HST's for Scotrails New Franchise

[XCTurbostar]

I'll be the first one to say that this is good for Scotland.

Long live the HST!
(Hides from impending flame war)

Thanks,
Ross

 

[HSTEd]

Pretty sure this scotches any need to ever order any more DMUs again assuming the electrification programme doesn't get canned.

That is 30+ units coming south by all reasonable expectations, additional to the electrification cascades.

 

[ScotGG]

Is Transport Scotland responsible for the fate of the Turbostars that the HSTs will replace or does DfT retain ownership of fleet cascading decisions in Scotland? I'm sure that Northern Rail would like some Turbostars that could replace 150s on some routes, which in turn could replace some Pacer diagrams.

Will be interesting to see. If regions in the north of England had devolution and local power like Scotland now does it would have a far better chance of getting better stock through a multitude of ways instead of being completely reliant on the whims of Westminster as now.

 

[HSTEd]

Multitude of ways? The money still has to come from somewhere.

 

[Topgun333]

Pretty sure this scotches any need to ever order any more DMUs again assuming the electrification programme doesn't get canned.

That is 30+ units coming south by all reasonable expectations, additional to the electrification cascades.

Possibly more. There are 59 170 Turbostars in use on the routes that the refurbed HSTs would work.

Although as pointed out reasonably above, it is more likely that if Transport Scotland has to give up some units, they would probably prefer to cascade 170s onto 156 diagrams and send excess 156s south (although 15 of the 48 156s are fitted with specialist Radio Electronic Token Block equipment for use on the West Highland line). I'm sure Northern would take additional 156s to add to its existing 156 fleet and run them instead of 150s on certain diagrams. The 150s then replacing Pacers.

 

[ainsworth74]

Although as pointed out reasonably above, it is more likely that if Transport Scotland has to give up some units, they would probably prefer to cascade 170s onto 156 diagrams and send excess 156s south (although 15 of the 48 156s are fitted with specialist Radio Electronic Token Block equipment for use on the West Highland line).

In some ways 156s would be better, for Northern Rail anyway, than 170s as their is already plenty of experience with 156s at Northern compared to 170s! 156s are also probably a more suitable for either directly replacing 14x units or allowing 150s to replace 14xs.

Certainly anyway you look at it this is tremendously good news for Pacer replacement as it should free up a big wedge of units for either direct or indirect replacement of the 14xs.

 

[sprinterguy]

Possibly more. There are 59 170 Turbostars in use on the routes that the refurbed HSTs would work.

The HSTs will only replace the long-distance Turbostar diagrams, though, which probably covers about 40 units at most.

 

[Topgun333]

The HSTs will only replace the long-distance Turbostar diagrams, though, which probably covers about 40 units at most.

Fair point.

 

[mr_towers]

The 170s can (could?) be easily fitted for RETB. The problems on the WHL are clearance related - mk3s and 156s being pretty much the only passenger stock permitted on the route.

I think we're likely to keep 170s, keep minimum 156s (unless new stock replaces them on scenic routes in which case they go) and loose 158s. Especially seeing as some of them are still unrefurbished from Northern!

 

[thetangoman]

The 170s can (could?) be easily fitted for RETB. The problems on the WHL are clearance related - mk3s and 156s being pretty much the only passenger stock permitted on the route.

I think we're likely to keep 170s, keep minimum 156s (unless new stock replaces them on scenic routes in which case they go) and loose 158s. Especially seeing as some of them are still unrefurbished from Northern!

I have also heard that because of the gearing in 170's they cannot cope with the gradients on the WHL and Far North lines

 

[sprinterguy]

In some ways 156s would be better, for Northern Rail anyway, than 170s as their is already plenty of experience with 156s at Northern compared to 170s! 156s are also probably a more suitable for either directly replacing 14x units or allowing 150s to replace 14xs.

In addition to this, I would personally hope that Scotrail settle on 158s for their "scenic" lines, if they can be cleared for the West Highland. They have air conditioning going for them over the 156s, and fitting a fully compliant disabled toilet won’t result in the displacement of any seats. That then results in the 156 fleet being cascaded south, which would be great news for Northern.

 

[Rapidash]

Well, if Scotland gets some of FGW HST's, me thinks its only fair that Exeter gets some 170/156's to replace the Pacers (Only 8 to get rid of!), add on the 153's and Bob's your uncle!

 

[HSTEd]

I assume that while 35-40 Turbostars will be displaced TS will release ~33 (all the non specialised WHL 156s) as although they will want units for strengthening they will be replacing 2 car sprinters with 3 car turbostars?

Also what works Inverness-Aberdeen?
Is that the express Turbostar fleet or is that still worked by Sprinters?

 

[455driver]

Originally Posted by sprinterguy
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)

That looks like 2+6 with possibility of 2+7 then, depending how tight the pointwork is to the end of the platforms.

How is it 2+6 (or 7)?
take away 36m (2x17.79 rounded up) for the 2 powercars and you are left with enough room for-
P1- 2+1
P2- 2+5
P3- 2+3
P4- 2+3
P5- 2+5
P6- 2+5
P7- 2+7 (with 5m spare)

Not exactly 2+6 except for 1 platform is it!
Pointwork is irrelevant, its signals and block joints which are the important bits.

 

[edwin_m]

How is it 2+6 (or 7)?
take away 36m (2x17.79 rounded up) for the 2 powercars and you are left with enough room for-
P1- 2+1
P2- 2+5
P3- 2+3
P4- 2+3
P5- 2+5
P6- 2+5
P7- 2+7 (with 5m spare)

Not exactly 2+6 except for 1 platform is it!
Pointwork is irrelevant, its signals and block joints which are the important bits.

Is this before the lengthening under EGIP?

 

[455driver]

Well, if Scotland gets some of FGW HST's, me thinks its only fair that Exeter gets some 170/156's to replace the Pacers (Only 8 to get rid of!), add on the 153's and Bob's your uncle!

TBH 150s would be better for the Metro services because of the hill climbing of the 170s compared to the 150s?
Why do you think Scotrail put more powerful engines in some 170s?

The 153s (better power to weight ratio than the 170s) are diabolical at climbing hills so the 170s will be even worse!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is this before the lengthening under EGIP?

No its using the figures now, what are the figures after EGIP?

 

[Old Hill Bank]

Well, if Scotland gets some of FGW HST's, me thinks its only fair that Exeter gets some 170/156's to replace the Pacers (Only 8 to get rid of!), add on the 153's and Bob's your uncle!

Exeter is getting 165-6s I thought.

 

[CC 72100]

Exeter is getting 165-6s I thought.

To be fair we get a different version each week. The most recent thought seems to be that 165/6 will be from Bristol area and DMU workings around there, with Devon getting 150s and 158s. In reality, nobody really knows what may happen.

 

[Mark62]

Well the announcers at cross country stations call voyagers, high speed trains. This is very ambiguous

 

[sprinterguy]

Well the announcers at cross country stations call voyagers, high speed trains. This is very ambiguous

The artists’ impression on page 5 of the Transport Scotland franchise brochure isn’t though!

 

[HSTEd]

How is it 2+6 (or 7)?
take away 36m (2x17.79 rounded up) for the 2 powercars and you are left with enough room for-
P1- 2+1
P2- 2+5
P3- 2+3
P4- 2+3
P5- 2+5
P6- 2+5
P7- 2+7 (with 5m spare)

Not exactly 2+6 except for 1 platform is it!
Pointwork is irrelevant, its signals and block joints which are the important bits.

Well if the pointwork is tight up against the platform then the signals probably will be too
The location of the points and so on is a reasonable, and far easier to measure, metric for the actual 'logical' length of the platform than block joints which are not obvious from casual observations.

 

[455driver]

Well if the pointwork is tight up against the platform then the signals probably will be too
The location of the points and so on is a reasonable, and far easier to measure, metric for the actual 'logical' length of the platform than block joints which are not obvious from casual observations.

It is the signals and block joints that stipulate the available platform length, 'logic' doesnt come into it and trying to butter it up wont change that!

 

[HSTEd]

It is the signals and block joints that stipulate the available platform length, 'logic' doesnt come into it and trying to butter it up wont change that!

Yes - and 'logical' in this context refers to what the computerised signalling system thinks the length of the platform is.... which will be the block length.

 

[455driver]

Well if the pointwork is tight up against the platform then the signals probably will be too
The location of the points and so on is a reasonable, and far easier to measure, metric for the actual 'logical' length of the platform than block joints which are not obvious from casual observations.

Just because it would be easier doesnt change the fact it is wrong! :roll:
It is the signals and block joints that stipulate the available platform length, 'logic' doesnt come into it and trying to butter it up wont change that!

 

[HSTEd]

Just because it would be easier doesnt change the fact it is wrong! :roll:
It is the signals and block joints that stipulate the available platform length, 'logic' doesnt come into it and trying to butter it up wont change that!

Come back when you can see the position of block joints from aerial or similar photography.

The Sectional Appendix is also not very helpful for this since it lists the platform lengths - and the maximum train that can fit into the platforms without fouling either the signalling system is not the same as the platform length as I am sure you are aware.

 

[455driver]

Come back when you can see the position of block joints from aerial or similar photography.

The Sectional Appendix is also not very helpful for this since it lists the platform lengths - and the maximum train that can fit into the platforms without fouling either the signalling system is not the same as the platform length as I am sure you are aware.

So you are commenting on something you dont understand and trying to support that view with 'aerial views' etc (again irrelevant), anyway this is way off topic so if you would like to start a thread about it then fine otherwise try and stay on topic for a change, oh and only post what you know to be fact and not what you think is fact which is not the same thing.
Maybe you should learn some of the intricacies about signalling so you would be better informed when posting about it, just a thought!

 

[ainsworth74]

Well the announcers at cross country stations call voyagers, high speed trains. This is very ambiguous

Cross Country don't operate any stations...

Also can't say I've ever heard 22xs being referred to as high speed trains on station announcements anywhere!

 

[Altnabreac]

I assume that while 35-40 Turbostars will be displaced TS will release ~33 (all the non specialised WHL 156s) as although they will want units for strengthening they will be replacing 2 car sprinters with 3 car turbostars?

Also what works Inverness-Aberdeen?
Is that the express Turbostar fleet or is that still worked by Sprinters?

HSTs are planned to work the Aberdeen - Inverness trains. Makes sense as the diagrams are interlinked.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

In addition to this, I would personally hope that Scotrail settle on 158s for their "scenic" lines, if they can be cleared for the West Highland. They have air conditioning going for them over the 156s, and fitting a fully compliant disabled toilet won’t result in the displacement of any seats. That then results in the 156 fleet being cascaded south, which would be great news for Northern.

Bike spaces could be an issue - IIRC Scotrail's 156s have six each, their 158s four, and even the 156s are regularly full up.

 

[Altnabreac]

Bike spaces could be an issue - IIRC Scotrail's 156s have six each, their 158s four, and even the 156s are regularly full up.

The "Scenic lines" specification includes extra luggage and cycle spaces so if 158s are used the internal layout will need to be very different to the current one.

I suspect 170s will not be used for the scenic / rural lines as the 1/3 2/3 doors opening directly into the saloon are not ideal for a frequent stopping service, especially in inclement weather.

Some 170s will probably be kept for Fife Circle and Dundee semi fast services.