Serco for Sleeper

[87031]

Appreciate a little back to the posts of a few weeks ago. Finally travelled on sleeper in new guise and share thoughts. Staff are the same as scotrail, just with better uniforms. Travel pack less but more than adequate. Dinner in lounge - just wanted chese and bits - ran out as 3 served - soup ok but over microwaved. Menu advertised was not in offer - no duck or lamb - jus haggis or macaroni cheese
Breakfast was the big change, host directed against highland breakfast as only a half sausage ! Ordered smoked salmon and scrambled egg - served 1.5 hours prior to arrival as it took "so long" to prepare new menus. Looked horrid served in box made of the same cardboard as hospital bedpan, egg would have bounced so overlooked, salmon great except for presentation. Stale bread role and juice.
Aside from this good trip except for fire alarms going off at Carlisle, bedding good and staff grand. May be good signs - just needs to seek out customer feedback and act on it - not sure when this will start...

That looks awful surely they can get something that looks a bit more classy than take away containers....

 

[DEE-DE]

Well, to be fair it was already the case with ScotRail that most staff advised against the cooked option.

 

[Bodiddly]

Abellio have confirmed the HST work will indeed be split between Inverness and Craigentinny.

Where is that confirmation, can you post a link? As far as we've been told it's not been confirmed yet.

doesnt look like that was the case today:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/G90503/2015/05/06/advanced

The ECS move you are seeing here is the daily shunt through the wash road and to the siding out the back to have the toilets emptied. This then allows the 67 to be released. The 67 is re-attached in the depot and the stock moves back to platform 1 where it is serviced by our cleaning staff.

 

[najaB]

Where is that confirmation, can you post a link? As far as we've been told it's not been confirmed yet.

This was posted in a previous thread.

 

[Bodiddly]

This was posted in a previous thread.

We've all seen that, it was from the franchise documents. Nothing has been confirmed to us yet from senior management.

 

[alastair]

Where is that confirmation, can you post a link? As far as we've been told it's not been confirmed yet.



The ECS move you are seeing here is the daily shunt through the wash road and to the siding out the back to have the toilets emptied. This then allows the 67 to be released. The 67 is re-attached in the depot and the stock moves back to platform 1 where it is serviced by our cleaning staff.

Thanks for clarifying,I hadnt realised that.

 

[Bodiddly]

Thanks for clarifying,I hadnt realised that.

Another interesting thing that's come out now is the set had been stabled in the shed on a Saturday night for the first few weeks of the franchise. After servicing, it now has to be stabled in the old Motorail siding next to platform 1 to free up the platform on a Saturday/Sunday. Eventually it is thought, there will be an access platform built and a shore supply to make this a more permanent fixture.

 

[Strathclyder]

I drove past Dundee station today and noticed there's a Caledonian Sleeper logo underneath the ScotRail logo on the sign. I can't find an up-to-date photo, but I've marked this screenshot from Google Streetview to show where the logo is.

Presumably this will be rolled out to all sleeper stations (if it hasn't been already)?

One has appeared at Dalmuir (taken today):

https://www.flickr.com/photos/129464815@N05/17220867889/

 

[47271]

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Spot the problem in the post above. To be fair they replaced it within days after a local outcry! I'm told that this was an error by Scotrail's rather than CS's contractor, but maybe others know better.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Spot the problem in the post above. To be fair they replaced it within days after a local outcry! I'm told that this was an error by Scotrail's rather than CS's contractor, but maybe others know better.

Should be Birnam shouldn't it? Anyone who knows "The Scottish Play" would spot that straight away...

 

[87031]

Just been looking at booking the Fort William sleeper and it seems that most nights there ain't much availability at all. The Inverness sleeper has a full coach of empty twin berths, as a previous poster said are there no plans to stick a 3rd sleeper on the Fort William portion in the summer. Seems silly to me if the demand is there?

 

[bavvo]

Is there any reason they can't add extra carriages (if there are any spares that could be found or salvaged) and use selective door opening?

What are the average loadings like usually anyway?

 

[sprinterguy]

Is there any reason they can't add extra carriages (if there are any spares that could be found or salvaged) and use selective door opening?

What are the average loadings like usually anyway?

You can't make the sleepers any longer out of Euston because the locomotive would be past the signal at platform end, and probably fouling access to an adjacent platform.

The current best compromise is that the Fort William sleeper often gains an extra (third) sleeper carriage during the summer months, to the detriment of the Aberdeen sleeper which loses one to operate with three sleeper vehicles instead of four. I'm not sure whether the insinuation above is that the new operator will not be doing this now.

There seems to generally be high demand for the Fort William portion of the Highland sleeper, due no doubt in part to its' relatively short length. Reading a recent article in RAIL Magazine, loadings on the Inverness portion are also said to be healthy, but the new management have expressed surprise that there is so little demand for the Aberdeen sleeper, and it is something that they will be looking at.

On the lowland sleeper to Glasgow/Edinburgh, there rarely seems to be a shortage of available berths, even at very short notice. Helped, of course, by the fact that both destinations receive a full complement of six sleeper cars, the same as the Inverness portion of the Highland.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

There seems to generally be high demand for the Fort William portion of the Highland sleeper, due no doubt in part to its' relatively short length. Reading a recent article in RAIL Magazine, loadings on the Inverness portion are also said to be healthy, but the new management have expressed surprise that there is so little demand for the Aberdeen sleeper, and it is something that they will be looking at.

Inverness and Fort William are far bigger tourist locations than Aberdeen and at present the sleeper seems to attract far more tourist loading than business travellers.

 

[bavvo]

You can't make the sleepers any longer out of Euston because the locomotive would be past the signal at platform end, and probably fouling access to an adjacent platform.

The current best compromise is that the Fort William sleeper often gains an extra (third) sleeper carriage during the summer months, to the detriment of the Aberdeen sleeper which loses one to operate with three sleeper vehicles instead of four. I'm not sure whether the insinuation above is that the new operator will not be doing this now.

There seems to generally be high demand for the Fort William portion of the Highland sleeper, due no doubt in part to its' relatively short length. Reading a recent article in RAIL Magazine, loadings on the Inverness portion are also said to be healthy, but the new management have expressed surprise that there is so little demand for the Aberdeen sleeper, and it is something that they will be looking at.

On the lowland sleeper to Glasgow/Edinburgh, there rarely seems to be a shortage of available berths, even at very short notice. Helped, of course, by the fact that both destinations receive a full complement of six sleeper cars, the same as the Inverness portion of the Highland.

Are the platforms at St Pancras any longer than Euston? I have seen that mentioned as a possible diversion when Euston is rebuilt anyway.

 

[po8crg]

Are the platforms at St Pancras any longer than Euston? I have seen that mentioned as a possible diversion when Euston is rebuilt anyway.

No, the Eurostar platforms are the same length as the sleeper platforms at Euston. Everything else at St Pancras is shorter.

In theory, they could run three full-length sections from two platforms at Euston and shunt them together for a non-stop run to Edinburgh, but the intermediate boarding stops would have to go to achieve that.

 

[Chrism20]

There seems to generally be high demand for the Fort William portion of the Highland sleeper, due no doubt in part to its' relatively short length. Reading a recent article in RAIL Magazine, loadings on the Inverness portion are also said to be healthy, but the new management have expressed surprise that there is so little demand for the Aberdeen sleeper, and it is something that they will be looking at.

Thanks, I just done a search for the article and it's a very interesting read.

I never knew they had an iPhone app until reading it. It looks quite good.

Interestingly they mention in the interview about running four or five coaches to Fort Bill in the summer.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Are the platforms at St Pancras any longer than Euston? I have seen that mentioned as a possible diversion when Euston is rebuilt anyway.

The Eurostar platforms are long enough and the track connection does exist from the NLL. There are two sticking points though. Firstly, the platforms are built at the European 760mm height so unless the new sleeper stock had been ordered with special retractable steps (as on the Class 373s) it would be necessary to add a temporary platform surface to raise them up to the right height. Secondly, the Eurostar platforms are accessed separately from the rest of the station as both arrivals and departures go through the undercroft for security and passport control. Fundamentally, had it been impossible to provide two 400m platforms at Euston during the rebuild process, then the St Pancras option would have been available but it would involve costs to modify the station. With the modifications that would be necessary, the platforms modified would then be completely inaccessible to Channel Tunnel services, which would likely incur some form of compensation to Eurostar and could limit the future growth of services as well.

 

[marks87]

I know it's been done to a death, but are the former international platforms at Waterloo not still an option, even as a temporary measure? Especially now with 92s up front.

Warerloo is also closer to Westminster...I can think of 56 reasons why such a move might prove popular

 

[Martin222002]

I know it's been done to a death, but are the former international platforms at Waterloo not still an option, even as a temporary measure? Especially now with 92s up front.

Warerloo is also closer to Westminster...I can think of 56 reasons why such a move might prove popular

From the current plans that have been relevled recently, as part of improving the access to the international platforms will see them being reduced in length by 60 meter, which would make them too short to accommodate the sleepers.

 

[The Planner]

Said it a few times on other threads, the Sleeper will not move from a Euston Road station, so give up on Waterloo etc....

 

[Blindtraveler]

I would say try and juggle demand with the berth a bit and run a 3 month trial of the following:
7 sleapingcars to Inverness, 3 for FortBill and 2 for Aberdeen.

 

[Chrism20]

I would say try and juggle demand with the berth a bit and run a 3 month trial of the following:
7 sleapingcars to Inverness, 3 for FortBill and 2 for Aberdeen.

Having watched the availability over the last few weeks I'd say two is reducing it too much for Aberdeen. They could definitely split it three and three with Fort Bill for the entire summer though for sure. How do you split it though? Do you remove a standard or first carriage from Aberdeen?

Aberdeen doesn't seem to follow the same patterns as the others and when it's busy it's random nights of the week whereas the others seem to be heavily loaded consistently on the same days.

 

[sprinterguy]

Interestingly they mention in the interview about running four or five coaches to Fort Bill in the summer.

That quote is describing the current operation, including the seated and lounge coaches.

 

[Chrism20]

That quote is describing the current operation, including the seated and lounge coaches.

Which is currently four (Seated, Lounge, First berth, Standard berths) so the suggestion within the interview is that they intend to strengthen it to five as First did.

Certainly in the summer, that’s Fort William. Says Strachan: “We run four or five [coaches] in the summer months, but we find the loadings are historically very strong, and since we opened the new website at the beginning of January, Fort William has been particularly strong. Inverness has also been strong. The one we want to have a look at is Aberdeen

http://www.railmagazine.com/people/interviews/a-new-dawn-for-the-caledonian-sleeper

 

[sprinterguy]

I would say try and juggle demand with the berth a bit and run a 3 month trial of the following:
7 sleapingcars to Inverness, 3 for FortBill and 2 for Aberdeen.

If there's currently berths regularly available when the Inverness portion is running with 6 sleeper cars then I think that providing 7 would be excessive. I think that six is ample, while two would be insufficient for the Aberdeen demand, such as it is.

Plus, once you start providing more than six sleeper cars on any one leg you get into complications because you are no longer keeping the carriages together in eight vehicle sets. While this is less of an issue now that there is no requirement to get a complete 8-car rake to Inverness each day for maintenance as this is being carried out at Polmadie, it still reduces the flexibility granted by having everything formed up in 8-car sets when it comes to maintenance schedules and swapping sets in and out of service. Remember the sleeper has a very small fleet to begin with (in comparison to other TOCs), and you would be breaking it up further by having 9 (Inverness), 8 (Edinburgh/Glasgow) and 7 (Fort William & Aberdeen) carriage rakes. And you'd still have problems rotating "Highland" sets back to Polmadie.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Which is currently four (Seated, Lounge, First berth, Standard berths) so the suggestion within the interview is that they intend to strengthen it to five as First did.

As I mentioned above, and based on how that comment has been phrased, I wasn't aware that they were planning on doing anything but continuing this practice in the first place, but yeah I get your point now.

 

[jopsuk]

What restrictions on train length do the passing loops up the WHL impose?

 

[D1009]

The Eurostar platforms are long enough and the track connection does exist from the NLL. There are two sticking points though. Firstly, the platforms are built at the European 760mm height so unless the new sleeper stock had been ordered with special retractable steps (as on the Class 373s) it would be necessary to add a temporary platform surface to raise them up to the right height. Secondly, the Eurostar platforms are accessed separately from the rest of the station as both arrivals and departures go through the undercroft for security and passport control. Fundamentally, had it been impossible to provide two 400m platforms at Euston during the rebuild process, then the St Pancras option would have been available but it would involve costs to modify the station. With the modifications that would be necessary, the platforms modified would then be completely inaccessible to Channel Tunnel services, which would likely incur some form of compensation to Eurostar and could limit the future growth of services as well.

Other than the platform height issue, would any modifications be necessary though? Departure and arrival flows of passengers are totally segregated, and there are no Eurostar departures anywhere near the departure times of the sleepers. For arrivals there are currently no passport or security checks at St Pancras anyway, and the first Eurostar doesn't arrive until 0900.

 

[sprinterguy]

What restrictions on train length do the passing loops up the WHL impose?

I'm not sure about loop lengths, but platform lengths on the West Highland line between Craigendoran Junction and Fort William are typically around 150 metres. There are exceptions, and I think that at the likes of Rannoch (115 metres) and Tyndrum Upper (123 metres), where the platforms are shorter and the loops are quite limited in length, then 150 metres might be close to the upper limit of what could be accommodated within the loop.

Speaking only as an observer and layman here, but longer trains do operate over the West Highland line, such as the Royal Scotsman and railtours, which in the latter case can easily load to ten or eleven carriages plus two locomotives, so I'm not sure how much of a limiting factor the shorter loop lengths are.

 

[BRX]

Am I alone in mourning the fact that (I presume) the new stock will not have openable windows like the mk3s do? It's a simple pleasure to get up in the morning, and go and take a breath of fresh highland air by the window.
The sleeper will become less attractive to me once the new trains are running, I think.