At risk of repeating myself, is there/what is the best objective method of measuring the success, or otherwise, of the HSTs intro?
I have posted this point earlier but either have had no responses, or been punted to another threat.
However, at risk of one or both happening again the point is …. how can the overall performance of the new SR HSTs be objectively measured? Timeliness and reliability are obviously key factors - as long as they are compared against current 170/158 timeliness and reliability. But over how long a period, and is the data reliable anyway?
As for passenger comfort and experience, who knows how that can be measured? other than "it's better/worse than it was" or more-bums-on-seats anecdotal and circumstantial findings.
I would not want to see any initial HST failures being over-egged, but at the same time it's important that if there are "real" problems (as compared to the 170/158s) then they are evidenced, highlighted and addressed.
For SR to say we are heading for "the best railway Scotland has ever had" is all very well, but what does that actually mean - and how are they going to prove it?