Scotrail Franchise - Abellio

[northwichcat]

I dread to think what language they would use to describe 150s and Pacers if they call a 170 'horrible'.

I'd certainly be happy if the 142s/150s and occasional 156s on my local line are replaced by 170s, subject to no loss of seats.

 

[Aictos]

Nothing wrong with Class 170s being used on Edinburgh/Glasgow to Inverness/Aberdeen other then longer trains being needed on specific services, they are clean, modern and can be quite comfortable.

Don't get me wrong, HSTs will be nice but I feel the existing stock is more then acceptable for the line especially as there are other routes with less desirable rolling stock that have to put up and shut up so why is Scotland any different?

They should be grateful for what they've got after all, it could be a lot worse.

 

[Chrism20]

Nothing wrong with Class 170s being used on Edinburgh/Glasgow to Inverness/Aberdeen other then longer trains being needed on specific services, they are clean, modern and can be quite comfortable.

Don't get me wrong, HSTs will be nice but I feel the existing stock is more then acceptable for the line especially as there are other routes with less desirable rolling stock that have to put up and shut up so why is Scotland any different?

They should be grateful for what they've got after all, it could be a lot worse.

You should try sitting on one for two and a half hours in the middle of January then both sets of doors swing open at Aviemore and a hurricane belts through the carriage.

They are fine for Edinburgh - Glasgow etc but for 150 minute plus journeys they do feel very cramped.

Why is Scotland different? Others may disagree but Scotrail being devolved to Holyrood was the best thing that ever happened to Scotrail. The further away the DFT are from it the better.

 

[SkinnyDave]

Will the Hitachi AT200s be doing the GQS to Falkirk Grahamston shuttles when wires go up?

 

[chris11256]

You should try sitting on one for two and a half hours in the middle of January then both sets of doors swing open at Aviemore and a hurricane belts through the carriage.

They are fine for Edinburgh - Glasgow etc but for 150 minute plus journeys they do feel very cramped.

Why is Scotland different? Others may disagree but Scotrail being devolved to Holyrood was the best thing that ever happened to Scotrail. The further away the DFT are from it the better.

All politicians are inept, doesn't matter whether they're in Hollyrood, Westminster or Cardiff.

170's are fine units, just not as well suited to very long journeys.

 

[Class 170101]

You should try sitting on one for two and a half hours in the middle of January then both sets of doors swing open at Aviemore and a hurricane belts through the carriage.

It is possible to fit internal doors to Class 170s to keep the warmth in and the cold out. See below as fitted to Scotrail 170s.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=C...F%2Fwww.flickr.com%2Fgroups%2Femu%2F;1024;685

 

[Chrism20]

All politicians are inept, doesn't matter whether they're in Hollyrood, Westminster or Cardiff.

170's are fine units, just not as well suited to very long journeys.

Maybe not them all but definitely well over 90% of them that's for sure.

Yes on short runs (up to 90 or so mins) you will never hear me complain about them at all.

 

[Butts]

Will the Hitachi AT200s be doing the GQS to Falkirk Grahamston shuttles when wires go up?

I certainly hope so as a regular user of the above route.

 

[Aictos]

You should try sitting on one for two and a half hours in the middle of January then both sets of doors swing open at Aviemore and a hurricane belts through the carriage.

They are fine for Edinburgh - Glasgow etc but for 150 minute plus journeys they do feel very cramped.

Why is Scotland different? Others may disagree but Scotrail being devolved to Holyrood was the best thing that ever happened to Scotrail. The further away the DFT are from it the better.

Think of it this way, you could have Pacers instead - remember there will always been a route worse off then your one.

 

[Chrism20]

Think of it this way, you could have Pacers instead - remember there will always been a route worse off then your one.

Eh no we won't because the Scottish Government had the commonsense to write into the ITT "No pacers". Another reason it's better off as far away from the DFT as possible. There has been constant investment in Scotrail and the infrastructure over the last decade and before that as they realise that it is needed and it is successful in taking people off the roads. Rather than telling us we should be thankful we've got what we have there are parts of Northern and Middle England that should be banging down the doors of the DFT and government telling them to adopt that approach instead of slapping a bandaid on a forty year old DMU and hoping it lasts another twenty years.

I agree there are worse off routes and there is very little wrong with the 170s on commuter runs. If the doors were at the end of the carriages and the legroom slightly better (I am no way tall at 5'9") and it was slightly more comfortable I'd say what's the point in changing them.

 

[ADRboy]

^^

Transport Scotland seem to be head and shoulders above the DfT.

 

[northwichcat]

Eh no we won't because the Scottish Government had the commonsense to write into the ITT "No pacers".

Actually they specified properly bogied stock so not only does it exclude Pacers but excludes any type of modern Pacer being created for the Scotrail franchise.

The wording of their toilet requirements excludes Voyagers without modifications being used by Scotrail.

 

[marks87]

Think of it this way, you could have Pacers instead - remember there will always been a route worse off then your one.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Edinburgh/Glasgow - Aberdeen/Inverness are inter-city routes. How do you think people would react if (e.g.) Kings Cross-Leeds (a journey shorter than Edinburgh-Aberdeen) was replaced with EMUs...or as you suggest Pacers?

 

[khib70]

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Edinburgh/Glasgow - Aberdeen/Inverness are inter-city routes. How do you think people would react if (e.g.) Kings Cross-Leeds (a journey shorter than Edinburgh-Aberdeen) was replaced with EMUs...or as you suggest Pacers?

Well said. It's about time someone knocked this "you could have had Pacers" nonsense on the head. Nobody should have Pacers. That doesn't and never will, make 170's suitable stock for two hour intercity journeys. (although given the choice I'd take one over a 185 any day of the week)

 

[northwichcat]

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Edinburgh/Glasgow - Aberdeen/Inverness are inter-city routes. How do you think people would react if (e.g.) Kings Cross-Leeds (a journey shorter than Edinburgh-Aberdeen) was replaced with EMUs...or as you suggest Pacers?

170s have been used on Liverpool-Norwich (over 5 hours) in the past and most people didn't consider replacing 170s with 158s an 'upgrade' to more suitable stock.

 

[NotATrainspott]

170s have been used on Liverpool-Norwich (over 5 hours) in the past and most people didn't consider replacing 170s with 158s an 'upgrade' to more suitable stock.

How many people actually use that route over the full length? The Glasgow/Edinburgh to Aberdeen/Inverness routes aren't a series of small regional routes strung together into a single diagram, they are a proper set of InterCity routes from one Scottish city to another with most people using them that way.

For good or bad, the SNP believe that Scotland isn't a region of a country but a country in its own right. Everything they do in government is tuned towards that goal, and appreciating that Aberdeen, Inverness, Perth and Dundee are cities in Scotland as much as Edinburgh or Glasgow are (where in the UK sense, they are little more than towns) and so deserve their own InterCity standard of transport is one of them. The people of Scotland seem to appreciate that aspect of their governance, even if they don't actually agree that Scotland should be an independent state, which is why they are doing so spectacularly well and will do so spectacularly well until one of the other parties understands the same thing.

There aren't actually a vast number of routes that Pacers would actually be useful on in Scotland. We don't have the same sort of lines that necessitated them in England, as there are only really electric suburban in Glasgow and the Central Belt, diesel inter-regional 90-100mph lines and rural lines like the WHL that are just too rural for Pacers to function properly.

 

[northwichcat]

How many people actually use that route over the full length? The Glasgow/Edinburgh to Aberdeen/Inverness routes aren't a series of small regional routes strung together into a single diagram, they are a proper set of InterCity routes from one Scottish city to another with most people using them that way.

I don't really see your point. Liverpool-Norwich serves a number of cities as intermediate calls: Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham, Peterborough - as well as some large towns without city status like Warrington and Stockport. A journey like Liverpool to Sheffield is similar to Glasgow to Dundee even if it's not end-to-end. Are you trying to say the majority of people who board Aberdeen services at Glasgow stay on until Aberdeen?

Remember that Scotrail chose to order 170s. They could have ordered 175s or 180s instead but chose not to. On the other hand 350s were forced on to TPE for Intercity style services to Glasgow/Edinburgh.

 

[Photohunter71]

DMU's for short dashes here and there are no problem,but just bite the bullet and get 68's and some new coaching stock with some form of DBSO or DVT. (Now wait for the DMU whingers having a pop!)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't overly care what they get, but they need to get something.

 

[tbtc]

Rather than telling us we should be thankful we've got what we have there are parts of Northern and Middle England that should be banging down the doors of the DFT and government telling them to adopt that approach instead of slapping a bandaid on a forty year old DMU and hoping it lasts another twenty years

Compared to the approach in Scotland of "slapping a bandaid on a 1970s HST and hoping it lasts another twenty years" and "slapping a bandaid on a 1960s Class 73 and hoping it lasts another twenty years"?

(not sure which 1973 EMUs you are reffering to by the way - the 319s etc being cascaded around England are a good bit younger than that)

Remember that Scotrail chose to order 170s. They could have ordered 175s or 180s instead but chose not to

Given that no 175s or 180s existed when National Express were ordering 170s for ScotRail, I don't think that you can claim much by this (they also didn't order 185s or Voyagers...).

Once they started ordering new DMUs, it made sense to continue ordering more of the same.

It is possible to fit internal doors to Class 170s to keep the warmth in and the cold out. See below as fitted to Scotrail 170s.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=C...F%2Fwww.flickr.com%2Fgroups%2Femu%2F;1024;685

Good point.

The idea that passengers in a 170 are being blown about by leaving the doors wide open at Aviemore for half an hour in the middle of hurricaine season is daft.

Wow. Those regulars on here who take note of who says what know that I strongly object to stock such as the 170s, with wide 1/3, 2/3 doors, being used on long-distance (semi)fast services, but I dread to think what language they would use to describe 150s and Pacers if they call a 170 'horrible'.

They don't complain about the doors though, do they?

There's talk about "lack of leg room, badly designed seats, limited luggage space, and cramped toilets", but then they also complain about the 156s (which have end doors), so it seems that they are more bothered about the quality of seats than any fascination with where the doors are.

TBH, it's no great surprise that anyone with free time to travel would select the eight coach train to Inverness/Aberdeen over the three coach one, but that doesn't mean it's just because of the position of the doors.

 

[northwichcat]

Given that no 175s or 180s existed when National Express were ordering 170s for ScotRail, I don't think that you can claim much by this (they also didn't order 185s or Voyagers...).

Once they started ordering new DMUs, it made sense to continue ordering more of the same.

The oldest Scotrail 170 was built in 1999, the first 175 was built in 1999 and I'm sure Alstom had a design before they started building them so I'm not sure why you're arguing I can't say they chose 170s over 175s.

 

[ScotTrains]

Whenever I travel between Glasgow and Aberdeen I try to go via Edinburgh so I can travel First class on an East Coast HST. Their service is so much better- complimentary cooked breakfast, afternoon tea or cooked dinner with alcohol, AND it's cheaper! Travelling with scotrail all I get is one small (yes smaller than standard class) cup of coffee and a little biscuit. FTPE is not much better, I had to pay for a sandwitch when I travelled first class between MIA and GLC this summer at leaving at 1700. Their new trains are rubbish for first class passengers- first class is in the middle of train with standard class people always coming in, no wifi either, seats not that comfortable, no complimentary food not even a sandwitch (pretzels and a biscuit isn't good enough on a 3hr journey leaving at 1700). Personally I'm glad First group are loosing franchise after franchise. Really looking forward to scotrails refurbished HST's with a buffet coach!

 

[Chrism20]

Compared to the approach in Scotland of "slapping a bandaid on a 1970s HST and hoping it lasts another twenty years" and "slapping a bandaid on a 1960s Class 73 and hoping it lasts another twenty years"?

I don't particuarly agree with using HSTs either. Time will tell with that one BUT given their past record which is one of success we have to assume that they have done their homework. I have also never heard of an HST being in the same state as a pacer.


And I stand corrected - 30 year old not 40.

sure which 1973 EMUs you are reffering to by the way - the 319s etc being cascaded around England are a good bit younger than that

Who mentioned EMUs?

Given that no 175s or 180s existed when National Express were ordering 170s for ScotRail, I don't think that you can claim much by this (they also didn't order 185s or Voyagers...).

Not true! They may not have been in service but they were definitely well on the way.

Once they started ordering new DMUs, it made sense to continue ordering more of the same.

True, IIRC Mary Dixon/Grant said the biggest regret with them was the doors and lack of walk through between sets.

The idea that passengers in a 170 are being blown about by leaving the doors wide open at Aviemore for half an hour in the middle of hurricaine season is daft.

It is not particularly comfortable when settled to be blasted with cold air. I did not mention thirty minutes or people being blown about.

in beginning to wonder why I said anything to start with

 

[IanM]

The oldest Scotrail 170 was built in 1999, the first 175 was built in 1999 and I'm sure Alstom had a design before they started building them so I'm not sure why you're arguing I can't say they chose 170s over 175s.

One key difference is that the Alstom units (175 and 180) have 110v control systems, whereas Bombardier chose to give 170 a 24v system. That gave 170 the ability to be backwards compatible with 156 and 158 which obviosuly the Alstom products couldn't offer. With hindsight, Bombardier got that very right.

 

[Rhydgaled]

170s have been used on Liverpool-Norwich (over 5 hours) in the past and most people didn't consider replacing 170s with 158s an 'upgrade' to more suitable stock.

Really? And if so why?

They don't complain about the doors though, do they?

There's talk about "lack of leg room, badly designed seats, limited luggage space, and cramped toilets", but then they also complain about the 156s (which have end doors), so it seems that they are more bothered about the quality of seats than any fascination with where the doors are.

They might not complain about the doors, but that doesn't mean the doors aren't a contibuting factor. Legroom at least I would think should be easier to provide with narrower doors at the ends than wider ones breaking up the seating area.

True, IIRC Mary Dixon/Grant said the biggest regret with them was the doors and lack of walk through between sets.

It is not particularly comfortable when settled to be blasted with cold air. I did not mention thirty minutes or people being blown about.

Do they only complain about the doors due to the cold, or do I have some agreement that their position compromises the interior layout? Agree that UEGs (Unit End Gangways) are very useful too when dealing with short sets.

 

[northwichcat]

Really? And if so why?

It was a backward step as 170s had replaced 158s on some services. At the time the 158s hadn't been refurbished so the condition of the 170 was much better. Also the 170s sometimes operated in 5 car formation. The 158s still lack PIS, while some people don't like it, it doesn't mean other people don't find it useful.

 

[Altnabreac]

It is possible to fit internal doors to Class 170s to keep the warmth in and the cold out. See below as fitted to Scotrail 170s.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=C...F%2Fwww.flickr.com%2Fgroups%2Femu%2F;1024;685

Indeed the ITT acknowledged this and specifically stated that the Intercity Stock requirement could be met by refurbished 170s but not in their current condition.

The tender required provision of passenger accommodation separated from external doors, bigger seat pitch and more luggage / cycle space.

All this could be achieved by an (expensive) refurbishment of 170s.

The tender also incentivised (but didn't require) stock with faster acceleration than a 170. It was expected that Voyagers might be offered hence the financial incentives in the ITT to cover the additional lease costs over 170s.

Where Abellio were clever was in sourcing short formation HSTs they hit the targets of higher quality passenger accommodation and faster journey times at (presumably) lower lease costs.

 

[185]

Potentially unrelated, but First Transpennine "blamed" the change of franchise for the loss of catering staff based at Glasgow, after their premesis, a tiny room, was reclaimed by its rightful owner... Scotrail.

Numerous redundancies at Skytrac Catering Limited as a result, I've seen the (quite pathetic) notice that advised staff their jobs will go, authorised by Procurement Manager Beverly Gordon.

 

[Blindtraveler]

So no catering on early and late turns out of Glasgow then? Or will Edinburgh Crews be taxied? Maybe forum member
Scotsman
knows?

 

[Chrism20]

So no catering on early and late turns out of Glasgow then? Or will Edinburgh Crews be taxied? Maybe forum member
Scotsman
knows?

IIRC it is in the contract for TPE that catering must be provided on the Scottish services.