more than its costs' worth of value to the rail network it just doesn't need to exist. If it did exist, I'm sure it'd be electrified and kept, but it doesn't so it won't.

 

[deltic08]

Would the cost of the new chord be significantly less than the cost of electrifying Busby Junction-Williamwood?
The main problem with your suggestion is you’d be running 4tph to EK without doubling any of the existing single track. There’s also the question of whether running an extra 2tph between Central and Williamwood would scupper any chance of the remainder of the Neilston branch going to 4tph.

Please read #3040 again where I said double Williamwood to EK where there would be 4tph and leave the remainder single track with only 2tph,

 

[deltic08]

Would the cost of the new chord be significantly less than the cost of electrifying Busby Junction-Williamwood?
The main problem with your suggestion is you’d be running 4tph to EK without doubling any of the existing single track. There’s also the question of whether running an extra 2tph between Central and Williamwood would scupper any chance of the remainder of the Neilston branch going to 4tph.

The earthworks are there already but would need further work such as drainage and new bed work. Double junctions at both ends of the chord would be costly but cheaper if done at the same time as doubling to EK.
Would the Neilston branch take 6tph?

 

[Southsider]

Please read #3040 again where I said double Williamwood to EK where there would be 4tph and leave the remainder single track with only 2tph,

Don’t confuse Busby with Busby Junction they are some miles apart and that section is already doubled. It’s Busby to EK that is single with passing loops.

 

[clc]

Please read #3040 again where I said double Williamwood to EK where there would be 4tph and leave the remainder single track with only 2tph,

When you said “double this bit” I thought you meant the new chord. The section of the EK line between Williamwood and Busby is already doubled.

 

[deltic08]

Don’t confuse Busby with Busby Junction they are some miles apart and that section is already doubled. It’s Busby to EK that is single with passing loops.

I do know the difference but a long time since I was there. Probably 1966.

Busby to EK still would need doubling though.

 

[deltic08]

When you said “double this bit” I thought you meant the new chord. The section of the EK line between Williamwood and Busby is already doubled.

I will have to look at a map to orientate myself.

 

[clc]

Would the Neilston branch take 6tph?

The long term aspiration is for Neilston to increase from 2tph to 4tph, Newton from 2tph to 4tph and Cathcart Circle from 1tph to 2tph. Someone more knowledgable than me might be able to advise whether the corridor could handle an additional 2tph on top.

 

[gingertom]

The long term aspiration is for Neilston to increase from 2tph to 4tph, Newton from 2tph to 4tph and Cathcart Circle from 1tph to 2tph. Someone more knowledgable than me might be able to advise whether the corridor could handle an additional 2tph on top.

I think the corridor could handle it but doubtful that Glasgow Central could handle the extra movements.

 

[route101]

I'll gladly bow to the superior knowledge of others, but I would imagine that it's theoretically possible, subject to the existing system being able to handle the additional load.

Some notes re East Kilbride:

1) There was a 1974 track plan in the BR Glasgow Signalling Drawing Office when I worked there showing track alterations for electrification.
2) Some readers may remember a 1980s proposal to close the Neilston line beyond Whitecraigs, close the East Kilbride line from Busby Junction (near Pollokshaws West) - Clarkston and connect the remaining part into the Neilston line, wiring it with the equipment recovered from beyond Whitecraigs.
3) Again from the 1980s, there was a plan seriously looked at to build a new station under East Kilbride town centre and close the existing terminus.

Heard about that , not sure if its worth it extending to EK centre nowadays ,becoming a ghost town . The topography means tunnelling .

Bit of fantasy but line from EK to Blantyre/Hamilton and somehow link it up with electrics , problem is alignment has been built on .

Topography with EK higher up and Glasgow lower down , line to city via Castlemilk not gonna be easy to out in .

Dont think thats a bad idea running 2 tph hour via Muirend , wonder if its any quicker , dont think so .

Though i think the improvement is going to be extra 156s from Shotts etc .

 

[deltic08]

Heard about that , not sure if its worth it extending to EK centre nowadays ,becoming a ghost town . The topography means tunnelling .

Bit of fantasy but line from EK to Blantyre/Hamilton and somehow link it up with electrics , problem is alignment has been built on .

Topography with EK higher up and Glasgow lower down , line to city via Castlemilk not gonna be easy to out in

Not fantasy just realisation of the ideal transport option. This is a good plan.

A bit of demolition here and there didn't stop Bathgate-Airdrie and Galashiels so why not here? A whole development was demolished at Gorebridge station site.

 

[Highlandspring]

Busby to EK still would need doubling though.

It’s worth pointing out that Busby to East Kilbride has always been single line since the railway was built in the 19th century.

 

[deltic08]

It’s worth pointing out that Busby to East Kilbride has always been single line since the railway was built in the 19th century.

That is why I didn't say redoubling.

 

[sannox]

Lot of new housing around there and EK is a car centric town . Altough parts of the town will have a quicker bus journey to City Centre .

I suspect Maryhill will be a lot easier to do than EK . Service going every 20 minutes will be a huge improvement if so .

The parts near the 18/21 up near Calderwood are marginal but still 35mins at best, longer at rush hour. Park and ride means train can be quicker, especially if you live in the south or Stewartfield. The bus however does well for those who want a direct service or can't park and ride.

It’s worth pointing out that Busby to East Kilbride has always been single line since the railway was built in the 19th century.

I thought the idea was to provide an additional platform at EK to improve the turnaround procedure and reduce pressure at Central. Equally a 2nd platform at Hairmyres with extension of the loop would likely negate the need for long redoubling to Busby?

 

[gingertom]

The parts near the 18/21 up near Calderwood are marginal but still 35mins at best, longer at rush hour. Park and ride means train can be quicker, especially if you live in the south or Stewartfield. The bus however does well for those who want a direct service or can't park and ride.



I thought the idea was to provide an additional platform at EK to improve the turnaround procedure and reduce pressure at Central. Equally a 2nd platform at Hairmyres with extension of the loop would likely negate the need for long redoubling to Busby?

ScotGov will no doubt engage a firm of consultants to work out how much doubling is needed and where, in order to deliver a robust 4tph timetable.

 

[Southsider]

Have the wires gone live on SDA and Shotts yet?

 

[NotATrainspott]

ScotGov will no doubt engage a firm of consultants to work out how much doubling is needed and where, in order to deliver a robust 4tph timetable.

All of it, essentially. The key word here is 'robust', since other Scottish rail capacity improvements are dependent on extra capacity at Glasgow Central. The line needs to be designed so that the recovery is at the East Kilbride end, meaning trains will have a rapid turnaround at Central. Without sufficient redoubling at the EK end, it won't be able to perform that duty and the rest of the rail network will suffer as well as the EK line itself.

 

[Carntyne]

Have the wires gone live on SDA and Shotts yet?

Sections to be treated as live from this morning, with other from next Sunday I believe.