http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Tag: A9 - Recent Posts en Sun, 17 May 2026 07:24:16 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-108117 Sat, 20 Apr 2013 00:36:59 +0000 chdot 108117@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://m.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/transport/contracts-offered-as-3bn-a9-upgrade-ploughs-ahead-1-2902970">Contracts offered as £3bn A9 upgrade ploughs ahead</a></p> <p>" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105660 Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:52:43 +0000 crowriver 105660@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>It is important to understand that in mainland Europe, new light rail and tramway construction projects do not bear the cost of utility modernisation or improvements to the highway to the extent that they do in the UK.</em></p> <p>Accounting in government is <em>always</em> political. Note how the true extent of the costs of the Forth Resilience Crossing are being squirreled away into other Transport Scotland budgets to make it look less expensive... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105657 Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:26:49 +0000 chdot 105657@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> ‘Successful citie’s such as Frankfurt and Karlsruhe power their light rail systems with electricity from hydro and solar energy and this would be a useful option for Edinburgh, the group said. </p> <p>It is important to understand that in mainland Europe, new light rail and tramway construction projects do not bear the cost of utility modernisation or improvements to the highway to the extent that they do in the UK.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.rail.co/2011/07/06/tramforward-welcomes-edinburgh-tram-decision/#" rel="nofollow">http://www.rail.co/2011/07/06/tramforward-welcomes-edinburgh-tram-decision/#</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105655 Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:23:23 +0000 chdot 105655@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> The Karlsruhe Stadtbahn is a German tram-train system combining tram lines in the city of Karlsruhe with railway lines in the surrounding countryside</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlsruhe_Stadtbahn" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlsruhe_Stadtbahn</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105652 Sun, 24 Mar 2013 16:07:41 +0000 neddie 105652@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>DaveC and PS - that's a very good idea about getting the Trams to run along the South Sub.</p> <p>New tram line at very little cost </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105649 Sun, 24 Mar 2013 15:49:41 +0000 chdot 105649@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Very little chance of getting more local services"</p> <p>Perhaps/probably. </p> <p>Though ScotRail trains to Dunbar have been added, and presumably services to Galashiels are accounted for - though they may just be extensions of current Newcraighall ones.</p> <p>The approach to Calton Tunnel used to be four track from Portobello until electrification (I think). So <em>possible</em> to add capacity - would mean relocating electric wire supports. Not easy or cheap - but perhaps better than HS2 or dualling the A9. </p> <p>Changes to signalling might be possible. </p> <p>There have been plans to reinstate the Abbeyhill Loop in connection with the South Sub. There have also been plans to sell it off (and build on the trackbed), but that was stopped 'just in case'. </p> <p>Transport has never exactly been 'rational'. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105644 Sun, 24 Mar 2013 15:03:00 +0000 PS 105644@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>There's even less capacity going into Waverley from the east. Very little chance of getting more local services into the timetable that way given the importance and frequency of East Coast services. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105621 Sat, 23 Mar 2013 23:00:44 +0000 crowriver 105621@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yeah, but I <em>was</em> talking about the South Sub. Instead of running all those Livingston trains via Haymarket, they could go south after Sateford, loop round the South Sub, and go into Waverley via Newcraighall and Brunstane. Or they could run on to the ECML and on to North Berwick. Or (eventually) go on the Borders railway to Galashiels... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105616 Sat, 23 Mar 2013 22:29:52 +0000 DaveC 105616@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I wasn't talking about the south sub. Chris appeared to be saying if Scotrail run trains south of Livy to Glasgow it would free up the Fife circle. My point is they do run trains to Glasgow north through Bathgate and south through shots. The Fife line carries no traffic on its way to glasgow as there is no way for it to get south again. This was why they proposed the new line running near Queens Elizabeth Yards, which they later abandoned. The Fife line splits nr Broomhouse. Glasgow traffic flows out next to the Fife circle to Edin Park, not on the Fife Circle line. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105549 Sat, 23 Mar 2013 02:08:22 +0000 chdot 105549@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Eh? I thought they already did?"</p> <p>Not via South Sub (except when lines between Waverley and Haymarket are closed - not often). </p> <p>Reopening SS to passengers means re/opening stations - eg Morningside, Cameron Toll Craigmillar, maybe Gorgie and (outside chance) Porty. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105548 Sat, 23 Mar 2013 01:58:37 +0000 DaveC 105548@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"They could also run passenger trains along via Slatetford and out to Livingston, and thence the Shotts line. Then no need to block the Queen Street or Fife lines."</p> <p>Eh? I thought they already did? </p> <p>I've collected friends from South Livingstone on the Glasgow - Edinburgh train. There are 4 lines into Edinburgh from Near Broom house. The lines from Fife use the north 2 lines through the west of Edinburgh while the Glasgow/Bathgate/Livingston trains use the south 2 lines. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105533 Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:43:23 +0000 crowriver 105533@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>They could also run passenger trains along via Slaetford and out to Livingston, and thence the Shotts line. Then no need to block the Queen Street or Fife lines. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105530 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 23:27:04 +0000 chdot 105530@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/6919033094/"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7221/6919033094_b18be265bf.jpg"></a><br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/6919033094/">Weekly nuclear train</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105528 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 23:00:03 +0000 PS 105528@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@DaveC Doing that in a "live railway environment" would be carnage. Network Rail would have a hairy fit and charge a fortune for doing it. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105527 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 22:51:34 +0000 crowriver 105527@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Apart from all the potential local passenger traffic (not all going to/from Waverley/Haymarket) there would be opportunities for trains from outside Edinburgh to go to Galashiels without going via Waverley - change at Edinburgh Park if people wanted to go to centre of town.</p> <p>Imagine getting a train at Bathgate changing at EP getting on a train that might have started at Dunblane, and seeing people getting off at Newcraighall (for QMU) with a shorter journey time than if they had changed at Waverley.</em></p> <p>Yeah, they could do that now if they wanted to. Just the renovation of a few stations to pay for, and some rolling stock maybe. Rejig the timetables and you're off...</p> <p>IIRC I read something in the early 1990s (when I lived in Morningside) that the South Sub was used to transport nuclear waste. I presume going from Torness to Sellafield for reprocessing?</p> <p>Indeed there is a loop from the East Coast mainline which connects to the South Sub via Newcraighall. Passes through the goods yard at Millerhill/Whitehill. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076&page=2#post-105520 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 21:41:42 +0000 DaveC 105520@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>They could very build a link bridge from Haymarket across the lines to the Southsub line thus:</p> <p><a href="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p86/Dave_Crampton/Untitled_zps343b05e2.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p86/Dave_Crampton/Untitled_zps343b05e2.jpg</a></p> <p>After all they built a similar bridge at the Golfists park near Broomhouse. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105502 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 18:27:42 +0000 PS 105502@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Frequency of Glasgow trains won't increase under EGIP, they'll just be longer.</p> <p>Best use of the south sub would really be tram trains but it would be a b to get them across the tracks at Haymarket, what with health and safety and all that. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105496 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 17:34:21 +0000 kaputnik 105496@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>'Not enough line capacity due to freight traffic'<br /> </em></p> <p>Cobblers.</p> <p>There is now no passenger services (apart from empty coach and diverted workings) and a minimal level of freight running through, in comparison to what would have rumbled down it in the days when the line was used for trip working (there were substantial yards at Morningside and Blackford).</p> <p><em>Interestingly, Network Rail are proposing to electrify the sub during the next control period (2014-19) to relieve pressure on the Waverley, which will be increasingly served by electric trains. Funds not 100% guaranteed, but it looks pretty likely</em></p> <p>Because of the role of the sub as a diversionary line, if you electrify what's going into Waverley then of course you also have to electrify that line if you want it to have much use.</p> <p>Was there ever that much Cockenzie / Longannet traffic using the sub? My understanding was that imported coal traffic for Cockenzie largely came in at Leith docks and that for Longannet comes in at Hunterston and the west - but had to use Forth bridge until the line from Alloa to Kincardine was reinstated - as the only access left when they shut the pit at Longannet was along the Fife coast. Either way it couldn't have been more than a few trains a day.</p> <p><em>Have only just noticed (Google Maps) that the Haymarket to Gorgie Road spur is currently only single track which would presumably have to be doubled if there were ever to be frequent Sub trains.</em></p> <p>It was indeed double at one point, I assume BR rationalised it, as for a diversionary loop it only makes sense to have the double access pointing towards the west. I suppose one major issue is that they want to increase throughput of Glasgow trains, and to enter/exit the S&amp;SJ lane you need to cross the E&amp;G lines. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105486 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 16:00:03 +0000 chdot 105486@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"it takes trains quite a while to come off the sub at Haymarket"</p> <p>Should be less of a problem with electric trains with better acceleration going round the 'outer circle'. </p> <p>Have only just noticed (Google Maps) that the Haymarket to Gorgie Road spur is currently only single track which would presumably have to be doubled if there were ever to be frequent Sub trains. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105485 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:39:14 +0000 steveo 105485@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Or maybe some on road light rail would help, maybe from the airport to haymarket... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105483 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:32:42 +0000 AKen 105483@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Maybe they could increase capacity into Edinburgh by building a railway down the Western Approach Road and creating a station at Lothian Road. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105482 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:22:41 +0000 Morningsider 105482@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Interestingly, Network Rail are proposing to electrify the sub during the next control period (2014-19) to relieve pressure on the Waverley, which will be increasingly served by electric trains. Funds not 100% guaranteed, but it looks pretty likely.</p> <p>My understanding is the main barrier to passenger services is the flat junction at Haymarket - it takes trains quite a while to come off the sub at Haymarket, blocking the lines for Fife/Glasgow trains. Not a problem in the past when there were far fewer trains on these routes. Might not be the problem it was with the removal of freight trains for Cockenzie and Longannet trains now using the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine line. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105481 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:18:20 +0000 chdot 105481@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>There has been plenty wrong with the South Sub 'economics' over the years. </p> <p>Various claims -</p> <p>'It would only replace the 38 bus'</p> <p>'Not enough line capacity due to freight traffic'</p> <p>Well that will be easier now Cockenzie is shut. </p> <p>Apart from all the potential local passenger traffic (not all going to/from Waverley/Haymarket) there would be opportunities for trains from outside Edinburgh to go to Galashiels without going via Waverley - change at Edinburgh Park if people wanted to go to centre of town. </p> <p>Imagine getting a train at Bathgate changing at EP getting on a train that might have started at Dunblane, and seeing people getting off at Newcraighall (for QMU) with a shorter journey time than if they had changed at Waverley. </p> <p>But TS is more interested in roads than actually how people want to travel. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105480 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 15:01:17 +0000 AKen 105480@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em> Says something about those in Transport Scotland determined to poo-poo the idea of re-opening service on the Edinburgh South Sub as not being cost efficient.</em></p> <p>I thought a problem with the South Sub was the limited capacity at Waverley? Only two lines handling all the traffic coming in from the West, South-West and North? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-105475 Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:40:04 +0000 chdot 105475@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> Jason Rose (@greendadtwit)<br /> 22/03/2013 13:15<br /> Gov's own report on A9 dualling: "This intervention would not support the road traffic reduction aspirations." </p> <p><a href="http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/files/documents/reports/j10194a/j10194a-a2D14.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/files/documents/reports/j10194a/j10194a-a2D14.pdf</a></p> <p>" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-21960 Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:29:05 +0000 kaputnik 21960@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Electric trains last a lot longer too.... </em> </p> <p>Manx Electric Railway still going strong. some of their units must be approaching 100 years old...</p> <p><em>How many folk would use it (rail to Inverness), though?</em></p> <p>If you could get on a train in Edinburgh or Glasgow and be in Aviemore by 9AM, get a day's skiing up at Cairngorm in and then a train back home, I'm sure a lot more people would. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-21955 Fri, 21 Jan 2011 13:34:15 +0000 LaidBack 21955@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><strong>PS</strong> <em>- How many folk would use it (rail to Inverness), though? </em></p> <p>More than at present. The A9 is showing growth in traffic - I suspect a dualled A9 will actually attract more and further reduce the attractiveness of rail.</p> <p>I'm not anti road improvement. But... a lot of people hammer down the A9 into Perth from Pitlochry and back because rail is slow and expensive.</p> <p>£70 million figure was not for dualling whole railway but adding capacity where possible. </p> <p>Electrification would be £700 million but at same time you'd have a viable use for energy being produced in North. Not just wind but tidal.<br /> Electric trains last a lot longer too.... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-21946 Fri, 21 Jan 2011 12:04:15 +0000 Morningsider 21946@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>cb - no, Network Rail say the cycle path will re-open in "spring 2011". I would assume this has been delayed by the winter weather (they are still trying to finish a few of the new stations) and probably means May or June. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-21945 Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:50:07 +0000 cb 21945@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Has the Airdrie to Bathgate cycle path been re-opened yet? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2076#post-21942 Fri, 21 Jan 2011 11:16:07 +0000 kaputnik 21942@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>They say that one of the main problems with the A9 is the changes between dual and single carriageway</em></p> <p>I think one of the main problems is that they were put in with the intention of being used as "crawler lanes" to let people safely pass the convoys of HGVs and caravans that build up on the A9, yet people see the second lane appearing and put their fut down for full warp speed, then forget when they are leaving the dualled section and continue to treat the single section as if it is a motorway. </p>