Caledonian Sleeper Mk5 Discussion

[33Hz]

They just check your ticket number and take your name then direct you to the correct carriage. How could that possibly be difficult?

Because you had an orderly queue and then as soon as the staff appeared to check people in, there was a melee as everybody rushed to get registered at once - with no attempt to get the situation under control. The main culprits were tour party leaders. From various comments at the time, this wasn't a one-off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because you had an orderly queue and then as soon as the staff appeared to check people in, there was a melee as everybody rushed to get registered at once - with no attempt to get the situation under control. The main culprits were tour party leaders. From various comments at the time, this wasn't a one-off.

What do you even need check-in for? People are perfectly capable of looking for a numbered room on their own, and the steward could come along and welcome them once the wheels were turning. Any stowaways could be chucked off at Crewe or Watford

 

[33Hz]

What do you even need check-in for? People are perfectly capable of looking for a numbered room on their own, and the steward could come along and welcome them once the wheels were turning. Any stowaways could be chucked off at Crewe or Watford

I agree totally - but I don't want to get into that debate though. The question is, do they have their issues more under control? Just seen the other thread in the Discussion forum is still alive - apologies, I probably should have asked there.

 

[OmniCity999]

I agree totally - but I don't want to get into that debate though. The question is, do they have their issues more under control? Just seen the other thread in the Discussion forum is still alive - apologies, I probably should have asked there.

it's been fine for the last six weeks, pretty busy too.

I think the issue comes, as you say when they have groups to check in. That should be done by a separate steward with one steward covering the single occupancy etc.

 

[TimboM]

I agree totally - but I don't want to get into that debate though. The question is, do they have their issues more under control? Just seen the other thread in the Discussion forum is still alive - apologies, I probably should have asked there.

The initially reduced timetable during lockdown used only 32 coaches per night out of the fleet of 75 - and probably about one passenger per coach on average.
It's now up to 50 coaches in play with the uplifted service and whilst loadings are certainly up, I suspect there's some capacity most nights.

The point being, with the reduced service and lower passenger numbers the better coaches and better rooms can be used and any with significant faults either kept at the depot (coaches) or not used (rooms) - hence any view of whether the (technical) issues have improved really need to be deferred until the full service is restored and there's 66 coaches per night in action with most berths occupied.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The initially reduced timetable during lockdown used only 32 coaches per night out of the fleet of 75 - and probably about one passenger per coach on average.
It's now up to 50 coaches in play with the uplifted service and whilst loadings are certainly up, I suspect there's some capacity most nights.

The point being, with the reduced service and lower passenger numbers the better coaches and better rooms can be used and any with significant faults either kept at the depot (coaches) or not used (rooms) - hence any view of whether the (technical) issues have improved really need to be deferred until the full service is restored and there's 66 coaches per night in action with most berths occupied.

I expect that more teething problems with coaches can be sorted out thoroughly while there is less demand on overall fleet availability. My assumption is that there will have been approximately 50% of the normal routine maintenance required per week. So, as long as maintenance staff were not isolating etc, there will have been more time for fixes to teething problems. The result will be a more reliable fleet unless there are some deep seated un-resolvable problems.

 

[TimboM]

I expect that more teething problems with coaches can be sorted out thoroughly while there is less demand on overall fleet availability. My assumption is that there will have been approximately 50% of the normal routine maintenance required per week. So, as long as maintenance staff were not isolating etc, there will have been more time for fixes to teething problems. The result will be a more reliable fleet unless there are some deep seated un-resolvable problems.

I suspect the maintenance staff numbers were reduced by a significant proportion too. Isolating, shielding, sickness, possible furlough etc. - it's highly unlikely there was a full strength team available.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I suspect the maintenance staff numbers were reduced by a significant proportion too. Isolating, shielding, sickness, possible furlough etc. - it's highly unlikely there was a full strength team available.

Lost opportunity. But with less revenue coming in it is inevitable I suppose.

 

[TimboM]

Lost opportunity. But with less revenue coming in it is inevitable I suppose.

I'm not sure how it's a lost opportunity if staff are unable to work for illness / health & safety reasons? Just the way the cookie crumbles...

Also, the Sleeper has been fully funded by Transport Scotland during the pandemic under an Emergency Measures Agreement, so the amount of revenue coming in isn't all that relevant.

 

[OmniCity999]

I'm not sure how it's a lost opportunity if staff are unable to work for illness / health & safety reasons? Just the way the cookie crumbles...

Also, the Sleeper has been fully funded by Transport Scotland during the pandemic under an Emergency Measures Agreement, so the amount of revenue coming in isn't all that relevant.

funding to break even or part funding? Because ive been paying through the nose for the service.

 

[TimboM]

funding to break even or part funding? Because ive been paying through the nose for the service.

EMAs effectively cover all remaining costs of running a service after passenger income is taken into account.

During the height of lockdown when it was for essential travel / key workers only there were only a handful of passengers on each train - Classic Berths were <£100 if I recall correctly and NHS staff travelled free. So you'd be looking at c.£1k passenger income on some services and hence Transport Scotland (TS) near enough funding the entire cost of running the trains.

Now loadings are up with the more relaxed restrictions and opening of tourism in Scotland, passenger revenues are up and the amount TS have to pay to fund the service and ensure it is break even (or thereabouts is less).

Sleeper tickets are not cheap, especially when trains are getting full as they are now and you book late(r) in the day. Only the higher priced bands will then be available.

However, it's worth remembering that in 'normal' times, both the CS accounts and ORR data show that passenger income covers <40% of running the service. Sleeper trains are just inherently expensive to run (lots of costs for fewer passengers and only one run per day/night for each train).

Personally, I think only paying 40% of what something actually costs is pretty decent value.

 

[33Hz]

hence any view of whether the (technical) issues have improved really need to be deferred until the full service is restored and there's 66 coaches per night in action with most berths occupied.

Indeed - that's why I said in the original question "but had they managed to get things more or less under control come the lockdown?"