Scottish Electrification updates & discussion

[jopsuk]

Whilst Moncrief Tunnel is being done I can't see trains n the route via Stirling going beyond Dunblane- are there even points at Gleneagles that would allow reversal there?

It is standard for engineering when the route via Ladybank is shut, all trains go via Stirling, and when the route via Stirling is shut, the EC and Sleeper trains go via Ladybank. Sending Glasgow trains round that way would probably hit capacity issues and be slower than a coach transfer down the A9

 

[Clansman]

Whilst Moncrief Tunnel is being done I can't see trains n the route via Stirling going beyond Dunblane- are there even points at Gleneagles that would allow reversal there?

It is standard for engineering when the route via Ladybank is shut, all trains go via Stirling, and when the route via Stirling is shut, the EC and Sleeper trains go via Ladybank. Sending Glasgow trains round that way would probably hit capacity issues and be slower than a coach transfer down the A9

Terminating services at Dunblane would be worse from a capacity point of view than Gleneagles because of the terminating local services from both Edinburgh and Glasgow. Also, the commute from Gleneagles to Perth is only 15 minutes, as it's next to the motorway - whereas Dunblane is around 30 minutes+ by the time you get out of the station and through the town to the motorway. Gleneagles would keep bus turn around times to a minimum and will cause far less disruption to a passenger's journey as far as time is concerned.
At Gleneagles, there's good few acres of disused land next to platform 1, where a third platform could easily be constructed, as well as passing loops and junctions both north and south of the station. It's highly convenient that Gleneagles has already been recently refurbished, so only minor scale modifications would be required to allow services to terminate and turn around efficiently, with as minimal disruption as possible.

 

[deltic08]

The bridge is a 1960 or 70 replacement which is in poor condition. The pedestrian walkways are currently cantilevered out from the main deck with parapets that would be extremely difficult to make OLE compliant - currently little more than standard open roadside fencing with mesh over the gaps.

There is little room adjacent to the bridge to allow a replacement to be built and wheeled or lifted in so a rebuild in situ is likely to be the only option.

Suspect the actual bridge works could be completed in less than a year but with extensive utility diversions required before and a lack of disruptive possession mean it'll probably end up taking that long.

The new loop was only added recently taking it up to 3 lines, can't see there ever being a need for 4 tracking through the bridge

OK, thank you for the info. The abutments looked so clean as if it was newer than it is.

 

[snowball]

OK, thank you for the info. The abutments looked so clean as if it was newer than it is.

I haven't seen the bridge from the railway but on Streetview it's all rust and peeled paint:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@56.1...4!1smOQY5JSi7MMNJhd9oedSPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

[Millisle]

Terminating services at Dunblane would be worse from a capacity point of view than Gleneagles because of the terminating local services from both Edinburgh and Glasgow. Also, the commute from Gleneagles to Perth is only 15 minutes, as it's next to the motorway - whereas Dunblane is around 30 minutes+ by the time you get out of the station and through the town to the motorway. Gleneagles would keep bus turn around times to a minimum and will cause far less disruption to a passenger's journey as far as time is concerned.
At Gleneagles, there's good few acres of disused land next to platform 1, where a third platform could easily be constructed, as well as passing loops and junctions both north and south of the station. It's highly convenient that Gleneagles has already been recently refurbished, so only minor scale modifications would be required to allow services to terminate and turn around efficiently, with as minimal disruption as possible.

Turning trains back at Auchterarder might be an economical option, not that I necessarily expect still to be around for this whole enterprise.

 

[92002]

Turning trains back at Auchterarder might be an economical option, not that I necessarily expect still to be around for this whole enterprise.

All the better to build a new station South of the current one. Which can be constructed whilst trains are running.

The tunnel works will however need a blockage.

 

[marks87]

All the better to build a new station South of the current one. Which can be constructed whilst trains are running.

Do you mean Perth? I'm not sure that moving it further from the city centre would attract much local support.

It is a bit of a sprawling mess of a station, though, that has at least two platforms too many. I've not looked at the service pattern in massive detail but would I be right in thinking that if we ignore the extensive overnight stabling, only three platforms would be needed if the station were positioned south of the junction between the Highland Main and Aberdeen Lines?

 

[marks87]

Incidentally, what's capacity like through Fife then via Linlithgow?

I'm just wondering if direct services from Aberdeen to Glasgow could continue if/when work is done at Moncrieff.

You could also maintain direct services from Inverness to Glasgow and Edinburgh but it would be a slog. In fact it might even be quicker to reverse south of Perth and go via Dundee that way (with another reversal).

 

[Clansman]

All the better to build a new station South of the current one. Which can be constructed whilst trains are running.
The tunnel works will however need a blockage.

Do you mean Perth? I'm not sure that moving it further from the city centre would attract much local support.
It is a bit of a sprawling mess of a station, though, that has at least two platforms too many. I've not looked at the service pattern in massive detail but would I be right in thinking that if we ignore the extensive overnight stabling, only three platforms would be needed if the station were positioned south of the junction between the Highland Main and Aberdeen Lines?

Incidentally, what's capacity like through Fife then via Linlithgow?
I'm just wondering if direct services from Aberdeen to Glasgow could continue if/when work is done at Moncrieff.
You could also maintain direct services from Inverness to Glasgow and Edinburgh but it would be a slog. In fact it might even be quicker to reverse south of Perth and go via Dundee that way (with another reversal).

As said, the bottleneck nature of Perth makes it a pivotal hub for all services, so 3 platforms would be pushing the capacity barrier currently. In my opinion, Perth merits atleast 6 platforms (2 through for the HML, 2 termini and 2 through for Dundee northwards).

Given that current services from Inverness are being increased to a regular hourly service from Perth, you're talking at least 2 platforms for the Highland Mainline, taking both The Chieftain and Sleeper into account. Also, the service increase from Dundee to compensate for the deduction in station calls from Intercity services would see peak time capacity through platforms 1 and 2 as high as 3tph. Including the Edinburgh semi-fast terminators and eventual scope for a Glasgow semi-fast terminator, as well as initial plans for VTEC to start their morning Stirling service to Perth, at least 2 termini platforms would be sufficient to cope with that.

The layout of the railway in and around Perth could easily hold an advantage. During the reconstruction of the station, it wouldn't necessarily be hard to contract temporary platforms either at the Friarton or next to the Dunkeld Road at Inveralmond, which would at least see Perth still providing a major connection for onward journeys - otherwise you're looking at services running as a replacement bus between Dunkeld/Dundee and Gleneagles.

As for diversions via Leuchars and Falkirk, this was already done on a couple of days last year so I doubt there won't be much standing in the way in terms of capacity, although I might be wrong given the projected service increase on both E-G and Intercity routes.

 

[NotATrainspott]

If there's a Perth blockade they may as well use the time to do the Moncreiffe tunnel works at the same time. As a result it might not be possible to have a temporary Perth South station.

What about a Hilton chord? Then you could have your temporary Perth station at Bridge of Earn and send trains to Dundee via a reversal at Ladybank. This would depend upon capacity being available over the Tay Bridge though, as an awkward consequence of using HSTs is that it wouldn't be possible to join up the Glasgow and Edinburgh services and split them at Ladybank. Such a station might be quite useful when the stopping services are enhanced along the Glasgow-Aberdeen corridor, as they would need to be able to be overtaken by the faster services.

 

[deltic08]

As said, the bottleneck nature of Perth makes it a pivotal hub for all services, so 3 platforms would be pushing the capacity barrier currently. In my opinion, Perth merits atleast 6 platforms (2 through for the HML, 2 termini and 2 through for Dundee northwards).

Given that current services from Inverness are being increased to a regular hourly service from Perth, you're talking at least 2 platforms for the Highland Mainline, taking both The Chieftain and Sleeper into account. Also, the service increase from Dundee to compensate for the deduction in station calls from Intercity services would see peak time capacity through platforms 1 and 2 as high as 3tph. Including the Edinburgh semi-fast terminators and eventual scope for a Glasgow semi-fast terminator, as well as initial plans for VTEC to start their morning Stirling service to Perth, at least 2 termini platforms would be sufficient to cope with that.

The layout of the railway in and around Perth could easily hold an advantage. During the reconstruction of the station, it wouldn't necessarily be hard to contract temporary platforms either at the Friarton or next to the Dunkeld Road at Inveralmond, which would at least see Perth still providing a major connection for onward journeys - otherwise you're looking at services running as a replacement bus between Dunkeld/Dundee and Gleneagles.

As for diversions via Leuchars and Falkirk, this was already done on a couple of days last year so I doubt there won't be much standing in the way in terms of capacity, although I might be wrong given the projected service increase on both E-G and Intercity routes.

How imminent is this work at Perth?

 

[Clansman]

How imminent is this work at Perth?

You're looking at 2025-2030 at the very soonest, as far as Network Raila are concerned - it's part of CP6 so it'll be dependent on the progress of EGIP as to when work is expected to start.

Although it should be completed as soon as possible in my opinion. It badly needs it.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

I haven't seen the bridge from the railway but on Streetview it's all rust and peeled paint:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@56.1...4!1smOQY5JSi7MMNJhd9oedSPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Here's one I took, not very clear I'm afraid - it's a bit of a jungle even at this time of year.

 

[Clansman]

If there's a Perth blockade they may as well use the time to do the Moncreiffe tunnel works at the same time. As a result it might not be possible to have a temporary Perth South station.

What about a Hilton chord? Then you could have your temporary Perth station at Bridge of Earn and send trains to Dundee via a reversal at Ladybank. This would depend upon capacity being available over the Tay Bridge though, as an awkward consequence of using HSTs is that it wouldn't be possible to join up the Glasgow and Edinburgh services and split them at Ladybank. Such a station might be quite useful when the stopping services are enhanced along the Glasgow-Aberdeen corridor, as they would need to be able to be overtaken by the faster services.

Hilton Junction would be ideal along with Kinnoull (Barnhill), as both are easily connected via the M90 across the Friarton Bridge. Although aerial views of Hilton Junction suggest that the land is already being used - and wouldn't be all that convenient as far as roads are concerned; making a temporary station at Bridge of Earn the more likely option, and sending Glasgow trains to Gleneagles instead.

Here's 2 maps showing both North and South locations of Perth, of which I've highlighted possible locations where spare land remains where temporary platforms and road links could easily be erected.

 

[Liam]

Hilton Junction would be ideal along with Kinnoull (Barnhill), as both are easily connected via the M90 across the Friarton Bridge. Although aerial views of Hilton Junction suggest that the land is already being used.

Here's 2 maps showing both North and South locations of Perth, of which I've highlighted possible locations where spare land remains where temporary platforms and road links could easily be erected.

It's not quite as simpleas that, though as there's no access to the Friarton Bridge from Perth or Bridge of Earn at J10 (or vice versa). You would either need to go through Bridge of Earn down to junction 9 or through Perth City Centre.

 

[Clansman]

It's not quite as simple as that, though as there's no access to the Friarton Bridge from Perth or Bridge of Earn at J10 (or vice versa). You would either need to go through Bridge of Earn down to junction 9 or through Perth City Centre.

Ye that's one of the factors I considered. Perth & Kinross Council would need to grant planning permission for an additional slip road from the Friarton Bridge to Craigie, joining the A912 just above the Moncreiffe Tunnel mouth, as well as an additional slip road on the A912 country road as it passes Hilton Junction towards Bridge of Earn.

As for Kinnoull (Barnhill), the first location (left) would be highly convenient, as it gives plenty of spare land to built upon and doesn't sit on a demanding gradient, so as long as planning permission was approved and what have you then it would be perfectly possible.

Although as you said, it's not simple - far from it. Perth station and the Moncreiffe tunnel could take as long as a year before they are fully operational, so it's weighing up the benefits of erecting temporary stations in these given locations or being willing to ferry millions of passengers by bus between Dunkeld/Dundee and Gleneagles for duration. The former in my opinion would be the better option in my honest opinion.

Looking at it, a temporary station at Hilton junction doesn't look the most feasible due to the likely blockade that will occur between Ladybank/Gleneagles and Barnhill. Given Gleneagles is only around 10 minutes down the motorway from Broxden 15 from Friarton Bridge also doesn't make much of a case for temporary platforms at Hilton. But Kinnoull (Barnhill) and Inveralmond would be essential ones to have in terms of connectivity, as they're next to motorways and have plenty of spare land around them, as well as an uncomplicated railway layout as opposed to Hilton Junction.

 

[Class 170101]

Almost certainly will be a block from Ladybank / Gleneagles or Dunblane to Perth. Perth Station itself would probably be split in two unless there is sufficient mileage at its southern end between the station and the possession limits particularly for possession trains to stand clear north of the tunnel.

Sleepers would run Inverness to Aberdeen thence to London (if at all)

Glasgow to Aberdeen services would run via Kirkcaldy if there is capacity via Fife. local services only between Glasgow and Stirling / Dunblane / Gleneagles which may dictate whether Stirling, Dunblane or Gleneagles is used as a rail - bus interchange. Buses / coaches are difficult to get hold of on weekdays. How many buses did Scotrail run for the recent Queen Street Blockade? I don' think it was very many.

 

[Clansman]

Almost certainly will be a block from Ladybank / Gleneagles or Dunblane to Perth. Perth Station itself would probably be split in two unless there is sufficient mileage at its southern end between the station and the possession limits particularly for possession trains to stand clear north of the tunnel.

Sleepers would run Inverness to Aberdeen thence to London (if at all)

Glasgow to Aberdeen services would run via Kirkcaldy if there is capacity via Fife. local services only between Glasgow and Stirling / Dunblane / Gleneagles which may dictate whether Stirling, Dunblane or Gleneagles is used as a rail - bus interchange. Buses / coaches are difficult to get hold of on weekdays. How many buses did Scotrail run for the recent Queen Street Blockade? I don' think it was very many.

Definitely be a blockade between Gleneagles/Ladybank and Perth, as well as one when Perth station is remodeled - whether they do the station in a oner or do it in segments, to maintain a certain degree of services.
I can't imagine the whole line from Dunblane to Perth and Ladybank will be closed in a oner either as that would spell chaos at Dunblane from a capacity point of view - trying to juggle both Intercity services and terminating locals running at a half hourly frequency from Glasgow and Edinburgh. You're better off getting Perth out the way first, using Gleneagles as the terminating point, then by the time Dunblane to Gleneagles comes around you won't have to bus passengers any further than Perth. Although that doesn't solve the potential capacity issue at Dunblane unless Intercity trains are halted at Stirling.

No idea how many coaches were hired in when Queen Street was getting done up, but when Perth is finally in for the works, there'll be more coaches hired in than what there was last year. Plenty of coach companies in and around Perth to keep the services flowing - Docherty Midland coaches have a large fleet, as do Stagecoach at Inveralmond.

 

[mcmad]

I'd think that Dunblane to Perth will be done over weekends and extended midweek night possessions rather than a big shut down and that the station will be done in 2 stages, the lines to Dundee and the lines to Inverness to keep some semblance of a service going.

 

[deltic08]

Here's one I took, not very clear I'm afraid - it's a bit of a jungle even at this time of year.

This abutment looks far worse than a photo on Railscot of the opposite abutment.

 

[deltic08]

I'd think that Dunblane to Perth will be done over weekends and extended midweek night possessions rather than a big shut down and that the station will be done in 2 stages, the lines to Dundee and the lines to Inverness to keep some semblance of a service going.

But there will have to be a blockade for 4 months or more when the tunnel floor is lowered.

 

[deltic08]

You're looking at 2025-2030 at the very soonest, as far as Network Raila are concerned - it's part of CP6 so it'll be dependent on the progress of EGIP as to when work is expected to start.

Although it should be completed as soon as possible in my opinion. It badly needs it.

2025-30 is mostly CP7. CP6 is 2019-24.

 

[deltic08]

Why not build a chord at Hilton Jnc towards Bridge of Earn then bridge across the Tay to the Dundee line on the opposite side. Build a temporary station somewhere on the chord. Through freight would then use this bridge in future instead of passing through Perth station.

 

[47271]

A Bridge of Earn station at Oudenarde, right by M90 Jn 9, and a downstream Tay crossing at St Madoes are aspects of other possible projects, one very likely and the other far off: Ladybank-Hilton capacity improvements and the mythical new high speed route via Glenfarg.

I'm not quite sure of the order of things in the world of Network Rail, but on that basis it would make total sense to double Ladybank-Hilton with stations at Newburgh and Bridge of Earn, complete with a Hilton chord, before tackling Moncreiffe Tunnel.

 

[Clansman]

Why not build a chord at Hilton Jnc towards Bridge of Earn then bridge across the Tay to the Dundee line on the opposite side. Build a temporary station somewhere on the chord. Through freight would then use this bridge in future instead of passing through Perth station.

The problem with Hilton Junction is that the land there is owned privately and the terrain means that an expensive road link would be required - not to mention 4 temporary platforms along the junction to link both Edinburgh and Glasgow branches.

A better idea would be to locate a temporary station at Bridge of Earn, where there is sufficient room and minimal additional road construction required. Also, Bridge of Earn has easy access to the M90, so it's only 5 minutes away from the Friarton bridge.

In my opinion, a temporary station at Bridge of Earn, a chord at Hilton Junction and the duelling of at least half of Ladybank to Perth are a must, before Moncreiffe Tunnel goes ahead.

That way you could run a circular service with no turn backs - so a Glasgow to Gleneagles service can easily run to Bridge of Earn to then run what would be an Inverness/Perth to Edinburgh service. No turn backs, and 15 minute connection via Hilton.

Created a wee map to show possible contingency plans;

 

[47271]

The problem with Hilton Junction is that the land there is owned privately and the terrain means that an expensive road link would be required - not to mention 4 temporary platforms along the junction to link both Edinburgh and Glasgow branches.

A better idea would be to locate a temporary station at Bridge of Earn, where there is sufficient room and minimal additional road construction required. Also, Bridge of Earn has easy access to the M90, so it's only 5 minutes away from the Friarton bridge.

In my opinion, a temporary station at Bridge of Earn, a chord at Hilton Junction and the duelling of at least half of Ladybank to Perth are a must, before Moncreiffe Tunnel goes ahead.

That way you could run a circular service with no turn backs - so a Glasgow to Gleneagles service can easily run to Bridge of Earn to then run what would be an Inverness/Perth to Edinburgh service. No turn backs, and 15 minute connection via Hilton.

Created a wee map to show possible contingency plans;

What you're saying is near identical to my thoughts, but let's get Newburgh and Bridge of Earn permanent stations as part of the project. It's bad enough for the area that we trundle through both at 40mph at the moment, far worse that Ladybank-Perth is doubled or part doubled, Newburgh gets nothing, and Bridge of Earn gets a station which is then taken away again.

 

[jopsuk]

so do a massive investment, including extensive signals and points, to provide infrastructure that will only be needed for a (relatively) short period of time?

 

[Clansman]

What you're saying is near identical to my thoughts, but let's get Newburgh and Bridge of Earn permanent stations as part of the project. It's bad enough for the area that we trundle through both at 40mph at the moment, far worse that Ladybank-Perth is doubled or part doubled, Newburgh gets nothing, and Bridge of Earn gets a station which is then taken away again.

I agree with you there. It's about time Transport Scotland get the finger out and get Newburgh and Bridge of Earn connected. They're ever growing towns and the need for enhanced public transport will only increase.

so do a massive investment, including extensive signals and points, to provide infrastructure that will only be needed for a (relatively) short period of time?

The temporary stations could always be built permanent, as 47272 has said. Theres huge demand for stations at Bridge of Earn and Newburgh, so really, nothing in what we've suggested wouldnt be utilised after Perth has been completed.

Perth is going to be the largest infrastructure program since Glasgow Queen Street, so therell have to be a huge investment anyway. A temporary structure at Inveralmond would also go a long way to ensure Inverness passengers are easily connected by bus to Gleneagles and Bridge of Earn. Given the large scale house project at Bertha Park and Muirton, there looks to be future demand for a railway station at Inveralmond in the near future anyway.

 

[najaB]

so do a massive investment, including extensive signals and points, to provide infrastructure that will only be needed for a (relatively) short period of time?

Stations at both Bridge of Earn and/or Newburgh would be quite well used and are worth doing as standalone projects. If the Glenfarg route ever goes ahead, Bridge of Earn would be even more useful.

 

[NotATrainspott]

A station at Bridge of Earn may be possible without needing to think about the rest of Hilton-Ladybank or the line to Edinburgh. Stopping services from the east coast running to Edinburgh would need somewhere to turn back off of the mainline, to allow the express Aberdeen services to pass, and a basic station at Bridge of Earn plus a siding or reversing signals could be just the ticket. The two (modern) bridges over the line through the town both appear to be single-track, so full redoubling looks unlikely and also unnecessary.