• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Caledonian Sleeper discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

GW43125

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2014
Messages
2,045
Absolutely.

Apologies, I was really responding to the suggestion that all Caledonian Sleeper passengers could be provided with first class seats for their onward journey.

It was the fact you quoted my post that threw me. No worries!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Scotrail84

Established Member
Joined
5 Jul 2010
Messages
2,360
What are the terms of compensation for those 'turfed out their berths' ?
I would hope they get a full refund . Plus free refreshments / food etc if on the 0540 to Kings Cross, and hopefully all put into first class where getting a brief sleep should be better than standard class !

What planet are you on?? They are getting conveyed due to the decent o another toc, they can't all just pile into first class. Do you realise how busy that train is after Newcastle, especially on a Monday morning.

As for compensation they will all get a full refund, you really don't like the sleepers do you? Always having a go at them.
 
Last edited:

LeylandLen

Member
Joined
28 Oct 2013
Messages
779
Location
Leyland Lancs
What planet are you on?? They are getting conveyed due to the decent o another toc, they can't all just pile into first class. Do you realise how busy that train is after Newcastle, especially on a Monday morning.

As for compensation they will all get a full refund, you really don't like the sleepers do you? Always having a go at them.

I am old enough to remember the proper sleeper services we had from/to Manchester and Euston , and between Glasgow/Edinburgh and Inverness and what hapenend in the rare occasions when the sleepers were cancelled.
I get the impression on this topic that they were far more reliable then under British Rail than some TOC who seem not to care too much about us, the passengers !
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,692
Location
Scotland
I get the impression on this topic that they were far more reliable then under British Rail than some TOC who seem not to care too much about us, the passengers !
There were more of them, so a cancellation would have - percentage wise - less impact. When there are only two a day in each direction, cancellation of one represents a 50% loss per-direction and 25% overall.
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
I am old enough to remember the proper sleeper services we had from/to Manchester and Euston , and between Glasgow/Edinburgh and Inverness and what hapenend in the rare occasions when the sleepers were cancelled.
I get the impression on this topic that they were far more reliable then under British Rail than some TOC who seem not to care too much about us, the passengers !

I don't remember BR giving full refunds.
 

Chris999999

Member
Joined
22 Jun 2010
Messages
238
There were more of them, so a cancellation would have - percentage wise - less impact. When there are only two a day in each direction, cancellation of one represents a 50% loss per-direction and 25% overall.

Ah. Lies, damned lies and statistics.
 

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
Full refund and a choice of times of onward travel options, not just crammed on the first train out of Waverley, is what I'd expect.

I had a Highlander cancelled on me before departure at Euston quite a few years ago, and long before the days of Serco. We were put up on the train overnight and, so long as I was out of my cabin at such and such a time they put me on First Class (that was already my class of travel) to Glasgow and onwards on any reasonable combination of day services.

So if I'd been caught up in this one I would've insisted on a 7am ish departure and a comfy seat in the Waverley lounge meantime. Any work commitments would have had to wait.
 
Last edited:

gsnedders

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2015
Messages
1,472
Why would passengers in a standard class berth be put into a first class day coach? If you have a standard class ticket all you are entitled to is a standard class seat!

To be fair, this is complicated by there really being three classes of travel on the sleeper (standard seat, standard berth, and first berth); if I have a second class berth ticket then what I'm entitled to isn't available, and honestly bumping people up into first would probably be good from the point of view of the probability of managing to get sleep! I mean, the majority of the people getting the sleeper are there to get to where they're going vaguely awake, and getting to sit around at Waverley (or do they get turfed out of the station while it's closed overnight?!) for four hours overnight probably isn't helping the "vaguely awake".

That said, I don't think there's really any good option: it's unlikely anything will result in people getting to London at a decent time and with a decent amount of sleep!
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,151
Full refund and a choice of times of onward travel options, not just crammed on the first train out of Waverley, is what I'd expect.

I think a choice of departure times will be a good compromise. Not everyone will appreciate being woken at 5am to get on the Flying Scotsman half-asleep.

Even if the list of choices is small (say over 3 or 4 departures) and a reasonable berth vacation time stipulated (say 0630), it should also help spread out the passenger load a bit more, or split between East and West Coast.
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,732
I think a choice of departure times will be a good compromise. Not everyone will appreciate being woken at 5am to get on the Flying Scotsman half-asleep.

Even if the list of choices is small (say over 3 or 4 departures) and a reasonable berth vacation time stipulated (say 0630), it should also help spread out the passenger load a bit more, or split between East and West Coast.

This morning at least the empty stock left Waverley at 05:19, so the passengers must've been turfed out some time (well) before that. (The "sorry, train cancelled - you can get the 05:40" tweet from CS was at 04:25.)

Also, if it was indeed an ETS fault with 92044 (not seen it 100% confirmed yet) then the train/passengers will have been without power since c.00:40-01:00 when the three portions arrived and were shunted together and the diesel locos taken off.

So presumably there was a point that the lack of heat/light became a safety issue (if not a comfort issue)? Not sure if it's less of a problem and the "2 hour rule" Scotrail84 cited doesn't apply, though, if the train is standing in a station?
 
Last edited:

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
This morning at least the empty stock left Waverley at 05:19, so the passengers must've been turfed out some time (well) before that. (The "sorry, train cancelled - you can get the 05:40" tweet from CS was at 04:25.)

Also, if it was indeed an ETS fault with 92044 (not seen it 100% confirmed yet) then the train/passengers will have been without power since c.00:40-01:00 when the three portions arrived and were shunted together and the diesel locos taken off.

So presumably there was a point that the lack of heat/light became a safety issue (if not a comfort issue)? Not sure if it's less of a problem and the "2 hour rule" Scotrail84 cited doesn't apply, though, if the train is standing in a station?
If I'd been told to vacate to do no more than facilitate a 5am ish ECS move (so we're probably talking about leaving the berth at 430 or so latest) I would've gone spare. It's one thing to have your Monday morning plans ruined, it's quite another to be roughed up in the middle of the night.

Fair enough to have the knock on the door, quite another to be given absolutely no choice about how it's dealt with.
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,732
If I'd been told to vacate to do no more than facilitate a 5am ish ECS move (so we're probably talking about leaving the berth at 430 or so latest) I would've gone spare. It's one thing to have your Monday morning plans ruined, it's quite another to be roughed up in the middle of the night.

Fair enough to have the knock on the door, quite another to be given absolutely no choice about how it's dealt with.

...and then to add to your ire you'd watch the "failed" loco that wasn't able to take you to London haul the stock away - to London!
 

gsnedders

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2015
Messages
1,472
This morning at least the empty stock left Waverley at 05:19, so the passengers must've been turfed out some time (well) before that. (The "sorry, train cancelled - you can get the 05:40" tweet from CS was at 04:25.)

Also, if it was indeed an ETS fault with 92044 (not seen it 100% confirmed yet) then the train/passengers will have been without power since c.00:40-01:00 when the three portions arrived and were shunted together and the diesel locos taken off.

So presumably there was a point that the lack of heat/light became a safety issue (if not a comfort issue)? Not sure if it's less of a problem and the "2 hour rule" Scotrail84 cited doesn't apply, though, if the train is standing in a station?

Could multiple 73s provide ETS in the station, at least?
 
Joined
1 May 2017
Messages
131
Does anyone have any information on reason for yesterday's 1A25 Edinburgh to Aberdeen going from 10 minutes late at South Gyle to 43 minutes late at Dalmeny Junction. It passed Kirkcaldy still approx 40 minutes late with 73 966 working solo up front.
Photo (rather a naff one!) in usual place.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/149563882@N07/
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Do stations not generally have shore supplies that allow carriages to take power whilst sitting there?

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_11_2013/post-6409-0-29968800-1384516722_thumb.jpg

Probably not still in use in many places these days as there is little use for them, particularly where there is a 25kV "shore supply" above.

(Talking of which, some European restaurant cars have a pantograph and transformer for use in exactly this kind of situation)
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,732
Could multiple 73s provide ETS in the station, at least?

Theoretically possibly, but in practice the 73s (and 67) which brought the portions in from Fort William/Aberdeen/Inverness would be detached as the full train is formed up and then head off to where they wait to take the Northbound portions a few hours later (where applicable) - I believe this is usually Craigentinny.

By the time they'd hooked up the 92, realised there was an issue - and that it couldn't be fixed - the 73s (plus drivers) would unlikely be available even if it was a feasible option. Three 73s are in Loughborough currently and the Colas 47 is at Craigentinny (for wheel turning I think) so it's not like they have locos spare at the moment either.

In addition, the 67 that worked the Highlander from Inverness (67007) went to Mossend and was swapped for another (67016) so that wouldn't have been available.

It also wouldn't solve the underlying issue of a failed train and having to get passengers all the way to London.
 
Last edited:

Chris999999

Member
Joined
22 Jun 2010
Messages
238
All of these problems are going to result in a significant backlash next year. It is easy to argue at present that the "trains are old and unreliable" and that next year we will have new ones.

There will be new carriages next year but the locos will be the same. If we have come to a position where we don't have any locos which can travel a few hundred miles to Scotland and back from London a few times, and expect them to provide heat, lighting and power all at the same time without breaking down then there is something very seriously wrong.

Someone along the line is going to point out that in most other countries, that they have locos which can run thousands of miles and do all these things.
 

captainbigun

Member
Joined
3 May 2009
Messages
977
All of these problems are going to result in a significant backlash next year. It is easy to argue at present that the "trains are old and unreliable" and that next year we will have new ones.

There will be new carriages next year but the locos will be the same. If we have come to a position where we don't have any locos which can travel a few hundred miles to Scotland and back from London a few times, and expect them to provide heat, lighting and power all at the same time without breaking down then there is something very seriously wrong.

Someone along the line is going to point out that in most other countries, that they have locos which can run thousands of miles and do all these things.

What are you on about? Give me some numbers? How many loco failures this year?
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,602
(Talking of which, some European restaurant cars have a pantograph and transformer for use in exactly this kind of situation)

Sounds like a very sensible solution! I guess it comes at a cost though.

If the sleeper stock had this, it would surely make the service a lot more resilient, at least south of Ed/Glasgow. It does seem a bit precarious that once the new stock comes in, it will be entirely dependent on just one type of loco, of which there are a limited number, with no option to hire in from elsewhere in moments of crisis.
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,732
What are you on about? Give me some numbers? How many loco failures this year?

92 failures this year are probably in single figures (or at least the ones we know about!) I'm also pretty sure this was the first time this year that one failing (or any of the electric locos for that matter) has resulted in a full cancellation or anything more than an hour's delay.

All of these problems are going to result in a significant backlash next year. It is easy to argue at present that the "trains are old and unreliable" and that next year we will have new ones.

There will be new carriages next year but the locos will be the same. If we have come to a position where we don't have any locos which can travel a few hundred miles to Scotland and back from London a few times, and expect them to provide heat, lighting and power all at the same time without breaking down then there is something very seriously wrong.

Someone along the line is going to point out that in most other countries, that they have locos which can run thousands of miles and do all these things.

The GBRf 92s are being overhauled and extensively modified to improve their reliability on the sleepers. Six have had the "mods" done already, one is in Loughborough with them underway - and three are due to have them done in due course. The one that failed on Sunday night is one of the ones that hasn't had the "mods" yet (although incidentally is usually a pretty reliable one).

Let's also not forget the 92s were designed to haul sleepers - and between them are covering c.1,500 miles per night, 6 nights a week largely without incident.

Since all the work at Wabtec/Brush the 92s have been a lot more reliable. They will breakdown - as all locos do - and GBRf are usually very resourceful at getting the train from A to B even when this does happen. (I believe there was a specific unfortunate set of circumstances on Sun night that meant a replacement loco wasn't feasible - but won't bore you with the details.)

As mentioned before several times on this thread, due to the profile the Sleeper has, and the fact one failure on one leg can scupper several others, any (major) failure gets a lot of publicity.

However, I don't think your pessimistic view of the traction is really backed up by recent overall performance, nor the considerable work that has gone in to improving the 92s.
 
Last edited:

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
I've posted a couple of logs of CS delays and failures on this thread over the last two years. These are based on the experiences of three very regular users of the Highlander.

I don't have time at the moment to compile a new one covering the past six months, but suffice to say that traction has played a tiny part in any past events leading to full or part refund through Delay Repay.

Network Rail issues are the biggie.

This forum is obsessed with broken down locos.
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,732
Probably because 'broken down loco' = substitute loco = frothy fans looking forward to an 86/87 on the WCML and 47 on the Highland sets.

And in reality of all the many runs up and down over the past three months (at least) that's happened only three times - 87002 subbed-in for a 92 last minute and 86401 subbed-in twice, once for a 92 and once for a 90.

Oh, and we shouldn't forget the one time 87002 was supposed to do the full run and it had to be subbed by a 90. :lol:

The two the 86 was involved in there was no delay as all sorted before scheduled departure and the two where 87002 was involved resulted in delays <1 hour.

On the other odd occasions there's been a failure at depot or prior to departure 92s/90s have subbed for each other without the passengers being significantly impacted, or probably even noticing.

As I said above, I'm pretty sure 92044's failure on Sunday night was the first time in a long while (3 months at least, probably more) when failure of the electric traction has caused a cancellation or major delay - and they've been 75-80% 92-hauled in that period too.

Anyway, what's happening about the itchy bedsheets?
 
Last edited:

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,732
Knew it was tempting fate championing the reliability of the 92s.

Looks like 92033 is having some issues on 1S25 (North Highlander). It's not left Euston yet 50+ mins after scheduled departure. 87002 just been scrambled from Willesden.


UPDATE 87002 has taken 92033 off 1S25 and 90046 has come in from Wembley (taken off the Lowlander ECS that's still at Wembley) to haul 1S25.

87002 will presumably drop 92033 off, then take the Lowlander ECS in for 90042 (as planned) to take north.
 
Last edited:

Hadders

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
27 Apr 2011
Messages
12,984
I used the seated sleeper between Fort William and Dalmuir on Monday evening. I had huge problems getting a reservation but eventually managed to get one from a very helpful clerk at York station on Sunday afternoon (I've no idea how she managed it but there was a fair bit of *******isation involved).

Anyway, seated the coach itself was the hired in DRS one in ex-Virgin Trains livery. Is this always the case these days? Frankly it was in a disgraceful state and hardly fit for a flagship overnight service with sky high prices.

Filthy dirty
Handwritten sign on the toilet door
Toilet paper holder held on with brown tape
Door between carriage and vestibule not working automatically

At least the train did run - last time I tried to do it I had to get a replacement coach as it was cancelled.
 

Tim R-T-C

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2011
Messages
2,143
Knew it was tempting fate championing the reliability of the 92s.

Looks like 92033 is having some issues on 1S25 (North Highlander). It's not left Euston yet 50+ mins after scheduled departure. 87002 just been scrambled from Willesden.

UPDATE 87002 has taken 92033 off 1S25 and 90046 has come in from Wembley (taken off the Lowlander ECS that's still at Wembley) to haul 1S25.

87002 will presumably drop 92033 off, then take the Lowlander ECS in for 90042 (as planned) to take north.

And this is the main reason why people are concerned about the Mark 5s. At present such a situation leads to delays, but unless more 92s are brought onstream, a single failure will lead to cancellation as none of the ALs or 90s will be able to supply the trainset.
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,732
And this is the main reason why people are concerned about the Mark 5s. At present such a situation leads to delays, but unless more 92s are brought onstream, a single failure will lead to cancellation as none of the ALs or 90s will be able to supply the trainset.

Yes, there's 2x 92s sitting at Crewe on post-Loughborough testing very soon to come back into service and one more in Loughborough getting the sleeper mods. When the Mk5s are there, it'll be another sleeper-ready 92 that's at Willesden/Wembley as the "spare", not a F/Liner 90.

The 90s are only on-hire whilst they get the whole fleet of ten (operational) 92s through Loughborough before the new stock arrives - six have been "done" already, one in the works, three to go...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top