Caledonian Sleeper

[Mingulay]

Serco are already making c.£25m or more losses this year due to the delay with the Mk5s and those will be increasing with every issue and bad bit of press. So don’t worry they’re being punished. Transport Scotland aren’t though (yet) despite being as culpable as anyone else

As for calling for major fines or resignations on the back of TripAdvisor reports...!!!!???

Not suggesting that . But given recorded incidents and anecdotal customer feedback from trip advisor . Any Transport Dept should put an official observer on every service with a clip board to record all defects , delays , poor service , and good service from staff . You then look at that against the service spec and force improvements , levy fines as is reasonable . But I am glad they are being punished . Could be another Carillion ?

 

[kristiang85]

That doesn't look good.

While some of the sleeper customers are regulars, an increasing amount will be the one off tourists wanting that magical hotel on wheels or people going for a special trip like an anniversary etc.

As one of those reviewers (from Australia) said, it's not a good advert for Scottish tourism right now.

The next two months are the peak of the Scottish tourism season and all this couldn't be happening at a worse time really.

Indeed. I just saw this article pop up on Twitter too - https://www.huckmag.com/places/a-chaotic-night-on-britains-new-caledonian-sleeper/

To quote one bit:

At about 5am, the idyll is shattered by a fist thumping at the door. It’s an appropriately solemn member of crew with bad news: something to do with a flat tire, followed by some hasty words of apology. We’re all to change at Stafford, where a replacement coach will take us the rest of the way.

There have been better early morning revelations, but I figure it can’t be too bad. It’s been five hours after all, and Stafford sounds reliably northern enough – surely it’ll be nothing more than a quick, painless cross border bus jaunt. It could even be something approaching fun; an opportunity for shared hangdog glances and muted camaraderie with my fellow evacuees. Still, best to check. After scrambling about for bags and belongings, I pull up Google Maps with two still largely unresponsive thumbs.

Stafford is 261 miles south of Glasgow. That means around six hours of coach travel, crawling across the clogged arteries of the UK’s busiest motorways.

To go to your point of tourism, my girlfriend and I started taking the sleeper up to see my parents near Edinburgh as a pleasant alternative to flying. But with all these nightmare stories, and weekends too small to waste time with delays or lack of sleep, we will definitely be using the plane in the coming months if we make the trip. Extrapolate that over many people, it really can't be great for them.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Not suggesting that . But given recorded incidents and anecdotal customer feedback from trip advisor . Any Transport Dept should put an official observer on every service with a clip board to record all defects , delays , poor service , and good service from staff . You then look at that against the service spec and force improvements , levy fines as is reasonable . But I am glad they are being punished . Could be another Carillion ?

Are Caledonian Sleeper not already under some sort of ‘SQUIRE’ checking/mystery shopping regime like the ScotRail franchise then?

 

[Highlandspring]

Yes CS is covered by SQUIRE.

 

[WesternLancer]

I’ve just had an email from Transport Focus on behalf of CS and Transport Scotland with one of their questionnaires.

Are these sent out at random? I’ve had the questionnaires before but don’t ever recall receiving one by email.

Booked a ticket in may with CS by phone and got tickets e-mailed

2 days after the trip I got a CS survey
1 day later I got the TF survey

did them both. I regarded the TF survey as better structured and more 'probing' - but it was TF commissioned by CS IIRC (as opposed to say by Transport Scotland)

 

[urpert]

Forerunner of real time trains lol

I'd agree the 'at' column would have been useful,

The software powering Southeastern's platform PIS has just started doing that ("This train is currently at Lewisham").

 

[Mathew S]

just looked at the 195 one. Top of page is basically not great

I don't know which thread you're reading, but the consensus on the 195s is yes, okay, teething troubles as with any new train, but it's minor stuff. Overall, they are really, really very good indeed.
Obviously time will tell, but it would seem like CAF have done some good work with the Northern units.

 

[387gwr]

How many Mark 5 are in service now?

 

[MrEd]

Can someone enlighten me here: now that the Lowlander has gone over to Mk5 operation, what is the typical diagram for each Mk2/Mk3 half-set? How often does each half-set visit Polmadie, and is any maintenance on the Mk2s/3s still carried out at Wembley? The only reason I ask is that the Mk5s have taken over on the Lowlander, so the full rakes of Mk2s/3s never reach Glasgow in passenger service. Are any spare Mk2/3 vehicles available at Wembley in case of failure during the day?

 

[Antman]

I love it. You criticise the railway (in this case perfectly valid and relevant criticism of the sleeper service and its issues) and the mods go deleting. And suggesting off topic. As ever. It’s all a bit Chinese....

 

[TimboM]

How many Mark 5 are in service now?

Right now just the two full sets (4x 8-car "units") on the Lowlander.

 

[USRailFan]

The Riviera haven't got enough spare stock (if any) to get anywhere near replacing CS. The Riviera is two short trains. CS is a much bigger operation.

How many operable Mk3 sleepers are there all in all (including the ones GWR use)?

 

[USRailFan]

But isn't the issue that...

a) CAF have delivered faulty coaches
b) The Mk2s are knackered and falling to bits

I'm not clear what Abellio could have done differently here?

They could take a GWR and convert Mk3 coaches to replace the Mk2s...

 

[USRailFan]

5Z11 0930 Polmadie-Wembley running tomorrow to reposition the Glasgow portion for tomorrow night’s service.

Oh, and 73/9s regularly work Load 6 trains on the WHL without any bother and keep to the timings. The “record” I’m aware of so far for a single 73/9 is a Load 8 rake + 2x 92s (an extra 252 tonnes or about 6 extra coaches worth)... underpowered??!

They do occasionally (and it is occasionally) break down, like any other loco. Unfortunately last night was in one of the most remote places on the UK network.

Aren't they re-engined and have close to the equivalent power of a Class 37?

 

[RLBH]

They could take a GWR and convert Mk3 coaches to replace the Mk2s...

A 16-coach Mark 3 rake with top-and-tail locos won't fit into the platforms at Euston. The 12 metres that are saved by having four Mark 2s in the rake is that critical, and is the reason why Mark 5 coaches are 22 metres long.

A comprehensive refurbishment to a common standard of the Mark 2s and Mark 3s would also be very time-consuming (see the Scotrail HSTs) and would only really be good for 10 years or so, at which point new coaches would have to be ordered or the service abandoned.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They could take a GWR and convert Mk3 coaches to replace the Mk2s...

That would make the overall train 12m longer (4 x 23m instead of 4 x 20m), and so not fit into Euston. It could be done, but they'd have to reduce the number of sleepers by 1 to do so (in practice probably 2 so the half-sets aren't messed up). If this goes on too much longer, though, they might find they have to do so.

This is the precise reason why the Mk5s are 22m long instead of the more usual 23-24m.

 

[USRailFan]

That would make the overall train 12m longer (4 x 23m instead of 4 x 20m), and so not fit into Euston. It could be done, but they'd have to reduce the number of sleepers by 1 to do so (in practice probably 2 so the half-sets aren't messed up). If this goes on too much longer, though, they might find they have to do so.

This is the precise reason why the Mk5s are 22m long instead of the more usual 23-24m.

Didn't they run half-sets of different lengths back in the early 90s tho? I think I read something about Glasgow sets having one or two fewer cars than Edinburgh ones?

 

[marks87]

I know we're now getting into the realms of fantasy - and I sense a punt to the "speculative ideas" section if we're not careful - but if coaches were being converted anyway, would it be entirely out of the question to give the "new" seated coaches driving cabs purely for the purpose of the empty stock move into Euston (while also retaining a corridor connection - so looking a bit like the end of a Sprinter)?

Do the existing Mk3 sleepers have the necessary cabling to facilitate push-pull working?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Probably a lot more expensive to fit 5 (?) coaches with cabs than use one loco.

 

[marks87]

Probably a lot more expensive to fit 5 (?) coaches with cabs than use one loco.

Yes, of course; but I was thinking of solutions to the length problem. Cutting out one loco frees up more than enough space to replace the 4 Mk2s with Mk3s.

It would come down to whether there would a benefit to keeping the train at full-length over the cost of fitting cabs to coaches that would be going under refurbishment anyway.

 

[USRailFan]

A 16-coach Mark 3 rake with top-and-tail locos won't fit into the platforms at Euston. The 12 metres that are saved by having four Mark 2s in the rake is that critical, and is the reason why Mark 5 coaches are 22 metres long.

A comprehensive refurbishment to a common standard of the Mark 2s and Mark 3s would also be very time-consuming (see the Scotrail HSTs) and would only really be good for 10 years or so, at which point new coaches would have to be ordered or the service abandoned.

10 years would more than suffice for a total overhaul of the MkVs. Even if the MkVs turn out to be complete failures and completely new stock needs to be ordered, 10-12 years should probably suffice.

 

[Bletchleyite]

10 years would more than suffice for a total overhaul of the MkVs. Even if the MkVs turn out to be complete failures and completely new stock needs to be ordered, 10-12 years should probably suffice.

The likely impact of a decision to refurbish Mk3s instead of buy new is the service ending in 10-15 years. Though HS2 might well ruin the economics of it, anyway. Or we might find the economics improved by swingeing low-carbon restrictions...

Either way the Mk2s need to go, they are knackered.

 

[sprinterguy]

Aren't they re-engined and have close to the equivalent power of a Class 37?

Indeed they are; the Caledonian Sleeper class 73s are fitted with an MTU engine producing 1600hp - A full 1000hp more than a "traditional" class 73 and only 150hp less than a 37.

I'm unsure of their power at rail, but based on the figures for the two 'prototype' class 73 upgrades (73951/952) which have slightly less installed power than the Caledonian Sleeper examples, they may very well produce more than the 1250hp continuous output of a class 37 at the railhead.

 

[RLBH]

Didn't they run half-sets of different lengths back in the early 90s tho? I think I read something about Glasgow sets having one or two fewer cars than Edinburgh ones?

In the early 1990s (and before) there were separate trains for each destination, so while the individual portions were longer - 7/9 sleepers plus lounge car, seated cars (typically a TSO and BSO) and any extra vans - they needed more, rather than longer, platforms. Reverting to that mode of operation would massively increase operating costs.

 

[USRailFan]

In the early 1990s (and before) there were separate trains for each destination, so while the individual portions were longer - 7/9 sleepers plus lounge car, seated cars (typically a TSO and BSO) and any extra vans - they needed more, rather than longer, platforms. Reverting to that mode of operation would massively increase operating costs.

Right so they even ran separate Glasgow and Edinburgh sleepers?

 

[RLBH]

Right so they even ran separate Glasgow and Edinburgh sleepers?

Five trains a night - though I believe on Saturdays Fort William was a portion off of the Inverness train, bringing it down to four.

Actually six a night, because there was a Plymouth service with portions from Glasgow and Edinburgh that was stopped in 1994.

 

[Steve Harris]

Five trains a night - though I believe on Saturdays Fort William was a portion off of the Inverness train, bringing it down to four.

Actually six a night, because there was a Plymouth service with portions from Glasgow and Edinburgh that was stopped in 1994.

Take a look at https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/the-introduction-of-mk3-sleepers-and-old-routes-served-by-sleeper-services.183067/
post 10 might be of interest to you both.

 

[InOban]

On the basis that no news is good news, can we assume that all services this week have run, and more or less to time, except for defective Mk2 lounges etc?

 

[mralexn]

On the basis that no news is good news, can we assume that all services this week have run, and more or less to time, except for defective Mk2 lounges etc?

There were reports yesterday that the Southbound Inverness portion was short formed, so some passengers had to travel by bus to Edinburgh and meet the full train there.

 

[Caleb2010]

Something must be going right, this thread was half way down the first page when I looked instead of semi permanently in the top 3