West highland line rolling stock solution (short term)

[Fife coaster]

Is their and possibility that once the 222s are in place that in the short term Scotrail could use the intercity 7s on the WHL the have better capacity and recently refurbished as the class 156 need replaced and let’s face it we can’t wait until BEMU arrive. As their was a story in one of the papers that a woman took a oil radiator with her and used it when she went to Glasgow from Oban left at luggage facility at picked it up for the return. If the trains are that bad we need urgent options.

 

[Farigiraf]

You'd be replacing a 40 year old train with a 50 year old train - I don't see the logic in that.

let’s face it we can’t wait until BEMU arrive

It's at most 10 years until these enter service. The 156s can soldier on until then. If for some reason they can't, the 170s would be a good fit provided they are allowed to run on the WHL.

If the trains are that bad we need urgent options.

They're not particularly worse than the 150s or 153s which are still used all over the place.

 

[nilvaj395]

Is their and possibility that once the 222s are in place that in the short term Scotrail could use the intercity 7s on the WHL the have better capacity and recently refurbished as the class 156 need replaced and let’s face it we can’t wait until BEMU arrive. As their was a story in one of the papers that a woman took a oil radiator with her and used it when she went to Glasgow from Oban left at luggage facility at picked it up for the return. If the trains are that bad we need urgent options.

To be fair to the woman the 156s/153s (150s weirdly less so) can be absolutely baltic inside when it's cold outside. I can see how that would get annoying after so long

The 43s would be a good idea as they are cleared , but like Farigiraf said they're old and I think the unions very much want them gone for obvious reasons.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jan 2026 ==

It's at most 10 years until these enter service. The 156s can soldier on until then. If for some reason they can't, the 170s would be a good fit provided they are allowed to run on the WHL.

I think the 170s have an RA of 5 and I think that's also the WHL's RA so wouldn't it just be a matter of platform and other clearances to check (and obviously staff training and moving them around)?

 

[Glasgowbusguy]

Issue with HST would be the splitting/joining of the train at cairnlarnic for Oban and Mallaig.
HSTs would require a lot of additional shunting unless the HST can be run with an engine at one end and DVT or similar

 

[3RDGEN]

The ScotRail tender for EMU/BEMU's specifies entry to service in late 2031, so maybe 2032 for the BEMU's which will replace the 158/170's from the Tweedbank and Fife routes, the HST's replacement should also replace a few 158/170's a little earlier. The assumption is these will be cascaded to replace the remaining ScotRail 156's until the "Alternative Traction" units are sourced for the WHL and FNL's as per the Transport Scotland "Rail services decarbonisation action plan, pathway to 2035" document.

I would assume 156's will remain on the WHL's until 2032/33 before being replaced by 158's as per the FNL's now, perhaps with a refresh to get them through to the mid2030's. Will the 156's last, doesn't appear to be much option really.

 

[185143]

To be fair, I've been on several early morning 156s on the WHL that have been absolutely baltic.

I remember doing the 05:20 Glasgow-Oban a couple of winters back and I still didn't have feeling in my toes by the time I was in the ferry terminal.

 

[nilvaj395]

Issue with HST would be the splitting/joining of the train at cairnlarnic for Oban and Mallaig.
HSTs would require a lot of additional shunting unless the HST can be run with an engine at one end and DVT or similar

That too, doh!

 

[Russel]

As their was a story in one of the papers that a woman took a oil radiator with her and used it when she went to Glasgow from Oban left at luggage facility at picked it up for the return. If the trains are that bad we need urgent options.

I saw that story, it did make me smile!

Is there a chance of 158s or 170s replacing 156s on the WHL?

 

[Uncle Buck]

They're not particularly worse than the 150s or 153s which are still used all over the place.

Aren’t 150s and 153s mainly used on local services (ie for short journeys) though, not services which take several hours and are marketed to foreign tourists as one of the world’s most beautiful railway journeys?

 

[Farigiraf]

Aren’t 150s and 153s mainly used on local services (ie for short journeys) though, not services which take several hours and are is marketed to foreign tourists as one of the world’s most beautiful railway journeys?

Well yes, and some more modern units potentially with panorama carriages would be far better, but the OP was talking about solutions that can be done today. 158s or 170s would be an upgrade, though they're still a few decades old and often not the cleanest - plus this would require taking them off the Fife Circle, which cannot be done until battery trains are introduced around Edinburgh.

 

[Killingworth]

This is a speculative thread.

It's time Harry Potter moved forward a few decades and put steam behind him. Just get WCR to takeover the Fort William - Mallaig service. 2 HST units with a 3rd in reserve.

Make a feature of it. Of course Scotrail could do it, but WCR should produce a better quality heritage product.

No windows to hang out of, no doors to worry about, no sparks to set light to the scenery and relatively slow speed for safety.

If the Mexicans and Nigerians can make use of them why can't we?

I know, I know. Corrosion. Lack of spare parts to provide a reliable service in such a remote area. Just a thought.

 

[Fife coaster]

Agreed I think transport Scotland can’t stall this for to much longer tag an order onto the northern procur to replace their 150s

 

[Bill57p9]

They're not particularly worse than the 150s or 153s which are still used all over the place.

Fastest journey I can find between Glasgow and Mallaig is 5 hours 14 minutes.
The only sprinter service I can think of that comes anywhere close is the Heart of Wales line, at around 4 hours.

ScotRail's 156s are very tired and really a bit of a poor offering in 2025 for such a tourist route.

Whilst the HSTs fit, surely such an operation would just haemorrhage money - unless of course it could be marketed as a proper panoramic service (similar to Glacier Express & Bernina Express).

With the required platform modifications I could see 158s making a decent stopgap, either from cascades elsewhere within ScotRail or maybe TfW?

 

[stevieinselby]

It's time Harry Potter moved forward a few decades and put steam behind him. Just get WCR to takeover the Fort William - Mallaig service. 2 HST units with a 3rd in reserve.

How many people would be happy to see the fares increase from £20 return to £70 return?

 

[Fife coaster]

the Problem also is that multiple units are very inflexible compared to coaching stock where during the summer you can add coaches as required. What’s needed is like what TransPennine had with the caf push pulls ideal with a new small diesel

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jan 2026 ==

As for the 158s as a Fife commuter the 158s are done their only a couple of years younger than the 156s if northern is replacing their 15x fleets the scotrail need to as well. They were good and have done really well but it’s time for new stock

 

[D365]

This is a speculative thread.

It's time Harry Potter moved forward a few decades and put steam behind him. Just get WCR to takeover the Fort William - Mallaig service. 2 HST units with a 3rd in reserve.

Make a feature of it. Of course Scotrail could do it, but WCR should produce a better quality heritage product.

No windows to hang out of, no doors to worry about, no sparks to set light to the scenery and relatively slow speed for safety.

If the Mexicans and Nigerians can make use of them why can't we?

I know, I know. Corrosion. Lack of spare parts to provide a reliable service in such a remote area. Just a thought.

Not to mention the elephant in the room that is WCRC themselves

 

[stadler]

I think that putting the 170s on the Fort William / Kyle Of Lochalsh / Mallaig / Oban / Thurso / Wick trains would be the best replacement. That would be simple if they get enough 222s to take some 170s off of the routes that are worked by 170s currently. I think the 170s are by far the nicest highest quality DMUs that we have. They would be a high quality comfortable train with large windows for a long distance scenic route. Putting the 156s and 158s on these routes has always seemed like a very poor choice of stock. It is just a shame that Scotrail gave away so many 170s to East Midlands Railway and Northern and Southern a few years back.

 

[nilvaj395]

Random but wouldn't a drawback with 170's be the lack of gangway connection? Certainly this wouldn't be an issue on FNL and Kyle but I can see it putting more pressure on the WHL in summer, when sometimes the gangways are the difference between getting a seat and not, and people (particularly tourists) who may need to change units to be in the correct one will have to do so on the platform at Crianlarich. It would also inhibit general guard and catering duties between units as the guard would be stuck in the rear set and the catering could only service one set at a time.

Also would you do 2x3 car 170s on the WHL + Highland Explorer? This would still leave Fort William passengers missing one less carriage after it splits (3 instead of 4) but the upshot is that Oban would go from 2 coaches to 3. If you wanted to be silly (this is the speculative section after all) you could rip out some centre trailers and make a 4-car 170 and a 2-car together for WHL, it might alleviate some but not all of the drawbacks.

 

[stevieinselby]

the Problem also is that multiple units are very inflexible compared to coaching stock where during the summer you can add coaches as required. What’s needed is like what TransPennine had with the caf push pulls ideal with a new small diesel

When a lot of trains split/join en route, having multiple units is pretty much essential – the amount of mucking about you would need to do at Crianlarich to detach carriages from one loco and attach them to the other train would be unworkable. Far more flexible to have 2-car DMUs/BMUs that you can attach/detach as you need them. if you're going with loose coupled carriages so that you can lengthen and shorten the rake then you're not going to have a driving cab trailer either so you can't run it as a push-pull set, you're going to need to run the loco round at each end and each reversal, and suddenly the whole proposition is looking a lot more complicated.

I suspect that with all the creature comforts that passengers expect these days, the difference in cost between unpowered carriages and multiple units is smaller than it used to be as they have to be a lot more complex than they did in the days of the Mark 1. The days of having yards full of carriages that sit idle for hours of the day or months of the year but can then be pulled into service for busy spells is long gone, for many reasons.

 

[deltic08]

Random but wouldn't a drawback with 170's be the lack of gangway connection? Certainly this wouldn't be an issue on FNL and Kyle but I can see it putting more pressure on the WHL in summer, when sometimes the gangways are the difference between getting a seat and not.

Also would you do 2x3 car 170s on the WHL + Highland Explorer? This would still leave Fort William passengers missing one less carriage after it splits (3 instead of 4) but the upshot is that Oban would go from 2 coaches to 3. If you wanted to be silly (this is the speculative section after all) you could rip out some centre trailers and make a 4-car 170 and a 2-car together for WHL.

.....or swap 2 Scottish 3-cars for 3 XC 2-cars then run 2+3 cars as far as Crianlarich and split as usual.

 

[Russel]

Random but wouldn't a drawback with 170's be the lack of gangway connection? Certainly this wouldn't be an issue on FNL and Kyle but I can see it putting more pressure on the WHL in summer, when sometimes the gangways are the difference between getting a seat and not.

Also would you do 2x3 car 170s on the WHL + Highland Explorer? This would still leave Fort William passengers missing one less carriage after it splits (3 instead of 4) but the upshot is that Oban would go from 2 coaches to 3. If you wanted to be silly (this is the speculative section after all) you could rip out some centre trailers and make a 4-car 170 and a 2-car together for WHL.

Yeah this is true, maybe 170s aren't idea then.

Maybe ScotRail just need to stop kicking the can down the road and put out a tender for new stock.

 

[Highlander1]

HSTs just aren't practical on the WHL. Without the ability to split couple there would be significant operational issues. They're also so unreliable at the moment. As soon as one failed the entire line would come to a halt.
You're likely to see 158/170 cascaded from Fife once the BEMU fleet comes into service. There would be work required for platform clearance though. There were plans for a hydrogen powered unit to replace the 156/158 on the WHL, Far North and Kyle lines but Scottish Government finances have seen that pushed down the to do list

 

[nilvaj395]

Yeah this is true, maybe 170s aren't idea then.

Maybe ScotRail just need to stop kicking the can down the road and put out a tender for new stock.

This is outside of the realm of this thread (short term), but I think someone said already they could look into whatever Northern is looking at. I also would love a panorama car-esque feature on the WHL, and I can imagine it would be very popular.

I do have a pessimistic view though that anything new won't be as reliable as a 158 which you would need for these types of lines as @Highlander1 said

 

[Russel]

There were plans for a hydrogen powered unit to replace the 156/158 on the WHL, Far North and Kyle lines but Scottish Government finances have seen that pushed down the to do list

If they wanted to take the financial risk, this could be the perfect opportunity for Porterbrook to demonstrate one of their many alternative powered ideas! Maybe they could stick a Hydrogen tank in one of the 350/2s they has sitting around!

 

[Transilien]

I would assume 156's will remain on the WHL's until 2032/33 before being replaced by 158's as per the FNL's now, perhaps with a refresh to get them through to the mid2030's. Will the 156's last, doesn't appear to be much option really.

The west Highland line, and all rural Scottish lines like it should get unique stock which is tailored to these routes. Not castaways that are planned to be withdrawn elsewhere.

 

[43096]

Also would you do 2x3 car 170s on the WHL + Highland Explorer? This would still leave Fort William passengers missing one less carriage after it splits (3 instead of 4) but the upshot is that Oban would go from 2 coaches to 3. If you wanted to be silly (this is the speculative section after all) you could rip out some centre trailers and make a 4-car 170 and a 2-car together for WHL, it might alleviate some but not all of the drawbacks.

They are not trailers!

 

[Uncle Buck]

This is a speculative thread.

It's time Harry Potter moved forward a few decades and put steam behind him. Just get WCR to takeover the Fort William - Mallaig service. 2 HST units with a 3rd in reserve.

Make a feature of it. Of course Scotrail could do it, but WCR should produce a better quality heritage product.

No windows to hang out of, no doors to worry about, no sparks to set light to the scenery and relatively slow speed for safety.

If the Mexicans and Nigerians can make use of them why can't we?

I know, I know. Corrosion. Lack of spare parts to provide a reliable service in such a remote area. Just a thought.

Replacing the current stock with HSTs is unwise; replacing a popular tourist attraction with HSTs is doubly so.

The west Highland line, and all rural Scottish lines like it should get unique stock which is tailored to these routes. Not castaways that are planned to be withdrawn elsewhere.

Yes, and they could be used on similar lines in the rest of the country.

 

[JonathanH]

Yes, and they could be used on similar lines in the rest of the country.

A bit like the deployment of 156s in the 1980s.

Actually, a question for those saying that unique stock is needed, were 156s the right stock in the late 1980s bearing the need to manage costs (subject to some capacity issues and recognising that class 37s and coaches had to be replaced with something sensible) and what has changed now that something unique is needed?

 

[Killingworth]

My HST post was very much tongue in cheek - although strange things can happen!

 

[Uncle Buck]

My HST post was very much tongue in cheek - although strange things can happen!

In that case I can express my honest opinion on it which is that it is certifiable