• 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.

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
Evidence would suggest that the service gets worse when HSTs are used. Couple that with the "classics" which put excrement onto the tracks and are very difficult for people with a disability or with a pram.

My other half is doing Inverness to Girvan tonight with a baby and pram. HSTs will make that harder. It's 2019, not 1979.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

scotraildriver

Established Member
Joined
15 Jun 2009
Messages
1,627
I might be wrong here! once the E&G line was fully electrified and running with 385 then wouldnt this have created a surplus of 170’s which could have been used to strengthen services instead of giving them to Northern.
That's exactly what First and National Express proposed in their franchise bids. Transport Scotland much preferred Abellios HST offering.......
 

cf111

Established Member
Joined
13 Nov 2012
Messages
1,346
That's exactly what First and National Express proposed in their franchise bids. Transport Scotland much preferred Abellios HST offering.......
I'm probably in the minority here because I like the 170s, I don't even mind the door placement! The one huge gripe I've always had is the lack of luggage space. They are a bit short for demand now but 6 cars on most services would have been fine.

I was enthused by the HST plan when the franchise was announced but I did have reservations because of the age of the coaching stock.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
I'm probably in the minority here because I like the 170s, I don't even mind the door placement! The one huge gripe I've always had is the lack of luggage space. They are a bit short for demand now but 6 cars on most services would have been fine.

I was enthused by the HST plan when the franchise was announced but I did have reservations because of the age of the coaching stock.

Likewise, I think refurbished, longer 170s would have been absolutely fine, and the HST idea was nuts. The 170s have comfortable seats and decent layouts, and I've done plenty of long journeys on them with no complaints at all.
 

GrimShady

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
It's the piss poor implementation and management of this project that's the issue. Other operators aren't having the same issues.
 
Last edited:

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
That implies they are getting a PRM exemption and the classics will continue into 2020 then?
It does, and it runs contrary to what a lot of staff were saying six or seven weeks ago.

There can't be enough 158s and 170s to sustain the service without using classics.

At least the story made the top of BBC Scotland news online - but, as ever, no attempt to properly question why we find ourselves in this situation.
 

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
Aye. I wonder what Monday will bring when my family are travelling back from Girvan? Let me guess - multiple units from BR days by any chance? The ancient HSTs with their poor access for prams and unreliability are yesterday's train.
 

cf111

Established Member
Joined
13 Nov 2012
Messages
1,346
Aye. I wonder what Monday will bring when my family are travelling back from Girvan? Let me guess - multiple units from BR days by any chance? The ancient HSTs with their poor access for prams and unreliability are yesterday's train.

I must admit that I did not appreciate how high the step up/down is on the mk3 coaches until I've had cause to use such a contraption. Of course I've always realised that it was there but it just never really registered before.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,165
Aye. I wonder what Monday will bring when my family are travelling back from Girvan? Let me guess - multiple units from BR days by any chance? The ancient HSTs with their poor access for prams and unreliability are yesterday's train.
I think you’re actually enjoying this. You never wanted HSTs in the first place, did you?
 

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
No not at all. My main concern is the service and HSTs are not good enough. I was just speaking to my other half there about travel back on Sunday. 156 from Girvan to Glasgow then uncertain from that point on. On Monday my 10 year old was put on a bus from Perth as the 158 was required elsewhere. These and many other issues are the direct cause of the failed HST programme.

I did want HSTs as they are much nicer than a 170. However, I can now see that they are not fit for purpose and should probably be scrapped. Sorry if that offends you but we are talking about machines here and affection for a machine is irrelevant.

The best defence of the HST with Scotrail would be for it to work, but it doesn't.
 

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
Ok. BR to to Ayr then a better unit north to Glasgow. From that point onwards it could be anything and with reservations and prams involved, it would be better to admit failure and get new stock.
 

Maxfly

Member
Joined
9 Mar 2010
Messages
269
Location
Scotland
No not at all. My main concern is the service and HSTs are not good enough. I was just speaking to my other half there about travel back on Sunday. 156 from Girvan to Glasgow then uncertain from that point on. On Monday my 10 year old was put on a bus from Perth as the 158 was required elsewhere. These and many other issues are the direct cause of the failed HST programme.

I did want HSTs as they are much nicer than a 170. However, I can now see that they are not fit for purpose and should probably be scrapped. Sorry if that offends you but we are talking about machines here and affection for a machine is irrelevant.

The best defence of the HST with Scotrail would be for it to work, but it doesn't.

You speak like the HST's are Scotrails only fleet they are having issues with?
As others have noted HST's being operated by other TOC's are not giving anything like the same issues, surely if the HST is as clapped out as you say the reliability would be the same across all operators no?
My initial feeling had been Watec were the main culprits in this sorry tale but as time goes on this has changed..
I doubt anyone is offended by your viewpoint, on a simple look at how things are, it is correct but when you try and add practical thinking into the debacle, then it does appear very basic tbh.
The other thought is that yes the frequent issues are a bit groundhog day but daily repetition of the same viewpoint is too. No-one is asking you to change your mind but your postings don't contain anything new or insightful to add to the existing conversation.
 

GrimShady

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2016
Messages
1,740
No not at all. My main concern is the service and HSTs are not good enough. I was just speaking to my other half there about travel back on Sunday. 156 from Girvan to Glasgow then uncertain from that point on. On Monday my 10 year old was put on a bus from Perth as the 158 was required elsewhere. These and many other issues are the direct cause of the failed HST programme.

I did want HSTs as they are much nicer than a 170. However, I can now see that they are not fit for purpose and should probably be scrapped. Sorry if that offends you but we are talking about machines here and affection for a machine is irrelevant.

The best defence of the HST with Scotrail would be for it to work, but it doesn't.

I do sympathise Highland37, thankfully I don't have to use the HML ScotRail services much but the HSTs are still steady and reliable performers with LNER and EMT. I've never had any issues when traveling on them with the exception of some dodgy lighting in a MkIII once (was was great actually, I could watch the sun dip across the country as it turned into late evening). Remember the bad weather of 2018 where the LNER HSTs were the only ones that could handle the HML in the conditions? ScotRail just gave up...surprise, surprise.
 

Highland37

Established Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
1,259
You speak like the HST's are Scotrails only fleet they are having issues with?
As others have noted HST's being operated by other TOC's are not giving anything like the same issues, surely if the HST is as clapped out as you say the reliability would be the same across all operators no?
My initial feeling had been Watec were the main culprits in this sorry tale but as time goes on this has changed..
I doubt anyone is offended by your viewpoint, on a simple look at how things are, it is correct but when you try and add practical thinking into the debacle, then it does appear very basic tbh.
The other thought is that yes the frequent issues are a bit groundhog day but daily repetition of the same viewpoint is too. No-one is asking you to change your mind but your postings don't contain anything new or insightful to add to the existing conversation.

I am trying to explain my point hence my reply to you and post. I have never said Scotrail's other fleets do not have issues. Why do you suggest that.

One distinction I would make though is that the other fleets are just that - a fleet. Wabtec have been unable to provide a fleet to date and probably never will. I asked further up how many sets are now with Wabtec for refurb. No one knows I guess but it's not looking good. The fleet as planned does not exist.

I'd also ask how many other fleets have been delivered to about 25% of total vehicles promised and of that 25%, what other fleet shows the level of failure to carry out diagrams? I am not suggesting Scotrail's maintenance is great. Clearly it isn't but we can't ignore the facts.
 

Killingworth

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2018
Messages
4,813
Location
Sheffield
I am trying to explain my point hence my reply to you and post. I have never said Scotrail's other fleets do not have issues. Why do you suggest that.

One distinction I would make though is that the other fleets are just that - a fleet. Wabtec have been unable to provide a fleet to date and probably never will. I asked further up how many sets are now with Wabtec for refurb. No one knows I guess but it's not looking good. The fleet as planned does not exist.

I'd also ask how many other fleets have been delivered to about 25% of total vehicles promised and of that 25%, what other fleet shows the level of failure to carry out diagrams? I am not suggesting Scotrail's maintenance is great. Clearly it isn't but we can't ignore the facts.

The HSTs are 40 years old, that's fact.

They seem to operate well enough on LNER and EMR (unrefurbished) and on XC and GWR refurbished, or are there reports somewhere to say they're not?

Yes, Wabtec are guilty of over optimism in what they promised on deliveries and on some workmanship. However the other operators have been operating this stock for about - 40 years. The inference from this is that the experience passed down has kept units going because they were known and understood - a bit like your cherished MGB or Morris Minor that's fairly basic, is simple enough to fix, but you need to understand corrosion and old wiring!
 

XC90

Member
Joined
4 Jun 2015
Messages
229
The TS consultation showed passengers wanted HSTs. A bit rich of them to complain now they are here.
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,766
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
The TS consultation showed passengers wanted HSTs. A bit rich of them to complain now they are here.
1: The significant and long-term disruption (short-forming, overcrowding, cancellations) has been down to the fact that the HSTs are not here in the numbers that are needed and were promised. Thus, to say that anyone complaining about HSTs who thought "oh, it would be nice to have these proper, InterCity trains" is being "a bit rich" misses the point entirely.

2: HSTs will have to be taken out of service eventually (and soon in the scheme of things). They're over 40 years old, you're not going to get more than another 10-15 years use max. So, what do we replace them with?
 

Paul Kerr

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2017
Messages
143
Likewise, I think refurbished, longer 170s would have been absolutely fine, and the HST idea was nuts. The 170s have comfortable seats and decent layouts, and I've done plenty of long journeys on them with no complaints at all.

How would you refurbish them in practice? Leaving the issues with the carriage door layout and the underfloor engines aside (which I know we have disagreed on in the past) to make a continuous train of 5 cars you would either need to order more centre cars (probably not possible now as it's a 20+ year old design) or hack apart 3 3-car sets to create one 5-car unit, which means you have created 6 surplus driving cars for every refurbished unit you've created. You could use those to create 2 car units but where would they find use in Scotland? Also they are woefully short of power on steeply graded lines. A 170 can barely reach 40mph on Borthwick Bank on the borders line (admittedly from a standing start at Gorebridge); from a running start and flat out they can barely top 50mph on the climbs to Drummochter or Slochd. HGVs can pass them on the parallel A9. So you would be looking at new engines as well to meet the spec of the reduced journey times the franchise had to meet, with all the challenges of abating the additional noise that come from that.

The 170 was an attempt at a one size fits all solution. It was a brave attempt, and they were a big step up from 158's on the E+G, but for non-commuter trains they don't work well. For accountants involved in the procurement process I'm sure the numbers look good on paper from having a standard fleet; but the commuter and long distance markets are different and should be treated as such. Whether you agree with the HST or not, longer 170's would not have met the franchise spec, so the franchise bidders who proposed them were quite rightly not selected. Why not ask fare-paying passengers what they want? A ram-packed 170 with people standing in the vestibules for over half of their journey surely is not.
 
Last edited:

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
The TS consultation showed passengers wanted HSTs. A bit rich of them to complain now they are here.
I could go with that silly point if the equally silly question asked in the consultation had been 'Do you want a train just like the comfortable ones successfully operated by East Coast, but under Scotrail will turn out to be rusting unreliable basket cases', and the silly consultees said 'yes please'.
 

Mingulay

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2018
Messages
463
The TS consultation showed passengers wanted HSTs. A bit rich of them to complain now they are here.

With respect that’s not a valid point. If the question was , do you want an HST intercity service with more capacity the answer was clearly going to be yes.

The supposition in that question is it would be reliable robust and on time

if they had posed the question do you want 40 year old trains that will be delivered late. Most will be unrefurbished and both will be unreliable and you will get short formed trains in substitution for the foreseeable.
I would suggest the response to consultation would be wholly different

TS could not run a bath and so it’s hardly surprising yet again a transport project descends into farce.

the bbc report was a whitewash of the facts and no drilling down on the solution. Poor journalism.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
The TS consultation showed passengers wanted HSTs. A bit rich of them to complain now they are here.

No. It showed they wanted a similar level of facilities to HSTs. And they're not here! That's the problem!
 
Last edited:

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
There were plans drawn up some time ago for refurbished four-car 170s for main line services in Scotland, which could be done by reducing some sets for other services to two cars. They had vestibule doors, a single first class area and buffets. I'd say that was fine.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
But would it reduce journey times?

Possibly not, but at least it would actually show up, and be less likely to break down.

I think ScotRail really do need to pull the plug on this flawed project now. Order some suitable new stock, and cobble together something as reliable as possible in the short term until it arrives.

There's a reason GWR withdrew all their HSTs - they're completely life-expired.
 

toot toot

Member
Joined
25 Aug 2011
Messages
47
How would you refurbish them in practice? Leaving the issues with the carriage door layout and the underfloor engines aside (which I know we have disagreed on in the past) to make a continuous train of 5 cars you would either need to order more centre cars (probably not possible now as it's a 20+ year old design) or hack apart 4 3-car sets to create one 5-car unit, which means you have created 8 surplus driving cars for every refurbished unit you've created. Also they are woefully short of power on steeply graded lines. A 170 can barely reach 40mph on Borthwick Bank on the borders line (admittedly from a standing start at Gorebridge); from a running start and flat out they can barely top 50mph on the climbs to Drummochter or Slochd. HGVs can pass them on the parallel A9. So you would be looking at new engines as well to meet the spec of the reduced journey times the franchise had to meet, with all the challenges of abating the additional noise that come from that.

The 170 was an attempt at a one size fits all solution. It was a brave attempt, and they were a big step up from 158's on the E+G, but for non-commuter trains they don't work well. For accountants involved in the procurement process I'm sure the numbers look good on paper from having a standard fleet; but the commuter and long distance markets are different and should be treated as such. Whether you agree with the HST or not, longer 170's would not have met the franchise spec, so the franchise bidders who proposed them were quite rightly not selected. Why not ask fare-paying passengers what they want? A ram-packed 170 with people standing in the vestibules for over half of their journey surely is not.
On your point of hacking apart 3
How would you refurbish them in practice? Leaving the issues with the carriage door layout and the underfloor engines aside (which I know we have disagreed on in the past) to make a continuous train of 5 cars you would either need to order more centre cars (probably not possible now as it's a 20+ year old design) or hack apart 4 3-car sets to create one 5-car unit, which means you have created 8 surplus driving cars for every refurbished unit you've created. Also they are woefully short of power on steeply graded lines. A 170 can barely reach 40mph on Borthwick Bank on the borders line (admittedly from a standing start at Gorebridge); from a running start and flat out they can barely top 50mph on the climbs to Drummochter or Slochd. HGVs can pass them on the parallel A9. So you would be looking at new engines as well to meet the spec of the reduced journey times the franchise had to meet, with all the challenges of abating the additional noise that come from that.

The 170 was an attempt at a one size fits all solution. It was a brave attempt, and they were a big step up from 158's on the E+G, but for non-commuter trains they don't work well. For accountants involved in the procurement process I'm sure the numbers look good on paper from having a standard fleet; but the commuter and long distance markets are different and should be treated as such. Whether you agree with the HST or not, longer 170's would not have met the franchise spec, so the franchise bidders who proposed them were quite rightly not selected. Why not ask fare-paying passengers what they want? A ram-packed 170 with people standing in the vestibules for over half of their journey surely is not.
To make a 5 car 170 you would only be adding 2 of the middle coaches from 2 sets so hacking 2 sets apart to add 2 coaches to an existing 3 car unit. The remaining 2 driving cars could be coupled and used as 2 car 170’s.
 

Paul Kerr

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2017
Messages
143
I am trying to explain my point hence my reply to you and post. I have never said Scotrail's other fleets do not have issues. Why do you suggest that.

One distinction I would make though is that the other fleets are just that - a fleet. Wabtec have been unable to provide a fleet to date and probably never will. I asked further up how many sets are now with Wabtec for refurb. No one knows I guess but it's not looking good. The fleet as planned does not exist.

I'd also ask how many other fleets have been delivered to about 25% of total vehicles promised and of that 25%, what other fleet shows the level of failure to carry out diagrams? I am not suggesting Scotrail's maintenance is great. Clearly it isn't but we can't ignore the facts.

I know it's easy for me as no I longer live in the UK and no longer travel on Scotland's railways regularly like you obviously do, and the delays and frustration must be very frustrating for regular users on the HML. As has been pointed out elsewhere though, had they gone with new stock, based on the issues and delays we've seen with the Mk5's, IETs, Class 385's, Stadlers etc. we would likely be in the same boat. I'm not sure why we have the issues commissioning new stock in this country, but every new train brought in seems to be beset by teething problems for many months after they are introduced. I know it's very easy for me to say this watching this saga from afar but given more time this can be turned around. The HST is still running well elsewhere and as more sets are delivered it can still be a success in Scotland as well. Journalists and the public have remarked on how the refurbs are a step up from previous stock; we just need to get more of them finished and running. Now that the castle and XC conversions are drawing to a close, that should help the rate of production.

Something really smells off with the way the HST introduction has gone in Scotland though. The power car traction motor issues aside, it does smack me as very odd that the refurbished castle and XC HST introduction programs seem to be going well and LNER/MML can keep their trains going effectively but ScotRail is struggling so badly. The core of the power cars (the MTU engines) are 10-15 years old. I just wonder if organizational issues are contributing to this. From articles I see like the one posted by the BBC yesterday on the retention toilet delays, the relationship between the managers and the train and maintenance crews seems to be very much "us versus them" on both sides. I also saw some very colourful comments from Mike Cash on the HSTs when there was an incident with an engine smoking at Queen St a few months back. I can't comment on why the culture is off or who/what is driving it (management, unions or a combination of both), but with a toxic environment like that definitely doesn't help, and it wouldn't matter what new stock we had running on the railway (NOVA Mk5, IET, Voyagers); there would still be a major struggle keeping things running if the management and unions can't work together to address the operational issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top