Edinburgh - Glasgow will take 10 mins less

[graygo]

I'm a pretty laid back person but I must admit that reading this seriously got on my moobs.

 

?650m??? 10 minutes???

 

The world's gone freeking mad!

 

STV Link

 

[dobmisterdobster]

Electrifying a line like this is fairly important.

Plus the cost includes the refurb of an entire station.

[graygo]

Electrifying a line like this is fairly important.

Plus the cost includes the refurb of an entire station.

 

Fair doos, I should have read the whole story rather than just the headline.

[Snake Plissken]

The difference between public transport in the UK and out here is staggering.

 

A single bus or subway journey anywhere in the city costs 1,080 won (60p) and you can get a card which is interchangeable with every form of transport - subway, bus and taxi. The KTX train lets you cross Korea for about 50,000 won (?27.89) and takes just over two hours, the train goes about 200 mph and there are plans to upgrade the KTX so you can go from Busan to Seoul in 90 minutes (the equivalent of going from Edinburgh to Derby).

 

I just checked online and the same journey in the UK(in terms of distance) would cost ?112 and would take four and a half hours.

[tian447]

We should get the guys that are doing the trams to do this upgrade.

 

They've done such a fantastic job so far.

[Tott]

The difference between public transport in the UK and out here is staggering.

 

A single bus or subway journey anywhere in the city costs 1,080 won (60p) and you can get a card which is interchangeable with every form of transport - subway, bus and taxi. The KTX train lets you cross Korea for about 50,000 won (?27.89) and takes just over two hours, the train goes about 200 mph and there are plans to upgrade the KTX so you can go from Busan to Seoul in 90 minutes (the equivalent of going from Edinburgh to Derby).

 

I just checked online and the same journey in the UK(in terms of distance) would cost ?112 and would take four and a half hours.

 

aye ,but can you take yer dug on the train ?

[Fourcandles]

I'm a pretty laid back person but I must admit that reading this seriously got on my moobs.

 

?650m??? 10 minutes???

 

The world's gone freeking mad!

 

STV Link

 

 

While I wouldnt argue that is hefty price........ I would make the general point that 2 x 10 minutes (assuming a return trip) is, for a business, a serious amount of time and therefore money.

 

For a business 20mins per day (100mins per week) is an additional 4-5% available productive time and it wouldnt take many businesses (out of 1000's affected) to increase productivity by 5% to cover that outlay.

 

 

[Elvis is a Jambo]

The difference between public transport in the UK and out here is staggering.

 

A single bus or subway journey anywhere in the city costs 1,080 won (60p) and you can get a card which is interchangeable with every form of transport - subway, bus and taxi. The KTX train lets you cross Korea for about 50,000 won (?27.89) and takes just over two hours, the train goes about 200 mph and there are plans to upgrade the KTX so you can go from Busan to Seoul in 90 minutes (the equivalent of going from Edinburgh to Derby).

 

I just checked online and the same journey in the UK(in terms of distance) would cost ?112 and would take four and a half hours.

I am currently in Seoul -it's pishing down and I have been stuck in a traffic jam for the last 2 hours, so it's not all good!

[Coco]

The main reason that Britain's railways are less efficient than some in other countries is that most of them were built 'first' by private companies who had to go around certain land owner's properties or natural features impassable at the times. If you were going to create new lines these days ... it would probably not be on the routes chosen back then by guys on horseback.

 

Then, this being a fairly crowded island and with the demands of ongoing services, it has been difficult to improve the existing lines. Using scarce funds for projects with absymal investment returns such as the half tram line in Edinburgh or the Borders light railway is crazy though.

[jamboz]

aye ,but can you take yer dug on the train ?

Yeah, in your packed lunch..

[Carl Spackler]

The main reason that Britain's railways are less efficient than some in other countries is that most of them were built 'first' by private companies who had to go around certain land owner's properties or natural features impassable at the times. If you were going to create new lines these days ... it would probably not be on the routes chosen back then by guys on horseback.

 

Then, this being a fairly crowded island and with the demands of ongoing services, it has been difficult to improve the existing lines. Using scarce funds for projects with absymal investment returns such as the half tram line in Edinburgh or the Borders light railway is crazy though.

 

I agree with you on the trams but disagree on the borders. The borders railway is a good project.

 

I've just looked on the EGIP website and I'd say it's all pretty good stuff in principle. As long as they don't **** up the contracts and get value for money.

 

 

 

 

 

[Coco]

I agree with you on the trams but disagree on the borders. The borders railway is a good project.

 

I've just looked on the EGIP website and I'd say it's all pretty good stuff in principle. As long as they don't **** up the contracts and get value for money.

 

Re the railway I presume that the 2010 benefit:cost ratio of 1.2 is now out of date and it is likely that the project will cost more than it benefits given the costs will be spiralling (all private sector potential bidders are out of the game). 60 year payback period is also laughable. Who are they to forecast what the demand for a light railway to Tweedbank will be in 60 years?!

 

It is just politics. Pork barrel politics.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/transport-environment/300m-rail-link-offers-poor-value-for-money-1.1037399

[Carl Spackler]

Re the railway I presume that the 2010 benefit:cost ratio of 1.2 is now out of date and it is likely that the project will cost more than it benefits given the costs will be spiralling (all private sector potential bidders are out of the game). 60 year payback period is also laughable. Who are they to forecast what the demand for a light railway to Tweedbank will be in 60 years?!

 

It is just politics. Pork barrel politics.

 

http://www.heraldsco...money-1.1037399

 

I've never looked at the figures but I've looked at the details. There really isn't that much in the way huge civils works required as the railway corridor is pretty much intact. The initial link at Gala will have some benefit but people in Midlothian will be able to get to the centre of Edinburgh very quickly using the new park and rides.

 

If you look at the current state of the Edinburgh Bypass the more that can be done to reduce car use the better. It's only going to get worse.

 

I'm talking about practicalities. I don't give a s**t about wooly green arguments.

 

Trams were/are just a bollocks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[pablo]

As the Bypass has been mentioned on the thread. I've never understood why there's still the big roundabout on it? How much would it cost to stick up a flyover when you consider the sums that get bandied around when discussing, new Forth bridges, trams, trains etc.?

[Carl Spackler]

As the Bypass has been mentioned on the thread. I've never understood why there's still the big roundabout on it? How much would it cost to stick up a flyover when you consider the sums that get bandied around when discussing, new Forth bridges, trams, trains etc.?

 

It was supposed to be a flyover but they cut back on the costs. I think there are still aspirations for them to do a big project there but it's not high up the list and you can understand why.

 

In the grand scheme of things Sherrifhall is not that massive a problem area. It has its moments but the big problems run from Straiton to past Hermiston Gait.

 

 

 

[davemclaren]

Re the railway I presume that the 2010 benefit:cost ratio of 1.2 is now out of date and it is likely that the project will cost more than it benefits given the costs will be spiralling (all private sector potential bidders are out of the game). 60 year payback period is also laughable. Who are they to forecast what the demand for a light railway to Tweedbank will be in 60 years?!

 

It is just politics. Pork barrel politics.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/transport-environment/300m-rail-link-offers-poor-value-for-money-1.1037399

 

 

Certainly viable as far as Gorebridge. The article you refer to states that the cost/benefit ratio has changed over he last few year whivh is understandable given the economic shocks that have happened but what is to say it won't change back in 5 years time. Sometimes you just have to have a vision and go for it.

[Coco]

Certainly viable as far as Gorebridge. The article you refer to states that the cost/benefit ratio has changed over he last few year whivh is understandable given the economic shocks that have happened but what is to say it won't change back in 5 years time. Sometimes you just have to have a vision and go for it.

 

I somewhat agree with opening up to Gorebridge ... but the car parks they have planned are too small. The trouble is that the commute is so short anyway and this makes is unlikely that there will be significant modal shifts (say from existing park and rides given the inflexibility of the train going via Newcraighall compared to the bus routes from park and rides).

 

In 5 years time if the line is opening it will have opened with a projected benefit cost ratio below 1x i.e. the line will be wasting money. And then on top it will be making operating losses too. The opportunity cost is that the money wasted on this is not available for other good projects.

 

That's my prediction anyway. I was not bad on the tram line predictions ...

[Pohang Jambo]

Yeah, in your packed lunch..

 

 

 

I've had dog soup a few times.

 

 

[davemclaren]

I somewhat agree with opening up to Gorebridge ... but the car parks they have planned are too small. The trouble is that the commute is so short anyway and this makes is unlikely that there will be significant modal shifts (say from existing park and rides given the inflexibility of the train going via Newcraighall compared to the bus routes from park and rides).

 

In 5 years time if the line is opening it will have opened with a projected benefit cost ratio below 1x i.e. the line will be wasting money. And then on top it will be making operating losses too. The opportunity cost is that the money wasted on this is not available for other good projects.

 

That's my prediction anyway. I was not bad on the tram line predictions ...

 

 

Not sure what you mean by the inflexibility of going via Newvraighall. It will be a quicker commute into town and beyond ( Gyle ) than by bus.

[The People's Chimp]

The difference between public transport in the UK and out here is staggering.

 

A single bus or subway journey anywhere in the city costs 1,080 won (60p) and you can get a card which is interchangeable with every form of transport - subway, bus and taxi. The KTX train lets you cross Korea for about 50,000 won (?27.89) and takes just over two hours, the train goes about 200 mph and there are plans to upgrade the KTX so you can go from Busan to Seoul in 90 minutes (the equivalent of going from Edinburgh to Derby).

 

I just checked online and the same journey in the UK(in terms of distance) would cost ?112 and would take four and a half hours.

 

At least! It's pathetic, but then as soon as any new civil engineering project is announced here, the first thing you hear are howls of outrage, followed up by NIMBY protests, the 'outrageous cost' protesters, the questions in Parliament/council meetings and so on.

[Coco]

Not sure what you mean by the inflexibility of going via Newvraighall. It will be a quicker commute into town and beyond ( Gyle ) than by bus.

 

Perhaps the actual time on train would be less but the journey time is unlikely to be significantly less.

 

Bus or walk to train station - then train with only a couple of stops in fairly useless places for most things. Then a further bus or walk to final destination. Potentially a lot of time added to a journey.

 

Compared to 1) existing bus services from numerous stops on routes 2) car from outside house to existing park and rides (free parking) with some services with stops on routes (potentially close to final destination) and 3) car from house to final destination. An inflexible solution suited to dormitory towns taking pit workers to their shift - not to today's more fluid working situations. I suppose there might be a bit of tourist/shopping traffic but of course not enough to fill the trains all day on non-work times. Note also pensioners will not be shifting from buses to trains.

[Coco]

At least! It's pathetic, but then as soon as any new civil engineering project is announced here, the first thing you hear are howls of outrage, followed up by NIMBY protests, the 'outrageous cost' protesters, the questions in Parliament/council meetings and so on.

 

If money is being wasted - where the benefits are less than the costs - then that money could be better spent on other good projects.

 

The tram at all costs Council and supporters are going to cause closures of vast amounts of Council services in order to pay for a half line. Tram opponents were right on this from the outset.

[The People's Chimp]

I'm not talking about the trams, but for instance the electrification of the Edin/Glas link - 10 minutes off the journey time is huge in terms of additional productivity and we are already hearing complaints.

[jamboinglasgow]

I see they are not going to build a link to the airport from the Edinburgh to Glasgow line (which would be a spur of a mile or two just past Kirkliston.) And the new station at Gogarburn is just going to be on the Edinburgh - Fife (and North) line (which via Tram connects to the airport.) Think that is a big opportunity missed.

[Coco]

I'm not talking about the trams, but for instance the electrification of the Edin/Glas link - 10 minutes off the journey time is huge in terms of additional productivity and we are already hearing complaints.

 

I have gone off topic.

 

But your point was about 'civil engineering projects' where the protesters were howling.

 

On the trams - and indeed on the Borders railway - they are and were right.

 

I would agree that if there is a cost effective way to significantly reduce Edin-Glasgow times it would be a great improvement.

[davemclaren]

Perhaps the actual time on train would be less but the journey time is unlikely to be significantly less.

 

Bus or walk to train station - then train with only a couple of stops in fairly useless places for most things. Then a further bus or walk to final destination. Potentially a lot of time added to a journey.

 

Compared to 1) existing bus services from numerous stops on routes 2) car from outside house to existing park and rides (free parking) with some services with stops on routes (potentially close to final destination) and 3) car from house to final destination. An inflexible solution suited to dormitory towns taking pit workers to their shift - not to today's more fluid working situations. I suppose there might be a bit of tourist/shopping traffic but of course not enough to fill the trains all day on non-work times. Note also pensioners will not be shifting from buses to trains.

All the recent re-openings have attracted more passengers than anticipated. I accept that this line is more rural for a lot of its length but Midlothian is expanding in terms of population and is mainly a dormitory town for edinburgh. Lots of other countries have many people making multi-mode journeys but to encourage that needs transferability of tickets and dovetailed timetables. Privatisation has not helped that.

[Brian Whittaker's Tache]

aye ,but can you take yer dug on the train ?

 

Of course, but I think they have them onboard already

 

[All Gone Wrong]

Edinburgh City Centre to Airport by tram cost Approx ?1billion,the airport bus will still get you there at the same time if not quicker.QUALITY let's hear it for Edinburgh SH*ty council.

[jamboz]

 

 

I've had dog soup a few times.

 

 

 

How was it? A bit ruff?

[tommythejambo]

In all fairness, the only train line in Scotland that makes a profit is that one.

 

So why not.

[jamboz]

 

 

I've had dog soup a few times.

 

 

 

Chicken poodle soup or "collie"flower soup? And did you wolf it all down in one sitting?

[Big D]

aye ,but can you take yer dug on the train ?

Only if s/he doesn't have a cargo after 9pm.

Back on topic. 10 minutes may not seem much but it is a 20% reduction in journey times on Scotland's most(only?) profitable route. More importantly it will free up capacity on the line for the trains through Grahamston and also on to Stirling, Perth,Inverness and Aberdeen. So the benefits to those lines have to be considered. Coco has nailed it regarding railways on mainland Britain. As the first country to build extensive railways, we have continually suffered from necessary decisions made 150 years ago. Glasgow QS was originally planned to be built on 40 foot stilts to try and avoid tunneling and mitigate the Sighthill drag. It wasn't so we have a 2 line tunnel and a hill that locos used to have to be pulled up by steam winch. Where else could Waverley possibly have been except in its constrained site? We have made some appalling decisions regarding rail networks in the last 50 years, but this is a great idea and should be applauded for the whole 40 minute journey. (Downside, I'll be struggling to finish a bottle of wine on the way through to the game now.)