Serco Caledonian Sleeper contract will NOT be extended

[DelW]

It will be interesting to see whether GBRF do retain the haulage contract from the new operator, whoever it is. AFAIK Scotrail don't have any other loco-hauled services, and there isn't a big fleet of other locos suitable for the work.

 

[Scotrail84]

It will be interesting to see whether GBRF do retain the haulage contract from the new operator, whoever it is. AFAIK Scotrail don't have any other loco-hauled services, and there isn't a big fleet of other locos suitable for the work.

Only GBRF owned 92s and 73s can couple to the coaches and provide ETH to them as well. The fleet is effectively non standard in terms of rolling stock compatibility.

 

[popeter45]

It will be interesting to see whether GBRF do retain the haulage contract from the new operator, whoever it is. AFAIK Scotrail don't have any other loco-hauled services, and there isn't a big fleet of other locos suitable for the work.

Who operated the class 68+mark 2 setup a few years ago?

Only GBRF owned 92s and 73s can couple to the coaches and provide ETH to them as well. The fleet is effectively non standard in terms of rolling stock compatibility.

Yes that's the current setup but nothing long term stopping adapting the mark 5's to standard coupling height or modify other FOC's motive power to the non standard coupler's

May be misremembering but I think I do remember hearing the class 93's would have variable height coupler's?

 

[liamf656]

According to an FOI someone posted on Twitter, the sleeper is to be remerged with ScotRail to ensure its longterm financial viability.

Is there a link to this online please? I've had a quick look to no avail

 

[Bald Rick]

Was this at a break clause, or some random date?

Break clause.

Cracking opportunity to get the Aberdeen portion started from Fraserburgh/Peterhead when they re-open.

Funniest post of the week! (But you forgot the smiley face )

I would be astonished if it wasn't a majority of Scots going to/from London

In my experience the origin ‘home’ point is more form the South (much bigger market) and very much touristy.



There’s a lot of overthinking here. This is a contractual matter, based on a pre-set franchise negotiation process. That process has been terminated. There’s nothing to stop TS opening new negotiations with Serco under a different mechanism. Whilst there are many reasons ‘for’ bringing CS ‘in house’, potentially merged with Scotrail, there are many reasons ‘against’ as well.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Who operated the class 68+mark 2 setup a few years ago?

I think that was DRS?

 

[Bletchleyite]

That is what I think will happen. CS has kind of priced itself out of the budget market and now has costs that prevent it going back there. Depends what Scotrail can achieve or are mandated to achieve.

I don't think it'll be binned. It's too political. It could well be simplified to save cost, though, e.g. removing the Aberdeen would hugely simplify the shunting. Aberdeen is easy for people to connect onto the Lowlander at Edinburgh, it's much closer to the central belt than the other two places. There'd also be the option not to run it every night if midweek is very quiet.

My personal view is that post HS2 we'll just have a two portion Highlander and no Lowlander (and maybe half the stock sent to the Riviera to replace the by then coming on 70-year-old Mk3s). But for now the Lowlander is still of value.

 

[zwk500]

Did I say it doesn't have to demonstrate value? No, I did not. In fact, what I did say way this service is of great value to those who use it and it delivers considerable economic benefit.

The question of to whom it demonstrates value and to whom it does not is the crux of this whole issue

Which is evidently recognized by the SG who have decided to end the contract on the grounds of value.

I'm not 100% sure if you're saying that the SG recognise it must demonstrate value, or if they recognise the value the service currently provides. Either way, the SG have decided to end the contract because the proposals Serco made did *not* demonstrate good value (or, at least, they believed better value is achievable through some other means).

 

[SteveM70]

Does the Night Riviera make any money?
What does it do differently to CS?

I’ve no idea

Loads. One route not three. No complicated splitting / shunting / joining at two different locations. One type of traction rather than two or more normally three. No subcontracted haulage / drivers. Refurbished 40ish year old coaching stock not brand new stuff costing a fortune

 

[Bletchleyite]

Refurbished 40ish year old coaching stock not brand new stuff costing a fortune

Coaching stock yes, but haven't they just put out a tender for brand new bimode locos for it?

 

[Scotrail84]

Who operated the class 68+mark 2 setup a few years ago?

Yes that's the current setup but nothing long term stopping adapting the mark 5's to standard coupling height or modify other FOC's motive power to the non standard coupler's

May be misremembering but I think I do remember hearing the class 93's would have variable height coupler's?

Money is the problem, plus you can't just modify the coaches, ETH output from locos would need to be sorted out.

 

[SteveM70]

Coaching stock yes, but haven't they just put out a tender for brand new bimode locos for it?

I thought so but wasn’t sure, but didn’t include the locos in my list of differences as the 73/9s and the bed duffs are both late-life refurbs

 

[Wynd]

Funniest post of the week! (But you forgot the smiley face )

Will you ever take these proposals seriously? Many others are.

 

[43096]

Does the Night Riviera make any money?

No, but the subsidy is effectively “hidden” in the wider GWR operation.

 

[yorkie]

If anyone has any ideas/suggestions for the service, please create a new thread (if there isn't one already) in the speculative discussion section

I wish them luck if they think changing operator will make the CS financially viable...

It was made far less viable when it was split out into a separate franchise compard to when it was with Scotrail!

 

[popeter45]

Anybody proficient in Photoshop want to mock-up what a mark 5 in ScotRail livery would look like?

 

[Falcon1200]

Separating the Sleepers from Scotrail was indeed a daft decision, re-integration would certainly make sense and bring operational and marketing benefits. But.... no matter how the service is provided in future, how will the Scottish Government justify the huge subsidy required to keep it going, given all the other pressures on national finances?

 

[deltic]

Does the Night Riviera make any money?
What does it do differently to CS?

It was subsidised by about £10m a year around a decade ago if I recall correctly

 

[zwk500]

Anybody proficient in Photoshop want to mock-up what a mark 5 in ScotRail livery would look like?

They'll presumably maintain the separate branding for the marketing. There will presumably be a 'part of Scotrail' or whatever slogan they want added in the corner.

 

[dk1]

Does the Night Riviera make any money?

Certainly not. Sleepers keep accountants awake at night has always been said since privatisation.

 

[zwk500]

Certainly not. Sleepers keep accountants awake at night has always been said since privatisation.

Does anybody know if/when Sleepers stopped being profitable (if ever) under BR?

 

[dk1]

Does anybody know if/when Sleepers stopped being profitable (if ever) under BR?

You only have to look at the huge shake ups especially after the mk3s where built/being built & how the concentration of the Anglo-Scottish route was centred entirely on Euston.

 

[paul1609]

In my experience the origin ‘home’ point is more form the South (much bigger market) and very much touristy.

Very much my experience on the West Highland and Lowlander over the 30 years up to 2019. The Glasgow section of the Lowlander seemed to lose loads of trade when the WCML modernisation was complete.
For me personally the modernisation meant that for the first time there was a daytime connection right through to the south coast off the lunchtime departure from Fort William or about a 14.00 departure from Helensburgh which made the southbound sleeper a lot less attractive.
I doubt the lowlander would survive the introduction of improved services via HS2.
Most important question for me is if Scotrail take over the sleeper will the lounge car become alcohol free?

 

[trek]

The fares are definitely aimed at (wealthier) tourists. It’s not great politics, I agree.

CS really misses out on a solid budget option like couchettes. It’s a shame.

Agree that a denser couchette option would be nice (and perhaps could have brought in more revenue per coach?).

But as a starter, could they just bring back shared cabins (perhaps in classic only) for those willing with no physical changes to the rooms required.

Personally I don't care yet am forced to take up a whole cabin when they could be selling the bed above/below me to someone else. They don't even fold up the top bunk in classic anymore anyway when solo, and the bed is made (I assume they are changing the sheets too even though no one has slept in the top bunk!)

 

[dk1]

Most important question for me is if Scotrail take over the sleeper will the lounge car become alcohol free?

I wouldn’t imagine so. I’m sure in the past when Scotrail brought this in Sleeper services where exempt. It’s a huge part of catering revenue & a totally different market/environment to a normal service. Partaking in liquid refreshment is an important part of the experience for me on these trains & would put me off if not permitted.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Separating the Sleepers from Scotrail was indeed a daft decision, re-integration would certainly make sense and bring operational and marketing benefits. But.... no matter how the service is provided in future, how will the Scottish Government justify the huge subsidy required to keep it going, given all the other pressures on national finances?

The same way they can justify subsidising basket cases like the Far North Line - it is just too political to fiddle with it.

 

[yorkie]

I've created a new thread for any posts of a speculative nature:

Caledonian Sleeper: How should it be run and what changes would you like to see?

This thread is to enable people to post their ideas, following the news in the non-speculative thread Serco Caledonian Sleeper contract will NOT be extended: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/serco-caledonian-sleeper-contract-will-not-be-extended.237956/ For example, should the Caledonian...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[43096]

Who operated the class 68+mark 2 setup a few years ago?

Yes that's the current setup but nothing long term stopping adapting the mark 5's to standard coupling height or modify other FOC's motive power to the non standard coupler's

May be misremembering but I think I do remember hearing the class 93's would have variable height coupler's?

Before everyone starts running away with themselves about traction changes and what have you, by very quickly asking Mr. Google, you can find that GBRf have a 15-year contract through to 2030 for the provision of locos and crews. Novation of the existing contract to the new operator is almost certain.

This was the original press release: https://www.europorte.com/content/uploads/2020/04/150217GBRf-caledonian-sleeper-UK.pdf

17 February 2015
GB Railfreight boosts rail services business with Serco Caledonian Sleeper contract

GB Railfreight (Eurotunnel Group) today announced that it has signed a 15-year contract with Serco to provide train drivers and traction for its Caledonian Sleeper franchise. This contract will provide GBRf around £100 million in revenues over 15 years.

Due to commence on the 1st April 2015, GBRf will be providing train drivers and traction for six night services southbound and six night haulage services northbound per week, from Sunday to Friday. These services will be operating on both the Lowland Sleeper route, between Euston and Edinburgh and Glasgow, and the Highland Sleeper route between Euston and Fort William, Aberdeen and Inverness.

From the beginning of the contract, four refurbed class 92s purchased thanks to Groupe Eurotunnel will be used on the electrified routes south of Edinburgh and Glasgow. North of Edinburgh, the company is planning to utilise six class 73/9s from October 2015, which are currently undergoing work at Wabtec’s facility in Loughborough. In the meantime, it will be operating class 47s, on hire from Harry Needle Railroad Company (HNRC).

his contract is a significant development for GBRf, highlighting its intentions for growth in the rail services market. With heavy investments in both traction and driver training, it’s another example of the freight operator’s approach to offering bespoke services that target the specific customer’s needs.

John Smith, Managing Director of GB Railfreight, said: “GB Railfreight are delighted to announce that we will be supporting Serco with train drivers and traction on their Caledonian Sleeper franchise. We’ve been working closely with the company in putting together a strategy that would work best for them on these given routes, and have invested in the appropriate rolling stock and training to make this strategy effective. We hope to build on this relationship over the next 15 years and ensure that passengers receive the optimum service.”

Serco’s Managing Director for the Caledonian Sleeper, Peter Strachan said, “GBRf are one of our key partners on the Caledonian Sleeper franchise. Together, we have worked closely to develop a traction strategy for the lifetime of the franchise which takes the service from the 1st April through to the introduction of the new trains in 2018 and beyond. GBRf have extensive experience in the rail services market and we looking forward to working together.”

 

[dk1]

The same way they can justify subsidising basket cases like the Far North Line - it is just too political to fiddle with it.

Yes exactly that.

 

[Alanko]

Yes that's the current setup but nothing long term stopping adapting the mark 5's to standard coupling height or modify other FOC's motive power to the non standard coupler's

Retain the 73/9s as ETHEL 2.0 and then use other traction on the front of those. Works for the 66s providing the grunt at the moment.