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

[Aictos]

Two things will happen and neither involve loco haulage:

1. Scotrail will end up running 156s but with a 153 in the middle with a DDA friendly loo.

2. Whatever replacement traction Transport Scotland sees is suitable for the West Highland line will probably more then likely also see use on the Far North lines too.

 

[Journeyman]

Two things will happen and neither involve loco haulage:

2. Whatever replacement traction Transport Scotland sees is suitable for the West Highland line will probably more then likely also see use on the Far North lines too.

Add Stranraer and possibly Borders to that list.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Roscos will only buy trains which suit many different sorts of route, or can easily be adapted for different routes. So there is no chance of some special design for the Scottish rural lines. After all, similar basket case lines exist in England also.

The S&C is probably the only English or Welsh one that compares - a relatively long line that is often used by tour parties etc. Most of the other English and Welsh ones are scenic but a lot shorter and tend mostly to be used for going somewhere rather than (enthusiasts aside) rides for the sake of it, e.g. the Conwy Valley or the Cornish branches.

 

[Journeyman]

The S&C is probably the only English or Welsh one that compares - a relatively long line that is often used by tour parties etc. Most of the other English and Welsh ones are scenic but a lot shorter and tend mostly to be used for going somewhere rather than (enthusiasts aside) rides for the sake of it, e.g. the Conwy Valley or the Cornish branches.

Heart of Wales is quite similar, especially given the lengthy single track sections. Obviously they'll be getting new stock as part of the wider Wales and Borders complete fleet renewal, and that's through-gangwayed CAF Civity units, which have to be quite high on the list for potential future WHL trains.

What's the long term rolling stock plan for the S&C? I'm guessing 158s will be retained for the time being.

 

[sprinterguy]

By traveling on them SprinterGuy, I suppose I should clarify my position of "clapped out" is more to do with the saloon than the underfloor equipment.

Do hope you don't take offence to my criticism of your name sake.

Still took a 37 to rescue the landslide unit though?

No offence taken at all, I'll readily admit to a sentimental fondness for class 156 units in general but I'm more than happy to say that the interiors of the Scotrail units are dated and barely fit for purpose in meeting 21st century passenger perceptions of comfort. I wouldn't go as far as "clapped out" - as I say, the saloons always appear clean and well maintained in my limited experience - but the competing Citylink coach IMO offers a superior and more comfortable traveling environment, which certainly suggests that the rail offering is a bit lacking.

The West Highland line certainly could do with more modern and more appropriate rolling stock that better suits the nature of the route and the expectations of 21st century passengers, and now that there is an "off the peg" UK Flirt option from Stadler, that would seem ideal to fulfil Scotrail's residual need for primarily rural DMUs in the next franchise: Large panoramic windows and a separate diesel "power car", so no underfloor engines. The establishment of a "Scenic Trains" requirement in the current franchise, albeit utilising refurbished class 156s and 158s at present, seems to point towards such a new fleet order being plausible to cover Far North/West Highland/Borders/G&SW in the next.

 

[GrimShady]

You've rubbished every suggestion everyone has made about DMUs and have said you think only LHCS and HSTs will do.



In some places it is, and that's fair enough, but that opinion is not universal. The point I'm making is that the 156s don't appear to be putting significant numbers of people off, and that super-duper luxury trains will need to pay for themselves by attracting huge amounts of new business, which I doubt they will. There's a limit to how much you can invest if you're not going to get the bums on seats.



Nowhere in particular, I just think it happens to be a particular strength of WHL services, so I thought I'd mention it.



Errr...which type 3s would those be? There's a tiny handful of 37/4s registered on the mainline, and they're chronically unreliable. Have you seen how often they've broken down on Cumbrian Coast services?

The only other locos in that power range are the Cal Sleeper 73/9s, which have had more than enough issues of their own, and even when they're all working, there's none spare during the day when they'd be needed. So where are suitable locos coming from?



I'm not enough of a wibbling anorak to care. A good train is a good train, and a bad train is a bad train, and it has nothing to do with what powers it, be it coal, hydrogen, plutonium, fairy dust or rocking horse poo. I have my personal favourite types of train that I love and am nostalgic about, and I'm an enthusiast, but I have my business hat on here. The economic case for LHCS on a line like the West Highland is very, very poor.



Fair enough, I'm not disputing those things, and yes, the 156s are long in the tooth and can't go on forever. But I think you're over-estimating what effect replacing them will have. A lot of people who use the bus probably do so for convenience, speed and price, and the WHL has so many infrastructure limitations that even with the best trains in the world, the bus will probably always be quicker. There are different people with different needs out there.

Agree Oban station isn't great, partly because usage has gone through the roof in recent years and the facilities haven't been upgraded to match, but that's a different matter entirely.

That's rather wishful thinking, but hey...

I fail to see where I've rubbished anything at all! Read my posts again paying particular attention to my own multiple unit suggestions. HSTs are a good fit for a comfortable enviroment in which to enjoy the scenery, plenty to go around and will last another 10 years until ScotRail deside what they want to do with the WHL, plus they're already taking a load. I've started many times, I'm open to suggestions. I was one of the few posters here supporting the addition of 153 units while others had a good old laugh to themselves, guess what...it's happening! I've never mentioned super-duper luxury trains at any stage. Good comfortable seats on trains with plenty of luggage space with a micro buffet is what's needed, not the Brighton Belle.

In it's current form, yes the WHL is a poor performer. We're talking about improving and transforming it from a basic service to attracting new business, which is what the whole 'scenic trains' thing was about anyway. Still your looking at this a purely profit and loss concern and not as a tool for improving the area. I think you'll find this is where Cal Mac interests are different, try the entrepreneurial hat.

Yes 37/4s are notoriously unreliable, did I say in their current form? Come to think of it I didn't specify 37s at all. Also as I've said the 73/9s are too heavy.

I don't think I am over estimating the effect of new stock. It's been shown all over the UK since the 50s that new and improved stock does actually meet with increased patronage. The addition of Sprinters in the 80s was particularly good at this especially on the English lines, not so good on the WHL as it was in many people's eyes a regression.

I don't think it is a simple as good train bad train. Look at the Class 800 series, wonderful traction package and performance Vs another basic interior, same again for the 385. There should be improvement on decor, comfort in 30 years not regression.

Keep an eye on the Cal Mac situation.

 

[Journeyman]

I fail to see where I've rubbished anything at all! Read my posts again paying particular attention to my own multiple unit suggestions. HSTs are a good fit for a comfortable enviroment in which to enjoy the scenery, plenty to go around and will last another 10 years until ScotRail deside what they want to do with the WHL, plus they're already taking a load. I've started many times, I'm open to suggestions. I was one of the few posters here supporting the addition of 153 units while others had a good old laugh to themselves, guess what...it's happening! I've never mentioned super-duper luxury trains at any stage. Good comfortable seats on trains with plenty of luggage space with a micro buffet is what's needed, not the Brighton Belle.

You've consistently stated that loco-hauled coaches and HSTs are *always* better than DMUs, and have been saying that the WHL should get specialist rolling stock or HSTs, both of which are unsuitable and too expensive. I'm not talking about the Brighton Belle either, I think you're taking me too literally. But it does seem that you want to offer something beyond a reasonable-standard modern DMU, and the market won't support that. I agree, the 153 idea is a good one, and probably a perfect stopgap until something more modern can be ordered, but it will have to be part of a larger fleet that will operate other routes such as Far North/Kyle, Borders, Stranraer etc. None of those can realistically support loco-hauled operation - the reason they all went over the DMU operation in the first place is the vastly superior economics. It's no exaggeration to say the 156s probably saved the West Highland and Far North lines from closure during the most penny-pinching years of the Thatcher/Major governments. The washout of the bridge that cut the Far North line off for ages would have been a perfect excuse to close it, but the introduction of 156s saved enough money to justify repairing it and keeping the line open.

In it's current form, yes the WHL is a poor performer. We're talking about improving and transforming it from a basic service to attracting new business, which is what the whole 'scenic trains' thing was about anyway. Still your looking at this a purely profit and loss concern and not as a tool for improving the area. I think you'll find this is where Cal Mac interests are different, try the entrepreneurial hat.

But ultimately the money for investment has to come from taxpayers or from fares revenue, and unless the benefit:cost ratio is positive, you can't spend the cash. Yes, there's more to it than just pure profit/loss, and yes, there's a case for getting more people spending money into the area, and I totally understand that - but your suggestion of specialised rolling stock for one line that only requires about eighteen vehicles for only part of the year will cost an absolute bloody fortune, whatever option you go for, and that destroys the economics of it all. Whatever ends up getting deployed, it has to be based on a standard product that can be used elsewhere, which is what ALL of the WHL's rolling stock has been over the years.

I have no idea why you think CalMac are so wonderful - they're just about the most inefficient, over-staffed, hugely loss-making organisation anywhere, with colossal problems.

Yes 37/4s are notoriously unreliable, did I say in their current form? Come to think of it I didn't specify 37s at all. Also as I've said the 73/9s are too heavy.

But you mentioned Type 3s, and the 37s are about the only Type 3s there are, so what other locos did you have in mind? It sounds like you're implying a rebuild project - who will design and finance a major re-engineering project on locos which are at least 52 years old? The risks involved in that are enormous. Are there any suitable locos around? I'm open to suggestions, but seriously, there aren't any.

I don't think I am over estimating the effect of new stock. It's been shown all over the UK since the 50s that new and improved stock does actually meet with increased patronage. The addition of Sprinters in the 80s was particularly good at this especially on the English lines, not so good on the WHL as it was in many people's eyes a regression.

Well, usage of the line is much higher than it was in loco-hauled days, and services are more frequent, to Oban anyway, so it's clearly not that much of a regression.

Keep an eye on the Cal Mac situation.

Dream on.

 

[GrimShady]

Here's another forum I came across with other non enthusiast opinions from a few years back.

http://forums.clydemaritime.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=8154

 

[Journeyman]

Here's another forum I came across with other non enthusiast opinions from a few years back.

http://forums.clydemaritime.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=8154

Class 37s and Mark 2s are not coming back. Get over it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Class 37s and Mark 2s are not coming back. Get over it.

We wouldn't want them back. Reliability would go through the floor.

 

[Journeyman]

We wouldn't want them back. Reliability would go through the floor.

Absolutely. I'm finding it very difficult to get GrimShady to tell me what he actually wants, but I think he's just being nostalgic and can't admit that (a) things have changed, (b) his views are not universally-held and are tied up with a lot of nostalgia for things a lot of people don't care about, and (c) stuff has to be paid for, and in an increasingly tough climate and on a loss-making line, you can't just throw cash at the problems. You can't ignore them either, so a compromise has to be found, but suggesting new loco hauled coaches, and possibly new or heavily-rebuilt locos too, is just laughable.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Heart of Wales is quite similar, especially given the lengthy single track sections. Obviously they'll be getting new stock as part of the wider Wales and Borders complete fleet renewal, and that's through-gangwayed CAF Civity units, which have to be quite high on the list for potential future WHL trains.

What's the long term rolling stock plan for the S&C? I'm guessing 158s will be retained for the time being.

No HOW are getting cascaded ex GA 2 Car 170's.

 

[Journeyman]

No HOW are getting cascaded ex GA 2 Car 170's.

Ah, my mistake - I forgot about those. Certainly an improvement on the 153s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely. I'm finding it very difficult to get GrimShady to tell me what he actually wants, but I think he's just being nostalgic and can't admit that (a) things have changed, (b) his views are not universally-held and are tied up with a lot of nostalgia for things a lot of people don't care about, and (c) stuff has to be paid for, and in an increasingly tough climate and on a loss-making line, you can't just throw cash at the problems. You can't ignore them either, so a compromise has to be found, but suggesting new loco hauled coaches, and possibly new or heavily-rebuilt locos too, is just laughable.

The only case I can think of where LHCS *might* work would be 73-hauled Mk5s maintained with the CS coaches (this might also allow some closer working with CS, e.g. adding a proper 2+2-with-tables day coach to the CS run). But a DMU (or other self-powered form of MU) is going to be the way, really.

 

[Journeyman]

The only case I can think of where LHCS *might* work would be 73-hauled Mk5s maintained with the CS coaches. But a DMU (or other self-powered form of MU) is going to be the way, really.

There's not enough 73s available to haul them, as they're used for shunting and ECS moves for a lot of the time they're not actually hauling the sleepers, and I suspect there aren't enough donor 73s available to convert more either. The split in the ScotRail/Sleeper franchise makes a common solution there much more difficult, anyway.

As you say, a multiple unit of some type is the only practical solution, and it will likely be a common fleet for all the "Scenic" lines, for economies of scale. The WHL's peak unit requirement is nine 156s in the summer, and a build of anything that small is woefully uneconomic.

 

[GrimShady]

You've consistently stated that loco-hauled coaches and HSTs are *always* better than DMUs, and have been saying that the WHL should get specialist rolling stock or HSTs, both of which are unsuitable and too expensive. I'm not talking about the Brighton Belle either, I think you're taking me too literally. But it does seem that you want to offer something beyond a reasonable-standard modern DMU, and the market won't support that. I agree, the 153 idea is a good one, and probably a perfect stopgap until something more modern can be ordered, but it will have to be part of a larger fleet that will operate other routes such as Far North/Kyle, Borders, Stranraer etc. None of those can realistically support loco-hauled operation - the reason they all went over the DMU operation in the first place is the vastly superior economics. It's no exaggeration to say the 156s probably saved the West Highland and Far North lines from closure during the most penny-pinching years of the Thatcher/Major governments. The washout of the bridge that cut the Far North line off for ages would have been a perfect excuse to close it, but the introduction of 156s saved enough money to justify repairing it and keeping the line open.



But ultimately the money for investment has to come from taxpayers or from fares revenue, and unless the benefit:cost ratio is positive, you can't spend the cash. Yes, there's more to it than just pure profit/loss, and yes, there's a case for getting more people spending money into the area, and I totally understand that - but your suggestion of specialised rolling stock for one line that only requires about eighteen vehicles for only part of the year will cost an absolute bloody fortune, whatever option you go for, and that destroys the economics of it all. Whatever ends up getting deployed, it has to be based on a standard product that can be used elsewhere, which is what ALL of the WHL's rolling stock has been over the years.

I have no idea why you think CalMac are so wonderful - they're just about the most inefficient, over-staffed, hugely loss-making organisation anywhere, with colossal problems.



But you mentioned Type 3s, and the 37s are about the only Type 3s there are, so what other locos did you have in mind? It sounds like you're implying a rebuild project - who will design and finance a major re-engineering project on locos which are at least 52 years old? The risks involved in that are enormous. Are there any suitable locos around? I'm open to suggestions, but seriously, there aren't any.



Well, usage of the line is much higher than it was in loco-hauled days, and services are more frequent, to Oban anyway, so it's clearly not that much of a regression.



Dream on.

The saloon and ambiance of LHCS is always going to beat the noisey vibrating environment of DMU.

Vastly superior economics in time for privatisation. Not only that the stock back then was at the end of its life and costly to maintain, it could easily have been replaced with modern LHCS. Sadly it wasn't and we're stuck with unsuitable DMUs which might be ok for an hour's journey but not the 5hrs to Mallaig.

Did the coming of the Sprinters help keep the line open? Yes they probably did but let's not forget the return of Steam in 1984 brought many people back in the summer.

Share with me your insights on your statement with reagrd to Cal Mac. The ships often sail with the basic manning level as permitted by law, are as efficient as it gets when it comes to running lifeline services, the newest fleet in the Merchant Navy, high safety standards. You should see what goes on with the private operators! Cal Mac understand that you need new tonnage to increase buisness. You could say one ship fits all (like the 156), the truth is it doesn't. Some need to be built specifically for particular run, maybe the same applies to rail traffic here. Ships are also very, very expensive lets not forget.This is off topic however.

Locos....easy..major refurb or brand new, same as anything else.

Train travel has been increasing throughout the network in general since the mid 90s, I still argue the current standard has chased business away based on my conversation with people how actually have been put off. Services are more frequent the base product hasn't changed...thays t he whole issue.

As I said, watch this space with regard to Cal Mac and ScotRail. You really should.

 

[Journeyman]

The saloon and ambiance of LHCS is always going to beat the noisey vibrating environment of DMU.

No, that's a subjective opinion that the overwhelming majority of ordinary punters don't share, because they don't even know what it means. Ordinary passengers honestly don't care where the engine is, it's only a minority of anoraks that have any opinion on this.

Locos....easy..major refurb or brand new, same as anything else.

Oh, come off it.

The 73/9 upgrade project for the Sleepers was fraught with problems and went massively over time and over budget - their availability is still poor and it's turning out to be a very poor choice.

The 37s are so old that even new engines and a lot of rebuilding is not going to change the fact that they're fundamentally knackered.

There's still no sign of your beloved HSTs turning a wheel for ScotRail.

Brand new? You do realise that no manufacturer currently offers any suitable new diesel locos for the UK market at all? Hence GBRF scrabbling around for spare locos. 68s and 70s are too powerful and uneconomic for short trains anyway, but new ones can't be built because they don't meet current emissions standards. All other off-the-shelf diesel locos offered by the major manufacturers don't fit the UK loading gauge, and there's nothing available in the Type 3 power range anyway.

So, whatever option you choose, for a loco requirement of probably about five or six, you'll have to spend millions on developing a completely new design for a line that loses an absolute fortune.

Seriously, what planet are you on?

Train travel has been increasing throughout the network in general since the mid 90s, I still argue the current standard has chased business away based on my conversation with people how actually have been put off. Services are more frequent the base product hasn't changed...thays t he whole issue.

I think you're looking for people to support your own particular bias. Last time I travelled on the WHL, I got chatting with a couple of Americans on the train who were absolutely loving it, and had planned the run as the centrepiece of their trip to Scotland. The reputation of the WHL is worldwide.

As I said, watch this space with regard to Cal Mac and ScotRail. You really should.

What do you actually think is going to happen?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Regarding the bridge collapse in the 1980s, it probably helped that it also cut off the Kyle line. Closing one line as a result may have been justified, cutting two (heavily subsidised but still well-used by tourists, much like the WHL) would be more problematic. The looming Sprinterisation definitely will have helped the business case though.

Though in that part of the country I'm not sure if it would actually have cost Thatcher/Major many votes anyway!

As far as LHCS versus underfloor DMUs goes, if you were to ask average punters about the engine noise while riding a 156 or 185, they'd probably say something along the lines of "oh, I hadn't really paid it much attention, but now that you mention it it is a bit annoying. Oh well *shrug*".

In fact, most enthusiasts would say the same, unless they're actually on a railtour. Rose-tinted glasses are all well and good, but they need to be taken off occasionally!

 

[Journeyman]

Though in that part of the country I'm not sure if it would actually have cost Thatcher/Major many votes anyway!

True! Wasn't that solid LibDem territory in those days?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

True! Wasn't that solid LibDem territory in those days?

I was only a kid so I'm not sure... it might well have cost them votes, but those votes would be from enthusiasts scattered across the whole country!

 

[Indigo Soup]

Some need to be built specifically for particular run, maybe the same applies to rail traffic here. Ships are also very, very expensive lets not forget.

Ships also don't really get mass produced - they're all bespoke to some extent. A long production run in the shipping world is about 20 units (service craft like tugs are a bit different) and the number of operators that need that many identical ships can be counted on your hands. If you're having to design a bespoke ship, it makes sense to design one that fits your requirements as closely as possible. Even then, there's compromise; the Uig and Ardrossan routes have slightly different requirements, but the CLAYMORE and GLEN SANNOX are being built to the same design.

 

[Journeyman]

As far as LHCS versus underfloor DMUs goes, if you were to ask average punters about the engine noise while riding a 156 or 185, they'd probably say something along the lines of "oh, I hadn't really paid it much attention, but now that you mention it it is a bit annoying. Oh well *shrug*".

In fact, most enthusiasts would say the same, unless they're actually on a railtour. Rose-tinted glasses are all well and good, but they need to be taken off occasionally!

Couldn't agree more. The reason loco haulage has widely disappeared is that it is phenomenally expensive and quite inefficient compared to multiple units, especially because the changes in the freight sector have made it very difficult to design a suitably versatile, medium-powered, mixed traffic loco. The changes in the structure of the rail industry have mitigated against loco haulage too. It was interesting to read recently that when the Southern Railway electrified the Brighton line in the 1930s, they had to consider whether to use locomotives or EMUs, and went for the multiple unit option because it was more flexible, more efficient, cheaper and ensured consistent performance, because all trains, of whatever length, had the same power-to-weight ratio. When the Luftwaffe were busy trashing the nation's transport infrastructure, Southern Electric services were able to continue in much tougher conditions than loco-hauled trains, because they could be reversed just about anywhere.

Those principles still apply today. Admittedly no-one is bombing us, but you know what I mean.

 

[Altnabreac]

Regarding the bridge collapse in the 1980s, it probably helped that it also cut off the Kyle line. Closing one line as a result may have been justified, cutting two (heavily subsidised but still well-used by tourists, much like the WHL) would be more problematic. The looming Sprinterisation definitely will have helped the business case though.

Though in that part of the country I'm not sure if it would actually have cost Thatcher/Major many votes anyway!

As far as LHCS versus underfloor DMUs goes, if you were to ask average punters about the engine noise while riding a 156 or 185, they'd probably say something along the lines of "oh, I hadn't really paid it much attention, but now that you mention it it is a bit annoying. Oh well *shrug*".

In fact, most enthusiasts would say the same, unless they're actually on a railtour. Rose-tinted glasses are all well and good, but they need to be taken off occasionally!

Good point. If it had been a similar expensive blockage north of about Tain then the railway may well not have survived.

I have to agree on LHCS vs DMUs. Ordinary punters just don't notice it really. A higher spec new DMU with decent catering, luggage and bikes is the way forward.

As regards catering let me say it again though. A staffed Micro Buffet is not the answer. App based at seat ordering, supplemented by paper menus and delivered to your seat from a non public facing catering catering cupboard (basically a small module in the centre of the train with a hot water urn, an ice machine, a fridge for properly cold drinks and a microwave for bacon rolls).

 

[GrimShady]

Class 37s and Mark 2s are not coming back. Get over it.

Where have I said bring back 37s and Mk2s? I was pointing you to the opinion of others stating what I've been saying about the 156 units.

 

[Journeyman]

Where have I said bring back 37s and Mk2s?

That was what people were saying in the link you posted.

 

[DelW]

As regards catering let me say it again though. A staffed Micro Buffet is not the answer. App based at seat ordering, supplemented by paper menus and delivered to your seat from a non public facing catering catering cupboard (basically a small module in the centre of the train with a hot water urn, an ice machine, a fridge for properly cold drinks and a microwave for bacon rolls).

If the ex-153 centre cars are being refitted internally, as presumably they will be, they would give an opportunity to try something like this. They could also potentially be fitted with an area of better seating (bays around tables, better window alignment) and marketed as e.g. "tourist saloon" at a supplementary fare. That might give a low-cost way to test the market for better-spec trains allowing higher pricing in advance of new stock being procured at sometime in the future.

 

[Journeyman]

If the ex-153 centre cars are being refitted internally, as presumably they will be, they would give an opportunity to try something like this. They could also potentially be fitted with an area of better seating (bays around tables, better window alignment) and marketed as e.g. "tourist saloon" at a supplementary fare. That might give a low-cost way to test the market for better-spec trains allowing higher pricing in advance of new stock being procured at sometime in the future.

It's a nice idea, but I don't think the majority of people would be up for paying supplements, and if they're not, it makes a section of seating off-limits, so you'd have part of the train empty and the rest full, so reproducing the problems you get on routes with an over-provision of First Class. In any case, the 156 window/seat alignment is about the best you'll find anywhere.

Certainly think there's scope for a better catering offer, if it can be fitted in. Hot snacks would be great.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As you say, a multiple unit of some type is the only practical solution, and it will likely be a common fleet for all the "Scenic" lines, for economies of scale. The WHL's peak unit requirement is nine 156s in the summer, and a build of anything that small is woefully uneconomic.

There's one manufacturer who will happily do that at a vaguely reasonable price, of course, as they do it all the time for the Swiss narrow gauge lines...and that would be the same one that has expertise in building "proper" scenic vehicles e.g. with windows all the way up to the ceiling - Stadler.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's a nice idea, but I don't think the majority of people would be up for paying supplements, and if they're not, it makes a section of seating off-limits, so you'd have part of the train empty and the rest full, so reproducing the problems you get on routes with an over-provision of First Class. In any case, the 156 window/seat alignment is about the best you'll find anywhere.

Certainly think there's scope for a better catering offer, if it can be fitted in. Hot snacks would be great.

It depends on the level of the supplement. I reckon you'd also easily flog posh meals to coach party tourists.

 

[GrimShady]

No, that's a subjective opinion that the overwhelming majority of ordinary punters don't share, because they don't even know what it means. Ordinary passengers honestly don't care where the engine is, it's only a minority of anoraks that have any opinion on this.



Oh, come off it.

The 73/9 upgrade project for the Sleepers was fraught with problems and went massively over time and over budget - their availability is still poor and it's turning out to be a very poor choice.

The 37s are so old that even new engines and a lot of rebuilding is not going to change the fact that they're fundamentally knackered.

There's still no sign of your beloved HSTs turning a wheel for ScotRail.

Brand new? You do realise that no manufacturer currently offers any suitable new diesel locos for the UK market at all? Hence GBRF scrabbling around for spare locos. 68s and 70s are too powerful and uneconomic for short trains anyway, but new ones can't be built because they don't meet current emissions standards. All other off-the-shelf diesel locos offered by the major manufacturers don't fit the UK loading gauge, and there's nothing available in the Type 3 power range anyway.

So, whatever option you choose, for a loco requirement of probably about five or six, you'll have to spend millions on developing a completely new design for a line that loses an absolute fortune.

Seriously, what planet are you on?



I think you're looking for people to support your own particular bias. Last time I travelled on the WHL, I got chatting with a couple of Americans on the train who were absolutely loving it, and had planned the run as the centrepiece of their trip to Scotland. The reputation of the WHL is worldwide.



What do you actually think is going to happen?

Why are you consistenly focused on Locos? How many times have I spoke of the multiple unit option. Please re-read my posts on suitable multiple units.

It is my preference for LHCS or something similar at least it terms of saloon quality. I have NEVER said bring back 37s or Mk2s merely pointing out the were much more suitable long distance trains. See previous posts about HST being the preferred train over the 170s to Aberdeen/Inverness.

HSTs are coming to ScotRail. Get over that!

The 73 project was also for a service that looses money yet it went ahead. I thought they were the wrong choice, but hey It happened. That's right here on Planet Earth. Maybe it should have been in concert with WHL stock renewal?

Is this yet another case of someone who has used the line once a blue moon knows better than the regulars? See that link for others thoughts on the matter.....we've been over this!

Your American tourists probably were loving it...The Scenery! Do you think they boarded and thought "my what a wonderful train this is....wish we had seats like this back home" - Doubtful!

Come to Oban and ask around what the view of the rail service is. Others have said the same on this very thread.

Your choice on suitable new DMUs is equally restricted.

Just watch this space in the future when it comes to Cal Mac.