ScotRail HST Introduction - Updates & Discussion

[Stoney1979]

I think it's important to differentiate between:

1. the original decision to take the HSTs versus
2. what is now coming to light with the refurb process/contract

They are two very different things.

While the process/contract, we have recently discovered, is clearly a mess due to project mismanagement by x,y,z (Wabtec, SR. etc. etc., take your pick) no-one can yet objectively say that the original decision to take the (refurbished) HST as a train in it's own right was incorrect because we don't have any data to prove it either way.

Apart from the odd niggle, the single set we do have seems to be doing well reliability-wise, coupled with anecdotal evidence that it rides well and that "normals" really like it which, collectively, suggest that the one set we do have has been a success - so far.

I keep banging on about how will we know the HST is a success compared to what we have now. How many 156/158/170s broke down today, for example? And how many didn't? How many were overcrowded, how many weren't? How many passengers hated their journey on them, and how many enjoyed it? Impossible to know, I guess.

 

[Carntyne]

That's true, but even if ScotRail's fleet is pretty much entirely tanked it doesn't explain the mess on the ballast and sleepers at stations such as Glasgow Queen Street and Glasgow Central.

Diesel trains leak all sorts out, unfortunately. Central's platform roads are being relaid bit by bit from the looks of it though.

 

[kylemore]

I hesitate as a mere fare paying punter to comment, however is this now officially a disaster or are we still merely at the Fiasco stage?

 

[EMU303]

IF the unrefurbished HSTs were not introduced from Dec - and with Alex H quoted recently that 19 DMU's are due to go to Northern in Dec - what impact would that have? Could it be offset by the introduction of EMUs on Stirling/Alloa/Dunblane from 8th Dec? I've no idea the number of DMU's that would be freed up from those routes, but could it see SR able to provide sufficient DMU's to run the planned timetable from Dec?
Then IF only refurb'd HST's were used in service then it would be a painfully slow process of introduction to relieve capacity probs with current 2 or 3 carriage DMU's on those routes, and equally slow release of DMU's to boost other routes. SR would then be waiting on Shotts electrification to release further DMU's but by then maybe more are due to go back to their leasing companies?
Quite a challenge, and that supposes enough 385's will be in service to run E-G and S/D/A along with the 365s plus the C'nauld - Edin service too. Precious few 385s in service so far but they are now arriving at pace from Hitachi. 23 units in SR possession i believe with another 3 due this week.
Or will the RMT accept the HSTs in their "classic" (copyright SR management) condition?

 

[Chrism20]

Possibly the wrong thread to ask this in but after the 19 DMUs go in December are there anymore to go after that? If yes does anyone know how many and when?

Also whilst it would be advantageous to do all the work at once is there scope for the toilets to be tanked before the work with the doors and the internal refurbs?

 

[43096]

Possibly the wrong thread to ask this in but after the 19 DMUs go in December are there anymore to go after that? If yes does anyone know how many and when?

Also whilst it would be advantageous to do all the work at once is there scope for the toilets to be tanked before the work with the doors and the internal refurbs?

I make it 17: 5 x 156, 6 x 158 and 6 x 170. There was another 5 156s planned to go, but a) there have been mutterings about them staying and b) there is no future operator signed up for them, so they will staying, at least for now.

 

[Mingulay]

IF the unrefurbished HSTs were not introduced from Dec - and with Alex H quoted recently that 19 DMU's are due to go to Northern in Dec - what impact would that have? Could it be offset by the introduction of EMUs on Stirling/Alloa/Dunblane from 8th Dec? I've no idea the number of DMU's that would be freed up from those routes, but could it see SR able to provide sufficient DMU's to run the planned timetable from Dec?
Then IF only refurb'd HST's were used in service then it would be a painfully slow process of introduction to relieve capacity probs with current 2 or 3 carriage DMU's on those routes, and equally slow release of DMU's to boost other routes. SR would then be waiting on Shotts electrification to release further DMU's but by then maybe more are due to go back to their leasing companies?
Quite a challenge, and that supposes enough 385's will be in service to run E-G and S/D/A along with the 365s plus the C'nauld - Edin service too. Precious few 385s in service so far but they are now arriving at pace from Hitachi. 23 units in SR possession i believe with another 3 due this week.
Or will the RMT accept the HSTs in their "classic" (copyright SR management) condition?

I think it's important to differentiate between:

1. the original decision to take the HSTs versus
2. what is now coming to light with the refurb process/contract

They are two very different things.

While the process/contract, we have recently discovered, is clearly a mess due to project mismanagement by x,y,z (Wabtec, SR. etc. etc., take your pick) no-one can yet objectively say that the original decision to take the (refurbished) HST as a train in it's own right was incorrect because we don't have any data to prove it either way.

Apart from the odd niggle, the single set we do have seems to be doing well reliability-wise, coupled with anecdotal evidence that it rides well and that "normals" really like it which, collectively, suggest that the one set we do have has been a success - so far.

I keep banging on about how will we know the HST is a success compared to what we have now. How many 156/158/170s broke down today, for example? And how many didn't? How many were overcrowded, how many weren't? How many passengers hated their journey on them, and how many enjoyed it? Impossible to know, I guess.

I think that’s a fair point.

My train today was overcrowded and late and a 158 refurb so you don’t get much worse than that. But the new timetable and electric offers me a poorer service so I’m not rushing to say goodbye the the diesels now. Can’t believe I am saying that. Just such a let down for my service After all the promises.

Let’s not rule out that the 385 Fleet may we’ll have a few tricks up thier sleeves yet by way off glitches or as yet unforeseen failures that could ground them. Add that to the mix of the current HST issue and diesels going off lease. Perhaps the happy train will be the flagship electric !

 

[sprinterguy]

If they get there with the carriages eventually , but the power cars prove to be less than reliable , is there the flexibility to source 68 locos without too much adaptation of the refurbished coaches to haul them ? Or are the carriages bespoke to the power cars where they join with the passage? So cant have one without the other ?

HST mark 3 coaches use a three phase train supply that is unique to these trains and makes them incompatible with anything other than HST power cars. The coaches also have buckeye couplers and no traditional buffers or drawgear, which is why translator vehicles need to be used when HST stock is moved around by locos.

I keep banging on about how will we know the HST is a success compared to what we have now. How many 156/158/170s broke down today, for example? And how many didn't? How many were overcrowded, how many weren't? How many passengers hated their journey on them, and how many enjoyed it? Impossible to know, I guess.

Miles per Technical Incident Number (MTIN) is an easily quantifiable way to monitor and compare reliability against other Scotrail fleets, and the annual passenger satisfaction surveys should give a general feel for how satisfied passengers are with the refurbished HSTs once they all enter service. Passenger loading data is usually available to TOCs, too, even if it generally isn't made public, beyond the national ''Top ten most overcrowded" shortlist that gets published intermittently.

 

[jopsuk]

HST mark 3 coaches use a three phase train supply that is unique to these trains and makes them incompatible with anything other than HST power cars. The coaches also have buckeye couplers and no traditional buffers or drawgear, which is why translator vehicles need to be used when HST stock is moved around by locos.

Although HST to Loco hauled and loco hauled to HST conversions have happened quite a lot. It's a solved problem, if required.

 

[Journeyman]

Although HST to Loco hauled and loco hauled to HST conversions have happened quite a lot. It's a solved problem, if required.

It is, but it isn't solved easily. A lot of problems have been encountered along the way.

 

[AndrewE]

HST mark 3 coaches use a three phase train supply that is unique to these trains and makes them incompatible with anything other than HST power cars. The coaches also have buckeye couplers and no traditional buffers or drawgear, which is why translator vehicles need to be used when HST stock is moved around by locos.

Although HST to Loco hauled and loco hauled to HST conversions have happened quite a lot. It's a solved problem, if required.

It is, but it isn't solved easily. A lot of problems have been encountered along the way.

How long would it take to convert an existing coach to an adaptor vehicle complete with the loco ETH supply in at one end and 3-phase out at the other?
Anyway, why do we need to? Each set of HST coaches comes with a modernised loco at each end! Surey the HST power cars arent that unreliable?

 

[Class37.4]

If there are issues with power car reliability then ScotRail will presumably look at the reasons and attempt to the address the issue, let’s remember that while the Power cars are old they have a relatively modern engine, and if 1 power car fails the other should be able to haul these much shortened HST’s reasonably well. I doubt the Power Cars are the biggest problem at the moment.

 

[sprinterguy]

Although HST to Loco hauled and loco hauled to HST conversions have happened quite a lot. It's a solved problem, if required.

It certainly can be done, but converting 26 sets of carriages would be one heck of an undertaking on top of the existing conversion and corrosion work. It's never, to my knowledge, been done on such a large scale before.

Given that the more pressing issue at present is the availability of refurbished mark 3 coaches, rather than the unproven reliability of the power cars in Scotrail's operating environment, putting more work on Wabtec now or in the future doesn't seem like a good idea, especially given that this additional conversion would be taking place in the middle of a costed and delayed project schedule.

Seems like a non-starter to me.

How long would it take to convert an existing coach to an adaptor vehicle complete with the loco ETH supply in at one end and 3-phase out at the other?
Anyway, why do we need to? Each set of HST coaches comes with a modernised loco at each end! Surey the HST power cars arent that unreliable?

During the late seventies/early eighties while the HST power cars were experiencing reliability problems, the Western region hastily rigged up a generator van to provide three phase train supply and allow a rake of HST mark 3s to be loco hauled in service. So it can be done, but as you point out I really don't expect power car reliability to be poor enough to warrant such drastic measures.

 

[43096]

It certainly can be done, but converting 26 sets of carriages would be one heck of an undertaking on top of the existing conversion and corrosion work. It's never, to my knowledge, been done on such a large scale before.

Correct. The majority of conversions have been LHCS to HST, which is easier, as generally you are taking kit off the vehicles (Motor-Alternator sets, buffers etc etc). Converting from HST to LHCS has been done, but not in anything like the same numbers: 12 TRUK to RFM conversions were done back in the mid 1980s, and probably a handful of Royal Train vehicles around the same time. There's been nothing converted to LHCS since then.

 

[route101]

That's true, but even if ScotRail's fleet is pretty much entirely tanked it doesn't explain the mess on the ballast and sleepers at stations such as Glasgow Queen Street and Glasgow Central.

Old stuff not cleaned off ?

Plan B , run with 170s as per normal . Worst case scenario really

 

[Rail Blues]

I think it's important to differentiate between:

1. the original decision to take the HSTs versus
2. what is now coming to light with the refurb process/contract

They are two very different things.

I don't think they are separate, the decision to use 40 year old stock had consequences rhat should have been built into the decision making process. It shouldn't be a surprise that carriages in their fifth decade would be heavily corroded, it shouldn't be a surprise that carriages not designed with power doors and built in such a way that each individual carriage is a bespoke unit would be tricky to convert. The reliability stats of the power cars were there for all to see.

 

[scotraildriver]

Old stuff not cleaned off ?

Plan B , run with 170s as per normal . Worst case scenario really

Except that said 170s are off to Northern. Worst case scenario is cancellation until refurbished sets arrive, which could be a while the way things are going.

 

[hexagon789]

Old stuff not cleaned off ?

Maybe, not pretty regardless.

Plan B , run with 170s as per normal . Worst case scenario really

That would potentially be nine 170s needed then, presumably from the ones due to go to the Borders Line services and wherever else the spare 170s are due to go.

 

[Stoney1979]

I don't think they are separate, the decision to use 40 year old stock had consequences rhat should have been built into the decision making process. It shouldn't be a surprise that carriages in their fifth decade would be heavily corroded, it shouldn't be a surprise that carriages not designed with power doors and built in such a way that each individual carriage is a bespoke unit would be tricky to convert. The reliability stats of the power cars were there for all to see.

Fair point. From the contract/process point of view it's reasonable to now say it's a failure and "I told you so", but that can't be said for the overall initial idea of getting the refurbed HSTs in because it hasn't happened yet (i.e. the actual HST refubs haven't yet failed, or succeeded, because they don't yet exist).

The refurbished set we do have seems to be doing well so it's a very small success, only 1/26th of what was promised by now and not a reliable measure of whole thing.

 

[Stoney1979]

Miles per Technical Incident Number (MTIN) is an easily quantifiable way to monitor and compare reliability against other Scotrail fleets, and the annual passenger satisfaction surveys should give a general feel for how satisfied passengers are with the refurbished HSTs once they all enter service. Passenger loading data is usually available to TOCs, too, even if it generally isn't made public, beyond the national ''Top ten most overcrowded" shortlist that gets published intermittently.

Thanks, that seems to be the best way to do it.

 

[stuart]

Is there an option to NOT release the 170s to Northern? Presumably they are going there to replace something else ... and so on.

 

[gsnedders]

Is there an option to NOT release the 170s to Northern? Presumably they are going there to replace something else ... and so on.

They aren't purely replacing things; Northern will have more stock at the end of the franchise than the beginning.

But, well, any such option would require:

• The DfT (or ORR?) allowing a derogation from the DDA to allow the non-compliant Pacers to remain in service,
• The DfT allowing a variation from the franchise agreement to allow the franchisee to continue to operate Pacers,
• Northern agreeing to delay the start of the lease of the 170s, and
• The ROSCO agreeing to modify end/start dates of leases.

 

[thealexweb]

That just moves the problem/using non-DDA stock from Scotrail to Northern? Why would Northern/Dft get involved at all? This is for Scotrail/Transport Scotland to sort out.

 

[Journeyman]

I don't think they are separate, the decision to use 40 year old stock had consequences rhat should have been built into the decision making process. It shouldn't be a surprise that carriages in their fifth decade would be heavily corroded, it shouldn't be a surprise that carriages not designed with power doors and built in such a way that each individual carriage is a bespoke unit would be tricky to convert. The reliability stats of the power cars were there for all to see.

Absolutely. This whole project raised eyebrows among those in the know right from the start, for the very reasons you've pointed out, and it's an object lesson in why using very old rolling stock is generally a bad idea. However good the finished product is, it's still not appeared in numbers and there could well be more problems along the way.

I think the "people prefer East Coast HSTs to ScotRail 170s" argument has been taken far too literally by decision-makers. The average punter doesn't prefer them because they're HSTs, they prefer them because they have more seats, are more comfortable and have better catering, and none of those are features unique to HSTs - they can be replicated in just about any train design you like, if it's specced properly. TS were flexible on the matter - their requirements could have been met perfectly by a decent refurb of the 170. It may not be a particularly popular or classic train, but at least it's here, and it works.

 

[Northhighland]

Think we have to be sensible here. The issue appears not to be the product, the unit in service is very well received by all passengers.

The issue is with the contract to refurb. Simply put the excuse over corrosion is no longer valid, we have one set completed and no dates for more. There are serious questions that needs asked here over this contract, none of the questions relate to the trains.

Amazed no opposition politicians have picked this up and questioned it. Shows how ineffective they are.

 

[mullac30]

Perhaps Scotrail could use soon to be off lease Class 185s instead of using "classic" HSTs while power doors are fitted, they'd certainly would be powerful enough to run the same timetable as a short HST, and have very high spec interiors since their refurb by TPE.

 

[Journeyman]

Think we have to be sensible here. The issue appears not to be the product, the unit in service is very well received by all passengers.

The issue is with the contract to refurb. Simply put the excuse over corrosion is no longer valid, we have one set completed and no dates for more. There are serious questions that needs asked here over this contract, none of the questions relate to the trains.

Amazed no opposition politicians have picked this up and questioned it. Shows how ineffective they are.

I don't think you can separate the two, though. Yes, the product is good, but making it has proven to be almost impossible because of the state of the donor vehicles, which has clearly led to Wabtec's problems. You can make an attractive looking train out of just about anything you like, but that doesn't mean it will work.

 

[deltic08]

They aren't purely replacing things; Northern will have more stock at the end of the franchise than the beginning.

But, well, any such option would require:

• The DfT (or ORR?) allowing a derogation from the DDA to allow the non-compliant Pacers to remain in service,
• The DfT allowing a variation from the franchise agreement to allow the franchisee to continue to operate Pacers,
• Northern agreeing to delay the start of the lease of the 170s, and
• The ROSCO agreeing to modify end/start dates of leases.

Why should Northern have the Pacers longer? We have had to put up with them for 35 years and can't wait to get rid. It is Scotlands problem.
Northern needs more trains because of growth so is going to have more trains at the end of a franchise. Don't forget 80ish Pacers are being scrapped starting about now, and 153/155s are to follow soon.
The 170s are very comfortable thank you.

 

[43096]

Simply put the excuse over corrosion is no longer valid

You what? Of course it is still valid! Every vehicle is probably going to take longer than planned as a result of additional work arising.

 

[MatthewRead]

Perhaps Scotrail could use soon to be off lease Class 185s instead of using "classic" HSTs while power doors are fitted, they'd certainly would be powerful enough to run the same timetable as a short HST, and have very high spec interiors since their refurb by TPE.

Don't forget driver training needs to be taken into account.