ScotRail HST replacement tender issued - ideas thread

[Class83]

LNER can get away with it because they run a limited number of services a day, which don't stop at all stations. There are eight stations on the routes concerned - six of them on Aberdeen-Edinburgh - where the HSTs have to use single door operation. Even 128m units might actually increase that number if end doors are available for passenger use.

Admittedly, one of those is Springfield, which has a grand total of five trains a day, six days a week - none of which are HSTs. But Broughty Ferry and Carnoustie are pretty well used.

For comparison of capacity:
170/4: 18 First, 172 Standard, 4 bikes, 1 wheelchair, 6 luggage stacks, 2 toilets
2+4 HST: 32 First, 208 Standard, 2 bikes, 2 wheelchairs, 8 luggage stacks, 3 toilets
2+5 HST: 32 First, 276 Standard, 2 bikes, 2 wheelchairs, 10 luggage stacks, 4 toilets
5-car 222: 50 First, 190 Standard, 2 bikes, 2 wheelchairs, 6 luggage stacks, 4 toilets

Probably what they have in mind, then - perhaps with vehicle end space in mind to provide the stretch goal of ten spaces.

Interestingly enough, the old HiTrans Turbo Boost study proposed 4-car Class 170 layouts that would almost comply with the requirement, in capacity terms at least.

Yes, I'd looked at the Intercity Stations and the limiting platforms were, shortest listed.

Edinburgh, avoid 18, but this generally isn't used for Aberdeen trains anyway so no problem with 16 (196m) or 17 (197m) which are the usual ones.
Haymarket; Platform 1 is 185m
Inverkeithing; Platform 1 is 188m
Kirkcaldy; Platform 1 is 193m
Leuchars; Platform 1 is 206m
Dundee; avoid bays, but through platforms are >300m
Arbroath; Platform 2 is 230m
Montrose; Platform 2 is 215m
Stonehaven; Platform 1 is 173m
Aberdeen; Platform 4 is 209m

So Stonehaven Platform 1 can take 7.5 23m vehicles.

Other places they might want to stop Dunfermline (if it becomes Inter8Cities, though Inverkeithing really covers this and would involve re-routing) 165m, Markinch (Glenrothes) 148m, Cupar 182m & Carnoustie at 142m. All of which would take 6 23m vehicles.

Places like Springfield and Broughty Ferry should be served by stoppers, probably Turbostars.

But essentially a 5 car 222 is a slight capacity increase on a 4 car HST and a 6 car 222 a slight capacity increase on a 5 car HST. Slightly shorter overall length, but doors slightly nearer the end.

 

[Dunnyrail]

Putting a bit of a spoke in the wheel, were not some of those off lease Inter City type units being looked at by new Open Access Operators? Their plans would clearly be dashed with no units to get their hands on, oh perhaps they could use off lease Sprinters?

 

[trainswitheddy]

Putting a bit of a spoke in the wheel, were not some of those off lease Inter City type units being looked at by new Open Access Operators? Their plans would clearly be dashed with no units to get their hands on, oh perhaps they could use off lease Sprinters?

Don't forget Voyagers will soon be off lease too. Grand Centrals also in til summer next year afaik, should be plenty around until then I'd of thought.

 

[takno]

I think something has got to give otherwise Transport Scotland will end up with units with a vastly reduced seating capacity barely any better than running a single 170. Either the bikes have to go in the areas adjacent to the cabs, which AIUI isn't permitted to have passengers in, or the number of bikes should be reduced. They need to decide if these trains are for passengers or push-bikes.

I thought the space behind the cabs having no seats was only a consequence of them being 125mph capable. If the max speed was reduced to 100mph you might be able to let passengers into it.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Putting a bit of a spoke in the wheel, were not some of those off lease Inter City type units being looked at by new Open Access Operators? Their plans would clearly be dashed with no units to get their hands on, oh perhaps they could use off lease Sprinters?

The will have enough. At least 113 cars of cl.222 seem to be available for Scotland - 22 units worth. OA are only interested in 30 cars - 5 units. Eversholt are expecting Scotland to happen, especially as the tender seems to have been written with their cl.222 stock firmly in mind.

 

[chuff chuff]

Eversholt are expecting Scotland to happen, especially as the tender seems to have been written with their cl.222 stock firmly in mind.

This has been running in the background and rumoured for sometime now,was told from a very good source early this year that this was gonna happen but no details as it was commercially sensitive as there were other interested parties.

 

[Russel]

EMR have begun a refurbishment of the 222s though, it was started in January and I believe is worth £3m.

I understand it was partly because they anticipated needing the 222s longer than expected a second time with the further updated 810 entry timescale.

I really don't see replacing threadbare seat covers as a refurbishment, it should be routine maintenance.

 

[InvHst]

Compared to a hst 222s are how long? Just I'd be curious on platform lengths in Inverness?

 

[hexagon789]

Compared to a hst 222s are how long? Just I'd be curious on platform lengths in Inverness?

All approximate:

HST 2+4: 128m
HST 2+5: 151m

222 5-car: 116m
Theoretical 222 6-car: 139m
222 7-car: 162m

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

In my opinion I think some of the 7-car 222's should be going to ScotRail to increase capacity!

 

[Scotrail84]

In my opinion I think some of the 7-car 222's should be going to ScotRail to increase capacity!

Would cause problems with short platforms unless theres some sort of ASDO that can be set up by the guard because theres no agreement for DOCCO with diesel trains at Scotrail, its only electric services where DOCCO applies

 

[John Bishop]

Would cause problems with short platforms unless theres some sort of ASDO that can be set up by the guard because theres no agreement for DOCCO with diesel trains at Scotrail, its only electric services where DOCCO applies

I think the max we will see is 6 cars, which, if they do some re-configuring onboard and increase capacity will be a welcome increase on the current offering without impacting platform space. Getting rid of the length of 2 power cars which don’t provide any meaningful passenger benefit will be a big step forward when it comes to train formations.

 

[David M]

Possibly stupid question - if Scotrail take all the 5 car and 7 car and then use 5 coaches from the 7 car sets to make some or all of the 5 cars to 6 cars - does this allow for the 2 end driving cars to be kept as spares?

 

[Blindtraveler]

Could even be that if they are handing them back and have reached an agreement with the leasing company to do so that the leasing company might then try and flog the assets to charter operations and therefore fitting the kit would be worth it
We will never see any more of these in scheduled passenger revenue earning service on a service train

 

[Class83]

Possibly stupid question - if Scotrail take all the 5 car and 7 car and then use 5 coaches from the 7 car sets to make some or all of the 5 cars to 6 cars - does this allow for the 2 end driving cars to be kept as spares?

According to wiki there are currently 4 seven car and 23 five car sets, so 54 driving cars and 89 intermediate cars.

So options include;
As is
8 six car and 19 five car units
22 six car units, but that would leave 1 spare intermediate vehicle and 8 spare driving cars)

I suspect either Scotrail take the 5 cars as is (it's about the right number of units) and the 7 car units got to Open Access, or Scotrail take the lot and you get a balance of five and six car sets to replace four and five car HSTs respectively. As discussed up-thread 7 car units are fine on Edinburgh/Glasgow* to Aberdeen routes, but may have some issues at smaller stations on Inverness to Perth/Aberdeen, though from a quick glance most stations would actually cope.

*Stirling, Dunblane and Gleneagles can all accommodate 7 cars.

 

[Meerkat]

Will the 222s be faster and better accelerating? Non-expert guesswork based on distributed power and more driven wheels.....

 

[swt_passenger]

I thought the space behind the cabs having no seats was only a consequence of them being 125mph capable. If the max speed was reduced to 100mph you might be able to let passengers into it.

That blanket rule was expressed as an absolute distance in metres but it was removed from the rail group standards a few years after it had been applied to the Voyagers. It’s not applied on more recent stock, they still have to have crash protection, but it’s expressed differently

 

[hexagon789]

Will the 222s be faster

Be restricted to the same permitted speeds as the HSTs, but perhaps you meant faster journeys?

better accelerating? Non-expert guesswork based on distributed power and more driven wheels.....

I'd expect them to be better in poor rail conditions because of more driven axles; interestingly though Eversholt's own data suggests the 222s are slightly slower to 100mph (About 160s in the performance chart) than the 2+4 short HSTs (~150s) but quicker than a 2+5 (~170s).

 

[Clarence Yard]

According to wiki there are currently 4 seven car and 23 five car sets, so 54 driving cars and 89 intermediate cars.

So options include;
As is
8 six car and 19 five car units
22 six car units, but that would leave 1 spare intermediate vehicle and 8 spare driving cars)

I suspect either Scotrail take the 5 cars as is (it's about the right number of units) and the 7 car units got to Open Access, or Scotrail take the lot and you get a balance of five and six car sets to replace four and five car HSTs respectively. As discussed up-thread 7 car units are fine on Edinburgh/Glasgow* to Aberdeen routes, but may have some issues at smaller stations on Inverness to Perth/Aberdeen, though from a quick glance most stations would actually cope.

*Stirling, Dunblane and Gleneagles can all accommodate 7 cars.

Try reworking the figures with 30 cars (5 units) going to OA and the rest, 113 cars (22 units) going to Scotrail. The deal for the former is likely to be done shortly.

 

[Scotrail84]

According to wiki there are currently 4 seven car and 23 five car sets, so 54 driving cars and 89 intermediate cars.

So options include;
As is
8 six car and 19 five car units
22 six car units, but that would leave 1 spare intermediate vehicle and 8 spare driving cars)

I suspect either Scotrail take the 5 cars as is (it's about the right number of units) and the 7 car units got to Open Access, or Scotrail take the lot and you get a balance of five and six car sets to replace four and five car HSTs respectively. As discussed up-thread 7 car units are fine on Edinburgh/Glasgow* to Aberdeen routes, but may have some issues at smaller stations on Inverness to Perth/Aberdeen, though from a quick glance most stations would actually cope.

*Stirling, Dunblane and Gleneagles can all accommodate 7 cars.

Blair Atholl southbound, Dalwhinnie southbound and Newtonmore can't take 7. I think Carrbridge would struggle as well.

I don't think Markinch or Ladybank can take 7. Broughty Ferry, Monifieth, Carnoustie and Portlethen definitely cant take 7.

 

[Nym]

Blair Atholl southbound, Dalwhinnie southbound and Newtonmore can't take 7. I think Carrbridge would struggle as well.

I don't think Markinch or Ladybank can take 7. Broughty Ferry, Monifieth, Carnoustie and Portlethen definitely cant take 7.

Good thing that the fleet is already fitted with SDO then…

 

[Meerkat]

Be restricted to the same permitted speeds as the HSTs, but perhaps you meant faster journeys?


I'd expect them to be better in poor rail conditions because of more driven axles; interestingly though Eversholt's own data suggests the 222s are slightly slower to 100mph (About 160s in the performance chart) than the 2+4 short HSTs (~150s) but quicker than a 2+5 (~170s).

I did mean faster journeys due to getting up to speed quicker, but had forgotten that the 2+4 have a ridiculous amount of power to put down.
Wondering whether in the real world the rail conditions mean that with distributed power they will accelerate quicker and go up the hills better and presumably the multiple engines gives better 'limp to the destination' ability when things go wrong.
Does the distributed weight give better braking across the train, or do heavy power cars have the advantage -do the 222s already have the equivalent of the WSP proposed to be fitted to the IC7s?

 

[Scotrail84]

Good thing that the fleet is already fitted with SDO then…

Theres no agreements in place for drivers to have anything to do with the doors on the diesel fleets. Any stock coming in will have to be modified to suit ScotRails operating procedures. Conductors will have to be in charge of configuring the ASDO system.

 

[hexagon789]

I did mean faster journeys due to getting up to speed quicker, but had forgotten that the 2+4 have a ridiculous amount of power to put down.
Wondering whether in the real world the rail conditions mean that with distributed power they will accelerate quicker and go up the hills better and presumably the multiple engines gives better 'limp to the destination' ability when things go wrong.
Does the distributed weight give better braking across the train, or do heavy power cars have the advantage -do the 222s already have the equivalent of the WSP proposed to be fitted to the IC7s?

HSTs don't have full EP braking, so a simple brake application will take longer to propagate down the train as the trailers are twin-pipe air brake only - the power cars alone have the electric brake units. Release is front power car only, so very slow on an HST vs a unit. (It takes 4 seconds from moving the handle to release for anything to happen and then up to a further 15 secs for the brakes to completely release (depends on train length and level of application, but 15 secs for Full Service on a 2+8 seems about average.)

222s also have rheostatic braking.

 

[380101]

Theres no agreements in place for drivers to have anything to do with the doors on the diesel fleets. Any stock coming in will have to be modified to suit ScotRails operating procedures. Conductors will have to be in charge of configuring the ASDO system.

Agreements and procedures can quite easily be negotiated. I'd expect any new/replacement rolling stock introduced to ScotRail will be set up for DOCO going forward on the network side. Network side drivers already work DOCO with no complaints on 385s, so really can't see why doing so on any HST replacement would be an issue.

 

[Scotrail84]

Agreements and procedures can quite easily be negotiated. I'd expect any new/replacement rolling stock introduced to ScotRail will be set up for DOCO going forward on the network side. Network side drivers already work DOCO with no complaints on 385s, so really can't see why doing so on any HST replacement would be an issue.

Only at certain depots though. There are at least 4 other depots that are diesel only depots that will be working these units and don't currently have any DOCO work or agreements.

 

[380101]

Only at certain depots though. There are at least 4 other depots that are diesel only depots that will be working these units and don't currently have any DOCO work or agreements.

The key word there is currently. If it's a toss up between continuing to drive crap old HSTs or newer, safer 222s that may require DOCO to be used, then I'm confident that an agreement in their operation will be reached.

Also to note, the agreements for DOCO are not depot specific, but unit dependant.

 

[chuff chuff]

The key word there is currently. If it's a toss up between continuing to drive crap old HSTs or newer, safer 222s that may require DOCO to be used, then I'm confident that an agreement in their operation will be reached.

Also to note, the agreements for DOCO are not depot specific, but unit dependant.

We were told a couple of years back that DOCO was the default method of working for scotrail just the diesel traction currently holds this back.

 

[Trainbike46]

What does DOCO stand for? and is DOCCO the same or something different?

 

[Class83]

Try reworking the figures with 30 cars (5 units) going to OA and the rest, 113 cars (22 units) going to Scotrail. The deal for the former is likely to be done shortly.

Interesting, suggests reforming is planned anyway, though if 5 six car units going elsewhere either there are going to be some driving cars spare or Scotrail get max 3 six car units, given scotrail will need pretty much all remaining 22 units, makes not much flexibility.

Blair Atholl southbound, Dalwhinnie southbound and Newtonmore can't take 7. I think Carrbridge would struggle as well.

I don't think Markinch or Ladybank can take 7. Broughty Ferry, Monifieth, Carnoustie and Portlethen definitely cant take 7.

Yeah, Highland line was better than I expected, though a few where one side is much longer than the other. Markinch and Carnoustie are the only 2 plausible stops on the list you mentioned and both capable of 6 car. Places like Dalgety Bay and Burntisland can also only fit 6 carriages, but likewise are unlikely to be served by Intercity Services. Scotrail went round extending platforms to take 6 car trains about 10-15 years ago, so there are a lot of 150m (give or take a bit) platforms out there. I think 6 car is the likely maximum length.

Theres no agreements in place for drivers to have anything to do with the doors on the diesel fleets. Any stock coming in will have to be modified to suit ScotRails operating procedures. Conductors will have to be in charge of configuring the ASDO system.

Why would a fairly straightforward policy change to operate stock as it is elsewhere on the network require modification of stock. Current operating procedures are defined by legacy stock the staff and unions agree, indeed insist, quite rightly is no longer fit for purpose, why would they object to modern stock and operating procedures?