Go ahead given to revamp Glasgow's subway, which last saw major re-furbishment in 1977:
http://www.spt.co.uk/news/110309_subway_mod.aspx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-12687499
Seems to me a reasonable amount of money for an upgrade,esp. given our goverments ability to spend bonkers amounts of money on projects- such as the trams and potentialy the new forth road bridge. Nothing about expanding the sytem.

That's splendid news.

Will there be any use of the un-used tunnels under Glasgow. i know a while ago there was talk of a second circle.

See my Glasgow Subway Film: http://www.youtube.com/user/NODDINGCAT#p/u/3/HvdcTTo7Q0U

^^ No expansion. Just an upgrade. It serves the western inner city and has done so for over 100 years. A loop with unique guage, ticketing and rolling stock serving such a small area is inefficient and short-termist in the extreme.

A long-term plan for the WHOLE conurbation should be developed with a new mode utilising old corridors, a la Manchester Metrolink, included. The subway could then be incorporated into this plan.

I believe this is just an SNP effort to shake off it's (admittedly inaccurate) anti-Glasgow reputation in time for the election.

^^^ What about creating light rail, Metrolink-style corridors into the city and then run these around the circle and back out again? You'd need to replace the existing stock, but it could work well maybe.

Not the Subway Cirlcle? Thoe would be some mighty small light rail vehicles

The Clockwork Orange's gauge is an inherent limiting factor. Like the occasional suggestions that London's Waterloo & City Line be "extended" to handle mainline services, the fact is that you'd need to effectively widen the tunnels dramatically to achieve the desired result.

Technically, this is feasible, but probably not without long closures of the system to allow the work to take place. The City & South London Railway—the ancestor of London's Northern Line's City Branch—did try widening its narrow tunnels by building a tunnelling shield with a hole in it that the line's original stock could fit through, but it was only a partial success and the line was ultimately closed to complete the work. It's unlikely modern health and safety regulations would permit such an approach today. (And it would be very expensive, what with the need to use manual tunnelling techniques. Nobody's designed a TBM that can carry a working railway through its core!)

The bottom line is that you'd have to close the entire network down to adapt it for larger gauge vehicles. I'm not aware of any current tram model that would come anywhere near close to fitting the present tunnels. (To put this in context, the Docklands Light Railway stock won't fit into tunnels built for the Jubilee Line, and that uses a larger gauge than the older Central, Piccadilly and Northern Line tubes.)

The Glasgow Subway could be extended, but you'd lose the simplicity of the service once you add branches to it. You'd likely also need to find a site for the larger depot and servicing infrastructure, which limits the options further: you can't just build a short branch here and another there, unless at least one of those branches runs by a large plot of land suitable for building a ton of sidings and some very large buildings on.

Trams are a distinct possibility given central Glasgow's grid layout and relatively wide streets, but the problem in Edinburgh are unlikely to endear light rail to Glaswegians.

I think construction of the proposed "Crossrail Glasgow" scheme makes the most sense long-term. Much of the work is already done. An additional option would be to modify the Glasgow Subway so that it can better serve the two termini, but as I'm not familiar with the infrastructure, I don't know whether that would require expensive new tunnels and stations, or just the installation of some more moving walkways.

Remind me does Glasgow have surface access or is it like New York I seem to remember where everything has to be lowered down a shaft?

There is a proper outside depot, the first incarnation of the Subway had to lower the trains.
I was surprised when i went that there wasn't a travelcard ticket, good for the trains buses and subway. Something like there is in London.

I was surprised when i went that there wasn't a travelcard ticket, good for the trains buses and subway. Something like there is in London.

What happened to the ZoneCard? :)

That's only for a week and longer though. Otherwise all you have is the region-wide Daytripper, costing over £10 and valid only after 9am, or the £16 Mackintosh Trail ticket valid only on First buses/subway and giving free entry to Mackintosh-related attractions. There are rail/subway-only passes.

The Clockwork Orange's gauge is an inherent limiting factor...

The rest of your post is good but please, please, please don't call it that. No-one actually calls it that in general conversation, it's just a term picked up by the media when they need a snappy headline. The trains aren't even orange anymore.

The best proposal for expansion I saw was an East End loop, basically mirroring the current loop but passing through some areas which are in need of regeneration, as well as the Commonwealth Games site. It would have been built through a combination of cut-and-cover tunneling and re-use of existing disused tunnels. Plus the East End has more and cheaper land for the sidings and large buildings you mentioned. Sigh, I can live in hope.

The bottom line is that you'd have to close the entire network down to adapt it for larger gauge vehicles. I'm not aware of any current tram model that would come anywhere near close to fitting the present tunnels. (To put this in context, the Docklands Light Railway stock won't fit into tunnels built for the Jubilee Line, and that uses a larger gauge than the older Central, Piccadilly and Northern Line tubes.)

The Glasgow Subway could be extended, but you'd lose the simplicity of the service once you add branches to it. You'd likely also need to find a site for the larger depot and servicing infrastructure, which limits the options further: you can't just build a short branch here and another there, unless at least one of those branches runs by a large plot of land suitable for building a ton of sidings and some very large buildings on.

Trams are a distinct possibility given central Glasgow's grid layout and relatively wide streets, but the problem in Edinburgh are unlikely to endear light rail to Glaswegians.

I think construction of the proposed "Crossrail Glasgow" scheme makes the most sense long-term. Much of the work is already done. An additional option would be to modify the Glasgow Subway so that it can better serve the two termini, but as I'm not familiar with the infrastructure, I don't know whether that would require expensive new tunnels and stations, or just the installation of some more moving walkways.

I agree with your main points sitmarco. Subsequently I think extending the subway and all that entails would not be worth the expense. Better connecting the two termini to the subway would be job one. A walkway parallel to the Argyle line would connect Glasgow Central to St.Enoch subway. And such a thing already exist at Queen St/Buchanan St. A simple re-naming of these stations so we have two termini and adjoining subway stations would make sense.

Also Crossrail involves existing infrastructure and would better connect the suburban network. See my map.


The best proposal for expansion I saw was an East End loop, basically mirroring the current loop but passing through some areas which are in need of regeneration, as well as the Commonwealth Games site. It would have been built through a combination of cut-and-cover tunneling and re-use of existing disused tunnels. Plus the East End has more and cheaper land for the sidings and large buildings you mentioned. Sigh, I can live in hope.

I honestly think the east end is already well-served by heavy-rail, particularly the near east. Look at the concentration of stations in my map below.

Although I think a few changes could improve the situation in the East End. Starting with the cheapest:

New heavy rail station at The Forge. (Blue square)

Crossrail: All existing infrastructure (Yellow) linking north and south.

Light Rail: Trams along the very wide Edinburgh Road could serve the northern parts of the east end (Green)

Old Tunnels: The High Street to Bridgeton tunnel would link the North Clyde and Argyle lines (Red) and the London Road tunnel would allow a new station at Celtic Park (Blue square) also serving 2014 arenas and village.

Cut and cover: the re-opened tunnel could continue in cut-and-cover form down London Rd to meet the Whifflet line at Carmyle (Red-dashed) serving a developing part of the city, and freeing up capacity at Central and on WCML.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5136/5526280887_36182319f9_b.jpg

And that's just one side of the city!

I honestly think the east end is already well-served by heavy-rail, particularly the near east. Look at the concentration of stations in my map below.

Although I think a few changes could improve the situation in the East End. Starting with the cheapest:

New heavy rail station at The Forge. (Blue square)

Crossrail: All existing infrastructure (Yellow) linking north and south.

Light Rail: Trams along the very wide Edinburgh Road could serve the northern parts of the east end (Green)

Old Tunnels: The High Street to Bridgeton tunnel would link the North Clyde and Argyle lines (Red) and the London Road tunnel would allow a new station at Celtic Park (Blue square) also serving 2014 arenas and village.

Cut and cover: the re-opened tunnel could continue in cut-and-cover form down London Rd to meet the Whifflet line at Carmyle (Red-dashed) serving a developing part of the city, and freeing up capacity at Central and on WCML.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5136/5526280887_36182319f9_b.jpg

And that's just one side of the city!

Actually I can see your point there. I often forget about the number of stations around there... although those two new stations you mentioned are definitely needed.

I'm a sucker for idealistic optimism, so I do still believe the subway will be extended one day, though likely as part of a metro/light rail network. Trams remain that elusive holy grail, but I fear "that Edinburgh incident" has tarred trams with a dirty brush in Scotland for a long time. Glasgow may still stand a chance though if we ease them in via Fastlink.

I agree with your main points sitmarco. Subsequently I think extending the subway and all that entails would not be worth the expense. Better connecting the two termini to the subway would be job one. A walkway parallel to the Argyle line would connect Glasgow Central to St.Enoch subway. And such a thing already exist at Queen St/Buchanan St. A simple re-naming of these stations so we have two termini and adjoining subway stations would make sense.

Also Crossrail involves existing infrastructure and would better connect the suburban network. See my map.



I honestly think the east end is already well-served by heavy-rail, particularly the near east. Look at the concentration of stations in my map below.

Although I think a few changes could improve the situation in the East End. Starting with the cheapest:

New heavy rail station at The Forge. (Blue square)

Crossrail: All existing infrastructure (Yellow) linking north and south.

Light Rail: Trams along the very wide Edinburgh Road could serve the northern parts of the east end (Green)

Old Tunnels: The High Street to Bridgeton tunnel would link the North Clyde and Argyle lines (Red) and the London Road tunnel would allow a new station at Celtic Park (Blue square) also serving 2014 arenas and village.

Cut and cover: the re-opened tunnel could continue in cut-and-cover form down London Rd to meet the Whifflet line at Carmyle (Red-dashed) serving a developing part of the city, and freeing up capacity at Central and on WCML.

And that's just one side of the city!

Leadensky, please please please apply for the SPT chief exec's job....

This is the kind of joined up thinking and workable solution required for providing regeneration to the east end at minimal cost and using infrastruture already there.

I dispair at the GCC elected officals/SPT unelected officials and their lack of joined up thinking and foresight.

I think it is the case of too many fact finding missions and not enough real action! :ohno:

Leadensky, please please please apply for the SPT chief exec's job....

This is the kind of joined up thinking and workable solution required for providing regeneration to the east end at minimal cost and using infrastruture already there.

I dispair at the GCC elected officals/SPT unelected officials and their lack of joined up thinking and foresight.

I think it is the case of too many fact finding missions and not enough real action! :ohno:

Thankyou JohnnyFive. I agree the SPT bring nothing but useless fantasy to the table. There job could be done better by enthusiastic volunteers. Big society anyone? I forgot it's a Labour council. Jobs for the boys...

Transport Scotland have looked at Crossrail, and considered not value for money. So perhaps that infrastructure would be better incorporated into a light rail system or, as their website suggest it could serve a new city terminus at St. Enoch. I respect that because they have qualified economists and engineers who send the money to national priorities. Glasgow's public transport is frankly, not bad.

Once the big spending on motorways and games villages is over, I think SG and GCC will get together and give Glasgow something better.