Proposal to rebuild the line to Ballater

[snakeeyes]

"It's been proposed that Scotland's Transport Secretary considers reinstating the Deeside railway line between Aberdeen and Ballater.

Fergus Mutch, the SNP's candidate for Aberdeenshire West in May's Holyrood election, has suggested the plan.


He'd like to see trains returned to the 70km line for the first time in almost 55 years.

Commenting on the plans, Fergus Mutch said:
“Rebuilding the Deeside Railway would be a complete game changer for Aberdeenshire.

"Overnight you would create the most popular tourist line in the country, with immense benefits for local residents and businesses alike.

"A move from road to rail is imperative if we're serious about Scotland's commitment to tackling climate change."

Could we see trains return to the Deeside line?

It's been proposed that Scotland's Transport Secretary considers reinstating...

planetradio.co.uk

 

[Bald Rick]

Overnight? I think he misunderstands how long it takes to build railway lines!

Especially when much of it is a well used cycle route, and some more is under the A93.

 

[Trackbedjolly]

Can't think of any of it 'under the A93' except the tunnel in Aboyne. The AWPR A90 goes under it in a cutting with no underbridge provided.
The station sites at Torphins, Lumphanan and Banchory are where it is built over by housing. Great idea to relieve traffic on the North Deeside Road in Aberdeen too-there it is more of a walker's route with some cycling and horse riders. Trackbed was double as far as Park so shared single track railway and walkway/cyleway should be relatively straightforward most of the way to outskirts of Banchory; thereafter big problems with 'house moving'. Tourist potential is mainly from Aboyne to Ballater. Certainly doable with the right political and cultural backing and plenty of cash....Real obstacle is that folk in that area are now wedded and welded to their cars-they would use the trains given the right incentive but would be unlikely to actively campaign for them to come back if it meant people's houses were going to be knocked down.

 

[Energy]

Overnight? I think he misunderstands how long it takes to build railway lines!

Especially when much of it is a well used cycle route, and some more is under the A93.

People forget when they are going by at 60mph just how big a railway is...

 

[Bald Rick]

Can't think of any of it 'under the A93' except the tunnel in Aboyne.

Isn’t there a section east of Aboyne by the Golf Course where the road is more or less encroaching on the old line? And the A93 crosses the line 5 times IIRC. But yes, the development in the way would be the big issue. Well, the second biggest issue after the £1bn+ bill. I make that about £50k per resident near the line outside the Aberdeen Western bypass.

 

[Bigman]

I saw this line on the box last year. Rob Bell walking abandoned railways. The Royal Family used to use it to get to Balmoral I believe.

 

[Trackbedjolly]

Isn’t there a section east of Aboyne by the Golf Course where the road is more or less encroaching on the old line? And the A93 crosses the line 5 times IIRC. But yes, the development in the way would be the big issue. Well, the second biggest issue after the £1bn+ bill. I make that about £50k per resident near the line outside the Aberdeen Western bypass.

Yes that's right on the approach to Aboyne from the east-an embankment was demolished. The road to Torphins B974 has taken over a section just north of the cutting close to Craigour; again this is a straightforward bridging and digging out the infilled cutting. No idea what it would cost probably a few hundred million at most not so close to a Billion unless every house to be demolished is valued at £10M. What has outside the AWPR got to do with it? Most of the users will be inside that road so why exclude them?! Unfortunately tourist traffic has no value when BCR is calculated so it would probably look bad overall.
Anyway this a speculative idea-looks very promising. Maybe the royals would allow the line to get to Braemar this time?

 

[Bald Rick]

No idea what it would cost probably a few hundred million at most not so close to a Billion unless every house to be demolished is valued at £10M.

A basic new railway costs £20m-£30m a mile minimum, and given the property that would be required for this one I suggest this would be rather more. (For comparison, Bicester to Bletchley is 19 miles and is £760m for the construction cost, ie £40m a mile. And that’s on a railway that still had track down and few encroachments. And it doesn’t include the cost of getting to the start of construction.

What has outside the AWPR got to do with it?

In that it is surely to benefit those people and the businesses there?

Unfortunately tourist traffic has no value when BCR is calculated so it would probably look bad overall.

All ‘traffic’ (passenger demand, and effect on other transport networks) is taken into account in a properly worked out BCR.

Anyway this a speculative idea-looks very promising.

It is very speculative, and I’m afraid doesn’t look promising.

 

[Highlandspring]

The AWPR took 6 years from approval to construction starting and the legal action to try and halt it went right up to the UK Supreme Court. There is absolutely zero chance of the Ballater line ever being reopened with that sort of hardcore NIMBYism in action in Deeside.

 

[Wynd]

A basic new railway costs £20m-£30m a mile minimum, and given the property that would be required for this one I suggest this would be rather more. (For comparison, Bicester to Bletchley is 19 miles and is £760m for the construction cost, ie £40m a mile. And that’s on a railway that still had track down and few encroachments. And it doesn’t include the cost of getting to the start of construction.




In that it is surely to benefit those people and the businesses there?




All ‘traffic’ (passenger demand, and effect on other transport networks) is taken into account in a properly worked out BCR.



It is very speculative, and I’m afraid doesn’t look promising.

Your views are rather speculative wouldn't you say?

Do you live here? What makes you say this is not promising?

There is every chance that this could happen, potentially in conjunction with the F&B.

These two lines are long overdue for reopening.

The benefits are massive and the cost, £1B for this line alone, is based on what? That's a large sum, may you please substantiate it?

The AWPR took 6 years from approval to construction starting and the legal action to try and halt it went right up to the UK Supreme Court. There is absolutely zero chance of the Ballater line ever being reopened with that sort of hardcore NIMBYism in action in Deeside.

Have faith, many in the North East want to see this happen.

 

[Energy]

Your views are rather speculative wouldn't you say?

Do you live here? What makes you say this is not promising?

There is every chance that this could happen, potentially in conjunction with the F&B.

These two lines are long overdue for reopening.

The benefits are massive and the cost, £1B for this line alone, is based on what? That's a large sum, may you please substantiate it?

Bald Rick has a lot of experience on the railways, I would trust his approximations. There is still no money following covid so even if the £1bn may be worth it, it will be hard to find.

 

[Bald Rick]

Your views are rather speculative wouldn't you say?

Do you live here? What makes you say this is not promising?

There is every chance that this could happen, potentially in conjunction with the F&B.

These two lines are long overdue for reopening.

The benefits are massive and the cost, £1B for this line alone, is based on what? That's a large sum, may you please substantiate it?



Have faith, many in the North East want to see this happen.

No I don’t live in Ballater, nor along the Dee. Not many people do. I do, however, visit regularly. (For clarity, I’m not a minor royal )

The reason it is not promising is that the benefits simply can not be ‘massive’. Unless I’m missing something - where can I find a simple summary of what the benefits might be? Preferably prepared by a transport planning professional, and with some quantification at high level.

For the cost - as I said in my previous post, new railways cost a minimum of £20-£30m a mile. Some cost much more. This one is 43 (and a quarter) miles. I’m afraid it won’t be at the cheap end of the scale either, as much of the old route has been lost to development. Getting the line out of Aberdeen will be tricky enough, let alone finding a way through (or near) Peterculter, Drumoak, Banchory, Torphins, Lumphanan or Aboyne.


I do think it’s quite funny that my views are considered speculative, when responding to a speculative suggestion, proposed by a candidate for an MSP seat, mentioned on the Speculative ideas thread.

 

[Wynd]

Speculative is one thing. Blanket statements devoid fo evidence, that's quite another. I do live here and have traversed the line often. I do not see robust evidence for your assertions. Not many people do? In comparison to where? Do I detect urban prejudice?

Much? Fact is the vast majority of the line is intact. Getting out of Aberdeen is fairly straightforwards, its only garden extensions that are the "development" in that area.

I assure you the benefits to the few folk who live here would be transformative, but if you aren't local and from the area I appreciate you may not have a full grasp on the range of issues that stand to be effected by this lines reopening.

Unless you are counting the active travel corridor as development, then your argument is not standing up to scrutiny as the corridor already exists and is largely intact.

The Deeside Way would have to be retained in one shape or form upon reopening the railway.

Further, your suggesting it follows the exact course as before. West of Banchory and East of Abyne is open to "correction".

You said yourself rebuilding old can be just as costly as building new.

Bald Rick has a lot of experience on the railways, I would trust his approximations. There is still no money following covid so even if the £1bn may be worth it, it will be hard to find.

For clarity, I question not his credibility nor expertise, merely his arguments.

 

[Bald Rick]

Speculative is one thing. Blanket statements devoid fo evidence, that's quite another. I do live here and have traversed the line often. I do not see robust evidence for your assertions. Not many people do? In comparison to where? Do I detect urban prejudice?

Much? Fact is the vast majority of the line is intact. Getting out of Aberdeen is fairly straightforwards, its only garden extensions that are the "development" in that area.

I assure you the benefits to the few folk who live here would be transformative, but if you aren't local and from the area I appreciate you may not have a full grasp on the range of issues that stand to be effected by this lines reopening.

Unless you are counting the active travel corridor as development, then your argument is not standing up to scrutiny as the corridor already exists and is largely intact.

The Deeside Way would have to be retained in one shape or form upon reopening the railway.

Further, your suggesting it follows the exact course as before. West of Banchory and East of Abyne is open to "correction".

You said yourself rebuilding old can be just as costly as building new.


For clarity, I question not his credibility nor expertise, merely his arguments.

Ok, so two questions that every rail project has to answer before it starts:

1) what problem is this trying to solve?
2) what possible solutions are there to solve it?

Then we can start to work out whether it will be worth spending a billion pounds (or more) of taxpayers’ money on, and whether the good folk of Deeside would rather that sort of money be spent on something else.

 

[Wynd]

You have made your views very clear. That cost valuation is also wide of the mark, as demonstrated above.

You are aware it's not just about Deeside, but whole swathes of the shire that stand to benefit? Or perhaps you are not?

If you are unaware of the various problems this project would solve, I would gently suggest you rethink you clear opposition to it. I can't say I'm surprised given you do not live here that your own understanding is as it is.

 

[Bald Rick]

That cost valuation is also wide of the mark, as demonstrated above

Demonstrated where, exactly?

My job is building railways, so without being too fat-headed, I have a reasonable idea about costs. What alternative costs do you propose?

If you are unaware of the various problems this project would solve, I would gently suggest you rethink you clear opposition to it.

I am unaware, but then I strongly suspect that so is almost everyone else reading this. That is why I asked the question, because if it’s not explained then no one is going to spend money on it. The proposer of such a scheme will get nowhere without answering what problems it solves. Every single ‘Restoring Your Railway’ proposal has done so (even if some of them are rather optimistic in the benefits claimed).

So what are they? Just a simple summary with a few numbers is enough. I can’t find anything on line, which suggests that no one actually knows, and/or no one is actually proposing this. I’m afraid I, alomg with most people, will oppose spending lots of taxpayers’ money on building something that no one has defined what it is intended to do.

 

[Wynd]

A billion for 43 miles of largely intact trackbed is questionable. Have you walked or cycled the whole line? If not, please do and come back to us.
This engineer just cannot buy in to that figure.

The appraisal stage is still in its infancy, but those figures are in the post and are being worked up as we speak. This proposal is moving forwards.

Let's be careful about who thinks what is a sensible use of taxpayer money in the modern era shall we? Unless you'd like me to wave a stick at boats without planes, new London transits to Brum, or messy divorces?

 

[johnnychips]

@Bald Rick The proposer is mentioned in the first post:

Fergus Mutch, the SNP's candidate for Aberdeenshire West in May's Holyrood election, has suggested the plan.


He'd like to see trains returned to the 70km line for the first time in almost 55 years.

Commenting on the plans, Fergus Mutch said:
“Rebuilding the Deeside Railway would be a complete game changer for Aberdeenshire.

"Overnight you would create the most popular tourist line in the country, with immense benefits for local residents and businesses alike.

"A move from road to rail is imperative if we're serious about Scotland's commitment to tackling climate change

I have emboldened the relevant text.

 

[Bald Rick]

A billion for 43 miles of largely intact trackbed is questionable. Have you walked or cycled the whole line? If not, please do and come back to us.
This engineer just cannot buy in to that figure.

Well you’ve got me there; I confess that I haven’t walked all 43 miles. Just a couple of them.

I have however built railways.

Whilst you might consider £20-£30m a mile questionable, I’ll ask you a question. I have a a few good friends currently building the Bicester - Bletchley stage of East West Rail. Between them, they have built railways all over the world, including Scotland. That part of East West Rail is costing £760m for 19 miles, and that does not include the costs of all the development, design, land purchase and work to secure the planning consents. It is also a route where the trackbed is almost entirely intact - certainly more intact than the Deeside line. The question is, what would make the Deeside line so different?

@Bald Rick The proposer is mentioned in the first post:

No further questions, your honour.

 

[Wynd]

Is East West Rail really comperable to Deeside?

That is going to be major line, through densely populated land, with significant traffic flows. The Deeside line is a branch line with far less traffic.

Are you quoting £760m for track, signals, civils on 19 miles of double track?

No further questions because a politician is proposing it?

 

[Bald Rick]

Is East West Rail really comperable to Deeside?

Yes, it’s a new railway.

That is going to be major line, through densely populated land, with significant traffic flows.

Have you walked / cycled all around the area East West Rail is in? If not, have a look at Google maps. It is not densely populated at all, and almost entirely through fields. No gardens to get through, no houses to demolish, no major roads built on the route, etc. Although the line will re connect two large regional cities, and a big (and growing) town in between, and enable the construction of tens of thousands of homes.

The Deeside line is a branch line with far less traffic.

Bicester to Bletchley will have three trains an hour. Far less traffic doesn’t sound like a good case for building a new railway.

Are you quoting £760m for track, signals, civils on 19 miles of double track?

The company building it is contracted to build it for that.

 

[Tobbes]

Yes, it’s a new railway.



Have you walked / cycled all around the area East West Rail is in? If not, have a look at Google maps. It is not densely populated at all, and almost entirely through fields. No gardens to get through, no houses to demolish, no major roads built on the route, etc. Although the line will re connect two large regional cities, and a big (and growing) town in between, and enable the construction of tens of thousands of homes.



Bicester to Bletchley will have three trains an hour. Far less traffic doesn’t sound like a good case for building a new railway.




The company building it is contracted to build it for that.

I'd love to see the route reopened through to Ballater, but I can't see it being less than £1bn+ for all the reasons @Bald Rick outlines.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Would a new (Ballater) route necessarily have to be built to full main line standards?

 

[tbtc]

Is East West Rail really comperable to Deeside?

That is going to be major line, through densely populated land, with significant traffic flows. The Deeside line is a branch line with far less traffic

Would a new (Ballater) route necessarily have to be built to full main line standards?

I don't know what savings you could make, other than building the line with a slower speed alignment (which wouldn't make as big a difference as you may think)

From what's been discussed on here before, the cost of a mile of branch line and the cost of a mile of HS2 aren't as different as people may assume - a line might be built on the basis that it'll be used pretty lightly but you still need to build it to modern standards, which can make a heavy rail re-opening look very expensive compared to a guided busway etc

We talk about doing things cheaper but nobody seems to have reduced the constructions costs to a level where schemes become cheap enough to get below the tens of millions of pounds per mile, which seems to be what things currently cost

 

[Tobbes]

We talk about doing things cheaper but nobody seems to have reduced the constructions costs to a level where schemes become cheap enough to get below the tens of millions of pounds per mile, which seems to be what things currently cost

This is a fair challenge. Would it be signficantly cheaper to build to W6 guage than W12 with electrification clearances and to 50mph rather than 75-100, and with allowed LXings instead of insisting on grade separation? I presume that it must be slightly cheaper (and in the case of LXings, more dangerous) but not that much cheaper (as well as being bl**dy expensive to change if you subsequently changed your mind).

 

[Bald Rick]

This is a fair challenge. Would it be signficantly cheaper to build to W6 guage than W12 with electrification clearances and to 50mph rather than 75-100, and with allowed LXings instead of insisting on grade separation? I presume that it must be slightly cheaper (and in the case of LXings, more dangerous) but not that much cheaper (as well as being bl**dy expensive to change if you subsequently changed your mind).

The cost difference between W6 and W12 on new lines is essentially zero. For a line such as this, W12 and electrification would be irrelevant, so any existing overbridges would be left as they are. The difference between 50mph vs 100mph is also essentially zero, on a given alignment (which this is). Level crossings gets interesting. On an effectively new route, ie where there isn’t a functioning railway in place now, any level crossings would almost certainly have to be full barriers. That means signals and interlocking in places you may well not need signals and interlocking. Easily £5m each. A new bridge in open country would be about double that; clearly more if you are in an urban environment. But then the risks are greater in an urban environment. There is a detailed risk assessment calculation you would have to do, but I suspect it would be difficult to demonstrate that a Level Crossing has the risk as low as is reasonably practical.

 

[Tobbes]

The cost difference between W6 and W12 on new lines is essentially zero. For a line such as this, W12 and electrification would be irrelevant, so any existing overbridges would be left as they are. The difference between 50mph vs 100mph is also essentially zero, on a given alignment (which this is). Level crossings gets interesting. On an effectively new route, ie where there isn’t a functioning railway in place now, any level crossings would almost certainly have to be full barriers. That means signals and interlocking in places you may well not need signals and interlocking. Easily £5m each. A new bridge in open country would be about double that; clearly more if you are in an urban environment. But then the risks are greater in an urban environment. There is a detailed risk assessment calculation you would have to do, but I suspect it would be difficult to demonstrate that a Level Crossing has the risk as low as is reasonably practical.

Very interesting, as ever. So, £40m/mile +/- it is!

 

[Bald Rick]

Very interesting, as ever. So, £40m/mile +/- it is!

Well the starting point is £20m-£30m for a simple railway. It can get a lot more expensive, clearly. The Met Line extension was over £100m/mile when it got cancelled.

 

[Wynd]

The Borders railway cost what, £300m for 35 miles of line, so may someone explain to me, in detail please, how it can be that numbers of £40m a mile are being bandied about just a few years after that projects completion?

How can we be talking about a 400% inflation in cost in a few short years?

 

[Tobbes]

The Borders railway cost what, £300m for 35 miles of line, so may someone explain to me, in detail please, how it can be that numbers of £40m a mile are being bandied about just a few years after that projects completion?

How can we be talking about a 400% inflation in cost in a few short years?

At least £400m, and it would appear that that depends on how you count it. If @Bald Rick had a figure of £20-30m/mile, then that's a safe starting post as he's forgotten more about this that I'll ever know.