A West to North curve at Gretna Green for Dumfries to Edinburgh/Glasgow services?

[mrgreen]

As far as I know, there's never been a west-to-north curve at Gretna Green. Gretna Junction has always been a simple divergence of the WCML to Glasgow and the Glasgow SW route to Dumfries (and, eventually, Glasgow).
A curve would enable a service from Dumfries (pop. 34k) and Annan (pop 9k) up the WCML to Edinburgh and Glasgow without dog-legging the 9miles each way from Gretna to reverse at Carlisle.
Currently, via the GSW it takes 1h50m and 2h10m from the two towns to Glasgow (and much longer to Edinburgh, changing at Glasgow).
Via the new curve it would take about 1h45m and 1h25m to Glasgow, and the same to Edinburgh. So a large time saving for Dumfries to Edinburgh and for Annan to both Glasgow and Edinburgh
With electrification of Gretna to Dumfries (25 miles double track, comparatively straightforward as in open country with no tunnels), the services could be fully EMU. And, assuming that the Glasgow suburban electrification had reached Kilmarnock from Barrhead by then, there would only be a 60mile gap in the GSW OHLE, which could be bridged by 25kV/battery EMUs that had ample time to recharge at each end.
Alternatively, without new OHLE, the Dumfries to Edinburgh/Glasgow service could be 25kV/battery EMU that used batteries for the 25 miles each way from Gretna to Dumfries.

Looking at Google Earth a simple single track curve at the junction couldn't be above 200m radius without some property demolition: so speeds would necessarily be low. You might improve on that a little by realigning the GSW and/or taking a flying loop over the lines. But the nearby village, river, motorway, and international border would prevent a high-speed curve. Alternatively you could construct a long (2km) curve to the west of the village to save a few minutes, but there's a ridge of land and the motorway to cross so it wouldn't be cheap. It would also by-pass Gretna station which wouldn't be popular.
I suppose a problem is the pathing of the services in the approaches to Edinburgh and Glasgow..... I know capacity upgrades are needed (and may happen) for both.

The SNP should love this, as it greatly improves Scottish connectivity without going over the border.
Can someone with greater crayon skills than me say if any of this is possible, or worthwhile? I'm not clear on how tight a curve could be on a new project like this.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Interesting, but another solution in search of a problem?

In the past, believe there have been local lines between Dumfries and Lockerbie (via Lochmaben) (closed to passengers in 1952 and to freight in 1966?) and another between Annan (Shawhill) and Kirtlebridge (line closed to freight 1955, to passengers somewhat earlier in the 1930s).

(Kirtlebridge station itself, a relatively tiny stop on the WCML, didn't last much longer than 1955, closing in 1960).

 

[The Planner]

Where is it people want to go from Dumfries? Even at 90 minutes, Edinburgh and Glasgow are out of realistic commuting distance.

Also not sure where you are getting 85 minutes to Glasgow though, its 27 minutes from Dumfries to Gretna Jn and 76 minutes from there to Glasgow with a Lockerbie and Motherwell stop on a TPE. That is 103 minutes. Dumfries to Gretna is a mixture of 70-80mph, you would need some impressive speed increases to get down to 85 minutes!

 

[mrgreen]

Where is it people want to go from Dumfries? Even at 90 minutes, Edinburgh and Glasgow are out of realistic commuting distance.

Also not sure where you are getting 85 minutes to Glasgow though, its 27 minutes from Dumfries to Gretna Jn and 76 minutes from there to Glasgow with a Lockerbie and Motherwell stop on a TPE. That is 103 minutes. Dumfries to Gretna is a mixture of 70-80mph, you would need some impressive speed increases to get down to 85 minutes!

The 85mins I quoted was Annan to Glasgow. I gave the time from Dumfries as 105min, so I think we're actually agreeing with each other.
I'd admit my times are probably slightly optimistic, since it's assuming nimble rolling stock and no pathing problems. A low-speed curve at Gretna J makes little difference to timings if all trains stop at Gretna anyway.
In practice, 5min or 10min difference in timing doesn't alter the conclusion that it'd be a much faster journey from Annan and Dumfries to Edinburgh., and from Annan to Glasgow.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Where is it people want to go from Dumfries? Even at 90 minutes, Edinburgh and Glasgow are out of realistic commuting distance.

Also not sure where you are getting 85 minutes to Glasgow though, its 27 minutes from Dumfries to Gretna Jn and 76 minutes from there to Glasgow with a Lockerbie and Motherwell stop on a TPE. That is 103 minutes. Dumfries to Gretna is a mixture of 70-80mph, you would need some impressive speed increases to get down to 85 minutes!

Look at the demographics - a population of around 31,000 with an age profile tending above 40 or so (or above) - commuting market ?

Leave it to the experts.

 

[adrock1976]

Also, the city that is geographically close to Dumfries, Annan, and Gretna Green is Carlisle, which is where both the railway lines and bus services are focused on.

Furthermore, for South West Scotland, the ITV station is Border TV (based in Carlisle), the Independent Local Radio station is CFM (based in Carlisle) which has the slogan "Cumbria and South West Scotland", Royal Mail's Automated Processing Centre in Carlisle covers both the CA (centred around Carlisle) and DG (centred around Dumfries) postcodes that has the cancelling stamp on machinable letters "Cumbria and South West Scotland".

On a final point for this cross border region, there are the Border Reivers and Border Collie dogs, which are said to be the most intelligent and obedient of all the dog breeds.

 

[30907]

Would it not be better to improve the GSW service? I appreciate that doesn't do anything for Dumfries-Edinburgh, but how big is the market?

 

[Clansman]

Decarbonisation, connectivity, and economic growth all in the medium-long term is the way the Scottish Government is strategising with transport, instead of the profit driven approach based on the here and now that's been toxicating the rail debate in the UK for years and preventing progress in the areas crying out for it the most.

So why is cutting Dumfries , Annan, and Gretna down to 90 minutes or less to both Glasgow and Edinburgh, and giving Lockerbie an hourly service to each, such a bad thing in this regard?

The south west of Scotland has been politically and infrastructurally alienated for decades. Connecting them up might not be a profiteering revenue stream for ScotRail or Network Rail anytime soon, but it certainly will transform the social and economic prospects of the region, as well as being politically attractive I would imagine from all major parties in Scotland - particularly the Conservatives going after the rural vote with notably high success in the South West and Borders.

 

[mrgreen]

I've had time to get my virtual crayons out. So here's an image of Greta Junction with the layout of the Oxley Chord superimposed, showing it's a roughly equivalent situation (though Oxley is double and the Gretna north-west curve need only be single track). As far as I can tell, the Oxley Chord is 15mph in both directions and hasn't carried a regular passenger service since it was built 30y ago, though Virgin did propose to send some Euston-Shrewsbury services that way (with reversal at Stafford).

 

[alex17595]

I was wondering wether you could put a small interchange station in some vicinity of the junction. I tried to come up with an idea but it turned into some over the top park and ride station. Which would probably cost much more anyway. However it could replace Gretna Station.

 

[The Planner]

Decarbonisation, connectivity, and economic growth all in the medium-long term is the way the Scottish Government is strategising with transport, instead of the profit driven approach based on the here and now that's been toxicating the rail debate in the UK for years and preventing progress in the areas crying out for it the most.

So why is cutting Dumfries , Annan, and Gretna down to 90 minutes or less to both Glasgow and Edinburgh, and giving Lockerbie an hourly service to each, such a bad thing in this regard?

The south west of Scotland has been politically and infrastructurally alienated for decades. Connecting them up might not be a profiteering revenue stream for ScotRail or Network Rail anytime soon, but it certainly will transform the social and economic prospects of the region, as well as being politically attractive I would imagine from all major parties in Scotland - particularly the Conservatives going after the rural vote with notably high success in the South West and Borders.

I don't think anyone anyone was saying it is a "bad" thing, more of if it is the "right" thing to do. If it becomes politically motivated and someone wants to spend that money, then crack on, but if its there as a bog standard proposal then it doesn't wash its face.

 

[ac6000cw]

As far as I can tell, the Oxley Chord is 15mph in both directions and hasn't carried a regular passenger service since it was built 30y ago,

That's because it was built entirely for freight use - it allowed coal trains to Ironbridge power station from the Stafford direction to get there without having to reverse using a long-gone remnant of the old ex-GWR Wolverhampton Low Level-Oxley route.

 

[mrgreen]

I was wondering wether you could put a small interchange station in some vicinity of the junction. I tried to come up with an idea but it turned into some over the top park and ride station. Which would probably cost much more anyway. However it could replace Gretna Station.

View attachment 92615

Something of that sort may be needed if Nicola get's her way, for customs and immigration checks on the hard border. You'll need longer platforms, though, and more of them!

 

[waverley47]

Dumfries to Edinburgh is a great idea, let's do some sums.

1. The absolute cost of building the chord is minimal compared to the cost of wiring the whole GSW line, but one of those is more important. Wiring the whole route, and redoubling the currently singled sections between Kilmarnock and Barrhead is going to cost a lot, and take a long time, but it should happen first. Once the wiring is done, and better journey times/capacity are realised, the journey time from Dumfries to Glasgow will be cut by somewhere around ten minutes.

That means that overall, the speed increase from building the chord is marginal over the speed increase from line improvements. Suddenly the speed argument disappears.

2. There aren't any existing services to extend as far as Dumfries. If there was a WCML stopper as far as Lockerbie then sure, this would be a good idea, but there isnt. You'd need new paths to send them up over Beattock, and those are at a premium. Sending to Glasgow would be virtually impossible, and sending to Edinburgh would be difficult. There are however more trains that terminate at Kilmarnock, that you could extend with wires as far down the line as you wanted.

3. Sending a train down the WCML to Dumfries serves a grant total of ... All the people in Dumfries and Lockerbie, plus a few surrounding villages. Yes, this part of Scotland needs better connections with the central belt, but there isn't really enough of a big population there to warrant 1tph to Edinburgh, or 2tph to Glasgow via different routes.

Having connections up the GSW as far as Glasgow serves more people, connects more places and provides commuter services for a big area. Lockerbie already has connections 1tp2h to Edinburgh, and look how many people use that service.

4. Does south west Scotland need services to Edinburgh. Yes, obviously, but Lockerbie does well enough and tbh changing at Glasgow isn't the end of the world. There aren't enough people making that return trip to serve a three coach emu per hour in each direction, and it's never going to be able to compete with cars (not even in a perfect world).


To sum up, basically wiring the existing route and providing 2tph from Carlisle via Kilmarnock to Glasgow would have far far more of an impact than this chord. There isn't a service that can be easily extended, there isn't the demand for a new flow and the speed argument falls down when you realise that either driving to Lockerbie or just speeding up the existing line will probably suffice.

10/10 for objective thinking, and this is a far better crayon proposal than many we see on here, but this is a project that would struggle to get off the ground, and struggle to pay for itself even if it already existed.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Lockerbie currently serves as a railhead for Dumfries to Edinburgh traffic which logically means people drive to Lockerbie although there is also a good bus service. Passenger numbers for Lockerbie are dis-proportionate to the size of the town and immediate surrounds..

I recall hearing that when TPE had settled into the Manchester to Scotland service the Lockerbie to Edinburgh flow became third by volume to Manchester to Glasgow and Edinburgh.

By road Dumfries or Lockerbie to Edinburgh takes a good bit longer than to Glasgow as M74 is connected to Edinburgh by a choice of single carriageway roads or a lengthy diversion via the outskirts of Glasgow by Motorway, hence the attractiveness of rail.

Whilst it doubtful anyone would commute from Dumfries to Edinburgh there will be many who require to make business trips - at least pre covid.

 

[drb61]

Also, fully re-doubling the Barrhead - Kilmarnock route (perhaps in conjunction with electrification) would increase capacity - allowing the Carlisle services to run non-stop from Glasgow to Kilmarnock and supplement the local services to Kilmarnock rather than running merely as an extension of them. This would achieve the goal of reducing Glasgow - Dumfries journey times by around 10 minutes.

 

[EastisECML]

Would it be worthwhile to link from the north of Dumfries to the WCML so a service could run from Carlisle to Dumfries and then back onto the WCML?

 

[waverley47]

Would it be worthwhile to link from the north of Dumfries to the WCML so a service could run from Carlisle to Dumfries and then back onto the WCML?

Oof that's got to be a good hour diversion. If you're sending them to Dumfries then just send them all the way up the GSW.

I suspect, if we see HS2 extended all the way to the central belt, it might go a bit closer to Dumfries and over the solway on a viaduct, but it's so far out if the way that it would never be worth diverting to.

 

[Clansman]

Oof that's got to be a good hour diversion. If you're sending them to Dumfries then just send them all the way up the GSW.

I suspect, if we see HS2 extended all the way to the central belt, it might go a bit closer to Dumfries and over the solway on a viaduct, but it's so far out if the way that it would never be worth diverting to.

I think EastisECML was meaning it as a complement to the GSW, rather than a replacement in that by building a chord from Dumfries to the WCML at the shortest point then you'd be able to able to provide meaningful journey times to both Glasgow and Edinburgh whilst also enhancing the Dumfries to Carlisle corridor (and potentially the Lockerbie to Glasgow/Edinburgh depending on where you build the line).

Not sure where you're getting the 1 hour diversion from, unless you're talking about Carlisle to Glasgow/Edinburgh? In which case you wouldn't have end to end passengers so it's not a concern. Providing the line was electrified from the WCML to Dumfries and onwards to Carlisle, you'd be able to replace the existing Dumfries-Carlisle shuttles with electric or bi-mode traction.

When the WCML north of Carlisle is closed I highly doubt it's down to Carlisle to Lockerbie on it's own, surely?

 

[waverley47]

I think EastisECML was meaning it as a complement to the GSW, rather than a replacement in that by building a chord from Dumfries to the WCML at the shortest point then you'd be able to able to provide meaningful journey times to both Glasgow and Edinburgh whilst also enhancing the Dumfries to Carlisle corridor (and potentially the Lockerbie to Glasgow/Edinburgh depending on where you build the line).

Not sure where you're getting the 1 hour diversion from, unless you're talking about Carlisle to Glasgow/Edinburgh?

Would it be worthwhile to link from the north of Dumfries to the WCML so a service could run from Carlisle to Dumfries and then back onto the WCML?

The post quoted implies that services would leave the WCML at Gretna, travel to Dumfries along the GSW and rejoin the WCML along a newly built chord. The diversion would be closer to fifty minutes, but that's still a good 20% extra added onto the Glasgow to London journey times.

In which case you wouldn't have end to end passengers so it's not a concern. Providing the line was electrified from the WCML to Dumfries and onwards to Carlisle, you'd be able to replace the existing Dumfries-Carlisle shuttles with electric or bi-mode traction.

When the WCML north of Carlisle is closed I highly doubt it's down to Carlisle to Lockerbie on it's own, surely?

There isn't the capacity or the demand for an Edinburgh to Carlisle stopping service. There definitley wouldn't be the demand for an hourly Edinburgh to Dumfries service. Add them together and you'd still struggle to fill a 150 most hours of the day.

The Dumfries to Carlisle shuttles are an oddball. Really they should be part of an hourly service from Carlisle to Glasgow round the GSW, but unfortunately this had never really been decided on. The units are probably the main reason this hasn't happened yet, everything else seems to be in place (apart from redoubling a few sections and wiring). Extending these shuttles to Edinburgh, is bonkers, not least for the money spent on a new railway line, but also it would be mad to extend a regular service to Edinburgh when so many economic and social links will be with Glasgow.

Lockerbie to anywhere doesn't fill regular trains. It gets far more passengers than it has a right to because it acts as a car park for most of Dumfries and the borders, but tbh most passengers travelling any distance probably already get the train, so you're not going to find some vast untapped demand by opening a link to Dumfries.

 

[Clansman]

The post quoted implies that services would leave the WCML at Gretna, travel to Dumfries along the GSW and rejoin the WCML along a newly built chord. The diversion would be closer to fifty minutes, but that's still a good 20% extra added onto the Glasgow to London journey times.

There isn't the capacity or the demand for an Edinburgh to Carlisle stopping service. There definitley wouldn't be the demand for an hourly Edinburgh to Dumfries service. Add them together and you'd still struggle to fill a 150 most hours of the day.

The Dumfries to Carlisle shuttles are an oddball. Really they should be part of an hourly service from Carlisle to Glasgow round the GSW, but unfortunately this had never really been decided on. The units are probably the main reason this hasn't happened yet, everything else seems to be in place (apart from redoubling a few sections and wiring). Extending these shuttles to Edinburgh, is bonkers, not least for the money spent on a new railway line, but also it would be mad to extend a regular service to Edinburgh when so many economic and social links will be with Glasgow.

Lockerbie to anywhere doesn't fill regular trains. It gets far more passengers than it has a right to because it acts as a car park for most of Dumfries and the borders, but tbh most passengers travelling any distance probably already get the train, so you're not going to find some vast untapped demand by opening a link to Dumfries.

To be fair I didn't perceive it as being a replacement to the WCML for London services, so the question of diversions shouldn't come into it as any sort of edge for any such proposal to go ahead. I perceived the initial post as suggesting a chord to link Gretna up to the north of the WCML, as well as suggesting one from Dumfries to the WCML as a longer term compliment.

I think it is a bit on the extreme side to say there is *no* demand to Edinburgh from Dumfries.

On your point about Lockerbie, is it fair to use existing rail usage in such a poorly served area of the country as a guage to measure future rail investment success? Especially given there will be a propensity in people's willingness to split there travel between peronal motors and public transport (and which mode of the latter), and how rail demand is impacted by frequencies and journey times in more remote areas.

There is no business case for the line in any short term - it's not something I'm going to imply that there is.

What I would say is that in a day in age where rail in Scotland is leading the way in the UK at changing the shape of how it looks at investment you'll find that increasing connectivity, decarbonisation, and long term economic growth is taking greater priority thanks to political policy makers who aren't one-dimensional enough to focus only through the prism of short term direct profit.

In this respect, investing in quality infrastructural connections to take the south west of Scotland down to the 60-90 minute mark from the central belt with the railways with regular frequencies, is what will encourage growth in the entire region well into the next few decades to come.

It's little wonder more outlandish suggestions like a Dumfries to Stranraer line have been banded about, of which in comparison a northbound chord at Gretna is a drop in the ocean in comparison. Yet it's emblematic of a much wider initiative and evolution of the Scottish transport industry.

I am sure that with the direction Scotland is taking, a new northbound link from the GSW to the WCML will happen within the next couple of decades.

 

[EastisECML]

I think EastisECML was meaning it as a complement to the GSW, rather than a replacement in that by building a chord from Dumfries to the WCML at the shortest point then you'd be able to able to provide meaningful journey times to both Glasgow and Edinburgh whilst also enhancing the Dumfries to Carlisle corridor (and potentially the Lockerbie to Glasgow/Edinburgh depending on where you build the line).

Not sure where you're getting the 1 hour diversion from, unless you're talking about Carlisle to Glasgow/Edinburgh? In which case you wouldn't have end to end passengers so it's not a concern. Providing the line was electrified from the WCML to Dumfries and onwards to Carlisle, you'd be able to replace the existing Dumfries-Carlisle shuttles with electric or bi-mode traction.

When the WCML north of Carlisle is closed I highly doubt it's down to Carlisle to Lockerbie on it's own, surely?

Yeah, it would be for a Carlisle to Edinburgh & Glasgow regional service via Dumfries & Lockerbie.

The post quoted implies that services would leave the WCML at Gretna, travel to Dumfries along the GSW and rejoin the WCML along a newly built chord. The diversion would be closer to fifty minutes, but that's still a good 20% extra added onto the Glasgow to London journey times.

I never said anything about London trains taking this route.

 

[waverley47]

I never said anything about London trains taking this route.

But that's the problem. There wouldn't be enough demand to run this service on its own, as neither Carlisle nor Dumfries are large enough markets. If you run this service, the only people served by this route who weren't served before would be passengers from Edinburgh to Dumfries, which wouldn't be enough to justify this service.

This implies that in order to try and attract passengers, you'd need to run through to somewhere, and while I wasn't actually implying that London trains would use this route, adding an extra hour onto the through journey (of which London trains account for approximately half) would be detrimental to journey times.

Basically, if this line is instead of fast services, you screw over passengers, and if it's on top of, then you don't have enough people to justify the demand.

Carlisle to Dumfries and Dumfries to Edinburgh passengers exist, but you'd attract more passengers to the service by having a half hourly service to Kilmarnock than you ever would with fast trains to Edinburgh.

On your point about Lockerbie, is it fair to use existing rail usage in such a poorly served area of the country as a guage to measure future rail investment success? Especially given there will be a propensity in people's willingness to split there travel between peronal motors and public transport (and which mode of the latter), and how rail demand is impacted by frequencies and journey times in more remote areas.

There is no business case for the line in any short term - it's not something I'm going to imply that there is.

About 150,000 people live in Dumfries and Galloway.

For some of those people, it would be quicker to drive to Ayr and change at Glasgow. Some of those people would be better served by Kilmarnock. We can assume that the majority of these people, who are already better served than they would be by this new service, wouldn't use this new service.

So, the people that would be better served amounts to people that live an hour's drive from Dumfries, which apart from Dumfries itself, is virtually empty. We can assume all of these people today would drive to Edinburgh/Glasgow or drive to Lockerbie, so looking at Lockerbie station gives a rough indicator for demand. (No long distance busses) Yes, demand would go up if there were direct trains once an hour from everywhere to everywhere, but I think you overestimate by how much.

Case study: Lanark is at the end of a small branch, with a chord off the WCML, about 50 minutes by train from Edinburgh if direct services ran. The capacity is there, it would be very very easy to reinstate the south facing chord. You'd be able to serve local stations with better frequencies. Lanark is within commuting range and already attracts large numbers driving from Edinburgh. Lanark serves a large hinterland of faint communities.

Lanark hasn't been built, because demand isn't there. Yes there is a decarbonisation and infrastructure argument that providing trains provides a public good, but it would never pay for itself. Simply, there lost is so long that its unrealistic to expect we'd get there before 2040

In this respect, investing in quality infrastructural connections to take the south west of Scotland down to the 60-90 minute mark from the central belt with the railways with regular frequencies, is what will encourage growth in the entire region well into the next few decades to come.

It's little wonder more outlandish suggestions like a Dumfries to Stranraer line have been banded about, of which in comparison a northbound chord at Gretna is a drop in the ocean in comparison. Yet it's emblematic of a much wider initiative and evolution of the Scottish transport industry.

I am sure that with the direction Scotland is taking, a new northbound link from the GSW to the WCML will happen within the next couple of

The argument for economic growth and development doesn't have legs either. Yes, Dumfries on average is a wealthier part of Scotland but it's mostly farmers tbh. We see this argument in the borders railway as well, "it would unlock land for devedevelopment". This isn't london, nobody wants to build a housing estate in the middle of ettrick forest. Any land that developers scramble for, and public transport helps development of in Scotland is going to be in Edinburgh or Glasgow.

Yes, direct services help economic growth but it's a bit of a drastic way to do that. Rural farming communities don't attract investment, no matter what the political situation. The borders was about commuters into Edinburgh, Dumfries is too far away really for that to hold water. Economic growth in this part of the world is probably going to come from tourism in the next few decades, and a fast train to Edinburgh helps but doesn't make or break it.

Decarbonisation sure, it's a long list of projects to go through and we will eventually see the line wired, but with full wires and a half hourly train as far as Glasgow, you kind of shoot yourself in the foot. Dumfries now has half hourly trains and probably attracted all potential demand, meaning extra trains aren't needed.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

If there was a will - and potential funding sources - to connect Dumfries to the northwards WCML, a curve at Gretna would be perhaps one mile in length, probably having to pass to the north of the villages of Gretna and Springfield which would be 'in the way' of a shorter chord. It would then immediately benefit from the high WCML line speeds.

A 'direct' line from Dumfries to the WCML, probably coming in somewhere to the north of Lockerbie might be circa 15 miles in length, probably at sub 100 mph speeds, yes it could provide a faster Dumfries to Edinburgh journey but the cost would be huge compared to the simpler Gretna option - even if not to a scale of 15:1 but still a substantially larger chunk of taxpayer money.

From time to time there have been noises about potentially re-opening some of the stations between Lockerbie and Carstairs and the theoretical Dumfries to Edinburgh (and possibly Glasgow) service would be the beast to serve these rather than any of the existing WCML services.

I am not holding my breath in anticipation of any of these developing although undoubtedly a useful subject to debate.

 

[mrgreen]

One benefit of a new west-north chord at Gretna is that you could then close the GSW section by section for upgrading (speed improvements, gauge enhancement, electrification); saving a lot of money and working time (possibly enough to pay for the chord). During the closures, you'd run a service from stations south of the closed section to Glasgow via the new Gretna chord.
This wouldn't be a solution for the Kilmarnock-Barrhead section as it's too far Kilmarnock-Glasgow via Gretna, but it would be useful for the GSW south of Kilmarnock.
Once the GSW upgrade was completed, you'd have more idea of how popular Dumfries/Annan via Gretna services were, and could decide whether to just revert to all services running Carlisle-Glasgow via the improved GSW route. Improvements to the 60miles from Kilmarnock-Dumfries could give 10min to 15min time saving: from a 60/70mph railway to an 80/90mph one.
I've ignored freight, as I'm not sure how much use the GSW gets for this now that coal is dead. As far as I remember it it is poorly connected (compared to the WCML) to hubs.

 

[Bald Rick]

One benefit of a new west-north chord at Gretna is that you could then close the GSW section by section for upgrading (speed improvements, gauge enhancement, electrification)

Spending a lot of money on a chord to then spend a lot, lot more money on the line doesn’t sound like....

saving a lot of money

Once the GSW upgrade was completed, you'd have more idea of how popular Dumfries/Annan via Gretna services were

You can have a reasonably good idea by doing passenger demand modelling. That would cost a few tens of thousands of pounds. Far cheaper!

 

[waverley47]

One benefit of a new west-north chord at Gretna is that you could then close the GSW section by section for upgrading (speed improvements, gauge enhancement, electrification); saving a lot of money and working time (possibly enough to pay for the chord). During the closures, you'd run a service from stations south of the closed section to Glasgow via the new Gretna chord.
This wouldn't be a solution for the Kilmarnock-Barrhead section as it's too far Kilmarnock-Glasgow via Gretna, but it would be useful for the GSW south of Kilmarnock.
Once the GSW upgrade was completed, you'd have more idea of how popular Dumfries/Annan via Gretna services were, and could decide whether to just revert to all services running Carlisle-Glasgow via the improved GSW route. Improvements to the 60miles from Kilmarnock-Dumfries could give 10min to 15min time saving: from a 60/70mph railway to an 80/90mph one.
I've ignored freight, as I'm not sure how much use the GSW gets for this now that coal is dead. As far as I remember it it is poorly connected (compared to the WCML) to hubs.

The GSW as actually relatively well engineered. You could probably go through and raise line speeds today with relatively minor works (I think there a couple of minor foot crossings that would need doing, and Dumfries/Kilmarnock both need remodelling at some point, but its built to quite a high quality).

The big one is wiring, which is on the list at some point, and redoubling the remaining inner sections from Barrhead to Kilmarnock which should be happening after wiring reaches Barrhead.

Once wired, it might actually be similar journey times from Dumfries to Glasgow via either route, and one gives far greater opportunities for service increases and connectivity.

Overall, I agree that this would be an okay project to invest in, but it shouldn't be a priority and definitley won't pay for itself

 

[drb61]

The GSW as actually relatively well engineered. You could probably go through and raise line speeds today with relatively minor works (I think there a couple of minor foot crossings that would need doing, and Dumfries/Kilmarnock both need remodelling at some point, but its built to quite a high quality).

The big one is wiring, which is on the list at some point, and redoubling the remaining inner sections from Barrhead to Kilmarnock which should be happening after wiring reaches Barrhead.

Once wired, it might actually be similar journey times from Dumfries to Glasgow via either route, and one gives far greater opportunities for service increases and connectivity.

Overall, I agree that this would be an okay project to invest in, but it shouldn't be a priority and definitley won't pay for itself

Indeed with the entire GSW route wired and double-tracked it might become a viable route again for longer distance services. With modest improvements to the line-speed I'm sure 'expresses' could manage Glasgow - Carlisle in well under 2 hours (I'm sure diverted HSTs have managed to crack the 2 hour barrier before, albeit probably non-stop). I'm thinking along the lines of an open-access operator coming up with a Glasgow - Leeds service calling at Kilmarnock, Dumfries, Annan, Carlisle, Appleby, Settle, Skipton, Keighley and Shipley, using bi-mode stock similar to the Class 800/0s.

 

[The Planner]

Indeed with the entire GSW route wired and double-tracked it might become a viable route again for longer distance services. With modest improvements to the line-speed I'm sure 'expresses' could manage Glasgow - Carlisle in well under 2 hours (I'm sure diverted HSTs have managed to crack the 2 hour barrier before, albeit probably non-stop). I'm thinking along the lines of an open-access operator coming up with a Glasgow - Leeds service calling at Kilmarnock, Dumfries, Annan, Carlisle, Appleby, Settle, Skipton, Keighley and Shipley, using bi-mode stock similar to the Class 800/0s.

That would have been forum Bingo if you had said Nottingham instead of Leeds.

 

[tbtc]

I can see some merits in this, sure, it's head and shoulders above a lot of the "re-opening" threads on here, I remember the logistics of trying to get from the Central Belt down to a game of football at Palmerston (having to cross the border twice, traveling via Carlisle) - I'm sympathetic to people in the south west wanting better services the rest of Scotland - it must be frustrating when there's a fast line to Edinburgh/ Glasgow nearby but the only way of getting a train from Dumfries to Edinburgh means going via Glasgow (or England).

If things were different (and "Britain" was one country), maybe we'd have an electrified line from Carlisle to Dumfries, with half hourly EMUs, and and a limited service running through to Ayrshire (e.g. like the Leeds - Skipton - Settle services). Carlisle isn't as large/significant as Edinburgh/ Glasgow, but it is around half an hour away, so more of a destination (look at the bus services - Carlisle gets a better frequency than Glasgow which gets a better frequency than Edinburgh - that's the priorities for locals). But there doesn't seem much appetite for improving cross-border services, and less-so as time goes by!

Some (re)openings look better because there's a service you can divert/extend (and no new paths are required through bottlenecks). Alloa was helped by the fact that there were Glasgow - Stirling services that could serve Clackmannanshire (in roughly the same time that a Stirling - Dunblane - Stirling service takes). Tweedbank was just the extension of the existing Newcraighall services (no new paths required at Waverley).

But other proposals become more complicated because there's nothing "easy" to extend/divert. That's why I'm not convinced (well, that and the long distance meaning that I doubt many people would make the trip daily). Paths over Beatock already have to be carefully flighted because of the time difference between fast passenger trains and freight paths (whether or not the service actually runs, the paths are in the timetable, and long heavy freight takes a long time to get up and over from the "Clyde" to the "Annan". So you may struggle to find space over Beatock and then into Glasgow/ Edinburgh, given that there are no obvious services to extend (divert one of the two Lanark services per hour? doubt that would go down well, but what else is there, without trying to find another path into central Glasgow/ Edinburgh?)