Scotrail Franchise - Abellio

Bodiddly said:

I'm sticking a tenner on Abellio!

Click to expand...

Said this last month! Where do I get my money?

HSTEd said:

Where does the loco come from

Click to expand...

Anywhere you want.If not just grab 8 pacers from Northern to leave them even more short stocked and put them on the front

Any idea what the plans are for the 16 class 314's, will they be refurbished or replaced as part of the larger EMU order?

khib70 said:

Your first sentence answers itself. I suspect you know perfectly well that racism has a much wider definition ( and obviously a much wider prevalence ) these days. Not tolerating this kind of pointless, ignorant insult to my country and its people is not "over emotional". Calling it that ,is, however, patronising

Click to expand...

Well said. I'm amazed indeed that "Clip" is amazed that the Scottish are a race. I've always thought them to be, as indeed are the English.

sprinterguy said:

At present:
Platform 1 – 75m (3 x 23m cars)
Platform 2 – 162m (6 x 23m cars)
Platform 3 – 125m (5 x 23m cars)
Platform 4 – 125m (5 x 23m cars)
Platform 5 – 168m (7 x 23m cars)
Platform 6 – 173m (7 x 23m cars)
Platform 7 – 192m (8 x 23m cars)

I’m not sure what the lengths will be once the extensions have been completed, but apparently platforms 2,3,4 and 5 will be able to handle 8-car trains.

Click to expand...

I'm think that between the intoduction of HSTs and ECML electrification, at least one daily Kings Cross - Edinburgh service ran on to Glasgow Queen Street. I was only a small person back then, so can't remember details - it may have been a Sunday-only - but I'm pretty sure this won't be the first scheduled visit of HST sets into Queen St.

Bodiddly said:

Said this last month! Where do I get my money?

Click to expand...

The bank

jeemac said:

I'm think that between the intoduction of HSTs and ECML electrification, at least one daily Kings Cross - Edinburgh service ran on to Glasgow Queen Street. I was only a small person back then, so can't remember details - it may have been a Sunday-only - but I'm pretty sure this wouldn't be the first scheduled visit of HST sets into Queen St.

Click to expand...

They did indeed. They ran into platform 7.

MidlandMainlie said:

Any idea what the plans are for the 16 class 314's, will they be refurbished or replaced as part of the larger EMU order?

Click to expand...

The current EMU order is only for the first stage of EGIP, I believe. When the Hitachi trains prove to be as reliable as the 395s, they'll almost certainly order another batch for the Stirling/Dunblane/Alloa services. There doesn't appear to be a vast amount wrong with the 314s on their current duties, so spending money on their replacement wouldn't seem to be a good idea. Reliverying the other 11 units into SpotRail colours wouldn't cost much or take long, so since there are no other plans for their replacement I can see that going ahead.

Also, how many 'long distance' trains are there in Queen Street at one time? Two platforms minimum will be needed for the 8x23m E&G shuttle and the other electrified services would be able to fit into any platforms since they're unlikely to ever be a double 4 car formation. If there would only be two long distance trains in at a time it would therefore be possible to fit them in the other two extended platforms, or in one of them plus the existing platform 7.

cf111 said:

They did indeed. They ran into platform 7.

Click to expand...

And blocked access to platform 6.

Goldfish62 said:

Well said. I'm amazed indeed that "Clip" is amazed that the Scottish are a race. I've always thought them to be, as indeed are the English.

Click to expand...

Racism might be too strong in this context. I would put it down to some people on this forum being downright pig ignorant.

Goldfish62 said:

Well said. I'm amazed indeed that "Clip" is amazed that the Scottish are a race. I've always thought them to be, as indeed are the English.

Click to expand...

Well given that the modern parlance for what defines race is about what populations now share as common traits and genetic similarity then that is what we actually share with the Scots as well as the Welsh and the Irish too. Therefore it does not equal it to being racist.

But I'm pig igorant so what do I know eh?

At this rate it wont be long until the railways are Nationalised, it just wont be this nation!

I believe the maximum for Queen Street will be 2+6 HST and trailers.

I understood only three platforms were to be lengthened at Queen Street.

Interestingly will Inverness platforms cope with a 2+6 HST set in platforms plus Sleeper Stock and the EC HST / IEP (9 car) or will the IEP will be a five car set north of Edinburgh at the same time?

Wow - Scotland goes Back To The Future, with HSTs on daytime services and Class 73s on overnight services

khib70 said:

It wouldn't be "whinging" to suggest that Scottish inter-city services deserve something better than tarted-up but clapped-out stock which has been run into the ground in England

Click to expand...

If you want to suggest that you have no chip on your shoulder, then I don't know why you are blaming Big Bad England for "running the HSTs into the ground" - they've been running to Inverness and Aberdeen for longer than a lot of posters to this Forum have been alive (plus to Glasgow Queen Street, pre ECML electrification) - which suggests that they've been "run into the ground" all over Great Britain, so I don't know why you are blaming "England" for the surprising fact that Old Trains Are Old (?)

Altnabreac said:

I suspect Abellio are better informed about the public's requirements than people moaning on here.

The Intercity stock requirement has come from Feedback from user groups, Hitrans, Nestrans and others that the 170s are inferior to the East Coast HST provision. Anecdotally users from Aberdeen and Inverness prefer to use EC services rather than Scotrail and this is what TS want to avoid

Click to expand...

I'm often suspicious about this kind of survey - since the few HSTs on the Aberdeen/ Inverness services are significantly longer than most ScotRail services - no great surprise if people prefer a longer train.

If the questions are only about the on-train aspect then fair enough, I'm just wary of surveys where people are asked to compare two different things.

As a Fifer (in exile!), I'd prefer to time my journeys for the HSTs, but then that's mainly because I've got more chance of a seat than on a three coach 170.

WatcherZero said:

Looking beneath all the spin from a technical standpoint the winning bid seems to be the cheapest with lowest cost (large reuse of HST's releasing MU's)

Click to expand...

The cheapness is an interesting bit of substance, that we may focus on more once the froth of excitement about HSTs wears off - I'd like to see more about this aspect.

HSTEd said:

Will these be full length HSTs?

I imagine Edinburgh-Inverness/Aberdeen could be 2+9 but I don't think Glasgow has the capacity does it?

Click to expand...

Hmm, chop some (ex East Coast/ ex FGW) HST rakes down to 2+6 or 2+7 length and then use the "spare" coaches to make a handful of "tourist" trains, with the old buffet car chopped up to create a "scenic" roof?

Find some redundant 67s to stick on the front of the "tourist" trains (plus a spare kettle for the token bit of steam in the Borders?

Too simple?

WatcherZero said:

Last I heard the easist conversion to 'tourist' was the the Mk3 rolling stock, slicing them in half longitudually and adding a new roof. Suggestion has always been the Mk3 carriages themselves are in fairly good knick its the locomotives that need a rebuild or replacement.

Click to expand...

See the butchered buffet car suggestion above

D6975 said:

I suspect that they'll all be the same length, having different length sets complicates diagramming. The platform lengths at Queen St is likely to be the limiting factor. 2+9 would be out of the question.

Click to expand...

LNW-GW Joint said:

"80 new (corridor) trains for EGIP". Do they mean 80 coaches (20 trains)? 80x4-car trains seems a lot.
The previous OJEU entries only talk about a maximum of 96 vehicles each for EGIP and the Alloa/Dunblane services

Click to expand...

Well, the peak Falkirk High "shuttle" requires sixteen 170s (i.e. 48 coaches), and I'd guess a similar amount of coaches needed to run the Glasgow/ Edinburgh - Dunblane "triangle", so eighty coaches seems on the low side for EGIP (esp given spares/ maintenance).

But then, eighty trains seems significantly on the high side (as you say). Ah, the perils of press releases that like to bump up numbers by quoting "carriages" or "seats" rather than the number of units

MidlandMainlie said:

Any idea what the plans are for the 16 class 314's, will they be refurbished or replaced as part of the larger EMU order?

Click to expand...

There were no plans to improve them, last I heard - not even on the list for WiFi - for some reason the Southside services and the Fife services are low down the list of priorities.

Class 170101 said:

I believe the maximum for Queen Street will be 2+6 HST and trailers.

I understood only three platforms were to be lengthened at Queen Street.

Interestingly will Inverness platforms cope with a 2+6 HST set in platforms plus Sleeper Stock and the EC HST / IEP (9 car) or will the IEP will be a five car set north of Edinburgh at the same time?

Click to expand...

Remember Inverness Sleeper portions may be shortened by then as the 16 coaches on the Highland may be split 5,5,6 if there is no requirement for a full half set to visit Inverness for maintenance each night.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

tbtc said:

There were no plans to improve them, last I heard - not even on the list for WiFi - for some reason the Southside services and the Fife services are low down the list of priorities.

Click to expand...

The ITT specification for Glasgow South electrics (i.e. The 314s routes) does include Wifi, In Cab CCTV and 2 dedicated Cycle spaces, none of which the 314s currently have.

The question is when does that have to be achieved by and do the Franchisee do it by upgrading 314s or just by replacing them with cascaded stock by 2019 or so?

Clip said:

Well given that the modern parlance for what defines race is about what populations now share as common traits and genetic similarity then that is what we actually share with the Scots as well as the Welsh and the Irish too. Therefore it does not equal it to being racist.

Click to expand...

Quite so! In the end the Europeans are the race - the Engs, Scots, Welsh, Irish are just nations!

According to a few newspaper writeups Arriva were knocked out early, National Express offered the most money and came second, Abellio offered the most additional services and cheap fares idea, First Group came third in the competition.

WatcherZero said:

National Express offered the most money

Click to expand...

Old habits die hard :roll:

WatcherZero said:

Last I heard the easist conversion to 'tourist' was the the Mk3 rolling stock, slicing them in half longitudually and adding a new roof. Suggestion has always been the Mk3 carriages themselves are in fairly good knick its the locomotives that need a rebuild or replacement.

Click to expand...

Did you hear that from a source that has even a basic understanding of structural engineering? It's probably not entirely impossible, but I'd say that it's highly improbable. The BR Mark 3 is a monocoque structure — that means that it is not a traditional body on chassis design, but that the entire vehicle body is structural, and there is no separate chassis. The roof, in particular, being both arched and ribbed, is likely to provide anything up to half of the vehicle's structural strength. You cannot just go chopping a monocoque in half without massive reinforcement being added back to it, to replace the structural integrity which you have just eliminated almost entirely.

It's unnecessary on a Mk3 anyway. All that's needed is to have the seating bays aligned with the windows. The normal windows are tall enough to give a great view.

Altnabreac said:

The question is when does that have to be achieved by and do the Franchisee do it by upgrading 314s or just by replacing them with cascaded stock by 2019 or so?

Click to expand...

My understanding is that the 314s have recently gone through what is meant to be their last refurbishment (having been around since the 70s). So I'm not sure there would be much value in adding all these features to the 314s.

The occasional stuck doors aside, they seem to be very reliable and so I'll be sad to see them go. I suspect with all these new carriages/trains being promised from 2017, we'll see some sort of trickle down and potentially see the Junipers or 320s (but probably more likely the 318s) running the Glasgow South routes.

If Abellio had been judged purely by their other uk franchises they currently operate maybe they wouldn't have won, no new trains introduced by them plus performance and stock refurbishment standards seem little more than mediocre

Murph said:

Did you hear that from a source that has even a basic understanding of structural engineering? It's probably not entirely impossible, but I'd say that it's highly improbable. The BR Mark 3 is a monocoque structure — that means that it is not a traditional body on chassis design, but that the entire vehicle body is structural, and there is no separate chassis. The roof, in particular, being both arched and ribbed, is likely to provide anything up to half of the vehicle's structural strength. You cannot just go chopping a monocoque in half without massive reinforcement being added back to it, to replace the structural integrity which you have just eliminated almost entirely.

It's unnecessary on a Mk3 anyway. All that's needed is to have the seating bays aligned with the windows. The normal windows are tall enough to give a great view.

Click to expand...

Yeah the monocoque rather than frame and the lack of equipment in the ceiling compared to other rolling stock (just lights, water tanks and air ducts with air conditioning units fitted under floor) is the reason why its been highlighted as an easier conversion. TS identified requirements for two levels of provision, rolling stock with big windows which the Mk3 in its present form qualifies for, however they also identified the desire for a limited number of lines to have viewing cars with ceiling windows ala Swiss trains and not unlike the design of the Amtrak link below. Reinforcement of the shell can be provided by creating a new upper structure with thicker supports and crossbars.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SGKqO8UWI.../L1qRzKEXnrY/s1600/amtrak+observation+car.jpg)

You can see a cutaway of the Mk3 frame design here, note the brochure highlights the monocoque frame as being the reason its easy to convert the carriages into restaurant cars and sleepers:
http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/Mk3 Brochure.pdf

WatcherZero said:

Yeah the monocoque rather than frame and the lack of equipment in the ceiling compared to other rolling stock (just lights, water tanks and air ducts with air conditioning units fitted under floor) is the reason why its been highlighted as an easier conversion. TS identified requirements for two levels of provision, rolling stock with big windows which the Mk3 in its present form qualifies for, however they also identified the desire for a limited number of lines to have viewing cars with ceiling windows ala Swiss trains and not unlike the design of the Amtrak link below. Reinforcement of the shell can be provided by creating a new upper structure with thicker supports and crossbars.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SGKqO8UWI.../L1qRzKEXnrY/s1600/amtrak+observation+car.jpg)

You can see a cutaway of the Mk3 frame design here, note the brochure highlights the monocoque frame as being the reason its easy to convert the carriages into restaurant cars and sleepers:
http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/Mk3 Brochure.pdf

Click to expand...

Ok, sure, the monocoque structure does lend itself to almost limitless internal reconfiguration (as long as you don't overload it). External reconfiguration (changing the body) is very limited, without a major structural engineering effort. You can plate over the standard windows (as done on sleepers and catering vehicles) without compromising the structure, but cutting more away compromises the entire structure.

For the skylight cars, I think that you'd be much better taking mark 2s, remediating any corrosion, upgrading the equipment to current mark 3 standard, and have a much easier time of just cutting some holes into the cantrail and roof. As I understand it, the mark 2s while they are not pure body on chassis design, are a step back from the monocoque of the mark 3, so are likely to require less reinforcement, and be an easier engineering challenge, for extra holes being cut into the upper structure.

Everyone in Scotland knows First Group never stood a chance, as the SNP would never award contracts to a competitor of Souter's Stagecoach, a major donor to the SNP

WatcherZero said:

Yeah the monocoque rather than frame and the lack of equipment in the ceiling compared to other rolling stock (just lights, water tanks and air ducts with air conditioning units fitted under floor) is the reason why its been highlighted as an easier conversion. TS identified requirements for two levels of provision, rolling stock with big windows which the Mk3 in its present form qualifies for, however they also identified the desire for a limited number of lines to have viewing cars with ceiling windows ala Swiss trains and not unlike the design of the Amtrak link below. Reinforcement of the shell can be provided by creating a new upper structure with thicker supports and crossbars.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SGKqO8UWI.../L1qRzKEXnrY/s1600/amtrak+observation+car.jpg)

You can see a cutaway of the Mk3 frame design here, note the brochure highlights the monocoque frame as being the reason its easy to convert the carriages into restaurant cars and sleepers:
http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/Mk3 Brochure.pdf

Click to expand...

The only flaw with this suggestion being that nowhere in the ITT does it identify Swiss style ceiling windows as a necessary requirement for the scenic lines product. I'm sure it's something TS would like to see, especially in a future DMU rolling stock order but the ITT does not appear to insist on it for refurbished stock.

Given Abellio have identified a larger number of routes they will use the stock on it seems unlikely that they've gone for an expensive conversion, well in excess I the tender requirements. It's more likely to be an upgraded 158 for the scenic routes, 170s for Fife, Dundee and HSTs for everything else. 156s to survive in Glasgow until Shotts, EK, Barrhead, Maryhill electrified in 2020 or so.

D6975 said:

Not specifically mentioned, but I suspect that the refurb will include auto doors of some sort (like Chiltern's MK3s) which will bring dwell times down from current HST levels.

Click to expand...

Unless they go with Modern Railways speculation of 442s between power cars.

Good Point said:

Everyone in Scotland knows First Group never stood a chance, as the SNP would never award contracts to a competitor of Souter's Stagecoach, a major donor to the SNP

Click to expand...

Except that's utter rubbish as the current franchise deal was signed by First in 2008 under an SNP administration. At the time the 3 year extension was controversial with Scottish Labour and others criticising it.

Stagecoach aren't particularly interested in bidding for Scotrail anyway because of competition issues for their bus operations.

Finally the franchise award is recommended by dedicated professionals at Transport Scotland who won't be doing any political manipulation of the bids so even assuming anyone wanted to misuse the bid process it's almost impossible to do so.

Hopefully Abellio will get rid of the awful 170s as soon as possible. When a train has a 170 coupled to a 158 I always choose a seat in the 158 - even if I have a reservation in the 170. I just find them more comfortable and less "tinny".
I hope there is something written in the Abellio franchise that prevents them cancelling the hourly Largs train as soon there are any problems, whilst continuing to run all 4tph to Ayr, even if necessary diverting the Largs train to Ayr.
I am happy that Abellio won the franchise. However, I am ecstatic that Scotfail have lost it!
HSTs, even 40 years old, are more suitable than 170s for anything longer than a 30 minute journey.

Scottish Transport Minister Keith Brown said Abellio pitched "the least expensive but most cost-effective" bid to take over ScotRail from Aberdeen-based FirstGroup.

Click to expand...

Herald Scotland

Class 170101 said:

I understood only three platforms were to be lengthened at Queen Street.

Click to expand...

That makes more sense: I was wondering how on earth platforms 3 and 4 were going to be extended sufficiently to accommodate 8 car trains. I think there might have been some crossed wires in the sources I read: Platforms 2 – 5 are all being extended, but only platforms 2, 5 and 7 will be able to accommodate 8 x 23 metre trains, probably.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

tbtc said:

Hmm, chop some (ex East Coast/ ex FGW) HST rakes down to 2+6 or 2+7 length and then use the "spare" coaches to make a handful of "tourist" trains, with the old buffet car chopped up to create a "scenic" roof?

Find some redundant 67s to stick on the front of the "tourist" trains (plus a spare kettle for the token bit of steam in the Borders?

Too simple?

Click to expand...

Far more elaborate than what has actually been announced, though. What we will probably be seeing will be 156s or 158s with more bike and luggage space and seats that line up with the windows. No cutting holes out of anything, by the looks of it.