From Preston to Montreal

Standard

The first efforts to electrify the railway in and around the harbour at Montreal in Canada came after 1915, and in part were driven by the British Government’s desire to increase its trade within the empire, and expand and develop resources.  They even set up a Royal Commission to look into how that could be achieved just before the start of the First World War.  One of the commissioners appointed was Sir William Lorimer, Chairman of the North British Locomotive Co., and yet it would be one of his company’s newer competitors who won an order for locomotive power for the Montreal Harbour Commissioners’ impressive project.

In 1915, the Harbour Commissioners had had a report prepared on the benefits of electrifying the railways around Montreal Harbour.  The following year, 1916, in the company’s annual report, they made this statement:

“It was ascertained that, in addition to the primary object of overcoming the smoke nuisance, the application of electricity would prove to be economical and flexible and especially advantageous for the elimination of the corrosion of steel and galvanized iron by acid gases.   Although preparations were made to urge forward the completion of this important work, the Commissioners decided that under existing conditions it would be advisable to postpone the expenditure for this undertaking until after the War.”

The “corrosion of steel and galvanised iron by gases” might well have been an early reference to acid rain.

Prior to the electrification of Montreal Harbour’s lines, the Canadian Northern Railway (CNR) had constructed a new line from the town of Mount Royal, to downtown Montreal, and had also introduced the first main line electrification to Canada.  Mount Royal is a town to the North West of central Montreal, and lies on the north west of the mountain from which it takes its name. In 1910 the CNR first proposed constructing a 5-km-long tunnel under Mount Royal, and developed the town as a “Model City”, originally laid out after the style of Washington, DC.  The line then made a connection with Montreal’s harbour lines, and a new central station was built, with a freight station located near the Lachine Canal and what is now described as Montreal’s old Harbour.  The newly electrified track to downtown Montreal used Bo-Bo electric locos built by General Electric at Schenectady, New York, whilst the Canadian GEC supplied the overhead equipment and power systems.    The point of this first scheme was to handle both suburban and main line trains from the new passenger station in Montreal to the suburban territory beyond Mount Royal, wherethe mainline traffic wastransferred to steam haulage.  

The electrification of the Mount Royal Tunnel section was electrified at 2,400V d.c., completed in September 1918, with the first train running through on 21stOctober that same year.

This period – marked both by enormous growth in freight traffic, and by the collapse of the Canadian Northern Railway (amongst others) – was a very difficult time.  The Federal Government nationalized the railway, and later took on board the Grand Trunk Railway (GTR), alongside others, and by 1923, Canadian National Railways became the major Railway in Canada. 

This photograph originally appeared on the cover of English Electric booklet No. 55 of its ‘Railway Electrification’ series, and published in 1931, shows some indication of the harsh conditions faced by electric traction in Canada.

It is speculation to suggest that this work and the GE built locomotives – which were completed between 1914 and 1918 – encouraged the Montreal Harbour Commissioners to press ahead with their plans to electrify the harbour lines.  It was 7 years later that the Harbour Commissioners were able to complete the electrification of the harbour lines, in 1925, and in order to conform to the standards adopted by CNR for the Mount Royal Tunnel, again, 2400V d.c. was adopted throughout.

However, and perhaps due to British Government influence, the Harbour Commissioners looked to the UK and English Electric for their project.  The Preston based company not only provided the nine, 100 ton locomotives, but also the motor generator sets for the substations that provided the traction power supply.   For the infrastructure work, three 1000kW motor generator sets were supplied to the initial installation, with the last two being manufactured at English Electric’s Stafford Works.  Subsequently, the Harbour Commissioners ordered two more machines from English Electric, each of which consisted of a 2,300kW, 63 cycles, synchronous motor, coupled to a pair of 1200V d.c. generators, connected in series.

The locomotives

No. 103 in original condition, and newly arrived from Preston, prior to embarking on its 70+ years of work in and around Montreal Harbour, and the Mount Royal line.

The new locomotives were a Bo-Bo design of 1720hp, and were supplied against two orders, and at the time, considered to be the most powerful units of their type, anywhere in the world.  The orders were placed in 1923, with the first four locomotives entering service in February 1925, and the second batch of five in operation from August the following year.  The locomotives were built at the Preston Works, and shipped across the Atlantic to Montreal.  In design, the units were a simple box cab layout, with a driving cab at each end, although one of these was provided with projecting lookouts so that the driver could have unobstructed vision during some shunting operations.  The cab with the projecting lookouts had duplicate controls, a further advantage for shunting service, whilst the cab at the opposite end, with only a single set of controls, and no lookouts, would be used predominantly for long haul operations.

Up until the completion of electrification works around the harbour, and arrival of these new locomotives, the Harbour Commissioners had been renting two electric units Canadian National Railways. It was a temporary measure, and to some degree an experiment in the use of electric traction, and the rented locos were from the six boxcab units built at GE’s Schenectady Works.

CNR blueprint diagram of the EE locos for Montreal Harbour. This diagram – also showing the position of the illuminated number board fitted in later years, was originally published in the journal of the Canadian Railroad Historical Society in January 1962.

Power equipment layout consisted of four; 430hp force ventilated traction motors, each being axle hung, and driving the wheels through single reduction spur gearing.   Given the harsh winter conditions in Canada, the traction motors received some interesting design attention.  To avoid condensation in the traction motors in cold weather, after the locomotive had completed its roster, all the field coils were connected in series, and heated through a connection to an external 220V power source.  Not without some irony perhaps, but the UK’s own problems with electric traction some 60 years later surfaced with a newspaper headline about service failures due to the ‘wrong kind of snow’ falling in Britain!  Most European rail networks – especially in Scandinavia – paid far more attention, like Canada, to the effects of freezing weather on traction systems than British Rail.

The locomotives were capable of exerting a tractive effort of 70,000 lbs at the wheel treads, and soon after their introduction, one of their number demonstrated these abilities, by hauling a train of some 5,240 tons, the heaviest then recorded.  Within the body of the locomotive, the remaining equipment was installed in cubicles along either side of a central gangway. This hardware consisted of a motor generator set, air compressors and banks of resistances, with standard English Electric camshaft control.  

With the English Electric version of this form of control, the operating current was not switched at the camshaft itself, but on line breakers, connected in series with the camshaft controller.  Special provision was made for the high-tension equipment, which was housed in a separate compartment, included access through substantial, interlocked, sliding doors, and which could not be opened unless the main switch was closed, isolating the equipment.

In view of the harshness of the Montreal climate in winter, important amongst the numerous design considerations, was the provision of adequate ventilation and heating. Provisions were made to guard against condensation in the traction motor field windings, which could be connected in series to a 220V shore supply, and the driving cabs were double glazed, and heavily insulated against the cold.

Leading Dimensions, Numbering & Withdrawal

For their time and size these were very powerful machines, and the maximum tractive effort they were able to exert was actually a little more than one of English Electric’s most famous diesel locomotive from the 1950s – the 3,300hp “Deltic” prototype.

CN No. 186 with commuter train in Montreal with the running number applied in 1949, and renumbered 6722 after 1969.
Photo © A.J.Schill/Joseph Testagrose Collection

The locomotives were numbered 9180 to 9188 when they were taken into CN service, as Class Z-4-a and renumbered as 180 to 188 in 1949, before a final renumbering in 1969, with numbers 6716 to 6724.  They were finally withdrawn from service in 1995, when carrying this number series.

In the same year, 1923, English Electric also received an order for a pair of 760hp Bo-Bo electric locomotives, for operation on the Niagra-St Catherines-Toronto route, which was electrified at 600V d.c., and used a ‘trolley pole’ form of overhead contact.  The 1920s were perhaps the last decade when electric tramway, inter-urban or other light rail networks used this form of electrification.

The petrol-electric crane/servicing locomotive built and delivered by English Electric in 1929.  Seen here in Preston shortly after completion, and before shipping to Montreal.

The Petrol-Electric Locomotive

Even these were not the only motive power designed and supplied by English Electric for Canada’s early electrification projects. In 1929 the Montreal Harbour Commissioners ordered what was described as a general service locomotive for repair and construction work – this was a 54ton petrol-electric locomotive, fitted with a 100hp 6-cylinder engine.  Attached to this petrol engine was a 52kW, 500 volt main generator and a 120 volt auxiliary generator, powering the traction motors through a 12-notch controller that provided fine control over the loco’s speed, up to a maximum of 12 mph.   Its unique feature – clearly because of its intended use – included a roof mounted jib crane, and a swinging/collapsible gantry, for maintenance and service personnel to reach whatever equipment was in need of attention on the overhead system.

 English Electric received yet another order from Canada – the company’s last, in 1952 – but this time for the Toronto Transit Commission, and perhaps sadly from Preston’s view, the order was only for motorcoach control equipment. That said, the 1952 order consisted of no less than 140 sets of that control equipment, with the mechanical parts and assembly from Canadian Car and Foundry (CC&F), from its factory in Montreal.  Today, CC&F is part of the Bombardier Transportation business, as its railcar facility in Thunder Bay, Ontario.

The original nine locos for Montreal Harbour had a very long service life, and were only withdrawn fully in 1995 – more than 70 years after their delivery and initial operation.  In later years the class ceased working around Montreal Harbour after 1940/41.This extract from a discussion on these locomotives appeared in the January 1962 edition of the newsletter of the Canadian Railroad Historical Society:

“The Montreal Harbour electrification, however, did not prove to be too successful. Technically it was fine but the financial burden was too great and at the close of the 1940 navigation season, electric operations were brought to a halt. During the following months, the National Harbours Board wire crews took down the expensive overhead and dismantled the electrification works. The electric locomotives, however, fitted admirably with the CNR’s need for additional motive power for the National System’s expanding Montreal Terminals electrification. The locomotives, therefore, were transferred to the Canadian National Railways in 1942 in exchange for nine steam-powered 0-6-0 switchers numbered 7512 to 7518 inclusive.”

In its final guise for CN, No. 6716 and a sister locomotive head a commuter service near Mount Royal in July 1983.  Although the headlight is still in the original position, the loco now has an illuminated number board just above the central cab window.
Photo © Clayton Langstaff

The electrification work, and the provision of these new boxcab locomotives was an important milestone for English Electric, and whilst the mechanical parts were sub-contracted to Beyer-Peacock in Manchester, this marked a major success for the company. These first orders for substation power equipment and locomotives were received only 4 years after the company came into existence, brining together the years of experience, and expertise already shown by the Dick, Kerr Co., pushing forward with electric traction. 2019 marks the centenary of what was for half a century perhaps the most famous electrical engineering company in the UK, and it was only just over a year ago that the doors on the factory in Preston, Lancashire were closed for the final time.

-oOo-

Useful Links:

BBC thinks British Rail Did Not Work?

Standard

On the BBC’s Breakfast show today a comment was made when interviewing a representative from the “We Own It” campaign group and a Rail Delivery Group spokesman.

Screenshot 2019-04-30 at 11.22.12The interview at Birmingham New Street Station was reviewing a proposal by the RDG to end the current rail franchising arrangements.

The idea is patently going to be considered under the Government review. But during the interviews, this comment was made in closing the piece:

“We know British Rail did not work”

A clearly absurd statement – quite apart from being factually incorrect.

Whilst British Rail had many problems, it is plainly the UK privatisation model that has failed. The proposal from the RDG about “localising” control and regulation of commuter and suburban services is just regurgitating the PTE formats set up during BR days.

Half baked schemes – like open access services – are just that, half baked. These latest suggestions just seem to add complexity to an already complex and badly managed arrangement.

Disappointing from the BBC – what next, repeat the myth about curly sandwiches on trains and in refreshment rooms?!!

-oOo-

Siemens New Rail Factory in Goole

Standard

The name of Siemens has an exceptionally long history with railway equipment and rolling stock manufacturing in the UK. To be precise since 1864, when the Woolwich factory was established in London, although the company had been set up in London in 1850, and over the next 30 years, William Siemens was responsible for the arrival of electric traction. Amongst many other innovative developments and delivering what we might today call ‘disruptive’ technology.

This week – April 23rd – it was announced that the company had submitted their plans to build a new factory in Goole, East Yorkshire, for the construction, testing and support for new rolling stock for UK train companies. The application is for outline consent to enable the development to be delivered in phases, with the first phase – the manufacturing facilities expected to open in 2023, with the factory fully operational in 2025. The new facility will manufacture and commission the latest development of the “Desiro” family, which itself – in the UK – dates back to 2000, when the first emu’s were ordered for service with First Great Eastern, and owned by Angel Trains.

Goole Infographics V2-02 (002)The new £200 million factory uses land on a 67 acre site, adjacent to the Guardian Industries UK glass factory, and the Goole intermodal rail terminal – a clearly appropriate location from a rail perspective – and is also close to junction 36 of the M62 motorway. The plans submitted include 80,000 sqm of manufacturing, commissioning, warehouse buildings and stabling sidings, as well as a four-storey, 5,000 sqm office building. Siemens Mobility is planning to create up to 700 jobs as part of this project, and 250 during the construction period, with an estimated additional 1,700 in the UK supply chain.

But Siemens Mobility is not just planning to build trains in Goole, as the company’s UK rolling stock engineering and commissioning team will be based here, and is planning to locate its Digital Operations Centre onsite, collecting and analysing train borne data for train operators.

Ntfl-exterior-platform

Artists impression of the new tube rolling stock design Photo: By Source, Fair use, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=44094899

The driver to carry the proposal forward was of course the £1.5 billion order for new trains for the Piccadilly Line for London Underground. The Piccadilly Line had the distinction at one time of being London’s longest tube line, and is now 113 years old. Under the Deep Tube Upgrade Programme, Siemens Mobility Ltd’s contract will supply 94 small-profile metro trainsets, following their successful award from the tender process that began in 2016. Siemens’ success was achieved against stiff competition from Alstom, Bombardier, CAF, and Hitachi, and which included three of the companies launching legal challenges that automatically prevented award of the contract. Suspension of the contract award was lifted by the High Court on 2nd November 2018, and the contract placed.

Whilst it is true that Siemens already have a considerable presence in the area, supporting the offshore and renewables industry, manufacturing turbine blades, this new factory is an important step in the re-growth of the UK’s rail manufacturing industry. It is interesting to reflect too that between 1957 and 1972, GEC Traction (later merged with Alsthom), secured orders for 720 sets of motorcoach power equipment for the Piccadilly, and the Heathrow Extension.

Some useful links:

 

-oOo-

Is Leeds Station Being Short Changed?

Standard

Back on the 7th March – the BBC carried a short story about the inability of Northern Rail to run longer trains out of Leeds City, due to ‘constraints from platform length’  That is, they were suggesting the platforms were not long enough to accommodate any multiple unit longer than a 3-car set.  This is the story they carried:

Northern’s long six-carriage trains delayed by two years

A bit odd perhaps, especially considering the huge upgrades, platform lengthening, additional tracks, facilities, etc., etc., etc. that were delivered by the “Leeds 1st” rebuilding project of 2001.  So how long are these Northern Rail trains going to be?  Because back in the days of old fashioned steam and diesel, Leeds City was handling 8, 10 and 12 coach main line services, after the 1967 remodelling and rebuilding.

At the time of the Leeds 1st Project, the Class 333 three-car electric emu’s were ordered from Siemens and CAF, and based on the Class 332 Heathrow Express sets.  Some were fitted with a fourth car, to cope with the extra passenger numbers in the mid 2000s, but the funding for the extra capacity came from South Yorkshire PTE, with the remaining funding from West Yorkshire.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Northern Rail (leased from Angel Trains) Siemens class 333 four car 25kV AC overhead electric multiple unit number 333011 of Neville Hill T&RSMD approaches Steeton station on the Up Shipley Main line forming the 14:15 Skipton to Leeds (2H23). Sunday 14th December 2008.                                                                                                  Photo David Ingham – icensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic license.

So these trains as 4-car sets have been operating for more than 10 years into and out of Leeds station – as excuses go, this one from Northern Rail is about as lame as they come.

These trains have cars that are a little under 24 metres in length – 96 metres -ish for a full train.   Back in BR days, a standard coach was around 23.5 metres long, so an 8-coach train would be 188 metres long – if Leeds City could manage a train of that length 50 years ago – why are the platforms too short for the new trains?

Still, Northern Rail are still keeping the good old ‘Pacers’ operational and the overcrowding continues.

-oOo-

Batteries Included!

Standard

Earlier in March, there was an announcement by Vivarail that the disappointing delayed entry into service of the Class 230 battery trains had a piece of better news for us – the development of a new fast charging feature.  That said, the first of the delayed 2-car units did make its way to the Marston Vale Line in the West Midlands in late February.

D78_West_Ham

One of the original Metro-Cammell D78 stock built by Metro-Cammell, and refurbished by Bombardier in the early 2000s                                                                                                                Photo: Alex Nevin-Tylee (AL6NT) – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=58215231

These trains have been re-engineered from London Transport’s ‘D78’ stock units, originally manufactured for London Transport by Metro-Cammell in Birmingham, with electrical equipment from GEC Traction and Brush.  The D78s were used on LT’s 600v DC surface lines, and started service between 1979 and 1983, with the Bombardier refurb taking place between 2004 and 2008.  Vivarail bought 150 of the driving motor cars and 300 non-powered cars.  These would be used to build not just these new battery powered trains, but additional, low emission diesel-electric multiple units, and hybrid sets for non-electrified routes.

1187-Interior-Future-Colour-3D-ViewIn their new guise, the aluminium underframe and bodyshell is retained, but the vehicles have been completely stripped out and re-equipped internally, and fitted out with low emission diesel engines, and other energy saving elements.  The batteries are lithium phosphate (LiFeMgPO4), with multiple cells in each unit.  ‘Valence’ battery modules, examples of which are already at work on ‘Optare’ buses in the UK, were fitted in the original test train.  More recently, Vivarail have signed a contract with Dutch firm ‘Hoppecke’ for ongoing supply of battery packages for the on-board systems as well as the charging points. The diesel engines, for traction, and powering gensets are, like most modern cars equipped with stop-start technology, adding further to their green credentials. These are 200hp Ford diesel engines, and meet the EU’s Stage IIIB emissions standard, and have been modified by Revolve in the UK, to the requirements for the rail traction environment, and these re-engineered trains from Vivarail.

c61e93d8-e9ec-469d-b118-d18394b01e00Overall, the new trains themselves are a highly innovative way of recycling older designs of rolling stock, and adopting the latest technology in battery, control and traction systems, extending, and expanding their working life.  The Vivarail designs can be built in either diesel-electric, battery, hybrid, or just about any combination of traction power required, and in a variety of configurations, in a 2-car and 3-car layout.

Vivarail_Class230_3Car

Next up – how about a hydrogen fuel cell powered train? Such plans are already well advanced, and would suit the Vivarail approach to development in the UK, whilst Birmingham University’s Centre for Railway Research and Education faculty is already moving down that path.

Read more by clicking on the image below:

Cover - Batteries included

Useful & Interesting links:

Vivarail

Screenshot 2019-04-02 at 19.53.18

 

 

 

InnovateUK

 

 

 

-oOo-

 

 

L&Y Locos At Work on BR

Standard

One year before the grouping of railways in 1923 the Lancashire & Yorkshire and London & North Western Railways amalgamated, forming the largest operating railway system in this country. It lasted only one year. After the formation of the LMSR a series of internal wranglings and power struggles, that would have pleased the most ardent admirer of Machiavelli, resulted in LNWR and L&Y motive power strategies becoming subordinate to that of the Midland company. The political ramifications of those early years of the LM S – despite having the former LYR chief mechanical engineer as the first head of that department under the new regime – were very Jong lasting indeed. While many hundreds of ancient and small Midland Railway designs survived the purges of the 1930s and 1940s, in common with the LNW R types, the locos of the Lancashire & Yorkshire taken over by BR in 1948 numbered only a few hundred.

1249 Ex LYR Pug 0-4-0St No. 51206

Ex LYR “Pug” 0-4-0St No. 51206 at Sandhill 30/05/1960. (c) Frank Dean

It is surprising how long lived many of these steam engines were, some even from before the turn of the 19th & 20th centuries, with working lives of 30 and 40 years or more.  Even some of the later designs under the ‘Big Four’ grouping of 1923, with their more effcient boilers and performance were withdrawn and scarpped perhaps too early in their working life.

The Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway evolved to serve the industrial heartlands and teeming populations of Lancashire, and West Yorkshire in particular, incorporating along the way the world’s first passenger railway, the Liverpool & Manchester.  The core of the system that stretched from Liverpool to Manchester, Leeds and the east coast port city of Hull was the Manchjester & Leeds Railway.  The initial 51 miles ran from Manchester Victoria Station to Normanton, and a total length of 51 miles.  By 1847, the route included Wigan, Preston, Blackburn, Bolton, Burnley and numerous mill towns, reaching Todmorden, Rochdale, Wakefield and Normanton.

By 1922, and the merger with the giant LNWR, the Lanky had a total of 1,417 miles of main line, and 2,217 miles, with sidings included.  The company had also employed the undoubted talents of Barton-Wright, John (later Sir) Aspinall, Hoy, and Hughes as Locomotive Superintendents / Chief Mechanical Engineers.  It is a tribute to their skill, and indeed innovation, that many of their designs survived until nationalisation – indeed, one of the Barton-Wright types traced its design back to 1877, and almost 100 were handed over to BR in 1948.  (It is true that they were modified between 1897 and 1900 under Sir John Aspinall’s watch.)

Aspinall 3F 0-6-0_Carnforth 1979

Built in January 1896, Ex L&Y No. 1300 became LMS number 12322, and in July 1950 BR number 52322, and withdrawn in August 1960. She was at Nuneaton (2B) in 1950, Wigan (Springs Branch) in 1954. Seen here at Carnforth Steamtown in 1979. (c) Rodger Bradley

No fewer than 8 representatives of the L&Y are preserved – including 2 ‘Pug’ 0-4-0ST, the Horwich Works 2ft gauge shunter “Wren”, and the classic Aspinall 2-4-2T No. 1008 at the National Railway Museum.  One of Barton-Wright’s 0-6-0 goods engines from 1887, No. 957 was built by Beyer Peacock and was in use on the Keighley & Worth Valley a few years ago.

It is not the purpose of this piece to cover every detail, but rather to give a flavour for how many and how long these locomotives from the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway survived into theage of the diesel as well as nationalisation.

 

Click on the image below to read on ….

L&Y Booklet cover

Usful links:

Vanderbilt - NY Times header 1901

LYRS logo

Worth Valley logo

Further Reading …

“The Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway in the 20th Century” – Eric Mason, published 1954 & 1961 – Ian Allan

“The Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway – A Concise History” – O.S. Nock,  published 1969 – Ian Allan

 

-oOo-

Springburn Closure

Standard

What was once the heart of the Scottish rail engineering industry – the Springburn district of Glasgow – has been dealt perhaps a mortal blow, with the announcement of the closure of Gemini Rail’s Springburn Depot.  There was never a railway works or even a maintenance depot bearing the name Springburn, but it was an area home to the North Briotish Loco Co.’s Hyde Park and Atlas Works.  Side by side with these were the Caledonian’s St Rollox and the North British Cowlairs Works – all of which built many thousands of railway locomotives, for home and export around the world.

Gemini Rail Services plant in Springburn to close with 120 jobs set to go

This closure was announced in December, and confirmed in January, with the loss of upt to 200 jobs, although it will not be completed until 2020.  Local and national politicians in Scotland and from the trades unions have been saddened and disappointed by the decision to close, and lose yet more engineering skills.

St Rollox, which was the only works retained in Glasgow by British Railways, was upgraded as nearby Cowlairs was closed in 1968.  It became part of British Rail Engineering in the 1980s, and renamed Glasgow Works, with the rump of the works being transferred to the BR Maintenance Ltd (BRML) arm in 1987, and renamed again as Springburn Level 5 Depot.

During its time as St Rollox in BR days, the closure of Barassie Works and Inverurie meant that all work came to the one remaining workshop in Scotland – the Glasgow Works.  In 1995 BRML was privatised and the St. Rollox site was sold to a Babcock/Siemens consortium along with the Wolverton site. In 2002 it was then sold to Alstom. In 2007 Alstom sold the site to RailCare Ltd. RailCare continued to operate the site until it went into administration on August 2, 2013.

Knorr Bremse were subsequently involved, and finally Gemini Rail, which began life in 2009, and remains based in Birmingham.  In a statement, announcing the closure, the company made this statement:

“…. with sincere regret that Gemini Rail Services announces that severely adverse market conditions means it will be closing operations at Springburn.”

The company also suggested Springburn’s location and a major decline in work contributed to the depot’s was ongoing, unsustainable losses.

Springburn rail depot’s closure confirmed with up to 200 jobs lost labelled a ‘betrayal’ of Scottish rail industry

Looking at this, and given the UK Government’s continued insistence about the ‘huge invetment’ in the rail network, capacity, trains and services, this seems an odd reason for the closure of the depot.   Scotland still has trains to operate and in need of maintenance.

So now, rail engineering, as with shipbuilding and heavy engineering has finally come to an end in Scotland.  Whilst we can see that there are still discussions, consultations and negotiations going on – this is a tragedy for UK engineering, and another loss – we can only hope it doesn’t turn into another supermarket or office park.

-oOo-