Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[Class 170101]

Have an underground station with an exit to Central at one and and an exit to Queen Street at the other.

Doesn't really help those people arriving at Glasgow Central High Level and transferring to Glasgow Queen Street High Level - a walk is still required.

 

[najaB]

Doesn't really help those people arriving at Glasgow Central High Level and transferring to Glasgow Queen Street High Level - a walk is still required.

Moving walkway the length of the station.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Moving walkway the length of the station.

Knowing Network Rail, a series of 20 moving walkways with a franchised food retailer at the end of each one...

 

[Class 170101]

Moving walkway the length of the station.

Would have to walk down to the Low Level stations. I would suggest it would still be quicker to walk via the street.

 

[clc]

Doesn't really help those people arriving at Glasgow Central High Level and transferring to Glasgow Queen Street High Level - a walk is still required.

Unless your destination is Charing Cross or a station on the Springburn via Duke St branch or an intermediate station on the A2B line you wouldn't need to transfer from Central to Queen Street. Thanks to the new tunnel you'd either have a direct service or the option of interchanging at Stirling, Dalmuir or Partick.

 

[NotATrainspott]

What might need to be considered with an attempt to build a single station between Central and Queen Street is that all the construction would then happen under the most expensive part of Buchanan Street and the city centre, and it would make any interchange with the Subway rather convoluted. Since each platform tunnel would be at most 200m long, I could see there being a possibility instead that each of Central and Queen Street would have their own station but at their extreme ends where it would not be as expensive to compulsory purchase on the surface.

Given that the Buchanan Galleries redevelopment is now dead it could be within the realms of possibility for a future redevelopment to happen with some consideration of a north-south tunnel. The Queen Street station could be built on the eastern side of the existing one, taking over the current station car park, the Buchanan Galleries MSCP that was to be demolished and replaced with Marks and Spencer and then with a northern entrance combined into a redeveloped bus station. The area of the city north of the Galleries isn't well integrated and it should be ripe for some good redevelopment if there were some massive investment in public transport at the same time.

The eventual need to rebuild Glasgow Central for TSI-compliant high speed services will also most likely result in its centre of gravity shifting southward as well. That reconstruction would result in the high value part of the city centre stretching properly down to the banks of the Clyde and if that area were then served directly by the north-south city tunnel station, it should also help to connect the south bank of the river into the city as well. A station near there would also be very close to St Enoch and given that the buildings between Central and St Enoch square aren't that amazing, further redevelopment which would provide a direct link between them would seem to be a reasonable idea.

 

[me123]

Would have to walk down to the Low Level stations. I would suggest it would still be quicker to walk via the street.

With moving walkways and no conflicting traffic/shoppers/charity beggars in your way, I think it's got potential to be much quicker than the street above.

 

[Southsider]

Afterwards I gleaned (though hardly exclusively) that NR wanted to do a Paisley Canal type job on East Kilbride/Barrhead/Kilmarnock. I then pointed out that EK was one thing but Kilmarnock was the diversionary route for WCML so surely needs more robust treatment.

I recall reading a presentation on Paisley Canal (can't find it at the moment) which detailed the approach taken where several compromises were employed such as long neutral sections and shutting off power should a freight loco use the line, all of which were contained within the railway companies' domain. The report concluded by pointing out that the same approach was not suitable for East Kilbride owing to clearance issues at the many arched bridges. I took it from this that they had looked at it but discounted it as solving this would involve several local authorities who may not see it as a priority. One thing that has changed since then is that the signaling has been replaced and is presumably compatable with electrification so that cost element has been dealt with.

**** found the presentation - track needs to be lowered by 420mm at the arched bridges to obtain clearance. That sounds like quite a depth to me, not sure how many arched bridges there are which would need this treatment.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I recall reading a presentation on Paisley Canal (can't find it at the moment) which detailed the approach taken where several compromises were employed such as long neutral sections and shutting off power should a freight loco use the line, all of which were contained within the railway companies' domain. The report concluded by pointing out that the same approach was not suitable for East Kilbride owing to clearance issues at the many arched bridges. I took it from this that they had looked at it but discounted it as solving this would involve several local authorities who may not see it as a priority. One thing that has changed since then is that the signaling has been replaced and is presumably compatable with electrification so that cost element has been dealt with.

Another important factor was that the TOC did not claim compensation payments for the disruption during construction.

 

[Southsider]

Another important factor was that the TOC did not claim compensation payments for the disruption during construction.

Indeed - and again in the railway companies' domain so could be repeated.
I had a quick scan of the route on Google Maps and it would appear that there are about a dozen structures which may or may not need attention. Some are minor, farm access bridges, others are major roads but some, such as Minard Road at Crosmyloof station, have been rebuilt recently and presumably electrification was catered for in the design. It looks (to my totally untrained eye) to be a relatively simple job and, given the steep gradients on the line, one well suited to electric traction.
Reading elsewhere on the forum of a dire shortage of DMU stock, this seems a ready source of around 10 156 units. Would it be true to say that in BR days there would have been a body addressing this 'bigger picture' which has been lost through privitisation and devolution or is the impact of the perceived shortage being overstated?

 

[jopsuk]

If you electrified tomorrow, releasing those DMUs- exactly where have you found spare EMUs?

 

[Altnabreac]

Indeed - and again in the railway companies' domain so could be repeated.
I had a quick scan of the route on Google Maps and it would appear that there are about a dozen structures which may or may not need attention. Some are minor, farm access bridges, others are major roads but some, such as Minard Road at Crosmyloof station, have been rebuilt recently and presumably electrification was catered for in the design. It looks (to my totally untrained eye) to be a relatively simple job and, given the steep gradients on the line, one well suited to electric traction.
Reading elsewhere on the forum of a dire shortage of DMU stock, this seems a ready source of around 10 156 units. Would it be true to say that in BR days there would have been a body addressing this 'bigger picture' which has been lost through privitisation and devolution or is the impact of the perceived shortage being overstated?

Possibly so. However I can see the logic for Transport Scotland and Scotrail which is that by 2017 Scotrail will effectively have as many DMUs as it could ever want so no need to electrify anything for stock purposes.

The pressing need in CP6 will be to replace the HSTs when they reach the end of their useful life in 2025 - 2030 or so. Electrifying to Aberdeen then becomes the key to achieving this without buying new Diesel Intercity Stock.

I still expect East Kilbride and possibly Barrhead to be done early in CP6 but I can see the logic of switching priorities to Fife and Dundee.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If you electrified tomorrow, releasing those DMUs- exactly where have you found spare EMUs?

It's not tomorrow but on a more realistic early CP6 timetable my understanding is that the follow up AT200 order is not for existing planned electrification. An extra 10 x 3 car AT200s are provisionally due in 2022 if the Scotrail Franchise is confirmed for 10 years and the rolling electrification extends past Shotts in 2019.

Sure Hitachi would build a few more if 30 units wasn't quite enough but I'd imagine that would cover EK fairly well.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Sure Hitachi would build a few more if 30 units wasn't quite enough but I'd imagine that would cover EK fairly well.

Worth bearing in mind the AT200 is a relatively new product, so will be available to order for perhaps 10 or 15 years, likewise with the AT300 family, it's not too unrealistic to assume Edinburgh and Glasgow to Aberdeen and Inverness services could be operated with new build AT300 units, should that be the direction the tendering process moves in.

 

[Highland37]

I wasn't aware that the Buchanan Galleries development had been shelved. How does that affect Queen Street redevelopment?

 

[Altnabreac]

I wasn't aware that the Buchanan Galleries development had been shelved. How does that affect Queen Street redevelopment?

Supposedly they have only been postponed rather than shelved and the planning permission will last a few years so they don't have to start right away.

In fact they seem to be saying EGIP works are one of the reasons for the postponement, I suspect they might be wanting to be sure the TWA Order is issued before they start work as the 2 schemes are closely intertwined.

If the scheme were cancelled entirely then I think Queen St redevelopment could still go ahead but it would need either a new Planning Application for the NE portion of the site or changes to the TWA Order.

 

[clc]

This update from SPT mentions that Network Rail has included key elements of station works in the current TAWS application which were originally to have been provided by the Buchanan Galleries developer:

http://www.spt.co.uk/documents/rtp091015_minute.pdf

 

[Highland37]

From reading the above link and associated reports, it appears that the Buchanan Galleries proposal has been postponed but the redevelopment of Queen Street has not.

 

[Altnabreac]

From reading the above link and associated reports, it appears that the Buchanan Galleries proposal has been postponed but the redevelopment of Queen Street has not.

Indeed. Worth remembering that the Queen St redevelopment was always right at the end of EGIP in 2017-18 so it's possible for the plans to change to accommodate the Buchanan Galleries pause.

Land Securities have had some big corporate changes in the last 12 months so not altogether surprising that they have slowed down expansion. They are much more focused on yield than turnover now.

 

[clc]

I agree with a lot of what you said here. Glasgow City Council's incompetent promotion of Crossrail really makes me angry.

The reason it annoys me though is that I think the City Union Line could be a really useful part of Glasgow's Rail Infrastructure.

• West Street does have the potential to be a very useful interchange, linking Ayrshire and Renfrewshire to the west end.
• A station in the Gorbals would support regeneration in the area and make the Gorbals feel more connected.
• A Glasgow Cross station with low level platforms on the Argyll Line would improve connectivity and assist with regeneration around the Saltmarket area.

However none of this makes any sense as part of an Edinburgh - Ayr cross country service, or by diverting existing trains away from Central station where existing passengers want to go.

As a new local service however it could be really useful and if it created capacity for say a new service to Renfrew & Braehead then people would accept the lack of a connection to Central because of lack of capacity for new services.

A 4tph service from Springburn - Renfrew would be a really useful local link, without any need to try and justify it by running spurious, slow through services from Ayr - Edinburgh. I suspect the main reason these through services are suggested is to try and justify it as a national scheme so Glasgow City Council doesn't have to fund it.

Why not run 4tph from Renfrew to Charing Cross instead of Springburn? That way you get all the benefits you mention but, even better, Renfrew gets a direct connection to various parts of the city centre:-

High St - for Strathclyde Uni and Glasgow Royal Infirmary;

Queen St - for CBD, shopping, Theatreland, Strathclyde Uni, City of Glasgow College, Glasgow Caledonian Uni, Royal Conservatoire.

Charing Cross - for various major employers such as Santander, Whyte & MacKay and Scottish Power. Plus big development potential at various sites nearby (India St, Pitt St).

Direct services to these areas rather than having to change at Bellgrove would obviously attract higher passenger numbers. You'd have to build the St Johns link which adds £50m? to the cost, but I'm sure that would be recouped over 60 years.

 

[Highland37]

I think Glasgow Cross Rail could only be a good thing. Whether it is as worthy of funding as other rail schemes in Scotland is another matter.

It's not a solution looking for a problem.

When I went to Paisley University I took the train from Milngavie and had to walk down from Queen Street to Central or change at Partick and also Central.

A train from Partick or anywhere east to Paisley would be excellent and make a big difference.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Another milestone for EGIP - the first wires are up on the E&G route. http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/first-wires-go-up-on-egip

The Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement Programme (EGIP) reached another key milestone last night (October 27) when the first 1.5km overhead power cables were run out on the main Edinburgh-Glasgow route.
Over 250km of overhead power equipment (OLE) will be installed in the coming months as part of the £742m Scottish Government-funded project.
The wiring work is currently being delivered using conventional mobile elevated platform methods, ahead of the arrival of a new wiring train in January

Does anyone know where the wiring has started?
A pity there is nothing similar to report in England...

 

[mr_towers]

Saw some just before Linlithgow (heading down) from the train home today. Good progress

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Another milestone for EGIP - the first wires are up on the E&G route.

Great news

 

[Glenmutchkin]

This afternoon we walked along the Union Canal east of Linlithgow. For much of the walk there is a good view of the E-G line and it looked to me as if the wires have started to go up on this stretch.

The electrics are due to start running in December 2016. How soon before that will training runs begin?

 

[Carntyne]

Might be a daft question, but will training runs be needed if drivers already have the route knowledge. (traction training required I know)

 

[adrock1976]

Another milestone for EGIP - the first wires are up on the E&G route. http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/first-wires-go-up-on-egip



Does anyone know where the wiring has started?
A pity there is nothing similar to report in England...

Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but I always thought that the first wires on the E & G were installed in 1990/1 between Waverley and Haymarket when the East Coast route was electrified.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but I always thought that the first wires on the E & G were installed in 1990/1 between Waverley and Haymarket when the East Coast route was electrified.

That's probably true if you're being hyper pedantic, but it's quite clear what's being referred to here. Wiring work has commenced on the E&G route in order to electrify the E&G route.

As for training runs - the bulk of the work can be done with the Class 380 units without having to run them on the E&G route, so whilst it's an 'Autumn 2016' thing at the moment, there's enough flexibility to not need to do anything until late October or November next year. Queen Street station is the last major project on the route, IIRC, so after that, and the usual electrification testing and sign offs, which should be end of August/beginning of September, all being well, it should be possible to do training.

It's not just the wires that need to be energised really before training can begin, the Class 321 units are also needed to release Class 380 units, so if they're let, the schedule will slip a bit, but it's got a bit of padding, so it's OK.

 

[Chris125]

A couple of interesting photos by 'Jed' of EGIP progress:


A glimpse of the future.... by Jed, on Flickr


Winchburgh Tunnel by Jed, on Flickr

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Outstanding

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Now looking like a proper railway for the first time this century.

The first photo shows the end of one wire run and the start of another, with two sets of Tensorex tensioning equipment on each of four masts (those with the diagonal bracing).