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

[hexagon789]

I can see a few problems:

• I'll confess that I've never actually been on a 153 (on several occasions when I've tried to find one they've all been substituted for 156s!) but I've heard that their ride quality is atrocious, so hardly "premium"
  
  
• I've also heard that their windows are awkwardly high - again, not ideal for a scenic service.
  
  
• Surely the people sitting in the bike carriage are going to be the people who have their bikes in the racks, and it's not certain that they'll want the "premium" service that will presumably come at an extra cost?

153s have the exact same bogie as 156s, so I don't see why ride would be an issue. The window sills are high though, that could be a slight issue.

 

[py_megapixel]

153s have the exact same bogie as 156s, so I don't see why ride would be an issue. The window sills are high though, that could be a slight issue.

As I said I'm just repeating what I've been told. I seem to have particularly poor luck with trying to find 153s; they always seem to put 156s on instead.

 

[43096]

Isn't the length of time because it is not vast amounts of money and being done on the cheap, as usual for UK cycling?

I’ll say this again: the bikes themselves make zero revenue for the operator and consume a disproportionate amount of space.

Amazing how much whinging comes out from the two wheel mob at any and every improvement made for them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’ll say this again: the bikes themselves make zero revenue for the operator

False. On a line like this, the tickets will only be being sold because of the bikes, so the bikes bring in additional revenue by attracting the cyclists to use the train instead of the car. It's nothing like the situation on a commuter line where the passenger usually has the option to leave the bike at the station - it's nearly all leisure cycling where the presence of the bike is the whole point of the journey.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The purpose of the journey is to undertake leisure cycling in a scenic area. The bike is not a mode of transport, it's an activity. No bike, no ticket sale; the alternative is a bike rack on the back of the car, not parking it at the station.

It is a completely different situation to a commuter railway - the only thing it has in common is a passenger and a bicycle.

 

[py_megapixel]

I’ll say this again: the bikes themselves make zero revenue for the operator and consume a disproportionate amount of space.

I would argue with that, because there are a good number of people who, if they were unable to take their bike on the train, would rather take their bike on another mode of transport than travel by train without their bike.

In other words, people are buying train tickets because they are also able to take their bike, and removing the option to take the bike would drive down ticket sales.

Amazing how much whinging comes out from the two wheel mob at any and every improvement made for them.

The "two wheel mob" as you describe it would whinge an awful lot less if the cycling infrastructure was adequate to start with. While on the continent there are proper bike lanes fully segregated from main roads, cyclists in this country have to make do with tiny narrow lanes separated only by painted lines, which drivers refuse to keep clear of.

 

[py_megapixel]

thats why people on the road should just be allowed to run them over.

More often than not it seems that people who consider cyclists should get out of the way or be run over, also kick up an enormous stink about space on the roads being taken away from cars so that proper cycling facilities can be put in. Cyclists aren't going away and the roads and the way people drive will have to adapt to it.

also if you have a bike why not use it instead of wasting people space on a train

As @Bletchleyite said earlier, I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of taking a bike on a train. It's either to transport a bike a distance which would be impractical to cycle, or it's so that the bike can be used for another activity (e.g. mountain biking) Nobody is hauling bikes on and off trains just for the hell of it.

 

[hexagon789]

As I said I'm just repeating what I've been told. I seem to have particularly poor luck with trying to find 153s; they always seem to put 156s on instead.

Probably because 153s aren't very popular and it makes sense to stick a 156 on for capacity if one is available?

 

[ScotTrains]

I wonder if the 153s will get re-deployed to other routes in winter depending on snowfall to serve the ski crowd, eg to/ from Aviemore? I don't think there will be much demand for them on the Oban route in winter.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wonder if the 153s will get re-deployed to other routes in winter depending on snowfall to serve the ski crowd, eg to/ from Aviemore? I don't think there will be much demand for them on the Oban route in winter.

Only on 15x or 170 operated services, obviously...but they do have ski racks on the concept design!

 

[fgwrich]

I can see a few problems:

• I'll confess that I've never actually been on a 153 (on several occasions when I've tried to find one they've all been substituted for 156s!) but I've heard that their ride quality is atrocious, so hardly "premium"
  
  
• I've also heard that their windows are awkwardly high - again, not ideal for a scenic service.
  
  
• Surely the people sitting in the bike carriage are going to be the people who have their bikes in the racks, and it's not certain that they'll want the "premium" service that will presumably come at an extra cost?

The 153s have exactly the same bogie as both 150, 156 and 170, so can hardly be that bad a riding unit. I've certainly never had any issues with them. Yes, the windows are fairly high, but again I've not found that to be particularly bad - the only 153s which were awful in this respect where the 153s operated by Wales & West / Wessex Trains who thought to re-use already low to the floor but oddly highly regarded ex Class 158 seats. The Richmond examples in the FGW sets were fine, and they operated on some equally scenic routes. Besides, as the 153 is effectively a glorified TGS - If your doing the route for the scenery, surely you would want to be sat in the 156. If your travelling with your Bike or Skies, then you'll want to be looking after it travelling in the 153.

In fact, looking at the FGW Examples again - I wouldn’t say there is much in it between that offered by the Richmond seats vs the Fansia in the refurbished 156s. Both give you a decent enough view out of the windows.

 

[gallafent]

They were more like pushchair lanes than cycle lanes!

Perhaps that's why the cyclists were avoiding them, for safety reasons. Sounds pretty responsible and reasonable not to ride on a cycleway if it is mainly populated by pushchairs to me.

Separately, apparently Sustrans designs paths for 12mph, a note on the cyclescheme commercial website suggests that you're better off on the road above 15mph, and DfT guidance suggests that the road is appropriate if you're above 18mph. Even the highest of these is straightforward to exceed for any moderately fit cyclist on the flat or better, and so it's hardly surprising cyclists choose to use the road instead, using common sense and as such following those guidelines. Maybe the infrastructure in Taunton isn't excellent enough! Some of the big blue ones in London are pretty good in my experience, haven't found anything as good as that outside the capital though.

 

[hexagon789]

I wonder if the 153s will get re-deployed to other routes in winter depending on snowfall to serve the ski crowd, eg to/ from Aviemore? I don't think there will be much demand for them on the Oban route in winter.

I doubt it very much, can't couple to an HST and by the time they are in service most services will be HST. Even if there are still 158/170 services I would expect the low top speed to significantly hamper running

 

[haggishunter]

One aspect of this project, it's been suggested that the 153s will only run on standalone Oban services because the 6 coach combined Ft Wm / Oban services are already at max length for regularly passing other services in the loops.

While extra capacity on any WHL services are clearly welcome, and there will certainly be some touring road bike traffic to Oban for onwards travel to the islands, the main potential demand for mountain bikes will be towards and including Fort William. Also when the snow level is low people ski touring to and from the stations on and around Rannoch Moor is not that uncommon, and people can travel to Nevis Range by train and either bus or taxi. I do recall a large group of ski tourers getting on at Corrour who put the skis in the overhead racks - which of course still had snow on them that then proceeded to melt and even when the skis were taken down the water continued to drip on people below!

It seems if the full potential for this project is going to be achieved the 153s need to either be on the Ft William services if not both - but that requires a complete recast of the time table or additional 3 coach 156+153 services to be added to Fort William in addition to the 3 current ScotRail services (and of course the timing needs to be appropriate too).

 

[InOban]

In the summer the capacity is needed on the 2-coach Oban services - Although there are six of them (in reality 5, since the first N-bound and last S-bound are virtually ECS), they have only a bit more capacity than the 4-coach FW trains. You would be surprised at the number of people who take their bikes on the ferry to Barra to cycle the length of the Western Isles. I've seen twenty bikes waiting for the boat.

In the winter the trains only have 4 coaches and in the event of a good snow season it would be quite feasible to add the 153 to the FW portion.

 

[PHILIPE]

In the summer the capacity is needed on the 2-coach Oban services - Although there are six of them (in reality 5, since the first N-bound and last S-bound are virtually ECS), they have only a bit more capacity than the 4-coach FW trains. You would be surprised at the number of people who take their bikes on the ferry to Barra to cycle the length of the Western Isles. I've seen twenty bikes waiting for the boat.

In the winter the trains only have 4 coaches and in the event of a good snow season it would be quite feasible to add the 153 to the FW portion.

My guess is they will be laid up for the Winter

 

[ScotRail158725]

One aspect of this project, it's been suggested that the 153s will only run on standalone Oban services because the 6 coach combined Ft Wm / Oban services are already at max length for regularly passing other services in the loops.

While extra capacity on any WHL services are clearly welcome, and there will certainly be some touring road bike traffic to Oban for onwards travel to the islands, the main potential demand for mountain bikes will be towards and including Fort William. Also when the snow level is low people ski touring to and from the stations on and around Rannoch Moor is not that uncommon, and people can travel to Nevis Range by train and either bus or taxi. I do recall a large group of ski tourers getting on at Corrour who put the skis in the overhead racks - which of course still had snow on them that then proceeded to melt and even when the skis were taken down the water continued to drip on people below!

It seems if the full potential for this project is going to be achieved the 153s need to either be on the Ft William services if not both - but that requires a complete recast of the time table or additional 3 coach 156+153 services to be added to Fort William in addition to the 3 current ScotRail services (and of course the timing needs to be appropriate too).

you could actually get 7 on the pass loops (just), as a 6 car fits into the station so with 3x 156 + 1x 153 you with half a carriage overhang each end you could fit a 7 car in

 

[scotraildriver]

you could actually get 7 on the pass loops (just), as a 6 car fits into the station so with 3x 156 + 1x 153 you with half a carriage overhang each end you could fit a 7 car in

You can't have coaches overhanging the platform as the 153s and 156s don't have selective door opening. And some locations have the stop board on the end of the platform so you would have a whole coach off at the rear.

 

[ashkeba]

You can't have coaches overhanging the platform as the 153s and 156s don't have selective door opening.

Is this not being added during the conversion?

 

[alangla]

My guess is they will be laid up for the Winter

Could put one solo on the Anniesland run & free up a bigger unit for elsewhere. You could probably successfully socially distance in it as well.

 

[Clansman]

Could put one solo on the Anniesland run & free up a bigger unit for elsewhere. You could probably successfully socially distance in it as well.

Anniesland conveniently absorbs the remaining DMUs out of Queen Street (hence why it's not high up the electrification list as of yet). So if in such a rarity that a 153 ever did somehow work an Anniesland (though it will never happen), it wouldn't do anything to increase capacity elsewhere but more than likely make the situation worse by leaving a spare DMU to hog up to 70m of platform at Queen Street for an hour before it's next run up north.

 

[ScotTrains]

My guess is they will be laid up for the Winter

That would be a shame. Wintertime would be an ideal time to run the special talks or the whisky and food tasting events as per the franchise agreement. Tables with demonstrations or food etc could be set up in the underused bike area for this. I'm sure it would be popular and provide extra income for Scotrail. Certainly better than having them laid up over winter, or worse travelling all day with nothing but fresh air onboard.

 

[ashkeba]

Tables with demonstrations or food etc could be set up in the underused bike area for this.

Amazing how quickly the anti bike/ski mob are willing to declare the project a failure and "underused" before it's even hit the rails.

 

[Jozhua]

I've been made aware of this picture (courtesy of Network Rail). Seemingly the units have now been route cleared.

Looks good! Will the 153 loo remain in service?

Perhaps they are trying to fit in the maximum number of spaces possible given the constraints around space, vehicle loading restrictions etc?

It does come across as being displeased whatever is done. I'll repeat: the bikes themselves are zero revenue and you might argue the space for them in many cases would be better off used for revenue generation i.e. more seats.

"The bikes are zero revenue", yeah if you look at it in a complete vacuum. However, bikes are clearly something many passengers want to bring along with them on this route and not having enough space for the bikes will discourage them or make them unable to use the services. This may push them to driving, or make them unable to acess local countryside.

Under this logic, "the toilets are zero revenue" and would be better replaced by seats, along with the luggage racks.

Plus, the 153's are unsuitable for passengers without significantly more re-fit than this will entail. Either this or the scrapheap... I know which one I would choose.

 

[Clansman]

The 153 situation has got me thnking. Hypothetically speaking, if one wanted to alight with a bike at say Corrour, how would they go about doing so if the local door on the platform was at the loo end of the 156/153?

 

[takno]

Amazing how quickly the anti bike/ski mob are willing to declare the project a failure and "underused" before it's even hit the rails.

I think the point was specifically about the winter season, when there's almost nobody wanting to go bike touring, and on routes where there isn't a massive amount of skiing anyway.

 

[alangla]

Anniesland conveniently absorbs the remaining DMUs out of Queen Street (hence why it's not high up the electrification list as of yet). So if in such a rarity that a 153 ever did somehow work an Anniesland (though it will never happen), it wouldn't do anything to increase capacity elsewhere but more than likely make the situation worse by leaving a spare DMU to hog up to 70m of platform at Queen Street for an hour before it's next run up north.

I was being kind of facetious about the lack of passengers on the Anniesland line. In reality I wouldn’t be surprised if some 153s end up going there on fill-in jobs tied to their 156

 

[Bletchleyite]

The 153 situation has got me thnking. Hypothetically speaking, if one wanted to alight with a bike at say Corrour, how would they go about doing so if the local door on the platform was at the loo end of the 156/153?

Put it in the middle of the formation.

 

[hexagon789]

Put it in the middle of the formation.

You can't though, not without a bundle of mods to the inner ends of the 156s since they were changed from BSI to bar inner couplings. I'm sure this was mentioned upthread.

 

[hexagon789]

My guess is they will be laid up for the Winter

I think that was always the plan