Caledonian Sleeper

[43096]

This is a 92 were talking about, not a 37. I have slept in the room directly behind 92043 from Glasgow to Edinburgh once but to be honest I fell asleep straight away! I don't think it was very loud though.

Once the rheo brake stack blowers start on a 92 you can hear them a mile (or two) off.

 

[JonathanH]

Wasn’t another reason that the 67s couldn’t supply the power needed for the new stock and the 73s could with less modification and expenditure (in that area anyway)?

They can't (yet) couple to the new stock but at 66, the 67 should have enough ETS index for an 8-coach train of Mk 5 stock if previous discussions on the subject are correct. The 73s had to be completely rebuilt to haul the sleepers. It would appear to be more a question of ownership / lease terms.

 

[tornado]

I have and can’t say I noticed any particular difference to any other sleeping car.

Useful to know, was worried about hearing the engine all night.

I guess the advantage being near the loco is also that not many people will walk past your door in the night after a few whiskies.

 

[43 302]

Once the rheo brake stack blowers start on a 92 you can hear them a mile (or two) off.

Oh I was talking about the quality of the noise and questioning why he would want to listen to a 92 lol!

 

[FOCTOC]

They can't (yet) couple to the new stock but at 66 should have enough ETS index for an 8-coach train of Mk 5 stock if previous discussions on the subject are correct. The 73s had to be completely rebuilt to haul the sleepers. It would appear to be more a question of ownership / lease terms.

69/4 is clearly the answer.

 

[Spaceship323]

69/4 is clearly the answer.

Good shout, but I doubt they'd be ready before the end of the franchise!

 

[6Z09]

Locomotive issues may exist, but far more pressing problems for Caledonian Sleeper management are the multiple disputes with staff and the Trade Union!
And they are making very little effort to solve anything, in fact over recent weeks have inflamed the situation.
They continue to hide behind Transport Scotland, just as Transport Scotland are keeping things at arms length, saying it's up to CS management to resolve!

 

[norbitonflyer]

As its only the two locos would the plan be just to change the Ft Bill beds over to booked skips and moving the 73s over to the other services , or just repalce the shed on the inverness beds so its a 73/67 pair instead, at least then the wouldn't need to do anything with the couplings, or just long term lease some more skips off DB and bin off the 73s onto Dept work

I thought there was an issue with the 67s on the West Highland - speed limited because of axle loads if I recall correctly. Which would suggest the 67s are for the Inverness or Aberdeen portions.
Pity - I'm booked on the Inverness in August and was hoping for a 66!

 

[6Z09]

I think you are safe enough for a 66 on the Inverness in August, things don't seem to happen very swiftly in Caledonian Sleeper land!

 

[Deafdoggie]

Locomotive issues may exist, but far more pressing problems for Caledonian Sleeper management are the multiple disputes with staff and the Trade Union!
And they are making very little effort to solve anything, in fact over recent weeks have inflamed the situation.
They continue to hide behind Transport Scotland, just as Transport Scotland are keeping things at arms length, saying it's up to CS management to resolve!

Why would they want to resolve it? With staff off and trains not running, the cost savings are considered well worth it.

 

[JonathanH]

I thought there was an issue with the 67s on the West Highland - speed limited because of axle loads if I recall correctly.

There was an issue which required different brake blocks to be fitted and speed restricted on certain 67s used on the West Highland Line (67004/07/09/11/30, I think) but they successfully ran there for nearly 15 years.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-67-duties-and-usage.57518/#post-917530

 

[6Z09]

Why would they want to resolve it? With staff off and trains not running, the cost savings are considered well worth it.

What staff are off?
Transport Scotland are footing the bill at present , but have they no wish to provide a service for passengers?
Aberdeen and now Fort William passengers are being massively inconvenienced .

 

[Deafdoggie]

What staff are off?

I believe they are on strike. Hence the original message about industrial disputes with trade unions.

 

[6Z09]

I believe they are on strike. Hence the original message about industrial disputes with trade unions.

They are not on strike! There have been a few strike days, but the massive disruption to passengers is being caused by staff not working overtime or working on rest days. They are all still getting paid their salaries.

 

[Deafdoggie]

They are not on strike! There have been a few strike days, but the massive disruption to passengers is being caused by staff not working overtime or working on rest days. They are all still getting paid their salaries.

And it's still saving money not paying then overtime

 

[6Z09]

And it's still saving money not paying then overtime

I'd imagine that laying on Road Transport and refunds to passengers eats into any savings you imagine.
This is a company that has annual industrial disputes over the past years!
By all accounts industrial relations are at an all time low!
Staff apparently being balloted for strike action for the third time this year! Surely some kind of record.
Staff, who would in the past, share a bit of banter with regular passengers are now very reluctant to do so,for fear of being next on the hit list, sad state of affairs.

 

[MrEd]

As its only the two locos would the plan be just to change the Ft Bill beds over to booked skips and moving the 73s over to the other services , or just repalce the shed on the inverness beds so its a 73/67 pair instead, at least then the wouldn't need to do anything with the couplings, or just long term lease some more skips off DB and bin off the 73s onto Dept work

I don’t think the Fort William would ever go over to 67s, as none of the crews who currently work that leg have ever signed them, I don’t think (when 67s worked the Fort William train they had Scotrail drivers, not GBRf as now). Also, 023 & 027 don’t have RETB equipment and are subject to severe speed restrictions on the West Highland Line. I’d expect to see them on the Inverness and Aberdeen portions, leaving the Fort William for one or two 73s.

As the 67s do not have the right ETS to work with Mk5s nor the Dellner couplers, I imagine they’ll work in tandem with a 73?

I also think the 67s working the Fort William portion in the past had to be specially modified with cast iron brake blocks to avoid overheating/excess wear on the long downhill sections. I don’t think 023 or 027 ever had this modification; the only ones with it were 004, 007, 009 and 011 from memory.

 

[FOCTOC]

I don’t think the Fort William would ever go over to 67s, as none of the crews who currently work that leg have ever signed them, I don’t think (when 67s worked the Fort William train they had Scotrail drivers, not GBRf as now). Also, 023 & 027 don’t have RETB equipment and are subject to severe speed restrictions on the West Highland Line. I’d expect to see them on the Inverness and Aberdeen portions, leaving the Fort William for one or two 73s.

As the 67s do not have the right ETS to work with Mk5s nor the Dellner couplers, I imagine they’ll work in tandem with a 73?

I also think the 67s working the Fort William portion in the past had to be specially modified with cast iron brake blocks to avoid overheating/excess wear on the long downhill sections. I don’t think 023 or 027 ever had this modification; the only ones with it were 004, 007, 009 and 011 from memory.

Sorry, but most of the above is uninformed wibble. 66 to 67 conversion = 2 days. Refresher = 1 day. Changing brake blocks one type to another isn't a 'modification', and where do you suppose the FW drivers came from at GBRF? As for the RETB, a simple mod as it's not a permanent fixture in the cab.

 

[MrEd]

There was an issue which required different brake blocks to be fitted and speed restricted on certain 67s used on the West Highland Line (67004/07/09/11/30, I think) but they successfully ran there for nearly 15 years.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-67-duties-and-usage.57518/#post-917530

Interestingly, 67004/007/009/011/030 were all fitted with RETB for working the Fort William route, and were assigned to the WABN pool (as was), but 030 never had the cast-iron brake blocks fitted. The rationale was that 004/007/009/011 were the dedicated locos and could work that section for days at a time, whereas 030 would be available to deputise if the other dedicated locos were unavailable; having 030 permanently RETB-fitted at least avoided the issue of obtaining a portable RETB set. I believe 030 was restricted to one round trip from Edinburgh to Fort William before it had to be stopped to have its brake blocks changed. That was how poorly the original carbon-fibre blocks coped on that route. In time, the 67s with cast-iron brake blocks came to be preferred on the Inverness run too, as the descents from Slochd and Druimuachdar took quite a toll on them.

Consensus among crews is that the 67s were an adequate, rather than an excellent, choice on the Fort William route. They were not all that reliable and were subject to pretty severe speed restrictions (and probably did the track no good). I also wondered how economical it was using a 3200hp loco to haul 4 coaches along at 40mph max. That said, using a 66+73 combo to do that takes things to a totally new level.

Nothing ever did the Fort William run as well as the 37s, but by 2006 they were totally life expired.

 

[John Bishop]

I don’t think the Fort William would ever go over to 67s, as none of the crews who currently work that leg have ever signed them, I don’t think (when 67s worked the Fort William train they had Scotrail drivers, not GBRf as now). Also, 023 & 027 don’t have RETB equipment and are subject to severe speed restrictions on the West Highland Line. I’d expect to see them on the Inverness and Aberdeen portions, leaving the Fort William for one or two 73s.

As the 67s do not have the right ETS to work with Mk5s nor the Dellner couplers, I imagine they’ll work in tandem with a 73?

I also think the 67s working the Fort William portion in the past had to be specially modified with cast iron brake blocks to avoid overheating/excess wear on the long downhill sections. I don’t think 023 or 027 ever had this modification; the only ones with it were 004, 007, 009 and 011 from memory.

The FW GBrf men used to sign the 67s same as the INV men used to, so no probs getting them back competent again.

 

[Horizon22]

I'm not sure if its been posted, or if people would find it useful to the discussion, but CS (Serco) are hiring a (multiple?) Train Manager(s)

Train Manager

Train Manager

careers.serco.com

We have a vacancy for a Train Manager to join our fantastic team in Edinburgh. As a guest champion the Sleeper Train Manager will be a key player in the delivery of the Caledonian Sleeper service. The role will also be responsible for ensuring the safety and security of the train, guests and crew.

You will be responsible for providing an operationally safe environment, ensuring an excellent standard of guest service, developing immediate solutions to problems encountered by guests. You will take full responsibility for the guest experience for those travelling in the seated coach, including revenue collection / protection. As part of your daily role you will compile reports on customer service issues, operational incidents, train running and performance, and defects in respect of each journey.

 

[D6130]

GBRf have just taken two LSL 37s on loan for an indeterminate length of time, as well as the two Colas 67s. I wonder whether their intention is to use the 37s on the FTW portion and the 67s on the ABD and INV portions....with a 73/9 coupled inside to provide hotel power and coupling adaptor?

 

[JonathanH]

GBRf have just taken two LSL 37s on loan for an indeterminate length of time, as well as the two Colas 67s. I wonder whether their intention is to use the 37s on the FTW portion and the 67s on the ABD and INV portions?

The 37s are for stock movements due to 47s not being available, not the sleeper. A 73 would still be needed for ETS.

 

[Sleepy]

I'm not sure if its been posted, or if people would find it useful to the discussion, but CS (Serco) are hiring a (multiple?) Train Manager(s)

Train Manager

Train Manager

careers.serco.com

Had read of the advert, surprised they're expected to be able to perform Team Leader / host role too !! Wouldn't have thought this would be acceptable to RMT. Does this ever happen - eg. if spare does anyone know ? Salary isn't too good considering it's obviously all night shifts either.

 

[6Z09]

Had read of the advert, surprised they're expected to be able to perform Team Leader / host role too !! Wouldn't have thought this would be acceptable to RMT. Does this ever happen - eg. if spare does anyone know ?

Don't think it's acceptable to any current staff!
Sadly as has previously been said, looking like much trouble ahead.

 

[StephenHunter]

What would be acceptable to the RMT?

 

[6Z09]

What would be acceptable to the RMT?

Probably just fair treatment and retaining long fought for terms and conditions. The members are the Union, not a bunch of sheep blindly following!

 

[Meerkat]

Had read of the advert, surprised they're expected to be able to perform Team Leader / host role too !! Wouldn't have thought this would be acceptable to RMT. Does this ever happen - eg. if spare does anyone know ? Salary isn't too good considering it's obviously all night shifts either.

Can you explain this please, as to an outsider the Team leader and train manager roles sound pretty much the same thing, and doing a bit of hosting as well sounds like the way a small hotel or restaurant would work - which in a way the sleeper is.

 

[Sleepy]

Train manager - this is the role traditionally known as the guard, responsible for dispatch and overall safety of the train, conducts ticket inspection in seated coaches. Team Leader is responsible for running the Lounge and supervision of the hosts.

 

[Meerkat]

Train manager - this is the role traditionally known as the guard, responsible for dispatch and overall safety of the train, conducts ticket inspection in seated coaches. Team Leader is responsible for running the Lounge and supervision of the hosts.

On a train with few stops and few passengers I dont really see that those two roles cant be the same person. Having a 'train manager' managing the staff on said train doesn't seem a huge ask - how many staff are they and do they really need much supervision?
Or am I forgetting that the railway isnt the real world again?