hexagon789
Veteran Member
12 seats more, assuming the 170 is a 170/4...That’s why it’s now a 5 car DMU formation as this gives more standard seats than on a 5 car HST.
12 seats more, assuming the 170 is a 170/4...That’s why it’s now a 5 car DMU formation as this gives more standard seats than on a 5 car HST.
During tourist season presumably a 5 car HST has some advantage over a 5 car DMU in terms of luggage and bike space, even if the number of seats is slightly less.
However they do have 6 bookable bike spaces on an HST.The DMUs have a greater number of bike spaces I understand. Although they are looking at increasing the amount on the HSTs - don’t forget the Scottish HSTs don’t have vans.
It's much easier and more cost effective to just use a 170+158, or a pair of 170s which have occasionally worked the service. This doesn't require any platform extension or additional train crew and offers more capacity than an HST.Perhaps the solution is not only use a 5 car HST but to provide another around the time on a Saturday timetable.perhaps 30 minutes before or after the current train. There are single line sections to take into account.
An easy solution would be to run a longer train, but stations would need extended for a one day problem.
This has always been a popular time on Summer Saturday. Even before 170s were introduced many years ago..
There are plenty of HSTs not in use to provide the train.
No real reason why it needs to be a 1010 departure. Could just as easily be a 1020 or 1025 deoarture to avoid any clashes.It's much easier and more cost effective to just use a 170+158, or a pair of 170s which have occasionally worked the service. This doesn't require any platform extension or additional train crew and offers more capacity than an HST.
If you wanted to add a 1010 departure from Inverness you would have a clash with the 1029 arrival from Glasgow Queen Street somewhere between Tomatin and Millburn Jn, and then again with the 1201 arrival from Edinburgh somewhere between Aviemore and Kingussie. These would have to wait back in loops.
How many bike spaces do Scotrail 158s and 170s have, then?The DMUs have a greater number of bike spaces I understand. Although they are looking at increasing the amount on the HSTs - don’t forget the Scottish HSTs don’t have vans.
They would still clash, just in different places. The more trains run the more time has to be added to schedules to cover this.No real reason why it needs to be a 1010 departure. Could just as easily be a 1020 or 1025 deoarture to avoid any clashes.
On single line sections it's not unknown for trains ro cross.They would still clash, just in different places. The more trains run the more time has to be added to schedules to cover this.
The problem is that it’s short formed whenever there’s issues and does on a semi regular occasion leave as a 2 car or 3 car when they need a unit to step up, ironically mostly due to an HST failing. It’s the busiest service that leaves Inverness all morning and has been for years.That’s why it’s now a 5 car DMU formation as this gives more standard seats than on a 5 car HST.
Trains cross in the passing loops all the time, but the ones at the northern end of the Highland Main Line require at least one of the trains to stop.On single line sections it's not unknown for trains ro cross.
Which is not unusual most days. They don't always cross at a station either.Trains cross in the passing loops all the time, but the ones at the northern end of the Highland Main Line require at least one of the trains to stop.
I think that you're missing the point. If it were unusual that would effectively make the entire line from Perth to Inverness one-way, which nobody has suggested because it is so hilarious... To add more trains will result in existing trains taking longer because they have to wait in the loops. Nobody is saying that running another train is impossible, simply that it has too many downsides and the route doesn't have enough people using it to justify them.Which is not unusual most days. They don't always cross at a station either.
The skill is to pass the trainss with minimum amount of delays. Especially when there is late running. .I think that you're missing the point. If it were unusual that would effectively make the entire line from Perth to Inverness one-way, which nobody has suggested because it is so hilarious... To add more trains will result in existing trains taking longer because they have to wait in the loops. Nobody is saying that running another train is impossible, simply that it has too many downsides and the route doesn't have enough people using it to justify them.
As for a station why would that have anything to do with it?
The skill is to pass the trainss with minimum amount of delays. Especially when there is late running. .
Trains wouldn't be delayed, their journey times would just be extended by the need to add time. You can't avoid that without either causing a collision (not an option, obviously) or doing further doubling.The skill is to pass the trainss with minimum amount of delays. Especially when there is late running. .
Extension of at least one loop somewhere between Newtonmore and Inverness so that it's possible for trains to pass while both are moving would be a good start. Obviously the Aviemore and Kingussie station loops do almost fulfil the purpose insofar as all trains must stop there anyway for passengers but it could be much better.Or perhaps to acknowledge that in 2023 in our quest (allegedly) for net zero, a population of the Highlands totalling 235000 people and 9900 square miles of land, should probably be served by more than two pieces of steel rail, 4ft 8 1/2 inches apart.
Unfashionable opinion perhaps, but in the fabled land where we achieve any form of economic growth, presumably the limit of our ambitions for should not be the capacity of a 5 car train, whichever flavour maintenance allow it to be today ....
I believe it's two slots for 170s and four for a 158, the HSTs originally only had two but now have six slots.How many bike spaces do Scotrail 158s and 170s have, then?
I was curious about this move since it was run by ROG, why is it now being moved up to Inverness?The problem is that it’s short formed whenever there’s issues and does on a semi regular occasion leave as a 2 car or 3 car when they need a unit to step up, ironically mostly due to an HST failing. It’s the busiest service that leaves Inverness all morning and has been for years.
In other news, HA12 has moved from Slateford to Inverness after being stored for about a year.
Given so few services have catering at present, it's not currently a major issue I wouldn't have thought. When the provision is lifted in May (or at least that's the intention), many may simply regard a trolley as a bonus rather than expect one given the very limited provision over the last few years.What are the catering arrangements now?
If you're travelling on a 158 +170 service that does have a trolley there will be at least 2 coaches in which anyone wanting even a lukewarm trolley coffee would have preferred to be in a 2+5 HST.
That could be a considerable number of visitors to The Highlands who will go home with an unflattering account of travel with ScotRail.
I did sight a catering trolley on an Inverness HST the other week!What are the catering arrangements now?
If you're travelling on a 158 +170 service that does have a trolley there will be at least 2 coaches in which anyone wanting even a lukewarm trolley coffee would have preferred to be in a 2+5 HST.
That could be a considerable number of visitors to The Highlands who will go home with an unflattering account of travel with ScotRail.
The clansman I think.That 10.50 departure from Inverness, am I right in thinking it's the remnants of what was once the through train to Euston?
I seem to remember a period in the 90s, once the loco hauled services had mostly been taken over by DMUs, when there was a 10 something departure from Inverness (and return trip) that was worked by a special loco hauled set, ex intercity AC mk2s if I remember right, that was longer than the other scotrail services and went from platform 1 or 2.
Seems unfortunate, if it's a known popular service, that they've not managed to diagram it for an HST.
I don't know about remnants of, but the Clansman was traditionally the 1030/1035 off Inverness. It moved to 1100 in 1986 when it was briefly upgraded to a 110mph Trent Valley service, then went into decline.That 10.50 departure from Inverness, am I right in thinking it's the remnants of what was once the through train to Euston?
Most countries in Europe offer nothing or possibly a vending machine on similar length Regional journeys. Catering if provided is predominantly only long-distance InterCity services.I agree it wouldn't look good to a visitor, to find that an Intercity branded 3 or 4 hour journey has no catering whatsoever. Especially if they've changed into that service from another long one, with no time to get a snack or hot drink in between.
Yes there is, but again running with the previous arrangement of one staff member for trolley and buffet.Is there a plan for the buffet bars to reopen in the scotrail HSTs...ever?
In UK terms a similar length of journey with Avanti, LNER or TPE would have a buffet and/or delivery for refreshments. Some would offer a delivery to seated option whilst others would have a trolley. With a seated offering in first class.Whatever might happen in other countries I'd say that in the UK basic catering is a fairly normal expectation on journeys longer than a couple of hours. The journey time from Edinburgh to Inverness is not that much less than from Edinburgh to London.
Meh it’s gotten to the point it’s probably easier (depends what end of the day) to get a lner service to Inverness just because of the catering. it’s annoying that Inverness isn’t great food-wise unless Costa coffee is your cup of teaWhatever might happen in other countries I'd say that in the UK basic catering is a fairly normal expectation on journeys longer than a couple of hours. The journey time from Edinburgh to Inverness is not that much less than from Edinburgh to London.
Seems we have managed to find a 1100 departure South today to run a GBRf charter train.Trains wouldn't be delayed, their journey times would just be extended by the need to add time. You can't avoid that without either causing a collision (not an option, obviously) or doing further doubling.
Extension of at least one loop somewhere between Newtonmore and Inverness so that it's possible for trains to pass while both are moving would be a good start. Obviously the Aviemore and Kingussie station loops do almost fulfil the purpose insofar as all trains must stop there anyway for passengers but it could be much better.
Where's it going?Seems we have managed to find a 1100 departure South today to run a GBRf charter train.
With no need for any extra railway being added.
Coming back from Inverness to Falkirk. Then stabled at Bo'ness for overnight rest.Where's it going?
To be fair, without looking, I'd expect a Charter to have a less optimal path than a service train. So may not be feasible to run a passenger service at that time.Seems we have managed to find a 1100 departure South today to run a GBRf charter train.
With no need for any extra railway being added.
As was said in the post that was replied to. It was not possible to run any more services at that time without major invedtment work On track.To be fair, without looking, I'd expect a Charter to have a less optimal path than a service train. So may not be feasible to run a passenger service at that time.
That said, if the demand warrants it, and I suspect in the height of summer it certainly does, the extra journey time might not that big an issue. Incentivise people to use a slower 11:00 relief with cheap advances, it already happens to an extent with other trains either side of it, as publicly advertised by ScotRail last Summer.