CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh

Are South Sub tram-trains any closer?

(100 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. chdot
    Admin

    "

    Now Edinburgh Southern SNP MSP Jim Eadie believes tram-trains could be the solution.

    Their hybrid design would mean they could leave the rail track at Haymarket and continue on the tram lines.

    Mr Eadie – who has secured a debate on the issue in the Scottish Parliament on Wednesday – visited Sheffield last week to see progress on what is believed to be the UK’s first ever tram-train project.

    The tram-train pilot, which will start running between Sheffield and Rotherham next year, is unique because it will link heavy and light rail infrastructure, systems and operations.

    "

    http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/tram-trains-could-allow-edinburgh-s-south-sub-railway-to-reopen-1-4017428

    Posted 8 years ago #
  2. crowriver
    Member

    Presumably though, the custom designed, very expensive, over specified rolling stock made for Edinburgh is incapable of running on standard train tracks? Or would have to be modified at further expense?

    Posted 8 years ago #
  3. chdot
    Admin

    "incapable of running on standard train tracks"

    Yes.

    IF this happened it would be new rolling stock.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  4. PS
    Member

    Ignoring for the time being the light rail/heavy rail safety issues, tram-trains on most of the South Sub look reasonably feasible because there aren't any passenger services to be disrupted by trams whose joining of the network is going to be somewhat unpredictable due to their interaction with motor vehicles.

    However, a major obstacle to them would be having to (presumably) get from the south side of the tracks to the north (or vice-versa) at the run into Haymarket, which is already a congestion blackspot. There is potential to cause delays, and therefore penalties, to an awful lot of long distance services there.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  5. Chug
    Member

    wrong thread

    Posted 8 years ago #
  6. Where exactly is the bottleneck? Could it not just run between Waverley and Haymarket but not go through the tunnel, so that it wouldn't take up any through platforms?

    Or Edinburgh Gateway - Gorgie - Morningside - Craigmillar - Brunstane - Waverley, with interchanges to the tram at Gateway and Balgreen and to the Borders Railway at Brunstane? This would actually connect many suburbs with industrial areas and the airport.

    One of the problems with Edinburgh public transport is that everything goes to the centre even though many people don't want to go to the centre.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  7. neddie
    Member

    They could build a tram bridge across the mainline where the Roseburn path ends, with a nice chord connecting it to the existing tram route.

    Then connect it on to the south-sub where 'our' nice new bike route, Roseburn to Canal, is going to go.

    And of course, because of joined up thinking, it WILL have a cycle path next to it, including across the bridge over the mainline.

    WON'T it?

    <Edit>

    Ooops.

    Wrong railway line. The bridge would have to be closer to Roseburn St / Murrayfield

    Posted 8 years ago #
  8. neddie
    Member

    Or...

    The tram bridge could stay at the end of the Roseburn path, with a new section of tram track running West, parallel to the WAR, through the council depot and connecting on to the south-sub there.

    That would kill about 3 birds with one stone.

    </THINKING_OUT_LOUD>

    Posted 8 years ago #
  9. neddie
    Member

    Here's my idea for a tram extension to the south-sub, with integrated bike route on the bridge.

    New tram route in blue. Bike route in yellow. Bikes/trams share the same bridge across the mainline.

    tram extn to south sub by Ed, on Flickr

    Posted 8 years ago #
  10. @edd1e_h Could we not just close West Approach Road to cars and use half of it for the tram and half for a cycle path?

    Posted 8 years ago #
  11. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Presumably though, the custom designed, very expensive, over specified rolling stock made for Edinburgh is incapable of running on standard train tracks?

    Correct, it couldn't, but that's nothing to do with it being the Edinburgh trams, there's a distinct difference between the profiles of tram rails and wheels compared to train wheels and rails. It has taken many years of development to come up with a wheel suitable for running on both types of rail.

    Then there's the whole crashworthyness thing.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  12. neddie
    Member

    Probably the easiest thing to do is to run heavy rail services along the south-sub, terminating at Murrayfield (new terminus built in council depot).

    Passengers would then have to walk on foot across a (new) footbridge to connect with the tram at Murrayfield.

    Integrated ticketing, anyone?

    Posted 8 years ago #
  13. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Let's not forget there's the largely unused Platform 0 at Haymarket, for services that aren't going as far as the tunnel.

    Although the track layout means services coming off the "Sub" have to cross the Edinburgh & Glasgow running lines to get onto the Fife line to access it, which brings up a different capacity problem of its own.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  14. chdot
    Admin

    "coming off the "Sub" ... which brings up a different capacity problem of its own"

    I suspect that's more of an issue than actually tunnel and Waverley platform capacity.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  15. chdot
    Admin

    "

    Whether it’s debates over the tram extension, campaigning for further investment in cycling infrastructure or the inquiry into the Forth Road Bridge closure, transport in Edinburgh has never been a more hotly discussed topic than right now.

    Over the past few months there has been talk about reinstating the Edinburgh South Suburban Railway, which I know has been a burning ambition for SEStran, Transform Scotland and the Capital Rail Action Group.

    "

    http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/opinion/jim-eadie-south-sub-return-can-take-us-in-the-right-direction-1-4018848

    Posted 8 years ago #
  16. cb
    Member

    On our previous South Sub thread chdot had mentioned that Network Rail were about to remove the remaining platform at Morningside Station.

    (I don't think this has started yet? I did see various folk in orange jackets rooting around that bit of the track the other week but I thought that may have been related to the footbridge repair (if it is, indeed, getting repaired)).

    However the current Bruntsfield/Morningside shopping consulation (see this thread) mentions that "There is potential in the future for the South Suburban rail line to reopen, serving passengers and increasing Morningside’s accessibility. A station safeguard is identified on this site, which will need to be taken into consideration in any future redevelopment." (my bold).

    Are Network Rail still planning on removing the platform? Anyone know? How does that work against a 'station safeguard'?

    (Incidentally, the Bruntsfield/Morningside consultation is worth looking at. As drnoble hints at, you need to have an opinion on shop frontages/use classes/ residential vs commercial ratios, etc. to fill it in fully.
    However you can leave answers blank and concentrate on some of the public space proposals which are quite interesting).

    Posted 8 years ago #
  17. jonty
    Member

    I assume a "station safeguard" just ensures the station area isn't built on. The platform would probably need to be knocked down and rebuilt anyway if the station re-opened.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  18. chdot
    Admin

    "about to remove the remaining platform at Morningside Station"

    That's what NR said.

    Turns out all they did was remove a section of the platform edge.

    Footbridge - new steps on south side, reopened.

    Morningside study identifies site where BoS sits as 'potential for re-development'. Might be necessary to allow a station as it is party built on former platform site.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  19. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Turns out all they did was remove a section of the platform edge.

    I'd wager that's to do with the loading gauge to accept slightly wider container sizes to pass, for instance.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  20. cb
    Member

    The platform would probably need to be knocked down and rebuilt anyway if the station re-opened

    I guess so. But I like to think that they could just send a couple of blokes down with some secateurs and a stiff broom, and perhaps a little tub of cement to patch up the worst bits.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  21. chdot
    Admin

    "I'd wager that's to do with the loading gauge to accept slightly wider container sizes to pass, for instance."

    Was/is.

    But NR sent out letters and responded to Twitter questions with 'removal of platform'!

    Posted 8 years ago #
  22. chdot
    Admin

    "But I like to think that they could just send a couple of blokes down with some secateurs and a stiff broom, and perhaps a little tub of cement to patch up the worst bits."

    Yeah but - elfNsafety + they like start again and spend money -

    http://www.londonreconnections.com/2013/lea-bridge-lives-again

    Posted 8 years ago #
  23. Tulyar
    Member

    As I attend a number of light rail meetings I'll confirm Kaputnik's info on the tyre profile for trams being very different to trains.

    Train wheelset flanges are not used to steer the wheels around corners, they are tapered to not have the flanges touching the rails.

    Tram wheelsets do use the inside of the flange to spread the load on tighter corners that trams run round by bearing on the keep on the grooved rail. In Sheffield the tram train project gave a choice of options

    1) modify the railway track - mostly pointwork on the railway with a 2-stage check-rail/frog system to avoid the trams falling off the track.

    2) change the grooved rail to take the railway profile wheelsets.

    As track renewal was needed option 2 was chosen for Sheffield. For Edinburgh we have the factors of the obvious settlement of the track slab and supporting sub grade under the other parts of the carriageway - perhaps requiring significant attention on Shandwick Place in the not too distant future, with visible settlement cracking on the top screed of the track slab, and serious subsidence/breaking away for the manholes on the diverted services along Shandwick Place. Note the movement under the 8-10 ton load of a bus axle.

    Equally on the street two pictures taken 2 months apart - same defect 28/11/15 vs 2/02/16

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/h52/24705433841/in/datetaken/

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/h52/23458343282/in/datetaken/

    Good to see prompt action on repairs by Edinburgh Tram?

    Them here's a look at what is happening to the relocated services on Shandwick Place - many right where people will be cycling

    Watch the thing move as it gets hammered down

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/h52/24503424330/in/datetaken/

    and this one - right where people cycle

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/h52/24798956355/in/datetaken/

    And this bundle of bad

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/h52/24772705056/in/dateposted-family/

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/h52/24170773254/in/dateposted-family/

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/h52/24681095192/in/dateposted-family/

    The sub grade here is an allivial deposit over fissured shale, with some bores logging water present. The Tunnel at Scotland Street recorded running sand during its construction (HT @Arellcat for that research) This sort of supporting ground is weakened by water, and with the cracks and movement in the tarmac (sealed) surface every heavy vehicle driving over this pumps the wet ground, making it weaker and leaching away the finer material, increasing the rate at which the road sinks...

    Back on topic.

    Personally I'd look at how a connection might be made from the rump of the old Caley alignment that remains from Slateford yard and since the West Approach hardly warrants 4 lanes & wide verges take the railway back along that alignment diving down and under the streets to pop out via Kings Stables Road car park, and build a new set of tracks at the foot of the Castle Rock where there is just about enough space - relocating the park access on top of the railway. The West Approach sits right alongside the edge of the South Haymarket Tunnel - 2 new tracks going in to Waverley on the South side (outside the Klondyke Wall and connecting on the Sub platforms could bring in trains from Carlisle and South Lanarkshire - raising (or lowering) the car park would restore the old yard and provide 2-3 extra platforms, and the potential for a more direct route in to the main station from Calton Road (for Holyrood) Edinburgh Council offices, and the car park/ a better taxi drop-off point - and even cycle parking in the undercroft.

    A tram-train option can cut across to the existing route - possibly along the Lothian Road alignment, and the tram (with increased frequency) has to go under Princes Street as has been done in most cities with seriously busy tram systems. This could deliver an all weather shopping arcade at basement level for many of the shops, a sheltered collonade looking out over Princes Street Gardens for viewing events, a public transport service which can continue to operate when Princes Street is closed off for major events, and provide a way to get the crowds in and out, and a tram stop directly integrated with Waverley Station and the St James's development through Waverley Market, and possibly the Scotland Street Tunnel or a short new link at the North Bridge Junction.

    The key junctions for extending the network, at Lothian Road and Leith Street/North Bridge would be below ground keeping the easily damaged and dangerous to cyclists pointwork on a reserved track, and bringing the trams up in the middle of the street - where they traditionally were place and eliminating the pinch between tram tracks and kerbs where many cycle falls take place. Centrally placed tram tracks can also be built more cheaply using standard rails, and even grass to provide various environmental benefits (rainfall surge attenuation, conversion of COx and NOx, filtration of PM captured on plant leaves, climate management (1 gallon of water uses c.2.5 million calories of heat to evaporate) and production of oxygen (1-1.5 sq m of grass deliver the annual requirement for an adult)- with the added gain of property values from having a green space outside). In Brussels the on street reserved tracks then use conventional level crossings where roads cross the tracks, and these can be made cycle friendly more easily than a grooved rail in the road.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  24. chdot
    Admin

    This (and the other ideas) too sensible for Edinburgh.

    "A tram-train option can cut across to the existing route - possibly along the Lothian Road alignment, and the tram (with increased frequency) has to go under Princes Street as has been done in most cities with seriously busy tram systems."

    And SG would have to cut new roads budget...

    Posted 8 years ago #
  25. cb
    Member

  26. chdot
    Admin

    Endless?

    Is that because it's a circle?

    Posted 8 years ago #
  27. chdot
    Admin

    Mr. Eadie -

    "

    "A new link to the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary that stems from the current South Sub station at Cameron Toll would vastly improve the transport options for patients and national health service staff, and it would serve the ever-expanding Edinburgh BioQuarter.”

    Don't know if he thinks he means a tram spur, don't think there would ever be a chance of a railway line.

    The only station at CT is the petrol one!

    Posted 8 years ago #
  28. chdot
    Admin

    "

    EDINBURGH’S proposed £1 billion City Deal could hold the key to hopes of reopening the Capital’s South Suburban rail line, according to leading advocates of the project.

    Edinburgh Southern SNP MSP Jim Eadie, who has secured the promise of talks between council leaders and Transport Minister Derek Mackay, said the expected injection of new cash from UK and Scottish governments could be a “game-changer”.

    "

    http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/south-sub-rail-project-could-reopen-with-city-deal-cash-1-4024347

    Posted 8 years ago #
  29. jonty
    Member

    The South Sub runs directly underneath Cameron Toll roundabout and at its closest the line is just under a mile away from the ERI - a tram/train link isn't totally inconceivable.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  30. chdot
    Admin

    Nothing is inconceivable, the problem is getting politicians and transport 'experts' to agree on priorities not pet projects!

    (Or doing 'what the voters want'.)

    South Sub SHOULD have trains now as part of the Borders line with some trains going to/from Bathgate, Stirling, Fife etc avoiding Waverley.

    Cameron Toll for RIE and KB. Tram might be nice but shuttle buses would be cheaper.

    Oh and if there's money, some better cycle infrastructure...

    Posted 8 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin