Speculating to the future: What next for the West Highland Line (WHL)?

[Clansman]

Why would it be dead going to Oban? On a year round basis, there are far more passengers to Oban than FW. The 12.11 ex oban has had to be supplemented by a coach on occasions.

I'm just basing it purely on the 5 services a day which couple/uncouple to Mallaig services en route, where they seem to be fairly filled but not full.
I'm probably wrong though, as I'm not a regular commuter.

That's the beauty with having 2/3/4 car units of the same class though, as you can chop and change as demand permits.

From someone who (I assume) uses the line often, how would you divvy out the rolling stock for the WHL? Because on a realistic scale I'd have thought that by using a consistent 4-car fixed units on the WHL on all routes, you are then immediately trying to find paths between Crianlarich and Glasgow for 5 services to and from Oban as a result. So having a mix of 2/3/4 for these lines would be very adequate.

 

[InOban]

If Visit Scotland want to fund some glamorous trains aimed at upmarket tourism, then fine, but I don't think it is the responsibility of TS/Scotrail. The most I can conceive is that an additional mini HST be provided which could be offered to the tour operators to provide an additional service to FW between, say, May and September.

As for the real trains for real people, then I agree that at some time, certainly by the next franchise, the remaining non-electrified lines will need new stock. It had been assumed that the pace of electrification would be such that no new diesel stock would be needed, so Bombardier et al haven't any designs.

I understand​ that the wheelbase of the 170 series is too long to negotiate the check rails of the tightest bends, and anyway they don't have corridor connection (sorry 380101); the only variant that does,the 172, has no toilets, I think. I don't know about the 185?

Remember that there will be large areas of SW England, Wales, and other parts which will also remain beyond the wires, so it may not be as small a production run as some might think.

 

[Kite159]

If Visit Scotland want to fund some glamorous trains aimed at upmarket tourism, then fine, but I don't think it is the responsibility of TS/Scotrail. The most I can conceive is that an additional mini HST be provided which could be offered to the tour operators to provide an additional service to FW between, say, May and September.

As for the real trains for real people, then I agree that at some time, certainly by the next franchise, the remaining non-electrified lines will need new stock. It had been assumed that the pace of electrification would be such that no new diesel stock would be needed, so Bombardier et al haven't any designs.

I understand​ that the wheelbase of the 170 series is too long to negotiate the check rails of the tightest bends, and anyway they don't have corridor connection (sorry 380101); the only variant that does,the 172, has no toilets, I think. I don't know about the 185?

Remember that there will be large areas of SW England, Wales, and other parts which will also remain beyond the wires, so it may not be as small a production run as some might think.

The 172s used by Chiltern (1s) & London Midland (2s/3s) have toilets.

If passengers moan about the engine of a 156 working hard on the WHL, then they would hate the sound of the underpowered 170 engine working extra hard to get moving, with all that lovely highland air rushing into the passenger area at every station where someone boards

 

[59CosG95]

I understand​ that the wheelbase of the 170 series is too long to negotiate the check rails of the tightest bends, and anyway they don't have corridor connection (sorry 380101); the only variant that does,the 172, has no toilets, I think. I don't know about the 185?

The 172/2s and /3s both have toilets on them. Wheelbase-wise, unsure about the 185s, but they can easily have 350/444/450 cabs if ScotRail so wished due to the modular design. Whether Siemens would build new cabs is another matter entirely.

 

[InOban]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the small fleet about to be released from Gospel Oak to Barking were undesirable because they didn't have toilets. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[route:oxford]

Deary me. Some people need to get with reality.

A 7-car unit of brand new vehicles on the West Highland, with first class and buffet (none of this "shop" nonsense - or is it selling bread and milk too?). And apparently two vehicles - brand new, don't forget - will be stored out of season.

Do you have any idea of the cost of that lot, and the revenue that is generated from lines like the West Highland?

I regularly suffer the cost of past failures to invest for growth over the predicted lifespan of units.

With a few years of the 150s, 156s & 158s being delivered, it was very evident that they were all at least one carriage short.

Not long after that, it was very clear that the 22x series was at least two carriages short.

There was no need for any 170 unit to be ordered as a two car set.

And yet, there is still hand-wringing about trains being too long for yesterday.

All sounds good. But I highly doubt passengers would want a live streamed feed of pheasants, birds and other small animals being blootered by the train they're on. This is a daily occurrence on rural lines. Bad enough seeing it from the driving seat! Worst case scenario you'll get to witness someone ending their life or a level crossing near miss!

Which is why a better idea would be for the "virtual observation deck" be streamed from the rear of the train.

 

[CosherB]

I'm only just able to post on this thread after laughing at the preposterous suggestions about new dedicated trains!

 

[Clansman]

I'm only just able to post on this thread after laughing at the preposterous suggestions about new dedicated trains!

I'm in the mood for a wee laugh tonight. So what would you propose?

 

[route:oxford]

I'm only just able to post on this thread after laughing at the preposterous suggestions about new dedicated trains!

You mean like the Sleeper carriages that have already been ordered?

Perhaps, the franchises need to be changed. Create a new one that balances the needs of residents in remote areas with the desires of tourists to visit and see those areas. Let's call it "British Scenic Railways".

So that'd be:-

West Highland Line
Kyle Line
Far North Line
Settle to Carlisle

Any others?

All with dedicated new-build scenic stock.

 

[CosherB]

You mean like the Sleeper carriages that have already been ordered?

Perhaps, the franchises need to be changed. Create a new one that balances the needs of residents in remote areas with the desires of tourists to visit and see those areas. Let's call it "British Scenic Railways".

So that'd be:-

West Highland Line
Kyle Line
Far North Line
Settle to Carlisle

Any others?

All with dedicated new-build scenic stock.

Exactly what I was on about. Mad as a box of frogs!

And what has the CS got anything to do with this? Completely different topic, not relevant here.

 

[Clansman]

Exactly what I was on about. Mad as a box of frogs!

And what has the CS got anything to do with this? Completely different topic, not relevant here.

To be fair. I'd be drawing the line short of dedicated scenic stock so I can see where you're coming from with this one

At the end of the day these lines need operational flexibility to cater for first and foremost, the commuters and the TOC. It's really easy to do that whilst still creating an environment which caters to some degree for scenic journeys (ie decent sized windows, seat window alignment, tables etc).

 

[NotATrainspott]

Exactly what I was on about. Mad as a box of frogs!

And what has the CS got anything to do with this? Completely different topic, not relevant here.

We're not talking about Swiss-style entirely custom rolling stock designed solely for scenic use. The concept of scenic trains here is really just a specific configuration of an otherwise bog-standard train. It's like how the Hull Trains 170s had a special InterCity layout for their specific use case. When on that route, they were more optimal than a standard layout would give, but upon being cascaded away they were just a few days' reconfiguration away from being basically standard trains. One basic design for a Class 158 replacement should really be able to do everything from the Exeter-Waterloo runs to Inverness-Kyle and other rural routes.

 

[route:oxford]

And what has the CS got anything to do with this? Completely different topic, not relevant here.

It's very relevant.

Caledonian Sleeper stock is being purchased from exactly the same company and being used for very limited diagrams.

What's the difference?

 

[Clansman]

We're not talking about Swiss-style entirely custom rolling stock designed solely for scenic use. The concept of scenic trains here is really just a specific configuration of an otherwise bog-standard train. It's like how the Hull Trains 170s had a special InterCity layout for their specific use case. When on that route, they were more optimal than a standard layout would give, but upon being cascaded away they were just a few days' reconfiguration away from being basically standard trains. One basic design for a Class 158 replacement should really be able to do everything from the Exeter-Waterloo runs to Inverness-Kyle and other rural routes.

This.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm only just able to post on this thread after laughing at the preposterous suggestions about new dedicated trains!

The Swiss do it on similar lines, nothing preposterous about it.

I genuinely believe there is significant potential tourist revenue that is not being exploited.

 

[Bletchleyite]

We're not talking about Swiss-style entirely custom rolling stock designed solely for scenic use.

I was and still am. I don't see the problem - it doesn't ever have to be used elsewhere, it can run on the line for the next 40 years.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

We're not talking about Swiss-style entirely custom rolling stock designed solely for scenic use. The concept of scenic trains here is really just a specific configuration of an otherwise bog-standard train. It's like how the Hull Trains 170s had a special InterCity layout for their specific use case. When on that route, they were more optimal than a standard layout would give, but upon being cascaded away they were just a few days' reconfiguration away from being basically standard trains. One basic design for a Class 158 replacement should really be able to do everything from the Exeter-Waterloo runs to Inverness-Kyle and other rural routes.

Thank goodness for at least one realistic suggestion. Making comparisons between the WHL and Swiss alpine routes is absolutely ridiculous. Quite apart from the immense difference in scale, and therefore grandeur, there's also a big difference in geography. Many of the high alpine routes actually form part of longer distance journey possibilities meaning tourists can take them in as part of a wider tour. Whereas the WHL, in railway terms, is a dead end. The scope for generating high-end revenue exists across the alps almost year round but the WHL season is really only a few weeks. Any high-spec scenic trains for the WHL would spend most of the year serving no purpose.

One lesson learned, eventually, by BR was that the best replacement for first generation DMUs was second generation DMUs ie Sprinters and Turbos, not Pacers or the non-developed Class 210 concept. So replacement stock for the WHL and other similar lines need only be an updated Sprinter style unit meeting modern standards of sound insulation with full air conditioning and decent alignment between seats and windows (that doesn't have to mean all bays with tables!). But extra frippery like external cctv or at seat service is of no real use to local users who use the trains all year. KISS principle applies.

 

[Clansman]

Thank goodness for at least one realistic suggestion. Making comparisons between the WHL and Swiss alpine routes is absolutely ridiculous. Quite apart from the immense difference in scale, and therefore grandeur, there's also a big difference in geography. Many of the high alpine routes actually form part of longer distance journey possibilities meaning tourists can take them in as part of a wider tour. Whereas the WHL, in railway terms, is a dead end. The scope for generating high-end revenue exists across the alps almost year round but the WHL season is really only a few weeks. Any high-spec scenic trains for the WHL would spend most of the year serving no purpose.

One lesson learned, eventually, by BR was that the best replacement for first generation DMUs was second generation DMUs ie Sprinters and Turbos, not Pacers or the non-developed Class 210 concept. So replacement stock for the WHL and other similar lines need only be an updated Sprinter style unit meeting modern standards of sound insulation with full air conditioning and decent alignment between seats and windows (that doesn't have to mean all bays with tables!). But extra frippery like external cctv or at seat service is of no real use to local users who use the trains all year. KISS principle applies.

I thought there were a couple of reasonable suggestions out there.

While I agree that there shouldn't be too high spec of rolling stock dedicated to the WHL for the reasons you've stated, I do believe however we're approaching the time where we have to look at alternatives to Sprinters. Come the next franchise, the 156s will be over 30 years old. By then we should really be prospecting the types of DMUs that will be ordered by Transport Scotland and Scotrail - hence why a couple of us have already highlighting fairly realistic suggestions as to what they may be.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I thought there were a couple of reasonable suggestions out there.

While I agree that there shouldn't be too high spec of rolling stock dedicated to the WHL for the reasons you've stated, I do believe however we're approaching the time where we have to look at alternatives to Sprinters. Come the next franchise, the 156s will be over 30 years old. By then we should really be prospecting the types of DMUs that will be ordered by Transport Scotland and Scotrail - hence why a couple of us have already highlighting fairly realistic suggestions as to what they may be.

TBF your post here:

A time will come when Scotrail will really have to bite the bullet and replace the sprinters - no doubt by the next franchise at least.

I reckon an newly built DMU with end gangways and based primarily on Iarnród Éireann's Class 22000 could serve as a replacement for the entire 156 and 158 fleets on the WHL, FNL and GSWR - Maybe throw in the HML locals into the mix to replace the Sprinters entirely.

Reason being is that it balances up comfort (provides a decent differentiation for commuters and tourists alike) with capacity and general operational efficiency, whilst providing an enhanced service for passengers on all routes operated on. It also doesn't confine certain sub-classes to the one route, unlike what Swiss style tourist coaches do. It allows the 156s to work local routes (until electrified) or go off lease and displaces 158s on the Far North line to enhance capacity elsewhere before succumbing to age and progress of electrification.

In my opinion, an order of such a variant of these units should be (assuming electrification reaches Maryhill, East Kilbride, Barrhead and Kilmarnock):

~10 x 4-car Class [y]/0:
Glasgow to Fort William/Mallaig/Carlisle/Newcastle

Capacity: ~240 (21 First Class, 219 Standard Class)
Shop counter and trolley station (Operated by trolley person after passing through the train initially - doesn't require additional staff)
Single Leaf sliding doors
6 bike spaces
1:2 ratio of bays to airline rows, all aligned with a window, 2 plugs and USBs per row
2 wheelchair spaces
3 toilets (1 wheelchair accessible)

~20 x 3-car Class [y]/1:
Glasgow to Oban/Stranraer/Dumfries
Inverness to Kyle/Wick/Thurso

Capacity: ~180 (All Standard Class)
Trolley station
Single Leaf sliding doors
4 bike spaces
1:2 ratio of bays to airline rows, all aligned with a window, 2 plugs and USBs per row
2 wheelchair spaces
2 toilets (1 wheelchair accessible)

~20 x 2-car Class [y]/2:
Glasgow to Oban/Stranraer/Dumfries
Inverness to Kyle/Wick/Thurso

Capacity: ~150 (All Standard Class)
Trolley station
Single Leaf sliding doors
2 bike spaces
1:4 ratio of bays to airline rows, all aligned with a window, 2 plugs and USBs per row
2 wheelchair spaces
1 toilet (wheelchair accessible)

Aside from the possibly dodgy quantities; for me, the main principle is realistic in my opinion and very reasonable on a number of levels which would see long lasting benefits for at least the next 30 odd years. Crucify away never the less.

Also thought I'd have a go at seeing how an end gangway 22000 would look, 380101 isn't going to be happy with this

is a decent stab at a possible specification. The chief issue, as so often these days, is finding a balance between the different needs that a train has to meet. For instance end doors need to be quite wide if bicycles are going to manoeuvre through them but that may reduce the space for seats. Same applies to a fixed catering point if you want something more than a Class 158 style stowage point. I totally agree about the need for gangwayed ends, if it was for me to decide no unit would be built without them. While I have a small degree of sympathy with drivers' complaints about the view out it's something which ought to soluble by more driver input at the design stage (and drivers would do well to remember just how well paid they are these days!)

 

[GusB]

How is the current West Highland fleet used? Do the same units generally find themselves on the same routes on a day-to-day basis, or are they rotated around the network on a fairly regular basis?

 

[HSTEd]

Perhaps the lines would get higher revenues with dedicated scenic stock
However the costs of such operations would likely be significantly higher than today.

If it doesn't decrease net subsidy its not a goer - why should the taxpayer be expected to subsidise jaunts on a railway that already serves little actual transport purpose

 

[DarloRich]

The WHL is lovely and I think the prospect of tourist traffic is high. However, unlike many posters here, I try to live in the real world. That means a standard class diesel unit of an off the shelf design furnished in a decent if not opulent fashion.

I like the 156s, they are probably the greatest BR DMU. They are getting on for 28-30 years old now though - not far off the age of the once ubiquitous class 101s that they originally replaced in Scotland.

Realistically, the best option is probably a follow-on order for class 195s. Perhaps in the following variant:-

195/3 - 3 car unit - end doors and corridor connection
195/4 - 4 car unit - end doors, first class section, shop and corridor connection.

/3 - DMSLO-MSLO-DMSO
/4 - DMFLO-MSSO-MSLO-DMSO

So on a normal summer day, the unit would leave Glasgow Queen Street in the following formation:-

DMFLO-MSSO-MSLO-DMSO - DMSLO-MSLO-DMSO

At Crianlarich, the four car set would proceed to Fort William/Mallaig and the three car set for the shorter journey to Oban.

Off-season, the unit should be readily re-configured with the MSLO and/or MSSO (shop) removed and stored if required without any digital tantrums.

eh? you aren't going to pay for new carriages and then store them! you either don't buy them or use them all year round.

A timely reminder of how unpopular these units have been over the years on the WHL. They were always too noisy (for long distance routes), too cramped, were basic to the point of being merely functional and quite frankly why anyone ever wanted to travel in them is a puzzle to me. If BR management ever devised a "train" - if that's what you could call them - to deter passengers from travelling/using the WHL the 156/158's fitted the bill perfectly.

The Class 37's with Mark II's were probably the zenith of the WHL, however there is a new opportunity to improve the experience for passengers. I would argue for the refurbishment of cascaded HST 125 units, with one power car, four carriages and a push/pull arrangement on the rear carriage. This configuration literally saved Scotrail back in the late 1970's when 47/7's and MKIII'S replaced the 27's push/pull arrangements. (Incidentally I remember these thrashing out of Queen Street and sometimes it was an odd loco combo - 27/37 or 25/37).

If Scotrail wanted to retain the existing Oban+Ft Bill combo - then you could arrange to have an 8 carriage set, splitting in the middle at Crianlarich, with the leading carriage for Ft Bill being the driver trailer.

Whatever the outcome the existing units are well past their life expires status and I for one would never travel on the WHL until they are replaced with something much better!

While i would love a loco hauled train with panoramic seating (?) and all the gubbins it simply wont happen and certainly not in the sense set out above. I very much doubt the MKiii is suitable for some kind of cut and shut DBSO mash up. That either means you run two trains or you run portion working via units.

If Visit Scotland want to fund some glamorous trains aimed at upmarket tourism, then fine, but I don't think it is the responsibility of TS/Scotrail. The most I can conceive is that an additional mini HST be provided which could be offered to the tour operators to provide an additional service to FW between, say, May and September.

As for the real trains for real people, then I agree that at some time, certainly by the next franchise, the remaining non-electrified lines will need new stock. It had been assumed that the pace of electrification would be such that no new diesel stock would be needed, so Bombardier et al haven't any designs.

I understand​ that the wheelbase of the 170 series is too long to negotiate the check rails of the tightest bends, and anyway they don't have corridor connection (sorry 380101); the only variant that does,the 172, has no toilets, I think. I don't know about the 185?

Remember that there will be large areas of SW England, Wales, and other parts which will also remain beyond the wires, so it may not be as small a production run as some might think.

That is a good point - IF all the interested stakeholders pony up (Scottish Government/TOC/NR/tourist boards/councils etc) the anything is possible. otherwise you buy off the shelf and keep the costs down

If Visit Scotland want to fund some glamorous trains aimed at upmarket tourism, then fine, but I don't think it is the responsibility of TS/Scotrail. The most I can conceive is that an additional mini HST be provided which could be offered to the tour operators to provide an additional service to FW between, say, May and September.

As for the real trains for real people, then I agree that at some time, certainly by the next franchise, the remaining non-electrified lines will need new stock. It had been assumed that the pace of electrification would be such that no new diesel stock would be needed, so Bombardier et al haven't any designs.

I understand​ that the wheelbase of the 170 series is too long to negotiate the check rails of the tightest bends, and anyway they don't have corridor connection (sorry 380101); the only variant that does,the 172, has no toilets, I think. I don't know about the 185?

Remember that there will be large areas of SW England, Wales, and other parts which will also remain beyond the wires, so it may not be as small a production run as some might think.

don't be silly..............

It's very relevant.

Caledonian Sleeper stock is being purchased from exactly the same company and being used for very limited diagrams.

What's the difference?

VAST subsidy?

 

[PHILIPE]

How is the current West Highland fleet used? Do the same units generally find themselves on the same routes on a day-to-day basis, or are they rotated around the network on a fairly regular basis?

They have to be RETB fitted, of course, and would cycle round with the remainder of the fleet so fitted. A train from Glasgow to Oban/Mallaig will often be formed off another route, i.e. Alloa, Cumbernauld.

 

[CosherB]

It's very relevant.

Caledonian Sleeper stock is being purchased from exactly the same company and being used for very limited diagrams.

What's the difference?

You are selecting facts to fit your argument, without accepting the reality of the situation. I have no idea why you are clutching at the CS as an example of rolling stock procurement for what is 100 miles or so of regular commuting traffic.

As DarloRich has pointed out, the CS benefits from massive political subsidies - it received £17 million in 2015-16 (http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/22982/rail-finance-statistical-release-2015-16.pdf), plus the Scottish Government has stumped up a £60 million grant to support the new Mk5 rolling stock procurement programme. The single reason for all of this money? Connectivity with London.

I am utterly dumfounded at some of the suggestions on here for rolling stock - although I suppose that I shouldn't have been surprised at the old HST "1+4" chestnut rearing it's head again. Please accept that the line will get standard DMUs - the likes of the 158 or 185 or their ilk will be more than adequate. I have no idea why this line deserves such 'special' rolling stock treatment.

 

[Essan]

The Class 37's with Mark II's were probably the zenith of the WHL

Aye, from a tourist perspective, you could pull down the windows in the carriage doors to take photos, whilst there was also adequate luggage space and - very importantly on this route - room for plenty of bikes in the brake van. I remember a friend of mine - who has cycled all over the world - pointing out back in 1989 just how useless the new Sprinters were going to be with their lack of storage space. Scotrail basically banned cyclists from using trains!

Since the 1980s mountain biking has taken off big time in the Highlands and is now a major draw. Scotrail have completely failed to capitalise on this, especially on a line that takes in places like Corrour or the option for, say, an easy day's ride from Rannoch to Bridge or Orchy. And remember, this is a year round market - with cross country skiers another potential market in winter.

IMO what the WHI most needs is much greater storage capacity and for Scotrail to market the line as once again being useful for those involved in all manner of outdoor pursuits. Whether they'd draw them back, I don't know.

Obviously, from a tourist point of view, more comfortable seating would be good. But I think all modern DMUs have quite adequate viewing. Lack of opening windows for photographers is the main issue (and I don't think there's an easy answer to that).

As for actually train configurations, don't forget that between the Fort and Mallaig it's often just a (nearly empty) 2 car unit.

 

[ScotTrains]

I would like to see 1st class provision on all scenic lines. Some of these lines are the most scenic in the world. Even though it is often cheaper and faster to take the bus or drive, people still come to travel on these lines to enjoy the journey. This is the exact type of people who would happily pay a little extra to make their​ journey even more enjoyable.

Just a small section of 1st class could be enough. It doesn't have to be that fancy either, just a nicer seat, 2+1 layout, nicer environment, good window position, and some refreshments (relevant to the route) too. The price difference should be realistic too, say about 30% extra. This could be managed to maintain 1st class loadings that are similar to standard class loadings. This is something Scotrail have yet to grasp. Scotrail 1st is very poor value and is therefore often empty even when standard is full.

Whenever I have travelled on the Wick/Kyle routes I always try to sit in the 1st class section. It always fills up first. This shows there is clearly a demand. Many travellers including myself would be willing to pay a little extra to sit there too. It may not be much but still worth something for the power socket, wood effect table, table light, curtains, antimacassars, 1st class smug feel etc etc. It really is bizarre why Scotrail never charged extra for this. Think of all that lost revenue over the years!

When 1st class is becoming increasingly popular with leisure travellers Scotrail really should try and cash in on this trend. Other operators are improving their provision; Virgin, Tpex and Grand central have all opened new 1st class lounges in the last few years yet Scotrail are removing 1st class provision (158s) and permanently closing their lounges (Waverley).
Not only does 1st class travel provide an extra source of income at little extra cost to the operator, it also helps to promote rail travel, therefore further increasing usage and revenue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am utterly dumfounded at some of the suggestions on here for rolling stock - although I suppose that I shouldn't have been surprised at the old HST "1+4" chestnut rearing it's head again. Please accept that the line will get standard DMUs - the likes of the 158 or 185 or their ilk will be more than adequate. I have no idea why this line deserves such 'special' rolling stock treatment.

Do you also not see why the Swiss do it?

There are others too. I think you'd fill the Conwy Valley with tourists if it was marketed right and used something better than a rotting Class 150 (though at least the ATW seat layout is not seemingly designed to minimise view out).

And First Class would be money for old rope, literally. Tourists love a bit of luxury.

 

[CosherB]

Do you also not see why the Swiss do it?

There are others too. I think you'd fill the Conwy Valley with tourists if it was marketed right and used something better than a rotting Class 150 (though at least the ATW seat layout is not seemingly designed to minimise view out).

And First Class would be money for old rope, literally. Tourists love a bit of luxury.

This is the UK, not Switzerland. Maybe your vocation should be as a TOC Marketing Manager!

 

[DarloRich]

This is the UK, not Switzerland. Maybe your vocation should be as a TOC Marketing Manager!

I think Neil is right in that there IS a tourist potential to be tapped but i think that is more by Jacobite style steam services rather than by TOC's franchised services.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Thank goodness for at least one realistic suggestion. Making comparisons between the WHL and Swiss alpine routes is absolutely ridiculous. Quite apart from the immense difference in scale, and therefore grandeur, there's also a big difference in geography. Many of the high alpine routes actually form part of longer distance journey possibilities meaning tourists can take them in as part of a wider tour. Whereas the WHL, in railway terms, is a dead end. The scope for generating high-end revenue exists across the alps almost year round but the WHL season is really only a few weeks. Any high-spec scenic trains for the WHL would spend most of the year serving no purpose.

One lesson learned, eventually, by BR was that the best replacement for first generation DMUs was second generation DMUs ie Sprinters and Turbos, not Pacers or the non-developed Class 210 concept. So replacement stock for the WHL and other similar lines need only be an updated Sprinter style unit meeting modern standards of sound insulation with full air conditioning and decent alignment between seats and windows (that doesn't have to mean all bays with tables!). But extra frippery like external cctv or at seat service is of no real use to local users who use the trains all year. KISS principle applies.

As others have said, the scenic routes can be used as part of a tour if you use coaches for other parts. Package tours of Scotland can easily sort these things out, and I see no reason why an integrated transport network of coaches between rail termini could not also be set up.

I chose the Hull Trains example deliberately as it demonstrated that you can actually offer something fundamentally different to a standard DMU experience without breaking the bank. The cost of fitting a small buffet in place of a few seats is minimal and the installation is totally reversible. I say that it should be equally possible to fit out WHL or other scenic route standard multiple units with a similar sort of high standard. The same basic unit could be used on Waterloo-Exeter runs and be chock filled with as many seats as you can cram in for London commuting. For scenic services, the amount of seating would be reduced but it would be aligned better with windows, as well as other non-seating areas being available. All you need to do is blank out or cover over the window nearest the door and you can have space for cycle racks or a catering area.

That the trains might only have a few months' tourist season doesn't really matter, because you're not really adding onto the operational cost. In the low season, it's not as if people are going to be left behind at stations because the space has been used for other things. If anything, having these special bits is only going to make the train more appealing and therefore less loss-making during these low seasons. The ability to go and have basic hot food and drink from a self-service area might be a reason why someone would take the train rather than a cheaper coach service. If the train is just a glorified coach then there's no reason why someone (like a local) would actively want to use it instead if it was more expensive and the journey time is longer. With a few seating bays blanked out you would have plenty of space for a hot drinks machine and something like this:

Another major factor that's worth remembering is that unlike last time, any new ScotRail trains for the scenic routes really would actually only be used on scenic services even if not kitted out specially. The 156s and 158s ended up running basically every sort of diesel service, from the Glasgow-Aberdeen expresses to branch lines like Paisley Canal. While only the RETB subfleet were able to run on most scenic routes, these trains could and still do end up running other diesel services across the ScotRail network. This was demonstrated in the recent Maryhill line landslip where the reason to bustitute from Crianlarich despite the Queen Street LL route being available was that the WHL trains needed to do other turns and the extra delay from the diversion couldn't be accommodated. However, this is very much on the way out with further electrification of suburban routes. The WHL 156s really won't be able to do much more than those and Anniesland runs, with the 385s running all of the stoppers in the Central Belt, the HSTs doing the express runs and their 75mph top speed making them impractical for use on the remaining diesel Dundee/Perth stoppers. Unless the trains were diagrammed to go over the City Union line and then make up GSW line services, they'll never do anything but scenic routes. Anniesland is obviously ripe for electrification but even then a scenic train on that line wouldn't be the end of the world given its short length and low passenger numbers. In the long term, electrification up to Aberdeen and Inverness (and presumably in between) will mean that the scenic trains from Glasgow and from Inverness will really have no reason to ever leave those areas.

If the trains are going to be restricted to scenic routes by default, there really doesn't seem to be any negative to making them optimal for those services. Beyond catering there are other enhancements which would require effectively no effort at all. That daft idea of external CCTV being displayed to passengers just requires a small piece of software running on the train internet system. The forward-facing CCTV is already going to be connected to this system for remote monitoring and retrieval purposes, so all you need is to send the live video stream to a web browser and you're done. Touristy info can also just be done through the normal train internet portal. Power sockets and WiFi would be happening regardless of the rest of the equipment standard.