• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

East Kilbride/Barrhead electrification updates

Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

gingertom

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2017
Messages
1,251
Location
Kilsyth
Apologies, I’d thought they were separate projects.
I was under the impression that Shotts, Dunblane & Alloa were in the original EGIP scope but were descoped as a result of the Jacobs review (the one where 6tph required grade separation at Greenhills and the Almond chord etc, going for a rebuild of Queen Street to accommodate 8 car trains instead). They were then the first in the rolling programme of electrification.
 

Altnabreac

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2013
Messages
2,414
Location
Salt & Vinegar
I was under the impression that Shotts, Dunblane & Alloa were in the original EGIP scope but were descoped as a result of the Jacobs review (the one where 6tph required grade separation at Greenhills and the Almond chord etc, going for a rebuild of Queen Street to accommodate 8 car trains instead). They were then the first in the rolling programme of electrification.
Dunblane and Alloa were but Shotts was never part of EGIP and was always a separate project.
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,208
Thanks for the correction. It just seemed like one continuous project, especially as there was an overlap in time.
 

59CosG95

Established Member
Joined
18 Aug 2013
Messages
6,477
Location
Between Peterborough & Bedlington
Thanks for the correction. It just seemed like one continuous project, especially as there was an overlap in time.
There were different project teams too. Shotts was Carillion Powerlines (CPL) which became SPL after Carillion got liquidated.
EGIP & SDA meanwhile were a JV of Costain (OLE) & Morgan Sindall (civils).
 

92002

Member
Joined
27 Mar 2014
Messages
1,124
Location
Clydebank
There were different project teams too. Shotts was Carillion Powerlines (CPL) which became SPL after Carillion got liquidated.
EGIP & SDA meanwhile were a JV of Costain (OLE) & Morgan Sindall (civils).
The EGIP schemes were the ABC Alliance of Alstom (Signals), Babcock (OHL) and Costain (Civils).

Shotts was an alliance of Carillion and SPL. When Carillion went burst SPL finished the project.
 
Joined
14 Mar 2021
Messages
190
Location
Glasgow
That’s what I thought - they demolished the 1970s era relay room in the process. I actually worked in there…..
The Glasgow South Suburban Renewals (GSSR) project would have done that - from memory I think that this project was completed before Busby Junction was remodelled.

There’s been talk of closing the line for up to a year to give contractors a “clear run” at it.
Network Rail ran a survey - the posters are still on display at Barrhead Station:
"Very soon we'll start work here to electrify the route. This major investment will provide more capacity, with longer, quieter and greener trains.

We're seeking your views on how we can minimise the disruption to you as we deliver the benefits of this programme to you as quickly as possible.

It's important that we deliver for our passengers and the communities that we serve, and we look forward to hearing your views".

Link: Scotrail Enhancements

I don't know if Network Rail will publish the results of their survey.

Barrhead survey poster.jpg
 

d9009alycidon

Member
Joined
22 Jun 2011
Messages
838
Location
Eaglesham
I would imagine that full extended possession would be the preferred option, this would allow the track could be lowered through Clarkston as I would imagine that the B767 Stamperland Crescent overbridge would be a nightmare to rebuild due to the restricted position of this bridge relative to nearby buildings. Any disruption to road traffic on this bridge would also be very unwelcome as it is a very congested road and a major bus route into the city
 

sannox

Member
Joined
1 Mar 2016
Messages
384
I would imagine that full extended possession would be the preferred option, this would allow the track could be lowered through Clarkston as I would imagine that the B767 Stamperland Crescent overbridge would be a nightmare to rebuild due to the restricted position of this bridge relative to nearby buildings. Any disruption to road traffic on this bridge would also be very unwelcome as it is a very congested road and a major bus route into the city

Yeah that won't be easy. I suspect it would be a case of building a modern replacement to the east as it seems more open there. The main difficulty would be the level of the roundabout at Clarkston Toll and the height over the railway and getting all that to tie up sensibly. That said that bridge has been needing replacing for years- large vehicles struggle with the twisty nature.

I'd say long term possessions make sense, particularly if you can use other rail lines and a bit of ingenuity.
 

Southsider

Member
Joined
10 Aug 2015
Messages
750
Yeah that won't be easy. I suspect it would be a case of building a modern replacement to the east as it seems more open there. The main difficulty would be the level of the roundabout at Clarkston Toll and the height over the railway and getting all that to tie up sensibly. That said that bridge has been needing replacing for years- large vehicles struggle with the twisty nature.

I'd say long term possessions make sense, particularly if you can use other rail lines and a bit of ingenuity.
There looks to be room towards the camera to achieve a better alignment, removing the dog leg. Height may not be such a big issue as something without arches could offer more clearance and a reasonable gradient towards Clarkston Toll to the left of the picture.3DFC5D80-2E3D-43CA-B46F-93471A4187CA.jpeg
 
Last edited:

GLC

Member
Joined
21 Nov 2018
Messages
298
Busby bridge too could too with being altered as well to let normal sized double deckers through for the 6, although space is very tight around that area
 

92002

Member
Joined
27 Mar 2014
Messages
1,124
Location
Clydebank
Busby bridge too could too with being altered as well to let normal sized double deckers through for the 6, although space is very tight around that area
Since that a road underbridge it would not come under the electrification project. It would need to be financed by the local council. Although a good time to carry out any work would be when the line is closed for works.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MadMac

Member
Joined
13 Jun 2008
Messages
955
Location
Moorpark, CA
Busby bridge too could too with being altered as well to let normal sized double deckers through for the 6, although space is very tight around that area
Since that a road underbridge it would not come under the electrification project. It would need to be financed by the local council. Although a good time to carry out any work would be when the line is closed for works.
Number of years ago, first decker (correct type) of the day through the bridge scraped the roof. It quickly emerged that the road had been resurfaced over the weekend…..
 
Last edited:
Joined
14 Mar 2021
Messages
190
Location
Glasgow
Meanwhile, the piling team has been busy pouring reinforced concrete piles at various locations along the route but particularly between the Nithsdale Road overbridge and the Cathcart Circle overbridge.
A pair of them are adjacent to the much loved Strathbungo pedestrian overbridge (down Barrhead):

Reinforced concrete pile at the Strathbungo footbridge down Barrhead.jpg

Up Barrhead:
Reinforced concrete pile at the Strathbungo footbridge up Barrhead.jpg

Location adjacent to the footbridge:
Piles adjacent to the Strathbungo pedestrian bridge.jpg
 

sannox

Member
Joined
1 Mar 2016
Messages
384
There is talk of replacing that bridge. I think it's completely unnecessary - the bridge at Nitsdale Road is barely 100m away. If they were keen to provide a pedestrian bridge it should be located further south where BR took out a bridge in the 80/90s that was more useful as halfway between the road bridges.
 
Joined
14 Mar 2021
Messages
190
Location
Glasgow
There is talk of replacing that bridge. I think it's completely unnecessary - the bridge at Nitsdale Road is barely 100m away. If they were keen to provide a pedestrian bridge it should be located further south where BR took out a bridge in the 80/90s that was more useful as halfway between the road bridges.
More than talk. Post #347 has a link to the public consultation regarding the design of the replacement bridge.
To be fair on the public campaign, the existing bridge is well used (my subjective observations).
I agree with you that potentially a replacement bridge located at the site of the bridge removed by BR (opposite Marywood Square) would be more useful. Network Rail hasn't proposed this site as an option for the location of the replacement bridge.

The old entrance on Darnley Road:
Darnley Road old pedestrian bridge entrance.jpg
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,595
Meanwhile, the piling team has been busy pouring reinforced concrete piles at various locations along the route but particularly between the Nithsdale Road overbridge and the Cathcart Circle overbridge.
A pair of them are adjacent to the much loved Strathbungo pedestrian overbridge (down Barrhead):

View attachment 99097

Up Barrhead:
View attachment 99098

Location adjacent to the footbridge:
View attachment 99099
Thought they were my photos, I was there on Wednesday too.

Interesting to see the progress.
 
Joined
14 Mar 2021
Messages
190
Location
Glasgow
I wouldn’t have expected Minard Road to be an issue, as it was rebuilt in the relatively recent past.

I have to correct myself, the Minard Road junction with Titwood Road is actually on the eastern side of the overbridge and so this is the Titwood Road overbridge.
It was renewed in 2006:
Overbridge 222/14 Titwood Road, Re-opened on 31st July 2006 by Tom Harris MP for Glasgow South. A joint project delivered by Network Rail and Glasgow City Council. Constructed by Edmund Nuttall Limited and designed by White Young Green.

Titwood Road Overbridge plaque.jpg


I assumed they were, the underpass has been closed off with a sign for a couple of weeks at least now.
The footbridge has been closed intermittently. I walked over it two days ago. It used to be like walking into a doocot but now it is quiet. It appears that the pest controller visited the site. It could do with a clean down with a power washer to remove the pigeon excrement.

Meanwhile, the piling continues.
Crossmyloof station, platform 1 (down Barrhead):
Pile at Crossmyloof station.jpg
 
Last edited:

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,208
Plans to relocate Hairmyres station have moved closer as Scotland’s Railway, South Lanarkshire Council and Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT) have agreed to fund and develop an expanded transport interchange.

As part of the East Kilbride Enhancements Project, Hairmyres station is moving to a new site off Redwood Avenue – approximately 600-metres to the west of its existing location.

Work is set to begin in 2024 on the new 18-acre site and the facility, with it being completed and operational by the end of the summer.


The funding is now in place for the relocation of Hairmyres Station. It's moving 600m west. Completion late 2024.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Maude673

Member
Joined
10 Apr 2018
Messages
28
Sorry if this has already been discussed but what stock will be used. Is the option for a further 10 cl 385s being exercised? Or just shuffled diagrams with existing stock?
 

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,487
Sorry if this has already been discussed but what stock will be used. Is the option for a further 10 cl 385s being exercised? Or just shuffled diagrams with existing stock?
This is an infrastructure thread, so we'd be going off topic. It's certainly been discussed elsewhere quite recently, though I can't immediately find the thread(s).
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,208
I've seen no announcement from Scotrail / Transport Scotland. With Hairmyres not due for completion until late 2024, I would think that decision isn't urgent.
 
Joined
14 Mar 2021
Messages
190
Location
Glasgow
On 9th June, Network Rail submitted an application for Conservation Area Consent: 21/01900/CON Complete demolition of overbridge 222/023 at Kennishead Path.
- Incorrect bridge number OB222/032 in the Conservation Area Consent
- Page 3 of the Letter mislabels a photograph of the bridge as "OB23 Cartcraigs Road".

See Glasgow City Council planning simple search

Bridge 222/023 is an old road bridge that was replaced by the adjacent modern bridge 222/023A at the junction of Kennishead Road and Kennishead Place. It is used for a public footpath Kennishead Path:Bridge 222 023 Kennishead Path.jpg

Adjacent Bridge 222/023A has a footpath that could be used for Kennishead Path:
Bridge 222 023A Kennishead Place.jpg

The target date for a decision is 6th August 2021.

This is an infrastructure thread, so we'd be going off topic. It's certainly been discussed elsewhere quite recently, though I can't immediately find the thread(s).
For speculation about the rolling stock see Scotrail former SPT Area Rolling Stock Replacement Ideas
 
Last edited:

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,595
Noticed more of the masts up between Busby Junction and Crossmyloof. Hairmyres not completed until late 2024, so is rough idea when the project may be complete.
 
Joined
14 Mar 2021
Messages
190
Location
Glasgow
Noticed more of the masts up between Busby Junction and Crossmyloof. Hairmyres not completed until late 2024, so is rough idea when the project may be complete.
Yes, on Sunday the team had a daylight possession and they erected more of the masts.

Masts south from Busby Junction:
Masts south of Busby Junction 2021-07-11.jpg

Masts in the distance north of Kennishead Station (includes two portals):
Masts north of Kennishead 2021-07-13.jpg

Masts on the embankment above Pollok Country Park:
Mast erected above Pollok Country Park 2021-07-11.jpg
 

d9009alycidon

Member
Joined
22 Jun 2011
Messages
838
Location
Eaglesham
The existing Hairmyers station has reasonably good bus interchange facilities, currently no buses venture anywhere near the proposed new site, I wonder if SPT will ask for the buses to reroute.
 

PaulMc7

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2019
Messages
4,029
The existing Hairmyers station has reasonably good bus interchange facilities, currently no buses venture anywhere near the proposed new site, I wonder if SPT will ask for the buses to reroute.
First's 21 terminates at the roundabout at the end of Greenhills Road across from Redwood Drive and the 201 terminates at the current train station but I'd imagine both will serve the new facilities. There's also 4 current SPT services that may also serve it.

The M1 goes to Hairmyres and stops at the hospital, same with the 205, the 395 serves the hospital before going along towards Eaglesham and the 399 is a rail link for Hairmyres anyway so that'll be the most likely.
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,674
Location
Leeds
Noticed more of the masts up between Busby Junction and Crossmyloof. Hairmyres not completed until late 2024, so is rough idea when the project may be complete.
The article linked in #360 said Barrhead EMU operations May 2023, East Kilbride EMU operations May 2024, but there could have been slippage since then.
 

clc

Established Member
Joined
31 Oct 2011
Messages
1,301
The article linked in #360 said Barrhead EMU operations May 2023, East Kilbride EMU operations May 2024, but there could have been slippage since then.
Perhaps EMU operation will start in May 24 but the new station won’t open until later in the year?
 

Top