The 'trolley problem' is a popular academic moral dilemma which unrealistically hypothesises a situation where a 'controller' has two options, both bad, and Must decide which course of action to take. For Hazard to use this inappropriate analogy is symptomatic of his biased under-researched EdinTram offering, which, faced with unexpected consequences from logical decisions, Hazard sarcastically dismisses those 'best efforts'. The 'trolley problem' requires an acceptance of tolerable casualty rate, which is a military reality not applicable to a public transport design decision or risk assessment. Hazard clearly has little/no experience of Project Implementation Reality.
As an Edinburgh person who’s been away wandering the wider world for over 50 years, we do like to come back and visit and check up on the family. We saw just the edge of the disruption caused by building the tram system and would hate to have lived through it but..... Visiting yet again just last week for a family wedding etc. we could not fault the trams, their convenience, fares, schedules and just downright enjoyment. Living out at an hotel at Edinburgh Park with trams and mainline trains within minutes made life so easy as no one, even residents really wants to use a car in Edinburgh if they can avoid it. Let’s put the past where it belongs, it’s built now, it works so embrace it.
Agree. I too am an ex-Edinburgh citizen who still occasionally comes "home" and the tram connection from the Airport to the town centre is a great boon!
@@BlazeClone surely you don’t drive a car instead. Where on earth would you park? Even if I bring my car to visit, it would be parked outside the city, probably in my hotel car park and stay there till it was time to leave. In between it would be trams or buses. It was bad enough trying to drive in Edinburgh 50 years ago, sod that for a lark these days.
@@terryvaughan8095 as a resident not as a visitor, the trams are clearly marketed towards tourism / visitors than for residents as they stand now. A majority of residents in Edinburgh would tell you they avoid getting on public transport due to traffic congestion, slow speed and unreliability, this is especially true when you are trying to avoid the centre of the city, as only a handful of routes go around or avoid it these are always slower paced routes which take even longer to get from A to B
Before the 1960s, Edinburgh had an extensive railway network in the north, many of these lines although abandoned and ripped up are still there as walking paths, and some still even have tracks. Maybe in the future we could relay and recreate these lines
I’ve lived in so many places in the USA where most of the rail lines have been torn up. My hometown had interurban electric trains to nearby cities and a tram system that hooked to it… all extirpated before my birth in 1961. Only a few remnants of tram tracks remained up to the late 1970s, and finally they were ripped up.
@@markiangooley there was a time period where you could travel from somewhere in Maine (Bangor maybe?) all the way to Wisconsin entirely by electric interurban trains. We must never forget what the auto industry took from us...
I live in the south of the city and our old rail line ─ the Suburban ─ is still there and functioning, just sans stations and electrification. It's deeply frustrating, particularly when I see Glasgow with their suburban rail network and metro. I still hold a view that it would be cheaper and better if we just renovate and rebuild the old rail network in a manner like the Borders. Then again, I imagine it would still be full of problems waiting to emerge. Ah well, it's nice to dream.
I am of the opinion that a proper ‘network’ with multiple lines would make the trams considerably more popular with locals - one of the problems with the line as built is the fact it doesn’t exactly serve the most densely populated areas of Edinburgh (although extending down to Leith will improve the sitiuation). While converting the disused rail corridor between Haymarket and Granton would be easier, cheaper and less disruptive, I would suggest that the proposal to run a branch south to the Royal Infirmary should be the next step. In addition to connecting the hospital itself, my understanding is that the corridor between North Bridge and Craigmillar is the most densely populated area of the city, not to mention you’d pass the Royal Mile and the University on your way.
As another resident. I can only agree! I've actually only had need to use the line twice when I needed to attend business events at Edinburgh Park, and it was actually really pleasant! I would definitely use it more if it served south Edinburgh, and I can see extensions to all the areas like Newbridge with house building being very important.
true, Bridges to Craigmillar is a very dense area of population, but, exactly because of that, the disruption caused by ANY additional over-ground transport on this corridor does not bare thinking about.... the roads up to Tollcross are simply too narrow (and, with all the historic districts, to widen them would basically be sacrilege),
going down Leith-walk or Easter road would be a much more effective addition, especially if you can continue down the A901 [Junction RD then changes a few names] on to Granton (as was originally planned)... Lothian RD only makes sense if you extend all the way up to morning-side or even Oxgangs... like Marchmont, it is a "walk into the center" district, & the commuting population for Lothian itself is not so big.
I feel that a "Clockwork Mini-Subway" (like in Glasgow) would suit the Auld C'ty well... though, if you had to make a tram link into the Reeky itself, I would say do it via Saint-Cuthbert's (Kings-Stables) RD, onto Johnston Terrace, through Grassmarket Square, and out onto The Pleasance, after that, returning, either down the end of the Royal Mile, then onto Calton-Hill/Balmoral or via the Pleasance itself to thesame, linking back to York Place... the disruption should be minimal, but, it will actually give a very useful additional route through the center
I visited Edinburgh and stayed at a low cost hotel at the edge of the city, with free parking and a 20 metre walk to the very regular trams. 20 minutes and I was in Princess Street, stress free and happy. Thank you Edinburgh do continue with your tram project, they're great.
I use the park and ride fairly regularly, the extension from York Place to Leith, should really help businesses down that route. Particularly looking forward to visiting the new distillery at Port of Leith and the Scotch Malt Whisky Society, as well as other waterfront venues. In 20 years time, nobody will be remembering the issues in building it. They will just be sorry they didn't complete the whole circle.
Edinburgh resident here. Edi as a city is the exact kind of place that would benefit immensely from a tram network. It's compact, it's got a decent density of people throughout, and it woudl easily work with the bus network. The trams themselves are nice, but they really don't do much at the moment. I feel like with things lining up the city will become more open. I also know a lot of residents are just absolutely sick of the construction: it seems like central edinburgh has been under perpetual construction for over a decade now
Fun fact - Bilfinger Berger had their Edinburgh office in a building I once worked in, used to joke that they should be paying us protection money to ensure that we didn't tell the rest of the city where they were.
I think they help run the ethylene plant at Mossmorran in Fife - it was smoking, but no flames this afternoon. Last week looking from Portobello beach the flame was a very golden burn colour for several minutes. I wonder what other pies Bilfinger have fingers poking through?.
A friend of mine who worked in Cologne had dealings with Bilfinger Berger in the early 1970s, about the time the two parts were starting to amalgamate. She said she did not find the company easy to deal with. The Wikipedia articles on the company might add some illumination about its attitude.
I was in Edinburgh at the weekend and the trams were packed with rugby supporters heading to and from Murrayfield. There's no question a city like Edinburgh needs some sort of rapid transit system. While the costs of building the line were incredibly high, the end result is a great asset for the city. I just wish the now under construction extension to Leith had been completed a lot sooner. I look forward to travelling on it.
As a resident I disagree. The trams occupy space that is also used by buses (except for the bit heading towards the airport) and occupy a lot more space per passenger than the double decker buses do. The trams serve places that were already covered by bus. For a fraction of £1.2 billion Edinburgh could have had a whole new fleet of electric double decker buses.
The Edinburgh trams are the majority of times empty....and now the buses are packed as less are put on ..I'm sure rugby supporters could get coaches or the 12.26 or 31 bus to mention only a few
The toy tram set is hardly "rapid" - it's no faster than the bus if you want to use it to get to the airport and unlike buses, tramcars can't be diverted when the polis close off Princes street for an age as they carry out a risk assessment before intervening in a fight between pigeons.
Excellent vide, Jago - though the cost of the extension is £120 million, not £12 million. One thing I would add is that from a local politics perspective there is now something of a consensus to expand the trams further. The SNP have long since dropped their opposition, and the ruling Labour administration, along with the Lib Dems and Greens are all in favour. So (economics willing), there’s a fair chance we will see more lines in the future. The population is mostly reconciled to them, and while there may not be love for them yet, there’s quite a bit of enthusiasm in the west of the city where they are most useful - that hopefully will extend to the North East too, once the Newhaven extension is complete. So generally things look reasonably positive compared to where we were a decade ago.
That's a fair assessment, I think. Many of my fellow citizens were quite right to complain about the lack of progress, especially if they were living, and/or trying to run a business along the intended route. Now we seem to see light at the end of the tunnel, thankfully.
He says the inquiry has cost £500 million, but every other source I've read says £12-13 million. And surely it would be impossible to spend £500m on an inquiry. Otherwise you'd need an inquiry into the inquiry.
I remember back when I was at university, I had just bought a newspaper (remember those?) and on the front cover was the headline "Trams are coming back" and for over a decade they kept digging up the same bits of road over and over again, what a nightmare that was. Thank you for another video in your "Tales From Scotland" series.
I live in Scotland and don't often venture through to Edinburgh, but any time I have the tram works have, at some point, impinged on my journey. I can only imagine how cheesed off the residents are. That said, I am all in favour of trams and wish they'd just improved and not scrapped the original ones all over the country. Cheers
Most of us residents know it will enhance not only tourism but the price of property as well as making life easier for a lot of us that don't want to rely on cars to get about.
@@cathsoutar5889 When your property prices go up think of the other Scots who are confined to their homes because public transport is so shameful. Take a step back and look at yourself ffs
Slight correction, Edinburgh Council are the majority shareholder in both Lothian Buses and Edinburgh Trams but both are operated separately at an arms length with no direct council involvement. There was talk of Lothian Buses and Edinburgh Trams merging at some point, as they have the same owner, but nothing has come of that yet. The line originally opened in May 2014 to York Place but the York Place stop is now disused and removed. They have built a replacement stop at Picardy Place outside the Playhouse Theatre, in preparation for the Leith section opening next year. St Andrew Square is the temporary terminus until the Leith section opens in Summer 2023. Excellent video as always 😊
@@stanislavkostarnov2157 There's no loop, end-to-end it runs from the airport, via Haymarket, then down Princes Street and turning left into St. Andrew Square, where it currently terminates. It has never run along George Street.
@@dom1310df Unlike Council owned Blackpool Transport which has Tory councillors on the board of directors, none of the directors at Lothian Buses or Edinburgh Trams are councillors. Only link to Edinburgh Council is they are the majority shareholder in the both companies but they have no say in the day to day running of the companies. 😊
Edinburgh native here, the reality of the situation was that when it was being constructed we were still suffering from the economic crash of '08, unemployment was rampant, homelessness was at an all-time high, budget cuts were happening everywhere, suicide rates were rocketing. So to have this project happening right in the centre, for them to dig up all the roads and realise they made a mistake, have to cover it all back up, then dig up and make more mistakes, taking years to complete the project and spending 10x+ the original estimate and causing massive disruptions, this has to go down as one of the most disgraceful projects in modern history. And what was it all for? To replace a bus service that was already one of the most efficient services in the city, that had it's own dedicated road that had buses every 5 minutes, absolutely useless and now we're left with is a mess of cables running above the length of princes street that obscures the beautiful view of the castle. The billion pound bulldozer has started rolling down the hill and now to cover up the shame of the project more money has to be dumped into it in an attempt to justify a horrific investment.
Loved the title. Constructing tram lines in urban areas seems to take years these days. It certainly did in Nottingham, but I suppose the original Victorian lines were not faced with a plethora of underground services, other than sewarage, and probably ignored any archeology they found, if indeed they recognised it as such.
Brilliant service ! Straight out of arrivals at the Airport, right on to a tram. Within 25 mins or so, one arrives at Waverley Station and can connect to the Rail Service. Best innovation in decades !
I've moved to Scotland in 2017, so I didn't get all of the controversy and for me it is just a system that has been there ever since I got to Scotland. I must say I only have good experiences with it. I regularly use Ingliston Park and Ride. It's really an ideal way to get to Edinburgh while not having to bother driving and parking in the city centre. I definitely like it.
The first phase of the Luas tram network in Dublin was finished a few years before Edinburgh's construction began and it seemed like a shitshow before this, at least they continued to build the network after the difficult first phase. But if you're talking about wasted money vs non-existent results, the Dublin Metro or Metrolink has Edinburgh beaten; not a single shovel has touched the ground and it's cost over €100m to date
Yes in both Dubin (Luas) and Manchester (Metrolink), locals at 1st resented the major street disruption caused. Now most are pleased and each system has had extensions done- with increased usage.
The Dublin metro is now to begin in 2024 according to the Irish government but i wouldnt bet on it its a great mistake that Edinburgh didnt extend their tram network
"Historic Xity" as a retro liveried Lothian Bus goes by. There is some argument that bus wise , Lothian (Edinburgh Corporation as was) is a better bus company than London Transport , after adjusting for size.
Having travelled on Edinburgh trams on a good number of occasions I can say that notwithstanding any financial hiccups, the trams give a vital and reliable service linking the airport, Waverley Station and Murrayfield Stadium. Every time I've been on them they seem to be well-used, possibly by tourists rather than residents. Without them, getting to and from the airport would be a real pain
Luton airport link! Seriously as an Scottish concession travel holder, the fact that free travel is limited to Edinburgh residents means I will never use it.
I moved from Lancashire to Edinburgh just as they opened and people were telling me how great it was and how exciting they were and I had to remind them I was from Blackpool 🤷♂️
£750m for a 14km tramline?! There's some serious grift at work there! I was in Warsaw a few months back, they built the 19km line 2 of their metro for about €160m, and that was considered scandalous. Now I know Poland is generally cheaper than the UK, but it isn't the 3rd world either and this was in the capital city. And despite outward appearances, Warsaw is a pretty old city, they had archaeology (and a copious amount of ordnance) to deal with.
One of the contractor apparently put clauses in the contract that tied the Council into a difficult financial situation thereby requiring the Scottish Govt to intervene
@@touristtam It is bad enough that there was *no-one* in the council with enough knowledge of either large scale public procurement or infrastructure projects to recognise the stitch-up. What is worse is that the possibility of such a problem arising was very high in the risk register and was ignored completely by the council.
Maybe they should have come here to Fleetwood to see how things are done. We had, at the time, the only main street tramway in operation in the entire country. It's the northern end of the Blackpool tramway. When the lines were upgraded in c. 2011/2012 it took an absolute age to get the service running again. Like Edinburgh the whole street became a ditch and though work progressed it was often only one guy doing something with 20 others looking on. Eventually everything got back to normal, though I don't like the new trams that much. Last year I visited Edinburgh for the first time in 30 years and used the tram to get about, limited as it was. Often it was easier to simply walk in from the hotel in Haymarket to the city centre. The ticketing was at first confusing, we have conductors back here, and the seeking out of a machine at Murrayfield turned into some what of a treasure hunt as it's hidden in some dark corner of the site and not on the platform as you might expect.
The Edinburgh Tram was perfect (for us coming in as tourists) travelling from the airport in and stopping at our hotel en route. I was aware that a large section of it was still not built however.
The effects of the line down to Newhaven should be interesting. Leith Walk and its surrounding streets are amongst the densest areas of housing in the city. Leith proper has undergone huge changes in the past couple of decades, with flats going up seemingly on even the most unlikely plots of land. Newhaven is, in parts, unrecognisable, compared to my experience as a boy, forty-odd years ago. Again, new flats, and all the infrastructure that goes with it. These residents are the ones who stand to truly benefit from the trams.
A fun video. I lived in Edinburgh from '96 - '07, and remember much of the controversy. One small correction: if I remember correctly, Edinburgh residents were given a referendum on the Congestion Charge - which they voted against. (Checked: it was in 2005.)
Having lived in Edinburgh during the works, the whole project was a mess. I remember leaving for work in a morning and having to come home a different way because of the works. I lived just off Leith walk,.... then they decided not to go to Leith. Now they are digging it up again.
I grew up in Edinburgh, but left 40 years ago, and found the video very interesting. A friend who left Edinburgh at the same time to move to Sheffield has never used the tram there because no lines run near where she lives. We remarked that if we had still been living where we grew up, we probably wouldn't have used the Edinburgh tram, either on its current route or any of the planned / axed extensions. (Incidentally, Ingliston is pronounced 'Ingalston' just to confuse people!) I remember seeing a presentation in about 1974 by a friend's father who was a lecturer at Edinburgh University that used a lot of disused railway lines to create a Light Rapid Transport system that was pretty comprehensive. The LRT system was never taken up and many of the lines became cycle tracks.
@@alexanderfoster3628 Buses simply don't cut it anymore in a growing city the size of Edinburgh. You're not considering that trams have much more capacity than buses, how much time is saved entering trams vs queuing up for single points of entry on buses (while also clogging the pavements for people walking), or the lack of level boarding on buses that makes it harder for people with mobility issues. Trams are also less bumpy and more reliably on time (assuming they're given traffic priority).
Use the tram on most visits to Edinburgh as we stay at a hotel on the line. It's a great asset to the city. Look forward to it being extended. From the west to centre it's much quicker than the bus as well. Keep faith with it Edinburgh.
As someone who visits Edinburgh, I am very glad the Tram is there, getting to and from the airport is so very easy. I am looking forward to the new section being done when I come back again.
As a former Edinburgh resident, I can tell you that the airport bus is quicker than the tram and runs on a lower fare. Just a little tip for your next visit
Edinburgh airport bus is cheaper, quicker, runs more frequently and is 24 hours. Edinburgh trams stop running after 10PM (or 11) so not suited for very late flights or the people who work at the airport.
In Sydney NSW, laying down the tracks for the recently opened ESLR came across a different problem: all the tracks of the old system that were encased in concrete had to be taken up first and that took ages. And they found that old electricity and phone cables had been buried beneath the surface but whoever put them there hadn't bothered to record their exact location! It was found that a stretch of old track at Kensington was actually almost like new, having been laid down only a few years before the La Perouse Line (Sydney's last) closed. The Sydney Tramway Museum were very happy to acquire this track!
Living in Nottingham, this is very familiar tale. Our local high street was closed completely, we were told this was to be for 4 months max. A year later, our local MP at the time, Anna Soubry, went visiting the various retailers, all of whom were near to ruin, promising them that she'd secured a deal to have the high road open within 4 weeks. Had she physically looked at the road and how far the contractors had reached, she might have realised they had blatantly lied to her. It took yet another 5 months. This was just an extension to the existing network. Completion was something like 18 months late. To this day the City Council still allege it came in on budget at £570m. Not a chance in a hell. No one has ever found out the truth.
"You are the completed survey to my proposed tramline" is the most romantic and unromantic thing I ever heard. I think if a women would say that to me I would be confused what to feel af.
Could you cover the Borders Railway? This was reopened to Tweedbank, opened by the Queen in 2015. It should be extended to Carlisle via Hawick and the sooner the better.
Is that the one that they downsized from two tracks to one and pig-headedly downsized all the new bridges and infrastructure also so that it could never be upgraded to two lines?
They have been a huge success here in Dublin after the usual initial hagglings as in Edinburgh. They are really striding ahead now with almost something new every year. Very extensive. A couple of words of note for others thinking of going the same route. Due their popularity they are packed except for off peak hours and we seem to have a large antisocial behaviour problem from young thugs and the authorities have been finding it hard to get a handle on it.
The Edinburgh Tram is to extend to Port of Leith and also to Lower Granton forming a loop around North Edinburgh and also plans to extend to North Newbridge and to Musselburgh that I think it should happen if plans do go ahead. I have been to Edinburgh several times and it is such a lovely city in Scotland. And earlier this year when I went there for the funeral it started to snow heavily. And it was quite emotional but amazing.
End of last year start of this I was using the trams quite frequently from West Edinburgh into the city centre and it was a really good Tram network with frequent service and well used. Feel as more opens it'll become much more liked as it really is a nice handy service.
It may also be that the trams built for Edinburgh are more than 10m longer than the trams used in Croydon - I don't know whether that would make them too big for some of the platforms or for the depot.
Greater length could possibly be a problem in Croydon at Sandilands, for example, which was the scene of the accident on the sharp curve a few years ago.
Stops like East Croydon, West Croydon, Lebanon Road, and Sandilands may have problems with extensions due to Road crossings/buildings/junctions being in the way making it cost prohibitive - for step free purposes the platforms have to be straight
I've always though that what they should have done with the trams is connect them up to the suburban railway lines, which would have given them a much greater reach at comparatively little extra cost. Much of the old Edinburgh rail infrastructure is gone but parts survive, even if just to ensure there's a way into Edinburgh when the main line is closed for some reason. York Place used to be the final stop on the city end of the line, but getting the track from York Place over to the top of Leith Walk for the second phase (Trams to Newhaven) required running it through exactly where the York Place platform was.
As a regular visitor ton Edinburgh over the past 23 years I’m well aware of the tram controversy but Jago fills in many of the details I’d not been aware of. He mentioned the disused railways around Edinburgh there are many of these running to places like new haven that are now cycle routes and walkways and there has been talk of putting in tram lines along these. I lived and worked in gullane near Musselburgh for some years and these places used to have train lines running to them, the routes these tracks took still being noticeable. When I was last in Edinburgh I say the tram lines being laid to Leith. The tram service did remind me of the Croydon system when I first used Edinburgh’s with its mix of street and old railway line use, and speaking of injuries and fatalities Croydon trams have had their share. I have to confess that despite the controversy and many of my Edinburgh friend’s opinions of it I like the trams. I also recall that it was supported by Edinburgh Green Party.
Unfortunately despite surface level appeal reopening suburban rail lines or running trams along the formerly-rail path network both have issues. They're doing another "feasibility study" on the Edinburgh South Suburban line at the moment, it being the most obviously "just run trains on it" level of complete since it's still active as a goods line and for emergency bypass when the main line is knackered, but that'll come back the same as the last one: it's not practicable because the only two options are to route it through Waverly which is already nearing the limit of its capacity and so the southsub service would be infrequent and irregular, ie pointless, or else build a new tunnel for it to bypass Waverly entirely which would cost so much money the project would be completely non-viable. Using parts of the North Edinburgh Path Network for the tram "loop" design was considered but ultimately seems to have been abandoned and for good reason. For a start, the walking and cycling paths network would have to go, there are many pinch-points where there simply isn't room in the cut for both a tramline and accessibility-compliant pathways, even if you only ran single track through. On top of that, given how deep the cut is relative to street level in many sections and how built up the areas around the paths are now, you'd struggle to get more than one or two locations where you could build stops that would actually be useful to anybody. The fact is the answer to Edinburgh's congestion problem is to get rid of the things causing the congestion as much as possible: cars have got to go. Reallocating street space for trams, buses, and cycling is how we get the city moving again, not trying to resurrect rail systems where frankly passenger services were always a secondary consideration to industrial and goods needs.
Superb documentary, Jago. Thanks very much for making and sharing this. I've had the pleasure of using the Edinburgh trams once, and enjoyed it immensely. I'll look forward to doing so again. New modes of transport are always, as you so rightly mentioned at the star, controversial. Ultimately it's hiw they benefit the public which should really be the standard. Yesterday I picked it a leaflet at Homerton Overground Station which focuses on 15 years of the Overground in London. I remember a relatively low-key launch of the Overground in the autumn of 2997 featuring Ken Livingston and his vision of reinvigorating some of the old surface London lines which were starved of investment at the time. I think the Overground network has been an unrivalled success. Hats off to the visionaries behind the Edinburgh tram system and the London Overground 👏🏾🚇🌟❤
Now I have Marillion's Heart of Lothian as an ear worm. That being said, it's a pretty good song to have as an ear worm ....On the outskirts of nowhere. On the ringroad to somewhere. On the verge of indecision. I'll always take the roundabout way.
A friend of mine, in Edinburgh, told me that, during the construction delays, some "genius" decided that buses should run where the tracks had been laid. The heavy buses flattened the asphalt, thus making the tracks stick up too far from the road. So, the tracks had to be completely relaid.
Trams are significantly heavier than buses. What your friend told you is total nonsense. I live in a city where buses run on tram routes. There has never been any issue, perhaps because we know how to build tram lines. The tracks are mounted on concrete sleepers, so it doesn't matter whether there's grass or asphalt between or next to the tracks. What surprises me most is that the Scottish haven't found a way to blame the English for their bad tram lines.
@@jacquesmertens3369 The tracks themselves didn't sink. The asphalt around them, which wasn't meant to be driven on, got flattened, leaving the rails sticking up too far from the road surface.
@@OofusTwillip If the tracks didn't move because they were properly attached to concrete sleepers, then it's only the bus that had an issue. Still no reason to stop the tram. Was the asphalt ordered from Irish travellers?
One of the (many) strange things about British politics is that government (local, regional, devolved or Westminster) can somehow always willingly and happily afford hundreds of millions of pounds for public enquiries into failing projects with no discussion or heartache, yet somehow can never afford the tens of millions to make those projects actually work in the first place without lots of complaining and much heartache.
The tram systems are not failed projects. HS2 is also necessary. The only issue with HS2 is the lack of commitment and foresight from the idiot Tories to commit to building not only from London to Leeds as well as Manchester, but obviously on to Scotland also. Anecdotal but my rail engineer friend in Edinburgh explained they did consider starting work from both ends as it were. Building the line in the UK is massively expensive but totally necessary. It would have incurred more costs to build from England and Scotland simultaneously but he believes it should have been done. Now Scotland is rightly annoyed it isn't even on the horizon. Services from Scotland will still benefit but it isn't direct. Make no mistake it will be built but when..
@@JohnnyZenith yeah, journeys from Glasgow and Edinburgh could’ve been about half the time, as it stands they’ll only be half an hour faster. No extra freight or local capacity freed-up on the WCML and ECML either. It could’ve helped with connecting the northern English cities too, ie share some trunk with new branches. Such a shame. HS2 could’ve revolutionised the trunk lines across the whole island. Now it’s a small London-centric system. 😔
@@kaitlyn__L Despite the pretence by politicians (of all parties), they never intended HS2 to be a genuine link to the north. Its primary purpose is to remove long-distance InterCity trains off the southernmost section of the West Coast Main Line between London and Milton Keynes so that more outer-suburban trains can be run for the Home Counties. Any other improvements are nice, but not particularly important to the politicians. It was always London-centric, because our government is. In other words, the NIMBYs who are protesting so much about HS2 are the very people it's intended to benefit!
@@atraindriver quite. I always mourn wasted potential but it’s true that even the most ambitious plans put forward only went to Manchester (which would still have been a big improvement but hey), extensions to Glasgow and Edinburgh was a “we’ll see” even under otherwise-maximalist Labour proposals. So there would always be wasted potential even in the best situation, let alone the one we have now with HS2.
I love how condense so much into so little and keep thoroughly salient. There are so many tangents to go off on. I was on the first tram sat next to an ex nurse who was on the last tram. She still had her souvenir ticket from 1956 in her spectacle case. I'm sure she said the cobbles outside the Royal Infirmary were wooden. I can vouch the trams were in stook and it was cutting it really fine as to if and where they would run. At Haymarket, for two weeks only, a couple of concrete buffer blocks suddenly appeared during construction while the rest of the works were still lurking about all over the place. This was to be the terminus. Then they suddenly vanished. To gain room, Haymarket tramstop was extended over the station cutting. A rather nice pub was demolished to allow this to happen. When the Princes' St contract was first done, the tracks ran from Waverley Bridge to Lothian Road and that was that. End of track. Tarmac thereafter. I remember cycling round a guy as I was turning onto Waverley Bridge. Then word got back to me that I was on tv. The guy in the middle of the road turned out to be a cameraman. I still appear on archive footage. It's a grey day but I'm on a bright orange bike (BSA 3 speed, 1980's). Then they had to do the trackwork all over again. Bicycles are allowed on trams. The tram layout is proven unsafe for cyclists. It is lethal and badly thought out. There have been many court cases to this effect. The route to Granton was controversial. It involves the old Caly/LMS to Granton and the Northern Sub through Costorphine Hill. This is a thoroughly successful and vital cycle track and wildlife corridor. The question of how to fit everything in that space was never resolved but walkers, cyclists, and a large family of viscous badgers at the Eurocrest Hotel (technically in the embankment under it) all put their oar, and teeth, in on that one. York Place was the terminus until a few months ago. Trams still use the points there to reverse but they terminate at St. Andrew Sq. now. Yet in comparative double quick time new track has been laid an island platform built a couple of hundred yards away in Picardy Place where the Statue of Sherlock Holmes was (or stil is? will be again?). The new overhead is not up yet.
@@SaxonSuccess Quite probably psychologically disturbed. They've faced me off, and puffed themselves into cute fluffy balls of hissing teeth when I surprised them on the bike.
Living in Fife I regularly used to visit Edinburgh however during the construction fiasco I avoided the city like the plague. Venturing further afield by Scotrail or bus. Even travelling to Aberdeen for days out shopping. Now in autumn of 2022 and I’ve only been across the water once.
The major problem is government corruption,and self dealing,but that has gone on for,yea these 150 plus years!! If you look at the history of transport projects,both in the UK,and US,there are many operations[built,and unbuilt],caught up in some bribery scandal(s),and every city,had some acclaim to same!! See Chicago,San Francisco,New York,London,and sundry other Municipal venues!! The Tweed Ring in New York was memorable,but one of many!! Thanks Jago,your sense of what makes things run,is excellent 👍,thank you!! 😇!
My one and only visit to Edinburgh was in 2012, when roads were being dug up. We were only there a week and suddenly the road layout changed becaus they wanted to start digging somewhere else. Would love to go back sometime and ride one of those trams.
Robert Risson deserves praise from every Melbourne citizen who watches this video for keeping Melbourne's tram system in place while so many other cities did away with it. The issue is the same in Sydney and Edinburgh. Simple to get rid of, extremely costly to replace.
Lived in Edinburgh for four years and can count on one hand the times I took the tram. The airport has the Airlinks and the remainder route is served by Lothian Buses. A wild.project.
Pretty good video. Just a few points. Ingleston is pronounced "ingelston". The SNP Scottish Government were not responsible for scrapping road charging. The City of Edinburgh Council in fact carried out a consultation on this, which returned a resounding no. Tram Line 3 was not to go to Musselburgh. It was in fact to go to Little France in the south of Edinburgh, where the then new Royal Infirmary hospital was being built. I should know; I live literally up the road from Little France, and many here are clamouring for Tram Line 3 to be resurrected, to alleviate the increased traffic created by the hospital. By the way, the section of tramway from Saughton to Hermiston Gate is on a former experimental guided busway, built 2005 I believe. If you go back to the 1990s there were other public transport ideas, including a north-south Edinburgh Crossrail, part of which would have utilised Scotland Street Tunnel, closed to rail traffic since 1868. One more crazy idea was a Royal Mile tramway, using kinetic energy, where energy from the downhill run would collect in a flywheel, enabling an uphill run. In the late 1980s/early 1990s there was one person suggested an Edinburgh light rail, based on two loops, using the Edinburgh Suburban Railway in the south, and the disused Leith North branch in the north. However, due to the council's obsession with on-road trams, that person walked away. Now, just who was that again? Oh yes - it was me. There was once a billboard in Princes Street, declaring "Taking you to the airport in 2012". Someone wrote below that, "Making me late for work in 2009". I wonder who could ever have done such a thing?
I was born and raised in Phoenix, Arizona (5th largest city in the US and one of the largest geographical cities in the US) and we didn't have light rail until late 2008. It suffered a lot of the same issues as this tram system, but after time and a few years of operations, it started to turn a small profit. Ridership was eventually low and complaints were many, but then people started noticing how efficient it was and extensions were slowly planned (with two added). Ridership gathered steam over the years and most citizens of Phoenix metro would say the light rail is a success. I think given time, the tram system in Edinburgh metro will be like Phoenix's: slow to start but successful in the long run.
I'm a Hearts season ticket holder for my sins, living not too far from London, so the tram is perfect for me, getting on at the airport through to Haymarket, leaving me with just a short wander along Dalry Road. I can leave home after 9am for a Saturday afternoon kick-off and be back indoors comfortably before 10pm. Much as I am grateful for it, it does seem shortsighted by the council to think that their target custom is just me (and my son when he tags along).
Per comment from Al Storer below. I've just remembered. The line through Sighthill was the guided busway, possibly worth a video on its own. It gave the trams a partly built route with some dedicate bridges. It was the no. 21's that used it, probably others. You could tell because they had wee sideways guide wheels on their corners that stuck out. I remember testing a bike along it one night about 4 a.m. but I never actually used the buses.
The guided busway was something I could never understand the point of. It took the buses off the road for a mile or so well outside the city centre where doing so might have been helpful and required modified buses, thus limiting the buses which could serve that route to a small proportion of the fleet.
@@Michael75579 They were a thing for a while back in the 1980s. Birmingham had the first one in Britain, Tracline, which was unashamedly promoted as a testbed for greater future plans (before something called bus deregulation screwed those plans up) to go along with proposals for a major West Midlands Metro project, and various other cities decided that they couldn't possibly be overshadowed by Birmingham. As far as I'm aware only Bradford and Edinburgh ever actually put concrete on the ground, and I think only Bradford's scheme is actually anything like worthwhile rather than a vanity project. Oh, and Gosport got one about 10 years ago which skulks along an old railway to make up for not being allowed the trams that they'd been promised.
Great video as always Jago, being Edinburgh born but currently living in London it was an interesting watch. One thing you did miss was part of the tramline reused the Fastlink (I believe it was called) guided busway, which itself had cost a lot of money to build, and was only open for a very short time, before it was closed for the tram works.
@@JagoHazzard Thank you for reading my comment and replying. Guided busway are quite interesting, they make a bus a bit more trainlike, steering the bus using small guidewheels fitted to the front axle, that run along the concrete.
Great video. One small point however. The concession passes on the Tram only being for local residents wasn't directly because of a decision by Lothian Buses but was forced on them. The issue is that the travel concession scheme is jointly funded by all Scottish local councils which allows for pass use across the whole of Scotland,. Unfortunately all the council's beyond Lothian refused to fund concessions on the trams leaving Lothian Buses to either fund the concessions themselves or not accept them at all. As they were already under a lot of financial pressure having just taken on management of the tram from a business perspective Lothian Buses had no choice to not accept passes from outside the area.
Good summary Jago. Last time I wanted to go from Edinburgh airport to Waverly station I took the air-rail bus. It was cheaper than the tram (which charges a premium for the last stop to the airport) and the bus drops you off outside the station. It was sleeting and we had luggage so more convenient. Pity, I would have like to have experienced them.
It seems to me that there's a fundamental issue underlying the problems with the Edinburgh trams - the car-centric mindset the residents have. The city knows they have an issue with traffic congestion getting worse every year, but at the same time none of them really want to acknowledge that any success at reducing it means fully embracing other transport modes besides cars. That has at least indirectly led to the snafus and other mismanagement of the trams. The city has a long road ahead if they want to resolve the problem. Informative video and also a cautionary tale.
No the council initiatives have created slower speed limits,endless speed bumps,spaces for people schemes and generally increased pollution because cars are now stuck in ineffecient road schemes and take longer to complete the same journey.....I know I live there....endless road works that get dug up and left weeks before they get finished,bus and taxi lanes that cyclists run the gauntlet on too..The council is quite happy issuing more street permits than there are spaces too just to make more money.Princes Street is a joke full of tat shops because the real shops moved out because its too much hassle driving and parking,and of course you cant take a bootfull of shopping on the new hybrid buses that are too big for the streets and have no room inside because of the hybrid equipment.....So look at the council before blaming car drivers that get fleeced,paying tax on fuel,paying to be fleeced coming into the city paying road tax that isnt used on roads....
@Jeff Schrader I dont think residents are car centric. I gave mine up because the problems with parking costs, not enough resident spaces or protected parking time for residents meant constantly getting tickets or parking a long way from your home, the rising price of the resident permits and still getting no space, and having to go on very expensive meter parking pr risk a ticket of you dont move ot at the crack of dawn. Living in the city centre is not easy without a car for things like normal food shopping where the big supermarkets are out of town and the small ones are super expensive and theres only so much you can physically carry yourself and haul up to your 5th floor tenement with no lift! Just getting to DIY type stores is difficult and theres stuff you just cant haul onto the bus sensibly...then it's very costly cab rides and some cabbies are a bit funny about what they'll let you get in with. You then have to pay for delivery for stuff you could otherwise have picked up in a car. Getting stuff to the tip...another big challenge and costly endeavour in a city centre. Mostly people in the city centre use buses and walk because it's easier than parking and the sheer cost!
I think you're right, however, traffic was already horrendous even in the 80's in Edinburgh. I know I used to sit in it, whether in a bus or a car. Outside of rush hour though it was ok. But then buses move quick as well. Now I live in Toronto, obviously a much larger city. Our massive highways do nothing to stop traffic congestion induced demand and all that. In comparison, Edinburgh is a doddle to get around purely by virtue of distances. Trams and dedicated right of way LRT trains are good. Subways are even better. This is happening all over Canada in our cities; expansion in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Quebec City (similar to Edinburgh centrally although a bit more sprawly) and more. All of it very disruptive, all of it very very expensive. All of it will benefit these cities' futures. Actually, shameless plug, I have a channel covering some of it! @grammin . BTW I miss Edinburgh .... a lot! Kinda like "Local Hero", lol🙂
In principle, I love the Edinburgh trams. But the reality of the route itself frustrates me. As it currently exists all it really amounts to is an airport link -- a slow, expensive, slightly cramped one at that. It's frustrating because EDI airport is flanked at either side by mainline railways, one even serving the Waverley - Queen Street express train. If they had opted to build a heavy rail airport link instead of light rail, it would've been a matter of building just one station and about a mile of track. Add a small fleet of purpose-built or simply renovated trains with plenty of space for luggage and job done. This would've meant shorter journey times to the airport for Edinburgers as well as opening the airport up to Glaswegians, who already tend to travel from EDI anyway as GLA is frankly pants. Falkirk and Stirling would also get the benefit. As for trams in Edinburgh, a north-south tram link would've been infinitely more beneficial to Edinburgh's transport network and urban fabric, instead of an overpriced, inadequate, glorified airport shuttle that travels almost completely parallel to already existing railways, where there is already good service. What infuriates me the most about this project is that now the idea is being mooted to replicate it here in Glasgow, where much of the above also applies.
The first phase goes onto York Place. It's actually a decent compromise if you are travelling to or from the airport. Taxis for that sort of distance can be expensive, buses can be a bit on the slow side. The second phase is due to open next year, so let's hope that opens without too many unforeseen problems. It's the easiest thing in the world to sit back and criticise but what is done is done. The best thing that you can do is to learn from your previous errors. Also, I have never really been a fan of the Blame Game it doesn't really achieve anything.
Interestingly enough, there was a proposed underground railway for the centre of Edinburgh around the time of the Glasgow metro. If memory serves, there was more hot air than digging, so nice to see things have not changed in the intervening years, and the entire thing was consigned to the history books.
I believe that was scrapped because they'd need to blast through basalt and they were worried it would destabilise the foundations of the old town buildings.
@@OnboardG1 I guess the experience of building the Scotland Street tunnel into Waverley, or Canal Street as it would have been at the time, would have been an eye-opener.
@@OnboardG1 Perhaps, but the plan was proposed in the 1890s to build a tunnel, cut & cover, from the Caledonian Railway's Station at the west end, along Princes Street to link up with the Newhaven & Granton Railway using the Scotland Street tunnel. Their intent was to gain access to the harbour and ferry crossing to Fife. This was proposed prior to the building of the Forth Rail Bridge, the opening of which scuppered the need for the Caledonian Railway's scheme. And yes, there would have been a station, approximately where H&M is now, in order to interchange with Waverley.
Since Edinburgh isn`t exactly flat and a lot of the deeper stonework around the town center is basalt building an underground system was always going to be a non-starter. This project though had a lot of promise but its promoters seriously underestimated the difficulties and cost of building an infrastructure project like this across an old city like Edinburgh. It was a bit of an eye-opener for those of us who, while watching the construction in Princes Street got a good look at what was underneath the road. Things like the remains of the old cable system, various old stonework constructions, and noticing that over the years the council had been cutting costs by just laying new layers of tarmac every time the street needed resurfacing. The old stone cobbles were still in place and the basic road bed had been raised by about a foot since the old tram system was shut down in the 1950s!
"a line south to Musselburgh". East, Jago. There was a separate alternative line 3 proposed that would have gone south, via Edinburgh University's "King's Buildings" campus and the new Edinburgh Royal Infirmary . I'm fairly sure the Musselburgh line was supposed to go via Portobello. There were however a lot of proposals (and the western, off-street, section largely runs along the very short lived guided busway, which itself was massively over budget and needed completely ripped out to build the tram, rather than as hoped being a useful foundation)
I visited Edinburgh recently used the tram once from the airport park and ride, got to prince's street alright however the line flooded on the way back and still ended up being ushered towards a bus. learned the hard way its just best to take the bus
Another great video, Jago. Two little relics of the original tramway that you might not have noticed though - at the junction where the A1, A7 and A8 meet, there is a short section of original tramway preserved in Regent Road (A1). Also in Dryden Street, to the north of the city, there are three tram poles (catenary support poles) and parts of the original tram depot still in situ.
I'd heard the project was a mess, but not the details. Thank you. I've also heard it said that the Edinburgh tram project set back tram construction in the UK by a decade. Bristol and Cardiff, for examples, could really do with a better transport system.
Bristol could do with a population which (a) don't blame all congestion on public transport, (b) accepts that if you want something you actually have to pay the price of it and (c) spend less time whining on social media. It was fairly apparent from industry conversation pre-Covid that if all Bristol's buses had a flat fare of 50p with a day ticket at £1 and a monthly ticket at a tenner, half the whiners would still complain that the buses were ridiculously expensive. Heck, they'd be whining if they were *given* a tenner a trip each time they got on a bus. (For a comparison, pre-Covid the First bus fares in Bristol which were being called "unreasonably expensive" were cheaper than Stagecoach's fares in the much smaller city of Lincoln.)
Excellent video, although one ironic thing you forgot to mention is that the Airlink 100 actually beats the tram into the city from the Airport by around 5 minutes. The Airlink is just an Enviro 400 running on public roads and it beats this custom built, segregated system.
Great video. I used to work at Saughton and the tram was brilliant for york pl - saughton. It was always packed already from york pl in the mornings so at least during rush hours it is very well used. I live and work at different part of the city now, but am looking forward for the leith part to open. Personally I hope that one day it will be extended to newington - cameron toll - liberton. its pretty much a straight road.
Every resident of Melbourne seeing this video has Robert Risson to thank for us holding onto our tram system when so many cities got rid of them. Sydney has the same problem as Edinburgh. Easy to get rid of, hugely expensive to put back.
As someone currently in working in the Leith and Newhaven areas, driving around for work is an absolute nightmare because of the new tram construction and I really hope the pain is worth it in the long run.
Wow! In my opinion, one of your very best videos. Jago. Not only for the excellent content but because the video showing various parts of Edinburgh really brought back happy memories of my visit there earlier this year. Many thanks on both counts.
I've used the trams in Edinburgh, the fare structure always really frustrated me because the fare to go from anywhere on the line to the airport is more than double the fare to go from anywhere on the network to Ingliston Park and Ride, just 1 stop and a 10 minute walk short of the airport. Dropoff by car at the airport is free, so it's as though there is a desire to stop people from using the tram for what is the only journey for which it makes sense. The tram tracks on Princes Street are a massive danger to those on bikes, but it isn't really the tram's fault. The road is enormous, two lanes in each direction most of the way along. The issue is firstly that there is no dedicated cycling infrastructure in place, but the bigger issue is that enormous peninsulas of pavement that stick out to force private cars to turn off, those push cycles (which are permitted to go straight on) onto the tram tracks. If there were a cycle lane through the jutting out bit of pavement, a lot of the danger could be averted. Like so much of the UK's road network, the streets of Edinburgh have been designed with very little regard to how someone might navigate them on a bicycle.
It's more expensive because of where it is. It's the same at every airport aroud the world. The Airlink bus is also more expensive in relation to the Skylink buses for the same reason. Tourists will pay it.
@Jack Mitchell Cycling lanes werent a priority in the 12th to 19th centuries when the majority of Edinburgh city centre was built...perhaps Milton Keynes is the place for you ;)
I live in Ottawa and we've had our light rail system for a few years now. It's been a similar story. Trains with doors that won't work, problems with the signaling, derailments, budget over-runs and more finger-pointing than you could ever imagine. I often wonder what Charles Yerkes would say...
As a Birmingham resident this all feels far too familiar. Whilst the original Midland Metro line from Birmingham to Wolverhampton has been really successful, the extension through the city centre has been something of a nightmare and, like Edinburgh, caused the exact problems it was trying to solve. Things are just about now looking on track but it was beset by problems. Might be worth a story.
People moan, are short sighted, and are selfish. A major city offers and builds a brilliant new transport system. All people can do is whinge about cost and upheaval. Same with HS2. Much needed and exciting. These things cost money, take time, have overruns, and involve some destruction. Then they get built, expand, become part of the fabric, and are well used. People are their own worst enemies.
@@JohnnyZenith The issue with the Birmingham City Centre extension that is currently ongoing is that it's seemingly serving...nowhere. The extension out to Digbeth majorly disrupts my route in and out of work on the bus, meaning I have to leave earlier to arrive on time and I get home much later due to slow moving traffic and road diversions. First world problem, sure, but I don't think the Eastside extension is necessary. There are a plethora of bus services that operate on the exact stretch of road that the Midland Metro is currently being extended to, and they are turning an already congested high street (B4100 road out of the City Centre) into a multi-transport road and dropping it from 4 lanes to 2. I understand it's a plan for the future and will likely be well used when completed, but no one was exactly crying out for it either, and it's a massive headache trying to commute. It's been nearly 2 years of road closures and disruptions
@@statorcs It's a plan for the near future and further still. Trams are succesful in all cities they are implemented in. I'm afraid you'll have to weather it. I lived in Birmingham in 2003 to 2005. It needed them then. I used to get the bus from town through Digbeth too. It was very reliable It's true. I understand your pain and I'm not trying to minimise it. I'd likely feel the same. The Eastside extension is necessary, with lower power consumption and high capacity multi-mode transport solutions, and very importantly with HS2 in mind.
@@JohnnyZenith The electric buses are faster out to the airport than the tram. No upheaval incurred. Waste of money and ruined a UNESCO World Heritage Site forever.
@@denisescally7090 This comment of course shows a lack of understanding into multi-modal multi-approach transport solutions. This isn't an attack on you I promise. The bus is not faster and can more easily incur traffic penalties. Whilst 24 hours and can match the tram for average journey times, the tram is a smoother, high capacity, high frequency service with much higher energy efficiency. Multiple platforms to solve capacity and service issues. Trams add a European and cosmopolitan air to a city and help grow the economy by being very reliable people movers. The trams have done nothing to alter the UNESCO world heritage site. I have found no evidence that any of the protected built environment has been demolished. I have found no evidence it was or is a waste of money. Ridership seems good.
I live in Edinburgh and really like the tram. We just need to be able to buy tickets more casually, ie tap on board, otherwise the rapid urban transport aspect is meaningless. Can’t wait for leith extension to open
I’m a student at the university of Edinburgh, and I live on Albert Street just off Leith Walk. The trams to newhaven project - and I’m sure they’ll be great when they’re done - is making my life a nightmare 🙃
