Far North frustration
In the second part of a special two-part focus on Scotland’s Far North Line, ANDREW MOURANT examines the prospects for Britain’s remotest line, and how services and timings can be improved
In the second of a two-part special focus, RAIL examines the prospects for Scotland’s remote Far North Line.
Everyone with any knowledge of or interest in the Far North Line has a view of how Britain’s remotest railway route could be improved. Some still call for Wick and Thurso to be brought in from the cold, for a rail bridge across Dornoch Firth that could change everything and become the catalyst for making Inverness commutable.
For others, the Dornoch link is a bridge too far - wildly unaffordable. They see the future as more passing loops, better signalling, track replacement and more reliable rolling stock. Such incremental improvements would shave time off the four and a half hours the train takes to reach Wick from Inverness, although far less than the 45 minutes that would be lopped off at a stroke by the Dornoch link.
It is, perhaps, a case of the wish list versus the art of the possible, but amid the debate are two incontrovertible truths.
Firstly, this meandering line crossing Scotland’s great wilderness is woefully unreliable, with end-to-end journey times 30 minutes longer than they were 20 years ago.
Take the week beginning November 13 2017. According to figures from Friends of the Far North Line (FoFNL), just 56% of trains arrived on time - 58.9% northbound, 52.2% southbound - although on closer inspection the figures were less grim than the headline, given that 91% arrived fewer than five minutes late. (However, refreshments trolleys were cancelled on 45% of services.)
The other truth is that passenger numbers have dropped alarmingly. Between 2011 and 2015, they fell 14% to and from Thurso, and 17% for Wick. Things deteriorated further in 2015-16 when, according to the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), Thurso numbers dropped a further 9% and Wick 8%.
“Making matters worse is Inverness-based Highland Council’s withdrawal of half-price rail travel for the over-60s, while concessionary bus travel funded by the Scottish Government remains free for any distance, time or route,” says campaign group Railfuture Scotland.
But might the rot be stopping? Although ORR figures for 2016-17 aren’t yet available,
Hitrans (Highlands Regional Transport Partnership) reports overall “stabilised footfall” on the FNL - up 12% at Alness and 9% at Dingwall, although down 11% at Beauly and 7% at Wick.
Time-wise, the train is nowhere near being able to compete with car travel. The service from Inverness to Thurso can take up to four hours, and to Wick four and a half. Even with 11 stops, the X99 bus takes only three hours from Inverness to Thurso or Wick. A car trip to Thurso takes two and a half.
Last year, North Rail Line Action Group (NORLAG) conducted a survey to determine what might tempt more locals onto the train. Far louder than anything else came the call for quicker services to Inverness.
“If the decline in passenger numbers from Caithness is to be reversed, there should be investment in line and trains to bring about journey time reductions,” said NORLAG convenor Mark Norton.
“The line needs to be useful to the local community, as well as tourists, to ensure its prosperity and long-term survival.”
In recent memory there have been fears for the line’s survival, but these seem to have receded. Now there’s even talk of creating a Sleeper service directly linking the Far North with Edinburgh and Glasgow; of marketing its scenic trains; of having tourism ambassadors by the end of 2018.
David Swanson, a spokesman for Caithness Chamber of Commerce, says tourism “is a big part of what we see as the future”. He’s a fan of the Sleeper idea.
“The possibility of leaving Thurso at 2100 and arriving in Edinburgh at 0600 the next day gives an opportunity to connect with the rest of the world. That would have a real benefit for business travel,” he says.
Locals are more ambivalent, however. NORLAG’s survey found that most travellers in the Thurso/ Wick area would only use a Sleeper occasionally - 38% four times a year or less, 36% ‘seldom or occasionally’, and 15% not at all.
Other plans are being considered to secure the line’s future. These have been worked on by Hitrans and The Far North Line Review Group (created last December and backed by the Scottish Government), and by the end of the year we may get some idea of what they look like.
In terms of tourism, more could be made of the ‘northern sky’ (aurora borealis),
The line needs to be useful to the local community, as well as tourists, to ensure its prosperity and long-term survival. Mark Norton, Convenor, North Rail Line Action Group
Swanson suggests. A proposed national nuclear archive at Wick - storing materials relating to the entire UK industry - might attract scientists and academics, possibly by train. Meanwhile, potential industrial use could be created by the off-shore wind farm being built eight miles off the Caithness Coast.
Swanson also wonders if there’s scope for a combined freight and passenger trains: “There have been some rumblings about this - for instance, having a coach containing pallets of seafood so it could be in London the next day.”
Hitrans Partnership Manager Frank Roach is keen to see a revival of freight. “It’s been a great loss,” he says.
A starting point might be the siding proposed at Kinbrace for timber loading - the so-called Branchliner project. Roach sees scope there to include a passing loop that would break up the 24-mile single-track stretch between Helmsdale and Forsinard into 17-mile and seven-mile sections - “not an ideal division, yet a cost-efficient improvement”.
He adds: “It’s now up to the forestry industry to decide [whether the siding is built]. We’ve identified a rail haulier ready to do it, although the costs aren’t known.”
Hitrans is examining infrastructure options for Network Rail’s next investment Control Period (CP6, 2019-24), and how to improve the timetable. It has been working around last year’s NR route study. Long term, this proposes an increase in services and a ‘more robust’ commuter link between Inverness and Invergordon, although given the current state of track and signalling, neither is immediately possible.
Among NR’s proposed improvements is an extra loop between Inverness and Dingwall, to provide greater flexibility along the line’s busiest stretch. There is also talk of replacing the existing radio-based signalling system - recently upgraded - with a conventional multiple aspect signalling (MAS) arrangement between Inverness and Dingwall.
Meanwhile, a split of the signalling panel into two sections - one from Inverness to Invergordon and covering the line west to Kyle of Lochalsh, the other covering Invergordon to the north - was being trialled as this issue of
RAIL went to press. And at the top end of the line are plans for a chord at Georgemas - a new connection that would allow direct services to Thurso without the need to reverse at Georgemas station.
The price for all this? Anything from £ 30 million to £ 75m, and nothing is set in stone. At this stage, it’s just an ‘aspiration’.
Railfuture Scotland wants to see the Far North Line’s jointed track replaced with welded track, track doubled as far as Muir of Ord, the RETB (Radio Electronic Token Block) signalling to be “ripped out” and replace with LED colour aspect lights, and line speed to be raised to 90mph “as much as possible”. It says: “This (along with a Dornoch link) would cut the journey times to 2hrs 20-30mins from Inverness to Thurso.”
Such a direct Dornoch Firth rail crossing would give east Sutherland’s towns (Dornoch, Golspie, Brora and Helmsdale) a fast commuter service into Inverness “which cannot be provided by the circuitous hour-long inland detour via Lairg”.
More than a decade has passed since rail consultant Corus identified “suppressed demand for rail travel on the line”. It pointed out that use of the Inverness to Kyle of Lochalsh line, serving a small population, had grown substantially, whereas “the Far North Line, with its much larger population, has seen little growth”. It said improved rail transport “would help investment potential in Caithness”.
Yet the argument for a Dornoch link received short shrift from Transport Scotland, which “considered… though not recommended for implementation… the significant costs required to develop the proposal… would have outweighed any benefits.”
But those costs never actually came to light. “Dornoch was rejected at the sift stage when it became clear the time saving was unlikely to provide a cost-effective solution, so no detailed analysis of the cost was carried out,” according to a TS spokesman.
Some campaigners also feel a golden opportunity was wasted by not incorporating a rail link into Dornoch’s road bridge, which opened in 1991.
But Railfuture hasn’t given up. It believes a short cut at Dornoch would achieve “a meaningful Inverness arrival before 0900, rather than the current useless arrival time
after 1030. The absence of funding shouldn’t be used as an excuse for abandoning the scheme.”
The reality now is that such a link lies beyond any horizon. Hitrans’ Roach explains: “When we studied it in 2007, it was priced at £120m. For 19 kilometres [12 miles] of new railway that was a huge cost. The benefits of spending that money are very small. The question is: can you do something for less money that improves train times?”
The way forward seems to be other improvements here and there, although even collectively these will never deliver people from Wick/Thurso to Inverness by 0900. There is, it seems, little political drive to that end.
Few people have a better feel for the Far North Line landscape than consultant Tony Glazebrook. Last year he produced a ‘warts and all’ view for Friends of the Far North Line, having persuaded ScotRail to give him a cab’s eye view of the entire route.
He pulled few punches: “Trains overstressed and unreliable… critical infrastructure
There’s no clarity on who has the authority to make things happen. Tony Glazebrook, Consultant
improvements long overdue… lineside vegetation out of control… practical improvements identified at local and regional level, but progression has been continually thwarted.”
Besides tourists, whose numbers fluctuate (dwindling in winter), Caithness and Sutherland rail users include Orkney residents who use the sea ferry from Stromness to Scrabster, and who board the train at Thurso. The line’s other key market is between Inverness (“a thriving city whose commuting needs should not be underestimated”) and Tain (where “frequency and reliability are absolutely paramount”).
Yet Glazebrook found that “consistently appalling delay problems” meant many missed connections at Inverness, with stops en route skipped in an attempt to ‘recover’ the timetable.
Why are there so many delays? Locals will be familiar with the inherent problems, visitors less so.
Take the long gaps between passing loops, which cause “grossly disproportionate delays when just one train runs only a few minutes late”.
Also, along the Muir of Ord loop, 12½ miles from the Inverness end of the doubletrack section, hydro-pneumatic-operated
The possibility of leaving Thurso at 2100 and arriving in Edinburgh at 0600 the next day gives an opportunity to connect with the rest of the world. That would have a real benefit for business travel. David Swanson, Caithness Chamber of Commerce
points restricted entry speed to 15mph on Glazebrook’s journey.
“Moreover, the train has to crawl along the entire loop at that speed,” he observed. “Invergordon is another very long passing loop, again with low speed throughout.”
He was left wondering if track limitations or an ‘overly simple’ Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS) application were to blame.
“Some other rural lines, such as Cambrian Coast, have a more comprehensive TPWS design that allows for higher speeds on long loops,” he said. If another loop between Inverness and Dingwall does get the nod, work could be carried out during Network Rail’s CP6 (April 2019-March 2024).
Then there’s the ‘random nature’ of the Far North Line’s eight request stops. “All trains have to drastically reduce speed in case someone wishes to board, regardless of need. While those alighting pre-warn the train conductor, there’s no such information available regarding boarders,” Glazebrook found.
One issue being addressed is the antiquated signalling system. When Glazebrook took his cab ride, in October 2016, an Invernessbased RETB signaller dealt with all trains at every crossing on the Far North and Kyle of Lochalsh lines. Glazebrook observed that this caused queueing delays “for practically every train at every RETB token exchange”, and frequently caused late-running services.
RETB has evolved from the physical token system for controlling traffic on single lines. When arriving at a token exchange point, drivers now radio their position and request an electronic token for the next line section ahead. Once issued, the driver operates a button in the cab to receive the radio-transmitted token.
There are 18 token exchange points on the FNL route, plus six on the Kyle line. Glazebrook forecast last year that splitting the control desk at Invergordon control would “drastically reduce radio queueing problems and double the present line possession”, and noted that digital radio had “vastly improved” reception and reduced token exchange problems.
All things considered, Glazebrook got off lightly on his trip from Thurso. He arrived in Inverness just seven minutes late (coincidentally, as did RAIL when taking the same trip almost exactly a year later, RAIL 843). Many have suffered far worse hold-ups.
It remains to be seen what will be done to address the line’s endemic problems… and when. The hard-pressed Class 158 diesel multiple units endure long shifts (350hp engines where 400hp engines are available elsewhere). They frequently overheat - their radiators are able only to cope with an ambient temperature of 23°C. Their power-operated plug doors are ‘excessively prone to failure’, especially in bad weather. And often trains collide with animals (especially deer), and have to be taken out of service.
What are the options? Glazebrook pointed towards new rolling stock - the Vivarail D-train, developed by converting ex-London Underground District Line trains from electric to diesel traction, but retaining their “exceptionally reliable’ electric traction motors. Manufactured as two-, three- or four-car sets,
‘an economic way to procure these could be to add orders onto the production runs for other operators”.
Since Glazebrook’s journey some things have improved, such as problematic level crossings. For example, a temporary speed restriction at Chapleton Farm (near Muir of Ord), in place for more than six years, has been removed. A new EBI gate provides information on the proximity of approaching trains through a simple red and green light system, and the line speed has been restored to 75mph.
And at Delny (near Invergordon), a crossing has been converted from an automatic open crossing to an automatic half-barrier, locally monitored, and the 35mph speed limit restored to 55mph. A bridge replacement is still being explored with the estate. (Delny was one of the two remaining automatic open crossings in Scotland - the last, on the Kyle Line in Dingwall, is to be upgraded at Easter 2018.) Other crossing improvements are in the pipeline.
Glazebrook found that one of the Far North Line’s glaring deficiencies was the absence of any means to warn drivers of people wanting to board at request stops. That forces trains to slow down regardless.
He suggested two remedies. One is that would-be passengers use the existing ‘press to call’ telephone several minutes before the train is due, so that the driver could be notified by radio in good time - with new signs put up to explain the drill.
Alternatively, an advanced warning light could be displayed at braking distance either side of the station, indicating the need to stop. The request stop itself would have signage, a ‘request’ plunger, and an indicator that the request had been accepted.
Travelling the line can be hit or miss for someone stuck out in the wilds, as Glazebrook found. The timetable allows only one actual stop at a request stop per section between passing loops. Yet the longest single-line sections - between Helmsdale and Forsinard, and Forsinard and Georgemas - each include two request halts.
Meanwhile, he believes that more could be done to link the Far North’s biggest towns, Thurso and Wick, by releasing a train to shuttle between the two. The existing Class 158 allocation at Inverness depot “just allows the possibility”. This idea has also been proposed by Hitrans, although Glazebrook says it would need two more maintenance fitters to help guard against any disruption caused by train failures in remote locations elsewhere.
As much as anything, he concluded, the Far North Line’s problems stem from management failings.
“There’s no clarity on who has the authority to make things happen,” he said. “Despite frequent discussions, there’s very little to show for them. If anything, performance is declining still further. This needs urgent attention.
“A workable timetable alternative is urgently needed. It would arrest further expenditure wasted on dealing with the consequences of daily timetable failure. User needs should be reviewed regularly.
“Everyone at local level has a good feel for what could be achieved, were actions identified to be followed through. They are frustrated at inactivity, the crumbling edge of ‘quality’, and the avoidable waste of resource daily witnessed.
“One person should be charged with leading the drive for route improvements. That, together with the perceived invisibility of blockers and decision-makers, means that paralysis is rife, and regression has overwhelmed progression.”