Why the Larkhall Branch ?

[Hugh Spicer]

SPT are spending millions restoring the branch line to Larkhall (which is
due to open in just a few weeks). And restoring it with electrification as
well ! But why Larkhall ? Why did SPT chose to ignore the options of
restoring links to Bridge of Weir and Kilmacolm ? Just a thought ;-)

[o***@hotmail.com]

Larkhall is a much bigger place than Bridge of Weir and Kilmacolm put
together. They did some studies IIRC and found it to be worthwhile. The
trackbed was still there, so the logistics of relaying that section
were the same as relaying to Kilmacolm - except that it's a shorter
distance.

I presume electrification was added in because all the routes from
there on in are electrified, so the new service could be fitted in with
existing ones. Plus if it was diesel, trains would have to go to
Central High Level, which is at full stretch. It's much easier to
electrify for re-opening than to try and add it later.

Kilmacolm is a possible reopening, but there are problems:

1) Elderslie to Paisley Canal has been built over, so trains would have
to use the Gilmour Street section, which is overstretched

2) it would be yet another service trying to fit into overstretched
Central. The Airport link has to be fitted into existing patterns
fairly soon.

3) the line (unlike Larkhall) is a walker's and cyclist's route, and
there might be objections to withdrawing this,

and, most pertinently

4) it's undeniable that there used to be a service to Kilmacolm, but
that was withdrawn because of lack of usage.

Nonetheless I wish the campaigners well. If only they'd restore 4
tracks (rather than just the 3 planned with the airport link) from
Gilmour Street in. Then, if Crossrail ever happens, there'll no longer
be any problems fitting trains into Central.