'Intercity' trains - New Scotrail Franchise

[Surreyman]

"Amongst many other improvements, the next ScotRail franchise is to have faster more comfortable trains connecting its seven cities with scenic trains on tourist routes.
This much has been widely reported but perhaps the big story is why the Scottish Government wants to pay more for rail quality improvements.
With the current ScotRail franchise worth £2.5 billion over its 10 year term, specified improvements could increase the annual bill for Scotland’s railways by tens of millions.
On 19th November plans for the new franchise, starting in April 2015, were unveiled as tender documents were made public. Transport Minister Keith Brown advised that as well as improving passenger experience, the franchise specification is ‘focused on innovation, connectivity, value and benefit for communities throughout Scotland.’
The ITT contains a detailed specification for rolling stock, all of which must have Wi-Fi. For inter-city stock this includes the need for a ‘passenger environment consistent with modern inter-city passenger stock in UK and Europe; seats to be aligned with windows, large luggage areas within sight, cycle storage and flexible pram space.’
As the current class 170 DMUs do not meet this requirement, new or refurbished rolling stock will be required. It is possible that the specification of additional storage areas may result in more coaches.

The ITT reflects the findings of an extensive rail consultation exercise undertaken by Transport Scotland in 2012 from which it became clear that the current class 170s were not considered suitable for long distance journeys especially when compared with a journey to Aberdeen on East Coast Mark 3 coaches".

Given that Electrification is promised, initially to Dunblane, it would seem that a new build of 'Bi-Mode' unit is required, IEP anyone?
An interim solution could be Voyagers/Meridians, not sure how the numbers and timescales work though.
And please, if anyone suggests HSTs or loco hauled Mk 3 stock, forget it, the only place they are going is the scrapyard.

 

[gordonthemoron]

could they buy some old Glacier Express coaches/trains?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Interesting that they want to replace the 170s. That could lead to a very large DMU cascade back across the Border (regardless of independence as they can't have room for that many DMUs on their network). IEP to me would be logical, production line available in NE England and routes to Inverness, Glasgow and Aberdeen being cleared for EC IEP anyways. Maintenance sharing with EC in some cases too.

Logic suggests anyway, and if bought in the normal way unlikely to be more expensive than anything else. Also Meridians post 2020 is an option but personally i would go IEP as they can specify the interiors to what they want too.

 

[tbtc]

I suppose it depends on what routes they are talking about.

Edinburgh - Falkirk High - Glasgow is the "flagship" service, which will be electrified shortly.

Edinburgh/Glasgow to Inverness/ Aberdeen services are the ones most in need of a long distance ambience, but will need to be diesel operated (other than the bit from Glasgow to Dunblane).

They've generally had the same stock on Falkirk High services as for Inverness/ Aberdeen services since the '80s (push/pull 47/7s, replaced by 158s, replaced by 170s).

So would that mean one type of train for Falkirk High services (wholly electric) and a bi-mode for the Aberdeen/ Inverness routes? Is the Falkirk High route big enough to warrant its own type of stock?

As YorkshireBear says, if the routes from Edinburgh to Inverness and Aberdeen are being cleared for IEP services from London, then it would be logical to look at them for "domestic" services.

125mph stock like 222s seems a waste on these routes though.

PS: This then leads on to wondering about what other diesel stock would be required in Scotland post-EGIP. 156s are fine on the WHL and GSW (plus would be fine on the Far North, where 90mph stock is a waste), but keeping three different types of DMU seems overkill (esp with something else doing the longer distance services)

 

[sprinterguy]

As the current class 170 DMUs do not meet this requirement, new or refurbished rolling stock will be required. It is possible that the specification of additional storage areas may result in more coaches.

The ITT reflects the findings of an extensive rail consultation exercise undertaken by Transport Scotland in 2012 from which it became clear that the current class 170s were not considered suitable for long distance journeys especially when compared with a journey to Aberdeen on East Coast Mark 3 coaches".

Note that the draft ITT only states that the class 170s are unsuitable in their current layout. The precise wording is as follows:

Bidders should note that, in the opinion of Transport Scotland, the existing Class 170 vehicles as currently fitted out would not comply, but if suitably refurbished they would be capable of being compliant. Bidders should not take this to mean, however, that Transport Scotland does or does not endorse the continued use of the existing Class 170s or 158s. Bidders may choose to use re-fitted, alternative or new vehicles.

The Franchisee will be expected to ensure that the whole fleet providing inter-city services shall be compliant as early as possible but by no later than from the end of CP5, which is in March 2019.

The Draft ITT lists the following minimum requirement to be met by Inter-city rolling stock, in addition to the existing passenger facilities:

• High quality and safe passenger environment consistent with modern inter-city passenger rolling stock in the UK and Europe. This condition is to be maintained throughout the Franchise Term, by means of an interior refresh if necessary;
• Bogied vehicles;
• Standard Class accommodation with a seating density no greater than a 2+2 seat configuration;
• Where First / Business Class is provided, a clear differentiation between quality of First / Business and Standard Class accommodation;
• Seats aligned with windows where practicable and where this does not lead to a significant loss in capacity or unacceptable leg-room;
• Air conditioning and appropriate heating, including during station stops;
• Toilet provision on board which is no less than currently provided on each route and that avoids smell being noticeable in seated areas;
• Real-time visual and audible passenger information system. TSI PRM compliance represents the minimum compliant standard;
• Facilities for storing large items of luggage within sight/proximity of passengers when seated – which in terms of capacity should be taken to be the same as provided currently on a ScotRail Class 170 with the addition of an extra luggage stack in each carriage which will occupy the space of approximately two seats; overhead racks for airline cabin style luggage, flexible space for pushchairs/prams and cycle storage facilities (minimum 2 cycles per 3 car multiple unit or equivalent);
• Wi-Fi (capability fully compatible with modern standards);
• 230V power sockets (one per pair of seats) capable of charging a laptop, mobile phone or similar device;
• Tables at all seats (may be fixed or folding);
• No more than 50% of the seats to be ‘airline’ style layout;
• Design to maximise comfort for standing passengers at peak times, e.g. space and handhold provision;
• Bodyside door locations / width and interior layout to facilitate rapid boarding and alighting; and
• Ability to support at least an at-seat catering service which is available to all passengers.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I think that IEP is a reasonably likely option, bought not through the DfT PPI scheme but as a standard ROSCO order from Hitachi. EGIP finishes in around 2020 and after that the Fife Circle will be the next major scheme, then continuing up through Fife to Dundee and then to Aberdeen, and to Perth and Inverness. IEP is being cleared to Aberdeen and to Inverness for East Coast and since the depots are also being upgraded to cope quite a lot of the necessary infrastructure works are happening anyway. Because the electrification will take quite some time and the majority of trains will still have to continue through past the wires until its finished, bi-mode makes much more sense as an option than relying upon diesel-only units for long periods of time. At the same time, the E&G HSR route will require 225km/h electric units with ERTMS to run into the existing terminii. Class 801s would be all that is needed for this new line, which could allow a consistent ScotRail InterCity fleet for all routes around Scotland.

If we run out of places to run Voyagers/Super Voyagers/Meridians at 125mph then I imagine they can be de-rated and used as long regional trains to replace 158s, such as on Aberdeen-Inverness.

 

[gordonthemoron]

nice to see they've scuppered Pacers and Voyagers/Pendos in the ITT

 

[David Goddard]

Based on current frequencies and timings, there are about 20 diagrams for the Edinburgh/Glasgow to Aberdeen/Inverness workings. Add to this a further four for each of the Edinburgh to Dundee and Edinburgh to Perth services and a fleet size in the region of thirty would be needed.

 

[sprinterguy]

Based on current frequencies and timings, there are about 20 diagrams for the Edinburgh/Glasgow to Aberdeen/Inverness workings. Add to this a further four for each of the Edinburgh to Dundee and Edinburgh to Perth services and a fleet size in the region of thirty would be needed.

The Edinburgh to Dundee and Perth workings are not a stipulated part of the "Inter-city inititative". Not that this stops any prospective bidder including them if it is more convenient from a rostering perspective.

Aberdeen to Inverness, however, is included under the inter-city banner for the purposes of the Scotrail franchise.

 

[ainsworth74]

The Draft ITT lists the following minimum requirement to be met by Inter-city rolling stock, in addition to the existing passenger facilities:

• Bogied vehicles;

That rules out Pacers then

 

[edwin_m]

The Edinburgh-Glasgow and Transpennine electrifications don't yet have rolling stock ordered and the specification for the two is pretty similar - interiors providing good levels of comfort for longer journeys but still able to soak up crowds when necessary. For both the best fit is probably a 3-car unit of 23m stock with end gangways and 1/3 and 2/3 door spacing (sorry Rhydgaled!).

There is probably a political imperative to ensure that Aberdeen and Inverness get stock with perceived quality levels at least as good as used between Edinburgh and Glasgow. If refurbished 170s don't cut it then how about 185s? These do have higher costs and suffer from differential speed restrictions, though the greater installed power might be useful.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I believe the middle doors on the routes into Northern Scotland are not well liked due to reducing temperature in the saloon, hence my suggestion of IEP. Your suggestion would most likely be suitable for EGIP though.

 

[Blindtraveler]

I believe the middle doors on the routes into Northern Scotland are not well liked due to reducing temperature in the saloon, hence my suggestion of IEP.

not well liked? Understatement! Same goes for the 170s on this route full stop. For me, the idea of 185s is a good one but with a refurb to include nicer seats, end gangways, more plugs and internall doors to block drafts. Failing that yes IEP for sure. The 170s are fine for the remaining DMU Services and should be retained as I believe the GSW Caan be cleared for them with some work, they would be good north of Inverness esp if regueared and HML is getting new stock Id guess. The sprinters can then go south.↲

 

[edwin_m]

Adding a gangway is likely to be impractical for any train with two end windows. The divider between them is a major element of the structure and removing it would require a rebuild of the end structure which in turn would affect all the equipment in the cab.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Adding a gangway is likely to be impractical for any train with two end windows. The divider between them is a major element of the structure and removing it would require a rebuild of the end structure which in turn would affect all the equipment in the cab.

Indeed. Though both Turbostars/Electrostars and Desiros are (to a certain extent) modular platforms- so it would perhaps be a case of replacing the whole cab rather than restructuring the existing one. Of course, the fact that even the 185s are getting towards a decade old (and the design has been discontinued by the manufacturers; AND the crashworthiness standards have probably been tightened too!) means that the point at which such an undertaking would become unviable would be quite an obstacle to overcome...

I suppose that as ridership has been improving rapidly nationwide, there may be a point at which 2 cars is insufficient for a reasonable majority of services. In that event, it might be a fair bit cheaper to replace half the cab ends of a number of 2-car 170s with an internal coach end (if such a thing is possible) to create a fleet of 4-car units? Presumably that would mean the crashworthiness question would be less of an issue.

 

[jopsuk]

To a certain extent the platform used is modular. Obviosuly a lot more complex that I'll make it, but in theory it should be possible to remove the whole cab front and bolt on the cab from the LM 172s (not the cab from the Electrostars, that would be slightly too wide).

Clearly it is vastly more complex than that, but I believe in principal it could be done.

 

[anthony263]

I would not be too surprised to see Hitachi offering IEP to Scotrail although perhaps a alternative similar to the class 395's. Hitachi are going to be hunting for work to keep their shiny train building/sticker fitting facility open.

Bombardier I think are also going to be pushing for additional work so perhaps we could see a modfied Adventra design with end doors.

In the meantime I am sure those class 170's would be very much welcomed elswehre on the uk railway network or even the class 158's (These I think would be in very high demand especially in Wales or with East Midlands trains)

 

[jopsuk]

I suppose that as ridership has been improving rapidly nationwide, there may be a point at which 2 cars is insufficient for a reasonable majority of services. In that event, it might be a fair bit cheaper to replace half the cab ends of a number of 2-car 170s with an internal coach end (if such a thing is possible) to create a fleet of 4-car units? Presumably that would mean the crashworthiness question would be less of an issue.

Scotrail's fleet of 170s is entirely 3-car. If it were possible to put intenral ends on, I'd suggest that really, for the Edinburgh/Glasgow-Inverness/Aberdeen services, six car units would be about right.

As it is clearly possible to put vestibule doors on (at a slight space cost and a reliability issue), this could potentially meet the requirments- six car units, with vestibule doors, a full 1st class carriage at one end and an enhanced catering service.

 

[BananaRepublic]

...IEP to me would be logical......Maintenance sharing with EC in some cases too.

Maintenance will likely be provided as part of the lease arrangement, as will be the case with EC, i.e. by Hitachi.

....and if bought in the normal way unlikely to be more expensive than anything else.

I think that IEP is a reasonably likely option, bought not through the DfT PPI scheme but as a standard ROSCO order from Hitachi.....

"....if bought in the normal way..."
"....as a standard ROSCO order from Hitachi...."

What would you consider "the normal way" or "a standard ROSCO order".
Neither exist as such.

The types of Train leasing arrangements have varied and evolved since privatisation.
The so called PFI arrangement for the IEP, in practise is almost identical to the most common, or "normal way" of more recent times.

In the case of Hitachi offering their SET for this Scottish contract, it would almost certainly involve an arrangement similar to that for their Class 395's with SouthEastern, or Siemens arrangements with most of their UK customers....and also the arrangement for SET's supplied under the IEP.

 

[Haydn1971]

Yay ! More knackered old hand-me-downs for Northern

Seriously though, the spec on the first page reads like a Desiro/Aventra sales brochure rather than a Class 800/801 type unit. Like the idea of scenic trains though on the tourist lines.

 

[SkinnyDave]

I think we will see the Aventra or Desiro on the Edinburgh -Glasgow Q Street and the rest of the EGIP..

Could be 222s for the long distance runs

170s will be kept and will release 158s for elsewhere

 

[Class83]

I think we will see the Aventra or Desiro on the Edinburgh -Glasgow Q Street and the rest of the EGIP..

Could be 222s for the long distance runs

170s will be kept and will release 158s for elsewhere

380's seem the most sensible option for the Edinburgh-Glasgow routes, and the 222s wouldn't be a bad fit for the Edinburgh and Glasgow to Aberdeen and Inverness services. Might be slightly overkill on Aberdeen-Inverness though, so I suspect those would stay 170 operated along with the remaining non-electrified routes.

 

[Nym]

Or just have a fleet of Desiro City units, some with generator cars fitted (leading car, no interunit gangways, ~1500 - 2000hp per 3/4 cars), with car end doors and 2+2 standard and 1+2 first with snack bar / vending machine catering.

Possibly having fixed length (6/7 car) units for all services

PS: The generator units would be fitted above the solebar as to avoid not being able to find generators with EU compliance, enable easyer conversion to passenger / luggage space, Provide luggage space in the remaining car half, and allow the car to be used in any Desiro City rake as required, so that unit lengths can be changed within the design principals of the Desiro City platform.

 

[SkinnyDave]

380's seem the most sensible option for the Edinburgh-Glasgow routes, and the 222s wouldn't be a bad fit for the Edinburgh and Glasgow to Aberdeen and Inverness services. Might be slightly overkill on Aberdeen-Inverness though, so I suspect those would stay 170 operated along with the remaining non-electrified routes.

I don't think it will be 380s

 

[47802]

Seems to me they are describing 170's with a modified layout so there you go 170's with a modified layout, 380's or something similar for Glasgow Edinburgh Job done.

 

[fgwrich]

And please, if anyone suggests HSTs or loco hauled Mk 3 stock, forget it, the only place they are going is the scrapyard.

Almost. I'm going to stick up for the Mk3 or Loco Hauled with 2 options. The first is a refurbishment akin to the DB/Chiltern Mk3s with the Porterbrook opertions for a DVT/Second cab. The other is looking into new rolling stock possibly from Siemens, with the same being used for the new Caledonian Sleeper service - with a configuration based around the OBB RailJet / Siemens viaggio comfort platform but obviously downsized for the UK Market (Siemens were reportedly already up for this before IEP turned up in the format that it did)} Both of these being used for the long distance Edinburgh/Glasgow to Aberdeen/Inverness type services.

I'd like to suggest another new build but unfortunately wont be happening with the onset of electrification is a DMU based on the Rotem Irish Rail 22000s. Long distance DMUs designed around a Mk3, which would be perfectly acceptable down here in England as well!

But coming back down to reality for a moment, Transport Scotland obviously seems to be impressed by Siemens, is after a long distance train most likely to be an EMU, and by the sounds of it isn't keen on 1/3 3/3 door positions - a new build successor to the 444? Which could spark up some interest for use across other parts of the country including the Great Eastern if the 444 type idea is to the pursued.

(Most of this is runny away with reality, but I think there's life in those Mk3s yet to be had, as proved by the interest being drummed up by Chiltern and Porterbrook)

 

[NotATrainspott]

Maintenance will likely be provided as part of the lease arrangement, as will be the case with EC, i.e. by Hitachi.

"....if bought in the normal way..."
"....as a standard ROSCO order from Hitachi...."

What would you consider "the normal way" or "a standard ROSCO order".
Neither exist as such.

The types of Train leasing arrangements have varied and evolved since privatisation.
The so called PFI arrangement for the IEP, in practise is almost identical to the most common, or "normal way" of more recent times.

In the case of Hitachi offering their SET for this Scottish contract, it would almost certainly involve an arrangement similar to that for their Class 395's with SouthEastern, or Siemens arrangements with most of their UK customers....and also the arrangement for SET's supplied under the IEP.

What I think we both meant is that Transport Scotland wouldn't be dealing with Agility Trains, rather with Hitachi financed by one of the normal ROSCOs like Porterbrook or Eversholt as they did for other orders like the 170s or 334s.

 

[47802]

But coming back down to reality for a moment, Transport Scotland obviously seems to be impressed by Siemens, is after a long distance train most likely to be an EMU, and by the sounds of it isn't keen on 1/3 3/3 door positions - a new build successor to the 444? Which could spark up some interest for use across other parts of the country including the Great Eastern if the 444 type idea is to the pursued.

(Most of this is runny away with reality, but I think there's life in those Mk3s yet to be had, as proved by the interest being drummed up by Chiltern and Porterbrook)

• Design to maximise comfort for standing passengers at peak times, e.g. space and handhold provision;
• Bodyside door locations / width and interior layout to facilitate rapid boarding and alighting;


That sounds like 1/3 2/3 doors to me, and I doubt anybody will want to build new diesel units, IEP hybrid possible but expensive and not much electric initially for such as Aberdeen. Inverness, so that's refurb 170's or possible cascaded units which would have to be 221/222/185 as for loco hauled with all the suggested possible loco hauled on this forum I think the there's going to have to be a lot of new 67/68's built, still of course that's Rail Enthusiast's fantasy land not the real world.

 

[Goatboy]

High quality and safe passenger environment consistent with modern inter-city passenger rolling stock in the UK and Europe

Design to maximise comfort for standing passengers at peak times, e.g. space and handhold provision;
• Bodyside door locations / width and interior layout to facilitate rapid boarding and alighting; and

So do they want a commuter train or an intercity train? It seems they don't really know...

 

[185143]

That rules out Pacers then

I was going to helpfully suggest that Northern run the trains in the new franchise, but this rules out pacers so I guess that's impossible then!