ScotRail HST Introduction - Updates & Discussion

[GrimShady]

Would it be viable to stick in a follow-on order for 5-car sets of Mk5As and 68s, perhaps, if things have got that bad? They would basically offer the same thing to passengers but have the advantage of being new, and possibly of being suitable for using on electrified lines in future simply by substituting an electric locomotive. Then for the time being operate unmodified HSTs on a derogation until they arrive.

The issues of daytime passengers on the Caledonian could be further solved by adding on one or two more TSOs and operating it as a separate ScotRail service tagged onto the Sleeper.

That would make too much sense. When the HSTs go they'll be back to DMUs no doubt.

 

[jingsmonty]

Ah, I assume that'll be the following one then:

HA05 42558 42032d 42010d 41022

I was erring on the side of caution as I wasn't sure how many sets were in Scotland at present and it wasn't shown as confirmed on the abrail site. Thanks for the clarification.

IT's the set with Power cars 43003 (one of the power cars from the very first HST set, 253001, I believe) and 43148 (a refurbished one).

 

[jingsmonty]

Would it be viable to stick in a follow-on order for 5-car sets of Mk5As and 68s, perhaps, if things have got that bad? They would basically offer the same thing to passengers but have the advantage of being new, and possibly of being suitable for using on electrified lines in future simply by substituting an electric locomotive. Then for the time being operate unmodified HSTs on a derogation until they arrive.

The issues of daytime passengers on the Caledonian could be further solved by adding on one or two more TSOs and operating it as a separate ScotRail service tagged onto the Sleeper.

Minus the performance....I'd have a refurbished HST set over the rather unimpressive looking Mk5a / Class 68s. Also, I can't see it being particularly cost effective to lease HSTs, then Lease brand new trains soon after?

 

[Journeyman]

I don’t have any issue with the project in terms simply that refurbishing old trains is destined to fail. Just that if you are going to do it. You try it first before everyone commits to it in terms of cost timing and delivery. I like the hst trains and we need more capacity. If they had 6 rather than 3 car 170 units as standard on the inter city routes north modified for better baggage and a catering car I would be equally content. Perhaps that would have been an easier job.

Absolutely agree. Certainly a few years ago there were plans for lengthened and upgraded 170s, which I would have been more than happy with.

 

[jingsmonty]

I don’t have any issue with the project in terms simply that refurbishing old trains is destined to fail. Just that if you are going to do it. You try it first before everyone commits to it in terms of cost timing and delivery. I like the hst trains and we need more capacity. If they had 6 rather than 3 car 170 units as standard on the inter city routes north modified for better baggage and a catering car I would be equally content. Perhaps that would have been an easier job.

An HST makes better use of the space available (no intermediate cabs & doors in the wrong place). I think that refurbishing 170s s 6 car InterCity units would have been a harder job than you'd think. New engines/transmission would be a must. Bigger CET tanks as well, which would have been nigh-on impossible to fit. Refurbishing a Mk3 is probably a better (& possibly easier, despite the issues) option.

First Group proposed something like this in their last franchise bid - it didn't even finish 2nd.

 

[Journeyman]

Minus the performance....I'd have a refurbished HST set over the rather unimpressive looking Mk5a / Class 68s. Also, I can't see it being particularly cost effective to lease HSTs, then Lease brand new trains soon after?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is yet another reason why the HSTs were a bad idea. The cost is creeping upwards and the lifetime of the finished product is making them less viable by the day.

 

[jingsmonty]

A lot of the fanboys think the HSTs are so good that they won't hear any criticism of this project. It's come as no surprise to me that 40-year-old trains are knackered, and the whole thing is turning into a right mess. I think I've seen enough to say this project has turned into an expensive farce, and was a serious mistake.

Really? Every project has issues (eg, the windscreens on the 385s), this one would appear not to be of Scotrail's making. 'A serious mistake'? We will see. I respectfully disagree with that, but we're all entitled to our opinion. It' far from ideal to have to put unrefurbished sets into service, but that's a failure on the part of Wabtec, not the trains themselves.

As far as being a 'fanboy', well, the project does deserve criticism - a lot of the infrastructure issues weren't thought out properly, for one thing. If it was such a bad idea, GWR & Cross Country wouldn't be doing the same thing (and, perhaps, this is part of the problem?).

 

[jingsmonty]

That would make too much sense. When the HSTs go they'll be back to DMUs no doubt.

You could argue that an HST IS a DMU (a DEMU, to be precise) - just a very fast one!

Who knows what the future holds...I'd be interested to hear the views of GWR passengers & Staff as to whether they prefer their Hitachi IEPs or do they miss their HSTs!

 

[BRX]

If only they'd gone for brand new stock, like caley sleeper or GWR, then everything would be right on time and trouble free.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If only they'd gone for brand new stock, like caley sleeper or GWR, then everything would be right on time and trouble free.

What, a bit like the CS stock, er, isn't?

 

[jingsmonty]

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is yet another reason why the HSTs were a bad idea. The cost is creeping upwards and the lifetime of the finished product is making them less viable by the day.

What do you mean by the 'lifetime of the finished product'? A refurbished Mk3/HST power car has as much life in it as any other steel bodied train - the Power Cars have already had a rebuild, don't forget (with a comprehensive re-engining programme). They have a lot of life left in them yet - THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF REFURBISHING THEM!

The decision has been made, we need these trains ASAP, NOT wait however long (and the high cost - much higher than refurbishing HSTs) new stock would take. Can you imagine the adverse publicity that would entail as well?

I guess some people just don't like HSTs...

 

[jingsmonty]

If only they'd gone for brand new stock, like caley sleeper or GWR, then everything would be right on time and trouble free.

I take it this a tongue in cheek comment.....?

 

[fgwrich]

Really? Every project has issues (eg, the windscreens on the 385s), this one would appear not to be of Scotrail's making. 'A serious mistake'? We will see. I respectfully disagree with that, but we're all entitled to our opinion. It' far from ideal to have to put unrefurbished sets into service, but that's a failure on the part of Wabtec, not the trains themselves.

As far as being a 'fanboy', well, the project does deserve criticism - a lot of the infrastructure issues weren't thought out properly, for one thing. If it was such a bad idea, GWR & Cross Country wouldn't be doing the same thing (and, perhaps, this is part of the problem?).

I completely agree, but apparently we are all just “fanboys” of the HST if we do not agree that we must replace everything that is old with everything that is shiny and new and will apparently work straight out of the box. Nor if we believe that the Mk3 is a tired old rattle box that apparently spills your coffee around the coach like it’s in space every time it goes near to a curve.

Yes they are older stock, and yes we are well aware of the many documented issues with the build of the Mk3s, but a large proportion of the blame in this affair lies with Wabtec for taking on far more than they can manage. Thankfully we are now starting to see the long overdue fruits of the project with second sets for ScotRail and GWR nearly ready for delivery, and yes ScotRail and Transport Scotland deserve their smaller share of the blame for believing Wabtec’s over ambitious timescales, but at least a ScotRail will have a just as acceptable back up in the form of the unrefurbished mostly low density sets. And as you say Jingsmonty, it’s not as if we’ve heard hoards of complaints from GWR and their set either! And to pile on the pressure, of which I’m sure there’s far more behind the scenes, we’ve also now had the first public statement from ScotRail blamining Wabtec for this issue as well.

And it’s not as if there’s been conversion issues with the newer stock either, 460-458 projects anyone!

 

[chuff chuff]

What do you mean by the 'lifetime of the finished product'? A refurbished Mk3/HST power car has as much life in it as any other steel bodied train - the Power Cars have already had a rebuild, don't forget (with a comprehensive re-engining programme). They have a lot of life left in them yet - THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF REFURBISHING THEM!

The decision has been made, we need these trains ASAP, NOT wait however long (and the high cost - much higher than refurbishing HSTs) new stock would take. Can you imagine the adverse publicity that would entail as well?

I guess some people just don't like HSTs...

The refurbished power cars have had nothing but some sticky back plastic some paint and the sound proofing under the cab replaced.My biggest worry is not the seats in the untouched coaches or indeed the refurbished ones it's wether there will still be two power cars running at the end of the journey.

 

[fgwrich]

If only they'd gone for brand new stock, like caley sleeper or GWR, then everything would be right on time and trouble free.

Trouble free... like the late Caley sleeper stock... or the late & often short formed IEP / IETs... or the CrossRail and London Overground Aventras... or the Thameslink Desiro City’s... I could go on but I think the point has been made.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The refurbished power cars have had nothing but some sticky back plastic some paint and the sound proofing under the cab replaced.My biggest worry is not the seats in the untouched coaches or indeed the refurbished ones it's wether there will still be two power cars running at the end of the journey.

Given that they have all had new engines at mid-life (so the engines and ancillaries are not 40 years old, more like 20, which is not old in railway terms nor indeed in terms of any other very large diesel engine) I don't see why that should be a massive concern.

It's the coaches rusting to bits (and things like ancient air-con not working properly) that are more of a concern.

 

[BRX]

I take it this a tongue in cheek comment.....?

Of course it is!

 

[jingsmonty]

The refurbished power cars have had nothing but some sticky back plastic some paint and the sound proofing under the cab replaced.My biggest worry is not the seats in the untouched coaches or indeed the refurbished ones it's wether there will still be two power cars running at the end of the journey.

Having driven 170s/158s, as well as HSTs, I'd have to say that I'd be more concerned about losing an engine in one of them...

An HST has enough 'grunt' to get out of trouble with one engine-one has made it up to Dalwhinnie (at line speed!) from Perth on 1 power car already..

The MTU engines are derated in the HST as well-they are, apparently, capable of 4000hp, as opposed to the 2250hp they are rated at. Almost suprised that no-one came up with the idea of 1x 4000hp power car..thankfully, nobody did!

 

[chuff chuff]

Yeah a four hst on one power car runs roughly the same as a 170,it's not the effect on performance but more the likely regularity of it happening.Don't think these power cars had the greatest reliability at great western and there have been quite a few days training lost to training set availability.

 

[43096]

Given that they have all had new engines at mid-life (so the engines and ancillaries are not 40 years old, more like 20, which is not old in railway terms nor indeed in terms of any other very large diesel engine) I don't see why that should be a massive concern.

It's the coaches rusting to bits (and things like ancient air-con not working properly) that are more of a concern.

Reversing the low reliability of the ex-GWR fleet will be the challenge. GWR’s HSTs are the worst performing HST fleet by a considerable margin.

 

[jingsmonty]

Reversing the low reliability of the ex-GWR fleet will be the challenge. GWR’s HSTs are the worst performing HST fleet by a considerable margin.

Agreed. They will have an easier life up here though...100mph max, 4/5 coach loadings. They will be coasting a lot more. To illustrate, I was told that the expected fuel economy is slightly more than twice what they achieved at GWR...given they are not constantly hammering flat out at 125mph.

 

[jingsmonty]

Yeah a four hst on one power car runs roughly the same as a 170,it's not the effect on performance but more the likely regularity of it happening.Don't think these power cars had the greatest reliability at great western and there have been quite a few days training lost to training set availability.

Some of the non-availability was not entirely to do with the HST...at least 2 days have been lost due to overdue maintenance exams, also other disruption (especially on the HML) -a day was lost recently due to a freight failing near Blair Atholl..

In fairness, set HA01 did lie down big time in July with a burst air pipe in 43127!

 

[Stoney1979]

The late delivery of the unrefurbished coaches doesn't make the project a bad one in itself, just a poorly planned and managed one. Who's to blame? Probably everyone involved, a bit each.

Nor does it necessarily make it a wrong decision, time will tell on that when the reliability and passenger number data come in. Nor does it make the HST inherently a bad train, as evidenced extensively above.

I was surprised, and as a proud and dedicated "HST fanboy" delighted to hear the SR plan, that's why I sought out this forum in the first place. I can fully see that a brand new stock option could have well have been a better option, 68s with Mk5s being the stand-out. But it wasn't taken that way.

So here we are and this thread is about the HST intro which, one way or another, is going to happen. It would be more interesting to talk about what is going to happen, rather than what could have, or never will.

 

[Stoney1979]

Ah, I assume that'll be the following one then:

HA05 42558 42032d 42010d 41022

I was erring on the side of caution as I wasn't sure how many sets were in Scotland at present and it wasn't shown as confirmed on the abrail site. Thanks for the clarification.

Does this mean that SR have 5 sets already in their possession, including the refurbished one?

 

[chuff chuff]

Some of the non-availability was not entirely to do with the HST...at least 2 days have been lost due to overdue maintenance exams, also other disruption (especially on the HML) -a day was lost recently due to a freight failing near Blair Atholl..

In fairness, set HA01 did lie down big time in July with a burst air pipe in 43127!

Oh there's been more issues than that,in themselves probably quite small but still meant the training train never left the yard/depot.Hopefully as more knowledge and experience comes the lesser the problems.

 

[Journeyman]

Do you know what? I actually think the HST is the most successful train this country has ever seen, both technically and commercially. It's transformed long-distance travel, making it far more comfortable, faster and more profitable than it ever was before. I'm hugely impressed by what the HST has achieved in it's lifetime.

But you know what? That lifetime is over. This project was a bad idea right from the start, and there are plenty in the industry who will tell you that. It's time they were retired gracefully, and the huge problems getting them introduced in Scotland is ample evidence for that.

It doesn't matter whether they're better than 170s or not, or whether new trains are better or worse or on time, or whatever. The simple fact is they're not here yet, and there's a load of problems potentially on the horizon that may never get resolved.

Whoever signed off on this has a lot of questions to answer.

 

[43096]

Whoever signed off on this has a lot of questions to answer.

Along with, presumably, the people who signed off 769s, Aventras for Crossrail and Overground, IEP, CAF sleeper stock, 444/450 refurbishment, Renatus 321s.... Need I go on?

Not that they have better things to do than justifying themselves to people making rants on web forums.

 

[Journeyman]

Along with, presumably, the people who signed off 769s, Aventras for Crossrail and Overground, IEP, CAF sleeper stock, 444/450 refurbishment, Renatus 321s.... Need I go on?

Not that they have better things to do than justifying themselves to people making rants on web forums.

So how come it's OK to be angry about those other projects, but not the HSTs?

 

[Stoney1979]

So how come it's OK to be angry about those other projects, but not the HSTs?

I suspect the point being made is that just because something is brand new doesn't mean it's better than anything else, nor that it's going to be delivered on time.

 

[43096]

So how come it's OK to be angry about those other projects, but not the HSTs?

Eh? It was a general observation. There’s far too many comments along the lines of “Wabtec/Porterbrook/whoever need to pull their finger out/try harder” etc etc as if the organisations involved are doing it deliberately and can’t be bothered. If people really believe that, then there are words to describe them that will have the moderators in a cold sweat.