Would it be feasible to complete the double-tracking by May 24?In the attached article is a plan showing Barrhead by May 23 and EK by May 24 - https://www.railengineer.co.uk/decarbonising-scotlands-railway/
Would it be feasible to complete the double-tracking by May 24?In the attached article is a plan showing Barrhead by May 23 and EK by May 24 - https://www.railengineer.co.uk/decarbonising-scotlands-railway/
Really? So far as I can tell, that surpasses all the relevant standards...The pedestrian bridge at Cartcraigs Road will need some work
View attachment 98816
It is a stone arch road bridge that became a pedestrian only bridge when the road was diverted.
I thought I’d read about that one being removed completely? The one that I’m really interested in is where the line goes under the Cathcart Circle.The pedestrian bridge at Cartcraigs Road will need some work
View attachment 98816
It is a stone arch road bridge that became a pedestrian only bridge when the road was diverted.
I haven't seen a Planning Application to close the Cartcraigs Road bridge. I don't know if an application is required?I thought I’d read about that one being removed completely? The one that I’m really interested in is where the line goes under the Cathcart Circle.
I also wondered what the situation was with these bridges regarding current permissbile clearance but, having seen some on the Shotts line, think they should be OK.I haven't seen a Planning Application to close the Cartcraigs Road bridge. I don't know if an application is required?
Here is a photo of where the line goes under the Cathcart Circle:
View attachment 98838
Compare it to where the line passes under the B768 Minard Road (photo taken from platform 2 at Crossmyloof station):
View attachment 98839
I leave it to readers to judge for themselves whether or not there are engineering challenges with these bridges.
Depending upon what’s above them, couldn’t they be ‘jacked and packed’. They look suitable candidates in the photos.I haven't seen a Planning Application to close the Cartcraigs Road bridge. I don't know if an application is required?
Here is a photo of where the line goes under the Cathcart Circle:
View attachment 98838
Compare it to where the line passes under the B768 Minard Road (photo taken from platform 2 at Crossmyloof station):
View attachment 98839
I leave it to readers to judge for themselves whether or not there are engineering challenges with these bridges.
Re Cartcraigs Road: there is indeed an application to demolish without replacement. https://publicaccess.glasgow.gov.uk...s.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=QTG6D7EXLH000I haven't seen a Planning Application to close the Cartcraigs Road bridge. I don't know if an application is required?
Here is a photo of where the line goes under the Cathcart Circle:
View attachment 98838
Compare it to where the line passes under the B768 Minard Road (photo taken from platform 2 at Crossmyloof station):
View attachment 98839
I leave it to readers to judge for themselves whether or not there are engineering challenges with these bridges.
The Supporting Statement mentions that Busby Junction is to be remodelled and implies that in the absence of the remodelling there would be no need to demolish the bridge.Re Cartcraigs Road: there is indeed an application to demolish without replacement. https://publicaccess.glasgow.gov.uk...s.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=QTG6D7EXLH000
I have to admit that I didn’t fully digest the statement, but wasn’t Busby Junction just remodelled a few years ago?The Supporting Statement mentions that Busby Junction is to be remodelled and implies that in the absence of the remodelling there would be no need to demolish the bridge.
@MadMac thank you for the link to this application. This masonry arch bridge is end-of-life and demolition would be necessary anyway. The only decision was whether to replace it with a new compliant structure or to close the pedestrian footpath. The footpath from the bridge down to Kennishead Road is overgrown. When I walked along it I had to shuffle past a burnt out motorcycle. It leads to a footpath at the side of Kennishead Road that ends a few hundred metres further south. There are no houses or business premises along this part of Kennishead Road.Re Cartcraigs Road: there is indeed an application to demolish without replacement.
Yes, Busby Junction was remodelled about 4 years ago. My reading of the statement was that the author was unaware that the remodelling was completed but that the track level was raised at that time which also makes the current structure non-compliant for electrification. Here is a photo taken from the soon to be demolished Cartcraigs Road bridge:I have to admit that I didn’t fully digest the statement, but wasn’t Busby Junction just remodelled a few years ago?
Yes, this is a modern structure which would have been built to the standards current at the time of construction. The height of the deck is constrained by road junctions at either end of the bridge with approaches that were raised when the bridge was reconstructed.I wouldn’t have expected Minard Road to be an issue, as it was rebuilt in the relatively recent past.
There is a pedestrian overbridge attached to the northern side of this bridge and so at least Network Rail must modify this structure for the electrification.The other one carries the Cathcart Circle and is right next to Shawlands Station, so a whole other set of challenges there. Having passed under it many times, I’ve wondered about just how they would deal with electrification.
Perhaps a simpler (and cheaper !) solution to the low overbridge issue might be dead sections under these structures (as long as train do not require to stop immediately adjacent to them), as adopted on the Paisley Canal line ?
I'd been thinking that myself - or possibly the insulating paint that NR recently first used at Cardiff?
Network Rail save £40m thanks to revolutionary electric resistant paint | Rail Technology Magazine
In a revolutionary world-first, electric resistant paint combined with voltage-controlled clearance (VCC) has helped make a Victowww.railtechnologymagazine.com
However I would suggest not using insulated sections as on the Paisley Canal line. Barrhead is on a strategic route of potential UK-scale significance, a diversionary route for the WCML. One day (I hope not too distant) it will be wired through to Carlisle. Let's not introduce the potential for a gapped electric train to block it.
It is the policy of the Scottish Government to do it within the next 14 years, according to the map in the article linked in #360.I sincerely hope electrification is extended to Kilmarnock (and round to Barassie) but I struggle to see a case for the Kilmarnock/Gretna section, given current traffic levels.
I assumed they were, the underpass has been closed off with a sign for a couple of weeks at least now.@MadMac thank you for the link to this application. This masonry arch bridge is end-of-life and demolition would be necessary anyway. The only decision was whether to replace it with a new compliant structure or to close the pedestrian footpath. The footpath from the bridge down to Kennishead Road is overgrown. When I walked along it I had to shuffle past a burnt out motorcycle. It leads to a footpath at the side of Kennishead Road that ends a few hundred metres further south. There are no houses or business premises along this part of Kennishead Road.
Yes, Busby Junction was remodelled about 4 years ago. My reading of the statement was that the author was unaware that the remodelling was completed but that the track level was raised at that time which also makes the current structure non-compliant for electrification. Here is a photo taken from the soon to be demolished Cartcraigs Road bridge:
View attachment 98873
(Photo taken before the piling work started)
Yes, this is a modern structure which would have been built to the standards current at the time of construction. The height of the deck is constrained by road junctions at either end of the bridge with approaches that were raised when the bridge was reconstructed.
There is a pedestrian overbridge attached to the northern side of this bridge and so at least Network Rail must modify this structure for the electrification.
View attachment 98874View attachment 98875
There’s been talk of closing the line for up to a year to give contractors a “clear run” at it.Would it be feasible to complete the double-tracking by May 24?
They could reintroduce termination at Busby to facilitate this.There’s been talk of closing the line for up to a year to give contractors a “clear run” at it.
This is actually covered in a Network Rail presentation on Paisley Canal electrification (I’ve posted it in the electrification resources thread at the top of the page). The problem is the arched bridges of which there are several along the route carrying main roads. The pantograph would foul the lower part of the arch and some are located right next to stations such as the north end of Thornliebank and both ends of Clarkston.Perhaps a simpler (and cheaper !) solution to the low overbridge issue might be dead sections under these structures (as long as train do not require to stop immediately adjacent to them), as adopted on the Paisley Canal line ?
I believe that’s the case. These bridges must be about 150 years old so time for new ones! The road alignment is more suited to horses and carts than double deck buses and HGVs, particularly the one carrying Clarkston Road.Thanks for the clarification Southsider. I seem to recall reading somewhere that raising overbridges is one of the most costly parts of OLE schemes, but if it has to be done it has to be done.
Just goes to show how well these bridges were built in a time before double deck buses and HGVs were even invented.I believe that’s the case. These bridges must be about 150 years old so time for new ones! The road alignment is more suited to horses and carts than double deck buses and HGVs, particularly the one carrying Clarkston Road.
Perhaps a contribution towards the cost of the new bridges should be transferred from the maintenance budget into the electrification budget based on the remaining life left in the old bridges rather than the project having to bear the entire cost. It would certainly bring down the cost of the electrification project which should make electrification more acceptable to funders.I believe that’s the case. These bridges must be about 150 years old so time for new ones! The road alignment is more suited to horses and carts than double deck buses and HGVs, particularly the one carrying Clarkston Road.
I could name a few places where bridges have been rebuilt for electrification clearance without including a much-needed improvement to the road width or alignment, presumably because the local authority had no cash to contribute.And maybe the council should also contribute as from the description of the current road configuration, the new bridge is likely to result in a noticeable improvement to the highway too.
And ShottsWhereas as part of EGIP in Scotland several road bridges were replaced with wider structures.
That’s what I thought - they demolished the 1970s era relay room in the process. I actually worked in there…..Yes, Busby Junction was remodelled about 4 years ago. My reading of the statement was that the author was unaware that the remodelling was completed but that the track level was raised at that time which also makes the current structure non-compliant for electrification.