Scotrail: Meet the Managers

[me123]

I thought the recent Meet The Managers session with Scotrail raised some good points and, as usual, a few laughs. I also have a few questions and I wonder if anyone on here can answer them:

Q. Are there any plans to introduce more services calling at Gleneagles?
A. In consultation with Transport Scotland, we are looking at the opportunity to deliver an additional hourly service between Perth and Glasgow Queen Street during the main part of the day. A final decision will be made in due course.
The Tactran Regional Transport Partnership is also proposing a study into an additional hourly Arbroath to Glasgow service that could make such a call.

A very good proposal indeed; this new service Arbroath! I know there's a huge demand for Perth services, probably a big market for Arbroath-Dundee, and it could easily serve intermediate stations between Dundee and Carnoustie with a good service as well as removing the need for Glasgow-Aberdeen services to call at Carnoustie.

Q. Would it be possible to add more carriages to the 0915 service from Edinburgh Waverley to Glasgow Queen Street?
A. We continuously review our rolling-stock allocation and are currently looking at this service. We also have to take into consideration the maintenance and servicing of our rolling stock – and some of this must be undertaken between the peak periods.

I'm surprised that this even has to come up, to be honest. Given the high passenger volumes on the 0900 service (which is 6 carriages) and the fact that this is the first service on which you can use Off Peak tickets, why is this only 3 carriages? I can't find a good explanation, as the train can easily divide at Edinburgh with one Turbostar going off to Haymarket Depot for "essential maintenance". Glad to see they're looking at this, and I hope that something good comes out of it.

Q. How is the electrification of the Glasgow to Edinburgh line progressing?
A. The electrification of the route, which includes Cumbernauld, Dunblane and Alloa is progressing well. Network Rail has an engineering company undertaking the detailed design work and is planned to have the whole electrified by 2016.

Good news!

Q. Would it be possible to introduce a service between Kirkcaldy and Cupar to fill the gap between the 1430 and 1630 services?
A. There is a service to Cupar that departs Kirckaldy at 1542.

There's always someone who can't read a timetable...

Would it be possible for offers such as the £15 anywhere voucher (run in conjunction with Sainsbury’s) to have a longer validity period?

Talk about being cheeky...

Q. Why is there no catering service on trains along the Dumfries line and are there plans to introduce it?
A. Catering was trialled on this line in 2002 but proved unviable. Since then, refreshment outlets have been established at both Kilmarnock and Dumfries stations, giving customers an opportunity to purchase refreshments prior to boarding.

Why is the catering unviable? Class 156s are able to carry catering facilities (as seen on West Highland Line services), and the route is quite busy, but there would certainly be demand, even just the passengers from Kilmarnock would buy something.

Q. Are there plans to ban the sale of alcohol on trains?
A. There are no plans to ban the sale of alcohol on trains.
We expect all our customers to travel in a safe and comfortable environment and certainly not be subjected to any drunken behaviour of other passengers.
It is rare to experience any problems with customers who have purchased alcohol on our trains - and our staff are trained to handle any disruptive passengers accordingly.
In the event of this happening, staff will move other passengers away from the disruptive group to another part of the train and then monitor the behaviour of the group.
We also work closely with British Transport Police to ensure that all our customers travel safely. On occasions when it is anticipated that alcohol could be an issue, bans on the carrying and consumption of alcohol on our trains are introduced and enforced by the Transport Police on the day.

This is something I feel strongly about. There's nothing worse than drunken behaviour on a train, and I strongly believe that alcohol should be banned except on services where alcohol is served. And again, these should be restricted to long distance intercity services (in my opinion).

I also think that train crew should be given better training on how to deal with drunken behaviour on a train. As I say, there's nothing worse than being on a train with a violent drunk. I remember once being on a train from Aberdeen-Inverness and there was a violent and drunk passenger. The training given should, according to Scotrail, have equipped the staff "to handle disruptive passengers accordingly". This seemed to consist of providing him with more alcohol. I don't know if they aimed to make him comatose, but it certainly did not work.

Any thoughts?

 

[Max]

I personally feel that drunken behaviour is particularly bad on days where there are a lot of football fixtures. NXEC often ban alcohol from trains after a certain time on matchdays to avoid this kind of thing occurring after games. This includes removing alcohol from sale in the buffet/restaurant. Perhaps Scotrail could look at doing something like this?

 

[me123]

I personally feel that drunken behaviour is particularly bad on days where there are a lot of football fixtures. NXEC often ban alcohol from trains after a certain time on matchdays to avoid this kind of thing occurring after games. This includes removing alcohol from sale in the buffet/restaurant. Perhaps Scotrail could look at doing something like this?

We do have "dry trains" for football and rugby matches, prohibiting sale and consumption of alcohol onboard relevant trains. I've never used them, but because of strict rules at the stadia in the first place, I'd imagine that they generally aren't that bad, though, all things considered.

 

[Failed Unit]

I'm surprised that this even has to come up, to be honest. Given the high passenger volumes on the 0900 service (which is 6 carriages) and the fact that this is the first service on which you can use Off Peak tickets, why is this only 3 carriages? I can't find a good explanation, as the train can easily divide at Edinburgh with one Turbostar going off to Haymarket Depot for "essential maintenance". Glad to see they're looking at this, and I hope that something good comes out of it.

Re- comment about 0915.

I wonder which train has the higher loading the 0900 or the 0915, my money would be on the 0915 as you state people will wait 15 minutes for the sake of a cheaper ticket and I bet the difference is at least £5 on that route (can't be bothered to check). I bet it is the same going the other way as well, the 0915 Glasgow - Edinburgh is only 3 coaches (again don't know just guessing). What I do know is this happens all over the UK, overcrowding on the first train that cheaper tickets can be used and the train is often shorter than the last peak service. I have used the 1815 Glasgow - Edinburgh, again the first evening train CDR's can be used on and it was 3 coaches and rammed full. I don't know where the rear 3 coaches went which it dropped off just before departure.

One thing that interests me is do they really do maintenance on every train as soon as it comes out of service? I see many trains just sat in the sidings at Haymarket and Eastfields in the middle of the day. Surely they can diagram services so that they can cope with the train been in service for another 50 minutes if the 0915 service was stengthened in both directions? (I know the units would be at the wrong depots but does this really matter).

As you said hopefully they will sort this out as Transport Scotland is generally better at these things then we are in the South. The cynic in me thinks that they will continue to sardine people in, but saying that overcrowding isn't as bad in Scotland as it is in England as transport Scotland are prepared to invest in upgrades before they reach busting point. Take the platform lengthening to 6 cars, I am sure that would be considered a luxary in the England. They ordered the extra coaches to make most peak trains between Edinburgh and Glasgow while 3 coaches could cope (just) from experience I would hate think how bad overcrowding would have been if they hadn't done this!

BTW - Not taking a dig at Scotland, more envy that they do something about problems up there and are forward thinking! Good on them! I guess in England the problem would be resolved by moving the time the first train that CDR can be used on back to 1000!

 

[djw1981]

IIRc the 0930 is the first cheap train though, or was there a recent rule change with simplification?

The 156 catering was unviable because IIRc Carlisle doesn't have a catering base, and Sales were very low - only an S&C style 'volunteer fundraising' servcie would be economoical. Those services sift a slot of empty air between Carlisle and Kilmarnock!

 

[me123]

IIRc the 0930 is the first cheap train though, or was there a recent rule change with simplification?

Off Peak Day Returns are perfectly valid on the 0915. Off Peak returns, in general, aren't because they are valid after 0915; therefore the first train you can travel on is the 0930 (again, it's 3 cars, but I'd imagine that it's not quite as busy as the 0915).

The 156 catering was unviable because IIRc Carlisle doesn't have a catering base, and Sales were very low - only an S&C style 'volunteer fundraising' servcie would be economoical. Those services sift a slot of empty air between Carlisle and Kilmarnock!

Never travelled personally, but I was under the impression that there was a reasonable demand, particularly from passengers using Dumfries station. Anyway, as you say, if there's no base in Carlisle there's probably not much point setting one up just for that service!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Failed Unit, according to scot-rail.co.uk, the 0945 Glasgow-Edinburgh is 6 cars (!), even though the 0915 and 0930 are only 3 cars, and the last 6 car from Edinburgh-Glasgow is at 0900.

I don't know if the train off the 0945 needs to go into Haymarket, or if there's a huge demand to travel on a connecting train or something, but it seems absurd that this train is 6 car yet the 0915 is wedged with only 3 cars. How hard is it to stick another 3 cars on the 0915 in both directions; I'm sure the "maintenance time" lost is not significant and it would certainly be considered a good decision by passengers.

Oddly enough, the evening peak sees 6 car trains extend over both sides, and Scotrail can easily cover the demand on these services, so why not morning peak? Why not utilise stock as effectively as possible; seeing as how there's several places who would kill to have the stock we have?

I don't get it.

 

[djw1981]

0915 is diagram HA706, which works with HA728 in AM peak and PM peak.

HA706 works from the 0600 ex GLQ to the 1830 ex EDB, and spends both nights at Eastfield.

HA728 works the 0930 EDB-GLQ. I suspect the issue may be that with all the long distance services to Aberdeen, Inverness etc trains on the move at that point, there is a unit shortage - maintenance comes into it only that, to make this a 6car train would involve talking one of the units on an 'all day maintenance' diagram off shed. Remember how tight the FSR diagraming is that they need the LHCS for Fife circle. It should be all sorted come electrification.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm sure the "maintenance time" lost is not significant and it would certainly be considered a good decision by passengers.

If a unit is due onto Haymarket depot at 0925 (random example), and you send it to Glasgow, then the soonest it could be on Haymarket depot would be 1155 (if the 'step up' system is working as diagramed). That is 2hrs lost maintenance. If the Unit is due on depot 0930-1530, you have lost 1/3 of the time. By the time shunts etc are removed from that time, you have perhaps halved the time on shed. This means either more work at night - needs bigger depot and more staff etc.

Customers may want more capacity, but they are also used to very high reliability of the 170 fleet in Scotland. Compromising maintenance would affect that. Just look at the slating the XC/LM 170's get.

 

[John_158]

Question i would have asked is why is 158868 sitting arround un used for nearly two years now when it can be overhauled and sent to EMT.

 

[shark1873]

someone should have asked if they will ever put on a decent service that goes to carstairs

 

[me123]

If a unit is due onto Haymarket depot at 0925 (random example), and you send it to Glasgow, then the soonest it could be on Haymarket depot would be 1155 (if the 'step up' system is working as diagramed).

My idea was that you run the 0915 from both Edinburgh and Glasgow as 6 car trains (they're currently 3 cars), you'd only lose an hour maintenance, you would probably have to play about with the diagrams to ensure that all trains receive maintenance at the right times. And it would also result in the train going to Eastfield instead of Haymerket and vice versa but the overall effect is negligible.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

someone should have asked if they will ever put on a decent service that goes to carstairs

I don't think any trains serve Carstairs for the purpose of serving Carstairs. The Sleeper uses it for joining movements, the Argyle Line service is due to capacity at Lanark and the Glasgow-North Berwick services are primarily to allow maintenance at Shields Road Depot.

 

[djw1981]

Eastfield doesn't do maintenance IIRc - just refueling and cleaning.

Re Carstairs, a Carlisle-Lockerbie-Carstairs-Motherwell service (extended to GLC if there is capacity would be good, and allow more Motherwell connections into TPE / WVC at Carlisle. If run with 100mph DMU (e.g. 170 post EG electrification) it could even run on to Stirling if GLC is at capacity. Otherwise, it might end up being 334 run which wouldn't be ideal.

 

[Failed Unit]

If a unit is due onto Haymarket depot at 0925 (random example), and you send it to Glasgow, then the soonest it could be on Haymarket depot would be 1155 (if the 'step up' system is working as diagramed). That is 2hrs lost maintenance. If the Unit is due on depot 0930-1530, you have lost 1/3 of the time. By the time shunts etc are removed from that time, you have perhaps halved the time on shed. This means either more work at night - needs bigger depot and more staff etc.

Customers may want more capacity, but they are also used to very high reliability of the 170 fleet in Scotland. Compromising maintenance would affect that. Just look at the slating the XC/LM 170's get.

I see where you are coming from, but they don't service every unit in this time and providing passenger seats should be the priority. I know it says this is currently under investigation. Perhaps the solution will be to run the 09:00 in each direction as 3 cars and the 0915 as 6 instead so the same no of units is used. The 0900 isn't as busy as the 0915 anyway due to the fact passengers wait until the 0915 to use the cheaper tickets. It seems a bit odd having the longer train on the less busy service.

It is a shame for Scotrail that the start of the cheap day return causes such overcrowding. I hope that when they electrify the route they make the standard unit length 4 car for off peak. When I use it (which is quite often due to family on the route) 3 cars are always very busy, 4 would be perfect. I know platforms will need lengthening and I think GQsT platform 7 can only take 8x 20m coaches so not really practical without difficult extension at Qst, they other stations should be easier. Although I think 5+6 can take 7x 23m so maybe run a 3+4 car in the peak and 4's off peak.

 

[djw1981]

They can't. 4-car offpeak would result in 8-car on peak. This will result in the need to rebuild Queen St (only 4 platforms there can take 6 cars anyway) and Waverley west end, as wel as platform lengthening in between.

Concurrently with electrification, we should get more E-G services - IIRC 6 via Falkirk high, 2 via Shotts (one semi fast, one stopping), and 4 via Airdie/Bathgate, in addition to the two-hour;ly NXEC service to Central via Carstairs. TS would lkiek XC to run over the same route on the alternate hour giving 13 services each hourly - ina combination of 2,3,4,6 car combinations (and voyager / HST / 225 combo's)

 

[me123]

I've always wondered if there'd ever be a case for running 2x158 on the route on certain off-peak services. The 158s aren't as good as the 170s for comfort, granted, but it would allow extra capacity elsewhere if needed. Off course, this is reliant on a 2x158 diagram somewhere to be swapped with a single 170 and I'm not sure if that's feasible or desirable.

 

[djw1981]

Ummm IIRC the only are which runs double 158 in central belt would be some of the Fife services. the 170's can't work highlands, and are over capacity for those routes anyway.

Also 158 is max 90mph, 170 is 100mph, so your paths ,ay get messed up in the close-to-capacity entrances to 'main stations'

 

[spoony]

With regards the dry trains at football/rugby away days, there are plenty ways and means of getting drink on board

 

[Failed Unit]

They can't. 4-car offpeak would result in 8-car on peak. This will result in the need to rebuild Queen St (only 4 platforms there can take 6 cars anyway) and Waverley west end, as wel as platform lengthening in between.

Concurrently with electrification, we should get more E-G services - IIRC 6 via Falkirk high, 2 via Shotts (one semi fast, one stopping), and 4 via Airdie/Bathgate, in addition to the two-hour;ly NXEC service to Central via Carstairs. TS would lkiek XC to run over the same route on the alternate hour giving 13 services each hourly - ina combination of 2,3,4,6 car combinations (and voyager / HST / 225 combo's)

I am sure that some I had seem 1x 3 car 170 and 2x 156's on platform 6 at Queen Street once so that is 7x 23m, or 8x 20m. Waverley can certainly take 8 cards on platforms 14 - 17.

However as you correctly point out the improvements that are planned may take demand away from certain trains anyway. For example someone from Bathgate will no longer need to use the route via Falkirk. Edinburgh Park - Glasgow passengers may also prefer to go direct rather than change.

The proposed non-stop train via Falkirk is going to be interesting to path to say the least! But I guess you are right with 13 tph 6 cars may be fine. I wonder if they would link the North Berwick an Bathgate services together when all electric? Probably a bit far to go!

 

[me123]

I doubt it. They could potentially link Helensburgh-North Berwick, though!

It's a 4tph service. Worryingly, all 4tph will call at all intermediate stations Airdrie-Glasgow and they will be traveling a long distance; potentially through to Helensburgh! This will be slower and much much busier; the route is already extremely busy at the peak times, and adding passengers won't help.

I'd like to see the following, but it probably won't happen:

• 2tph Edinburgh-Dalmuir via Bathgate, non-stop Bathgate-Airdrie, all stops Airdrie-Dalmuir via Glasgow and Yoker
• 2tph Edinburgh-Milngavie via Bathgate, all stops to Blairhill, fast to High Street, ll stops to Milngavie
• 2tph Airdrie-Helensburgh, as currently (non-stop Hyndland-Dalmuir)
• 2tph Springburn-Balloch, as currently happens in the evenings (via Singer)

This maintains all service frequencies, ensures a competitive journey time from Edinburgh-Glasgow, has minimal impact on those West of the city. The capacity is definitely available, and it prevents overcrowding which, IMO, will be a big issue by the time the link starts.

However, I don't know if the stock would be available for this. It also results in an infrequent timetable, and a need to recast the whole Argyle Line timetable, which can be tricky because of the Virgin, NXEC and TPE trains going that way. But is stock is there, and you can successfully get the timetables, I think you'd be sorted!

What's more likely, IMO, is 2tph Edinburgh-Balloch, 2tph Edinburgh-Helensburgh with no effect on the West End services whatsoever.

 

[djw1981]

Added to which there is no extra capacity west of Kelvinhaugh Junction, and if/when the Cumbernauld services get diverted to Queen St low level when the E&G electrification happens to free up paths at Queen St HL, then it will be at capacity from Bellgrove - Charing Cross as well. Though of course this requires the construction of a new chord, and will result in Springburn losing this service (unless a reversing move was built into the pathing!!), and a reduction in the number of trains using the Cowlairs Chord (itself new in 1993) to 0 - unless for pathing reason between Queen St and Greenhill one of the Stirling / Alloa services was diverted this way, thus improving Cumbernauld's service.

 

[me123]

... but this doesn't effect West of Kelvinhaugh; there's no additional services West of High Street, the enhancement is all at the East End.

Cumbernauld services will also use QS low level, so I can see these services using the Kelvinhaugh turnback (assuming this goes ahead) or, indeed, some Edinburgh services using this and allowing the Cumbernauld trains to link to the West End and Milngavie and Dalmuir. Then there's the Whifflet services to take into consideration (again, assuming they get wires).

Of course, cross-rail will help if it goes ahead by allowing Edinburgh-Paisley/EK/Barrhead trains to operate, and these would pass the city centre at the new Glasgow Cross station, but would not allow

Question is: does Cumbernauld (and Barrhead) really get a service enhancement (with regards to journey times), and is it worth the service loss to Springburn passengers?

Anyway, good reason for Glasgow Crossrail; it opens up many possibilities that will ease congestion both at Partick-Hyndland and Glasgow Central High Level.

 

[djw1981]

I really don't see the demand being their for Edinburgh - EK / Ayr services. Especially given the capacity restriction from Glasgow - Paisley. There is an argument for Edinburgh - Glasgow Airport service, vbut it needs to be fast, which limits stops. The alternative of the new 'fast' Shotts line service with a same station transfer - cross platform would e an idela but unlikely onto teh airport train at Central.

TS have the data for ticket destinations, and given our limited capacity on certain key routes, we need to ensure that we meet the key flow demands. The effect of the new Kilmarnock service on the M77 traffic will be interesting given that until the coming Deecember Killie commuters hd the choice of a fast coach - and try to park in the town centre or a infrequent train service or drive. I hope SR have some temptingd eals on that line to atrtract new customers. I never understood why Kilmarnock was treated as secondary to Ayr when electrification hapopened.

 

[me123]

I have to be honest, I didn't get why Kilmarnock had such a rubbish service. When you go down the line, you can see that there's no room for double tracks, though. You'll need to get by with passing loops, which I'm glad that they're now installing. But why didn't they?!?

Re: North Clyde-Ayrshire through services, I was thinking that trains would run this way instead of going to Central or Partick, freeing up valuable space at both points. Although I would say the demand would only really be there for Edinburgh-Glasgow Airport. Airdrie-Paisley and the like would benefit, but there's not many people doing this so it's not what's making me propose that option.

 

[djw1981]

There used to be room for 2 tracks on the same formation...... I think the current single track runs down the 6ft of the double track.

 

[sidthesyphon]

When you go down the line, you can see that there's no room for double tracks, though.

The line was originally double all the way, being singled in the 70s between Barrhead and Kilmarnock. The line was slewed in several places to run in the centre of the formation to give clearance under some of the bridges.