Meanwhile, north of the border:

[whole diary]

[Red Squirrel]

To lift our spirits amid all the doom and gloom of soggy signalling and collapsing embankments, here's an update of progress on the Borders Railway.

[grahame]

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/265240-fares-and-timetable-for-the-borders-railway-have-been-released/?

Fares and the timetable for the new Borders Railway have been released.

Two trains an hour will run in each direction at peak times, and Sundays will see an hourly service.

The first train will leave Tweedbank at 5.20am, getting into Edinburgh at 6.15am. The last service will leave Waverley at 11.55pm and get into Tweedbank at 12.52am.

Looking at the new route's catchment ...
* Tweedbank - "Large Village"
* Galasheils - 12500
* Stow - Village
* Gorebridge - 6000
* Newtongrange - Village
* Eskbank - station for Dalkeith - 11600
* Shawfair - new town but (?) on hold
it's good to see the sort of service (hourly / every 30 mins in peak) and length of day for this sort of catchment - adds up to around 35,000, which compares to 63,000 on the TransWilts south of Chippenham (Melksham + Trowbridge + Westbury).    So scope for better services around here if the current services do well 

[Red Squirrel]

The price tag seems to have risen by ^50 million to ^350 million - i.e. ^11.7 million/mile, or ^1000 per person in the catchment by grahame's figures.

Perhaps they've included the cost of the rolling stock?

[grahame]

in the catchment

I'm reluctant to use the term "catchment" ... rather I compared populations within the named area of the stations at the "country" ends of both lines.   I don't know how far people will travel by bus or car to Tweedbank - "catchment" may well include Selkirk, St Boswells, Kelso and Hawick. Just as TransWilts catchment includes Warminster, Frome and (by token of fares) Bradford-on-Avon.  Then you to admit that the borders railway is the only line for many places served, whereas the "only served by" population in Wiltshire is Melksham. But then the Wiltshire line has a web of connections at both ends bringing all sorts of extra and through traffic to a double ended service, whereas the borders railway calls at stations (and ends at a station) without connecting trains to elsewhere.  All of which makes comparison (and I know I started it!) fraught with danger.

[Red Squirrel]

The 'only served by' factor is an interesting one. I was rather taken aback when a rail-minded friend (who lives in Peterborough) spoke of a trip to Northampton in which he had problems finding anywhere to park near the station there. Given that he lives near Peterborough Station, what on earth would possess him to DRIVE? Peterborough and Northampton both have very good rail services... The problem is, of course, that the only practical (and I am using the term loosely) rail route from Peterborougn to Northampton involves a trip on the Victoria Line, and takes two-and-a-half hours or more.

Peterborough to Northampton are about 40 miles apart, and the area between them is lightly populated. How would you put a value on connecting these 400,000 people?

[Red Squirrel]

According to the latest podcast from the Borders Railway project (Episode 7 Part 2, click here) the construction cost is ^295 million. I can't see how the additional ^55 million (see my earlier post) can be the cost of the trains, as in this podcast they tell us that the trains are likely to be cascaded class 158 stock - so does anyone have any idea what this additional sum is for?

[stuving]

There's a report from over a year ago that suggests there are at least two differences of that order that can be in or out depending on which definition of "cost" is being used:
Borders railway completion date put back as cost of project soars