I couldn't agree more. I occasionally travel on scenic trains like the golden-pass panoramic in Switzerland, and the stock on that is just worlds apart from a 156. And even my daily commute is more comfortable and better for scenery-gazing. I can't imagine tourists would be particularly impressed.
I thought the problem was that you couldn't get reservations for the Glasgow-FTW portion, and CS support staff gave confusing instructions - I haven't heard of walk-ons ever being rejected.
But... you could fit two DBSO's in the middle of the HST, and run it as 2 half-HST's. Maybe fit Dellner couplings, to both ends of the unit, to make sure you can couple quickly and in any arrangement.
There were issues with overheating radiators. There were resolved though, and it's not a fundamental feature of 158s - they've been running up and down the Pennines okay for years
I think all of the Inverness based 158s are refurbished now. Were the seats ScotRail blue with saltires? If so it was a refurbished unit.
When you say “regularly” presumably you mean “just the once, to Oban on May 30th 2014 and never again since”. And it’s the New Measurement Train - though why the ‘New’ hasn’t ever been changed to ‘Network’ over the last 10+ years I don’t know.
Fort William isn’t one of the seven cities.
Of course, the Ayr trains were once operated by Swindon Inter-City DMUs, calling at Paisley, so it's not entirely beyond the realms of sanity....
Another reason why THE LENTRAN LOOP MUST BE BUILT.
I’m afraid you’re quite wrong on that count.
Yes we are out here!I made many posts on the subject of the sorry state of rolling stock, total lack of imagination, lack of interest. All of it was stamped on by the forums usual 'cant do' brigade.
What will be interesting is if the proposed 153 baggage plan goes ahead.
Good to know there are some with sense/like minded out there......finally
I'm certainly not against more imaginative means of promoting and providing rolling stock better suited to the needs of the West Highland line, but I can't help but wonder how you feel that any of the loco hauled derivatives you've suggested would actually be advantageous over the current, or a comparable, multiple unit operation, given the limitations represented by the lengths of platforms and single line sections:NTMU Kyle!
The issue with the MkV formations would be the choice of motive power, there isn't anything with a suitable RA apart from the 37s although they would make very, very nice WHL sets.
Like James James post above I suggested a split HST system with stripped down ex156 units in the middle nose to nose. This would still enable the split at Crianlarich and feature plenty of cycle/baggage space/buffet in the ex156 driving coach. As usual this was subjected to bouts of laughter from the 'cant do' brigade when all your talking about is stipping down a 156 and converting it to HST phase supply and control desk. Expensive? Maybe but cheaper than custom built units surely by a long shot, it would at least give you decent train to be used for another 10-15 years. The issue with this is the woefully low tractive effort of the Class 43.
Another option which springs to mind is a push/pull emu system utilising the soon to be introduced 385s and heavily modified Class 73's. This gives the ability to use the units anywhere on the network and run them as emus south of Craigendoran. I would think the interior's would have to be customised though as the 385s are very spartan IMO, micro buffet/shop inplace of trolley, more luggage space. As for expense surely it could be part of the current 385 order and I can see Hitachi offering a few for free or heavily discounted prices due the the recent fiasco.
All of these suggestions are technically possible, anything that costs more than £100 seems to be regarded by some members as hideously expensive and therefore doomed to fail.
If you build them people will come otherwise no one is going to use a clapped out basic service that hasn't changed *cough* downgraded since 1989 especially now the dreaded BUS excels in terms comfort and timings!
The rail service in these areas should be used as a tool for improving the community, expanding tourism and other social benefits, not profit!
Maybe things will change in the future when my former employer Caledonian MacBrayne get the franchise
I'm certainly not against more imaginative means of promoting and providing rolling stock better suited to the needs of the West Highland line, but I can't help but wonder how you feel that any of the loco hauled derivatives you've suggested would actually be advantageous over the current, or a comparable, multiple unit operation, given the limitations represented by the lengths of platforms and single line sections:
Platform lengths south of and inclusive of Crianlarich can accommodate a maximum of 6 x 23 metre carriages: To continue with the current splitting arrangement with single ended HSTs, even with power cars off the platforms at WHL stations, the maximum train length to Oban or Fort William respectively would be 1+3; a reduction in capacity from the 4-car class 156s that currently ply the Fort William route. There's also only one or two platforms, post lengthening, that will even be able to handle a 2+6 HST formation at Glasgow Queen Street (without fouling signals and points), and I believe these will be fully engaged handling Edinburgh - Glasgow traffic.
With 385s, using 3-car units you avoid the platform issue at Queen Street, but still lose capacity compared to the present day if splitting at Crianlarich, and if using 4-car units you're back up against the strictures of platform utilisation at Glasgow Q.S.. You're also adding an additional coupling operation at Helensburgh, and presumably would require another class 73 at Crianlarich waiting in the wings to take one or other of the portions forward, adding complexity and potential delay to the existing operation, even with autocouplers.
Of course you could run separate services to Oban and Fort William while maintaining current frequencies to both, but how much spare capacity is there on the single line sections between Craigendoran Junction and Crianlarich, and there is an increased (though probably fairly insignificant, in the grand scheme of things) crew cost and resource to consider.
I agree that there are more inventive ways to serve the needs of passengers on the West Highland line than with thirty year old 156s, or fettled class 158s: Personally I look forward to seeing a fleet of 4-car Stadler bi-modes (Shorter carriages than Super Sprinter stock) with panoramic windows introduced to the service once Cal-Mac take on the franchise.
