In what way?I have always thought that the perfect option.
In what way?I have always thought that the perfect option.
222s are maintained in Derby. Not Central Rivers.underfloor engines were specifically excluded in the ITT for the I7C rolling stock. Transport Scotland could always change their minds though. However maintenance provision would be a major issue, as the 222 fleet is maintained at Central Rivers, which isn't exactly on Scotland's doorstep. Depots can be built, staff can be sourced/trained, but it's a major and expensive faff for yet another interim period until the wires go up. Rolling stock for electric services will have similar maintenance requirements but at least that will be the long term final solution.
my bad, but still a long way away for major overhauls.222s are maintained in Derby. Not Central Rivers.
Not as I understand it. The ITT here https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/33332/scotrail-franchise-itt-4855286-45.pdf states that the existing Class 170s were considered unsuitable as intercity trains, but could be made suitable with sufficient refurbishment. No mention is made of underfloor enginesunderfloor engines were specifically excluded in the ITT for the I7C rolling stock.
Whatever happens to the 222s, they won't be maintained in Derby as the depot is being transferred from Bombardier to Hitachi as part of the 810 introduction.my bad, but still a long way away for major overhauls.
If they are without a home they would be the ideal length to replace the HSTs until further electrification takes place. A reasonably reliable multiple unit so a good replacement on Inter7City routes.In what way?
Yes I agree it will take further expense but so will anything that replaces the current fleet. I also remember Chris Garnett saying underfloor engines would never be an option for GNER routes & look at those now.underfloor engines were specifically excluded in the ITT for the I7C rolling stock. Transport Scotland could always change their minds though. However maintenance provision would be a major issue, as the 222 fleet is maintained at Central Rivers, which isn't exactly on Scotland's doorstep. Depots can be built, staff can be sourced/trained, but it's a major and expensive faff for yet another interim period until the wires go up. Rolling stock for electric services will have similar maintenance requirements but at least that will be the long term final solution.
which suggests to me any new operator would need to have a new maintenance facility established, with all the investment that entails. Either by the Rosco leasing them out or the operator. An added expense.Whatever happens to the 222s, they won't be maintained in Derby as the depot is being transferred from Bombardier to Hitachi as part of the 810 introduction.
which suggests to me any new operator would need to have a new maintenance facility established, with all the investment that entails. Either by the Rosco leasing them out or the operator. An added expense.
replacing an interim fleet with another interim fleet sounds like throwing good money after bad, as regards setting up maintenance and staff training. If the ultimate replacement fleet turns out to be a Hitachi AT200/300 variant then Craigentinny is on hand. Whether they have capacity is a different matter, so Haymarket likely will still have a role to play.Depends if they're replacing something else (e.g. Scottish HSTs), in which case an existing facility can be modified. While outsourced vendor maintenance has largely been the norm for new fleets, the traditional model is also an option.
There'd be more chance of Angel having that lawyer than ScotRail. One thing the ROSCOs are very good at is having contracts with watertight T&Cs.I'm sure a good lawyer could find a way out of that agreement should there be the will there to do so
How long is interim? 10-15 years service say would be a decent return for any up front investmentreplacing an interim fleet with another interim fleet sounds like throwing good money after bad, as regards setting up maintenance and staff training. If the ultimate replacement fleet turns out to be a Hitachi AT200/300 variant then Craigentinny is on hand. Whether they have capacity is a different matter, so Haymarket likely will still have a role to play.
I'd agree. But a lot has been sunk into the HST programme, seems a shame for that to go to waste, but it has to be recognised that the programme hasn't been as successful as hoped. It may well be cheaper to ditch them in favour of 222s. It's a conversation that needs to be had.How long is interim? 10-15 years service say would be a decent return for any up front investment
replacing an interim fleet with another interim fleet sounds like throwing good money after bad, as regards setting up maintenance and staff training. If the ultimate replacement fleet turns out to be a Hitachi AT200/300 variant then Craigentinny is on hand. Whether they have capacity is a different matter, so Haymarket likely will still have a role to play.
I'd agree. But a lot has been sunk into the HST programme, seems a shame for that to go to waste, but it has to be recognised that the programme hasn't been as successful as hoped. It may well be cheaper to ditch them in favour of 222s. It's a conversation that needs to be had.
Smart motorways are dangerous and whatever your opinion on them, they are not helping motorists. Lack of road maintenance in many areas, lack of investment in new roads, even small but important chords and extensions, the ULEZ extension and cutting up roads into bicycle paths and bus lanes increasing congestion even more in some areas. Labour accelerated the war but granted, the Tories have suspended the war, to put it that way and mainly local councils have made their own decisions.How are they waging war on the motorist? They have cut fuel duty, handed out grants for people to buy electric cars, continued with "smart motorway" projects despite cancelling rail upgrades etc.
Transport Scotland is at the mercy of HMT funding via the Scottish parliament so their green ambitions are irrelevant. HMT will decide whether a fleet of new IETs will be worth the cost which I doubt sincerely.I know the Scottish government have this ambition of completely decarbonising the railway by an extremely ambitious target but I honestly cannot see this being met, or certainly not without a level of investment and expertise, not to mention absolutely world beating disruption to passengers whilst infrastructure works a done then is quite frankly unacceptable or impossible, especially given current tough times
I thought the rail unions in Scotland were now pushing firmly against HSTs? Wasn’t there a thread about it last month?Depends how interim. 22x are mid-life - there's at least another 15-20 years in them unless emissions regulations shorten that.
I'd be astonished if that conversation wasn't a long way along.
HMT funds Scots gov with a block grant. Unlike England, the Treasury can't micromanage Scottish transport investment decisions. Obviously Scots gov have to decide what their priorities are but if they decide to electrify there's nothing the Treasury can do to stop them.Transport Scotland is at the mercy of HMT funding via the Scottish parliament so their green ambitions are irrelevant. HMT will decide whether a fleet of new IETs will be worth the cost which I doubt sincerely.
Certainly a trial was previously announced by XC but guess that's gone now with the change in contracts.Could any mid life overhaul include one less engine and the addition of a battery pack to cut pollution in stations?
You would think it an option that's way up there. Been talked about a lot. Its like a very mini Project Thor lol.Could any mid life overhaul include one less engine and the addition of a battery pack to cut pollution in stations?
Before the ROSCO invests in that kind of project they will want a home for them first, otherwise it would be sunk costs.You would think it an option that's way up there. Been talked about a lot. Its like a very mini Project Thor lol.
Of of course, that goes without saying.Before the ROSCO invests in that kind of project they will want a home for them first, otherwise it would be sunk costs.
There is a lot of logic in that, but as you say, they wouldnt be earning money.A more left field thought I had - rather than scrap - was 20 5 car 221s ex Avanti would be great as a centrally owned 'float' to increase capacity across the network at specific times. E.g. when the East Coast is closed Avanti and East Mids don't have any ability to increase capacity, or in the summer XC and GWR struggle with Cornwall demand. One of those totally non commercial so will never happen ideas but if we're being speculative..!
Ah the old school BR way. Have trains available for use at busy times. Its a shame that never caught on......seriously though this is one aspect of privatisation that has really damaged the railway.Certainly a trial was previously announced by XC but guess that's gone now with the change in contracts.
A more left field thought I had - rather than scrap - was 20 5 car 221s ex Avanti would be great as a centrally owned 'float' to increase capacity across the network at specific times. E.g. when the East Coast is closed Avanti and East Mids don't have any ability to increase capacity, or in the summer XC and GWR struggle with Cornwall demand. One of those totally non commercial so will never happen ideas but if we're being speculative..!
Is it this summer or next that ASLEF has said they will refuse to drive the HSTs?The HST will be around for the best part of the next decade.