• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Were refurbished HSTs the right choice for ScotRail?

Status
Not open for further replies.

alangla

Member
Joined
11 Apr 2018
Messages
1,178
Location
Glasgow
Even if 185 actually happened, are ScotRail express services not heavily reliant on SP or HST speed differentials to keep time? 185 definitely doesn’t appear to be the answer
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,435
They could cancel the contract with Wabtec, or at least part of it and contract someone else to carry out the work.
Lease some emus and loco haul them until HSTs are done.
Apply for a derogation.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
Yes, I'm sure a bunch of elderly diesels hauling some 319s (the only EMUs I can think of in storage?) around would go down smashingly
 

Highlandspring

Established Member
Joined
14 Oct 2017
Messages
2,778
..with no door or brake control. This thread is taking a lurch towards Walter Mitty territory.
 

hollyblue

Member
Joined
31 Aug 2018
Messages
15
made some calls and got this heading down to fill in. Don’t thank me
 

Attachments

  • C07E9F72-3BB1-4B08-B419-E4D35AD84159.jpeg
    C07E9F72-3BB1-4B08-B419-E4D35AD84159.jpeg
    214.8 KB · Views: 68

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
Any alternative is looking at needing 100-125 carriages and 50 locomotives- or 25 locomotives and 25 compatible driving trailers. Right now.
 

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,435
It was a bit of a joke.
They'll just apply for a derogation to run the slam door HSTs for a while.
 

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,626
Just to get back on track, unrefurbished slam door HSTs will enter service on the 10th December. All parties in agreement this is the only viable option even if it means a temporary return to slam doors and non CET toilets. The RMT have accepted this as a temporary solution but must be removed from service as soon a physically possible. Guards are being trained and sets organised. It is going to happen and is far from ideal, but preferable to cancelling services.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,049
It was a bit of a joke.
They'll just apply for a derogation to run the slam door HSTs for a while.
They can apply... In my view it is unlikely that they will get it. Frankly if derogations are allowed (and in my view, given how long the railway industry has had to sort things out and failed abysmally, they should not be) there are more deserving causes eg TfW
 

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,435
So perhaps TfW and others will also get a derogation.
If the choice is grant a derogation or force mass service curtailments whilst perfectly usable trains sit in sidings, I know which way the political pressure will be applied.
It's not as if there aren't solutions like ramps which mitigate the accessibility issues of older stock. Those don't suddenly cease to exist on some arbitrary date.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,049
So perhaps TfW and others will also get a derogation.
If the choice is grant a derogation or force mass service curtailments whilst perfectly usable trains sit in sidings, I know which way the political pressure will be applied.
It's not as if there aren't solutions like ramps which mitigate the accessibility issues of older stock. Those don't suddenly cease to exist on some arbitrary date.
DfT will be very hesitant not least because they know very well that litigation would follow (not only from disability groups but also potentially those who have incurred significant expense to achieve the deadline). Let's be brutally honest, the rail industry has had over 10 years to address this but frankly just haven't bothered, presumably just expecting derrogations as of right. If there are no derrogations the TOCs will quite deservedly suffer financial penalties for breaking their franchise obligations..
 
Last edited:

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,435
But ultimately it's the passengers who would suffer if there was no train at all - including those who are of reduced mobility.
Not suggesting derogations should be granted on an open-ended basis. But granting a derogation until such time as new of refurbished stock is available would be pragmatic.
That wouldn't prevent financial or other consequences for those who have failed to fulfill their obligations from being applied.
 

TT-ONR-NRN

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
10,413
Location
Farnham
One of the problems here is, although there are some trains available from other operations, you have to take into consideration driver learning and clearing the unit for the line.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,049
But ultimately it's the passengers who would suffer if there was no train at all - including those who are of reduced mobility.
Not suggesting derogations should be granted on an open-ended basis. But granting a derogation until such time as new of refurbished stock is available would be pragmatic.
That wouldn't prevent financial or other consequences for those who have failed to fulfill their obligations from being applied.
You keep banging on about those of reduced mobility - what about those with other disabilities who would be sold down the river?
 

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,435
I mentioned reduced mobility once directly and once obliquely. Hardly "banging on".

Other disabilities. Partially sighted, pretty easy to paint a door in a contrasting colour. Unable to operate the door, pretty easy to employ someone to take care of that.

Hardly selling anyone down the river if it's only a stop gap because a programme which was meant to deliver a compliant fleet over a year in advance of the deadline is horribly delayed.
Or perhaps everyone else should be "sold down the river" and expected to find other ways to go about their daily lives.

Would disabled people rather continue with the current mitigation measures for a year or so or have no train service at all for a year or so?
 

Class37.4

Member
Joined
8 Oct 2018
Messages
125
They can apply... In my view it is unlikely that they will get it. Frankly if derogations are allowed (and in my view, given how long the railway industry has had to sort things out and failed abysmally, they should not be) there are more deserving causes eg TfW

Well I think it will happen if needed, which probably will be on a number of franchises, and in particular I’m interested to know how they can make the MML HST’s compliant in the next 14 months.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,161
DfT will be very hesitant not least because they know very well that litigation would follow (not only from disability groups but also potentially those who have incurred significant expense to achieve the deadline). Let's be brutally honest, the rail industry has had over 10 years to address this but frankly just haven't bothered, presumably just expecting derrogations as of right. If there are no derrogations the TOCs will quite deservedly suffer financial penalties for breaking their franchise obligations..
And the reason why it hasn’t been done? That’s because DfT haven’t authorised the work - it was told years ago what needed to be done and by when and has buried its head in the sand.
 

route:oxford

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2008
Messages
4,949
It turns out they were the wrong decision.

The correct decision would have been to order a batch of 20 seven-coach Hybrid 22x series in 2013 when project Thor was being mooted.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,531
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
It turns out they were the wrong decision.

The correct decision would have been to order a batch of 20 seven-coach Hybrid 22x series in 2013 when project Thor was being mooted.

Eh? They wouldn't be building any new ones, and none would be available of the existing ones yet.

There are a number of options which it turned out may have been better, e.g. lok+Mk5, Class 800, Stadler FLIRT, CAF DMU or whatever.
 

Paul Kerr

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2017
Messages
143
I disagree - there were plenty in the industry who thought it was crazy, and figured something like this would happen.



Nope. The last set was meant to be completed by next month, so we should have 26 sets - so far we have one. That's a pretty major failure.



But it's too late for that to happen now, unless they miraculously deliver 25 sets in a month.

They were a bad choice.

So you keep telling us, you think they are a bad choice. But with respect to you I have yet to see you come up with a feasible alternative with the funds that ScotRail had available, and please don't go back to your notion of using a 6 car Class 170. As an intercity train they are a complete joke. Leaving the underfloor engine argument aside which I accept we could go back and forth on all day, the doors are in the wrong place, they don't have nearly enough luggage space and their engines are woefully underpowered, and that's just for starters. That is what happens when you try and use a generic commuter design and pass it off on long distance services.

Plenty in the industry thought it crazy so you say. Those probably would be the same people who foisted Class 170's, 180's, 185's and other glorified railbus designs on long distance travellers. We need to wait for more trains to enter service but with their performance they could be a game changer and they were designed without the compromises we see on many of the shiny "modern" designs of today. The unfortunate thing is that train design is too often dictated by accountants which leads to poorly designed trains. Many of the HST replacements have been like trading a 40 year old Rolls Royce for a brand new Fiat 500. No disrespect to those who drive a Fiat but you're not comparing like with like and I know which one I'd rather have. You think the HSTs are such a bad idea? Go ahead and suggest a serious proven alternative that a) is available now and b) matches the performance of a short formed HST. Just because it's shiny and "new" doesn't mean it's better.
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,543
Location
Elginshire
There are a number of options which it turned out may have been better, e.g. lok+Mk5, Class 800, Stadler FLIRT, CAF DMU or whatever.
Going back to when Abellio was awarded the Scotrail franchise, how many of those options were actually available at the time? 800/801 had already been proposed, but the 802 hadn't - and I'd imagine that Scotrail services would need the extra oomph from the uprated engines. The Mk5, FLIRT and CAF DMUs are a much more recent developments.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
Going back to when Abellio was awarded the Scotrail franchise, how many of those options were actually available at the time? 800/801 had already been proposed, but the 802 hadn't - and I'd imagine that Scotrail services would need the extra oomph from the uprated engines. The Mk5, FLIRT and CAF DMUs are a much more recent developments.

The Mark 5 design concept has actually been around for years. Remember that the Sleeper franchise was awarded at the same time as the ScotRail one, and the Mark 5 had already been largely designed by then - it was intended as a family of vehicles for a range of different purposes.
 

Northhighland

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2016
Messages
606
Going back to when Abellio was awarded the Scotrail franchise, how many of those options were actually available at the time? 800/801 had already been proposed, but the 802 hadn't - and I'd imagine that Scotrail services would need the extra oomph from the uprated engines. The Mk5, FLIRT and CAF DMUs are a much more recent developments.

Are they really suitable for the HML though? Mk5 maybe fine but the others look like modern 170’s to me.

Very frustrating to be stuck in Dalwhinnie in a moderate snow fall on a 170. To watch a loco hauled Tesco train drive past.

The HML is unlikely to ever be electrified so we need a long term suitable alternative that can grow with capacity changes and meet seasonal peaks so we offer tourists encouragement to come to Scotland.

Current mess needs fixed with input from people who live and work in the Highlands. Not sorted in Edinburgh or Glasgow.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
Are they really suitable for the HML though? Mk5 maybe fine but the others look like modern 170’s to me.

There's nothing wrong with 170s that a decent refurb, and reforming into longer sets, couldn't fix. All the other options available are prefectly decent trains too.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,161
There's nothing wrong with 170s that a decent refurb, and reforming into longer sets, couldn't fix. All the other options available are prefectly decent trains too.
Given that ScotRail are losing only 20 Class 170 sets (4 to Southern, 16 to Northern), and that the design is out of production, maybe you can explain your plan to cover the shortfall between 121 HST trailers and 60 170 cars.
 

whhistle

On Moderation
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
2,636
So perhaps TfW and others will also get a derogation.
May as well just not bother with the deadline if everyone who it affects will get some sort of derogation...

Like airport check-in, a deadline is a deadline.
If that means trains are short, so be it for the TOCs not looking at other solutions.

Guess using the 442s and locos was also out of the question :P
 
Last edited:

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
Given that ScotRail are losing only 20 Class 170 sets (4 to Southern, 16 to Northern), and that the design is out of production, maybe you can explain your plan to cover the shortfall between 121 HST trailers and 60 170 cars.

Transport Scotland stated in the franchise specs that refurbed 170s were acceptable, so it may well have been possible to bid on the basis of keeping them.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,161
Transport Scotland stated in the franchise specs that refurbed 170s were acceptable, so it may well have been possible to bid on the basis of keeping them.
Congratulations on not answering the question.

So 50 cars less capacity is/was OK, then?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top