ScotRail HST Introduction - Updates & Discussion

[43096]

I have never understood the mk 3 love in. I've never found them particularly comfortable and the squeek and rattle is far more intrusive than any underfloor diesel.

You must have been on some very different Mark 3s to me then. Only rattles I can recall have been on FGW stock - on parts changed at the last refurb.

 

[Highlandspring]

What did the other prospective franchise holders offer for Scotrail Intercity? I seem to remember someone offering brand new LHCS (Mk5A?).

I was told at the time that the First bid was based entirely around the Siemens Desiro family which meant more 380s for the E&G and 185s, or a more modern version, for the diesel network.

 

[kje7812]

You must have been on some very different Mark 3s to me then. Only rattles I can recall have been on FGW stock - on parts changed at the last refurb.

I've had some very noisy XC HSTs in the past.

 

[najaB]

...when the common sense thing to do would be to invest in new rolling stock.

The going rate for new-build DMUs is north of £1M per carriage. I doubt, all in, that Abellio are going to be paying much over £250K per carriage. So, before we consider anything else, they are getting anything up to four times the number of seats for the money. The Mk3's are, basically, sound and after the PRM work good for another 10 years or so. The Scottish network is going to look considerably different by then with Glasgow to Dundee and probably Edinburgh to the Fife Circle both electrified. If that's the case, about half the inter-city running will be under the wires which would make bi-modes ideal, where if they were ordered today we'd be talking about running diesel 85% of the time.

 

[Journeyman]

The Mk3's are, basically, sound

You've got to be kidding me. I recently did some work for another TOC operating Mark 3s - the things are falling to pieces.

 

[najaB]

You've got to be kidding me. I recently did some work for another TOC operating Mark 3s - the things are falling to pieces.

Not all of them are in the same condition. Scotrail had the pick of the GWR examples.

 

[43096]

I've had some very noisy XC HSTs in the past.

So have I. Noise was from the power car though, and this was 10 years or more ago....

 

[Journeyman]

Not all of them are in the same condition. Scotrail had the pick of the GWR examples.

Maybe they did, but GWR HST reliability is significantly worse than the other TOCs that operate them, which doesn't bode well.

 

[najaB]

Maybe they did, but GWR HST reliability is significantly worse than the other TOCs that operate them, which doesn't bode well.

Scotrail has (allegedly) also poached experienced staff from Craigentinny...

 

[Bikeman78]

I have never understood the mk 3 love in. I've never found them particularly comfortable and the squeek and rattle is far more intrusive than any underfloor diesel.

I've travelled on HSTs for 20 years and I've got no idea what you're talking here. Way more pleasant than a 158 or a voyager. That said, the IETs are pleasant enough to travel in though better seats would be nice.

 

[Rail Blues]

I've travelled on HSTs for 20 years and I've got no idea what you're talking here.

20 years? You'd better get home you're tea will be burnt to a cinder.

Either you have been incredibly lucky or I have been unlucky in that I've found most of those I've travelled on in recent years squeak and rattle from the corridor connections and a large number are quite rough riding.

Way more pleasant than a 158 or a voyager.

I think you are missing the magic prefix 'In my opinion'. Anyway a comparison between a hst and a class 158 is IMO comparing apples and oranges, one is intended for inter regional services, the other is for inter City duties. That said I would far prefer any of the voyager family over a hst for a longer journey.

 

[Bikeman78]

I think you are missing the magic prefix 'In my opinion'. Anyway a comparison between a hst and a class 158 is IMO comparing apples and oranges, one is intended for inter regional services, the other is for inter City duties. That said I would far prefer any of the voyager family over a hst for a longer journey.

Each to their own. I've hardly travelled on voyagers but still had more of them with failed air con compared with HSTs. How hard can it be? They've never properly fixed the smelly toilets but they are a lot better than they were.

 

[kje7812]

20 years? You'd better get home you're tea will be burnt to a cinder.

Either you have been incredibly lucky or I have been unlucky in that I've found most of those I've travelled on in recent years squeak and rattle from the corridor connections and a large number are quite rough riding.

Same here, mainly with XC but some of the east coast ones are similar.

 

[route101]

Was on a XC HST to Glasgow (might be last chance ) and you could definitely hear it squeak , smooth enough departing stations . Now of course the powercars make little noise. Air con had failed but the open droplights helped compared to same failure on a pendo. Good seating too with many airline seating. XC ones could do with a proper buffet car though.

 

[route101]

Yes, though obviously a HST set could deputise, hence why the stop boards are being put up even on the smaller stations.

Will be interesting to see how often this will happen?

 

[konstant]

Not all of them are in the same condition. Scotrail had the pick of the GWR examples.

Scotrail didn't really get the pick of the bunch. Quite the opposite actually. The average GWR MK3 has around 100 holes in the roof prior to a C6. I counted some with 150+ holes in the roof alone.. I've worked on EMT, GC and GWR MK3 and have never seen a solid one yet. Even when going to do MPI inspections on the door pillars, we would constantly and consistently find ones where the structural welds we were going to test had never even been made in the factory as it was "too difficult" for the lazy sods to weld.

I'm with Journeyman, never seen a solid one yet.

 

[najaB]

I'm with Journeyman, never seen a solid one yet

I'm not saying that isn't the case, but ScotRail did have a choice over which carriages and power cars they were taking.

 

[43096]

I'm not saying that isn't the case, but ScotRail did have a choice over which carriages and power cars they were taking.

Did they? Why did they opt to take all the GEC traction motor power cars, then?

 

[InOban]

Surely the choice of a standard set of power cars is a separate issue from choice of passenger vehicles?

 

[najaB]

Why did they opt to take all the GEC traction motor power cars, then?

Because those are the ones they wanted out of what was on offer.

 

[Highlandspring]

It’s very strange you say that because I asked ‘ someone’ intimately involved in the project right back at the start when I had some very minor involvement how they picked which powercars were coming. The reply was that FGW had asked ScotRail if they had any particular preference for which of the powercars due to come off lease they wanted and were effectively told “no it’s ok, you pick for us”. Hence why they ended up with all the GEC motored ones.

Anyway, today’s HST news is that 43163 is on hire to LNER and is currently heading to Kings Cross on 1E09 the 0930 from Edinburgh. It comes back on 1S22 1500 Kings Cross - Stirling.

 

[Journeyman]

Scotrail didn't really get the pick of the bunch. Quite the opposite actually. The average GWR MK3 has around 100 holes in the roof prior to a C6. I counted some with 150+ holes in the roof alone.. I've worked on EMT, GC and GWR MK3 and have never seen a solid one yet. Even when going to do MPI inspections on the door pillars, we would constantly and consistently find ones where the structural welds we were going to test had never even been made in the factory as it was "too difficult" for the lazy sods to weld.

I'm with Journeyman, never seen a solid one yet.

Opinion amongst many in the rail industry is that Abellio were fools for deciding to do this.

The refurbs have been fraught with difficulty, they're hugely fuel-inefficient and expensive to run in short formations, and, as has been pointed out many times, the bodies closely resemble Swiss cheese. Rumour has it that the person responsible for pushing the HST option within Abellio is an HST enthusiast who has allowed heart to rule head, and it's turned out, in my opinion, to be a very bad decision.

All it effectively does is kick the can down the road in terms of rolling stock replacement, and just creates a problem in a few years time, rather than conclusively solving it now, which could have been done with new rolling stock. There's plenty of suitable designs out there that would have improved comfort and capacity, have been cheaper to operate and would have lasted a hell of a lot longer, while being more energy efficient and eco-friendly. The HST has turned out to be a very, very bad choice here.

I'll grant you they're nicer to travel in than Class 170s, which are not bad trains but not ideal for long journeys, but that's about all they have going for them.

 

[47802]

Opinion amongst many in the rail industry is that Abellio were fools for deciding to do this. Quite apart from the fuel it's added to the Scottish nationalists' perennial sense of grievance ("they're 40 year old cast offs!"), the refurbs have been fraught with difficulty, they're hugely fuel-inefficient and expensive to run in short formations, and, as has been pointed out many times, the bodies closely resemble Swiss cheese. Rumour has it that the person responsible for pushing the HST option within Abellio is an HST enthusiast who has allowed heart to rule head, and it's turned out, in my opinion, to be a very bad decision.

All it effectively does is kick the can down the road in terms of rolling stock replacement, and just creates a problem in a few years time, rather than conclusively solving it now, which could have been done with new rolling stock. There's plenty of suitable designs out there that would have improved comfort and capacity, have been cheaper to operate and would have lasted a hell of a lot longer, while being more energy efficient and eco-friendly. The HST has turned out to be a very, very bad choice here.

I'll grant you they're nicer to travel in than Class 170s, which are not bad trains but not ideal for long journeys, but that's about all they have going for them.

Where's the like button

 

[Rail Blues]

effectively does is kick the can down the road in terms of rolling stock replacement, and just creates a problem in a few years time, rather than conclusively solving it now, which could have been done with new rolling stock. There's plenty of suitable designs out there that would have improved comfort and capacity, have been cheaper to operate and would have lasted a hell of a lot longer, while being more energy efficient and eco-friendly. The HST has turned out to be a very, very bad choice here

Yup, sounds about right to me.

 

[GrimShady]

68s and Mk5s TPE style. They would be coming into service now if they had done so.

That being said I'm still looking forward to the HST. Much better than a rotten DMU.

 

[TwistedMentat]

Opinion amongst many in the rail industry is that Abellio were fools for deciding to do this. Quite apart from the fuel it's added to the Scottish nationalists' perennial sense of grievance ("they're 40 year old cast offs!"), the refurbs have been fraught with difficulty, they're hugely fuel-inefficient and expensive to run in short formations, and, as has been pointed out many times, the bodies closely resemble Swiss cheese. Rumour has it that the person responsible for pushing the HST option within Abellio is an HST enthusiast who has allowed heart to rule head, and it's turned out, in my opinion, to be a very bad decision.

All it effectively does is kick the can down the road in terms of rolling stock replacement, and just creates a problem in a few years time, rather than conclusively solving it now, which could have been done with new rolling stock. There's plenty of suitable designs out there that would have improved comfort and capacity, have been cheaper to operate and would have lasted a hell of a lot longer, while being more energy efficient and eco-friendly. The HST has turned out to be a very, very bad choice here.

I'll grant you they're nicer to travel in than Class 170s, which are not bad trains but not ideal for long journeys, but that's about all they have going for them.

So what you're saying it's probably one of us on the forum to blame?

 

[Journeyman]

68s and Mk5s TPE style. They would be coming into service now if they had done so.

That being said I'm still looking forward to the HST. Much better than a rotten DMU.

Yes, I still think it'll be an improvement, but only a marginal one. The 170s are not fundamentally bad trains.

 

[GrimShady]

Yes, I still think it'll be an improvement, but only a marginal one. The 170s are not fundamentally bad trains.

Maybe so but the ambiance of a MK3 and the new seats are still an improvement and looking at the renderings it would appear more than marginal. That's just my view.

I'd rather a 170 over the 380s used on the E&G at present.

 

[mullac30]

Thing is, the good thing about HSTs are the sheer performance of the short sets, I'd doubt there would be many new DMUs or Bimode trains that could match the performance of a short set. There is also the problem that there is a lack of new-build intercity spec DMUs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, I still think it'll be an improvement, but only a marginal one. The 170s are not fundamentally bad trains.

The main issue is that they're too short. If they could acquire enough to run them all as 6-car formations they'd be just fine.