222 contract for Scotrail: updates (not speculation)

[Russel]

I may have missed it, but I can see that Scotrail have said they are taking 5 car units, but aren't some of these currently in 7 car formations? Has it been said what will become of the spare cars if some units are to be shortened for Scotrail?

 

[Deepgreen]

They will basically be "new" trains when they enter service.

Yes, I read the story in an on-line feed the other day and the writer couldn't decide whether to call them 'new' or 'refurbished' and so did both, frequently, throughout the story!

 

[JamesT]

I may have missed it, but I can see that Scotrail have said they are taking 5 car units, but aren't some of these currently in 7 car formations? Has it been said what will become of the spare cars if some units are to be shortened for Scotrail?

Lumo are also taking some 222s and using them in 6-car formations. A previous post has suggested there will only be 3 spare cars when everything is reformed. Which will be the ROSCOs problem to deal with. I expect they will be kept in storage in case somebody wants to lengthen in the future, or they will be a useful source of spare parts for the rest of the fleet.

 

[RiverDon]

Lumo are also taking some 222s and using them in 6-car formations. A previous post has suggested there will only be 3 spare cars when everything is reformed. Which will be the ROSCOs problem to deal with. I expect they will be kept in storage in case somebody wants to lengthen in the future, or they will be a useful source of spare parts for the rest of the fleet.

Scotrail is taking the three spare centre cars too.

 

[jfowkes]

The 222s should be a lot more reliable than the HSTs, so fewer trains needed to cover the same number of diagrams.

Given the discussion in https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/emr-class-222’s-declining-reliability.289251/, the HSTs must be pretty bad to be worse than the 222s!

I hope they get a *very* good refresh and overhaul when they go up there.

 

[RiverDon]

Given the discussion in https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/emr-class-222’s-declining-reliability.289251/, the HSTs must be pretty bad to be worse than the 222s!

I've been working won HSTs for nearly a year now and I've only had one failure which was a brake fault before departure. I've not experienced any other problems in service. It's pretty rare to get a booked HST substituted with a 170 or 158 too, I can't remember the last time I had that. Although I have heard that up to maybe 12-18 months ago they were failing and being substituted regularly but they have definitely settled down now. The new WSP equipment was giving issues for a while but it has also calmed down. The HSTs get a bad press but they're not actually that unreliable in service these days.

 

[43096]

Given the discussion in https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/emr-class-222’s-declining-reliability.289251/, the HSTs must be pretty bad to be worse than the 222s!

Or just someone with an anti-HST bias. How anyone can say a Turbostar is quieter than a Mark 3 I don’t know, given there is an engine under the floor on one but not the other.

 

[AndrewE]

I really hope that the 222's engines are on rafts and that there are a good number of spares so that they can be swapped out without impacting set availability too badly...

 

[Highlander1]

You have to use the selective door opening or you can't open the doors on a 222. The driver has to select the number of coaches to open every time they open the doors or hand over control to the guard to open.

Some platforms on the routes only hold 4 coaches so unless they get extended or 222s don't call at them, selective door opening will be in operation.

Correct. Some hold less than 4 coaches. I suspect we may see a substantial timetable change once they come into service for that very reason but we're getting into the speculative.

 

[waverley47]

Correct. Some hold less than 4 coaches. I suspect we may see a substantial timetable change once they come into service for that very reason but we're getting into the speculative.

No comment on the above I'm afraid. The big timetable recast will come with the BEMUs, as given the performance examples we've seen, it's looking like ten minutes will be coming off the Leven runs as a minimum, and trains through Fife will be able to stretch their legs a lot more.

 

[Highlander1]

I've been working won HSTs for nearly a year now and I've only had one failure which was a brake fault before departure. I've not experienced any other problems in service. It's pretty rare to get a booked HST substituted with a 170 or 158 too, I can't remember the last time I had that. Although I have heard that up to maybe 12-18 months ago they were failing and being substituted regularly but they have definitely settled down now. The new WSP equipment was giving issues for a while but it has also calmed down. The HSTs get a bad press but they're not actually that unreliable in service these days.

Failures happen frequently and they are regularly substituted for 170s. I was on a 170 yesterday that should have been a HST. One broke down at Gleneagles the other day and caused significant disruption. From a passenger point of view, the leaking corroded ceilings, faulty vestibule doors and electrical issues seem to be every train.

 

[RiverDon]

Failures happen frequently and they are regularly substituted for 170s.

All I can say is that's not my experience.

 

[John Bishop]

I've been working won HSTs for nearly a year now and I've only had one failure which was a brake fault before departure. I've not experienced any other problems in service. It's pretty rare to get a booked HST substituted with a 170 or 158 too, I can't remember the last time I had that. Although I have heard that up to maybe 12-18 months ago they were failing and being substituted regularly but they have definitely settled down now. The new WSP equipment was giving issues for a while but it has also calmed down. The HSTs get a bad press but they're not actually that unreliable in service these days.

I’d consider yourself lucky! Quite a few failures recently and quite common for a 170 subsitution for HST! I’ve had 3 alone this week. The fleet is knackered and full of corrosion, hence why 5 Mk3s headed down south this week as they are not fit for passenger service, indeed a large proportion of the fleet are similarly affected. They've had their day but time to move on.

 

[RiverDon]

I’d consider yourself lucky! Quite a few failures recently and quite common for a 170 subsitution for HST! I’ve had 3 alone this week.

My last one was before Christmas! They are definitely ready for the scrappy but I think some people on this forum like to lay it on a bit thick about how bad they supposedly are.

I'm looking forward to the 222s though.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Isn't it needed for Pitlochry?

Thought Pitlochry had some of the longest platforms on the HML.

Long platforms yes, but if trains are crossing there the first to arrive has to stop at the mid platform signal although there is still a decent length of platform in rear.

 

[sprinterguy]

Mk4s were a huge improvement on Mk3s – there was a really noticeable difference between IC125s and IC225s when I used to travel on GNER.

I'm surprised to see this opinion, as the mark 4s had shockingly bad ride quality for at least the first couple of years from new and some of the flimsiest, most plasticky seating I've encountered on any UK train. By the time they'd been under GNER stewardship for a couple of years at least the ride quality issues had been overcome, but they were looking well tired and tatty internally - the interiors didn't wear well at all after barely a decade.

 

[Deepgreen]

I'm surprised to see this opinion, as the mark 4s had shockingly bad ride quality for at least the first couple of years from new and some of the flimsiest, most plasticky seating I've encountered on any UK train. By the time they'd been under GNER stewardship for a couple of years at least the ride quality issues had been overcome, but they were looking well tired and tatty internally - the interiors didn't wear well at all after barely a decade.

Me too - the Mk3s are still widely regarded as the best coaches produced to date, which is a sad reflection on the railway's ability to learn and improve.

 

[InTheEastMids]

I really hope that the 222's engines are on rafts and that there are a good number of spares so that they can be swapped out without impacting set availability too badly...

The current reliability issues EMR seems to be having don't - in my view - reflect their reliability over most of their lives. Whether maintenance is being skimped because of handback, or maintenance are just overwhelmed keeping Cl222 in service whilst debugging 810s I don't know.

Also, in general, 222 can keep time with an engine out, which obviously an HST can't do, and I think that redundancy is part of the secret of the apparent reliability.

 

[Dfatcontroller]

It looks that way. Lumo are getting 222001-005, while ScotRail will inherit 006-023 and 101-104. Has it been confirmed that Lumo’s are going to /6?

My conclusion is this will result in 222501-504 (ex 101-104) and 506-523 (ex 006-023). Thus no 505.

Later down the line, if ScotRail opted to take on Lumo’s 5 then there’s a high chance the class return to original unit numbers at that point.

Numbers would be unlikely to revert as all manner of paperwork would need to be changed.

 

[thenorthern]

I notice all over the press releases it's mentioned that the "new" fleet or "newer" fleet which is being picked up by the media. It's a bit of a stretch to describe the Class 222s as "new" given they are now 20 years old. I am aware that the Class 222s are quite unpopular on her but they do have better acceleration than the HSTs, meaning that they have better journey times but to describe them as "new" is a stretch.

Slightly off topic I remember when EMR introduced "newer" trains to the Crewe to Derby line in the form of Class 170s in 2020. Sure they were "newer" than the trains they replaced but they were sometimes 22 years old by that point and in some cases only 6 years newer than the Class 158s they replaced. What made it worse was I remember the Class 170s being introduced by Central Trains on the Crewe to Derby Line back in 1999 when they were actually "new" trains, they were of course withdrawn from the Crewe to Derby line in 2007 when East Midlands Trains came in. Meaning while while the line had "new trains" in reality, they had gone back in time 21 years.

I wish TOCs stopped describing refurbished trains as "new" as a 20 year old car would never be described as "new".

 

[Russel]

I notice all over the press releases it's mentioned that the "new" fleet or "newer" fleet which is being picked up by the media. It's a bit of a stretch to describe the Class 222s as "new" given they are now 20 years old. I am aware that the Class 222s are quite unpopular on her but they do have better acceleration than the HSTs, meaning that they have better journey times but to describe them as "new" is a stretch.

Slightly off topic I remember when EMR introduced "newer" trains to the Crewe to Derby line in the form of Class 170s in 2020. Sure they were "newer" than the trains they replaced but they were sometimes 22 years old by that point and in some cases only 6 years newer than the Class 158s they replaced. What made it worse was I remember the Class 170s being introduced by Central Trains on the Crewe to Derby Line back in 1999 when they were actually "new" trains, they were of course withdrawn from the Crewe to Derby line in 2007 when East Midlands Trains came in. Meaning while while the line had "new trains" in reality, they had gone back in time 21 years.

I wish TOCs stopped describing refurbished trains as "new" as a 20 year old car would never be described as "new".

They may not be brand new, but they are 25 years younger than what they are going to replace and worlds apart from the HST.

 

[Snow1964]

They may not be brand new, but they are 25 years younger than what they are going to replace and worlds apart from the HST.

Yes, and the maintenance contract ending 2037-2042 (depending on options) puts them in a phase 2 timeframe of Scotrail fleet replacement, along with 334s and 170s.

Phase 1 would be 318, 320, 156, 158

The 380 and 385s would probably be a separate phase 2050-2060

 

[kkong]

The majority of platforms are too long for 10 cars, even the bay platforms at Aberdeen don’t fully fit a 9 car 800 with the cab and crew door being off the platform.

Attached is a photo of a 9-car 800 at Aberdeen P5 this afternoon.

The crew door is definitely on the platform and I'd argue that the cab door is also just on the platform.

A 10-car 222 would be a couple of metres shorter than this.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

Attached is a photo of a 9-car 800 at Aberdeen P5 this afternoon.

The crew door is definitely on the platform and I'd argue that the cab door is also just on the platform.

A 10-car 222 would be a couple of metres shorter than this.

View attachment 200779

Shows you the last time I was up in Aberdeen!

I guess it allows it to be possible then, but surely it will be mega rare.

 

[D365]

I’ve seen in the images of how the 222s will look, they seem to have the numbers as 2225xx. Is this going to be the case and Scotrail will make a new subclass of /5s (Like Lumo made the /6s) or will they stay as they are now?

It looks that way. Lumo are getting 222001-005, while ScotRail will inherit 006-023 and 101-104. Has it been confirmed that Lumo’s are going to /6?

My conclusion is this will result in 222501-504 (ex 101-104) and 506-523 (ex 006-023). Thus no 505.

Later down the line, if ScotRail opted to take on Lumo’s 5 then there’s a high chance the class return to original unit numbers at that point.

Equally, the imagery from ScotRail's press release might be AI generated, thereby resulting in meaningless subclass designations.

 

[williamn]

Or just someone with an anti-HST bias. How anyone can say a Turbostar is quieter than a Mark 3 I don’t know, given there is an engine under the floor on one but not the other.

Depends a lot on where you sit. Generally the sliding vestibule doors don’t work so there’s an awful lot of squeaking and banging to be heard if you’re anywhere near the end of a carriage. Something atmospheric to me but not desirable to a regular traveller. Plus the power cars aren’t exactly quiet either. I can see how a Turbostar would be deemed quieter.

 

[HighlandStorm]

I can see how a Turbostar would be deemed quieter.

They literally are working flat out, yet going nowhere fast on the Highland Main Line climbs. Engines seem to resonate with the entire train, hard to comprehend how anyone could think a 170 is quieter on this route! On limited stops on the E&G they were OK, but they should never have been used on longer journeys.

With the latest announcement on the 222s, the irony is Transport Scotland wrote the 2014 invitation to tender to effectively rule out 22x and 170s from intercity ScotRail services !

 

[fgwrich]

Me too - the Mk3s are still widely regarded as the best coaches produced to date, which is a sad reflection on the railway's ability to learn and improve.

On this point, I wonder how different the situation could have been if Alstom had built the Mk5 with the Coradia UK as a base or continued LHCS production off the Nightstar design. They (the 175 & 180) have always felt like a successor to the Mk3 and clearly have bits of it that are inspired by them. Unfortunately I’ve not been over to Canada yet to try the former Nightstar vehicles before they face retirement so can’t comment on their ride quality but have wracked up many years on the UK Coradia’s and they ride perfectly.

 

[38Cto15E]

Could there be problems in the future with the 222's when working the Highland main line, are they going to be up for the task on this route?

 

[liamf656]

Could there be problems in the future with the 222's when working the Highland main line, are they going to be up for the task on this route?

I reckon they'll be alright