New Caledonian Sleeper franchise ads another unnecessary layer of bureacracy to the railways.

 When the Transport Scotland consultation went out a few years ago suggesting separating the Caledonian Sleeper from the Scotrail franchise as an option, I objected, suggesting to either keep it as part of Scotrail or include it in either the West Coast or Cross Country franchises (the sleepers were nominally part of Intercity under British Rail) on the grounds that a separate franchise would cost more to run and effectively be the country's smallest franchise, only operating four trains a day (two going north and two south, although both trains split into 2-3 portions north of Carstairs). What would be the point in having a whole franchise just to run these few trains? So it's finally here; the new Caledonian sleeper franchise, which will be operated by Serco from 1st April, with locomotives supplied by GBRF (instead of DB Schenker as is the case at the moment). This could almost be an April fool's joke as the locos that will haul the train in the highlands will be Class 73 Electro-diesels; a type designed to run on the DC third rail-electrified regions of the South East and the Wirral. Why not stick with DBS and its proven Class 67s, or go to DRS and its Class 68s? Cost must be the obvious answer. But why the need to borrow locos from a freight company at all? With the supply of new Sleeper coaches (to be built by CAF in Spain) imminent, why not acquire a few locomotives (either new or second hand) and drivers for Serco itself? The use of third-party locomotives is not unique to the Caledonian Sleeper. Chiltern and Arriva Trains Wales also have long-term arrangements with DBS for supply of Class 67s. Under British Rail, where everything was owned by the same organisation, you could easily more locos and drivers between sectors. Under our fragmented system of Privatisation, such arrangements are complex and no doubt require a lot of back-room staff and lawyers to arrange. It's time to re-integrate our railways, not break them up even further.
 https://www.sleeper.scot/

I have a car! And why crossovers are the way for the future.

Crossovers. Part 4x4, part family car. They have become incredibly popular in the last few years, but the concept is not a new one. Jeep's Jeepster of 1948 was an early attempt to mate the practical body of a Jeep with an inexpensive two-wheel-drive drivetrain. Rover's "Road Rover" prototype of the 1950s was a more refined concept, but never made it to production. The Range Rover eventually became a successful, refined 4x4, but it still retained all the off-road engineering of its Land Rover brother. The Land Rover Freelander introduced the concept of the "soft roader", a vehicle with slightly less off road hardware, resulting in a lower price. In the late 1990s, demand for family 4x4s rocketed. However most of these vehicles never went off road. The time was right for a vehicle with the looks and practicality of a 4x4 with the economy of a regular estate car. The Nissan Qashqai, introduced in 2006, was an immediate success, with more than 39,000 sales in 2010 making it the tenth best selling new car in Britain. Other car companies have jumped on the bandwagon, with "crossover"models in varying sizes and styles. Some are more "soft-roader" like the Skoda Yeti, which is available with or without four-wheel drive. Others are essentially restyled or re-engineered conventional cars like the Volvo XC70, which is a 4x4 variant of the V70 estate car, or the Rover 25 Streetwise, which was a regular Rover 25 with chunky plastic bumpers and styling modifications. Similar to the latter is the Ford Fusion, which is based on the Fiesta chassis, but with raised suspension and a chunky 4x4-style body. It's a practical little car, although it's not very sporty. I just bought one and I love it. It's economical (the 1.4TDCi diesel I own managing 52mpg), practical (with a relatively large estate-style boot) and good looking. Confusingly, the Fusion name is used in the US market on an executive saloon, but that's a whole other subject.

How about a North Glasgow circle?

In 2005, Kelvindale railway station was opened in Glasgow, allowing diesel trains from Queen Street high level to travel to Anniesland via Maryhill to connect with electric services to Dalmuir from Queen Street low level. Now a look at the railway map shows an almost circular route from Anniesland to Ashfield (by diesel train) in one direction, and to Springburn (via Queen Street low level) in the other. The missing part of the circle is a non-passenger line at Cowlairs junction. To get from Ashfield to Springburn, one must travel into Queen Street and change trains. But what if the circle was completed/ If the line from Springburn to Anniesland (via Kelvindale) was electrified and the Kelvindale branch (which terminates in a bay platform at Anniesland) was joined to the electric line to Queen Street low level, you could than have an urban electric route that allows cross-city travel without changing trains and frees up platforms at Queen Street high level.

Two reasons to build the Garngad chord.

A couple of weeks ago I had a bash around the newly-electrified bits of Glasgow (including Whifflet and Cumbernauld) to see how things were progressing up there. I was pleasantly surprised to see an electric train running from Cumbernauld to Dalmuir via Queen Street low level. However, to reach Queen Street low level, the train must reverse at Springburn. The lines from Springburn to Queen Street high level are not yet electrified (this will be done as part of the EGIP). Construction of the Garngad chord would allow the train to run directly into Queen Street low level (although it would then be unable to pick up or drop off passengers at Springburn, because it would avoid the station completely).
Another electric service to be introduced recently is a train from Ayr to Edinburgh, calling at Glasgow Central. This in reality is a combining of two services, the Ayr-Glasgow and the Glasgow-Edinburgh (via Carstairs) trains. The trains runs to Glasgow from Ayr, where it reverses and then heads to Edinburgh.
A faster Ayr-Edinburgh service using Glasgow Crossrail and the Garngad chord would avoid Glasgow Central completely. Without the Garngad chord, services from Ayr could use the city union line to access the Airdrie-Bathgate line to get to Edinburgh. Diesel trains could theoretically use it in its present state, but electrification is preferred. However, the Garngad chord would give trains the option of running via Falkirk, which is a faster (although less direct) route.

Spaceport should come to Prestwick

Prestwick airport has been in the news for all the wrong reasons lately, with Ryanair cutting services, the airport losing money and having to be bought by the government to keep it running. Even the state of the adjacent railway station has declined as maintenance has been cut back. But hope could be on the horizon. Prestwick has been shortlisted for the role of the UK's first spaceport. The candidates for this honour are Campbeltown, Kinloss, Llanbedr, Leuchars, Lossiemouth, Newquay, Prestwick and Stornoway. Of these, Prestwick has the best transport links, access to a large local engineering base and universities and a central location, making it ideal for startup space ventures such as Reaction Engines. The time is perfect for Prestwick to usher in a new era for Ayrshire and the UK. 

The future of the UK's Antarctic science fleet.

This year, the government announced a new Antarctic research vessel to replace the RRS James Clark Ross. The new ship will be bigger than the vessel it replaces, enabling a continuing British presence in the Antarctic for many years to come.
As well as the British Antarctic Survey's ships, the Royal Navy has an ice patrol vessel, HMS Protector, which replaced the damaged HMS Endurance (see photo). Protector is viewed as only a temporary replacement, and does not have any permanent hangar facilities for a helicopter, but I wonder if a sister to the BAS's new ship could be built alongside it for the Royal Navy? Ideally in a British shipyard.

Bristol channel meanderings.

Severn link http://www.severnlink.com/ are proposing a fast ferry from Swansea in Wales, to Ilfracombe in Devon. This will considerably shorten the journey between Wales and Devon, which currently requires a long trip via Bristol. Ilfracombe is currently the terminus for the boat to Lundy island, and Swansea was formerly the terminus of Swansea-Cork ferries, so the infrastructure is there to support a ferry service. The Swansea-Ilfracombe route was formerly run by the steamers of P&A Campbell's White Funnel fleet, which included the motor vessel Balmoral. The Balmoral itself is currently laid up in Bristol, awaiting funding to return her to service.  http://www.heritagesteamers.co.uk/balmoral/
Bristol is also home to a couple of railway campaigning groups. The Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways http://fosbr.org.uk/ are supporters of a frequent suburban train service and the reopening of suburban stations. One such station, Portishead, has its own revival group, the Portishead railway group. http://www.portisheadrailwaygroup.org/  Portishead makes a good case for reopening. Much of the line has already been reopened as a freight route to Portbury docks. Only a small extension would need to be built to the town, and crucially the trackbed has not been built on. A railway line would alleviate local road congestion and improve access to the town, as well as benefitting the environment.