ScotRail HST - Alternative Provision

[GrimShady]

I am too young to remember the HSTs heyday so it is amusing to see members of the site glorify them. I am sure plenty of people didn't like them when they where introduced and didn't think they were real trains because they have power cars not a locomotive etc etc. They are very comfortable but that is not the only metric that matters. They are awful on fuel efficiency, seating density (across whole length of train including power cars) and reliability compared to an 802.

Plenty of people didn't like them but the comfort level was there which people do care about, not to be found on most modern builds. Fuel efficiency and seat density is the concern of TOCs who don't really give a toss about your comfort, I couldn't care less if it costs them a bit more on fuel...sods law.

802s are the epitome of modern trains design, cheap and basic fittings, ridiculously rough riding with the bare minimum in creature comforts which they can pass off as "ergonomic/modern" or any other hip buzz word. Trains designed purely around the TOC and not the customer. They have still to prove themselves worthy of being 43s or 91s successor mechanically.

The current fit out of 385s or 800s is tolerable for an hour.....that's all.

 

[Journeyman]

802s are the epitome of modern trains design, cheap and basic fittings, ridiculously rough riding with the bare minimum in creature comforts which they can pass off as "ergonomic/modern" or any other hip buzz word. Trains designed purely around the TOC and not the customer. They have still to prove themselves worthy of being 43s or 91s successor mechanically.

The current fit out of 385s or 800s is tolerable for an hour.....that's all.

The 385s and 800s are designed for different duties. But anyway, I consider the 800s to be very good trains and superior to the HST in just about every way. And I do long journeys on then regularly.

 

[GrimShady]

A man can dream...
(thanks to rdlover777 for his excellent 755 drawings as a template btw)

They do look good mate!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The current fit out of 385s or 800s is tolerable for an hour.....that's all.

385s are only designed for an hour. They are an interurban EMU - comparable to a Class 350 and to me they have a similar level of comfort. Both have awful First Class, though - in both cases Standard is to me more comfortable.

80x have awful seats (Fainsa Sophia), but if you fit something decent for a long distance journey (Grammer IC3000, FISA LEAN) then there's nothing really wrong with the train itself (other than the accessibility issue which really should move us towards low floor). I don't agree regarding the ride, I think it's decent enough. Or maybe CAF could do a diesel version of the TPE EMUs which look excellent.

Having said that about the Sophia, a thicker base cushion would solve the issues with them. The only reason I really dislike them is that after not very long you can feel the frame through the base, and the headrest is a bit low down (the slightly higher version used in 1st on Thameslink solves that, too).

 

[GrimShady]

The 385s and 800s are designed for different duties. But anyway, I consider the 800s to be very good trains and superior to the HST in just about every way. And I do long journeys on then regularly.

Ones a commuter the other is a high speed commuter.

Funny that seen as a HST still out performs 800 diesels, they can't even reach 125 off the wires! How can you honestly prefer the antiseptic Ryan Air style no frills Hitachi rubbish compared to the Mallard/GWR FC or infact practically another IC environment?

They are trash on so many levels, perfect train for the accountant and greedy TOCs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ones a commuter the other is a high speed commuter.

To be fair, most of GWR is now basically a semifast outersuburban commuter service in its character. The Westcountry services are rather different, but using the same stock was just easier. And TBH much as I dislike Fainsa Sophias the excellent legroom was much appreciated on the couple of occasions when I've done the full journey from the Westcountry to/from Padd.

 

[GrimShady]

385s are only designed for an hour. They are an interurban EMU - comparable to a Class 350 and to me they have a similar level of comfort. Both have awful First Class, though - in both cases Standard is to me more comfortable.

80x have awful seats (Fainsa Sophia), but if you fit something decent for a long distance journey (Grammer IC3000, FISA LEAN) then there's nothing really wrong with the train itself (other than the accessibility issue which really should move us towards low floor). I don't agree regarding the ride, I think it's decent enough. Or maybe CAF could do a diesel version of the TPE EMUs which look excellent.

Having said that about the Sophia, a thicker base cushion would solve the issues with them. The only reason I really dislike them is that after not very long you can feel the frame through the base, and the headrest is a bit low down (the slightly higher version used in 1st on Thameslink solves that, too).

Lighting, luggage space, ride quality let's not forget noise of the traction motors plus lots more.

 

[Journeyman]

80x have awful seats (Fainsa Sophia), but if you fit something decent for a long distance journey (Grammer IC3000, FISA LEAN) then there's nothing really wrong with the train itself (other than the accessibility issue which really should move us towards low floor). I don't agree regarding the ride, I think it's decent enough. Or maybe CAF could do a diesel version of the TPE EMUs which look excellent.

I actually think the 80x seats are good. They're firm, yes, but I think they're a good shape, so permit good posture, and there's a lot of legroom in the airline seats.

The ride is different to an HST, certainly - the suspension seems stiffer and firmer, but I reckon it's much more predictable and consistent, and noise levels are absolutely fine.

I know it's popular to slag them off, but I think the IET/Azuma beats most other recent fleets by a fairly hefty margin.

 

[GrimShady]

To be fair, most of GWR is now basically a semifast outersuburban commuter service in its character. The Westcountry services are rather different, but using the same stock was just easier. And TBH much as I dislike Fainsa Sophias the excellent legroom was much appreciated on the couple of occasions when I've done the full journey from the Westcountry to/from Padd.

I should have explained more clearly I was talking and the ECML services.

 

[43096]

The 385s and 800s are designed for different duties. But anyway, I consider the 800s to be very good trains and superior to the HST in just about every way. And I do long journeys on then regularly.

I just don’t understand how 800s can ever be described as “very good”. They are utterly appalling: abysmal seats, abysmal ride quality and they cost a fortune to lease. They are, frankly, some of the worst trains ever built.

 

[Journeyman]

Lighting, luggage space, ride quality let's not forget noise of the traction motors plus lots more.

Lighting - absolutely fine, no idea why you don't like it.
Luggage space - extra legroom in airline seats makes it easy to put bags under seats, overhead racks are pretty generous compared to a lot of other stocks.
Ride quality - superior to Mk 3s and 4s by a long way. Far less spilling of drinks going on.
Noise of traction motors is barely noticeable - the sound insulation is very good.
What "lots more"?

 

[43096]

Ride quality - superior to Mk 3s and 4s by a long way.

You are away with the fairies if you believe that!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Lighting, luggage space, ride quality let's not forget noise of the traction motors plus lots more.

What, 80x?

The lighting is OK. It's a bit bright, but not the worst - certainly no worse than GWR's abomination in the HSTs. It really helps that it's indirect.

There is loads of luggage space - both floor level racks and the largest overheads of any UK train. Crikey, my 120 litre rucksack fits, fully packed with a tent attached to the outside (I got a few "impressed" type remarks when I last hoiked it up there ). It's the best provision of any current UK IC train by far.

Ride quality - about the same as a 350. Indeed the whole ambiance is almost identical to a Class 444, which is about as good as IC EMUs get in the UK.

Traction motors - really? It's hardly noticeable other than starting out.

Diesel engines? Less audible than the 57 on the front of the Night Riviera from the front couple of coaches.

The seats are rubbish and the interior scheme is a bit bland (though even that isn't true of the LNER red interior). That's all, really.

 

[Journeyman]

I just don’t understand how 800s can ever be described as “very good”. They are utterly appalling: abysmal seats, abysmal ride quality and they cost a fortune to lease. They are, frankly, some of the worst trains ever built.

I honestly don't understand why you think they're so bad. I like them. I think there's just a lot of "they're not Mark 3s" thinking going on.

The HSTs needed replacing, and I think the IET/Azuma is a good replacement. I use them regularly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You are away with the fairies if you believe that!

Mk4s ride like an absolute cart (at 125 on the north ECML it feels like a derailment at times). Mk3s have a nasty side to side sway. Yes, it is better than both - easily. The heavyweight 221 and the Class 158 (the previous best ride benchmark) probably beats it, but the 80x is more economical, has more legroom and doesn't smell of wee.

 

[Journeyman]

You are away with the fairies if you believe that!

Yup. I do believe it.

 

[Journeyman]

The lighting is OK. It's a bit bright, but not the worst - certainly no worse than GWR's abomination in the HSTs. It really helps that it's indirect.

GWR high density HSTs were ghastly and the 800s thrash them into the ground in providing a better travel environment.

 

[Highland37]

@Bletchleyite

What on earth do you put in a 120 litre sack? My expedition one is 65!

 

[paul1609]

Ones a commuter the other is a high speed commuter.

Funny that seen as a HST still out performs 800 diesels, they can't even reach 125 off the wires! How can you honestly prefer the antiseptic Ryan Air style no frills Hitachi rubbish compared to the Mallard/GWR FC or infact practically another IC environment?

They are trash on so many levels, perfect train for the accountant and greedy TOCs.

Out of interest (and its a genuine question!) what is the mileage of non electrified line cleared for 125 running now?

 

[GusB]

Out of interest (and its a genuine question!) what is the mileage of non electrified line cleared for 125 running now?

As far as I'm aware there is none! 100mph is the maximum, and there isn't much of it.

 

[GrimShady]

Lighting - absolutely fine, no idea why you don't like it.
Luggage space - extra legroom in airline seats makes it easy to put bags under seats, overhead racks are pretty generous compared to a lot of other stocks.
Ride quality - superior to Mk 3s and 4s by a long way. Far less spilling of drinks going on.
Noise of traction motors is barely noticeable - the sound insulation is very good.
What "lots more"?

The lighting is like a veterinarian's clinic, harsh and ridiculously bright to the point the entire interior is reflected on the windows even during the day. Many similar posts on other threads. Reminds me of a NY MTA subway.

Ride Quality - Awful! Swaying, sharp vertical bouncing, vibrating all the way to Newcastle. There's a section of track around North Berwick that's particular bad on all stock, 800 failed miserably. Remember we're not comparing stock of the same vintage from competing manufacturers, there's supposed to be 30 years of advancement here! Also detailed in other threads.

Noise - Yip on par with the 385 surprise, surprise. Accelerating and dynamic braking, exactly the same vs the gently humming of the MKIV air con.

Luggage - Again, same tiny little racks found on 385 which are absolutely no use on a IC train. It was fun watching a foreign school group trying to board in Edinburgh with platform staff shouting at them to get on whilst the others couldn't fit their luggage anywhere. Pax being advised to use the overhead racks for heavy items which slid off later on! Many old dears didn't have the strength to lift their cases up there. Last time I was on one there was luggage everywhere. Detailed in other threads and an issue with the Unions now.

Powerpoints - Detailed in another thread. Waste of time.

Seats - I may as well sit on a Church Pew.

Tables - Okay actually quite sturdy, the support leg is highly annoying as is the outboard side of the table which has a convex curvature rendering a good few inches of space useless! What's that all about? It would have been better off on the inboard side to stop drinks etc from flying off thanks to the garbage ride.

The RMT has many, many more gripes which I won't bother listing. Staff hate the trains which says it all really.

When you describe something as "fine" I get the distinct impression that even your goodself is aware it's on the limit of tolerance. If you're happy shelling out the same ticket price for a sub standard product then please do enjoy. I expect at least like for like or an improvement.

UK Railjet is what we should have had.

 

[Journeyman]

The lighting is like a veterinarian's clinic, harsh are ridiculously bright to the point the entire interior is reflected on the windows even during the day. Many similar posts on other threads. Reminds me of of a NY MTA subway. Detailed in other threads.

Ride Quality - Awful! Swaying, sharp vertical bouncing, vibrating all the way to Newcastle. There's a section of track around North Berwick that's particular bad on all stock, 800 failed miserably. Remember we're not comparing stock of the same vintage from competing manufacturers, there's supposed to be 30 years of advancement here! Also detailed in other threads.

Noise - Yip a par with the 385 surprise, surprise. Accelerating and dynamic braking, exactly the same vs the gently humming of the MKIV air con.

Luggage - Again, same tiny little racks found on 385 which are absolutely no use on a IC train. It was fun watching a foreign school group trying to board in Edinburgh with platform staff shouting at them to get on whilst the others couldn't fit their luggage anywhere. Pax being advised to use the overhead racks for heavy items which slide off later on! Many old dears didn't have the strength to lift their cases up there. Last time I was on one there was luggage everywhere. Detailed in other threads and an issue with the Unions now.

Powerpoints - Detailed in another thread. Waste of time.

Seats - I may as well sit on a Church Pew.

Tables - Okay actually quite sturdy, the support leg is highly annoying as is the outboard side of the table which has a convex curvature rendering a good few inches of space useless! What's that all about? It would have been better off on the inboard side to stop drinks etc from flying off thanks to the garbage ride.

The RMT has many, many more gripes which I won't bother listing. Staff hate the trains which says it all really.

When you describe something as "fine" I get the distinct impression that even your goodself is aware it's on the limit of tolerance. If you're happy shelling out the same ticket price for a sub standard product then please do enjoy. I expect at least like for like or an improvement.

I respectfully disagree with all of this.

I've approached the introduction of the Azumas from as neutral a point as possible, and I consider the ride, noise levels, lighting and comfort to be perfectly acceptable.

What's your problem with the power points, FFS???

Yes, the seats are firm, and I'd appreciate them being softer, but they're an excellent shape and there's FAR more legroom and space for bags under them, which is a big plus.

 

[GrimShady]

I respectfully disagree with all of this.

I've approached the introduction of the Azumas from as neutral a point as possible, and I consider the ride, noise levels, lighting and comfort to be perfectly acceptable.

What's your problem with the power points, FFS???

Yes, the seats are firm, and I'd appreciate them being softer, but they're an excellent shape and there's FAR more legroom and space for bags under them, which is a big plus.

Disagree all you wish as is your right, plenty of other posters saying exactly the same thing. I have looked at the IET from the customers point of view, im being screwed!

It really doesn't bother me at all HSTs and 91s are going, such is the nature of vehicles, I expect at the bare minimum the same quality I was getting before or more....not less.

With all due respect you're far from neutral being inside the industry and involved with procurement. You consider 156s "fine" for five hour journeys, how you arrived at this conclusion i'll never know, maybe because you don't have to suffer them regularly. You've also stated your admiration for the Turbostar on HML, equally just as potty although I did like them on the E&G. You've also stated your admiration for the 385s which are again sub standard and not what they should have been, same story as 800 series units. I'll put up with a 385 for the 45 min journey but I'm still being screwed over seat wise. I'll admit I travel FC whenever I can so the leg room issue never affects me.

There's a thread detailing the power points issue......there's no need for your hostility, thanks

 

[43096]

Yes, the seats are firm, and I'd appreciate them being softer, but they're an excellent shape and there's FAR more legroom and space for bags under them, which is a big plus.

That’s just using other factors to try to justify the seat comfort. The seats are massively short of being even borderline acceptable.

 

[HSTEd]

UK Railjet is what we should have had.

The only way a loco hauled formation, or even a top and tailed one, could have hoped to meet the journey times achievable with multiple units, would have been with enormous installed power with the attendant cost, power supply and fuel consumption issues.

You would need TGV power cars to make up for the terrible low-range acceleration.

It would have to be some sort of high speed bespoke Co-Co diesel on both ends.

I myself have huge issues with the IEP programme, for example the insistence on portion working to save a small number of vehicels and a small portion of the fleet operating costs, which helped lead to the madly overspecified OHLE on the Great Western. But I'm afraid an MU was the only reasonable solution.

 

[Journeyman]

That’s just using other factors to try to justify the seat comfort. The seats are massively short of being even borderline acceptable.

Again, I disagree. I prefer them to LNER Mallard seats.

 

[Journeyman]

I am actually neutral. I work in the industry, but I've never specified a train or made a final decision on what gets deployed where. I have done extensive consultancy in this field, so I do know how and why decisions get made. There's a lot of factors involved in designing trains.

For the record, I currently write safety documentation for a heritage railway and provide services to a ticketing company. I was not involved in the IET at all. Therefore I'm neutral - I speak merely as a punter.

 

[43096]

Again, I disagree. I prefer them to LNER Mallard seats.

You are the exception that proves the rule, then!

 

[GrimShady]

The only way a loco hauled formation, or even a top and tailed one, could have hoped to meet the journey times achievable with multiple units, would have been with enormous installed power with the attendant cost, power supply and fuel consumption issues.

You would need TGV power cars to make up for the terrible low-range acceleration.

It would have to be some sort of high speed bespoke Co-Co diesel on both ends.

I myself have huge issues with the IEP programme, for example the insistence on portion working to save a small number of vehicels and a small portion of the fleet operating costs, which helped lead to the madly overspecified OHLE on the Great Western. But I'm afraid an MU was the only reasonable solution.

I'm all for EMUs as long as they can provide the ambiance of a unpowered coach, these things don't.

IMO all ECML IET should have been pure EMUs with an appropriate diesel loco at the non electrified sections.

 

[GrimShady]

This what the RMT has said regarding IET

Dear Colleague

WORKING CONDITIONS, CLASS 800/801 AZUMA SERIES - LNER

Members have raised some serious concerns following the introduction of the Class 800/801 AZUMA fleet. There are multiple on-board issues and inadequate facilities which are detrimental to passengers and staff alike. The available luggage storage has been found to be woefully inadequate and with the upcoming Christmas period there will likely be a large increase in health & safety issues and stress for frontline staff. These issues have been ignored by management who have responded along the lines of ‘you will just have to manage it’ – a complete failure to take responsibility for an intolerable working environment.

Other issues reported by members include:-

Toilets going out of use randomly
Taps flooding floors
Bicycle storage spaces that are unable to accommodate bicycles
Ovens leaking
No rubbish storage provision
Disabled toilet doors failing
Seat reservation failures

Our National Executive Council has considered the matter and shares the concerns that members have raised. We will not sit back and allow our members and passengers to have their safety and wellbeing compromised. I have written to LNER to arrange an urgent meeting with senior management to address these issues. I will keep you advised of further developments.

Yours sincerely

Mick Cash
General Secretary

And then there's all the general public's criticism on Tripadvisor...

https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attra...stern_Railway_GWR-London_England.html#REVIEWS

https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Attra...don_North_Eastern_Railway-London_England.html

Have a look a the comparisons between the old stock and new stock.