Serco for Sleeper

[Chris125]

Honest question: If they are building new coaches for the sleeper, how difficult would it be to get a set of auxiliary driving controls in the end coach so that it wasn't a propelling move?

As that carriage would be acting as a cab it would presumably need to meet all the same standards on crashworthiness and the like as any other driving vehicle, plus all the safety systems etc, bumping the cost and complexity up.

 

[jamieintercity]

Just realised that first scotrail runs the sleeper in the morning of the 31st of march and serco runs it in the evening/morning of the 1st of April. So what's going to be the traction in the evening southbound/northbound runs of the 31st of march?

Are GBRf class 47 going to be used for the Highland portion of the sleeper since they will not enough class 73s ready or will continue to use class 67 from DBS. And will that be the same for class 92s or will there be enough class 92s by the 1st of April?

 

[najaB]

So what's going to be the traction in the evening southbound/northbound runs of the 31st of march?

Rather naively I assumed that things would continue 'as is' for a while after the change in franchise. It's a good question!

 

[NotATrainspott]

Rather naively I assumed that things would continue 'as is' for a while after the change in franchise. It's a good question!

I think that is the intention. Has any franchise change caused an overnight change in how they run services? Introducing new rolling stock or traction or a new route or whatever is a challenge in itself and lumping that challenge in with the challenge of actually taking the reins of the whole franchise would be asking for trouble.

 

[marks87]

Won't it depend on the contracts? If Serco's contract with GBRf starts on April 1st, they'll provide the traction. Whether that's 92s/73s or not remains to be seen.

 

[scotraildriver]

Rather naively I assumed that things would continue 'as is' for a while after the change in franchise. It's a good question!

This does appear to be the most likely scenario. We have some information that we (scotrail and EWS) drivers and guards will continue to work the service at least for a few months. But no one has any real, firm information. The fact that there are currently 3 Scotrail drivers in training on the 67's kinda supports it but no one really knows for sure.

 

[Adam0984]

I think that is the intention. Has any franchise change caused an overnight change in how they run services? Introducing new rolling stock or traction or a new route or whatever is a challenge in itself and lumping that challenge in with the challenge of actually taking the reins of the whole franchise would be asking for trouble.

So what your trying to say that the overnight that a franchise changes there isn't a team at the first station it stops at after midnight with a full set of stickers, posters and uniform? :roll:

 

[NotATrainspott]

So what your trying to say that the overnight that a franchise changes there isn't a team at the first station it stops at after midnight with a full set of stickers, posters and uniform? :roll:

To be honest, if they were really determined, it wouldn't take incredibly long to replace those three things you mentioned. Staff just need to have their uniforms ready before the switchover and put on the new stuff when they get up for work in the morning. The 'ScotRail is operated by Abellio' stickers could be put on whenever a train is in the depot and is clean. If station staff are the ones who replace the posters then these could be swapped as well at staffed stations. Unstaffed stations might be a bit more of a problem but the normal station cleaning/maintenance staff rove around them every day to get them sorted and they could just bring new posters to put up whenever they visit. The First branding on the existing posters is very discreet so it might be passable just to ignore it completely until the poster would normally be replaced.

EDIT: Oops, thought this was the ScotRail thread.

 

[ModernRailways]

So what your trying to say that the overnight that a franchise changes there isn't a team at the first station it stops at after midnight with a full set of stickers, posters and uniform? :roll:

Didn't Govia attempt something like that with the current Thameslink and Great Northern franchise?

 

[47802]

I notice that the WNXX forum is suggesting 47's a real step forward there then.

I bet the driver of the Aberdeen sleeper which had a tangle with a tree the other day was pleased he was in a 67 rather than a 47 or a 73.

 

[thealexweb]

I notice that the WNXX forum is suggesting 47's a real step forward there then.

I bet the driver of the Aberdeen sleeper which had a tangle with a tree the other day was pleased he was in a 67 rather than a 47 or a 73.

Could you elaborate why you think a 67 is more appropriate. Just curious

 

[ainsworth74]

Modern (well nearly modern) crash regulations mean that the cab of a 67 should be tougher than a locomotive that was designed using 1960s crash regulations.

 

[Harbon 1]

Could you elaborate why you think a 67 is more appropriate. Just curious

I assume it's purely because it's younger and therefore must be stronger

Edit:- ainsworth74 beat me to it

 

[TUC]

Didn't Govia attempt something like that with the current Thameslink and Great Northern franchise?

And the effect on the vinyls looks so tidy and slick.

 

[Romilly]

Turning the discussion back to ticketing, and apologies if I have missed the answer in this now rather lengthy thread, I wasn't sure that I understood why on the sleeper.scot website it is generally the case that a first-class cabin (with sole occupancy) is generally cheaper than sole occupancy of a standard (i.e. twin) cabin. Also, I can't seem to get the "click on the passenger image and choose your own berth" function to work.

 

[causton]

Didn't Govia attempt something like that with the current Thameslink and Great Northern franchise?

Are you kidding? Half the staff still have First visible on their uniforms because they would rather that than their namebadge; or they have a First coat that they're wearing rather than the new GN/TL ones, or they have a First hi-vis still etc!

 

[ModernRailways]

Are you kidding? Half the staff still have First visible on their uniforms because they would rather that than their namebadge; or they have a First coat that they're wearing rather than the new GN/TL ones, or they have a First hi-vis still etc!

My point was changing all the posters, and other branding. Staff are obviously going to wear the old uniform. East Coast staff still wear GNER uniform for example...

 

[Suraggu]

My point was changing all the posters, and other branding. Staff are obviously going to wear the old uniform. East Coast staff still wear GNER uniform for example...

Um no They still have NXEC jackets, trousers, coats, gloves, hat and scarfs.

 

[causton]

My point was changing all the posters, and other branding.

It's still there if you know where to look for it... well, the London Connections maps still say FCC by name!

 

[ModernRailways]

Um no They still have NXEC jackets, trousers, coats, gloves, hat and scarfs.

Nope, some staff still have GNER blazers (waistcoats too), and almost all of the drivers I've spoken to who were with East Coast when it was GNER are still using a GNER bag (briefcase/suitcase) (even if it is just a small tag).

I should know better than to make a generalisation...

It's still there if you know where to look for it... well, the London Connections maps still say FCC by name!

Obviously there are still some things

 

[DelW]

Turning the discussion back to ticketing, and apologies if I have missed the answer in this now rather lengthy thread, I wasn't sure that I understood why on the sleeper.scot website it is generally the case that a first-class cabin (with sole occupancy) is generally cheaper than sole occupancy of a standard (i.e. twin) cabin. Also, I can't seem to get the "click on the passenger image and choose your own berth" function to work.

I'm not sure what the pricing issues might be, but for the current stock, there is no difference between first-class and standard class cabins, when travelling first class the upper berth is folded away and only the lower is made up (possibly set higher off the floor than when both berths are in use?).

 

[Fishplate84]

It's probably because they don't want lots of potentially double use cabins occupied cheaply with one person.

If you want your own space, travel first. If you don't, travel standard. Can't see the logic of booking a standard solo anyway, unless it was going to be priced less than the first class price. But see my initial comment. They'd end up loosing a fortune giving away capacity like that.

 

[DEE-DE]

Can't see the logic of booking a standard solo anyway

I would've thought it's for three people travelling together. You would probably have to book it on the phone but it would allow you to open the door between the two cabins.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's probably because they don't want lots of potentially double use cabins occupied cheaply with one person.

If you want your own space, travel first. If you don't, travel standard. Can't see the logic of booking a standard solo anyway, unless it was going to be priced less than the first class price. But see my initial comment. They'd end up loosing a fortune giving away capacity like that.

I'm not clear why, given that *all* the cabins are identical other than the wheelchair access one, they don't dump the cabin selection and just take bookings of whatever you want to book until the train is full. Then set them up accordingly.

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's probably because they don't want lots of potentially double use cabins occupied cheaply with one person.

If you want your own space, travel first. If you don't, travel standard. Can't see the logic of booking a standard solo anyway, unless it was going to be priced less than the first class price. But see my initial comment. They'd end up loosing a fortune giving away capacity like that.

The only point of Standard solo was as a supplement to a Standard walk-up ticket. However I wonder if they've done this as a very cynical means of making more money out of companies who won't pay First Class?

I doubt I would travel on business sharing a cabin (though I would consider the flatbeds - I find sharing a cabin with one unknown person very awkward compared with sharing a whole open coach with partitions).

Neil

 

[dcsprior]

It's probably because they don't want lots of potentially double use cabins occupied cheaply with one person.

If you want your own space, travel first. If you don't, travel standard. Can't see the logic of booking a standard solo anyway, unless it was going to be priced less than the first class price. But see my initial comment. They'd end up loosing a fortune giving away capacity like that.

People who want their own cabin and are spending their own money to travel will indeed travel First.

Employers who limit their staff travel to Standard class only will pay more.

In other words, Serco have learnt something from EC's "Scottish Executive" package, which sees lots of business travellers who wouldn't be allowed to buy two Advance First Singles be allowed to buy a more expensive return ticket which is technically not a First class ticket but amounts to the same thing

 

[Bletchleyite]

In other words, Serco have learnt something from EC's "Scottish Executive" package, which sees lots of business travellers who wouldn't be allowed to buy two Advance First Singles be allowed to buy a more expensive return ticket which is technically not a First class ticket but amounts to the same thing

Expenses-fraud-tastic. Some employers must be downright thick to let an employee get away with that.

Neil

 

[marks87]

Expenses-fraud-tastic. Some employers must be downright thick to let an employee get away with that.

Neil

No, it's just a pre-programmed aversion to first class travel, no matter the circumstances.

I could find a First Advance for (e.g.) £20, compared to a walk-up standard fare of £40. My employer would tell me to get stuffed with the former, but happily pay the latter.

Not all businesses are like that, though. I was in London on business a few years ago with expenses paid direct by the company I was visiting. When I explained that a first-class berth on the sleeper was cheaper than the combined cost of another night in the hotel and a standard rail fare, they were happy to reimburse it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, it's just a pre-programmed aversion to first class travel, no matter the circumstances.

I could find a First Advance for (e.g.) £20, compared to a walk-up standard fare of £40. My employer would tell me to get stuffed with the former, but happily pay the latter.

If there was a Standard Advance for £19, I would as well People like finding these fares and saying they are cheaper than Standard, but if you don't need the flexibility of a walk-up, the comparison is with the Standard *Advance*, not walk-up. And also don't forget a Standard Off Peak Return being usually 10p more expensive than a single.

I don't think I've ever seen a situation where on a given train the cheapest First Advance was cheaper than the cheapest Standard Advance / half an Off Peak Return. Though doubtless it does happen *very* occasionally (the latter slightly more often).

Not all businesses are like that, though. I was in London on business a few years ago with expenses paid direct by the company I was visiting. When I explained that a first-class berth on the sleeper was cheaper than the combined cost of another night in the hotel and a standard rail fare, they were happy to reimburse it.

I think the Sleeper is the one exception I would give, because I would not expect someone to share a hotel room on a business trip, and it's a hotel on wheels.

Neil

 

[marks87]

If there was a Standard Advance for £19, I would as well People like finding these fares and saying they are cheaper than Standard, but if you don't need the flexibility of a walk-up, the comparison is with the Standard *Advance*, not walk-up. And also don't forget a Standard Off Peak Return being usually 10p more expensive than a single.

I don't think I've ever seen a situation where on a given train the cheapest First Advance was cheaper than the cheapest Standard Advance / half an Off Peak Return. Though doubtless it does happen *very* occasionally (the latter slightly more often).

That's not my point.

There more than likely would be a corresponding standard advance for cheaper than the first, but my employer wouldn't care provided my claim was only for a standard ticket, regardless of price or validity.

If they're happy to reimburse £40 for a standard walk-up ticket, there's no valid reason (other than statistics) to not reimburse £20 for a first advance.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There more than likely would be a corresponding standard advance for cheaper than the first, but my employer wouldn't care provided my claim was only for a standard ticket, regardless of price or validity.

If they're happy to reimburse £40 for a standard walk-up ticket, there's no valid reason (other than statistics) to not reimburse £20 for a first advance.

I agree that's mad. However a prudent employer would insist on the *Standard* advance - i.e. the absolute cheapest option on the required trains or something sensibly approximating to them with the required degree of flexibility.

Neil