Caledonian Sleeper

[Bletchleyite]

Are there set prices then, rather than pure yield pricing?

The fares are yield managed, yes, though as with all Advances there are fixed tiers with quotas. Fare increases can be done by increasing the price on those tiers and by changing the balance of availability towards the higher ones.

 

[Re 4/4]

As i understand it, the reason the sleeper exists is because scotgov believes the link to london is important for places north of the central belt.

Wouldn't a more affordable sleeper with say couchettes be even better at fulfilling that aim?

 

[jagardner1984]

Far be it from me to cut Serco any slack - but it has to be said it wasn’t that long ago First were selling bargain berths for £19. I am quite frequently trying to book and seeing no berths available (or only premium berths of some flavour). So a combination of the reduced capacity, new stock and marketing is working at some level to fill the stock at the prices charged a lot of the time.

I suspect given how vocal the public are on rail services (including many who have never been on the sleeper) - I suspect the truth is much closer that in the context of X gazillion subsidy on energy bills etc - they can’t be bothered with the fight to be rid of it.

There is government subsidy of ferries many do not use, Opera people don’t go and see, or youth sport lots of people don’t participate in.

Compared to the 26.7% of Government spending on “Social Protection”, the 4.6% spent on all Transport, of which a smaller proportion is spent on Rail; of which a much smaller proportion is spent on the Sleeper, of which a tiny proportion boils down to the subsidy per passenger.

A large part of the art of government is picking your battles.

 

[Bald Rick]

Wouldn't a more affordable sleeper with say couchettes be even better at fulfilling that aim?

As ever, couchettes do not easily fit in the U.K. loading gauge. At least not in a way that makes them significantly cheaper per passenger than a full blown sleeper.

A more affordable way, obviously, is to invite those seeking connectivity from north of the central belt to get the day trains that already operate. Or fly (which is what most of them do).

 

[Meerkat]

Far be it from me to cut Serco any slack - but it has to be said it wasn’t that long ago First were selling bargain berths for £19. I am quite frequently trying to book and seeing no berths available (or only premium berths of some flavour). So a combination of the reduced capacity, new stock and marketing is working at some level to fill the stock at the prices charged a lot of the time.

Don’t forget Covid - wealthier people saved a lot of money during the pandemic, and it seems domestic holidays are still more popular than before.

 

[Bald Rick]

Also don’t forget that for two people travelling together, it’s often good value, especially to the Highlands.
Next week 2 of you can get London to Fort William for £250 in a classic cabin. Compared to alternatives, that’s a great price.

I‘d say there’s definitely room to lift prices more, especially in summer. The Inverness sleeper has already sold out for some dates in May, at prices of £300-£400.

 

[BRX]

I think the sleeper is unfortunately trapped in a kind of political dead zone where it is kept running because cutting it would cause an outcry, but at the same time there's not a strong enough will to really make it work the best it can.

That is, accepting it's going to need a subsidy but getting the greatest possible value out of that subsidy. They just didn't try very hard to offer a couchette-level option when the new trains were designed. Also, if the trains are in the position of selling out on certain nights then yes one option is to put the fares up even more but another is to consider running more beds per night, as has been discussed previously on this thread.

But adding extra services is not appealing to politicians who want to keep their heads below the parapet. It would likely involve arguing that a rise in the total subsidy could result in a lower subsidy per passenger.

Although I think a couchette-level option is the big missed opportunity, I also wonder if the seats could be better used given a bit of effort. That is (ignoring other constraints) whether, given some strong marketing and promotion, 2 or 3 carriages of seats instead of just one, could be filled on certain services at certain times of the year. I assume this would not be attractive to an operator from a revenue point of view - it would be a matter of maximising the social benefit of the subsidy. I don't think many potential customers even know the overnight seats option even exists - I never see them marketed as a thing in themselves, and the option often doesn't show up in journey planners (for example, the Scotrail app will tell you a single journey from Inverness to London overnight costs about £200 rather than the £55 or £75 that the seats actually cost).

(A couple of people will likely pipe up saying the seats are a waste of time as they'd choose a cheaper overnight bus instead - fine, they are not the best option for everyone, but they are for many people: they do have a number of advantages over the bus for certain passengers.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do the seats routinely book up?

I suppose they could have used a less budget seat option, perhaps one with a bit more recline even if they can't be flatbeds? You get more recline in an economy class plane seat (albeit more width and legroom on CS).

 

[800001]

Do the seats routinely book up?

I suppose they could have used a less budget seat option, perhaps one with a bit more recline even if they can't be flatbeds? You get more recline in an economy class plane seat (albeit more width and legroom on CS).

I travelled London to Edinburgh last Sunday night, the train was fully booked, all seats and berths taken. This was the Edinburgh/Glasgow train.

 

[Trainbike46]

Do the seats routinely book up?

I have travelled in the seats from glasgow a few times. The seats had sold out approximately 2/3 of the time, and all my journeys were well outside peak periods

I suppose they could have used a less budget seat option, perhaps one with a bit more recline even if they can't be flatbeds? You get more recline in an economy class plane seat (albeit more width and legroom on CS).

Personally, I think if they used the same seats that Avanti is putting in their standard class pendolinos, the seats would be more comfortable, and they would be able to fit more (so sell more seats)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Personally, I think if they used the same seats that Avanti is putting in their standard class pendolinos, the seats would be more comfortable, and they would be able to fit more (so sell more seats)

Given that the seats are a budget option I was surprised they didn't move to 2+2 (albeit with recline - does Transcal offer that?) - but perhaps that'd then give them no selling point over the coaches, and they do want and need to charge more than them.

Personally I have used the CS seats (albeit only in the old stock so far) and would do again as long as sleep wasn't strictly necessary, but would only use an overnight coach if I was able to guarantee an empty adjacent seat; I'm not spending 8 hours squashed up against someone unless there's no other viable option for getting there (i.e. air travel). So the 2+1 layout is the key selling point to me.

 

[Trainbike46]

Given that the seats are a budget option I was surprised they didn't move to 2+2 (albeit with recline - does Transcal offer that?) - but perhaps that'd then give them no selling point over the coaches, and they do want and need to charge more than them.

Personally I have used the CS seats (albeit only in the old stock so far) and would do again as long as sleep wasn't strictly necessary, but would only use an overnight coach if I was able to guarantee an empty adjacent seat; I'm not spending 8 hours squashed up against someone unless there's no other viable option for getting there (i.e. air travel). So the 2+1 layout is the key selling point to me.

that is fair. For me, the avanti standard class seats are simply way more comfortable, and way easier to sleep in than the current seats in the cally sleeper. For me, moving to 2+2 would be an acceptable trade-off, but I appreciate that wouldn't be true for everyone

 

[BRX]

Have to say, travelling alone, for me I would not really use the CS seats, except in desperation, if I couldn't book one of the solo seats. If I had to choose between CS and overnight bus, in each case in a 2+2 I would probably still go for the CS though.

Not sure why CS don't choose to have a slight price differential between the single and doubled seats.

 

[lachlan]

I would be more likely to use the sleeper (in a seat or otherwise) if there was a Bristol leg (presumably could run via Birmingham). Appreciate we once had an extensive sleeper network that has been cut back presumably due to lack of demand however if the services are regularly filling up and there is talk of adding capacity, new routes should be considered too.

As of now I'll still take it, connecting in London,but southbound it's not early enough to get to work on arrival. An expensive cabin would be a lot more tempting if I could arrive at Temple Meads by around 9am

 

[Snapper37]

I would be more likely to use the sleeper (in a seat or otherwise) if there was a Bristol leg (presumably could run via Birmingham). Appreciate we once had an extensive sleeper network that has been cut back presumably due to lack of demand however if the services are regularly filling up and there is talk of adding capacity, new routes should be considered too.

As of now I'll still take it, connecting in London,but southbound it's not early enough to get to work on arrival. An expensive cabin would be a lot more tempting if I could arrive at Temple Meads by around 9am

Yes the old Plymouth to Edinburgh sleeper is much missed. Particularly as berth costs were £12 in the 90’s. Mind you the times when I found I was the only passenger on some sleeper trips was indicative of a bigger problem.

 

[zwk500]

I would be more likely to use the sleeper (in a seat or otherwise) if there was a Bristol leg (presumably could run via Birmingham). Appreciate we once had an extensive sleeper network that has been cut back presumably due to lack of demand however if the services are regularly filling up and there is talk of adding capacity, new routes should be considered too.

As of now I'll still take it, connecting in London,but southbound it's not early enough to get to work on arrival. An expensive cabin would be a lot more tempting if I could arrive at Temple Meads by around 9am

For Bristol to Glasgow next week you can take a 7.05 flight from Bristol arriving at 8.20, for less than £50. The sleeper can't really compete on price against the mild inconvenience of having to leave home a little bit early. You could leave home at 6am and still be in central Glasgow before 9am.

 

[The exile]

For Bristol to Glasgow next week you can take a 7.05 flight from Bristol arriving at 8.20, for less than £50. The sleeper can't really compete on price against the mild inconvenience of having to leave home a little bit early. You could leave home at 6am and still be in central Glasgow before 9am.

That depends where “home” is. In addition, you’ve got to add the cost of getting to /parking at the airport - usually much higher than getting to / from a station need be.

 

[paul1609]

Yes the old Plymouth to Edinburgh sleeper is much missed. Particularly as berth costs were £12 in the 90’s. Mind you the times when I found I was the only passenger on some sleeper trips was indicative of a bigger problem.

Missed by whom? I used to be sent down on the sleeper to and fro Plymouth when I first joined the navy in 1987. I don't remember ever meeting any non Mod or Navy personnel on board. Once Rosyth Naval Base was closed in the early 90s and the Type 42 destroyers were relocated to Portsmouth that business finished. I think the sleeper held on to the next timetable change. I think there was attempt to revive it with a portion that went to Poole but that only lasted a couple of years before it was canned due to lack of demand, I can't see it would be any different now.

 

[lachlan]

For Bristol to Glasgow next week you can take a 7.05 flight from Bristol arriving at 8.20, for less than £50. The sleeper can't really compete on price against the mild inconvenience of having to leave home a little bit early. You could leave home at 6am and still be in central Glasgow before 9am.

I'd be going to Stonehaven or Aberdeen. You can fly but I'm trying to avoid taking internal flights. I'm not sure how much it costs to fly but if I take the train I can walk at both ends whereas flying I'd need buses or taxis which increases cost and faff.

I do suspect though the number of people making such journeys are slim. I don't plan to do so regularly.

HS2 will have a positive impact as well eventually as changing at Old Oak and Haymarket will probably be faster and more convenient than today's cross London interchange

 

[zwk500]

I'd be going to Stonehaven or Aberdeen. You can fly but I'm trying to avoid taking internal flights. I'm not sure how much it costs to fly but if I take the train I can walk at both ends whereas flying I'd need buses or taxis which increases cost and faff.

I do suspect though the number of people making such journeys are slim. I don't plan to do so regularly.

This is the problem - people are looking at singular journeys, but the train will need to cater for the overall picture. It will be interesting to see what happens to the lowland sleeper once (if) the later phases of HS2 are in place.

 

[JamieL]

This is the problem - people are looking at singular journeys, but the train will need to cater for the overall picture. It will be interesting to see what happens to the lowland sleeper once (if) the later phases of HS2 are in place.

Given how HS2 has been hobbled, most notably the scrapping of Golborne, journey times to Scotland are unlikely to improve more than 30mins. As such why do you think it will make a difference?

 

[zwk500]

Given how HS2 has been hobbled, most notably the scrapping of Golborne, journey times to Scotland are unlikely to improve more than 30mins. As such why do you think it will make a difference?

Losing the Golborne link has lessened the impact, but knocking half an hour off is still likely to make the first/last HS trains and one's own bed (or a nice hotel) more attractive than the Sleeper to the Central Belt.

 

[JamieL]

Losing the Golborne link has lessened the impact, but knocking half an hour off is still likely to make the first/last HS trains and one's own bed (or a nice hotel) more attractive than the Sleeper to the Central Belt.

Bearing in mind it will probably still be Avanti - or "we may strand you in Preston and certainly won't get you there on time" - I personally doubt it will change a great deal. Might be slightly more chance of getting a seat I suppose.

 

[Bald Rick]

They just didn't try very hard to offer a couchette-level option when the new trains were designed.

That’s because “They” didn’t need to. In our loading gauge you can’t easily get many more couchettes in a coach than sleeper beds, and you sell the sleeper beds for more. So why fill the same amount of train with about the same number of people paying less?

Also, if the trains are in the position of selling out on certain nights then yes one option is to put the fares up even more but another is to consider running more beds per night, as has been discussed previously on this thread.

How do you run more beds on some nights?

That is (ignoring other constraints) whether, given some strong marketing and promotion, 2 or 3 carriages of seats instead of just one,

The seats are less likely to sell out than the beds. Given that this means CS are much more likely to sell, per train, around 110 cabins at £200-£400 each than 62 seats at roughly a quarter of the price, tells you all you need to know about their relative popularity with the travelling public.

 

[Siemens Trains]

The seats are less likely to sell out than the beds. Given that this means CS are much more likely to sell, per train, around 110 cabins at £200-£400 each than 62 seats at roughly a quarter of the price, tells you all you need to know about their relative popularity with the travelling public.

That's a good point, well made. This fact seems lost on those expecting the Lowland market to evaporate in favour of day trains immediately HS2 starts running. There seems high demand for the sleeper, despite significant challenges over the past few years. Even with early or late daytime alternatives on 4 hour journey times I feel a well-operated Lowland sleeper would remain justifiable, with loads approaching capacity.

 

[Bald Rick]

That's a good point, well made. This fact seems lost on those expecting the Lowland market to evaporate in favour of day trains immediately HS2 starts running. There seems high demand for the sleeper, despite significant challenges over the past few years. Even with early or late daytime alternatives on 4 hour journey times I feel a well-operated Lowland sleeper would remain justifiable, with loads approaching capacity.

Maybe. I think it’s more likely than not that the lowlander to go when HS2 opens to Crewe.

 

[gabrielhj07]

Maybe. I think it’s more likely than not that the lowlander to go when HS2 opens to Crewe.

Why would this be so?

Demand for the Lowlander would not be absorbed by day trains running half an hour faster, especially as that saving can be made today by choosing the right train.

 

[Bald Rick]

Why would this be so?

Demand for the Lowlander would not be absorbed by day trains running half an hour faster, especially as that saving can be made today by choosing the right train.

well, there is a theory that some lowlander demand is actually highlander demand going ‘short’ because the highlander is full. (Certainly I’ve done that in the past, and I’m sure I’m not the only one). Also that the Aberdeen and is underused, and sometimes the Glasgow too.

Now add in a sub 4h London Glasgow / London Edinburgh, and some sleeper passengers will transfer to day trains.

Put all that together, and that makes the whole sleeper operation a little less viable. So - and this is my thoughts only - you drop the lowlander, and have the highlander as an Inverness / Fort William / Edinburgh train.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Put all that together, and that makes the whole sleeper operation a little less viable. So - and this is my thoughts only - you drop the lowlander, and have the highlander as an Inverness / Fort William / Edinburgh train.

I too am inclined to think that with Golborne HS2 would basically kill the Lowlander off. Without Golborne it's possibly questionable as there's less speed gain and Edinburgh isn't served.

That would be fairly convenient, because it could allow Mk5a stock to be released to replace the Mk3s on the Riviera, which by the time the complete HS2 was open and running would likely be pushing 70 years old.

I suppose the Highlander could potentially drop a couple of coaches off in Edinburgh before splitting for FW and Inverness, and pick them up the other way.

 

[JamieL]

I too am inclined to think that with Golborne HS2 would basically kill the Lowlander off. Without Golborne it's possibly questionable as there's less speed gain and Edinburgh isn't served.

That would be fairly convenient, because it could allow Mk5a stock to be released to replace the Mk3s on the Riviera, which by the time the complete HS2 was open and running would likely be pushing 70 years old.

The benefits of the Lowlander are getting into London before 0800 in the morning. Will HS2 trains leave Glasgow Central before 0400 to offer the same service? I suspect not.

In any event, without Golborne I think its questionable with HS2 will offer much of a speed upgrade to Scottish customers.