5x Class 153 conversion to bike and baggage vans for Scotrail

[adamedwards]

Report in Local Transport Today on a possible conversion of 153s to be baggage vans on Scottish tourist routes like the Far North, as they can be joined to existing trains:

https://www.transportxtra.com/publications/local-transport-today/news/55657/scotrail-to-consider-providing-carriages-for-bikes-on-scenic-routes

The Scottish Government has started talks with ScotRail over the provision of carriages with space for outdoor equipment, including bicycles, on some of the nation’s scenic railways.

The Government’s programme for 2017-18 committed to taking forward work on “introducing dedicated carriages for cycles and other outdoor sports equipment on rural routes in the north and west”.

ScotRail and Transport Scotland were unable to comment on suggestions that single-carriage...

Unfortunately this is not the whole article but that has been posted here on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...&set=gm.1956499791056868&type=3&theater&ifg=1
Seems a good idea to me. If they will then mean tandems can get to Wick, Kyle and Oban I will be very happy!

 

[Pete_uk]

Yes, a ferry good idea. Therefore I doubt it will ever see the light of day

 

[jopsuk]

if this does happen for the West Highland Line expect to see more Mountain bikers at Corrour!

 

[Bevan Price]

I suspect it would only be affordable (for the operators) if a fee was required for carrying bikes on trains.

 

[507021]

Not a bad idea at all.

 

[furnessvale]

I suspect it would only be affordable (for the operators) if a fee was required for carrying bikes on trains.

That depends on how many additional fare paying passengers (cyclists) were generated.

 

[randyrippley]

They'd be better used attached as baggage cars on tourist lines such as Barrow.....or maybe they could just be used as carriages so people don't have to stand on busy routes

 

[fairliered]

New thread.
Idea for Pacer conversion for rubbish skips at Scotrail stations.
And just as likely as the idea behind this thread.

 

[xc170]

Wouldn't be too difficult to set up, rip the seats out and paint them blue..

Leasing costs shouldn't be too costly considering the age of the 153.

Would be good PR and really useful in the summer, good luck with it I say, hope to see it happen!

 

[Cowley]

Perhaps they could set an area aside for cans of midge repellent?

 

[route:oxford]

Seems a fair plan for redundant stock.

There's always going to be a *but* though.

For the West Highland Line, there'll be a need for two. One for the Oban portion and one for Fort Bill - people often forget how heavily loaded and popular the Oban branch is.

From memory, it's a 3 coach 156 to Fort Bill and a 2 coach 156 to Oban, so that's 5 cabs (same post 158) If 2 153s are added, that'll take it up to 9 cabs - wouldn't that be too many?

Not forgetting some west Highland Line platforms are quite short south of Crianlarich.

So if all the minor issues could be overcome - a very good idea.

 

[sprinterguy]

From memory, it's a 3 coach 156 to Fort Bill and a 2 coach 156 to Oban, so that's 5 cabs (same post 158) If 2 153s are added, that'll take it up to 9 cabs - wouldn't that be too many?

There haven't been any 3-car hybrid 156s on the West Highland line in about twenty five years: Fort William portions are typically 4-cars, sometimes just 2. All the same limitations that you've outlined still apply, though.

 

[adamedwards]

I wonder if the converted 153 might be part seating, as I know I would much rather sit with my bike. The space would also be good for trolley supplies for catering.

I would also expect them to be used only on some services leaving say mid morning from Wick, Kyle etc and mid afternoon back to allow for connections from further south. Could the 153s be left at the buffers when not needed?

 

[aar0]

From the title I was imagining ScotRail's new HSTs towing a 153 behind

 

[61653 HTAFC]

This isn't a bad idea, but the railway isn't always a friendly environment for innovation: sometimes with good reason. Using 153s in this way would mean another stock type for crews to be trained on even if no passengers are carried. If they're only used in high season those competencies would lapse over winter, meaning the cost of extra training runs.

 

[LowLevel]

This isn't a bad idea, but the railway isn't always a friendly environment for innovation: sometimes with good reason. Using 153s in this way would mean another stock type for crews to be trained on even if no passengers are carried. If they're only used in high season those competencies would lapse over winter, meaning the cost of extra training runs.

153 is only a one day conversion from 156/158 for the guards etc. They're not complicated units, no computers etc to mess about with.

 

[NotATrainspott]

There's presumably a little nugget of truth in this. We've heard that mixing 153s into Sprinter formations reduces the cost to ROSCOs - without a need for toilets or wheelchair areas the accessibility requirements aren't that expensive to meet. Presumably the ROSCOs are going around looking for interest in 3/4 car 75mph Sprinter sets. Other operators like Northern might want the 153s fully refurbed, since they would be used primarily as extra passenger capacity. If ScotRail is looking at adding non-passenger capacity, it might be a bit cheaper.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Someone suggested up thread making an area for the catering trolley and supplies, but with all the space available could not a small buffet counter also be incorporated somewhere?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

153 is only a one day conversion from 156/158 for the guards etc. They're not complicated units, no computers etc to mess about with.

What about the fitters? I get the impression that the 153s/155s aren't the most reliable units around... Fair point Though, if the crew side isn't as major an issue as I assumed.

The biggest stumbling block might be the condition of the units though, if Northern's 155s are anything to go by.

 

[47802]

Someone suggested up thread making an area for the catering trolley and supplies, but with all the space available could not a small buffet counter also be incorporated somewhere?

Oh yeh why go further and have a full blown Coffee Shop, a Bar, a Bistro and a Children Play Area!

Personally I think its fine as long as those who might use this baggage train pay the full cost of it and its not subsidised by the rest of us through taxes or the ticket price.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Oh yeh why go further and have a full blown Coffee Shop, a Bar, a Bistro and a Children Play Area!

Personally I think its fine as long as those who might use this baggage train pay the full cost of it and its not subsidised by the rest of us through taxes or the ticket price.

Well that's exactly the type of reaction I would have expected from you, big difference in a small buffet counter/servery and what you just added!

 

[broadgage]

I feel that conversion to cycle and luggage vehicles could be a good idea for stock that will soon be obsolete for other uses, provided that it is not too expensive.
Retaining a few seats in order that cyclists may keep an eye on their machines, provided that this is allowed without having to modify the vehicle for DDA compliance or whatever it is called this year.
If the vehicles are only needed in the summer, it would seem worth running them just once a week in the winter to keep up competencies.

 

[30907]

There are arguably public policy benefits (health and environment) to promoting cycling (etc) - I speak as a (very) ex-cyclist BTW - which could justify an increase in subsidy.

The cabs issue could be resolved by diagramming so that only one MLV ran in a train, as (currently) Oban has double the number of trains compared with Mallaig.

 

[Chester1]

I don't understand why the 153s can't be given a derogation for PRM TSI if they are only allowed to work with compliant units. The cheaper mods could be made to them and platform information and train announcements could advise disabled passengers to use other the carriages. The bike idea might work but the units shouldn't be redundant in the first place.

 

[takno]

Oh yeh why go further and have a full blown Coffee Shop, a Bar, a Bistro and a Children Play Area!

Personally I think its fine as long as those who might use this baggage train pay the full cost of it and its not subsidised by the rest of us through taxes or the ticket price.

I quite like the sounds of a childrens play area. Keeps them occupied and out of the rest of the train so everyone can get some peace. Shouldn't be too difficult to knock together a jungle gym from a couple of old BRUTES and some mail-sacks.

 

[HSTEd]

From memory, it's a 3 coach 156 to Fort Bill and a 2 coach 156 to Oban, so that's 5 cabs (same post 158) If 2 153s are added, that'll take it up to 9 cabs - wouldn't that be too many?

My understanding is the 8 control board/vehicle limit only applies with Pacers in the formation - Sprinters have a limit of 12.

Otherwise 10-car 159 formations that run every day would have serious issues.

 

[gazthomas]

April 1st has come early, how about new units to to replace the 158’s that are now 30 years old, that include the necessary accommodation and facilities?

 

[Highlandspring]

This rumour has been kicking about for a few months internally but I haven't seen or heard anything at all to substantiate it.

 

[XCTurbostar]

This is almost as good as the Class 442s..

 

[gazthomas]

This is almost as good as the Class 442s..

That’s a cracking idea, we can take the 37/4’s that are knackered from their recent sojorn to Cumbria back to where they below in push-pull mode with 442’s!