Prospects of HSTs surviving on "Highland Chieftain" (London/Inverness VTEC)

[InOban]

So there we have it then.

Regular commuters from Stirling could have a decent service that doesn't leave them standing to and from Edinburgh in a 2 car 158 on the morning or evening peak - but Westminster and the Scottish Goverment have united to stop it happening.

And local and national goverment wonder why so many people drive from Stiring to Edinburgh every day.

But within the next year that 158 will be replaced by a 3 or 4 car or longer 385 probably running nonstop from Falkirk to Edinburgh Park.

 

[Class 170101]

There is expected to be a penalty on the Class 800 between Edinburgh and Inverness and a gain between London and Edinburgh. From what I have seen the journey time from London to Inverness overall is unchanged.

 

[yorkie]

There is expected to be a penalty on the Class 800 between Edinburgh and Inverness and a gain between London and Edinburgh. From what I have seen the journey time from London to Inverness overall is unchanged.

Presumably this means the Chieftain departing Edinburgh earlier than the current 1634 departure time?

 

[Class 170101]

Logically I would say so.

 

[Highlandspring]

Hopefully, because on its current times it can really snarl the Abbeyhill, the West End and the Gardens up if it's even just a few minutes late.

 

[jimm]

So there we have it then.

Regular commuters from Stirling could have a decent service that doesn't leave them standing to and from Edinburgh in a 2 car 158 on the morning or evening peak - but Westminster and the Scottish Goverment have united to stop it happening.

And local and national goverment wonder why so many people drive from Stiring to Edinburgh every day.

No, there we don't have it. East Coast is not charged with providing commuter services within Scotland, so it doesn't. New electric trains and overhauled HSTs are on the way for Scotrail, along with a substantial timetable overhaul in May next year - or is there something wrong with the Scots doing things like that to provide extra capacity all by themselves?

 

[GaryMcEwan]

No, there we don't have it. East Coast is not charged with providing commuter services within Scotland, so it doesn't. New electric trains and overhauled HSTs are on the way for Scotrail, along with a substantial timetable overhaul in May next year - or is there something wrong with the Scots doing things like that to provide extra capacity all by themselves?

From past experience it's because no matter who is running Scotrail, be it National Express, First or Abellio, they somehow manage to mess it up somehow which then leads to the inevitable delays and things end up appearing much later than they should have done. My main line is the Argyle Line and when have Scotrail ever provided extra capacity for that? It's probably no better now than it was when the line reopened in 1979.

 

[Clansman]

The point of the Stirling service was to allow business commuters to reach London before 11am, something that the current ScotRails services do not allow. Moving the service to a busier time defeats the purpose of it in the first place. Anyone who studied the possibility of this service before it was introduced knew fine well that it's current usage will be low. But never the less the proposal pursued because there was presented economic benefits that could be gained from it, as outlined by both VTEC and Stirlingshire council.

Any boost on capacity during peak hours on the main ECML corridor will come from the additional capacity provided by the IEPs, as well as the additional services run by FirstEC and TPE. I can't see the argument for restraining services from going any further North than Edinburgh on the basis of capacity when capacity itself is getting a major boost in the coming years.

 

[tbtc]

No, there we don't have it. East Coast is not charged with providing commuter services within Scotland, so it doesn't. New electric trains and overhauled HSTs are on the way for Scotrail, along with a substantial timetable overhaul in May next year - or is there something wrong with the Scots doing things like that to provide extra capacity all by themselves?

Fair points.

Yes, you could get a large number of people on a Stirling service that arrived in Edinburgh at 08:xx and departed at 17:xx, but then the same is true of arrivals/departures on most Edinburgh services - it's a busy city - I'm sure if VTEC ran it through to Dundee or Dunfermline or Glasgow at nice rush hour times they'd get lots of seats filled - there's nothing special about Stirling. The fact that ScotRail throw everything they can at Fife (including the expense/hassle of loco hauled) whilst putting a two coach 158 to Stirling suggests that Fife is a much more important market than Stirling.

Problem is, there's the small matter of transporting hundreds of people to Dunbar/ Berwick/ Newcastle/ York/ London etc - which some might say is VTEC's job to do.

There's the following southbound services

• 15:30
• 16:00
• 17:00
• 17:30
• 18:31
• 19:35

...plus the 16:34 to Inverness and the 18:33 to Aberdeen.

So , for my money, there's no spare stock for a jaunt to/from Stirling, there's other towns/cities that would have a case for hypothetical Edinburgh commuter slots, Scotrail/NR are spending lots of money on upgrading regular Stirling services and VTEC have enough on their plate serving their own passengers.

But apart from that...

 

[DackandBlecker]

or is there something wrong with the Scots doing things like that to provide extra capacity all by themselves?

Well, BR CrossCountry, Virgin CrossCountry and Arriva XC have done that with the 0630ish from Dundee to Edinburgh and beyond, so, yes, until there's a 5 car HST that will provide similar capacity.

 

[InOban]

And that train exists because Scotrail hasn't had the stock to run one themselves at that time. Once the HSTs arrive, there will be no need for it, although there will remain significant demand from Aberdeen and Dundee to places South of Edinburgh.

 

[jimm]

From past experience it's because no matter who is running Scotrail, be it National Express, First or Abellio, they somehow manage to mess it up somehow which then leads to the inevitable delays and things end up appearing much later than they should have done. My main line is the Argyle Line and when have Scotrail ever provided extra capacity for that? It's probably no better now than it was when the line reopened in 1979.

Still doesn't mean that it's East Coast's job to do Scotrail's job for it - none of the Aberdeen services, the Highland Chieftain, or the current Stirling services run at times north of Edinburgh that are much use for commuting. Might that be because they are there to do another job entirely, like link the North East and Highlands with places south of Edinburgh?

Where is the compelling argument that this should change, when Scotrail ia about to get lots of new rolling stock and electrification out to Dunblane - and will be retaining rather more of the 170s than initially expected when electrification was being planned, in order to increase capacity on diesel-worked services?

In any case, this thread is supposed to be about the Highland Chieftain, not what might suit Stirling's commuters, never mind the Argyle Line.

And the prospect of any HSTs remaining with VTEC is nil.

 

[GaryMcEwan]

Still doesn't mean that it's East Coast's job to do Scotrail's job for it - none of the Aberdeen services, the Highland Chieftain, or the current Stirling services run at times north of Edinburgh that are much use for commuting. Might that be because they are there to do another job entirely, like link the North East and Highlands with places south of Edinburgh?

Where is the compelling argument that this should change, when Scotrail ia about to get lots of new rolling stock and electrification out to Dunblane - and will be retaining rather more of the 170s than initially expected when electrification was being planned, in order to increase capacity on diesel-worked services?

In any case, this thread is supposed to be about the Highland Chieftain, not what might suit Stirling's commuters, never mind the Argyle Line.

And the prospect of any HSTs remaining with VTEC is nil.

Heaven forbid that an operator might actually try and help Scotrail out with the ever crumbling fleet and over crowding issues. Going by your posts, I'm assuming you don't commute by train? Have you recently been on a peak time service either in Edinburgh or Glasgow heading north? I'd rather take a Virgin HST to either Aberdeen or Inveress over a crammed 3 car 170 any day of the week. Also I know which operator provides the better customer service...

 

[Failed Unit]

Transport Scotland has previously tried to stop the East Coast franchise operating north of Edinburgh, though…

I think you will find that was the other way around. East Coast proposed to drop running north of Edinburgh and that upset Transport Scotland. If they had got what they wanted they would be doing a full service every 30 minutes between London and Edinburgh. Maybe a few other changes on the main East Coast route.

Likewise XCs changes to Scottish services were knocked back by Transport Scotland.

I agree not many people do the full journey, but both the Aberdeen services and the Inverness service has a lot of cross Edinburgh traffic. More stay on than get off. Aberdeen - Newcastle has a health flow as an example.

I know it has bieng suggest that the East Coast operator operate more services to Inverness, such as the 0935 Edinburgh - Inverness to give people from the North East the possibility of getting to Inverness earlier directly. Not a good use of the set was the general view. But irrespective people don't want to change trains. Hence why transport Scotland was so against the direct services getting ceased.

 

[Failed Unit]

And the prospect of any HSTs remaining with VTEC is nil.

Rumour has it they may keep some rather than the Mk4s because the power upgrades as not complete to run the Edinburgh - London service. Irrespective - if this plan does happen they won't be using them to go further than Edinburgh. I suspect this will never happen and either the Mk4s will stay or they just wont bother with the 4 hour Edinburgh - London service all day.

 

[jimm]

Heaven forbid that an operator might actually try and help Scotrail out with the ever crumbling fleet and over crowding issues. Going by your posts, I'm assuming you don't commute by train? Have you recently been on a peak time service either in Edinburgh or Glasgow heading north? I'd rather take a Virgin HST to either Aberdeen or Inveress over a crammed 3 car 170 any day of the week. Also I know which operator provides the better customer service...

As a Scot, you are presumably well aware of all the changes to Scotrail's services in coming months - most of which will likely be in place before a single East Coast 800 turns a wheel in passenger service north of Edinburgh.

Changes which are presumably intended to make sure no one has to ride in a crammed 3-car Class 170 out of Edinburgh or Glasgow in future. Or aren't people willing to see what impact all those changes have and demand jam now, never mind that East Coast doesn't have the trains to spare to do other people's jobs too?

And yes, I do commute by train - in GW territory, where passengers would dearly have loved to have had just a fraction of all the 170s and new emus that Scotland has received since the 1990s - or extra stock that has appeared on pretty much every other route out of London in that time.

The same Turbo fleet delivered in 1992-3 (minus the set wrecked in the Paddington crash) had to carry the load until last year, when 387s started operating. That HSTs and 180s had to pick up some GW commuter jobs was because there was nothing else available to help handle ever-increasing passenger numbers in the area - not because anyone thought they were the best solution.

 

[Clansman]

VTEC will have a larger fleet when the IEPs are in full swing. If capacity takes a hit on North of Edinburgh services as a result of ScotRail, then VTEC should have the flexibility to allow 5-car set to replace 9-car sets. But given the amount of people who travel on existing services to Aberdeen/Inverness, why on earth would they want to change at Edinburgh for these destinations when they could go direct?

I doubt Mr Joe Public from York is going to think to himself "If it weren't for those bloody 170s....." when it comes to deciding whether to go direct to Aberdeen/Inverness or not. It's about connectivity and simplicity of the journey for most people, not the types of trains they're travelling in.

 

[43096]

And the prospect of any HSTs remaining with VTEC is nil.

Really? Says who? The franchise agreement states that for the plan to retain stock, VTEC can keep either Mark 4 or HST stock.

What happens now is up in the air because of the current franchise position and various other factors.

 

[route:oxford]

The same Turbo fleet delivered in 1992-3 (minus the set wrecked in the Paddington crash) had to carry the load until last year, when 387s started operating. That HSTs and 180s had to pick up some GW commuter jobs was because there was nothing else available to help handle ever-increasing passenger numbers in the area - not because anyone thought they were the best solution.

Conveniently choosing not to disclose the considerable increase in capacity in GWR territory between Banbury & the Capital of the Thames Valley via the World's Best City thanks to the introduction of Voyager stock on clockface timetables in the early noughties.

 

[jimm]

a. I wasn't actually thinking of Banbury-Oxford-Reading - more the Thames Valley area in general, including the London end, where the Turbo services in the peaks unit very recently could have more than given a 158 from Glasgow or Edinburgh to Stirling a run for its money for overcrowding. Even now with the 387s in use we are still only part way to the long-term capacity fix.

b. Are you seriously trying to tell us that Voyagers represent a "considerable increase in capacity" on what XC provided prior to 2002?
XC previously ran an hourly serviceon the Birmingham-Banbury-Oxford-Reading axis, with a mix of seven-coach HSTs and Class 47+7 coaches formations, seating about 450 and 380 passengers respectively - someone may know the exact figures.
These were replaced by half-hourly Voyagers seating 200 people (class 220) or 252 (class 221). Even with the subsequent changes to the XC sets resulting in a modest boost in seat numbers, two four-car Voyagers per hour don't even provide the same number of seats as a single hourly HST did and just a couple of dozen or so more than the 47+7. The 221s work precious few services on the Birmingham-South Coast axis, and even a 220 followed by a 221 only just improves on the HST's capacity.
Not what I would call considerable. Puny or pathetic perhaps, in the light of how much rail travel has grown in the past 15 years.

And nothing to do with the Highland Chieftain.

 

[gsnedders]

I think you will find that was the other way around. East Coast proposed to drop running north of Edinburgh and that upset Transport Scotland.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/transport-scotland-rail-2014-consultation.55413/ was what I was thinking of; a Transport Scotland consultation which included:

We are therefore considering whether services north of Edinburgh should be provided by the Scottish franchisee, with Edinburgh becoming an interchange hub for cross-border services in the east of the country. In this scenario cross-border services would terminate at Edinburgh Waverley, with onward connections being provided by ScotRail.

 

[BRX]

A bit strange to use commuter services along the Thames Valley as a comparison with those northwards from Edinburgh or Glasgow, to imply that the Thames Valley is hard done by - if you want to travel from Edinburgh to Perth at peak time you've pretty much got one direct train per hour. Whereas London to Reading has 16 per hour. Both have capacity problems perhaps but it's not as if Scotland's railways have been exactly flooded with investment compared to those in the southeast, over the past 2 decades.

 

[jimm]

Nothing strange about it, or did you miss what I said in post #166?. Services out of Paddington missed out on the bonanza of extra rolling stock seen in the past 20 years on other routes out of London. You should have tried a Turbo stopping service in or out of Paddington in the peaks if you think Scotland was hard done by. There was a reason why FGW suburban trains dominated the lists of the 10 most overcrowded trains in Britain for long periods.

Since the mid-1990s, Scotrail has acquired 50+ Class 170s and 70+ 334s and 380s, with 70 Class 385s and 26 HSTs now on the way.

Even if you account on the debit side for 303s going for scrap in the early 2000s and the 170s and other dmus that are going to leave - a figure now much smaller than initially expected - I would venture to suggest that the tools to ease capacity problems on peak services between Edinburgh/Glasgow and Stirling or Perth are in Scotrail's grasp and they certainly shouldn't need East Coast to do their job for them.

 

[Stopper]

On Stirling-Edinburgh, how often are peak time trains a single 158? I travel between Linlithgow and Edinburgh and I’d have to say that’s quite rare. During the day it’s mainly a single 158, but at peak times it’s often a 3-car 170 or a 4-car 158. This morning the Perth-Edinburgh was a 5-car 158+170.

Stirling’s service to Edinburgh isn’t great, a 2tph stopper (sometimes more in peak times I believe, with a couple of fast services). However larger/similar sized towns such as Kilmarnock, East Kilbride, Dunfermline both get the same slow nearly-all-stopper service to their nearest city. Remembering that Stirling gets 3tph, sometimes 4tph to Glasgow as well with 1 or 2 being fast.

Additional Stirling semi-fasts would be a great however unlikely (and probably impossible) addition, but the removal of the Dunblane services from Linlithgow and Polmont (2 extremely busy stations) and replacement of them with a 2tph slow pointless E-G via Cumbernauld service would not go down well.

 

[InOban]

Discussing the Stirling services is off topic, but while Linlithgow and Polmont will lose direct trains to Larbert, Stirling and Dunblane, the 'pointless' E-G via Cumbernauld will presumably have plenty of space for the much larger number of passengers joining at L and P to get to Edinburgh.

 

[Stopper]

It wasn't that off-topic. The poster referred to a 2-car 158 in the peaks, which rarely ever happens as far as I'm aware. It's 3/4 cars, even 5 at times, so their service is fine. Speeding up their service would disrupt 2 of the busiest stations in the E-G area.

 

[swt_passenger]

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/transport-scotland-rail-2014-consultation.55413/ was what I was thinking of; a Transport Scotland consultation which included:

That’s what I was remembering as well, there was definitely a short lived view that ScotRail would run all services north of Edinburgh. Obviously TS must have had to do a pretty quick policy U-turn when that became public; and as the 2014 consultation was in 2011 they can presumably now act as though it never happened...

 

[Harbornite]

leads to the question of whether it makes sense to have Inverness-London as part of the EC franchise. Perhaps it would be more sensible to hand it over to Crosscountry, for example.

No it wouldn't, the franchise is called Crosscountry for a reason...

 

[bella]

Just noted that a 800 did a test return run from Doncaster Carr into Glasgow Central last Thursday night just before the delivery of some 385s. Are any other similar runs likely?

 

[route101]

Just noted that a 800 did a test return run from Doncaster Carr into Glasgow Central last Thursday night just before the delivery of some 385s. Are any other similar runs likely?

Theres been two class 800 runs into Glasgow i think . Seems like the VTEC service to Glasgow is staying