New ScotRail EMU's, Any more news?

[158722]

North Clyde, Argyle and Cathcart Circle platforms are 6x20m long and it would be very challenging to extend enough of them to allow DOO. The new trains are 3-4x23m long so could not double up when necessary. There are plenty of electrified or soon-to-be-electrified routes that don't run through these platforms that they can find use on. Simultaneously, the existing 3x20m EMUs (minus the 314s) are to be kept and refurbished for continued use on their current lines. Putting new longer 160km/h trains on 140km/h routes with platforms too short for them and putting old shorter 140km/h trains on 160km/h routes with platforms that are being extended at great expense for them would be utter madness.

So where are the new units going to be used then? As I've stated before, there are going to be 70 of them, of which something between 35 to 40 will be required for E&G, Stirling, Dunblane, Alloa, etc. And the balance?

 

[SC318250]

This is only a guess but

I suspect the new emus apart from Glasgow to Edinburgh will do Helensburgh/Milngavie to Edinburgh and possibly North Berwick/Dunbar, which which will allow the 334s to either take over the remaining North electrics and Argyle line services, which will then allow 318/320 to move to cover the 314s withdrawl and newly electrified East Kilbride and Barrhead/Kilmarnock/Shotts services or vice versas

 

[Scotrail84]

Yes they were, I was one of them. At least Edinburgh, Queen st and Stirling crews were all trained on Edinburgh sub, Haymarket West Jn - Portobello Jn. The engineering closures if I remember right were to facilitate the electrification of Haymarket north tunnel amongst other things. The services that ran round the sub were mostly E&Gs.

I can guarantee you that not everyone was given sub in the above depots you mention, in fact one of the major depots you mention had less than 50% trained on it. Most guards knowledge on the route has lapsed and would need a full day to learn it again.

 

[clc]

Maybe they'll increase frequency on the Cathcart Circle? Neilston could do with 4tph, even before factoring in the new station planned for Barrhead South.

 

[158722]

This is only a guess but

I suspect the new emus apart from Glasgow to Edinburgh will do Helensburgh/Milngavie to Edinburgh and possibly North Berwick/Dunbar, which which will allow the 334s to either take over the remaining North electrics and Argyle line services, which will then allow 318/320 to move to cover the 314s withdrawl and newly electrified East Kilbride and Barrhead/Kilmarnock/Shotts services or vice versas

That is entirely my reading of the subject, makes total sense.

 

[NotATrainspott]

This is only a guess but

I suspect the new emus apart from Glasgow to Edinburgh will do Helensburgh/Milngavie to Edinburgh and possibly North Berwick/Dunbar, which which will allow the 334s to either take over the remaining North electrics and Argyle line services, which will then allow 318/320 to move to cover the 314s withdrawl and newly electrified East Kilbride and Barrhead/Kilmarnock/Shotts services or vice versas

That still doesn't answer how they would expect them to serve Queen Street Low Level or the other major stations along the route. SDO is wonderful but when the busiest, most major stations along the route would require it it isn't really feasible. Unless they want to use 4x23m trains on the route all day, every day, and still reduce the number of seats available at peak times (remembering that it is not feasible to add any more services along the entire route due to the conflicts at Newbridge and Hyndland East) it still seems that the best course of action is to keep the existing 334s on these duties. These are already having WiFi and power sockets fitted and the only thing that they might then need would be tables. There are only fourteen 314s up for replacement, three of which are necessary on the Paisley Canal route which is currently run by 3 carriage 380s at times as well, so I imagine the AT200s will end up there as well.

 

[Altnabreac]

That still doesn't answer how they would expect them to serve Queen Street Low Level or the other major stations along the route. SDO is wonderful but when the busiest, most major stations along the route would require it it isn't really feasible. Unless they want to use 4x23m trains on the route all day, every day, and still reduce the number of seats available at peak times (remembering that it is not feasible to add any more services along the entire route due to the conflicts at Newbridge and Hyndland East) it still seems that the best course of action is to keep the existing 334s on these duties. These are already having WiFi and power sockets fitted and the only thing that they might then need would be tables. There are only fourteen 314s up for replacement, three of which are necessary on the Paisley Canal route which is currently run by 3 carriage 380s at times as well, so I imagine the AT200s will end up there as well.

I understood the 4 car AT200s were all required to run the Glasgow - Edinburgh via Falkirk services so any other routes AT200s are used on the only issue is the extra 18m or so from running 6 x 23m carriages.

On Edinburgh - Helensburgh runs all the platforms from Edinburgh - Airdrie were built as 150m anyway so no SDO needed anyway.

There can't be many platform issues between Helensburgh and Airdrie where a bit of SDO would work.

Is Queen St LL a lot less than 140m anyway? If so you'd probably want to lengthen them a little but I wouldn't think a 20m lengthening would be impossible anyway.

 

[SC318250]

Paisley Canal could be run by 2 units only.

A 4 car 380 does a few early morning runs
Before going on to Ayr runs

 

[clc]

The brochure on the TS website states:

"Refurbished trains and additional capacity on Glasgow suburban electric routes from December 2016"

http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk... franchise/Scotrail Brochure October 2014.pdf

Presumably refers to the 7 x 4 car 321s given the date. Any guesses as to how these will be deployed?

 

[jopsuk]

probably:
put on single unit diagrams that have marginal overcrowding at some point, in order to double up 320s (or 318s) on services that have more severe overcrowding?

 

[170401]

I can guarantee you that not everyone was given sub in the above depots you mention, in fact one of the major depots you mention had less than 50% trained on it. Most guards knowledge on the route has lapsed and would need a full day to learn it again.

So you would agree then that it would not be beyond the capabilities of the rail industry to train up 'some' relevant crews over the route from Greenhill lower - Glasgow Central for the purpose of diverting Glasgow - Aberdeen/Inverness services?

 

[ADRboy]

The new trains won't be on A2B. 334's will be staying there.

 

[Scotrail84]

So you would agree then that it would not be beyond the capabilities of the rail industry to train up 'some' relevant crews over the route from Greenhill lower - Glasgow Central for the purpose of diverting Glasgow - Aberdeen/Inverness services?

No I don't agree because the depots you mentioned have never had that route in first place, it would take months to train the crews on the route in question. It would cost an awful lot of money to run route learning trains in between the timed passenger services. You then have to cover the crews booked jobs that would be uncovered through route learning. There's not enough a/r to allow this.

 

[170401]

No I don't agree because the depots you mentioned have never had that route in first place, it would take months to train the crews on the route in question. It would cost an awful lot of money to run route learning trains in between the timed passenger services. You then have to cover the crews booked jobs that would be uncovered through route learning. There's not enough a/r to allow this.

So what do they plan to do with the Aberdeen and Inverness services for the 4 months of the Queen st tunnel closure (Which is still over a year away)?

 

[Scotrail84]

So what do they plan to do with the Aberdeen and Inverness services for the 4 months of the Queen st tunnel closure (Which is still over a year away)?

At the moment there is a couple of options. Start/terminate at bishopbriggs then run buses to the city centre. Option two is start/terminate at springburn transferring passengers to the LL services to get to queen St that way. Option 3 is run them into the LL via anniesland but that's a probably a non starter.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So what do they plan to do with the Aberdeen and Inverness services for the 4 months of the Queen st tunnel closure (Which is still over a year away)?

I've also heard they will only go as far as perth. With local services taking passengers to/from Glasgow. Another option is for passengers go to edinburgh for connections.

 

[170401]

At the moment there is a couple of options. Start/terminate at bishopbriggs then run buses to the city centre. Option two is start/terminate at springburn transferring passengers to the LL services to get to queen St that way. .

So what will happen to Dunblane/Stirling/Alloa/Cumbernauld/Grahamston services? If this actually happens it'll mean an awful lot of buses parked on an already very congested road or an awful lot of passengers using local services between Queen st ll and Springburn. Might be ok for a Sunday but not during the peaks Monday - Friday. You ever seen the 1718 - Alloa or 1748 - Dunblane never mind lumping passengers for the 1741 Aberdeen onto the same trains to connect at Springburn? Sending them all in buses to Bishopbriggs in the evening peak would just be ridiculous.

Option 3 is run them into the LL via anniesland but that's a probably a non starter

Is that because "it would take months to train the crews on the route in question. It would cost an awful lot of money to run route learning trains in between the timed passenger services. You then have to cover the crews booked jobs that would be uncovered through route learning. There's not enough a/r to allow this."

I've also heard they will only go as far as perth. With local services taking passengers to/from Glasgow. Another option is for passengers go to edinburgh for connections.

I can see this going down well politically in the North and Northeast!

 

[edwin_m]

At the moment there is a couple of options. Start/terminate at bishopbriggs then run buses to the city centre. Option two is start/terminate at springburn transferring passengers to the LL services to get to queen St that way. Option 3 is run them into the LL via anniesland but that's a probably a non starter.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I've also heard they will only go as far as perth. With local services taking passengers to/from Glasgow. Another option is for passengers go to edinburgh for connections.

I imagine truncation at Bishopbriggs would get pretty short shrift from Transport Scotland and Springburn would be nearly as bad. For the Perth option what are these local services that connect to Glasgow? If existing ones are being extended then surely that's about as much resources as running the fast trains through to Glasgow?

I have to say if the cost of training crews is the reason for considering these very unsatisfactory options, then it makes a very good argument to reduce them by adopting the DOO you oppose in your signature!

 

[Scotrail84]

So what will happen to Dunblane/Stirling/Alloa/Cumbernauld/Grahamston services? If this actually happens it'll mean an awful lot of buses parked on an already very congested road or an awful lot of passengers using local services between Queen st ll and Springburn. Might be ok for a Sunday but not during the peaks Monday - Friday. You ever seen the 1718 - Alloa or 1748 - Dunblane never mind lumping passengers for the 1741 Aberdeen onto the same trains to connect at Springburn? Sending them all in buses to Bishopbriggs in the evening peak would just be ridiculous.



Is that because "it would take months to train the crews on the route in question. It would cost an awful lot of money to run route learning trains in between the timed passenger services. You then have to cover the crews booked jobs that would be uncovered through route learning. There's not enough a/r to allow this."

Queen street men must have the LL route already as the sleeper sometimes runs that way. Crew change at bishopbriggs?



I can see this going down well politically in the North and Northeast!

It's major engineering works, passengers have to understand that. Whatever they do will be well advertised beforehand.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I imagine truncation at Bishopbriggs would get pretty short shrift from Transport Scotland and Springburn would be nearly as bad. For the Perth option what are these local services that connect to Glasgow? If existing ones are being extended then surely that's about as much resources as running the fast trains through to Glasgow?

I have to say if the cost of training crews is the reason for considering these very unsatisfactory options, then it makes a very good argument to reduce them by adopting the DOO you oppose in your signature!

The route in question is currently doo and I find it highly unlikely that crews would be trained. I can only go by what I'm hearing. Nobody really knows what is going to happen.

What I can tell you is that when Winchburgh tunnel shuts then the plan is to start/terminate dunblanes at Linlithgow. Queen streets will be every 30 min six cars via dalmeny.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Glasgow dunblanes might run in to springburn via Cumbernauld and terminate there?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's major engineering works, passengers have to understand that. Whatever they do will be well advertised beforehand.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The route in question is currently doo and I find it highly unlikely that crews would be trained. I can only go by what I'm hearing. Nobody really knows what is going to happen.

What I can tell you is that when Winchburgh tunnel shuts then the plan is to start/terminate dunblanes at Linlithgow. Queen streets will be every 30 min six cars via dalmeny.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Glasgow dunblanes might run in to springburn via Cumbernauld and terminate there? Then depart out via bishopbriggs as there was something about a crossover going in at cowlairs to allow this mentioned during a recent brief. [./QUOTE]

 

[170401]

. I can only go by what I'm hearing. Nobody really knows what is going to happen.

But you seem pretty sure that Aberdeen/Inverness services won't go to Glasgow Central, is that fact or just what you're hearing from the bothy experts? What are your sources?

Then depart out via bishopbriggs as there was something about a crossover going in at cowlairs to allow this mentioned during a recent brief.

No their wasn't. The crossover mentioned in the briefing was at Anniesland to allow services to access GLQ LL from Maryhill. Nothing has ever been mentioned about any infrastructure changes at Cowlairs in the briefings.

 

[Scotrail84]

But you seem pretty sure that Aberdeen/Inverness services won't go to Glasgow Central, is that fact or just what you're hearing from the bothy experts? What are your sources?

No it wasn't the bothy lawyers. A briefing this was mentioned. Also they are going to encourage the use of the A-B line for queen street customers during the closure to ease the pressure on the main line. Pretty certain central won't happen as 170s are no good to them over there plus the aforementioned route problems.


No their wasn't. The crossover mentioned in the briefing was at Anniesland to allow services to access GLQ LL from Maryhill. Nothing has ever been mentioned about any infrastructure changes at Cowlairs in the briefings.

Possibly, but sure they said cowlairs to allow access to springburn. Whatever happens it going to be madness for a few months and Winchburgh tunnel will be interesting.

 

[170401]

No it wasn't the bothy lawyers. A briefing this was mentioned. Also they are going to encourage the use of the A-B line for queen street customers during the closure to ease the pressure on the main line. Pretty certain central won't happen as 170s are no good to them over there plus the aforementioned route problems.

The only stuff that's been mentioned about the Queen st closure on the briefings I've been on were the Anniesland connection and the use of A-B. If anything else has been suggested by the briefers then it has probably been their own opinion and not fact.

Their is precedent for Aberdeens/Invernesses running into Central during engineering works although this was back in NX or possibly pre privatisation Scotrail days and using 158s via Cumbernauld and the R&C. 170s have also worked into Central before on Shotts services so their is no problem with that.

 

[Scotrail84]

The only stuff that's been mentioned about the Queen st closure on the briefings I've been on were the Anniesland connection and the use of A-B. If anything else has been suggested by the briefers then it has probably been their own opinion and not fact.

Their is precedent for Aberdeens/Invernesses running into Central during engineering works although this was back in NX or possibly pre privatisation Scotrail days and using 158s via Cumbernauld and the R&C. 170s have also worked into Central before on Shotts services so their is no problem with that.

This would have happened when Perth men worked to central and as far as Carlisle if i recall correctly.

I dont think the diversions have happened under FS but i know turbos have worked to central and back but they need to be moved as quickly as possible as only the Edinburgh men can move them out the way.

 

[ADRboy]

Update on the AT200. Routes confirmed & layout consultation with stakeholders

http://www.spokes.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/1506-EGIT-trains-cons-presentation.pdf

 

[thealexweb]

Do we know if the North Berwick / Dunbar services will utilise three car or four car versions? Either way it appears there will be a (small) reduction in seating capacity. As a user of the line I do appreciate the current overcapacity of our line I am just curious.

 

[D365]

Interesting to note the details that have been confirmed in the type approval and delivery programme. 'T1~T7' to be fully manufactured at Hitachi's Kasado plant, sub-assembly provided for 'T8' onwards. No First Class compartment for the 46 3-car units.

Additionally, it seems ASR are expecting a TOPS classification in the 3xx range despite a presumed shift towards the 7xx range for NXEMUs.

 

[me123]

Interesting route map.

Late 2017, we'll see the E-G trains going over to the AT200s, no surprises there. No surprises either with the Stirlings and Cumbernaulds quickly following suit. But... during 2018 we're going to see the Cathcart Circle being operated by AT200s :? Really? Going from 314s to new inter-regional EMUs seems a bit of a change. (I'm assuming they're getting three car trains, of course).

The North Berwick/Dunbar runs don't totally surprise me either, but the omission of the Carstairs runs does. Does this imply that 380s will continue running via Carstairs to Edinburgh, but potentially not out to East Lothian? And East Lothian - Glasgow runs go via Shotts now :?

Good to see the Shotts line being electrified soon, and I think that these trains will be appropriate for that run.

It seems a bit odd if I'm being honest, and I wonder if it will play out slightly differently in practice.

 

[mbreckers]

Update on the AT200. Routes confirmed & layout consultation with stakeholders

http://www.spokes.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/1506-EGIT-trains-cons-presentation.pdf

Page 8, Vehicle Interior.

They have two photos of a Class 380 in there

 

[59CosG95]

Speaking of which: will the Class 380s operate alongside the AT200s? Or will they be cascaded southwards? I'll imagine the North will be crying out for them.

 

[jopsuk]

the 380s are to be retained. Other than east of Edinburgh, the AT200s don't at all replace them. The AT200s will replace DMUs mainly- on the E-G mainline via Falkirk High, on the Edinburgh/Glasgow to Stirling/Dunblane/Alloa services, on Glasgow-Falkirk Grahamston via Cumbernauld and Edinburgh-Glasgow via Shotts. The only EMUs they'll displace will be elderly 314s

 

[158722]

the 380s are to be retained. Other than east of Edinburgh, the AT200s don't at all replace them. The AT200s will replace DMUs mainly- on the E-G mainline via Falkirk High, on the Edinburgh/Glasgow to Stirling/Dunblane/Alloa services, on Glasgow-Falkirk Grahamston via Cumbernauld and Edinburgh-Glasgow via Shotts. The only EMUs they'll displace will be elderly 314s

Indeed, the displaced North Berwick 380s will probably see off the few remaining 314 diagrams on Inverclyde lines and Paisley Canal so everything beyond Shields depot becomes 380 operated.

The only surprise, as has been commented, is that AT200s look to be direct replacements for the 314s on the Cathcart circle, etc turns. Using your newest, freshest units to replace your oldest, most basic ones on very short inner suburban workings seems odd. AT200s on say, Lanark turns, with their WCML running and longer journey times, displacing 318/320s to replace the 314s off Cathcart etc seems a more logical deployment.