Scottish electrification

[Failed Unit]

It made me think after reading the moving units debate, what is the current situation for the electrification in Scotland.

The plan is the following routes should be electrified.

Glasgow - Edinburgh via Falkirk,
Polmont & Croy (yes I know that isn't where the junction is) - Dunblane
Glasgow - Larbert via Cumbernuald.

I haven't ever seen this project as formally been approved and paid for but as some people have seen in various magazines in some places overhead line mast piles are been sunk. I know the main Edinburgh - Glasgow line was planned to be running in 2014 but some piles are on the Cumbernauld route.

Once these lines are done then maybe some 158's will be released. The other thing to remember however is that the Boarders rail link will need some 158's released from the electrification.

The masterplan would be to divert the Cumbernauld route to Low level to free up capacity for another express Edinburgh - Glasgow service.

 

[jopsuk]

Surely if Dunblane is electrified then the Kincardine branch (at least as far as Alloa) will be too? As it would be exceptionally stupid NOT to include it.

With all those electrified, it would primarily be 170s released, though I guess the 158+170 workings to Inverness and Aberdeen could go 2*170 in that case?

With the Edinburgh-Falkirk-Glasgow line electrified, I wonder if there will be then pressure to wire-up the Shotts route?

 

[Failed Unit]

Surely if Dunblane is electrified then the Kincardine branch (at least as far as Alloa) will be too? As it would be exceptionally stupid NOT to include it.

With all those electrified, it would primarily be 170s released, though I guess the 158+170 workings to Inverness and Aberdeen could go 2*170 in that case?

With the Edinburgh-Falkirk-Glasgow line electrified, I wonder if there will be then pressure to wire-up the Shotts route?

I think I had heard that the Alloa route could be done at the same time as Dunblane. But after that who knows, mainly rumour but Whifflet branch may get done (I think this is more to free paths into Central high level as the Whiffleet route would go to low level instead). I know Shotts is on the wish list but so is Glasgow - Aberdeen. Glasgow - Anniesland is described as been a useful route to electrify.

In terms of free units in the peak my understanding is the following.

8 units Edinburgh - Glasgow all 170s'
6 diagrams Edinburgh - Dunblane (mixtures of 170 & 2x 158 so hard to give the exact number of sets to be released)
3 diagrams??? Glasgow - Falkirk Grahamson / Cumbernauld (170's and 158)
5 diagrams Glasgow - Alloa / Dunblane (mixtures of 170's, 158's and 156's some are 2x 156, some are 2x 170 some are 170+158)

In short a fairly useful release of set.

 

[tbtc]

The great thing about Scottish electrification is that there's a clear virtuous circle.

Do the main Edinburgh/ Glasgow/ Dunblane "triangle" and the cost/ benefit for doing the Alloa branch and the Cumbernauld line become pretty attractive

Do them, and the Cumbernauld - Coatbridge line looks good (meaning through Stirling/ Falkirk - Motherwell trains, for example)

Do these, and the Shotts/ Whifflet lines look good, meaning these lines could be integrated into the Lanarkshire "low level" services through Glasgow Central

Then Paisley Canal should be straightforward, then...

One bit of work on one line means that other lines become more and more attractive, which means the electrification "crew" could become a permenant operation over the next decade or so.

 

[me123]

8 units Edinburgh - Glasgow all 170s'

Try 16 in the peaks. 8 diagrams run between the two cities, which are operated as 6 carriage units in the rush hour.

The plan is initially to get Glasgow-Edinburgh under wires, along with diversionary routes via Cumbernauld and via Falkirk Grahamston. I don't think Stirling, Dunblane and Alloa are planned at the same time, but it would make sense to get these over as well. I think they'll happen a bit later. One of the many benefits would be electrification through Coatbridge Central, which would potentially see an extremely useful Motherwell-Stirling "Glasgow Bypass" service for Lanarkshire.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Do these, and the Shotts/ Whifflet lines look good, meaning these lines could be integrated into the Lanarkshire "low level" services through Glasgow Central

Then Paisley Canal should be straightforward, then...

I've always found Paisley Canal an oddity. Corkerhill to Paisley Canal is less than four miles, but it's not electrified! There's an EMU depot on the line at Corkerhill!

Shotts and Whifflet have an additional issue that there's not much capacity for turning back in the low level without additional work, and there's not enough capacity through Partick either. Whifflet's the easy one, where there is a case for the diversion. The difficulty comes with Shotts, because it's not a regular half hourly timetable, and because the Caledonian Express to Central really does benefit from going to the high level station - it's a useful link to Central from Edinburgh for onward journeys to Ayrshire.

 

[CarterUSM]

Try 16 in the peaks. 8 diagrams run between the two cities, which are operated as 6 carriage units in the rush hour.

The plan is initially to get Glasgow-Edinburgh under wires, along with diversionary routes via Cumbernauld and via Falkirk Grahamston. I don't think Stirling, Dunblane and Alloa are planned at the same time, but it would make sense to get these over as well. I think they'll happen a bit later. One of the many benefits would be electrification through Coatbridge Central, which would potentially see an extremely useful Motherwell-Stirling "Glasgow Bypass" service for Lanarkshire.

There has been rumours of these stirling-motherwell services for years. With regards to cumbernauld, scotrail is actively seeking to route these to queen st low level when electrification occurs, everything that has been mentioned will happen sooner or later, it is really all part of the EGIP. I'd hazard a guess that the benhar route via shotts will be the last to get done though. It really should have all been done at the time, especially the glasgow suburban lines and freight routes that were missed out.

 

[route:oxford]

Should the wires reach Dunblane, will Kippenross tunnel be capable of accommodating or will, as has been suggested to me, it require to be re-cut and covered?

I'm also wondering if it would be better to wire all the way to Perth. There are a few services from Glasgow/Edinburgh that extend the City Triangle to Perth, particularily early morning/late evening.

If wires did go all the way to Perth... What would be the most suitable multi-purpose loco to drag (or swap out) both goods or passengers services for the final run to Inverness?

 

[Old Timer]

I've always found Paisley Canal an oddity. Corkerhill to Paisley Canal is less than four miles, but it's not electrified! There's an EMU depot on the line at Corkerhill!.....

Wasn't there the intention to close this line ?

I think it was the plan and that is why it was not electrified. Passengers using Gilmour St and buses instead. I could be wrong.

 

[CarterUSM]

Wasn't there the intention to close this line ?

I think it was the plan and that is why it was not electrified. Passengers using Gilmour St and buses instead. I could be wrong.

Hi OT, firstly, nice to see you back on. Secondly, the line WAS closed back in the early or mid 80's. Re-opened nearly as far as the old Paisley Canal station site as single track with a passing loop at Crookston in the eary 90's??. Line electrifed as far as the west end of Corkerhill Depot headshunt adjacent to said station.

 

[Greenback]

Hi OT, firstly, nice to see you back on. Secondly, the line WAS closed back in the early or mid 80's. Re-opened nearly as far as the old Paisley Canal station site as single track with a passing loop at Crookston in the eary 90's??. Line electrifed as far as the west end of Corkerhill Depot headshunt adjacent to said station.

Yes, the Paisley Canal line was running out to Kilmacolm when it closed in 1983. I think it reopened in 1991/2, but I could be wrong on that!
PS Good to see you posting again OT!

 

[Old Timer]

Thank you for the welcome back guys. I am flattered, and it is very kind of you.

Thanks also for the update. Thought I was losing the plot as the years race by !

 

[CarterUSM]

Yes, the Paisley Canal line was running out to Kilmacolm when it closed in 1983. I think it reopened in 1991/2, but I could be wrong on that!
PS Good to see you posting again OT!

Yes it was also a gret diversionary route for Ayrshire services. Indeed, i believe Ardrossan boat trains used this route as standard for many years. Perhaps Largs too if i remember correctly. ( I remember reading about it) Incidently OT, its a pleasure.

 

[tbtc]

I'm also wondering if it would be better to wire all the way to Perth. There are a few services from Glasgow/Edinburgh that extend the City Triangle to Perth, particularily early morning/late evening.

If wires did go all the way to Perth... What would be the most suitable multi-purpose loco to drag (or swap out) both goods or passengers services for the final run to Inverness?

Personally, I'd say its not worth it, as the routes south of Dunblane are relatively "self contained", so little point in going to Perth unless you go all the way to Aberdeen/ Inverness (and, to do that, you'd need to do the Fife Circle first, then do the Tay Bridge, then...), so any Perth extension won't be cost effective for many a year

Good to see OT back too, now the election is over

 

[jopsuk]

Aye- the few Glasgow or Edinburgh-Perth via Stirling services that do exist would I'd have thought stay diesel, operating using the diesel units for Glasgow/Edinburgh - Inverness/Aberdeen plus Fife Circle. Little point in going all the way to Perth/Dundee until the problem of electrics across the Forth Bridge has been solved.

 

[Failed Unit]

Has there every been a formal annoncement over the E&G electrification, I have seen many documents planning and discussing, but I have never seen a formal press release with President Salmon saying he is wonderful and how the English could never electrify 50 miles of mainline and diversion routes? It seems low key in comparison with the North West area.

 

[CarterUSM]

Aye- the few Glasgow or Edinburgh-Perth via Stirling services that do exist would I'd have thought stay diesel, operating using the diesel units for Glasgow/Edinburgh - Inverness/Aberdeen plus Fife Circle. Little point in going all the way to Perth/Dundee until the problem of electrics across the Forth Bridge has been solved.

How much of a problem actually is that? Clearance issues and cost?

 

[rail-britain]

I haven't ever seen this project as formally been approved and paid for but as some people have seen in various magazines in some places overhead line mast piles are been sunk. I know the main Edinburgh - Glasgow line was planned to be running in 2014 but some piles are on the Cumbernauld route

Can you confirm locations for masts, as I've not seen any
The project is due for approval next month, however is most likely to be trimmed back, extended by about three years, but with the Glasgow Airport extension reinstated as part of the Glasgow South scheme

 

[Failed Unit]

Can you confirm locations for masts, as I've not seen any
The project is due for approval next month, however is most likely to be trimmed back, extended by about three years, but with the Glasgow Airport extension reinstated as part of the Glasgow South scheme

I have seen a photo of one in a rail mag (can't remember which one) near springburn. I have seen one in the flesh near Polmont station (Linlithgow side)

 

[LE Greys]

Personally, I'd say its not worth it, as the routes south of Dunblane are relatively "self contained", so little point in going to Perth unless you go all the way to Aberdeen/ Inverness (and, to do that, you'd need to do the Fife Circle first, then do the Tay Bridge, then...), so any Perth extension won't be cost effective for many a year

If you go to Aberdeen, you might as well continue to Dyce to cover the airport service (although the station is still on the wrong side of the airport). Can't see Perth-Inverness ever being cost-effective though, let alone Dyce-Inverness (although that requires a few more loops to allow an hourly service and a new station at Inverness Airport). This might mean a little island of diesel traction at the top of the country for decades to come, with the electric Highland Chieftain being dragged by a pair of Class 57s from Perth.

The Forth Bridge problem is a real nightmare. You could have a short section of third rail, but that's a bit impractical. Answers on a post, please.

 

[Failed Unit]

If you go to Aberdeen, you might as well continue to Dyce to cover the airport service (although the station is still on the wrong side of the airport). Can't see Perth-Inverness ever being cost-effective though, let alone Dyce-Inverness (although that requires a few more loops to allow an hourly service and a new station at Inverness Airport). This might mean a little island of diesel traction at the top of the country for decades to come, with the electric Highland Chieftain being dragged by a pair of Class 57s from Perth.

The Forth Bridge problem is a real nightmare. You could have a short section of third rail, but that's a bit impractical. Answers on a post, please.

I don't consider the forth bridge that much of a problem. Lots of metal to put knitting up. The Tay Bridge However....

 

[tbtc]

If you go to Aberdeen, you might as well continue to Dyce to cover the airport service (although the station is still on the wrong side of the airport). Can't see Perth-Inverness ever being cost-effective though, let alone Dyce-Inverness (although that requires a few more loops to allow an hourly service and a new station at Inverness Airport). This might mean a little island of diesel traction at the top of the country for decades to come, with the electric Highland Chieftain being dragged by a pair of Class 57s from Perth

I think the way to do it is:

1. Edinburgh/ Glasgow/ Dunblane triangle

2. Edinburgh - Thornton

3. Worry about Aberdeen

Would the Forth/ Tay Bridges really be *that* hard to do (considering electrification has been managed at plenty of other long bridges)?

 

[CarterUSM]

That is what i'd like to know myself. What exactly are the challenges with regards to it?

 

[tbtc]

That is what i'd like to know myself. What exactly are the challenges with regards to it?

It always gets used as a reason why electrification through Fife will never happen, but surely there's a way of adding the wiring from the sides of the bridge?

I can understand long tunnels being tricky (like the Severn one, when the GWML gets done)

 

[Failed Unit]

I can't see any problems at all with the Forth Bridge as stated earlier. The tay bridge maybe because of the length and exposure to gusts of wind. Saying that the Royal Boarders bridge isn't exactly shelted from the wind and it does OK. The sea wall near Saltcoats keeps going better than a Voyager at Dawish so maybe the Tay isn't such a problem. The can solve Claypole can't they

 

[Old Timer]

The Forth Bridge problem is a real nightmare. You could have a short section of third rail, but that's a bit impractical. Answers on a post, please.

I see no valid reason why this should be the case. Can you enlighten us please ?

 

[CarterUSM]

The Queen street tunnel was also long touted by people i know as an excuse for not electrifying into the station years ago. Is this nonsense, or are modern methods now able to deal with any issues that may have been a problem then?

 

[Old Timer]

The Queen street tunnel was also long touted by people i know as an excuse for not electrifying into the station years ago. Is this nonsense, or are modern methods now able to deal with any issues that may have been a problem then?

Many years back the design of the insulators meant that the mechanical clearances required were much different to now.

The development of new equipment, together with the use of modern insulating materials has meant that the OHL can be run through much tighter clearances than before.

By way of example, the clearance under the Birmingham flyover (Rocker Bridge) at Nuneaton is at absolute minimum. Similarly the OHL through platform 5 under the new footbridge is twin contact because there was inadequate clearance to run through the standard system height.

I doubt there is any section of line that cannot now be electrified using modern equipment.

 

[tbtc]

Many years back the design of the insulators meant that the mechanical clearances required were much different to now.

The development of new equipment, together with the use of modern insulating materials has meant that the OHL can be run through much tighter clearances than before.

By way of example, the clearance under the Birmingham flyover (Rocker Bridge) at Nuneaton is at absolute minimum. Similarly the OHL through platform 5 under the new footbridge is twin contact because there was inadequate clearance to run through the standard system height.

I doubt there is any section of line that cannot now be electrified using modern equipment.

I miss these interesting insights - cheers for that

For various reasons, these "myths" develop on the railways over the years (like Pacers and Third Rail), so its good to see the evidence from the coal face

 

[LE Greys]

I see no valid reason why this should be the case. Can you enlighten us please ?

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Many years back the design of the insulators meant that the mechanical clearances required were much different to now.

The development of new equipment, together with the use of modern insulating materials has meant that the OHL can be run through much tighter clearances than before.

By way of example, the clearance under the Birmingham flyover (Rocker Bridge) at Nuneaton is at absolute minimum. Similarly the OHL through platform 5 under the new footbridge is twin contact because there was inadequate clearance to run through the standard system height.

I doubt there is any section of line that cannot now be electrified using modern equipment.

I think you've just shot down all my reasons. I was originally going to suggest that clearances were too tight in places and that a broken wire risked turning the whole bridge into a giant electric fire. However, I bow to your superior knowledge.

 

[CarterUSM]

Many years back the design of the insulators meant that the mechanical clearances required were much different to now.

The development of new equipment, together with the use of modern insulating materials has meant that the OHL can be run through much tighter clearances than before.

By way of example, the clearance under the Birmingham flyover (Rocker Bridge) at Nuneaton is at absolute minimum. Similarly the OHL through platform 5 under the new footbridge is twin contact because there was inadequate clearance to run through the standard system height.

I doubt there is any section of line that cannot now be electrified using modern equipment.

Many thanks. I thought modern technology would be able to overcome issues such as this.