XC on ECML

[HawkeyeTheNoo]

Since East Coast will all but abandon the Glasgow to Kings Cross route from May 22nd and XC will be taking over those journeys will they all be Voyager run or will there be a chance of the odd HST being seen in Glasgow Central? Now that would be nice!

 

[rail-britain]

There are already two HSTs a day into Glasgow Central, so no change

 

[gordonthemoron]

Since the XC services to Glasgow are all diesel, why don't they run into Queen St like the East Coast services used to pre-electrification?

 

[43167]

Since the XC services to Glasgow are all diesel, why don't they run into Queen St like the East Coast services used to pre-electrification?

Lack of paths probably. 4 Edinburgh-Glasgows an hour, plus Stirling services from both, then between Glasgow & Croy there are Aberdeen/Inverness and Paths Queen St to Cowlairs will be at a premium as there are also the Anniesland via Maryhill, Falkirk G'ton via Cumbernauld and the West Highland services to squeeze in. Not forgetting the various ECS to/from Eastfield that Scotrail need in order to run the service.

 

[DarloRich]

Since the XC services to Glasgow are all diesel, why don't they run into Queen St like the East Coast services used to pre-electrification?

Dont think an HST would fit into Queen Street

 

[Aictos]

Dont think an HST would fit into Queen Street

Google is everyone's best friend,

With the exception of the extension of platforms towards George Square (a suggestion that probably won't happen), I don't think Queen Street's platforms can be extended much, if at all. The only thing that could be done is an extention of P7 towards the tunnel, but that's unlikely to ever be used by Scotrail, and HSTs would still block the tunnel.

As for HSTs in Queen Street, they will overhang even on Platform 7. A look here will also show you that a long HST will block the valuable Platforms 5 & 6. Queen Street needs all the platforms it can get, particularly Platforms 2, 6 and 7 which can hold 6 car trains. So you'd be crippling the station by putting an HST there!

 

[DarloRich]

Google is everyone's best friend,

With the exception of the extension of platforms towards George Square (a suggestion that probably won't happen), I don't think Queen Street's platforms can be extended much, if at all. The only thing that could be done is an extention of P7 towards the tunnel, but that's unlikely to ever be used by Scotrail, and HSTs would still block the tunnel.

As for HSTs in Queen Street, they will overhang even on Platform 7. A look here will also show you that a long HST will block the valuable Platforms 5 & 6. Queen Street needs all the platforms it can get, particularly Platforms 2, 6 and 7 which can hold 6 car trains. So you'd be crippling the station by putting an HST there!

I never thought of using Google! Just from personal observation i didnt think any of the platforms were long enougth.

However, what about the voyagers - could they fit?

 

[onionjoe76]

Going back to the original post. I'm booked to travel between Edinburgh Waverly and Glasgow Central with XC on 24th of May (21.14 service). My reservation says Coach E. Could this be an HST? IIRC XC Voyagers don't have a coach E.

Or will it be a former EC 91 in new livery?

 

[TomJ93]

XC aren't getting any new trains.

Could be a super Voyager or booked for two.

 

[tbtc]

XC aren't getting any new trains

This is the problem, for me.

Its fine saying that a four/five coach Voyager is more suited to the current volumes of traffic in a 225 between Glasgow and Edinburgh, and I agree that a nine coach train is overkill, but if XC have any spare Voyagers then they should be used to double-up on the busy services they already operate, not stretched further by the addition of more diagrams etc

 

[onionjoe76]

XC aren't getting any new trains.

Could be a super Voyager or booked for two.

Thanks

 

[rail-britain]

Since the XC services to Glasgow are all diesel, why don't they run into Queen St like the East Coast services used to pre-electrification?

You will presumably remember that when a HST operated, it was in place of an Edinburgh - Glasgow - Edinburgh service
I doubt ScotRail would be happy with that now
Equally, the turn around time would probably not be sufficient now for a HST, blocking Platforms 5, 6, and 7 for some considerable time

Voyagers could operate, equally they could probably use the two shorter platforms 3 and 4 (avoiding the use of 1 so that passengers with luggage do not have so far to walk)
Again this would take the path of a ScotRail service
However, these could operate additionally
Furthermore, they could be routed via Cumbernauld and Falkirk Grahamston thus if late running does occur there would be little impact on the main route via Falkirk High

Transport Scotland already have some plans in place to increase capacity / number of services to both the main Glasgow stations
EGIP will see a further increase at Glasgow QS, by 20% by 2016
Glasgow Central will see an increase of about 15% by 2014

Finally, there is the issue over passengers making their way between Glasgow Central and Queen Street, which was another reason why Kings Cross services were moved to Glasgow Central as the majority of passengers use this station
Many Cross Country services previously used Glasgow Central, the only major change is their route via the ECML
Therefore the only passengers affected are those travelling from Glasgow to south of York

I personally suspect many passengers will return to using ScotRail services, as this was the historic and more commonly known route
Mention the Shotts or Bathgate route and many people are unaware of these

 

[RichW1]

Anyone else think electrification needs to just have a rolling programme that includes ALL Intercity routes right up to Aberdeen and Inverness (but maybe not to Penzance as we all know about the sea problems with electrification? Because then surely rolling stock could be ordered electric only and we don't have all this diesel issue stuff going on. Seems a bit mad having a hotch potch of motive power and no-one's quite sure what to order when it comes to it. Electrify, then we get some decent trains (well at least without the underfloor vibration and noise anyway!!!

 

[tbtc]

Anyone else think electrification needs to just have a rolling programme that includes ALL Intercity routes right up to Aberdeen and Inverness (but maybe not to Penzance as we all know about the sea problems with electrification? Because then surely rolling stock could be ordered electric only and we don't have all this diesel issue stuff going on. Seems a bit mad having a hotch potch of motive power and no-one's quite sure what to order when it comes to it. Electrify, then we get some decent trains (well at least without the underfloor vibration and noise anyway!!!

XC will probably be the last franchise to go electric. Even when the GWML is wired up there'll be a frustrating mix of wired/unwired on XC.

Aberdeen - Edinburgh (unwired)
Edinburgh - York (wired)
York - Leeds (unwired)
Leeds - Wakefield (wired)
Wakefield - Birmingham (unwired)
Birmingham - Longbridge (wired)
Longbridge - Bristol Parkway (unwired)
Bristol Parkway - Bristol (wired)
Bristol - Plymouth/ Penzance (unwired)

Electrifying the MML properly may mean the section from York to Derby is electrified, but there's no prospect of XC being able to replace Voyagers with EMUs.

Manchester - Bournemouth will have shorter gaps to fill (Coventry - Oxford and Reading - Basingstoke) once the GWML is wired - both of these really ought to be done shortly afterwards.

 

[jopsuk]

plus there's the (turbostar operated) ex Central Citylink routes, which have lots of isolated sections of electrification that would need to be linked.

 

[attics26]

Going back to the original post. I'm booked to travel between Edinburgh Waverly and Glasgow Central with XC on 24th of May (21.14 service). My reservation says Coach E. Could this be an HST? IIRC XC Voyagers don't have a coach E.

Or will it be a former EC 91 in new livery?

Plymouth - Glasgow booked HST (1901 off Darlington where I might be despatching it) if it was double voyager still wouldnt have an E (either ABCDF or ACDF plus either GHJKL or GJKL.

 

[me123]

Since the XC services to Glasgow are all diesel, why don't they run into Queen St like the East Coast services used to pre-electrification?

Well, I've already been quoted in this thread! But I'd also like to add that the East Coast services to Glasgow provide a valuable 1tp2h between Motherwell and Edinburgh that would not otherwise exist. Consequently, running the new CrossCountry services via Motherwell is important to maintain that link. Before A-B opened, I used those trains a lot and contrary to popular belief they were (and probably still are) very popular between Motherwell and Edinburgh.

 

[Crossover]

My reservation says Coach E. Could this be an HST? IIRC XC Voyagers don't have a coach E.

Could be a super Voyager or booked for two.

Interesting one - don't think XC have a coach E on a Voyager regardless.

The Super Voyagers are A, B, C, D and F I think and when there are two it starts again at G.

 

[junglejames]

Anyone else think electrification needs to just have a rolling programme that includes ALL Intercity routes right up to Aberdeen and Inverness (but maybe not to Penzance as we all know about the sea problems with electrification? Because then surely rolling stock could be ordered electric only and we don't have all this diesel issue stuff going on. Seems a bit mad having a hotch potch of motive power and no-one's quite sure what to order when it comes to it. Electrify, then we get some decent trains (well at least without the underfloor vibration and noise anyway!!!

I actually dont want the wires north of Edinburgh. Certainly not north of Stirling.
One of the main reasons (and actually is a reason ive previously heard for not doing it), is because it could spoil the look of the Forth Bridge.
With the Forth Bridge being a listed structure you would have to get permission to put wires across it. It isnt just NRs decision. I certainly hope it never happens. Also I reckon wires may spoil The Highland Mainline.

 

[jopsuk]

they're definitely going to wire north of Stirling (Dunblane!), and I don't think they'll look too bad on the Forth bridge- I'm sure the pylons on the apporaches will be handled with care, and on the main spans you'll not be able to see them.

Electrification to Aberdeen is certainly a Transport Scotland aspiration, I think Inverness though isn't- much lower traffic volumes for one thing.

 

[me123]

Electrification to Aberdeen is certainly a Transport Scotland aspiration, I think Inverness though isn't- much lower traffic volumes for one thing.

Electrification to Aberdeen would make a great deal of sense. A fair proportion of the trains to Stirling and Fife will eventually be electric anyway. The Aberdeen-Dundee route has a frequency of at least 2tph Monday-Saturday; often more. You've then got East Coast trains coming from London which could be run by electric sets rather than HSTs.

Wiring up as far as Inverness is, however, unlikely! That said, with an aspiration for 1tph to the Capital of the Highlands, it's perhaps not totally ridiculous to suggest that Perth-Inverness could be electrified in the distant future, perhaps also with Aberdeen-Inverness which may also 1tph at some point. But we're talking years away yet, if it ever happens! (Who knows, there may be modern, clean, green fuels that don't need OHLE just around the corner).

 

[4SRKT]

Re HSTs at Queen Street, don't forget that XC trams are 2+7 rather than 2+8 as was the case when ECML units ran there in BR days. Would this shorter formation still cause blocking of a number of platforms?

Anyway, I agree with the point that the lack of paths is a good enough reason not to send them this way.

 

[scotsman]

I actually dont want the wires north of Edinburgh. Certainly not north of Stirling.
One of the main reasons (and actually is a reason ive previously heard for not doing it), is because it could spoil the look of the Forth Bridge.
With the Forth Bridge being a listed structure you would have to get permission to put wires across it. It isnt just NRs decision. I certainly hope it never happens. Also I reckon wires may spoil The Highland Mainline.

Sorry, but there is such a thing as progress. If I want to get to Edinburgh, it takes me 35min to travel the 17 miles to Edinburgh, electrification would speed up journey times somewhat and would probably kill off the bus bandit's coach service just down the road!

Remember that the cantilever structure of the bridge means that it's very inlikely you'd spoil the bridge, as for the Highland Mainline - scenery shouldn't feature highly in the equation, the purpose of the railway is to get from A to B as safely and efficiently as possible. If you want scenery - head to the Strathspey Railway!

 

[tbtc]

I actually dont want the wires north of Edinburgh. Certainly not north of Stirling.
One of the main reasons (and actually is a reason ive previously heard for not doing it), is because it could spoil the look of the Forth Bridge.
With the Forth Bridge being a listed structure you would have to get permission to put wires across it. It isnt just NRs decision. I certainly hope it never happens. Also I reckon wires may spoil The Highland Mainline.

Given the size of the central sections of the Forth Bridge, I don't think you'll notice the wires from the distance. On the outside sections you'll see the masts, of course, but the same is true of the Royal Border Bridge at Berwick and lots of other structures.

As for the Highland Main Line, they wired the WCML through the Lake District
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well, I've already been quoted in this thread! But I'd also like to add that the East Coast services to Glasgow provide a valuable 1tp2h between Motherwell and Edinburgh that would not otherwise exist. Consequently, running the new CrossCountry services via Motherwell is important to maintain that link. Before A-B opened, I used those trains a lot and contrary to popular belief they were (and probably still are) very popular between Motherwell and Edinburgh.

I wonder whether there will be more people who give up the Motherwell service for the Airdrie one. At least, once the A2B is running properly in the future...

 

[RichW1]

It's such a painful thing the lack of electrification in Britain. We're having to try and improve the network from a very low technical base both in signalling and electrification. The HST seems to be a mixed blessing - On the one hand it was desperately needed to speed things up, but on the other it discouraged politicians from doing anything else because at the time they always thought 'they'll do' and kept that view until we are where we are. The HST gave government a good reason to just about get away with doing nothing. Now we have a much more mobile population and vastly larger number using rail, we're reaping the consequences of the lack of electrification and close signal spacing etc. I know it'll gradually get sorted but I wish it wasn't going to take another 25 years or so which will probably be the case. As yet, there's no national ERTMS implementaion plan either. HS rail won't get the first part opened until 2026 before the rest starts so it's all a long game. I just feel we've just started to really climb the mountain but the effects of the last decades of the 20th century are still in effect. Still, the future looks bright, patience I'm not so good at with such a lag between what's possible and when we actually get things!

 

[junglejames]

Sorry, but there is such a thing as progress. If I want to get to Edinburgh, it takes me 35min to travel the 17 miles to Edinburgh, electrification would speed up journey times somewhat and would probably kill off the bus bandit's coach service just down the road!

Remember that the cantilever structure of the bridge means that it's very inlikely you'd spoil the bridge, as for the Highland Mainline - scenery shouldn't feature highly in the equation, the purpose of the railway is to get from A to B as safely and efficiently as possible. If you want scenery - head to the Strathspey Railway!

Never said there wasnt such thing as progress. Theres also such things as not overly spoiling a listed structure. The masts will ruin the look of the bridge, and I really hope it never ever happens. Sorry if you put electrification before this, but I dont.

Electrification may save you 5mins, but thats about it. You only get increased acceleration. Unfortunately the line through Fife is a bit slow. Unfortunate, but its not the only place.

Sounds like your right in the middle of the Fife Circle somewhere. The main problem there is the fact you only see local stoppers, and no fast services.

 

[RichW1]

If only they could electrify and blow damn great ditch in the countryside from there to Aberdeen, put in faster tracks and do the poor times from Edinburgh to Aberdeen a favour.

 

[route:oxford]

they're definitely going to wire north of Stirling (Dunblane!), and I don't think they'll look too bad on the Forth bridge- I'm sure the pylons on the apporaches will be handled with care, and on the main spans you'll not be able to see them.

When the wires reach Dunblane, they will definitely have bridged the Forth.

 

[route101]

Going back to the original post. I'm booked to travel between Edinburgh Waverly and Glasgow Central with XC on 24th of May (21.14 service). My reservation says Coach E. Could this be an HST? IIRC XC Voyagers don't have a coach E.

Or will it be a former EC 91 in new livery?

What kind of ticket allows you to make an reservation via Edinburgh and Glasgow?

 

[Skimble19]

Never said there wasnt such thing as progress. Theres also such things as not overly spoiling a listed structure. The masts will ruin the look of the bridge, and I really hope it never ever happens. Sorry if you put electrification before this, but I dont.

Electrification may save you 5mins, but thats about it. You only get increased acceleration. Unfortunately the line through Fife is a bit slow. Unfortunate, but its not the only place.

Sounds like your right in the middle of the Fife Circle somewhere. The main problem there is the fact you only see local stoppers, and no fast services.

Got to be honest, potentially spoiling the look of a bridge should not be any reason to stop electrification in the slightest. Come down to the ECML to see what happened here due to electrification and you'll see it's unlikely to bother them! :roll: