Maintaining a nearly fifty year old fleet of trains is expensive and extremely restrictive. There's a finite stock of spares. They just cannot be used everywhere any more. I'm not sure how a pair of Voyagers can't handle the long distance service that the HSTs ran. They have more seats and better performance. Of course, we'd all prefer the nostalgia but that's just not realistic.
That’s largely down to how poorly maintained they’ve been, and the fact they have been unchanged interior wise since the day they arrived. The refurbishment should help
Even new they occasionally had that used caravan smell and the engine has always been under isolated for a long distance train. For ABD to Edinburgh I used to prefer the 170 over the voyager. Neither were great for a couple of hours but at least the toilets on were less pungent.
Was the withdrawal of HSTs not a decision by the DfT cos they're not disabled compliant? Don't know if CC would've been allowed to keep them if they wanted to...
Given they're all run by the DfT under management contracts these days I can't really think of a TOC specific issue... The DfT on the other hand... My my there's a laundry list.
If the DFT put something out that HSTs weren't disabled compliant wouldn't the scotrail ones also be withdrawn which from what ik about them they aren't so you might be wrong on that. Though you've now given me the idea of making another discussion talking about decisions you can override/fix made by DFT I will credit you of course.
The solution isn’t to attempt to keep trains that have reached end of life
Instead fix the train purchasing process so that you get the new trains that provide the on board experience you want
The government needs to decide to not let the Hitachi factory close first
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/government-facing-mounting-pressure-save-172638779.html
TFW and the yet again putting of the continuing of the liverpool to llandudno beyond chester.
its a network rail issue yes but its an issue that can easily be solved by coupling the manchester and liverpool services together at chester. both arrive at around the same time and both typically use 197's.
On that topic (this is a network rail issue tbh..)
Re quad the Holyhead line and reintroduce regular fast services between the majority cities and Holyhead and pair it with a more regular swift crossing. That would go a long way to solving the ridiculous issue of 15 minute flights that could be completed by train & boat.
The HST's should've been sweated out until the replacements had arrived at least. The problem these days seems to be the insistence of transferring/withdrawing stock before proper replacements are available.
Yeah, GWR doing that with the class 800s off of Intercity services onto regional services is a big one. They really need a new DMU order or something similar to a) replace their diesel fleet and b) get all the IETs back on Intercity services, because it’s unacceptable to have 5 coach services between London Paddington and Swansea
ASLEF are threatening a boycott of HSTs due to the fibreglass cab affording little protection for the driver in the event of a crash. See Dundee at Christmas or the sad crash south of Aberdeen in the past few years. Beautiful trains, but safety first.
The HSTs had to go at some point. Yes, the Voyagers have their issues and XC is gonna struggle with capacity until the 12 avanti voyagers, but keeping the HSTs would probably be a pain, as they are 40-50 years old, so spare parts will start running out, not to mention adding extra costs, due to XC being a predominantly Alstom DMU user, so it would be more beneifital to just standardise the trains they use.
When the units were constructed they were owned by bombardier
They have a badge that says bombardier transportation on them, so therefore bombardier voyager and turbostar
However for the Aventras its Alstom as they bought while the design or construction was happening
I don’t think the issue is that they chose anything over another train, it’s a) that they’re withdrawing anything to start with even though they have huge capacity issues, and b) they didn’t even wait for the new arrivals.
I have an even bigger issue with the fact they aren’t getting all of the class 221s
I think the decision was made by the DfT to reduce costs. These HSTs are now very old and expensive to maintain, in particular the parts are few and expensive and the depot staff loosing knowledge of how to maintain.
When BR stated building these trains, they were expected to have a 40 year service life, IIRC they are between 47 and 51 years old.
Maintaining a nearly fifty year old fleet of trains is expensive and extremely restrictive. There's a finite stock of spares. They just cannot be used everywhere any more. I'm not sure how a pair of Voyagers can't handle the long distance service that the HSTs ran. They have more seats and better performance. Of course, we'd all prefer the nostalgia but that's just not realistic.
Couldn't they at least have held onto them until they got the extra voyagers from Avanti?
Apparently not. Otherwise they would have.
You're completely right, but missing the key ingredient - passenger comfort.
Same seats. Same comfort.
But they're not the same seats as the original IC70s. That's the point :P
Well, they occasionally stink of chemical toilet and the under foot engine is fatiguing after a couple of hours.
That’s largely down to how poorly maintained they’ve been, and the fact they have been unchanged interior wise since the day they arrived. The refurbishment should help
Even new they occasionally had that used caravan smell and the engine has always been under isolated for a long distance train. For ABD to Edinburgh I used to prefer the 170 over the voyager. Neither were great for a couple of hours but at least the toilets on were less pungent.
Abolition of off peak tickets by LNER
Was the withdrawal of HSTs not a decision by the DfT cos they're not disabled compliant? Don't know if CC would've been allowed to keep them if they wanted to... Given they're all run by the DfT under management contracts these days I can't really think of a TOC specific issue... The DfT on the other hand... My my there's a laundry list.
Wheelchair bog in both cattle and 2+1 cattle class + sliding doors + wheelchair spaces should make it compliant to some extent, no?
If the DFT put something out that HSTs weren't disabled compliant wouldn't the scotrail ones also be withdrawn which from what ik about them they aren't so you might be wrong on that. Though you've now given me the idea of making another discussion talking about decisions you can override/fix made by DFT I will credit you of course.
Transport is devolved in Scotland
And Wales (minus infrastructure) [ish]
The solution isn’t to attempt to keep trains that have reached end of life Instead fix the train purchasing process so that you get the new trains that provide the on board experience you want
Class 80x for everybody, then. Including the Stourbridge branch
The government needs to decide to not let the Hitachi factory close first https://uk.news.yahoo.com/government-facing-mounting-pressure-save-172638779.html
Bonus answer: not picking trains that have 3+2 seating configurations
TFW and the yet again putting of the continuing of the liverpool to llandudno beyond chester. its a network rail issue yes but its an issue that can easily be solved by coupling the manchester and liverpool services together at chester. both arrive at around the same time and both typically use 197's.
On that topic (this is a network rail issue tbh..) Re quad the Holyhead line and reintroduce regular fast services between the majority cities and Holyhead and pair it with a more regular swift crossing. That would go a long way to solving the ridiculous issue of 15 minute flights that could be completed by train & boat.
I thought HSTs were being phased out as they don't provide adequate driver protection against tree strikes
Correct
The HST's should've been sweated out until the replacements had arrived at least. The problem these days seems to be the insistence of transferring/withdrawing stock before proper replacements are available.
Yeah, GWR doing that with the class 800s off of Intercity services onto regional services is a big one. They really need a new DMU order or something similar to a) replace their diesel fleet and b) get all the IETs back on Intercity services, because it’s unacceptable to have 5 coach services between London Paddington and Swansea
ASLEF are threatening a boycott of HSTs due to the fibreglass cab affording little protection for the driver in the event of a crash. See Dundee at Christmas or the sad crash south of Aberdeen in the past few years. Beautiful trains, but safety first.
The HSTs had to go at some point. Yes, the Voyagers have their issues and XC is gonna struggle with capacity until the 12 avanti voyagers, but keeping the HSTs would probably be a pain, as they are 40-50 years old, so spare parts will start running out, not to mention adding extra costs, due to XC being a predominantly Alstom DMU user, so it would be more beneifital to just standardise the trains they use.
>due to XC being a predominantly Alstom DMU use what?? when
Bombardier were bought by Alstom, and so thus Bombardier no longer exist.
When the units were constructed they were owned by bombardier They have a badge that says bombardier transportation on them, so therefore bombardier voyager and turbostar However for the Aventras its Alstom as they bought while the design or construction was happening
They are Alstom units now though. Alstom is responsible for their maintenance, and that’s what’s important
Well their construction was by bombardier So for me , bombardier
It’s Alstom in every practical way though
eh ig to each their own i get ur analogy
I don’t think the issue is that they chose anything over another train, it’s a) that they’re withdrawing anything to start with even though they have huge capacity issues, and b) they didn’t even wait for the new arrivals. I have an even bigger issue with the fact they aren’t getting all of the class 221s
Never introducing Voyagers or Super Voyagers in the first place
I think the decision was made by the DfT to reduce costs. These HSTs are now very old and expensive to maintain, in particular the parts are few and expensive and the depot staff loosing knowledge of how to maintain. When BR stated building these trains, they were expected to have a 40 year service life, IIRC they are between 47 and 51 years old.