Caledonian Sleeper discussion

[TimboM]

I believe that the buffer end of the eurostar platforms have a weight limit that a 92 would breach - this came up when the Orient Express carriages had to be propelled in for that film advert.

Was that weight limit ever confirmed? (The Orient Express stock move was done by Eurotunnel Krupps locos from Dollands Moor-St P (and vice versa) - a 92 only did the tunnel run as the Krupps weren't fast enough - and as for why they were propelled in, Krupps aren't exactly photogenic...!)

 

[GW43125]

I’m looking at booking the highland at the end of July seated, any engineering works likely to happen that we know of and are we looking at a rake of mk2s still?

 

[TimboM]

I’m looking at booking the highland at the end of July seated, any engineering works likely to happen that we know of and are we looking at a rake of mk2s still?

New stock on the Lowlander not due until late October now, Highlander TBC but some suggestions it won't be for approx. another year from now... so you'll definitely be in Mk2s!

As for engineering works - will depend on when exactly you're thinking of travelling - if you've a more specific idea of when (or even weekday vs weekend) those with knowledge of such things may be able to advise. I believe there's quite a few Sunday-night/Bank Holiday diversions via ECML this Spring/Summer. Not sure about things on the WHL specifically though.

 

[cf111]

No power due to an overspeeding MA.

Cheers. No lounge again tonight, no heating. Been told in the lounge before boarding so I'm away to the co-op for provisions!

 

[GW43125]

In terms of engineering works, dates I’m looking at are either go north Sun 22nd July south Fri 27 July or north Mon 23rd July south Fri 29th July.

If anyone knows about anything planned for those dates, I’d be grateful.

 

[TimboM]

In terms of engineering works, dates I’m looking at are either go north Sun 22nd July south Fri 27 July or north Mon 23rd July south Fri 29th July.

If anyone knows about anything planned for those dates, I’d be grateful.

I take it the second option is South on Sunday 29th?

 

[GW43125]

I take it the second option is South on Sunday 29th?

You’re entirely correct. I’ve spent the night on a plane so my brain is somewhere over the Atlantic, sorry!

 

[paul1609]

I believe that the buffer end of the eurostar platforms have a weight limit that a 92 would breach - this came up when the Orient Express carriages had to be propelled in for that film advert.

Theres a couple of unused platforms at London Stratford where they would fit. Customs hall could probably be converted in to quite a nice dedicated Caledonian Sleeper station.

 

[captainbigun]

Stratford International?

Not much use, aside from a lack of link to the ECML, it’s all signalled with TVM430.

It’s Kings Cross that is an option.

 

[paul1609]

Stratford International?

Not much use, aside from a lack of link to the ECML, it’s all signalled with TVM430.

It’s Kings Cross that is an option.

Surely Class 92s have TVM signalling. London Stratford would have a direct link to the WCML avoiding the HS2 works at Euston.
As I understand it the only platforms at St Pancras that have access to the ECML are the Eurostar (within the International Zone) or HS1 platforms (not long enough) and that they require KVB signalling even to access the ECML.

 

[najaB]

Surely Class 92s have TVM signalling

I believe that some do. And some work the Sleeper. There might even be some overlap between the two sets, but it would be by chance rather than by design.

 

[TimboM]

I believe that some do. And some work the Sleeper. There might even be some overlap between the two sets, but it would be by chance rather than by design.

Most of the 92s (including a good number of the "Sleeper" locos) have TVM - and I don't think it's a huge job (for 92s) to get it sorted/certified if they wanted to use it. However, I can't see Serco wanting to start their premium London<->Scotland service with "guests" having to make their way out to Stratford, though. Doubt it would be a realistic option.

The Serco/CS Chairman actually spoke about the alternative options in an interview when they won the contract - his favourite was St P - I think more based on the platform length/grandeur of the building as a starting point for the service. As for the various reasons noted, though, it may not be all the feasible.

As @captainbigun says, it's most likely Euston until they cannot use it any more, then Kings X - probably with split trains as happened last August BH.

 

[BRX]

I always liked the waterloo idea... which someone will tell me is impractical for some reason. As a south londoner I might be biased.

 

[TimboM]

I always liked the waterloo idea... which someone will tell me is impractical for some reason. As a south londoner I might be biased.

Without wanting to dampen the idea, one of the issues with Waterloo would be the use of Third Rail until the vicinity of North Pole Bank - on Third Rail, 92s only have an ETH Index of 108 (vs 180 on 25kv A/C). The lower ETH wouldn't be enough for a full Load 16 rake of the new stock - or at least not with the stock in "full power" mode. So the "guests" would probably need to make do with dimmed lights and lots of the new "mod cons" turned off at the start of their journey as the Sleeper made its way through South London.

 

[GW43125]

Not to mention the longest usable platform length at Waterloo is now in the vicinity of 260m, which is just enough to hold a 12 car 450 with 10-15 metres spare.

 

[BRX]

Have the ex eurostar platforms been shortened?

 

[Tadman]

Without wanting to dampen the idea, one of the issues with Waterloo would be the use of Third Rail until the vicinity of North Pole Bank - on Third Rail, 92s only have an ETH Index of 108 (vs 180 on 25kv A/C). The lower ETH wouldn't be enough for a full Load 16 rake of the new stock - or at least not with the stock in "full power" mode. So the "guests" would probably need to make do with dimmed lights and lots of the new "mod cons" turned off at the start of their journey as the Sleeper made its way through South London.

Do the new MkV cars have a lower electric draw? Here in the states there is evidence that newer sleepers with more efficient heating and LED lighting draw far less power. Not that this makes Waterloo a viable option, but food for thought.

 

[BRX]

I think they have a higher power draw because they've got stuff that the Mk3s don't, like showers.

 

[najaB]

Do the new MkV cars have a lower electric draw?

No, far higher. They have more amenities that need powering.

 

[TimboM]

I think they have a higher power draw because they've got stuff that the Mk3s don't, like showers.

No, far higher. They have more amenities that need powering.

I believe (very) roughly the new stock will have a 50% higher power draw - no doubt using the latest efficient lighting etc, but as @BRX and @najaB have said there's a whole lot more kit that needs powering on the new rakes.

 

[GW43125]

Have the ex eurostar platforms been shortened?

Yes, as part of the works. The platforms are now just long enough for a 12/450. A lot of the crossovers are under the shed now.

 

[ScottDarg]

1S26: 92033
5S26: 86101

 

[TimboM]

Yes, as part of the works. The platforms are now just long enough for a 12/450. A lot of the crossovers are under the shed now.

IIRC Kings X is max Load 13 with two locos - and only in one or two platforms - and that is probably the most likely alternative to Euston currently. So platforms that cannot take a Load 16 + 2x 92s may be something that have to be worked around anyway (e.g. by shortening the Lowlander/splitting the Highlander as happened last August Bank Holiday when the services ran to/from Kings X).

 

[GW43125]

IIRC Kings X is max Load 13 with two locos - and only in one or two platforms - and that is probably the most likely alternative to Euston currently. So platforms that cannot take a Load 16 + 2x 92s may be something that have to be worked around anyway (e.g. by shortening the Lowlander/splitting the Highlander as happened last August Bank Holiday when the services ran to/from Kings X).

My point was that Waterloo has even shorter platforms than Kings X.

The Pullman platform (2) at Victoria isn’t much better either

 

[Kite159]

Maybe it is a cunning plan of Serco, reduce the demand by hiking the prices to allow them to make the trains shorter so they can use Kings Cross instead of Euston

 

[GW43125]

Maybe it is a cunning plan of Serco, reduce the demand by hiking the prices to allow them to make the trains shorter so they can use Kings Cross instead of Euston

The next station is cynic central

 

[43096]

Maybe it is a cunning plan of Serco, reduce the demand by hiking the prices to allow them to make the trains shorter so they can use Kings Cross instead of Euston

It has been suggested that Serco would prefer to use Kings Cross rather than Euston (better passenger environment than Euston) and would then run 3 trains out of London via the East Coast.

Presumably something like:
KX-Inverness and Fort William
KX-Glasgow and Aberdeen
KX-Edinburgh

It would need extra crews and paths, but only one extra loco, as you wouldn't then need the loco for 1C11/1B26.

 

[BRX]

It would require extra lounge/seated coaches as well, wouldn't it?

*edit* actually it wouldn't necessarily

 

[43096]

It would require extra lounge/seated coaches as well, wouldn't it?

No, it shouldn't require any extra stock.

Fort William would be as now with the lounge/seated coaches added at Edinburgh. It's still 4 half-trains (8 cars each), just split differently.

 

[BRX]

Something like

INV [6+L+S] + FTW [3]
GLC [6+L+S] + ABD [3+L+S]
EDB [6+L+S]

It would place a disproportionate demand on the Inverness Lounge/Seats though. And create an opportunity to run a lounge/seats through to Fort William that isn't there at present (if extra sets were built)