• 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!

5x Class 153 conversion to bike and baggage vans for Scotrail

Status
Not open for further replies.

Maxfly

Member
Joined
9 Mar 2010
Messages
269
Location
Scotland
I've just been watching a series called "The Munro Show" from 1991. One particular episode is very critical of the recently introduced Sprinters, usual stuff, too small, not enough luggage space, not enough cycle storage, bad catering (if any). Also featuring an interview with Charlie Sinclair ScotRail Services Manager who is desperately trying to defend these things.

Unreal it's taken 30 years to do anything about it!

Charlie Sinclair has been retired a long time now, I think it can’t have been too much after that show. Still alive and pottering about though.
The sprinters were an obvious cost cutting exercise and they do depress me. Drivers do like the fact they are simple and generally keep on going compared to other units but even the refurbs are struggling recently.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

CM

Member
Joined
28 Dec 2010
Messages
667
I've just been watching a series called "The Munro Show" from 1991. One particular episode is very critical of the recently introduced Sprinters, usual stuff, too small, not enough luggage space, not enough cycle storage, bad catering (if any). Also featuring an interview with Charlie Sinclair ScotRail Services Manager who is desperately trying to defend these things.

The shows host, Muriel Gray, describes the 156 as a "Hopeless little train"

Unreal it's taken 30 years to do anything about it!

Which episode precisley?
 

GrimShady

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
Charlie Sinclair has been retired a long time now, I think it can’t have been too much after that show. Still alive and pottering about though.
The sprinters were an obvious cost cutting exercise and they do depress me. Drivers do like the fact they are simple and generally keep on going compared to other units but even the refurbs are struggling recently.

Nice to know he's still around as he must have been in his mid 60s when the episode was filmed.

Also nice to see the old ScotRail blue signs at stations including the West Highland Terrier. Why ScotRail ever got rid of this very popular mascot I'll never know!
 

Maxfly

Member
Joined
9 Mar 2010
Messages
269
Location
Scotland
Nice to know he's still around as he must have been in his mid 60s when the episode was filmed.

Also nice to see the old ScotRail blue signs at stations including the West Highland Terrier. Why ScotRail ever got rid of this very popular mascot I'll never know!

I wouldn’t like to guess how old Charlie is, looked the same age for years lol.
 

bluesfromagun

Member
Joined
12 Jul 2010
Messages
53
I don't know where this bat**** crazy idea of sticking a 153 in the middle of a 156 has come from that people are discussing on here?
The way they will (I thought obviously) operate is to still be independent units, with diagrams that see them utilised only to beef up certain WHL trains. They'll attach and detach as required, and run ECS on their own where necessary. Why would anyone want to create a separate tiny fleet of three car 156s? That's an operational nightmare.
 

HLE

Established Member
Joined
27 Dec 2013
Messages
1,405
I don't know where this bat**** crazy idea of sticking a 153 in the middle of a 156 has come from that people are discussing on here?
The way they will (I thought obviously) operate is to still be independent units, with diagrams that see them utilised only to beef up certain WHL trains. They'll attach and detach as required, and run ECS on their own where necessary. Why would anyone want to create a separate tiny fleet of three car 156s? That's an operational nightmare.

Rumour made up by enthusiasts I would think. Stupidest idea I've seen for a while.
 

GrimShady

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
I don't know where this bat**** crazy idea of sticking a 153 in the middle of a 156 has come from that people are discussing on here?
The way they will (I thought obviously) operate is to still be independent units, with diagrams that see them utilised only to beef up certain WHL trains. They'll attach and detach as required, and run ECS on their own where necessary. Why would anyone want to create a separate tiny fleet of three car 156s? That's an operational nightmare.

There were such things in the early 90s on WHL.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
Erm... that’s exactly what happened on the WHL every summer for years...

Two summers only iirc and not consecutive - 1989 and 1992.

Why would anyone want to create a separate tiny fleet of three car 156s? That's an operational nightmare.

They were designed to be operable in any variation of 2 or 3-car units up to a maximum of 12-cars.
 

whhistle

On Moderation
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
2,636
They were designed to be operable in any variation of 2 or 3-car units up to a maximum of 12-cars.
However, I don't believe any "middle" car ever existed.
That means you'd have 1 + 1/2 a car running around, like First have done with their 158s in the south.
 

hexagon789

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Sep 2016
Messages
15,713
Location
Glasgow
However, I don't believe any "middle" car ever existed.
That means you'd have 1 + 1/2 a car running around, like First have done with their 158s in the south.

That's correct, no 156 centre cars, but they were designed to run with driving cars split and added onto other sets to run as 3-car units of necessary and without (AFAIK) the need for any modifications as with 158s.
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
How different is it from the situation with the 150s? If a TOC needs more capacity than a 2-car 150 (for example) then why not add a 153? A quick win, I would have thought. After all, there are 2 3-car 150/0s and other 150s are split used to make further 3-car units so the idea of a 'tiny' fleet of 3-car units being an operational nightmare doesn't necessarily apply! If more capacity is needed, why not use spare, life expired assets to fulfil it. After all, it's not as if there's a huge pool of spare diesel units of more than 2 cars.
 

marks87

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2010
Messages
1,609
Location
Dundee
I don't know where this bat**** crazy idea of sticking a 153 in the middle of a 156 has come from that people are discussing on here?
The way they will (I thought obviously) operate is to still be independent units, with diagrams that see them utilised only to beef up certain WHL trains. They'll attach and detach as required, and run ECS on their own where necessary. Why would anyone want to create a separate tiny fleet of three car 156s? That's an operational nightmare.

I wasn't aware people were actually still discussing it.

Someone mentioned it, thanks to slightly ambiguous wording in an article, and it was quickly pointed out that "between" could/will mean "between a pair of 156s", i.e. 156-153-156. There was then a little discussion about whether or not it would have been technically possible in the first place...but again, it wasn't a genuine suggestion, just an enquiry as to the intra-unit coupling.
 

simon7929

Member
Joined
27 Sep 2011
Messages
692
Location
Stockton South
They coupled a 153 to half of 156454 under Northern Spirit many years ago and it ran around in service. The 52 end was away for repair after hitting the buffers in Middlesbrough sidings.
 

aleggatta

Member
Joined
28 Sep 2015
Messages
537
I wasn't aware people were actually still discussing it.

Someone mentioned it, thanks to slightly ambiguous wording in an article, and it was quickly pointed out that "between" could/will mean "between a pair of 156s", i.e. 156-153-156. There was then a little discussion about whether or not it would have been technically possible in the first place...but again, it wasn't a genuine suggestion, just an enquiry as to the intra-unit coupling.
I think it all came around from the "153's dont have RETB so couldn't possibly operate on the line with open cabs" opinion with the general view being that it simply wasn't possible to add RETB to the 153's so this was the 'get out'. Obviously they will get RETB and run as independant units.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,532
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I think it all came around from the "153's dont have RETB so couldn't possibly operate on the line with open cabs" opinion with the general view being that it simply wasn't possible to add RETB to the 153's so this was the 'get out'. Obviously they will get RETB and run as independant units.

Prize for the first short-form of just a 153... :)
 

InOban

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,208
They won't run on their own because they won't have an accessible toilet. And there isn't capacity South of Crianlarich to accommodate additional services.
 

Maxfly

Member
Joined
9 Mar 2010
Messages
269
Location
Scotland
I don't know where this bat**** crazy idea of sticking a 153 in the middle of a 156 has come from that people are discussing on here?
The way they will (I thought obviously) operate is to still be independent units, with diagrams that see them utilised only to beef up certain WHL trains. They'll attach and detach as required, and run ECS on their own where necessary. Why would anyone want to create a separate tiny fleet of three car 156s? That's an operational nightmare.
Because that was what was put forward by those in higher places originally? No more operationally a nightmare than running a tiny fleet of single car 153's that need their own paths and crews, with tiny seating capacity (presumably). Certainly I agree with not having them plonked in the middle of a 156 but the project certainly still seems...fluid the now.
 

haggishunter

Member
Joined
25 Aug 2016
Messages
349
While any extra capacity would be welcome my recent trips on the WHL suggest the 153s aren't on their own going to scratch the surface of the issues this plan is due to address. I know there are issues with longer trains, so decoupling Oban and Fort William services into separate paths, so longer services to each can reflect demand and an increase in frequency from Glasgow to Fort William are essential.

A couple of weeks ago I had to literally shove people to make space to board a rammed Southbound 156 at Tyndrum Lower that was already around 15 minutes late due to the level of overcrowding. I got on the third door I went to after not even trying to get on through the first 2 doors I tried - the stacks of luggage made any attempt futile! There were push chairs perched on top of luggage, luggage on tables, passengers on tables, there were people standing in the toilet, and it wasn't just a case of people in the vestibules, the entire length of the coaches were full of standees. In the end a group of four backpackers who were waiting with me never boarded and went off to hitch hike.

I’ve made 4 recent trips on the WHL and if not throughout then for at least a substantial part it’s been full and standing with the luggage situation farcical. Last Friday I queued for 26 minutes to use the toilet.... Shortly after Corrour there was a PA announcement that the toilets were out of use. The PIS didn’t work most of the trip, when it came to life it was wrong causing confusion and panic amongst tourists. This resulted in the guard and trolley person shoving their way through trying to shout destinations! Manual PA announcements when they worked mostly couldn’t be heard, simply nowhere near loud enough for the numbers crammed in. On boarding in Glasgow and at subsequent stops where people did manage to board there were numerous incidents of 2 or 3 people with reservations for the same seat, which unsurprisingly lead to heated arguments.

There are things here and now that are/were in ScotRail’s power and they continue to shoot themselves in the foot and leave the front line staff unfairly in the firing line . Seat reservations should just stop until all new and refurbed stock are in use, the PA and PIS not being fit for purpose on the refurb 156s is inexcusable and must be addressed for the 153s.

I've asked ScotRail by email about the Class 153 conversions and the response was a generic we'd like to see them in service but we have no further information or date for service.

It's not for specific events or at certain times of day, because of the limited service frequency it's all day every day for an increasing proportion of the year. The Tourism industry is of huge economic importance, if there isn't the infrastructure and service levels to support the level of visitation that is on an upwards trajectory there is going to be a sudden breaking point where the feedback from visitors becomes so toxic that the bottom simply falls out of the market almost overnight. The trials and tribulations of CairnGorm Mountain should serve as sufficient warning to all not to take visitor markets for granted, things need to change rapidly and dramatically.

Recent experiences on the WHL and the HML are of a service that is at breaking point, the staff are being put into such a situation that I'd not be surprised if industrial action isn't in the offing and I wouldn't blame them in the slightest. The fact is I know people who simply wont go near either rail route to the Highlands because of the situation on the trains, and when the alternative is the A82 around Loch Lomond in the summer that is saying something... So it is almost certain that the grossly overcrowded services and poor offering is suppressing demand - both routes could carry significantly more passengers if the service was up to scratch.

So the 153s are very much needed however it looks like it will be nowhere near enough... So what is needed to boost services on the WHL - is the use of only one platform at Corrour for example a limiting factor, would using both enable an uplift in service frequency. Would a somewhat nuclear option of starting WHL trains from and terminating them at Dumbarton Central allow a frequency increase or longer 156 services?
 
Last edited:

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,626
There shouldn't be an issue with reservations as the seat numbers haven't changed on refurbished units. If several people claim to have reserved the same seat I can guarantee someone is looking at the wrong reservation coupon. I see this constantly, people claiming their outward reservation for the return journey and vice versa. Double booking of seats is virtually unheard of .
TrainFX are currently updating the software fix the PIS issues.
The poor quality of workmanship on the refurbished units (mainly involving the toilets) is being addressed under warranty from Gemini Rail.
There will be considerable changes to the WHL timetable in December and May next year to improve frequency and reliability, including more traincrew in the WHL depots.
There is nowhere to terminate or start services at Dumbarton without seriously impacting the North Clyde service. Summer specials on the WHL used to terminate at Dumbarton Central but BR rationalised the station to cut costs so now there is no spare platform. (The great rose tinted BR that everyone apparently wants back)
You cannot run longer than 6 cars due to loop lengths.
 
Last edited:

snookertam

Member
Joined
22 Sep 2018
Messages
774
The issue is that the class 156 units are also required for the East Kilbride line. ScotRail will unfortunately take far more notice of complaints about overcrowding affecting Giffnock and Clarkston than they will on the West Highland line, which is why they get several 6 car workings daily. For as long as the same units cover both routes then the same issue will be apparent unless more class 156s appear somewhere.

The West Highland line was also subjected to cost cutting over a number of years and what you experienced above is the consequence. There has been little attempt for a long time to create a service that is worthwhile for the community, and it appeared that what was being provided was the minimum they could get away with (See the above point). There has been an attempt to reverse this slightly with the addition of the extra Oban services but the Fort William and Mallaig sections are still problematic for as long as they have to attach/detach at Crianlarich due to the 6 car maximum formation south of Crianlarich. Passenger usage on the West Highland Line is also highly seasonal yet ScotRail have the same number of units year round - although they could divert units from Glasgow suburban working during the school holidays at least as passenger numbers do reduce at this time of year, but again I suspect they're scared of the people of Giffnock too much.

EDIT: just saw the post immediately above by @scotraildriver - perhaps some of these issues will be resolved then. Any indications of what the changes will involve?
 

NotATrainspott

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2013
Messages
3,223
An unfortunate problem moving forward is that it won't be as easy to shift units from commuter routes onto the WHL in future as the rest of the ScotRail network gets electrified. If all the rural routes have one specific fleet of trains, and they all see the same cyclic demand, then there's either going to have to be a surplus of trains in the off season or there will be a shortage in the peak. The only mitigation would be to make the scenic fleet capable of running as commuter trains in the low season - e.g. bicycle areas having flip-down or re-installable seating - but I'm not sure how well a compromise design could ever work.

In the short term I wonder if the changes in the GB rail network since the franchise was awarded could help. Back then, there seemed to be an idea that every last non-Pacer DMU carriage would be desperately required for the 2020 deadline and the fact that ROSCOs wouldn't acquire new DMUs. Since then, a good number of new self-powered trains have been ordered and it's possible the 156s and other BR DMUs will be as unable to keep up with passenger expectations as the Pacers were. If so, there might be a few more 15X DMUs going free and able to be added onto the WHL and other scenic services at fairly minimal cost.
 

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,626
It is rare now for an RETB unit to appear on the EK line or any other. They almost exclusively work out of Queen St with the non RETB units doing everything else, so the people of Giffnock won't have any influence over unit allocation. They only work WHL and Annieslands now, no Dunblanes,Stirlings, Alloas, Grahamstons or Shotts now so that freed up units. There should actually be spare 156s daily, but with units still being refurbished and ALOT of issues with the refurbished ones things are a bit tight. The quality of the work from Gemini is shocking, it's no wonder it's being shut down.
 
Last edited:

snookertam

Member
Joined
22 Sep 2018
Messages
774
It is rare now for an RETB unit to appear on the EK line or any other. They almost exclusively work out of Queen St with the non RETB units doing everything else, so the people of Giffnock won't have any influence over unit allocation. They only work WHL and Annieslands now, no Dunblanes,Stirlings, Alloas, Grahamstons or Shotts now so that freed up units. There should actually be spare 156s daily, but with units still being refurbished and ALOT of issues with the refurbished ones things are a bit tight. The quality of the work from Gemini is shocking, it's no wonder it's being shut down.

Fair enough, wasn't aware they weren't using them as widely as previously (used to find them ending up at Heaton!), however there could still be the issue over the amount of RETB enabled class 156 units there were (I'm not sure how many there are). From what I heard the spare 156 units being provided from the reduction in routes were going largely to strengthen the East Kilbride and Barrhead routes.
 

GrimShady

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
While any extra capacity would be welcome my recent trips on the WHL suggest the 153s aren't on their own going to scratch the surface of the issues this plan is due to address. I know there are issues with longer trains, so decoupling Oban and Fort William services into separate paths, so longer services to each can reflect demand and an increase in frequency from Glasgow to Fort William are essential.

A couple of weeks ago I had to literally shove people to make space to board a rammed Southbound 156 at Tyndrum Lower that was already around 15 minutes late due to the level of overcrowding. I got on the third door I went to after not even trying to get on through the first 2 doors I tried - the stacks of luggage made any attempt futile! There were push chairs perched on top of luggage, luggage on tables, passengers on tables, there were people standing in the toilet, and it wasn't just a case of people in the vestibules, the entire length of the coaches were full of standees. In the end a group of four backpackers who were waiting with me never boarded and went off to hitch hike.

I’ve made 4 recent trips on the WHL and if not throughout then for at least a substantial part it’s been full and standing with the luggage situation farcical. Last Friday I queued for 26 minutes to use the toilet.... Shortly after Corrour there was a PA announcement that the toilets were out of use. The PIS didn’t work most of the trip, when it came to life it was wrong causing confusion and panic amongst tourists. This resulted in the guard and trolley person shoving their way through trying to shout destinations! Manual PA announcements when they worked mostly couldn’t be heard, simply nowhere near loud enough for the numbers crammed in. On boarding in Glasgow and at subsequent stops where people did manage to board there were numerous incidents of 2 or 3 people with reservations for the same seat, which unsurprisingly lead to heated arguments.

There are things here and now that are/were in ScotRail’s power and they continue to shoot themselves in the foot and leave the front line staff unfairly in the firing line . Seat reservations should just stop until all new and refurbed stock are in use, the PA and PIS not being fit for purpose on the refurb 156s is inexcusable and must be addressed for the 153s.

I've asked ScotRail by email about the Class 153 conversions and the response was a generic we'd like to see them in service but we have no further information or date for service.

It's not for specific events or at certain times of day, because of the limited service frequency it's all day every day for an increasing proportion of the year. The Tourism industry is of huge economic importance, if there isn't the infrastructure and service levels to support the level of visitation that is on an upwards trajectory there is going to be a sudden breaking point where the feedback from visitors becomes so toxic that the bottom simply falls out of the market almost overnight. The trials and tribulations of CairnGorm Mountain should serve as sufficient warning to all not to take visitor markets for granted, things need to change rapidly and dramatically.

Recent experiences on the WHL and the HML are of a service that is at breaking point, the staff are being put into such a situation that I'd not be surprised if industrial action isn't in the offing and I wouldn't blame them in the slightest. The fact is I know people who simply wont go near either rail route to the Highlands because of the situation on the trains, and when the alternative is the A82 around Loch Lomond in the summer that is saying something... So it is almost certain that the grossly overcrowded services and poor offering is suppressing demand - both routes could carry significantly more passengers if the service was up to scratch.

So the 153s are very much needed however it looks like it will be nowhere near enough... So what is needed to boost services on the WHL - is the use of only one platform at Corrour for example a limiting factor, would using both enable an uplift in service frequency. Would a somewhat nuclear option of starting WHL trains from and terminating them at Dumbarton Central allow a frequency increase or longer 156 services?

It's been like this in the summer since 1989.

High time to get rid of the crud that is the 156.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top