Scotrail HST alternatives?

[chuff chuff]

There is often a sense of relief amongst many train crew when a 170/158 rolls in vice an HST personally I've been very lucky regarding problems with the power cars,and I prefer them to aforementioned 170/158 best diesel to drive we've ever had.
However there are probably many reasons why they have been a poor choice,age,non existent infrastructure,lack of recent locomotive maintenance experience and the rest,but with little or no money to throw at the problem where do we go.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

And there we have a big part of the problem. Attitude.

Well this is utterly ridiculous.

The nerve of some people!

 

[Trainbike46]

I have posted this before, but seeing as you are sceptical...

The Angel Trains investor report (as per Angel's website) for the period when the lease was signed can be found here: https://angeltrains.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Investor-Report-01_07_14-to-30_06_15-Final.pdf

The relevant part is:
View attachment 148619

Th relevant text is:

As evidenced by this post above, the Scottish government has guaranteed the lease of the HSTs until 2030; they are unlikely to be replaced before then, simply because it would mean paying for two leases at the same time. Fortunately that also gives enough time to order new stock to replace them when the time comes. Stadler already has bimodes in service in the UK (and I can say the 755s are really good trains), and a trimode version is likely to enter service soon with the 756s in Wales, other manufacturers are also working on bimodes and trimodes (including CAF and Hitachi), so ordering a trimode or BEMU (depending on electrification progress) to replace the HSTs around 2030 is entirely rasonable. Scotrail seems to have taken steps to improve the HSTs so they can continue until 2030ish as well

 

[jagardner1984]

I'm sure it exists somewhere, but it would be interesting to see a Chart of comparative length between contract award and final unit of an order being in service (i.e. the end of the need for the previous product to be serviceable)

As has been said previously, I would think for the final unit to be in service by 2030, an announcement of the process would need to come fairly soon.

The idea that what is causing the poor performance, the wheel flats, the visible corrosion, the faulty inverters, the leaky roofs, is some lack of care or professionalism amongst Scotrail staff is frankly risible, and insulting in the extreme. There was perhaps some sort of logic in the "classic" sets being used as a stop gap for a few years until something else came along. The idea that in some fairly challenging conditions, the HST would be a suitable train to be the backbone of Scotland's railway at over 50 years old by the point of withdrawal, having led extremely full lives on the Western previously, was always pushing the bounds of logic to the extreme.

 

[PG]

it would be interesting to see a Chart of comparative length between contract award and final unit of an order being in service

That may be skewed somewhat by the 701's - ordered mid 2017 within none yet in service and the TOC saying it'll take a couple of years to get them all in service.

 

[takno]

The idea that what is causing the poor performance, the wheel flats, the visible corrosion, the faulty inverters, the leaky roofs, is some lack of care or professionalism amongst Scotrail staff is frankly risible, and insulting in the extreme. There was perhaps some sort of logic in the "classic" sets being used as a stop gap for a few years until something else came along. The idea that in some fairly challenging conditions, the HST would be a suitable train to be the backbone of Scotland's railway at over 50 years old by the point of withdrawal, having led extremely full lives on the Western previously, was always pushing the bounds of logic to the extreme.

It's not a lack of care or professionalism, but it could easily be a lack of experience and personnel (and a wheel lathe). Those are problems which Scotrail have acknowledged, without as far as I'm aware ever attempting to suggest that the staff are careless or unprofessional. We are where we are, and it's likely to be more productive to build up the experience and solve the solvable problems rather than falling back on the magical delivery of some different fleet of moderately clapped-out junk to fill the gap before new stock is ordered, with the associated staff training and building of experience from scratch that would require.

I agree that you'd really want to be starting procurement now, but given the current state of Scotland's finances, and the likelihood of a change in Westminster government before the next Scottish budget, I don't see much chance of it happening now for at least another year. Fortunately it doesn't seem unachievable to have new stock in place in 6 years, particularly if it's a run-on order, of a unit with an existing safety case etc. Worst case you're going to be rolling them into service a bit before you want to, and one would assume that by that point people will be so grateful to see the back of the HSTs that they will still accept them with open arms.

 

[najaB]

We are where we are, and it's likely to be more productive to build up the experience and solve the solvable problems rather than falling back on the magical delivery of some different fleet of moderately clapped-out junk to fill the gap before new stock is ordered, with the associated staff training and building of experience from scratch that would require.

I presume that was directed to the Class 22x as suggested by a number of posters above?

 

[gingertom]

As evidenced by this post above, the Scottish government has guaranteed the lease of the HSTs until 2030; they are unlikely to be replaced before then, simply because it would mean paying for two leases at the same time. Fortunately that also gives enough time to order new stock to replace them when the time comes. Stadler already has bimodes in service in the UK (and I can say the 755s are really good trains), and a trimode version is likely to enter service soon with the 756s in Wales, other manufacturers are also working on bimodes and trimodes (including CAF and Hitachi), so ordering a trimode or BEMU (depending on electrification progress) to replace the HSTs around 2030 is entirely rasonable. Scotrail seems to have taken steps to improve the HSTs so they can continue until 2030ish as well

can't help thinking that, once the wires are up, a bunch of 6-car versions of GA's inter city fitted out 745s could work well if a single central door would be acceptable to TS. They would be a bit of overkill for today's loadings, but provide room for passenger growth. In the interim though, would the power modules that would be required to make them 755s have enough range to do a full day of operation without needing refuelled? I am aware the wheel configurations of the 745 and 755 are different, creating yet another issue to be resolved.

Going for a Stadler solution doesn't help the UK supply chain much though, and a Hitachi 80x (or CAF equivalent) might be preferrable.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

As evidenced by this post above, the Scottish government has guaranteed the lease of the HSTs until 2030; they are unlikely to be replaced before then, simply because it would mean paying for two leases at the same time.

There are other factors that come into it. This isn't as clear cut as you say.

Depending on the lease, the ROSCO is likely to be spending money on the heavy maintenance of these trains. Given the excessive issues they've been experiencing, and the consequential lack of set availability. This is likely to be a significant cost to them. Angel Trains Year-End Investor Reports for 2021 and 2022 cite "Continued Service Operation work on HSTs" as one of their major areas of capital expenditure, and we'd also expect a corresponding reduction in lease payments from ScotRail. There may be a significant incentive for Angel Trains to cut their losses.

ScotRail/Transport Scotland may also be able to use other legal instruments to break the contract or end it early in the event that the trains are not fit for purpose.

And, ultimately, if the trains don't work, then they don't work. The fleet is run down, and if it gets to the point where it can't be reasonably operated, then ScotRail will have to seek replacements. Whatever the cost.

 

[Wynd]

There is no need for a replacement before 2030.

There is a need to get these machines, all of them, including the 5th coaches, in to service and out of sidings.

 

[Killingworth]

There is no need for a replacement before 2030.

There is a need to get these machines, all of them, including the 5th coaches, in to service and out of sidings.

I like travelling in HSTs and thought they were* a good product, but was concerned to note rust bubbling through body panels on a GWR unit at Swindon in November 2015.

In June 2021 I crossed the footbridge at Pitlochry and pictured the roof of a supposedly refurbished unit.

If the very visible roof can't be made water tight I have to wonder about what's happening out of sight. Poor work by Wabtec?

Are GWR's remaining units as bad? If not can any of them be used to back up this fleet? I hate to think what Mexicans and Nigerians think of their venerable museum pieces.

All this said I look forward to riding on the Midland Blue Pullman unit/s next year. With regular light use and tender loving care they may be doing better.

*First used in 1977.

 

[43096]

There are other factors that come into it. This isn't as clear cut as you say.

Depending on the lease, the ROSCO is likely to be spending money on the heavy maintenance of these trains. Given the excessive issues they've been experiencing, and the consequential lack of set availability. This is likely to be a significant cost to them. Angel Trains Year-End Investor Reports for 2021 and 2022 cite "Continued Service Operation work on HSTs" as one of their major areas of capital expenditure, and we'd also expect a corresponding reduction in lease payments from ScotRail. There may be a significant incentive for Angel Trains to cut their losses.

We don't know what the lease arrangement is. You are assuming that Angel are responsible for heavy maintenance on the ScotRail fleet, when there is a very real possibility that they are on a dry lease where ScotRail are responsible for all the maintenance. If Angel is responsible for heavy maintenance, then that will be factored into the lease price - and you can bet they would factor condition risk in (Angel know rather more about them than ScotRail do). So Angel don't really have losses to cut, as the reason the Section 54 is in place is to extend the period ScotRail pay back for the up front capital investment, so there's a lower lease cost per year.

ScotRail/Transport Scotland may also be able to use other legal instruments to break the contract or end it early in the event that the trains are not fit for purpose.

I bet they can't. The ROSCOs are very, very strong contractually - it is something they know they have to get right to manage risk to their business.

And, ultimately, if the trains don't work, then they don't work. The fleet is run down, and if it gets to the point where it can't be reasonably operated, then ScotRail will have to seek replacements. Whatever the cost.

Whatever the cost? Given the Scottish Government has a £1.5 billion hole in its numbers and ScotRail is looking down the barrel of an £80 million budget reduction, I don't think so.

 

[najaB]

I like travelling in HSTs and thought they were* a good product, but was concerned to note rust bubbling through body panels on a GWR unit at Swindon in November 2015.

In June 2021 I crossed the footbridge at Pitlochry and pictured the roof of a supposedly refurbished unit.

This is one reason why people expressed surprise that the GWR units were taken up by Scotrail rather than the then Virgin ones. (Or had Virgin already failed by then?)

 

[PG]

This is one reason why people expressed surprise that the GWR units were taken up by Scotrail rather than the then Virgin ones. (Or had Virgin already failed by then?)

IIRC Virgin (or LNER) were still using their HSTs at the time that Scotrail needed them hence GWRs were utilised.

 

[Energy]

This is one reason why people expressed surprise that the GWR units were taken up by Scotrail rather than the then Virgin ones. (Or had Virgin already failed by then?)

Nope, a Modern Railways article from 2017 lists Angel Trains HSTs from Great Western. LNER/VTEC only had 14 HSTs split between Angel and Porterbrook.

 

[najaB]

IIRC Virgin (or LNER) were still using their HSTs at the time that Scotrail needed them hence GWRs were utilised.

That may well be the case, but I do remember some discussion around that point.

 

[snookertam]

There is no need for a replacement before 2030.

There is a need to get these machines, all of them, including the 5th coaches, in to service and out of sidings.

Would love to know the basis for this assertion that there’s no need for a replacement. I mean we only have the experience of those working with them and using them as passengers, the failure rate and the sheer number of things going wrong with them. And that’s before the logical conclusion that, at over 50 years old, are unlikely to be functioning even to the level they are now.

And then there’s the fact that every other operator has seen fit to get rid long before ScotRail will be. Maybe there’s a reason for that, too. So if you’re aware of anything else, I’d love to know.

 

[najaB]

Would love to know the basis for this assertion that there’s no need for a replacement. I mean we only have the experience of those working with them and using them as passengers, the failure rate and the sheer number of things going wrong with them. And that’s before the logical conclusion that, at over 50 years old, are unlikely to be functioning even to the level they are now.

And then there’s the fact that every other operator has seen fit to get rid long before ScotRail will be. Maybe there’s a reason for that, too. So if you’re aware of anything else, I’d love to know.

First off, I don't think anyone is saying that it wouldn't be desirable to replace them sooner rather than later, but the question is if it's actually necessary to do anything before the end of the current lease period.

And as for why other operators have (mostly) replaced their fleets, it was because they were replacing them with their 'future fleets' for the next 30-plus years. The progress of electrification in Scotland is such that Scotrail is, unfortunately, not at the stage yet where they can acquire a right-sized inter-city train yet. Assuming that the intention is to buy new, they would either have to buy new diesel units and run them under increasing lengths of wires for 20 years or more, buy too many bi-modes, or over-specify the battery capacity for BEMU units.

About the only option currently available for new-build units would be a Class 755 variant.

 

[Southsider]

There are other factors that come into it. This isn't as clear cut as you say.

Depending on the lease, the ROSCO is likely to be spending money on the heavy maintenance of these trains. Given the excessive issues they've been experiencing, and the consequential lack of set availability. This is likely to be a significant cost to them. Angel Trains Year-End Investor Reports for 2021 and 2022 cite "Continued Service Operation work on HSTs" as one of their major areas of capital expenditure, and we'd also expect a corresponding reduction in lease payments from ScotRail. There may be a significant incentive for Angel Trains to cut their losses.

ScotRail/Transport Scotland may also be able to use other legal instruments to break the contract or end it early in the event that the trains are not fit for purpose.

And, ultimately, if the trains don't work, then they don't work. The fleet is run down, and if it gets to the point where it can't be reasonably operated, then ScotRail will have to seek replacements. Whatever the cost.

Don’t Angel own the Class 175s? Is there scope for a deal to be done using them? I know there’s not enough to cover all the HST diagrams but 158/170 are already covering a fair proportion of them.

 

[hexagon789]

Don’t Angel own the Class 175s? Is there scope for a deal to be done using them? I know there’s not enough to cover all the HST diagrams but 158/170 are already covering a fair proportion of them.

The 175s aren't available.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The 175s aren't available.

In what way aren't they? Nobody seems in the end to have signed for them, despite rumours to the contrary.

 

[GlitterUnicorn]

First off, I don't think anyone is saying that it wouldn't be desirable to replace them sooner rather than later, but the question is if it's actually necessary to do anything before the end of the current lease period.

About the only option currently available for new-build units would be a Class 755 variant.

Out of interest, what more would it take to push things from 'desirable' to 'necessary'?

Don’t Angel own the Class 175s? Is there scope for a deal to be done using them? I know there’s not enough to cover all the HST diagrams but 158/170 are already covering a fair proportion of them.

Would be (at best) 70 coaches available instead of 120 and in 2 and 3 car units. Though in practice the working HST fleet is more like 90. The only benefit is that Angel own them.

Class 222s seem like the obvious solution.

 

[jagardner1984]

One wonders if Scottish ministers haven’t been so burned by the Ferry debacle (another discussion as to who is primarily responsible for that) that in any kind of big public procurement, the preferred choice will for the foreseeable be whatever the “safe” and most immediately deliverable option is deemed to be, regardless of long term suitability or alignment with strategic goals. In that sense something which (in its sister product the Voyager) done many many miles on the Aberdeen route in particular, in the Class 222 in some form or other, seems the most viable option, whenever that may be - and presumably you could do a similar thing with the HST introduction that you could do a “Classic” and “Refurb” thing to get the units in service sooner with crew training, whilst someone gets round to putting new stickers on them.

I’m sure someone at Haymarket must have Wabtec’s number - perhaps on that dartboard ?

 

[takno]

One wonders if Scottish ministers haven’t been so burned by the Ferry debacle (another discussion as to who is primarily responsible for that) that in any kind of big public procurement, the preferred choice will for the foreseeable be whatever the “safe” and most immediately deliverable option is deemed to be, regardless of long term suitability or alignment with strategic goals. In that sense something which (in its sister product the Voyager) done many many miles on the Aberdeen route in particular, in the Class 222 in some form or other, seems the most viable option, whenever that may be - and presumably you could do a similar thing with the HST introduction that you could do a “Classic” and “Refurb” thing to get the units in service sooner with crew training, whilst someone gets round to putting new stickers on them.

I’m sure someone at Haymarket must have Wabtec’s number - perhaps on that dartboard ?

Procuring battered old intercity stock from England, on the basis that some trains that looked just like it has run the line before? Sounds like a pretty heroic version of "safe". I suppose they could cover all bases by getting the refurb done in a Clydesdale shipyard.

 

[John Bishop]

Procuring battered old intercity stock from England, on the basis that some trains that looked just like it has run the line before? Sounds like a pretty heroic version of "safe". I suppose they could cover all bases by getting the refurb done in a Clydesdale shipyard.

Well a fleet of 222s would be a hell of a lot better and more reliable than the current offering. I wonder if anyone has the figures for the 2 fleets with regards to reliability?

 

[jagardner1984]

Well a fleet of 222s would be a hell of a lot better and more reliable than the current offering. I wonder if anyone has the figures for the 2 fleets with regards to reliability?

I suppose there would be two relevant stats there - one being the Miles per casualty - and the other being the overall leasing cost per mile in service. One would assume on the latter, having close to half the fleet sitting around in various states of disrepair probably doesn’t do too well for the HST.

 

[takno]

Well a fleet of 222s would be a hell of a lot better and more reliable than the current offering. I wonder if anyone has the figures for the 2 fleets with regards to reliability?

Difficult to say since Haymarket don't maintain any 222s

 

[najaB]

Out of interest, what more would it take to push things from 'desirable' to 'necessary'?

Basically it boils down to if there's a realistic way to get the HSTs up to an adequate standard of reliability to deliver the minimum required service level or not.

If so then replacement might be desirable, but isn't necessary. By way of an analogy, if your pedal cycle gets you where you need to go, then a car isn't necessary, as much as it might be better.

 

[Gonzalez]

In what way aren't they? Nobody seems in the end to have signed for them, despite rumours to the contrary.

Although confidential meaning I can't really mention the facts at this time, but it is confirmed a TOC has already signed them on, just haven't been publicly announced yet.

 

[Meerkat]

Stadlers keep being mentioned but is that design concept practicable?
For the capacity needed they would need at least two power pods wouldnt they, and then would they fit where they need fit on platforms and termini?