ScotRail’s New Trains Procurement Programme

[Struner]

To me Stradlers level boarding trains for Anglia and Merseyrail and Wales have rendered all previous trains obsolete.
In a world where every bus has a ramp, many powered and passenger operated, I see no place for previous trains with those ridiculously heavy not so portable ramps.
I hope Scotrail continue with forward thinking
K

Living in Stadler country (Noordelijke nevenlijnen, NL) myself, yes: the arrival of the GTW’s made a lot of difference (though the station infrastructure people weren’t really aware of what it meant) this was fifteen year ago.
i have no idea about standarisation of infrastructure in Scotland: platformheight,-lenght & -curvature. Does networkrail publish (as in: put online) a database of those parameters?

 

[Ex-controller]

Apologies for derailing the thread slightly, but I have never seen any evidence that the 380s and 385s can’t cope with repeated journeys on the Cathcart Circle, other than repeated claims on here. 334s yes, that was called out in a report when discussing 314 replacements, but not 380/385. 385s. I believe 385s have mostly liquid cooled components anyway so I would have expected them to have significantly more thermal headroom. A part of me wonders if this is a meme like 158s have broken air con. I would be happy to be proven wrong though

There is no restrictions on any unit on the number of Cathcart Circle workings they perform. This is a myth. Any type of unit could work a full day of workings on this route, indeed class 380s are diagrammed to do so.

Class 334 units had very few diagrammed workings on the Cathcart Circle and branches, but there was at no stage any operational restriction applied to them. They could be, and were, utilised as and when required.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Living in Stadler country (Noordelijke nevenlijnen, NL) myself, yes: the arrival of the GTW’s made a lot of difference (though the station infrastructure people weren’t really aware of what it meant) this was fifteen year ago.
i have no idea about standarisation of infrastructure in Scotland: platformheight,-lenght & -curvature. Does networkrail publish (as in: put online) a database of those parameters?

Nominal UK platform height is 915mm above rail, but there are a lot of lower* platforms in Scotland, particularly on rural lines. However as per Greater Anglia, why not just start the process? Platforms can be raised, either fully or using a "Harrington hump", as they go along.

* Many as low as a typical old style European height, which pose far more of a challenge with UK rolling stock, which doesn't** have proper steps like European stock. Some stations have portable wooden steps, but they do sometimes get nicked or vandalised. Some of these stations are actually in surprisingly big places, for instance Salford Central (on the edge of Manchester city centre) has platforms as low as a typical German or Swiss station, and London Paddington P12 is very low as well, with a step up/down of about, if I recall, 50cm.

** Pacers sort of did, but nothing else does/did.

 

[Struner]

Nominal UK platform height is 915mm above rail, but there are a lot of lower* platforms in Scotland, particularly on rural lines. However as per Greater Anglia, why not just start the process? Platforms can be raised, either fully or using a "Harrington hump", as they go along.

* Many as low as a typical old style European height, which pose far more of a challenge with UK rolling stock, which doesn't** have proper steps like European stock. Some stations have portable wooden steps, but they do sometimes get nicked or vandalised. Some of these stations are actually in surprisingly big places, for instance Salford Central (on the edge of Manchester city centre) has platforms as low as a typical German or Swiss station, and London Paddington P12 is very low as well, with a step up/down of about, if I recall, 50cm.

** Pacers sort of did, but nothing else does/did.

Thanks!

 

[XAM2175]

Doing a bit of googling and searching it would appear that engines in the inter7city trains can be converted from diesel to hybrid hydrogen and diesel. These trains are perfect for this as current regs say that hydrogen must have a independent power car .
Over time as the technology improves it could become 100% hydrogen.
Alternatively they might make good candidates for battery conversation with new power cars

No. The HSTs are showing their age structurally and are now tainted by the bad press surrounding their crashworthiness in the Carmont disaster. It's virtually certain that they're either going to be 1) replaced early by stock cascaded from elsewhere, or 2) replaced later by a new-build fleet.

Oh, and the routes that they currently run are intended for complete electrification!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Doing a bit of googling and searching it would appear that engines in the inter7city trains can be converted from diesel to hybrid hydrogen and diesel. These trains are perfect for this as current regs say that hydrogen must have a independent power car .
Over time as the technology improves it could become 100% hydrogen.
Alternatively they might make good candidates for battery conversation with new power cars

They’re not far off of Fifty!

 

[Glasgowbusguy]

They’re not far off of Fifty!

If you are basically replacing the power cars during a hydrogen conversion then it doesn't matter how old the coaches are

 

[NotATrainspott]

If you are basically replacing the power cars during a hydrogen conversion then it doesn't matter how old the coaches are

The Ship of Theseus comes to mind!

Hydrogen is difficult to store and has low energy density, unlike diesel. Any practical hydrogen train is going to have to fill up every available space with hydrogen tanks or it won't get very far. I can't see any hydrogen locomotives being built, since you'd need fixed formation multiple units to have enough space.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

If you are basically replacing the power cars during a hydrogen conversion then it doesn't matter how old the coaches are

Seriously?? So you’re suggesting if ScotRail were planning for brand new locomotives, a rake of Mark 1s would be suitable?

Anyway it’s pie in the sky seeing as they’ve confirmed this won’t be happening.

What will be very interesting will be seeing if Scotland will ban diesel use in other operators too - Avanti on diversion, TPE when their 802 doesn’t seem to want to work on electricity (GWR always seem to run diesel London Cardiff for this reason), etc.

What I’m most curious about is the supplier. If it’s Hitachi, you’d have an almost fully Hitachi fleet but then a little small fleet of older Siemens trains on the side.

 

[Glasgowbusguy]

The Ship of Theseus comes to mind!

Hydrogen is difficult to store and has low energy density, unlike diesel. Any practical hydrogen train is going to have to fill up every available space with hydrogen tanks or it won't get very far. I can't see any hydrogen locomotives being built, since you'd need fixed formation multiple units to have enough space.

Not really the Alstom’s Coradia iLinthas a range of approx 500 miles on a full "tank" of hydrogen , so range is definitely not an issue with hydrogen

 

[Energy]

Seriously?? So you’re suggesting if ScotRail were planning for brand new locomotives, a rake of Mark 1s would be suitable?

Meanwhile in New Zealand.... and let's not forget the 68 +mk2s.

 

[Trainbike46]

What I’m most curious about is the supplier. If it’s Hitachi, you’d have an almost fully Hitachi fleet but then a little small fleet of older Siemens trains on the side.

It seems rather likely that the three new fleets (suburban (B)EMU, Far north line, IC) will have different suppliers, as different suppliers seem to be good at different types of units, and there is the size of the order book to consider (specifically in the case of hitachi and Alstom!)

 

[scotraildriver]

If you are basically replacing the power cars during a hydrogen conversion then it doesn't matter how old the coaches are

The coaches are absolutely done. Despite the refurbishment they leak like sieves (look at the amount of patching on the roofs), have substantial corrosion some of which was highlighted in the Carmont report and are just plain unreliable, regularly suffering electrical faults/trips, heating and air con issues and lots more. They've done their time.

 

[snowball]

Quite apart from the issues surrounding lengths of platforms, coaches, and trains, which I'll leave to other people to discuss, the trains acquired in each of the three phases will have to have a lot of flexibility.

Phase 1 will include some straight electrics to replace existing older emus and to replace 156s on newly electrified lines such as Barrhead; and some BEMUs for partly electrified lines such as Borders and Fife. At the time of placing the order the achievable rate of electrification will be uncertain, and so therefore will be the relative numbers of EMUs and BEMUs.

Over time, lines will be converted from partially to fully electrified, so there will probably be a need to convert BEMUs to EMUs, ideally finding some other productive use for the weight capacity saved on the batteries.

Phase 2 will be hydrogen trains for remoter lines and some at least of them will need to have sufficient tank capacity for Inverness to Wick and Thurso. On the other hand some of them will do runs like Glasgow to Stranraer, already electrified to Ayr and eventually to Girvan, so they may well have pantographs and transformers. Inverness to Tain is to be wired eventually, the West Highland will have wires to Craigendoran, and even the Kyle line trains, if equipped, will be able to use the wires to Dingwall.

Phase 3 is to replace diesel on trains from the central belt to Aberdeen and Inverness. If these were to be supplied as straight electrics, they would be unusable until at least one of the routes is fully electrified. But the plan is to put in partial electrification first to achieve the earliest possible decarbonisation. Therefore either the phase 3 trains (or some of them) must be initially supplied as BEMUs, or some BEMUs supplied in phase 1 must be temporarily used as inter-city trains.

 

[Mikey C]

Talgo were talking about building a factory in Scotland, you imagine they'll be thrown something.

 

[Energy]

What will be very interesting will be seeing if Scotland will ban diesel use in other operators too - Avanti on diversion, TPE when their 802 doesn’t seem to want to work on electricity (GWR always seem to run diesel London Cardiff for this reason), etc.

Transport Scotland can stop diesel running on Scotrail but I don't think they have authority on other operators (though they will have input).

Non-Scotrail lines will all be electrified under the decarbonisation plan so it isn't really a problem.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2022 ==

Talgo were talking about building a factory in Scotland, you imagine they'll be thrown something.

Phase 1: Hitachi most likely, already having class 385s in Scotland (and a fairly clear order book at Newton Aycliffe) has a lot going for it. Talgo having a factory in Scotland might sweeten the deal but lack of existing trains the UK will drive up their costs. Both Siemens and Bombardier are not unlikely options.

Phase 2: Alstom or Stadler, they have hydrogen technology (so do Siemens but they are a couple years behind)

Phase 3: I wouldn't be suprised if it ended up being intercity spec 385s. 80Xs would be expensive and have quite a high step up to fit the optional diesel engines. 397s wouldn't be a suprise and neither would FLIRTs (especially if Stadler get phase 2).

 

[snowball]

Non-Scotrail lines will all be electrified under the decarbonisation plan so it isn't really a problem.

The Scottish decarbonisation plan avoids clear commitments concerning freight-only lines. Admittedly there are not many left in Scotland.

 

[dm1]

I just hope the tender has level boarding as a requirement (with 915mm platform height). There is now absolutely no argument for not doing so, and not doing so could in fact quite reasonably be considered not compliant with the Equality Act etc, given that Stadler have now demonstrated that it is entirely possible even with the UK loading guage.

A procurement that big might force some of the manufacturers with UK factories to finally start producing properly accessible trains, on fear of losing all orders to Stadler. Not that I would object to that, Stadler make very good trains! However given people's desire to keep at least some train manufacturing capability in the UK, and given that both Hitachi and Alstom are more than capable of producing low floor trains elsewhere, the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that nobody was asking for it and they didn't see the need to update existing designs.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Not really the Alstom’s Coradia iLinthas a range of approx 500 miles on a full "tank" of hydrogen , so range is definitely not an issue with hydrogen

Yes, by filling every available space with hydrogen tanks. Much more space is allocated to hydrogen storage in the Coradia iLint than would be necessary on an equivalent DMU.

It stands to reason that you'd struggle to build a viable hydrogen locomotive to pull standard carriages. Spreading the tanks and traction equipment around seems inevitable, so you'd end up with some sort of EMU. The most locomotive-like thing possible would probably be driving vehicles fitted with large tanks and the fuel cells but the rest of the traction equipment being in the intermediate vehicles. Then you'd essentially have an EMU pushing/pulling around portable hydrogen power stations in DVTs!

I just hope the tender has level boarding as a requirement (with 915mm platform height). There is now absolutely no argument for not doing so, and not doing so could in fact quite reasonably be considered not compliant with the Equality Act etc, given that Stadler have now demonstrated that it is entirely possible even with the UK loading guage.

A procurement that big might force some of the manufacturers with UK factories to finally start producing properly accessible trains, on fear of losing all orders to Stadler. Not that I would object to that, Stadler make very good trains! However given people's desire to keep at least some train manufacturing capability in the UK, and given that both Hitachi and Alstom are more than capable of producing low floor trains elsewhere, the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that nobody was asking for it and they didn't see the need to update existing designs.

Not really. If stations and/or trains are equipped with ramps and staff to operate them, then it's totally compliant with the regulations. That said, level boarding capability does have other benefits for the rail operator. It means staff are no longer required to meet that accessibility requirement, so you can cut wage costs.

The Stadler low-floor design is one way but I think automated deployable ramps will end up being the default approach. With the limitations of our loading gauge, having lower train floors doesn't seem like a fully generic solution. HS2 will have automated gap fillers that will oversail any non-TSI-compatible platforms and provide a full step. Once you're comfortable with this being automatically deployed from a train, giving it a ramped profile doesn't seem too much of a stretch.

What would be great is if some supplier can come up with a packaged automated ramp product that can then be retrofitted to existing fleets. It might cost a bit to cut out the accessible carriage vestibule floors and weld in the ramp system, but paying for staff for the rest of the lifetime of relatively new trains won't be cheap either.

 

[43074]

The coaches are absolutely done. Despite the refurbishment they leak like sieves (look at the amount of patching on the roofs), have substantial corrosion some of which was highlighted in the Carmont report and are just plain unreliable, regularly suffering electrical faults/trips, heating and air con issues and lots more. They've done their time.

Agreed on the corrosion but the unreliability
does seem to be a more acute problem on ScotRail sets than it is for CrossCountry and GWR sets. That suggests the maintenance is an issue as well as their age.

 

[Energy]

Agreed on the corrosion but the unreliability
does seem to be a more acute problem on ScotRail sets than it is for CrossCountry and GWR sets. That suggests the maintenance is an issue as well as their age.

XC and GWR have maintained them for a lot longer and when they were a lot younger. Unsuprisingly GWR decided to keep its best HSTs so the Scotrail ones weren't exactly in the best of condition.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2022 ==

I just hope the tender has level boarding as a requirement (with 915mm platform height). There is now absolutely no argument for not doing so, and not doing so could in fact quite reasonably be considered not compliant with the Equality Act etc, given that Stadler have now demonstrated that it is entirely possible even with the UK loading guage.

The equality act only requires reasonable adjustment to be made, which a ramp meets. I would like to see level boarding though, Stadler would be a nice choice but I'm not sure if they can produce enough trains in the time period for phase 1.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm sure if the UK makes a policy decision of no more step boarding trains the other manufacturers will quickly come up with a product.

 

[cactustwirly]

XC and GWR have maintained them for a lot longer and when they were a lot younger. Unsuprisingly GWR decided to keep its best HSTs so the Scotrail ones weren't exactly in the best of condition.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Aug 2022 ==


The equality act only requires reasonable adjustment to be made, which a ramp meets. I would like to see level boarding though, Stadler would be a nice choice but I'm not sure if they can produce enough trains in the time period for phase 1.

Scotrail got the Angel owned ones, and GWR got the ones owned by First group and some Porterbrook powercars?

The scotrail ones went off lease first so they must have picked the best

 

[Acfb]

I haven't travelled by train by Scotland that much in the past two years but the 170s I've been on on the Borders and Fife routes including the ones I was on yesterday seem rather tatty inside to me. I'm not sure what the issue with the 385s is though?

It would indeed be good if the Borders line could be electrified ASAP.

 

[Wyrleybart]

What will be very interesting will be seeing if Scotland will ban diesel use in other operators too - Avanti on diversion, TPE when their 802 doesn’t seem to want to work on electricity (GWR always seem to run diesel London Cardiff for this reason), etc.

What I’m most curious about is the supplier. If it’s Hitachi, you’d have an almost fully Hitachi fleet but then a little small fleet of older Siemens trains on the side.

I notice you avoided mentioning XC diesel trains to Glasgow and Aberdeen as well as the hourly clockface service linking Edinburgh to "England". Don't seem to be any plans to replace the voyagers, although there have been rumours of ex Avanti voyagers replacing their HSTs.

A good ruse would be to use some of the TPE 802s on an Edinburgh-Derby service, connecting with XC trains there. Theoretically TPE 802s could run under the OLE to Colton Jn

 

[Rick1984]

The class 385 have an interior wholly unsuited to suburban work like the Cathcart lines. It is mostly full size table seats.
Suburban lines need an interior with more circulating space.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I notice you avoided mentioning XC diesel trains to Glasgow and Aberdeen as well as the hourly clockface service linking Edinburgh to "England". Don't seem to be any plans to replace the voyagers, although there have been rumours of ex Avanti voyagers replacing their HSTs.

A good ruse would be to use some of the TPE 802s on an Edinburgh-Derby service, connecting with XC trains there. Theoretically TPE 802s could run under the OLE to Colton Jn

Well to be honest, I assumed Voyagers would have a replacement by 2035. It’ll be concerning if they’re still running the entirely electrified Glasgow York on diesel in thirteen years time.

 

[snowball]

It would indeed be good if the Borders line could be electrified ASAP.

All it needs is a feeder station (which is presumably one of the six announced on 1st July), a few miles of wiring from Tweedbank, and waiting until 2027 for the battery trains to start to arrive.

 

[Clansman]

Queried with Transport Scotland about the platform lengths issue (re capacity with having a common fleet to replace 318/320/334/158/170) and received a vague, but interesting response - 'subject to change as it progresses'. Either they haven't figured this one out yet or they are just talking in regards to USPs by potential bidders (i.e low floor units for example).

 

[Inthewest]

Eh. The 318/314/320 fleet aren't really suitable for replacement with a 385. The latter get very unhappy on the short frequent stopping nature of Strathclyde runs, and the latter are 23m coaches, meaning quote a large tranche of platform extensions and station rebuilds would be needed.

And that is what will be needed.
Much like Greater Anglia sorted / sorting all their platforms for better level boarding and lengths... as we'll likely never have double deck trains in this country, longer units are the only way and that means longer platforms.
No point in skimping out what will be required... that is simply the price that must be paid.