• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

ScotRail HST Introduction - Updates & Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mingulay

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2018
Messages
463
I'm not for one minute saying they didn't by the way - as you say, we don't KNOW.

However in my side of engineering it is a completely normal thing to state an assumption that the asset you are altering is in good condition. Old doesn't necessarily mean poor condition if it has been correctly maintained, and unless the client is willing to pay for you to do a condition survey then why would you not accept their assurances that the asset is in good condition? There has to be a starting point from which to estimate a piece of work, and the asset owner should know the condition of their asset!

From a supplier point of view, if I assume that the whole coach will need to be rebuilt and price / programme accordingly then I'm not going to get the contract - plus you will sometimes find that the client will want everyone to price with the same assumptions to get a better comparison of costs, so I could be told to assume that the asset is good like everyone else has.

It's not necessarily the cut-and-dried incompetence on the part of Engineers that a lot of people seem to think it is.

As I have suggested before. It would have been common sense to have a test set refurbished before any contract was agreed. How can you commit to a project you never done before. Scotrail and TS should have figured that out for themselves so I blame them more than Wabtec. Our relationship as passengers is with TS and Scotrail so all the blame has to be directed there. As passengers our contract is our TOC and our Government we have no right to apportion blame to wabtec.

Certainly the Scotland’s best ever railway has not been heard for while. Consigned to the archives and annals of advertising slogans that backfired in the clients face !
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,160
Do you have any actual evidence that the fitters at Shields “couldn’t be arsed to maintain them properly” as you so disparagingly put it? Presumably they were working to the appropriate VMIs. I know that obtaining spare parts was proving very, very difficult for example. Perhaps you know different...?
Where did I mention staff at Shields? It was a reference to ScotRail as an organisation.

Although I don’t subscribe to the “all the staff are wonderful and saintly and it is all the fault of management” clichés.
 

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,626
They did do a test coach. No particular issues were found.
Unfortunately it was a cross country one which was in much better condition than the GWR vehicles, presumably as a result of years of running along the coastline.
 

Northhighland

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2016
Messages
606
I wouldn't disagree with this at all, but it needs to be noted that the front line staff aren't to blame, but they take the flak for it. I don't blame passengers for being frustrated in the slightest. I'm still right behind the HST introduction, but when a 158 turns up as a replacement (on a peak train), this is just as frustrating for the staff as it is for the passengers!

I feel sorry for some front line staff. There are a significant number of them that do try really hard and deserve credit for the way they conduct themselves in very difficult circumstances.

However this far from universal sadly. Some have no thought for passengers or other staff. Some are plainly rude. Abellio need to work on this and for me the whole culture around running the railway is wrong. It needs at every level to focus on customers needs.
 

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
I'm as frustrated as anyone else by this, I have to sit in smelly classic HSTs on a regular basis, but publically playing out the case between Scotrail and Wabtec would probably lead us to a situation similar to the blood letting between Caledonian Marine Assets Ltd and Ferguson's over the two new Macbraynes ferries that never get completed. We'd have a very clear idea of what might be going wrong, and how unrealistic expectations got it to where it is, but the job wouldn't be getting done any quicker.
 

nat67

Established Member
Joined
23 Apr 2014
Messages
1,477
Location
Warwickshire
I'm as frustrated as anyone else by this, I have to sit in smelly classic HSTs on a regular basis, but publically playing out the case between Scotrail and Wabtec would probably lead us to a situation similar to the blood letting between Caledonian Marine Assets Ltd and Ferguson's over the two new Macbraynes ferries that never get completed. We'd have a very clear idea of what might be going wrong, and how unrealistic expectations got it to where it is, but the job wouldn't be getting done any quicker.
At least you seem to be having a HST at all rather than a rancid 170 or 158.
 

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
As a reminder: A big part of the problem is that Hitachi opened their new IEP depot in Doncaster because of plenty of local rail experience, the result was that lots of Wabtec staff left and went to Hitachi. (Other rail engineering locations in Yorkshire also lost staff to the IEP depot so not just Wabtec).
Wabtec have been struggling to recruit replacement staff...
Wabtec only started loosing staff after winning the contract.

Then a question needs to be asked - why are Wabtec consistently losing staff to a competitor and what is behind the pattern?
 

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
At least you seem to be having a HST at all rather than a rancid 170 or 158.

I am on a 158 right now. The noise is very high. People do care about engines under floors, or more realistically, the noise. My decibel app says 74db.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,160
Then a question needs to be asked - why are Wabtec consistently losing staff to a competitor and what is behind the pattern?
Hitachi can offer more money and better job security on the back of a 20+ year maintenance agreement for the IEPs.
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,594
I'm as frustrated as anyone else by this, I have to sit in smelly classic HSTs on a regular basis, but publically playing out the case between Scotrail and Wabtec would probably lead us to a situation similar to the blood letting between Caledonian Marine Assets Ltd and Ferguson's over the two new Macbraynes ferries that never get completed. We'd have a very clear idea of what might be going wrong, and how unrealistic expectations got it to where it is, but the job wouldn't be getting done any quicker.

Never noticed them being smelly , a first glasgow bus is hwever
 

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
At least you seem to be having a HST at all rather than a rancid 170 or 158.
My point relates to earlier ones regarding a lack of cleaning and litter removal at Edinburgh compared to 170s, not unspecific dislike of a certain train type.

I'm afraid the last but one HST I was on did suffer from smells as a result of discarded food packaging.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
Then a question needs to be asked - why are Wabtec consistently losing staff to a competitor and what is behind the pattern?
Easier working conditions, guaranteed work load and hence jobs for at a least 27 years? Others (TOCs/FOCs) are losing key staff to Hitachi too.

Refurbisher work load be some what quiet after early 2020 and all the delayed PRM work is completed.
 

Mingulay

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2018
Messages
463
They did do a test coach. No particular issues were found.
Unfortunately it was a cross country one which was in much better condition than the GWR vehicles, presumably as a result of years of running along the coastline.


Thank you. That’s good information. Just the one coach?
 

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,626
Thank you. That’s good information. Just the one coach?
Yes. It was one of the spare coaches removed from cross country HSTs a few years ago. It was fitted with the new doors and extensive testing done. There are a good few photos on internal intranet showing the process. All seemed well. At the time there were no full rakes available so this was the test bed and presumably formed the basis of the contract. Regrettable the coaches supplied from GWR have proved much more challenging.
 

Northhighland

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2016
Messages
606
My point is that recognising the issue is part of the remedy. Whilst Scotrail's management of this has been abysmal, like they are in many other areas, it is not their fault that the trains have not been delivered. It also not the fault of the Scottish Government or Transport Scotland.

A contractor is responsible for what they have agreed to deliver. If they are instructed to deliver something, it is up to them to decide whether they can or cannot deliver it. If they agree to do something after giving advice that they are uncertain, that in no way relieves them of their obligations. It's a contract. So in short, the contractor is under no obligation to deliver anything other than what they have agreed to.

We know that set three is still at Doncaster and that corrosion etc is not stopping it leaving. Something else is.

I'd also say that I don't think Wabtec are able to deliver this. At best, they might be able to bang some sets out sporadically.

So blame isn't helpful but recognising the issues is. Scotrail have been awful but this is not their fault and when the passengers are faced with an inferior service, moving to the road (they are!) and the reputation of the railway is getting worse (it is!), then it is fair, but tough to blame that on the company that has in in the main, been responsible for it.

Contracts are freely entered by two or more parties. Obligations exist on both sides of a contract.

Saying that neither Abellio nor Scottish Government have any blame for non-delivery is simplistic at best.

The contracting client needs to be sure that the contractor they choose is capable and has capacity to deliver the work required in the timescale required. Called due diligence. Both parties have a duty.

Blaming Wabtec is so easy. But they would have and definitely should have known Wabtec were also committed to X country and GWR work as well.

We also don’t know the full facts. That is the other thing that smells very badly here. If government and Abellio had Wabtec bang to rights they would have told the public so. They clearly are not in a strong position contractually or they would have been posturing. They would not take any flack for Wabtec if they could avoid it.

Anyway none of that gets the trains done any quicker. No sign of any work starting in Kilmarnock either.

What is needed here is some honest communication with the public. Nearly April HST classics still not performing reliably, surely still can’t be staff training?

Short forming will become a major issue very soon when routes get busier at Easter.
 

Wst71Pa2

Member
Joined
1 May 2018
Messages
93
Contracts are freely entered by two or more parties. Obligations exist on both sides of a contract.

Saying that neither Abellio nor Scottish Government have any blame for non-delivery is simplistic at best.

The contracting client needs to be sure that the contractor they choose is capable and has capacity to deliver the work required in the timescale required. Called due diligence. Both parties have a duty.

Blaming Wabtec is so easy. But they would have and definitely should have known Wabtec were also committed to X country and GWR work as well.

We also don’t know the full facts. That is the other thing that smells very badly here. If government and Abellio had Wabtec bang to rights they would have told the public so. They clearly are not in a strong position contractually or they would have been posturing. They would not take any flack for Wabtec if they could avoid it.

Anyway none of that gets the trains done any quicker. No sign of any work starting in Kilmarnock either.

What is needed here is some honest communication with the public. Nearly April HST classics still not performing reliably, surely still can’t be staff training?

Short forming will become a major issue very soon when routes get busier at Easter.

A few things to consider
1. Wabtecs customer is the ROSCO Angel Trains, might be part of why information is not forthcoming
2. Still untrained drivers from over 6 months ago, Constant stream of new start Conductors and Drivers, in progress and no sign of when new start driver basic traction will change from Turbos/Sprinters to HST
 

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
Contracts are freely entered by two or more parties. Obligations exist on both sides of a contract.

Saying that neither Abellio nor Scottish Government have any blame for non-delivery is simplistic at best.

The contracting client needs to be sure that the contractor they choose is capable and has capacity to deliver the work required in the timescale required. Called due diligence. Both parties have a duty.

Blaming Wabtec is so easy. But they would have and definitely should have known Wabtec were also committed to X country and GWR work as well.

We also don’t know the full facts. That is the other thing that smells very badly here. If government and Abellio had Wabtec bang to rights they would have told the public so. They clearly are not in a strong position contractually or they would have been posturing. They would not take any flack for Wabtec if they could avoid it.

Anyway none of that gets the trains done any quicker. No sign of any work starting in Kilmarnock either.

What is needed here is some honest communication with the public. Nearly April HST classics still not performing reliably, surely still can’t be staff training?

Short forming will become a major issue very soon when routes get busier at Easter.


I don't think that is correct. Wabtec should never have entered into a contract that they were incapable of delivering. The stock is leased by Scotrail from Angel trains as said above. No, it is not up to the Scottish Government to assess whether Abellio has done due diligence on Angel Trains doing due diligence on Wabtec. That is nonsense. The whole point of this set up is the Railway industry is meant to have the skills and expertise to deliver this programme. It's not an in-house job.

Nothing the Scottish Government is doing right now, or any politician, is preventing these trains being introduced. The fault is entirely at Wabtec (no that doesn't mean the workforce should be shamed as someone says above and no one is saying that).

Yesterday I saw the GWR coaches about to depart to Edinburgh from Inverness. Seen this set a fair bit on the HML.
 

RLBH

Member
Joined
17 May 2018
Messages
962
Wabtec should never have entered into a contract that they were incapable of delivering.
I think it's hard to conclude that Wabtec knowingly entered into a contract that they couldn't fulfil. There will almost certainly be some flavour of contractual penalties, not to mention disruption to other work and reputational damage. No company inflicts that sort of thing upon itself unless run by complete idiots or moustache-twirling villains, and there's no evidence that Wabtec's management are either.

Discussions behind closed doors between Wabtec, Angel Trains, and Abellio ScotRail will be along the lines of who gave what assurances to whom. I'd be amazed if Wabtec hadn't been instructed to prepare a bid with a certain set of assumptions about the state of the existing rolling stock. It would be almost impossible to assess bids if they were made on differing bases.

For that matter, if a bidder had said 'No, we know they're in worse state, and they'll cost much more to refurbish,' the result would be an uncompetitive bid and potentially disqualification for having information not available to other bidders.

When comparing bids, this assumption isn't so important. All the bidders would experience the same fundamental difficulties. But Abellio would also have been comparing Angel's bid for refurbished HSTs to bids for other types of rolling stock altogether, and that makes the assumption all the more important. The likes of CAF and Bombardier (and possibly even other bidders for the ScotRail franchise) would be keenly interested in the goings-on here.

Whoever settled on that assumption will probably be subject to some very pointed questions. I'd be looking at Angel Trains myself, but it's equally possible someone at Abellio had an agenda to bring HSTs into service in Scotland.
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,597
What I find a little bit surprising is that the extent of the corrosion to the carriages was unknown. I'd have thought that high speed rolling stock would be subject to periodic, rather detailed inspection to make sure things weren't going on out of sight that could compromise structural integrity and so on.
 

Northhighland

Member
Joined
19 Aug 2016
Messages
606
I don't think that is correct. Wabtec should never have entered into a contract that they were incapable of delivering. The stock is leased by Scotrail from Angel trains as said above. No, it is not up to the Scottish Government to assess whether Abellio has done due diligence on Angel Trains doing due diligence on Wabtec. That is nonsense. The whole point of this set up is the Railway industry is meant to have the skills and expertise to deliver this programme. It's not an in-house job.

Nothing the Scottish Government is doing right now, or any politician, is preventing these trains being introduced. The fault is entirely at Wabtec (no that doesn't mean the workforce should be shamed as someone says above and no one is saying that).

Yesterday I saw the GWR coaches about to depart to Edinburgh from Inverness. Seen this set a fair bit on the HML.

It is clear responsibility for running Scotland’s railway lies with government. They put Abiello in place anne agreed the contract strategy. To say they have no responsibility or input is just plain wrong.

We need to know who knew what when. Only then will we know the truth. No point in pushing forward with this if it can’t be delivered.

Doing nothing isn’t the answer.
 

Highlandspring

Established Member
Joined
14 Oct 2017
Messages
2,778
We need to know who knew what when. Only then will we know the truth. No point in pushing forward with this if it can’t be delivered.

Doing nothing isn’t the answer.
This is a forum for railway enthusiasts, it isn’t the Watergate investigation. “We” don’t need to know or do anything.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
Whoever settled on that assumption will probably be subject to some very pointed questions. I'd be looking at Angel Trains myself, but it's equally possible someone at Abellio had an agenda to bring HSTs into service in Scotland.

The HSTs add lost of extra capacity fairly cheaply with the ability to extend easily.
It basically illustrates what capacity is needed for 10 years time when new bi-modes are ordered (after a bit more electrification).
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,354
It is clear responsibility for running Scotland’s railway lies with government. They put Abellio in place and agreed the contract strategy. To say they have no responsibility or input is just plain wrong.

We need to know who knew what when. Only then will we know the truth. No point in pushing forward with this if it can’t be delivered.

Doing nothing isn’t the answer.
It can be delivered just later than planned, still very cheap on a per seat basis...
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,533
Location
Redcar
Okay I think we've wandered off the topic again a bit here. As a reminder this is to discuss the introduction of the HSTs to Scotrail. It is not to discuss why they were chosen and whether they should have been chosen. That discussion can be found here and people are welcome to continue it with any thoughts or comments that they have.

Otherwise please ensure that your posts remain focused on the HSTs that are being introduced, dates of entry, etc. Posts which are not on topic are liable for deletion without further notice (and some of them are quite lengthy so I'm sure you don't want all that hard work to be sent into the electronic abyss ;) )

Thanks,
ainsworth74
 

jingsmonty

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2014
Messages
1,022
Location
Inverness
Personally, I'm happy that HSTs were chosen. They will offer a big upgrade in service & comfort for passengers. Clearly there is more work to be done (quite apart from the whole Wabtec/Coach issue, which has been done to death), but it was always going to be a steep learning curve for us all.

The whole issue with the 'Classics' is that Scotrail are (understandably) probably reluctant to spend anything more than the bare minimum on them, given they're a short term stopgap. We badly need the refurbished coaches ASAP, but analysing the ins & outs of the contract here isn't going to help!

My worry is for the future of HSTs as a whole - they are great trains, but compromised by having slam door coaches & no CET tanks. The refurbishment issues will hardly convince other TOCs to go down the 'HST route', which is a great pity, imho
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,597
My worry is for the future of HSTs as a whole - they are great trains, but compromised by having slam door coaches & no CET tanks. The refurbishment issues will hardly convince other TOCs to go down the 'HST route', which is a great pity, imho

Depends how it goes with the refurbed sets, once they are settled in, as far as reliability and popularity with passengers are concerned. And perhaps subsequent TOCs could benefit from the results of the learning curve that is presumably currently being climbed. Maybe it means that the cost per set is more than what was hoped for with this batch - but still at a point which makes it competitive with new build, and would come with more confidence that it, and timescales, were realistic.
 

Goldromans

Member
Joined
11 Feb 2017
Messages
222
I believe this has already been asked and explained (apologies if so), but would it be possible for ScotRail to take on LNER Mk3’s, as I imagine these are in much better condition? I imagine even if they could it would likely be too late to refurbish them, but could they be used for ‘classic’ sets? Having just been refurbished a couple of years ago, I’m sure passengers would prefer (and be more familiar with) the LNER Mk3’s to the old FGW ones?
 

SHerr

Member
Joined
27 Jul 2018
Messages
37
What I find a little bit surprising is that the extent of the corrosion to the carriages was unknown. I'd have thought that high speed rolling stock would be subject to periodic, rather detailed inspection to make sure things weren't going on out of sight that could compromise structural integrity and so on.

I must admit I have wondered the same, but also are/should there be any obligations on the leasees (ie GWR) to maintain their vehicles in a suitable condition before returning to the Rosco? I lease my car and guarantee that if when I handed it back full of rust and holes I shrugged my shoulders saying ‘sorry it’s been near the sea every day’ then I would be faced with a very large bill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top