Scotrail HST alternatives?

[Clansman]

The joint steering group formed to discuss the HST safety issues, their future, their eventual replacement and potential short term replacement.

This group includes individuals from ScotRail, Transport Scotland, the RMT, ASLEF, the ORR, Network Rail Scotland and Angel Trains.

It was stated by this group that 222s were one option under discussion.

I believe I also read of the 222 option in an article or column in either the June or July issue of Modern Railways.

It is well known that ASLEF are pushing for 222s, so I wouldn't be surprised if they raised the issue in the first place within the Carmont group.

Since the HSTs are having the relevant safety guards installed and further discussions over improving them are ongoing, any talk of the 222s would appear to be nothing more than stakeholder engagement at this point, rather than anything ScotRail is actively pushing from the inside of their own accord and future planning.

Will be interesting to see how it develops, but there's not a lot to go on in any case.

 

[12LDA28C]

So just another version of the same rumour. The MD of another, not involved, TOC is not going to be party to any discussions.

Unless of course they were interested in leasing some 222s themselves and were given a reason by the ROSCO why they couldn't? I'm not really in the habit of perpetuating foundless rumours personally.

 

[QSK19]

The recently withdrawn EMR 156s require significant repairs and I'd imagine the engines are pretty knackered too.

Absolutely knackered rot boxes - an example being the extra special ventilation one of them had due to there being rusted holes in the shell. Glad they’re gone from EMR, especially the /9s.

 

[Wynd]

They're really not. I've done the Highland Mainline on one, it was nicer than a 158 as it's less noisy.

They do have downsides (e.g. small luggage racks) but the biggest problem with Class 170 is that not nearly enough were built, twice as many would have been nice.

Lets see.

Tables that are too low.
Armrests that are too low. The ergonimics when seated generally are just poor.
Freezing in the winter.
No plugs on many that I have been on.
They are far too short for the intercity routes.
First class is not worth it, and is really a waste of more valuable space.

Then we get to the real issue. The noise.

The entire cabin resonates at speed with the engines, which are drastically underpowered.
Its a passenger experence that can often leave you with a headache after a mere 2 hour journey.

The HST is not even a reaonable comparison from a passenger expereince. The 158 doesnt resonate like a drum either.

Further, you dont get to invalidate any passengers experence and opinion.

I will be cheering on HST's lasting to 2030, as will most passengers who get them from Aberdeen to Central Belt. They are the next best thing from the LNER Azuma.

All we need now is to get all the HST's and 5th carriages in to operation, and diminish any 170 backfill on to intercity routes.

Scotlands passengers would be grateful.

 

[Wyrleybart]

All we need now is to get all the HST's and 5th carriages in to operation, and diminish any 170 backfill on to intercity routes.

Scotlands passengers would be grateful.

Has anyone tried writing to the MSPs and asked why so many of their trailers are parked up at Slateford and Inverness - particularly as they are in peak tourist season. In fact earlier this year Scotrail were asking pax not to travel in the midmorning train from Inverness due to over crowding, whilst just yards away were stored "5th car" trailers.

 

[hexagon789]

In fact earlier this year Scotrail were asking pax not to travel in the midmorning train from Inverness due to over crowding

That was because it was booked 3-car 170. It has been changed to 170+158 since the May timetable change.

 

[Wyrleybart]

That was because it was booked 3-car 170. It has been changed to 170+158 since the May timetable change.

Thanks
Makes a lot of sense, but wouldn't a 2+5 HST have been more suitable ? Clearly a popular, and maybe a premium train ?

 

[hexagon789]

Thanks
Makes a lot of sense, but wouldn't a 2+5 HST have been more suitable ? Clearly a popular, and maybe a premium train ?

It can't be without completely altering the diagram.

After arriving at Edinburgh, the unkts do two return trips to Glenrothes round the Circle.

Edit - strike that, it appears that since the May change, the diagram now does two return Dundee trips instead of Glenrothes as before.

 

[Wyrleybart]

It can't be without completely altering the diagram.

After arriving at Edinburgh, the 170 does two return trips to Glenrothes round the Circle.

Isn't that the point though ? Surely Inverness - Edinburgh is a 7 capitals "Inter City" service, and Glenrothes is a suburban diagram, If Scotrail are serious about provision of 7 capitals rolling stock then the diagrams would be changed to reflect what is more appropriate ? Obviously not singling Scotrail out here because it happens in a lot of areas, but the point really is - why do you have Intercity stock parked up (whilst still costing lease fees) just because you are trying to squeeze Intercity miles out of ostensibly suburban rolling stock ?

 

[hexagon789]

Isn't that the point though ? Surely Inverness - Edinburgh is a 7 capitals "Inter City" service, and Glenrothes is a suburban diagram, If Scotrail are serious about provision of 7 capitals rolling stock then the diagrams would be changed to reflect what is more appropriate ? Obviously not singling Scotrail out here because it happens in a lot of areas, but the point really is - why do you have Intercity stock parked up (whilst still costing lease fees) just because you are trying to squeeze Intercity miles out of ostensibly suburban rolling stock ?

That's surely one for the stock diagrammers. The 170 would need to come south somehow anyway; might as well be in passenger service.

But this interworking goes back to at least 2005 when the second batch of 'Express' 170s were in service, most of the remaining 158 diagrams on the HML went 170 and interworking of 170s between what are now labelled the 'Inter7City' routes and the suburban routes started.

I'm sure the idea then was rolling stock efficiency but perhaps whenever the HML timetable is next altered it might be possible to remove these interworked diagrams.

 

[Goldromans]

Speaking of diagrams, do we know if there are any long-term plans for the HST replacements to completely take over the Intercity routes (ie no more 170's or equivalent on Intercity services)?
Also, I've seen Alex Hynes has said the new trains will have level-boarding capability (even if the stations would need future work to actually implement this). Would this rule out any of the previously discussed new-build options? (8XX's, Mk5's, etc)

 

[hexagon789]

Speaking of diagrams, do we know if there are any long-term plans for the HST replacements to completely take over the Intercity routes (ie no more 170's or equivalent on Intercity services)?
Also, I've seen Alex Hynes has said the new trains will have level-boarding capability (even if the stations would need future work to actually implement this). Would this rule out any of the previously discussed new-build options? (8XX's, Mk5's, etc)

The replacements should broadly coincide with 170 withdrawal as well, at least within a few years.

I think it was said that stock rotation meant that it was likely the replacement for the 170s would appear on at least a couple of the Inter7City workings still.

 

[snowball]

Deleted

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Of course if they absolutely do a “ Manhattan project” style on electrification, it would help immensely.

 

[Vectron383]

The only stock that can currently offer level boarding (to my knowledge) is from Stadler, eg their FLIRTs. Correct me if I’m wrong here though!

Speaking of diagrams, do we know if there are any long-term plans for the HST replacements to completely take over the Intercity routes (ie no more 170's or equivalent on Intercity services)?
Also, I've seen Alex Hynes has said the new trains will have level-boarding capability (even if the stations would need future work to actually implement this). Would this rule out any of the previously discussed new-build options? (8XX's, Mk5's, etc)

 

[Clansman]

The only stock that can currently offer level boarding (to my knowledge) is from Stadler, eg their FLIRTs. Correct me if I’m wrong here though!

Pretty much any manufacturer would be able to conjur up level boarding if you asked. Stadler are the only ones in the UK as of yet who offer level boarding extending from the train, however as we see with elsewhere you can raise platforms to match the floor height on any train that doesn't have an additional step up (ie pretty much any regional and metro MU built post privatisation - most notably the Aventras with Crossrail, and the 700s on Thameslink).

 

[3RDGEN]

Speaking of diagrams, do we know if there are any long-term plans for the HST replacements to completely take over the Intercity routes (ie no more 170's or equivalent on Intercity services)?
Also, I've seen Alex Hynes has said the new trains will have level-boarding capability (even if the stations would need future work to actually implement this). Would this rule out any of the previously discussed new-build options? (8XX's, Mk5's, etc)

In May 2022 TS issued this document "https://www.transport.gov.scot/medi...nd-forecasts-for-electricity-and-hydrogen.pdf"

If you go to Appendix 7.1, Page 123 it gives the ScotRail rolling stock plan which details,

"2030 Electrification complete: Montrose to Aberdeen.
Service Introductions and Rolling Stock Notes: Aberdeen to Montrose (Battery Electric for Scenarios 4 and 5) – Class 158 units withdrawn / 170 units cascaded to Southwest Scotland
Glasgow Queen Street / Edinburgh Waverley to Aberdeen (Battery Electric for Scenarios 4 and 5) - HST Fleet Withdrawn / Class 170 units cascaded north West Highland Line"

This ties in with the HST lease to 2030 but predated the potential short term HST replacement discussion, whichever way the HST's/replacements are required until 2030 under this plan.

Further electrification by 2035 sees the final 170's withdrawn from Scotrail.

 

[Goldromans]

In May 2022 TS issued this document "https://www.transport.gov.scot/medi...nd-forecasts-for-electricity-and-hydrogen.pdf"

If you go to Appendix 7.1, Page 123 it gives the ScotRail rolling stock plan which details,

"2030 Electrification complete: Montrose to Aberdeen.
Service Introductions and Rolling Stock Notes: Aberdeen to Montrose (Battery Electric for Scenarios 4 and 5) – Class 158 units withdrawn / 170 units cascaded to Southwest Scotland
Glasgow Queen Street / Edinburgh Waverley to Aberdeen (Battery Electric for Scenarios 4 and 5) - HST Fleet Withdrawn / Class 170 units cascaded north West Highland Line"

This ties in with the HST lease to 2030 but predated the potential short term HST replacement discussion, whichever way the HST's/replacements are required until 2030 under this plan.

Further electrification by 2035 sees the final 170's withdrawn from Scotrail.

If I understand properly, does this suggest all the HSTs will be withdrawn once electrification to Aberdeen is complete, leaving 170's to work Central Belt - Inverness services? Can't imagine this going down well with Inverness passengers.

 

[3RDGEN]

If I understand properly, does this suggest all the HSTs will be withdrawn once electrification to Aberdeen is complete, leaving 170's to work Central Belt - Inverness services? Can't imagine this going down well with Inverness passengers.

Perhaps the promise of electrification and six car 170's in the meantime may help. It's possible the 2035 date mentioned above means HST's/replacements could continue until Inverness is wired vice 170's.

Bringing the 222's in over the next couple of years until 2035 would work but the HST's are on lease to 2030 so how do ScotRail get out of that? Angel spent a lot of money on those HST's and want it back.

 

[snowball]

A review of the Scottish electrification/decarbonisation programme, originally due in spring 2023, is still expected by the end of the year. I expect that for financial reasons the dates for wiring to Aberdeen and Inverness (and everywhere) will be pushed back.

 

[chuff chuff]

I expect that for financial reasons the dates for wiring to Aberdeen and Inverness (and everywhere) will be pushed back.

I don't think that was ever in doubt from day one.

 

[Davester50]

They're really not. I've done the Highland Mainline on one, it was nicer than a 158 as it's less noisy.

They do have downsides (e.g. small luggage racks) but the biggest problem with Class 170 is that not nearly enough were built, twice as many would have been nice.

Exactly. The 170s are good trains. Nice wide doors, no massive step up, good mix of tables and airline seats. Wish they had gained sets, than got rid of.

 

[Goldromans]

Exactly. The 170s are good trains. Nice wide doors, no massive step up, good mix of tables and airline seats. Wish they had gained sets, than got rid of.

The problem is the 170's are suburban trains and aren't suited for long-distance journeys up to Aberdeen and Inverness, for reasons that are well established.

 

[Davester50]

The problem is the 170's are suburban trains and aren't suited for long-distance journeys up to Aberdeen and Inverness, for reasons that are well established.

What, the inter-urban units being used on inter-urban services aren't suitable? Nah.

 

[Goldromans]

What, the inter-urban units being used on inter-urban services aren't suitable? Nah.

A 3.5+ hour journey from Edinburgh to Inverness is not an inter-urban journey, and as I said the reasons they're not suited to these routes have been listed many times.

 

[Davester50]

A 3.5+ hour journey from Edinburgh to Inverness is not an inter-urban journey, and as I said the reasons they're not suited to these routes have been listed many times.

That's the extreme though.
There's plenty of passengers on the Aberdeen-Dundee-Central Belt not doing the full route, and train stops every 20-odd minutes where the HSTs aren't suitable

 

[Goldromans]

That's the extreme though.
There's plenty of passengers on the Aberdeen-Dundee-Central Belt not doing the full route, and train stops every 20-odd minutes where the HSTs aren't suitable

An extreme, yes. A rarity, no. I agree there are some services on these lines that are more inter-urban - although this is more common up towards Aberdeen - and the 170's work for these. But they just aren't best suited to inter-city services. Not bad, just not suited.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The problem is the 170's are suburban trains and aren't suited for long-distance journeys up to Aberdeen and Inverness, for reasons that are well established.

They are not. They are regional express trains, as per most of Europe doors at thirds are the norm
on this sort of service.

 

[Davester50]

An extreme, yes. A rarity, no. I agree there are some services on these lines that are more inter-urban - although this is more common up towards Aberdeen - and the 170's work for these. But they just aren't best suited to inter-city services. Not bad, just not suited.

Lets have a look at a typical day. I took next Tuesday (22/8/23), and just ScotRail services.
There's 29 services from Aberdeen - Dundee to Edinburgh and Glasgow, plus an Inverness - Aberdeen - Edinburgh.
There's 11 from Inverness to Perth and Edinburgh and Glasgow.

Now what services should form the basis of a rolling stock strategy? The one with only 11, or the one with 30?

 

[Wynd]

Comparing the 170 to the HST is like comparing an Austin Metro, to a BMW 5 series.

Intercity should be HST or equivalent, IET, and that includes Scotland's cities.

A 3 hour journey to Glasgow on a 170 is not an enjoyable experiece, nor is the 2.5 hours from Edinburgh.