CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
"Alex Salmond plans high speed rail link to south"
(32 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
His transport policy could start with being a little bit more supportive of a low-medium speed link to the south i.e. a proper Borders Railway, not the single track low-speed, low-service, low-capacity parochial byeway using old rolling stock that they've come up with instead.
Then they can worry about the hovertrains.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Other transport policy initiatives are available.
Posted 10 years ago # -
For a change, I agee with the EEN commenters on this. Total back of a betting slip policy. Note though:
"His announcement, during a visit to Carlisle, followed recent reports that the proposed third phase of high-speed rail from either Leeds or Manchester to Edinburgh and Glasgow would be ditched after a Yes vote."
So it's just a knee jerk rebuttal to a rather spiteful scare story from London.
Anyway, sorting out Scottish rail services ought to be more of a priority. Borders rail to Carlisle; Inverness-Perth dual tracking; Highland and Far North lines improvements; Electrification of Edinburgh-Aberdeen; Dare I say building a proper trams network in Edinburgh; etc.
Posted 10 years ago # -
The prefacing of any and all stories about Scotchland with 'Alex Salmond' is becoming tedious.
If this were the plan of a single individual then it wouldn't merit reporting. Presumably it's actually the plan of the Scottish Government, or Transport Scotland, or the SNP?
Posted 10 years ago # -
"The prefacing of any and all stories about Scotchland with 'Alex Salmond' is becoming tedious."
Yes, and probably counterproductive.
"Presumably it's actually the plan of the Scottish Government, or Transport Scotland, or the SNP?"
Perhaps.
As crowriver says - 'should be other priorities'.
I suspect Ed - Newcastle journeys could already be quicker without much investment - if that was considered to be important.
Current fastest is 1hr22.
But would 1hr15 or even 1hr make much difference (practically or psychologically?)
If Scotland becomes independent I think there will be increased interaction with Newcastle. Berwick could bathe in its revived existence as the 'border town'.
It's quicker to get there than to Glasgow!
Posted 10 years ago # -
It was included in a speech by the FM to business leaders, so actual Scottish Government policy. As usual, pretty poor reporting - the commitment is to a feasibility study into a possible route for HSR to the border and on through northern England to link with HS2 (due to end in Leeds and Manchester).
Details: http://news.scotland.gov.uk/News/FM-announces-study-into-north-to-south-HSR-link-bc1.aspx
Not clear if this is separate from the proposed Edinburgh-Glasgow HSR route, also being assessed by Transport Scotland at the moment.
In my opinion, all a huge waste of cash. Install in-cab signalling (ETCS Level 3) on the east coast main line and Edinburgh-London journey times can be cut to three and a half hours using the existing rolling stock (and new Hitachi Super Expresses) for a fraction of the cost of HSR north of Leeds.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Why is it that discussion boards like this are usually better informed and always better written than 'real' journalism? It's making me mad!
Posted 10 years ago # -
"In my opinion, all a huge waste of cash. Install in-cab signalling (ETCS Level 3) on the east coast main line and Edinburgh-London journey times can be cut to three and a half hours "
Almost certainly true.
Apart from the 'we like spending lots of other people's money 'cos it's progress' problem, there are (perhaps) issues of track capacity - though those will be largely closer to London.
Bigger issues are 'why'.
Is this about 'encouraging' people to stop flying? Or some belief that more/faster travel is 'good for the economy'?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Not clear if this is separate from the proposed Edinburgh-Glasgow HSR route, also being assessed by Transport Scotland at the moment.
I'm pretty sure it is. Although, presumably you could piggy back on a N-S line out of each of Edinburgh and Glasgow to provide a link between the two cities (dependin gon alignments and what have you).
Why is it that discussion boards like this are usually better informed and always better written than 'real' journalism? It's making me mad!
Because journalism is little more than high-speed and low-comprehension/low-challenge topping and tailing of press releases nowadays. Maybe it always was, but it's far more obvious in these internet days when you can see the source online as well.
However, I think it's pretty much always been the case that I have been able to spot errors or inaccuracies in a lot of news stories pertaining to subjects I have a reasonably detailed understanding or knowledge of. Suspect that is the nature of the beast when journalists have to be generalists by necessity, but it does make you question the veracity of pretty much everything you see and hear in the media, which is ultimately not a bad place to be.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Apart from the 'we like spending lots of other people's money 'cos it's progress' problem, there are (perhaps) issues of track capacity - though those will be largely closer to London.
There are some significant capacity constraints on the lines heading into Glasgow too. Second biggest suburban rail network in the UK, but suburban services share tracks with intercity services.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"There are some significant capacity constraints on the lines heading into Glasgow too. Second biggest suburban rail network in the UK, but suburban services share tracks with intercity services."
All the more reason to deal with these than minutes shaving/slashing on long distance routes.
I (and many others) go to London a few times a year. Book ahead, get the cheapest trains (which are usually the ones that take 4hr45.
Would love to get there in 4 hours (at no extra cost) but definitely think that spending money to benefit people who use the Glasgow suburban network every day is more justifiable!
Posted 10 years ago # -
chdot - Network Rail do have plans to deal with bottlenecks on the ECML near London (although quite some time into the future). The beauty of the latest versions of in-cab signalling is that they allow trains to run closer together than current signalling, increasing track capacity. It also allows trains to run at more than 125mph - a speed limit which was set as it is the fastest a train can travel while allowing the driver to easily see line side signals. The rolling stock on the east and west coast main liens are easily capable of 140mph.
Posted 10 years ago # -
All the more reason to deal with these than minutes shaving/slashing on long distance routes.
True, but there's also an argument that if you're going to spend all that money on new infrastructure for extra capacity you might as well make it a high-speed-ready line as the incremental cost may be relatively small. Two birds, one stone.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Yes.
I'm just saying that 'capacity' is one 'justification' for HS2.
Plan 1 - shut Euston...
Posted 10 years ago # -
Any idea how much time "in-cab signalling" could cut on Ed to Newcastle?
Are speed constraints here more due to route/track issues than signalling/slower trains on 2 track route?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Back in the mid 90's I used to quite enjoy the 4-hour train journey from London KX back to Edinburgh after work on a Friday.
Almost 20 years later and it would appear no progress has been made in reducing the journey time - which seems crazy.
If they got the train down to 3 hours, there would be v little benefit to taking a plane, if you look at the door-to-door trip. (London City excepted)
Posted 10 years ago # -
If they got the train down to 3 hours, there would be v little benefit to taking a plane
Thing is, the old 1990s rolling stock is already capable (and was designed for) of a running line speed of 140mph vs. current limit of 125mph. BR played around with modifying the signals on the ECML so that this could be achieved (from memory it requires clearing 2 blocks ahead of the express train, rather than the usual 1), but this has the effect of reducing line capacity.
I'm sure Tulyar has more and better details about it and why it never worked (or was never made to work) in practice.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
ALEX Salmond has hinted that the entire Waverley rail line between Edinburgh and Carlisle could be reopened once the route from Waverley to the Borders is up and running."
It's those headline writers again - will he do all the work? Or be around to cut the ribbon??
Posted 10 years ago # -
will he do all the work? Or be around to cut the ribbon??
He's have to fight Keith for the dayglo vest / hard hat photo op. He never normally misses one.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Well that's a common sense announcement. Level of commitment is a bit nebulous: “We will look at the possibility of commissioning a feasibility study into extending the line if it emerges there is scope and demand to do so."
Still, a move in the right direction.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Or to put it another way. If it turns out lots of people want to travel North from the Tweedbank we'll consider giving them the option to travel South.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Or maybe he was in Carlisle to ask how many fancied a direct route to the Capital(?)
Posted 10 years ago # -
kaputnik - my understanding is that 140mph running was dependent on the deployment of a new type of signalling, known as five aspect signalling. This involved the use of a flashing green signal to provide a fifth aspect (the other signalling aspects being green - clear, double yellow – preliminary caution, yellow – caution and red - stop). A flashing green aspect would indicate that a train could run at an enhanced line-speed to the next signal. A steady green aspect would require the driver to brake to line speed.
22 miles of the ECML, between Stoke Junction south of Grantham and Werrington Junction north of Peterborough, were fitted with the new five aspect signalling, which were used during the testing of the Intercity 225. However, the then rail safety body (HMRI) decreed that trains operating above 125mph must use in-cab signalling for safety reasons and the Intercity 225 trains have been limited to operating at 125mph since introduction into operating service.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Or maybe he was in Carlisle to ask how many fancied a direct route to the Capital(?)
A Carlisle-Edinburgh journey would still be substantially quicker along the WCML route than any Waverley Line route.
IIRC it's currently about 90 minutes, and that includes the ridiculously slow corner at Carstairs that Network Rail should be fixing soon. It would likely to be closer to 2 hours along the Waverley Line.
If anything, completing the Waverley Line would help link the southern Borders towns to their traditional commercial centre of Carlisle, adding to Scotland's invisible export of labour and import of goods. Will also help Borders football fans have a few drinks on match days at Carlisle United. ;-)
Posted 10 years ago # -
@PS, aye but that assumes that you only want to go to Carlisle or Edinburgh, as the services on that line barely stop anywhere en route, if at all.
Borders rail is all about the stops inbetween.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@crowriver Indeed - "a direct route to the Capital"
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
