http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Are South Sub tram-trains any closer? en Thu, 21 May 2026 06:29:34 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-366179 Mon, 30 Jan 2023 17:31:35 +0000 Tulyar 366179@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>As should have happened from outset trams should run UNDER carriageway from Haymarket Terrace to Leith Street - route proposed and planned by Caledonian Railway to extend from terminus on Lothian Road to North British Hotel</p> <p>Ground conditions - alluvial &amp; clay over fractured shale all the way. Sink piles along the carriageway (centre/edges) remove section of carriageway &amp; lay beams on piles, then replace carriageway in stages</p> <p>Dig out space under beams for trams and all weather pedestrian space with access to gardens and shops on Princes Street</p> <p>Trains from Slateford could also go back on old rail track bed &amp; drop underground where this runs close to &amp; parallel with existing rail tunnels from Haymarket. There is space for an option to fit in 1-2 tracks along foot of Castle Rock and bring trains in to the Sub - South of the Klondyke Wall, with space to add 1-2 platforms under Fruit Market The Mound is basically waste material tipped from High Street over 2 centuries ago reckon its settled by now </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-366162 Sun, 29 Jan 2023 21:18:10 +0000 chdot 366162@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“</p> <p>The council also plans to look again at the South Suburban rail line. Cllr Arthur said: “It is still quite speculative, but we have been speaking to Network Rail – there has been more than one meeting and I think they’re open to a discussion about it.” He said it would not be possible to reopen the whole circular route because the section between Waverley and Haymarket was too congested. “But there is a chance part of the line could open, so Portobello perhaps to Slateford or something like that.” </p> <p>“</p> <p><a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/edinburgh-transport-blueprint-public-transport-plans-will-make-edinburgh-one-of-leading-cities-in-europe-4005748" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/edinburgh-transport-blueprint-public-transport-plans-will-make-edinburgh-one-of-leading-cities-in-europe-4005748</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-363319 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 12:31:45 +0000 jonty 363319@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That was an argument for Picardy Place being the way it is too - buses must be able to turn around. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-363318 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 12:09:03 +0000 chdot 363318@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“I doubt Princes St could take more trams without doing something about reducing the number of coincident Princes St bus routes.”</p> <p>Yes </p> <p>That highlights one of the many mysteries of how Ed ‘runs’ its transport options. </p> <p>One of the assumptions/plans for the tram was that there would be no/few buses on Princes St. </p> <p>The idea was to have bus/tram exchanges. </p> <p>Can’t remember the details (or if they were worked out). Think/presume the idea was for one at the bottom of Lothian Road and the other - ? - at the bottom of The Bridges, when the idea was to go down Leith Street.</p> <p>Whatever the plan and reasons for not doing it - ‘people will never change bus/tram/bus ‘ - there must be a better way of dealing with buses/passengers/Princes St. </p> <p>People keep putting pictures on Twitter alleging that ‘most of the buses are empty’ and ‘it’s quicker to walk’. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-363317 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 11:50:30 +0000 jonty 363317@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Now <em>that's</em> thinking big! </p> <p>Perhaps at the same time they can grapple with the issue that the WCML has to share tracks with perhaps Edinburgh's most convenient and well-used suburban line. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-363316 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 11:42:58 +0000 Arellcat 363316@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I agree that 'we' are still assuming everyone goes into the city centre rather than around it, and that Waverley and Haymarket are the only destinations that matter to a re-opened South Sub. But trams-on-Sub that then reuse the Slateford-WAR alignment into town are <em>still</em> akin to bus thinking, and I doubt Princes St could take more trams without doing something about reducing the number of coincident Princes St bus routes.</p> <p>I tend to think that the elephant in the room isn't the South Sub at all, but the complete lack of an alternative for freight to get from the ECML to the WCML for which the Sub is the only choice. I think Network Rail should rebuild the route from Berwick to Tweedbank via Coldstream, and rebuild the route from Tweedbank to Symington via Innerleithen, Peebles and Biggar. That could build capacity and opportunity for all kinds of passenger movements. Rebuild the connection from Alnwick to Coldstream with a new wye junction for further resilience. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-363315 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 11:26:44 +0000 jonty 363315@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>And that is certainly a concern. Seems like the rigorous approach would be to invest tens/hundreds of thousands in a high quality 'shadow' bus services as a 2 year experiment, SfP style, which actually help people, than a continual trickle of feasibility studies which provide no immediate value or risking hundreds of millions on actually doing it.</p> <p>Given the challenges around building the new stations, re-routing/running alongside freight, bespoke vehicles, increasing capacity around Waverley/tying in the tram and rail network near Haymarket, I genuinely wonder whether - if the demand is there - building a roughly parallel tram line would be the cheaper and better option.</p> <p>In some ways, that's what a tram line going north from the Bridges would (partly) do. It would probably soak up most of the suburb-city centre demand and a fair chunk of the suburb-suburb demand that the Sub would likely meet. I understand such a line if fully built would essentially parallel the Sub from South Newington to Fort Kinnaird, on a probably more useful alignment. That's certainly where I'd spend the money! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-363314 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 11:16:31 +0000 chdot 363314@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“it would at least provide some inter-suburb travel and indicate likely demand.”</p> <p>Previously one argument was that ‘well the 38 sort of goes that way and doesn’t have many passengers’. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-363312 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 11:09:33 +0000 jonty 363312@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Interesting to note that no Lothian bus really traces the line of the South Sub. Appreciate it clearly wouldn't be as fast or be able to exactly follow the route but it would at least provide some inter-suburb travel and indicate likely demand. Lots of scope for a filtered route through the Grange, for example. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=4#post-363311 Thu, 08 Sep 2022 10:43:34 +0000 chdot 363311@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“</p> <p>The Scottish Transport Users’ Consultative Committee – whose members from all over Scotland were appointed by the Minister of Transport – held a hearing on March 23, 1962, on the South Sub closure. And when it voted, there was a tie – eight votes for, eight against. The chairman, former Edinburgh Lord Provost John G Banks, gave his casting vote in favour of closure.</p> <p>Mr Drysdale says Banks reflected a view common among politicians and others at the time. “These were the men who in the early 60s were dreaming of urban motorways, flyovers and underpasses. There was growing car ownership, people wanted the freedom of the car. Politicians didn't want to stand in their way.”</p> <p>…</p> <p>In fact, 50 per cent of journeys on the South Sub in 1961 were suburb to suburb, such as Morningside to Portobello or Craigmillar to Gorgie, rather than suburb to city centre.</p> <p>…</p> <p>Mr Drysdale believes the South Sub still has the potential to play an important part in an efficient city transport system, especially linking areas which are not linked by bus services. Well-known capacity problems between Haymarket and Waverley could be overcome by exploring the option of a “tram train”, already used in Sheffield, he says.</p> <p>“</p> <p><a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/heritage-and-retro/heritage/edinburghs-south-sub-railway-heres-why-forgotten-railway-closed-60-years-ago-today-3835213" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/heritage-and-retro/heritage/edinburghs-south-sub-railway-heres-why-forgotten-railway-closed-60-years-ago-today-3835213</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-359698 Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:11:42 +0000 chdot 359698@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="https://theedinburghreporter.co.uk/2022/04/edinburgh-south-suburban-railway-campaigners-remind-you-to-respond-to-online-consultation-this-week" rel="nofollow">https://theedinburghreporter.co.uk/2022/04/edinburgh-south-suburban-railway-campaigners-remind-you-to-respond-to-online-consultation-this-week</a></p> <p><img src="https://theedinburghreporter.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/image-2.png"> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-350306 Tue, 04 May 2021 13:16:55 +0000 boothym 350306@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It's more realistic than other proposals though there's still plenty of complications. </p> <p>Most Shotts line trains stop everywhere, except a few in the peaks - however even the ones which only stop at Bellshill/Shots/West Calder/Livi still take just over an hour from Glasgow to Slateford. </p> <p>If you're adding more fast trains, will there be the capacity at both the Glasgow suburban and WCML ends of the line? </p> <p>Plus you'd have to use diesels until the south sub and line to Eskbank gets electrified. Eskbank being single track also complicates things. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-350303 Tue, 04 May 2021 12:20:21 +0000 jonty 350303@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That's certainly the most realistic proposal for the south sub going I think. A train from Morningside to Glasgow (or Galashiels) seems much more useful than one to Waverley, and it provides another way around the existing problem of junction capacity at Portobello. Trams on the line is surely a non-starter while it's still required for freight, whereas the Borders-Glasgow concept could be trialled almost immediately (without the intermediate south sub stations, of course). Potentially hard to justify using the (regrettably) limited capacity on the Borders lines for trains which don't go straight into Edinburgh though, and and I'm not sure how much space there is on the bit of the WCML it would have to use. But very encouraging. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-350299 Tue, 04 May 2021 11:29:37 +0000 chdot 350299@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“</p> <p>He said: “Imagine a fast, direct service running from the Borders Railway stopping at Eskbank, Shawfair, Newcraighall, Kinnaird Park, Craigmillar, Newington, Morningside and then running down the Shotts line to Glasgow Central. This would be a real alternative to the City by-pass and trains could whisk travellers direct from Eskbank to Glasgow in a little over 90 minutes and Morningside to Glasgow Central in a little more than an hour, all without travelling into Haymarket or Waverley for the train to Queen Street.” </p> <p>“</p> <p><a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-elections-2021-lib-dem-candidate-calls-for-edinburghs-south-sub-rail-line-to-reopen-as-train-alternative-to-city-bypass-3223008" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-elections-2021-lib-dem-candidate-calls-for-edinburghs-south-sub-rail-line-to-reopen-as-train-alternative-to-city-bypass-3223008</a></p> <p>Eskbank to Glasgow currently 1 1/2 hours, with 20 mins for changing trains at Waverley. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-321889 Sun, 02 Feb 2020 11:07:50 +0000 gembo 321889@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>To summarise on the 86th posting - This line could reopen No it can’t? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-321883 Sun, 02 Feb 2020 10:24:40 +0000 chdot 321883@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“</p> <p>Other major feeder and link lines suggested include the reopening of Edinburgh’s lost circle line. </p> <p>That involves making use of the double-track Edinburgh Suburban &amp; Southside Railway (ESSR) that loops around the city and is still used for diverted services and freight transport. </p> <p>“</p> <p><a href="https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18204897.scotlands-railway-roadmap-think-tank-reveals-wish-list-train-network/" rel="nofollow">https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18204897.scotlands-railway-roadmap-think-tank-reveals-wish-list-train-network/</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-320999 Fri, 17 Jan 2020 13:36:31 +0000 wingpig 320999@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Instead of south sub services running to Haymarket, add a wee spur just before the line crosses under the WAR, take it along Roseburn St to a nice new Roseburn Russell Terminal. Campaigns against it might distract the campaigners enough to allow the CCWEL Tobe completed. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-320994 Fri, 17 Jan 2020 11:54:29 +0000 jonty 320994@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I've loved the idea for years. But recently I've come to thinking that a lot of support for re-opening the South Sub comes from an assumption that Morningside Road is destined to be forever car-clogged.</p> <p>One bus gate in the vicinity of the Clock would probably kill any peak time business for a station that close to the centre, I think. </p> <p>A really interesting proposition would be services from the West that completely avoid Waverley, or perhaps terminate at its less physically constrained east end. Bring back Leith Central and take some pressure off the core?! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-320992 Fri, 17 Jan 2020 11:30:33 +0000 PS 320992@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I can't see the south sub being reopened to timetabled passenger services as long as there remain only four tracks between Haymarket and Waverley (and there's not much chance of that changing). Haymarket is one of the most congested parts of the Scottish rail network, so there will be no appetite to bring additional services into the mix. </p> <p>Besides, is the demand really there? The distances involved aren't vast, and I'd imagine you'd just be converting bus passengers into train passengers. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-320987 Fri, 17 Jan 2020 10:34:51 +0000 neddie 320987@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The Western Approach Rd could be converted to a tram and active travel corridor, with cars banned from the Western end.</p> <p>That would allow south-sub trams to get as far as Lothian Rd at least.</p> <p>From there, a new tunnel under Lothian Rd, then alongside the castle side of the existing railway to Waverley.</p> <p>"A new tunnel", I hear you say. "That would be too expensive." But they managed to build loads of tunnels in the 19th C. We need to go back to that mentality of "railway is King".</p> <p>And they still seem to be building tunnels for cars without anyone batting an eyelid e.g. Silvertown tunnel in London. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-320984 Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:00:58 +0000 chdot 320984@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“Inter-running with strategic freight route would not allow for high frequency passenger headway;”</p> <p>Since Longannet closed, much less freight. </p> <p>“studies have suggested the business case is weak for a south-suburban rail option given the inability of options to adequately serve the city core, which would be fundamental to the demand and benefits case.”</p> <p>That’ll be studies from many years ago. </p> <p>One concluded that no more passengers would be attracted than then used the 38 bus!</p> <p>The main problem is the same as LB’s - ‘everything must go via Princes Street’</p> <p>There is an assumption that the Sub would just be like the 60s where people ‘just’ went from Morningside (for instance) to Waverley. </p> <p>There is also the assumption that trains couldn’t be fitted in at Haymarket - a self fulfilling prophecy as the rebuilding of the station and various phases of resignalling never took the possibility into account. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-320983 Fri, 17 Jan 2020 08:00:11 +0000 gembo 320983@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Keeps coming round this one bit like the trains used to do.</p> <p>Maybe as you can still see where the stations were and much of the line still visible. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-320979 Thu, 16 Jan 2020 22:12:22 +0000 CycleAlex 320979@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>From the tram route study in CMP: </p> <p>There are fundamental feasibility issues that mean that the use of south-suburban alignment for a transit / metro type service is likely to be undeliverable and unviable; these include:</p> <p>– Inter-running with strategic freight route would not allow for high frequency passenger headway;</p> <p>– Inability to access city centre limits potential. A rail option would be unfeasible due to constraints at Waverley /Haymarket. Tram-train mooted as alterative to overcome this; however, the city centre tram network’s similar constraints represent a significant obstacle; and</p> <p>– Tram-train cost and deliverability are very uncertain. There are myriad issues re overhead line, signalling, track compatibility, platforms, level access.</p> <p>- Notwithstanding feasibility issues, previous<br /> studies have suggested the business case is<br /> weak for a south-suburban rail option given the<br /> inability of options to adequately serve the city<br /> core, which would be fundamental to the<br /> demand and benefits case.</p> <p>- Relief of city centre constraints better utilised<br /> supporting service enhancements in other corridors. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-320978 Thu, 16 Jan 2020 22:06:08 +0000 chdot 320978@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="https://twitter.com/edsouthsub/status/1217915140806455303" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/edsouthsub/status/1217915140806455303</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-288085 Tue, 31 Jul 2018 18:41:32 +0000 crowriver 288085@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I suppose if you've just invested in a bunch of new electric trains, it's a good idea to use them a bit more than just ferrying GLA-EDI commuters about. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-288078 Tue, 31 Jul 2018 17:28:30 +0000 chdot 288078@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“</p> <p>The five years from 2019 could feature more wiring in Scotland, with ScotRail Alliance Managing Director Alex Hynes telling RAIL: “I’d love to see more electrification - Stirling to Perth, East Kilbride and the Edinburgh South Suburban.” </p> <p>Hynes acknowledged that the East Coast Main Line would need work to increase its capacity, as more operators plan trains to and from Scotland.</p> <p>“</p> <p><a href="https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/scotrail-targets-further-electrification-schemes" rel="nofollow">https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/scotrail-targets-further-electrification-schemes</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-268319 Thu, 30 Nov 2017 17:45:16 +0000 jonty 268319@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yeah - any more platforms beyond the ones currently being built seem to be for extra tracks in the East tunnels and capacity boosting there. There's a diagram in the linked report. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-268318 Thu, 30 Nov 2017 17:20:01 +0000 neddie 268318@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Pretty sure the capacity problems are due to the tunnels either side of Waverley.</p> <p>They should have got the developers of the Morrison St car park at Haymarket to drill another tunnel while they were at it... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-268313 Thu, 30 Nov 2017 16:22:28 +0000 chdot 268313@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“Pretty much every critique of re-opening the South Sub for passenger traffic points out that there is currently no spare capacity at Waverley for the additional train movements proposed.“</p> <p>Yes, but Waverley is currently getting extra platforms.</p> <p><em>Also</em> all previous reports stuck with the Morningside to Waverley circle notion.</p> <p>How about trains from Galashiels to Dunblane or Perth or Glasgow stopping at Edinburgh Park for rail and tram interchange?</p> <p>Extra Borders line trains that go to Edinburgh destinations without changing at city centre stations. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16003&page=3#post-268310 Thu, 30 Nov 2017 15:56:27 +0000 ejstubbs 268310@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Klaxon: <em>it's far more complicated than re-instating conventional rail services to/from Waverley.</em></p> <p>Perhaps it would be fairer to say that it's a different kind of complication. Pretty much every critique of re-opening the South Sub for passenger traffic points out that there is currently no spare capacity at Waverley for the additional train movements proposed. (I suspect the reduction/change in scope of the EGIP won't have helped as much as some might have hoped, especially since the traffic growth forecasts indicate that the longer trains that were supposed to remove the need for a six-times-an-hour E-G service will become inadequate sooner lather than later.)</p> <p>Whether it's harder to engineer extra capacity into Waverley, or to re-engineer the South Sub to accommodate tram-trains, I couldn't say. (I don't believe either would be trivial.) </p>