CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
"Edinburgh-Glasgow rail link faces three-year delay"
(133 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
As with the high speed line in England I sometimes wonder why people couldn't just get the earlier train if they need to be there at a certain time.
It would be nice to see the front of Queen St station again.
Posted 11 years ago # -
The original plans for EGIP were pretty much complete and a major consultation exercise on the proposals had just finished when Ministers announced the filleting of the scheme. Apparently, Ministers did this without any real discussion with Network Rail or ScotRail - they simply told them it was happening just before they made the announcement.
I can hardly say this is a surprise - decision taken by non-engineering expert on massive engineering project results in giant mess. All to save money to spend on vanity projects such as the Forth Crossing and A9 dualling.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Actually, the main point is to increase capacity on the rail network. Rail passenger numbers are going through the roof. HS2 and EGIP are not vanity projects; they are necessary to cope with this growth. It's my view that it's a mistake for politicians to talk about them as if journey time reduction is the main benefit when in reality it's just a side benefit.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Last July, Brown announced that initial plans to increase the frequency of trains from four to six an hour had been scrapped in favour of extending existing services from six to eight carriages.
This seems to be the main cock-up. Whichever official at Transport Scotland presented that as an option to 'Yomper' Broon should get a good roasting...
Posted 11 years ago # -
That bit I understood, that's why the platforms in Queen St need to be longer.
I was watching an old train show last week and the west coast line seemed to have more tracks then. Could we run more tracks on the same route?
Posted 11 years ago # -
"HS2 and EGIP are not vanity projects;"
I agree with half of that.
"It's my view that it's a mistake for politicians to talk about them as if journey time reduction is the main benefit when in reality it's just a side benefit."
A lot of truth in that - especially on shorter trips - eg EG.
'How long does it take to get to Glasgow?' 'About 50 minutes - or over an hour if you just miss the train you're trying to catch'
This is also why plane v train times discussions are always interesting. (Particularly Edinburgh to London).
It's completely valid to add journey to airport and checking-in times.
(To be clear I prefer trains for all sorts of reasons.)
It does seem odd that all comparisons are about people travelling to central London (ie near King's Cross) from central Edinburgh.
But this also makes journey times for HS2 a bit disingenuous if they are going to be building new 'parkway' stations. Similar to the EasyJet idea of geography...
"Whichever official at Transport Scotland presented that as an option to 'Yomper' Broon should get a good roasting..."
You mean the six trains an hour option?
"That bit I understood, that's why the platforms in Queen St need to be longer"
Except that I was surprised they wouldn't already take 8 coaches.
Presumably a previous 'upgrade' created more concourse and shorter platforms??
Posted 11 years ago # -
Wouldn't have thought so - Queen Street concourse is already pretty skinny. Certainly not wide enough to squeeze an extra carriage in.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Could we run more tracks on the same route?"
No way. This has all been looked at. An upgrade of the WCML would not generate the benefits of a new line. For instance, HS2 will be able to have double-decker trains - that is not possible on the existing infrastructure. Adding more tracks alongside the WCML would require years of line closures, complete rebuilding of bridges and tunnels, and wholesale demolition of lineside properties (and that's a LOT of properties, considering that patterns of urban development in the UK have been influenced enormously by the railways). And it wouldn't even be any faster than it is now. It's just not value for money.
Posted 11 years ago # -
According to the wikies…
"The adjacent Buchanan Street station of the rival Caledonian Railway closed on 7 November 1966 as a result of the Beeching axe and its services to Stirling, Perth, Inverness, Dundee and Aberdeen transferred to Queen Street. This caused difficulties with longer trains, as Queen Street is in a confined position between George Square and the tunnel.
In the 1980s, HST were used on Cross Country and East Coast services, having to use Platform 7 with the end of the train being close to the tunnel mouth."So it looks like the platforms have always been short.
Buchanan St Station is long gone but there is a tunnel runs from where it used to be to Tesco in Springburn. I don't know if the tunnel is blocked by the Tesco building as I've never been through that one. I've sneaked into some of the other old railway tunnels.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Some old photos of Queen St here:
http://urbanglasgow.co.uk/archive/queen-street-station__o_t__t_2757.html
Lots of lovely Class 37s. There is a wee bit of video at the bottom but it's not all Queen St, some at the end is Central.
Anywho, in the internal shots there are a few of the platforms and they look much like today. I didn't know the current car park is on what used to be a freight station and there used to be 4 low level platforms. I used to stay in Ayr and had relatives in Shawlands so I was much more familiar with Central in those days. I even remember St Enoch but not as a station. It was a car park by the time I was in it.
It looks like there was a classical pillared entrance on the west side where the ticket offices and information desks are now.
Some sources say the front was covered up in '69 when I was 3 but I'm fairly sure I remember it when you could still see more of the arch. One of the pics has a Morris Marina Coupe which would have been made in the early '70s so perhaps it took a while to build the new front and I really did see it before the arch was hidden.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"PASSENGERS will have to wait until 2018 for faster journeys on Scotland’s flagship rail line – two years later than expected, ministers have admitted."
Posted 10 years ago # -
To be honest, despite being a regular commuter on the Haymarket-Queen St line I don't think shaving off 8 minutes would radically alter my world. That said electrification absolutely has my backing if only so I can actually breathe in Queen St rather than inhaling diesel fumes from half a dozen idling trains.
I also recall reading something about getting 6 trains per hour instead of 4 - a bit overkill for much of the day in my mind but it'd be great for peak times (and also just before or after peak times when I usually travel). Though there is up to 8 trains per hour if you count the low level Airdie-Bathgate line. The one that runs to/from Milngavie doesn't stop that much in between Queen St and Edinburgh and is really only 10 mins or so slower than the Falkirk line. Stop at Edinburgh park is quite handy too. I'm also vaguely recalling that it has been 'considered' to run a few trains direct from Queen St to Waverley without stopping at Falkirk etc (not sure about Haymarket).
Posted 10 years ago # -
Aside from the environmental benefits, the electric trains will accelerate quicker than the diesel stock and provide a smoother, quieter ride. Purchase and maintenance costs should also be below that of equivalent diesel stock. The pattern of Edinburgh to Glasgow commuter services, running the traction for long periods of time at close to its maximum speed, all day, every day, has always taxed rolling stock (and run quite a lot of previous incumbents into the ground in the past.) Even if the new trains won't be running to a vastly improved timetable, they should find it easier to stick to a timetable.
Posted 10 years ago # -
There is also the advantage of being able to hear platform announcements over an accelerating electric train.
Haymarket seems to be particularly bad for making their announcements all but in possible to hear (no worries, I'll just glance up at the information screen on the platform - Oh, silly me, there aren't any).From the hootsman article:
"
Electrification of other routes which feed into the main line, such as from Dunblane and Alloa, was shelved last year when the project was slashed from £1 billion to save money.
"But later...
"
Transport minister Keith Brown told MSPs: “By December 2018, we will complete the electrification of the Stirling-Alloa-Dunblane line services [...]"
"So the Dunblane line will be electrified then?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Dunblane electrification was kicked further into the long grass behind the main Edinburgh-Glasgow route when they cut the budget last year. Are they saying that all the electrification will now be delayed until 2018, or is the Hootsmon just raking over the coals on a slow news day?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Last time I looked, the electrification of the Edinburgh-Glasgow line was going ahead as per plan. Dunblane/Alloa was knocked out of EGIP but instead would be funded out of the ongoing commitment to electrify 100km of track per annum.
The Scotsman piece doesn't really draw it out, but the journey time reduction can't happen until the Dunblane line is electrified because any electric trains will be held up by the diesel ones which exit Queen Street on the same line before heading up to Dunblane.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@cb:
"For passengers awaiting the 13:04 servi...VROOMMMMMMMMMM.....Bridge of Allan and Dunblane"
There's at least an improvement in that they use a computerised voice now instead of getting someone who apparently spoke martian to screech out a bunch of sounds that were supposed to be the platform change for the Queen St service but may well have been an interstellar callsign to begin an alien invasion.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Can't figure out what's new from last week's story -
PS (above) seems to have understood...
Posted 10 years ago # -
Mildly OT, but I had to drive from Glasgow to Laidback on Monday night to drop off a disassembled Fuego. I can't understand how anyone would elect to go by car rather than rail between the cities unless they had masses of luggage. Slower, more expensive (young persons railcard...) and I couldn't read.
Also, is it just Queen Street that currently looks like the back of an ambulance with all the 'don't attempt to run - you'll hurt yourself' nonsense? Violent overuse of red/yellow chevrons.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
Chaos for Edinburgh - Glasgow rail commuters"
(Summer 2015)
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Chaos"?
Apparently trains still going to run by diverting around the closure.
Inconvience perhaps closer to reality.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I think claiming that trains will simply divert round the closure of the Winchburgh tunnel is a bit of a leap. Yes, a few trains will be able to run via the Dalmeny chord and then reverse at Dalmeny and into Edinburgh along the Fife line. However, you are probably talking about one or two trains each way per hour (at most) as they have to fit in between the Fife traffic, deal with the single lead-in junction at Winchburgh and so on.
The vast majority of passengers will probably end up travelling between Linlithgow and Edinburgh Park by bus.
Posted 10 years ago # -
ou can get to Glasgow central in an hour from Waverley on the lvinngston train, faster version of the slow train if you know what I mean. Doesn't go via wynchburgh
The Helensburgh / Milngavie trains via Edinburgh park, I am not so sure about.
But looks like there will be options
Posted 10 years ago # -
Presumably they would not be paying £10 million in compensation to Scotrail if there were not going to be a fair few cancellations...
Posted 10 years ago # -
I suppose running extra/longer/faster services on the Shotts / Motherwell / Bathgate lines is being considered to help take up the slack?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Longer should be ok into central, platforms very long, but timings might be hard to squeeze anymore trains through, it is a very busy station
Posted 10 years ago # -
On checking the map, it's striking but for how a few hundred metres of chord at Dalmeny to allow access from the east to the Winchburgh Chord, this could be completely avoided.
Of course, the Minister for Motorways cut that bit of the EGIP out of the plans.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Of course, the Minister for Motorways cut that bit of the EGIP out of the plans.
Indeed. Trains simply go from point A to point B on a single route, and rolling stock and infrastructure is always om perfect condition. Cars and lorries need a network to cope with all the
roadworksimprovements.Posted 10 years ago # -
Final Business Case for EGIP just published. The project has been formally cut into two phases. Phase 1 - the simple electrification of the Edinburgh-Falkirk High-Glasgow QS line will begin soon, plus the upgrade of Queen Street. However, Phase 2 (effectively the bit of EGIP that KB axed) is only happening after 2025.
The benefit cost ratio for Phase 1 is 0.7-0.8. That is, it costs more money than the benefits it provides.
The benefit cost ration for both phases is 1.7. That is, it provides more benefits than it costs.
So, axing part of the scheme is effectively costing money - with no guarantee that Phase 2 will ever see the light of day.
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
