The Chairman has just jacked it in and gone for early retirement. Should they just retire the whole project?
I think they should.
Yes. Spend the money on the appalling state of the roads instead.
I liked the Evening News' front cover today 😀
[url= http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/ ][img] http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/CustomPages/GetImage.aspx?ImageID=74188 [/img][/url]
It wouldn't be missed, that's for sure. Really would be a sublime celebration of incompetence if they called the whole thing off - would they leave the tracks in Princes St as a warning to others?
Nope. To jack it in now that they have spent all this money would be insane. Too late to stop. Let's at least get a ride on a tram out of it.
Thing is, the trams don't even go anywhere I'd want a ride on a tram to! I'm not sure what problem they're solving...
How much track have they actually laid? I can only think of a couple of hundred yards on princes street.
Thing has got to be less that a quarter of the way through. A thought which is absolutely terrifying.
IA - Allegedly - I think the problem that they were trying to solve was that one or more of the members of the council's construction firms didn't have enough work on... Just like when they decided to try and bankrupt all the shops on George Street.
They could have dualled the A9 north of perth for all the money already wasted. I like the idea of the tram but its not been delivered big waste of cash.
The yard In leith which is guarded 24hrs a day by a sleeping security man Is full of sleepers and rails ready to lay . This has got to be the worst waste of money ever. Scrap the whole idea reinstall the great bus service we used to have and build a rail spur from North gyle to the airport . Job done .
Dont get me started on the length of time the museum refurb and Commy pool is taking. 🙁
What is a thread like this without Hitler telling like it is.
Probably not safe for work due to understandable strong language.
Blimey - sounds even worse than the Cambridge Guided Bus!!
I thought they'd pulled all the hundreds of spoofs of that Hitler video that were going round, nice to see it back!
🙂
Too late now. So much work has been done they might as well finish
The project always was lunacy. Half a billion pounds (and counting) to lay just one tram line. I don't see why they couldn't have extended one of the train lines (e.g. the one that goes to Edinburgh Park already) to the airport.
The SNP tried to kill the project when they took over the Scottish Government but all the other parties outvoted them to keep it going.
They have nearly finished the Gogar depot & they are well underway with digging the tunnel under the A8. The tracks have been laid at Stenhouse and also by the new brdige at Edinburgh Park. I don't know about further east but I'd say the route from town to the airport is pretty well advanced.
They're past the point of no return finacially i think.
Completely unrequired as Edinburgh has a great bus service.
It's shocking that hundreds of millions will end up spent on this while the roads are a mess, cycle routes are underfunded and people regulary die on the non-dualed A9.
The wole thing is stupid. It neither interfaces properly with teh airport or teh main line trains. There is a ruddy train line on the airport estate anyway
Stupid half baked idea. Should be using the south suburban loop as well - the rails for that are still there
Should they just retire the whole project?
Yep.
Not to mention the dire need to start construction of the Forth Replacement Crossing if anyone in Fife wants to carry on commuting into Edinburgh without having to go via Kincardine...
Agree it was a joke to start with, i'd love to see the numbers they used to justify the trams as I can't see it reducing traffic much at all!
What I always found massively annoying about Edinburgh is the fact that the railway runs right past the airport, literally 1/4 mile from the end of the runway. Is there a station there? Is there hell. No, coming from the north you travel right past the airport into Edinburgh then get a bus or taxi back out to the airport.
Total lunacy.
thats the bit that is totally barking crazy legs - and the trams are not going to interface properly either at teh airport IIRC. Tehy certainly do not interface properly with the main line trains.
[url= http://archive.transformscotland.org.uk/campaigns/reopenthesouthsub/index.html ]Reopen the South Sub![/url] campaign page. Seems to have stalled somewhat judging by the last update.
It doesn't seem that transformative an idea IMHO, not that I'm an expert in how people move around Edinburgh. But it would cost peanuts as the line is currently in use by both freight and passenger services (IIRC one intercity goes right round it for some reason) so you're only talking about building some stations - glorified bus shelters really. Seems like an easy experiment to carry out.
Of course there's a reason the line closed in the first place.
Here is the closest thing I could find to the original business case, from 2007. Pretty impenetrable I reckon ! And lots of out of date assumptions.
They're meant to be working on an updated business case. Apparently this update shows that the trams are going to be profitable from year 1. Guffaw.
They should cancel it now.
I think the whole tram idea was just the Edinburgh Council transport loonies way of punishing the city for knocking back their ill thought out congestion charging plan.
are there any tram schemes that actually worked well both logistically and financially?
Manchester? It replaced a train service and interfaced with the rail stations properly
TJ the rails for the south sub line are still there as its still used as a freight line and for access to Craigentinny for empty passenger sets. But your right these derelict stations could be used again.
The new waverley line to gala could have been built and up and running for a fraction of the tramline cost also.
Sorry Garry didn't see your post.
TJ is right, Manchester trams aren't bad actually.
The current roadworks as they extend the system eastwards out to Oldham are incredibly annoying though.
But the trams fit in well with both the existing train and bus networks.
Any ideas what their plans are for hanging power cables in Princes Street?
Is'nt the power source coming from underneath on the new system .?
Manchester? It replaced a train service and interfaced with the rail stations properly
Aye, but do you remember the crap advertising campaign in the run-in to the referendum on funding the expansion.
Tag line: "What would you say to trams in to the heart of Rochdale?"
Most people in Manchester: "We don't live in Rochdale, or have any reason to go there"
Result: 'No' vote.
Andy
swtanfree -its overhead cables - on posts on princess street
stanfree - no. dont think so.
I'm surprised that the German company Bilfinger Berger is getting so much stick, zee Germans are normally spot on with building stuff, it's the UK companies that are usually pants.
Also with the parliament building being 3 years late and went from an estimate of £40mil to over £400mil final cost, it would seem Edinburgh stumbles from one embarrasement to another.
I think that the problems are based on the fact that there are a load of different companies doing small bits of the project rather than one company doing all of it like they do on every other tram project on the planet. One firm runs late so others have huge problems and the financial implications of that get passed on to the good people of edinburgh.
Oh ok then, I'll put up the case for the tram.
The trams are primarily required as in future years there wouldn't be enough bus capacity on Princes St to cope with the predicted increase in bus passengers. It can come to a standstill at the moment so fast forward 20 years and the buses would all be full with no room for any more.
The trams will provide a faster, more reliable journey time when compared to buses and are generally loved by residents of any city which has installed them. The tram will interface properly with the airport, anyone that says otherwise is a taxi driver/EEN reporter.
For sure some things have gone wrong (it's a huge project involving major works across an entire city - it's possible we could have expected this!) but hey, lets hang on in there and put up with a bit of pain to get a great modern public transport system for the future.
Surrounded by Zulus and TJ your right Im getting confused with the North Haymarket tunnel which Is in the process of electrification , Its to be powered from underneath as opposed to overheads. It amazes me that rail projects can be donw so quick , the haymarket tunnel will have been wired In just over 15 weeks (only working weekends) which Is a pretty massive achievement.
financial implications of that get passed on to the good people of edinburgh.
I think you mean the English........... :p
The Sheffield one was great despite at first sight linking together only 2 rough estates and the shopping center! Would have been better to re-build the link to Crooks (and thus the uni and student houses) but can't have everything.
Nice to see the News taking their traditionally unbiased position there 
They still like to pretend there's no traffic problems in central edinburgh. Head in the sand, no congestion charges, no trams... They were against the guided busway too til that turned out to be an enormous success then just quietly shut up. Until it turned out that it'd be closed for the trams, when it suddenly became an essential service that we'd be mad to lose.
Obviously the trams were badly planned and now badly executed but I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. In particular I'd like to beat the owner of every shop on the tramline that's complained about distruption with a big stick, the same shops that have complained for years about traffic and losing business to out of town sites, quick to demand compensation will they be paying a share of their increased profits once the lines are open? Will they ****.
I've watched Edinburgh city centre dying off and choking up in my lifetime, maybe this isn't the perfect fix but all I've really seen is opposition, not alternatives.
TINAS - Most of the people in Edinburgh are English.
Ah the joys of looking back in time.
Sheffield has been through exactly this. All these arguments, praises, criticisms, conflicts, doom-mongering and general annoyance.
Now it is a profitable, popular form of transport around the city.
Sheffield is a good example of where it has worked.
Look up the historical reporting of opposition of TJ Killis cleaners. The tram was going to 'ruin' him. He's now making a mint as the tram runs right past his shop.
"and put up with a bit of pain to get a great modern public transport system for the future."
But it won't be - it's only one route, not a system. And we're running short of electricity apparently.
The guided buses lane was absolute madness - a driver could competently conduct a bus all the way across the city but suddenly needed guided assistance over a mile or so of virtually straight route? Bo....ks.
Ah the joys of looking back in time.Sheffield has been through exactly this. All these arguments, praises, criticisms, conflicts, doom-mongering and general annoyance.
Now it is a profitable, popular form of transport around the city.
Sheffield is a good example of where it has worked.
Look up the historical reporting of opposition of TJ Killis cleaners. The tram was going to 'ruin' him. He's now making a mint as the tram runs right past his shop.
I remember the Sheffield Supertram opening day. I think our school went on the inaugural Middlewood to Castle Square journey. I also remember the horror that was Sheffield during the tramworks. The roadworks in Edinburgh don't seem to be half as bad. Seems to be a hell of a lot of time and money just to link the airport with Leith, via Princes Street though.
what is most irritating is the fact we had trams in edinburgh when i was a boy. talk about progress
IMO the major drawback of the Sheffield tram is that the majority of it is on road much so doesn't offer that much benefit over buses, and when one breaks down you can't just push them off the road, granted that doesn't happen very often.
And even worse - what will the Taxi drivers rant about now ? It used to be so simple, just say "trams" and no more making polite conversation just sleep through the journey.
This Edinburgh fiasco was badly commissioned (a new separate arms length company led by someone with no experience) the plan was really flawed (avoids the main train station, demolishes a dedicated busway, has a dubious route....) and a badly setup contract, lots of independent subcontractors etc....
I would love if it had been thought out and done properly. But from a project management and budget point of view it is so funny to actually be sad.
Should they get rid of it after spending so much - probably not at this stage imo. It'll probably be a really short / rubbish setup to start with but hopefully when they come to extend the line to it's original length (and the originally promised 2 lines!) hopefully they'll have learnt their lesson and not let anyone from the council anywhere near contracts, budgets, planning and responsibility.
You'd never catch Glasgow City Council wasting money like that....
The guided buses lane was absolute madness - a driver could competently conduct a bus all the way across the city but suddenly needed guided assistance over a mile or so of virtually straight route? Bo....ks.
I think the idea here was too avoid the queues of traffic to reduce bus journey times with little impact on regular traffic, not to help the drivers steer!
OT but, I use to work for RMC (Ready Mix Concrete) and one of their first contracts was filling in the gaps in the roads left when they lifted trams lines around London.
http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/history2/45/RMC-Group-p-l-c.html
The tram will interface properly with the airport, anyone that says otherwise is a taxi driver/EEN reporter.
Really? My understanding was that it doesn't go right to the terminal. Is that wrong?
It certainly does not interface3 with the railways properly
Yep, short walk on covered walkway from terminal at airport, so no further than most other airport rail links.
There is to be an interchange at Haymarket that will tie it into the rail network - not perfect but I guess having Waverley in a big hole below street level made linking into that too difficult/ expensive.
Trams are so early 90's. Most other cities have moved on through their own version of the hulme arch and are now on millenium wheels. We should just introduce civic ideas quotas - once there are five you've got to go away and come up with a new idea.
What is the latest civic must have / folly?
So actually then neither is a proper interface. The tram should go directly to the terminal as it does on many other airports. Not to do so is stupid. Same with the trains. So you want to get the tram from leith to get a train to london. An interchange at haymarket where you still have the to go down a significant height is useless. How do you get from heymarket to waverly to get your london train - get on a tain and get off again?
Its half baked.
TJ, don't the trams run along Princes Street? not far from Waverley surely! The lines, or tunnels directly into the station do not have capacity for any more services as i understand it, they restrict train movements as it is.
If it gets you from the airport into town without having that stupid really long and uncomfortable bus journey then even with a covered walkway I'm definitely in.
Although will it be any better than busses? IIRC the entire point about the Manchester ones, and why they were an innovative idea was that they were tram/train hybrids. So fast(ish) train speeds on the miles of existing but unused old rail lines all over the place but going onto roads in the town centre so you could get right to the shops without needing any new station capacity (Manchester having closed its main railway station in the 60s).
Surely something similar would be a pre-requisite for modern trams, otherwise it's just an expensive bus lane, isn't it?
There is to be an interchange at Haymarket that will tie it into the rail network - not perfect but I guess having Waverley in a big hole below street level made linking into that too difficult/ expensive.
as I understand it the main focus of rail development in edinburgh over the next decade is driven by the need to cater for the new high speed trains to daaan saaarf and will be focussed at haymarket as there are technical issues with them coming into waverley - can't electrify waverley because of the headroom in the tunnel to the south or the platforms too short rings a bell.
RS - think of people with impaired mobilty? It should be right into Waverly station and right into the airport terminal. An ionterface at heymarket is no good if you want a train from waverly
MOlgrips - manchester had two main train stations when I lived there in the 80s and the railway the tram goes on was not disused. The trains were stopped and replaced by the tram
TJ, while it would nice to accommodate everyone, Waverley is a huge headache to get any more services into so just not going to happen, 99.9% of people will be fine accessing waverley from princess street like they have to just now. The trams should be about moving bodies into and out of the city centre during rush hour, and this is its biggest fail in my eyes as it doesn't offer a big enough advantage over the bus.
I meant the 'main' one as in Manchester Central. It had various rail lines pointing towards it I think although not going all the way.
Trams are a brilliant idea if you're living in 1890.
I actually applied for a job with those well regarded german contractors as Edinburgh Tram design manager about 18 months ago. In hindsight I was bloody lucky that I didn't get it.
It does go to the Airport and it does stop outside Waverly and through Haymarket.
Just as an aside - I was working for Network Rail when the Scottish Parliament cancelled the Edinburgh Airport Rail link - which we had spent a shitload of time and effort developing. It would have provided a link from Dundee, Stirling, Glasgow etc directly to the Airport and then on to Edinburgh. It was cancelled for no good reason other than they were already comitted to building the Tram.
The 'Sheffield' tram service may be a good one, but it's a little daft to name it the 'sheffield supertram'. That name suggests one can use the tram to get around sheffield.
don't get me wrong, it does a fantastic job of shuttling people around from hillsborough, to the meadowhall shopping centre. Just in case the good people of hillsborough get bored of the hillsborough shopping centre...
perhaps it should be called 'the happy hillsborough shopping day out to meadowhall tram service'.
Sheffield grinds to a halt about 3 times a week when a tram breaks down on west street*. i dread to think what would happen if these things were allowed to use busier roads...
not to mention the nightmare of rail-renewal every 20 years...
(*quite why the tram uses west street i've no idea. it's a very long detour to go from Cathedral to kelham island - which is about a 5min walk, or 15mins on the tram)
On the new this morning they were talking about a 100 or 200 million overspend like it was no big deal 😯
Lets take a conservative £1bn for the final cost of the trams. What would that have paid for that might actually be of use to someone?
[i]What would that have paid for that might actually be of use to someone? [/i]
Could have kept the Vulcan flying for YEARS! 😉
(see [url= http://www.singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/save-the-vulcan ] this thread[/url] from a couple of days ago if you don't get the reference...)
The guided buses lane was absolute madness - a driver could competently conduct a bus all the way across the city but suddenly needed guided assistance over a mile or so of virtually straight route? Bo....ks.
"I think the idea here was to avoid the queues of traffic to reduce bus journey times with little impact on regular traffic, not to help the drivers steer! "
Of course it was so why not just let the drivers use their skills on a separate tarmac lane on the line chosen instead of building a comparatively expensive concrete channel and modified buses.
I meant the 'main' one as in Manchester Central. It had various rail lines pointing towards it I think although not going all the way.
I don't think Manchester Central was ever the main station for Manchester, which was and is Piccadilly (4th busiest in the UK after B'ham New St, Glasgow Central & Leeds, according to Wikipedia). Victoria is the second busiest, & Metrolink runs directly from one to the other.
IIRC all the off-street bits of the network at the moment were conversions of existing heavy rail; I think the Chorlton stretch is the only bit of disused track bed to be used in the expansion.
Andy
[i]Of course it was so why not just let the drivers use their skills on a separate tarmac lane on the line chosen instead of building a comparatively expensive concrete channel and modified buses. [/i]
But when you put bus lanes down they're used by normal traffic too, people parking up or unloading etc, they stop at junctions for traffic to turn across them.
Put down a concrete channel and the bus can go MUCH faster in complete safety and no other traffic can use it. The problem lies with the bus going faster, a driver can't steer it between narrow kerbs at those speeds so it needs to be guided. It's basically a cheap and slightly more versatile version of a tram network.
Still runs into problems at junctions though cos you need to lower the kerb so other traffic can at least cross it so you're not far off square one again...
TJ - The tram station at the airport is at the end of the covered walkway, i.e. exactly the same distance you need to walk if you're getting a taxi out of the airport.
alsidair - its still not as it should be. It should be right in the terminal. Why have a walk of a couple of hundred m? WIt means its useless for mobility inpaired people.
Its just stupid that it doesn't go right to the terminal and also join properly with the train station.
It just shows a lack of joined up thinking
TJ - Waverley is already packed and the St Andrews Square stop is 5 mins walk away from Waverley anyway. Waverley is stuck between Castle Rock and Princess Street/ Gardens so no space to expand, and only 4 lines go into Waverley from the west and more would encroach on the Gardens and mean digging some fairly serious tunnels so unlikely to happen. If most people can make the trip down some steps (as they do now), and there is a viable option for the less able then what's not to like?
The airport link will be great - it's linked to the terminal undercover, and will be closer to the airport entrance than the distance from security to the new end of the terminal (Gates 12 upwards), and will hopefully get quite a lot of taxis off the road.
Even if it only runs from Princess St to Ingliston and the Airport it will be fine by me.
I think the point, TJ, is that the cost associated with terminating the tram line inside the terminal building would be pretty high compared to stopping just outside it.
And as for linking with the railway network, you have to work with what is there already. The levels at Waverley make things very difficult and Haymarket Station is on a very complex and busy road junction. It's all about a finding the solution which is the best compromise for the tram, pedestrians, cyclists, cars, HGVs, buses, taxis etc etc and all the while thinking about interchanging between these different modes of travel. You wouldn't obtain a perfect solution without a blank canvas and a massive pile of cash.
I don't know how anyone can defend this.
Its ridiculous that its not in the terminal and no proper intrerface with the trains is stupid.
So for example I live in North berwick and I want to go to the airport. Train to Waverley - either climb the steps and go outside to get a tram to the airport where I again will have to go outside and walk a couple of hundred m to the terminal building. Or get another train from Waverley to Heymarket then go up escalators to outside to get the tram.
Thats twice you have to walk reasonable distances outdoors / climb steps with your luggage
I don't care what the practical considerations are - this is half baked. If you are going to do something like this do it properly. This is supposed to be the basis of a system for the next century - so do it properly or don't do it.
Have you actually used modern european integrated transport systems?
Edit - amsterdam - an escalator in the terminal building takes you to the train station. Fast links to city centre and loads of other destinations
Geneva- main train station underneath the airport - Ok you go about 20 m under a covered walkway - again you have a choice of loads of trains.
Say you want to go from Glasgow or Stirling to Edinburgh airport> You will have to go past the airport on teh train and then go back out on the tram. Bonkers. From stirling the train avctually goes past teh runway.
Double edit - its not "just outside" if it is as stated above - its a couple of hundred m away
Triple edit
Its the poverty of ambition that gets to me. Want a tram link do it right
"I don't care what the practical considerations are"
That says it all.
When you start with a city built on volcanic hills so there's lots of steep gradients and you can't tunnel at all easily, the railway line runs through the middle in a deep trench and the whole thing is a World Heritage Site then I guess the options for integrating transport are pretty limited.
Do taxis not drop you off right outside the door of the place?
The point being Stu that it is an inadequate compromise. Its poverty of ambition. compromise it so much its actually no advantage over what is there already.
There are tunnels under the city built a hundred years ago.
Its half baked and half hearted.
I can easily beat the Airlink bus from West End of Princess Street to the end of the airport road on the A8. Usually pass one or two on my commute, and I could save a few mins by using the Gogar roundabout or underpass but I doubt I'd live too long. Takes quite a few mins getting from the Gyle side of the A8 to the cycle path on the north side of the road at Maybury, round the tram depot works and back over the RBS bridge and onto the south side again.
I bet the tram will be quicker than me regardless, which is an improvement.
Anyway no point arguing TJ, I think the trams will be pretty handy for getting me out of Leith if I ever have the misfortune to end up there, or getting to airport.
You clearly think the current plan is underambitous and they should have gone for something even bigger and more expensive, so we'll never agree.
I hate the trams as much as you do probably but your arguments are ridiculous TJ.