What would you do with the Cally Sleepers?

[CW2]

Purely hypothetically, how would you improve the route, timings, and calling points of the Caledonian Sleeper services? The idea would be to serve a wider range of locations, whilst adapting to changes in the market.

Here are a few ideas to start:

Highlander

Potential to start earlier from Euston and run via Birmingham New Street, but this would only work northbound (unlikely to get a corresponding southbound path) so I ruled this out. Stick with the current 1S25 path to Carstairs South Jn., then continue to Motherwell (call), Coatbridge Central (call), and Stirling.

At Stirling, train divides. Attaches 2 seating coaches to Inverness portion. Train departs circa 05:00 Stirling to Inverness. Stops as now, but all open stops for non-sleeper passengers.

Aberdeen portion also attaches 2 seating coaches and runs via Alloa, Dunfermline Town, Glenrothes with Thornton, Ladybank, and as now to Aberdeen. All open stops for non-sleeper passengers. (Requires formal reopening of Alloa – Dunfermline line for passenger traffic).

Fort William portion attach 2 seating coaches. Train depart circa 05:10 and runs via Larbert, Glasgow Queen Street Low Level, then picks up the existing path. All open stops for non-sleeper passengers.

Lowlander

Runs as booked to Carlisle arrive 05:08, where train divides. Edinburgh portion (front) depart circa 05:30 and run direct via Carstairs avoider, picking up existing 1B26 path ex Carstairs East Jn.

Glasgow portion attach 2 seating coaches. Train depart (diesel hauled) circa 05:45 via Dumfries and Kilmarnock to Glasgow Central, calling at all principal stations. Pathing will require some flexing of the existing Scotrail DMU services. All open stops for non-sleeper passengers. The later arrival in Glasgow Central should not be an issue, as there is the option of an earlier arrival by travelling on the Fort William portion to Queen Street Low Level.

Southbound services would mirror the calling pattern of the northbound ones.

Caledonian Sleepers would also gain revenue (albeit mainly abstracted from Scotrail) by allowing local passengers to use their services. The main problems I foresee are:

• Reopening of the Alloa – Dunfermline line on a timetabled basis
• Additional diesel loco (class 73/9) required for G&SW routeing of Glasgow portion
• Additional seating coaches required
• Displacement of operational staff from Edinburgh Waverley to Stirling
• Engaging operational staff at Carlisle.

Please feel free to pick holes in it – it’s just an idea …

 

[JonathanH]

There have been a number of threads about doing something different with the Caledonian Sleeper. Indeed there is one on the next page which indicates why stopping the train at Birmingham New Street isn't going to happen.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/suggestions-for-changing-the-calling-points-on-the-caledonian-sleeper.203086/

This probably ought to be moved into that thread.

Going through your points as I see them:
* I wouldn't want to get off a train at Motherwell or Coatbridge Central at 4am or board one at 1am. I don't think that is particularly practical.
* I'm not sure the track layout at Stirling is particularly well suited to splitting the sleeper there, particularly in the southbound direction.
* Scotrail now run a train in front of the sleeper from Perth to Inverness so there really isn't a need for the train to deal with internal travellers.
* Adding extra seating coaches isn't a good use of the platform space at Euston as the number of seats is probably about what is needed for that demand.
* Having people board the train in the middle of the night isn't good for the passengers making the through journey.
* How many people want to get off the sleeper in Alloa or Dunfermline - if I wanted to get to these places at 5am, I could already do so by getting off at Stirling or Inverkeithing and waiting for a day train, taxi or similar.
* Opening the Alloa to Dunfermline line just for the sleeper doesn't sound like the catalyst to getting a regular service over the line.
* Splitting at Edinburgh means that the locomotives can go to Craigentinny for fuel or be swapped. Stirling is a bit remote.
* There are already Scotrail / Cross Country trains which run close to the Aberdeen portion so again not internal use of the sleeper is required.
* People use the Fort William portion from Edinburgh - why would you remove this facility?
* Why would the lowlander go via Dumfries and Kilmarnock? Is there some untapped demand? It is mainly fields between the two. Kilmarnock and points north are adequately served by travelling through to Glasgow and getting a day train.
* Why would you replace an electrically hauled train with a diesel for relatively questionable reasons?
* Carstairs has a well established track layout for splitting the sleeper - while it has split at Carlisle before, splitting there just incurs extra running costs.
* Mixing 'normal' passengers with long distance passengers on a late night train out of Glasgow would be ridiculous.

Caledonian Sleeper is probably happy forgoing the possible revenue from the complication of internal passengers in Scotland.

The operation of the Caledonian sleeper is probably as efficient as it can get to serve the current destinations and still requires a large subsidy. I don't see this helping things.

 

[LOM]

The signalling at Stirling does not have the flexibility to allow splitting/joining of portions in the manner you have described. There is a reason why the shunts take place at Edinburgh and Carstairs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One thing I would be inclined to do is to build one additional Mk5 coach with a TPE style interior (ideally with better window-aligned seats, though) which would be entered in the timetable as a separate ScotRail service for the Fort William "day coach", ending the nonsense with the Sleeper seated coach and whether you need a reservation or not. It wouldn't affect Euston as you'd just shunt 3 coaches on instead of 2 at Edinburgh.

 

[JonathanH]

One thing I would be inclined to do is to build one additional Mk5 coach with a TPE style interior (ideally with better window-aligned seats, though) which would be entered in the timetable as a separate ScotRail service for the Fort William "day coach", ending the nonsense with the Sleeper seated coach and whether you need a reservation or not. It wouldn't affect Euston as you'd just shunt 3 coaches on instead of 2 at Edinburgh.

How is that nonsense? Are there really occasions when the seated sleeping coach doesn't have enough capacity from Edinburgh? In theory CS already have enough Mark 5 coaches if this was actually a problem although whether it is allowed in the TMS is a possible issue.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How is that nonsense? Are there really occasions when the seated sleeping coach doesn't have enough capacity from Edinburgh? In theory CS already have enough Mark 5 coaches if this was actually a problem although whether it is allowed in the TMS is a possible issue.

The nonsense is that despite the limited capacity one can't reserve a seat from Fort William due to the risk of filling up seats needed by overnight passengers.

 

[Hadders]

How is that nonsense? Are there really occasions when the seated sleeping coach doesn't have enough capacity from Edinburgh? In theory CS already have enough Mark 5 coaches if this was actually a problem although whether it is allowed in the TMS is a possible issue.

The nonsense is that despite the limited capacity one can't reserve a seat from Fort William due to the risk of filling up seats needed by overnight passengers.

Trying to purchase a ticket as a day passenger between Fort William and Glasgow/Edinburgh is practically impossible.

For starters the timetable says it's reservations compulsory, those of us on here know that isn't really the case and the seated coach is highly unlikely to be sold out but a 'normal' passenger won't realise this.

Given that almost all booking sits fail to show the service is also an issue - we know that you can just buy a walk on ticket valid on any service but, again, a 'normal' passenger doesn't know this and would be unlikely to realise.

It's not unreasonable to want a seat reservation for a 6 hour journey. The fact the it's almost impossible to get one is a problem. Granted there are far bigger issues out there but how long before Serco turn round to Transport Scotland and try to withdraw using the seated coach as a normal train due to 'lack of demand'.

 

[CW2]

There have been a number of threads about doing something different with the Caledonian Sleeper. Indeed there is one on the next page which indicates why stopping the train at Birmingham New Street isn't going to happen.

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/suggestions-for-changing-the-calling-points-on-the-caledonian-sleeper.203086/

Thanks for your comprehensive response.
My thinking was that there are areas of Scotland with reasonably large population centres which currently have no through service to / from London, which could be served by the Cally Sleepers. Specifically I was thinking of the G&SW route, and parts of Fife. You could add the Aberdeen - Inverness line to that list, so extending the Aberdeen portion through to Inverness might also be considered.

Going through your points as I see them:
* I wouldn't want to get off a train at Motherwell or Coatbridge Central at 4am or board one at 1am. I don't think that is particularly practical.
* I'm not sure the track layout at Stirling is particularly well suited to splitting the sleeper there, particularly in the southbound direction.
* Scotrail now run a train in front of the sleeper from Perth to Inverness so there really isn't a need for the train to deal with internal travellers.

If calling at Motherwell or Coatbridge resulted in incurring extra station staff costs I agree with you, but if it could be achieved at no cost, the option is there. I have actually joined a sleeper after midnight at Coatbridge - but it was a VERY long time ago.

I'm not that familiar with the modernised layout at Stirling, so I don't know what capabilities the layout has there. This whole hypothesis could crumble at this point, I freely admit.

Running seats on the Sleeper portions as described could enable Scotrail to withdraw their "shadow" services, saving fuel and resources.

* Adding extra seating coaches isn't a good use of the platform space at Euston as the number of seats is probably about what is needed for that demand.
* Having people board the train in the middle of the night isn't good for the passengers making the through journey.
* How many people want to get off the sleeper in Alloa or Dunfermline - if I wanted to get to these places at 5am, I could already do so by getting off at Stirling or Inverkeithing and waiting for a day train, taxi or similar.
* Opening the Alloa to Dunfermline line just for the sleeper doesn't sound like the catalyst to getting a regular service over the line.

The extra seating coaches get added at Stirling / Carlisle - they don't run through from Euston.
Given the nature of the train and the staffing levels, and modern mobile phone technology, it shouldn't be impossible to stop a train at around 01:00 and open 1 or more doors (only) for the purpose of boarding pre-booked passengers. It doesn't have to be an undignified noisy free-for-all.
As for Alloa and Dunfermline, I have no figures for the level of demand - and as you say it would be difficult to justify reopening the line to passenger traffic just for this train. However it might assist the case for opening if a daily through service to England could be offered.

* Splitting at Edinburgh means that the locomotives can go to Craigentinny for fuel or be swapped. Stirling is a bit remote.
* There are already Scotrail / Cross Country trains which run close to the Aberdeen portion so again not internal use of the sleeper is required.
* People use the Fort William portion from Edinburgh - why would you remove this facility?
* Why would the lowlander go via Dumfries and Kilmarnock? Is there some untapped demand? It is mainly fields between the two. Kilmarnock and points north are adequately served by travelling through to Glasgow and getting a day train.
* Why would you replace an electrically hauled train with a diesel for relatively questionable reasons?

Fuelling and maintenance can take place during the daytime layovers, with locos swapping over at Stirling if needed.
Again, services shadowing the sleeper could themselves be withdrawn, saving resources.
Yes, the loss of the Fort William seats from Edinburgh is an issue - but if it is mainly tourist traffic (as I suspect) then it's equally possible for tourists to stay overnight in Stirling. It might boost the local economy.
There's more population along the G&SW route than along the WCML, and it has been denied a through service to London. Again, I've no inside track to the demand figures, but it couldn't be any worse than Carstairs. Having a through train is important. The additional diesel mileage is balanced to some degree by the reduced diesel mileage on the Inverness portion (by running through electric to Stirling).

* Carstairs has a well established track layout for splitting the sleeper - while it has split at Carlisle before, splitting there just incurs extra running costs.
* Mixing 'normal' passengers with long distance passengers on a late night train out of Glasgow would be ridiculous.
Caledonian Sleeper is probably happy forgoing the possible revenue from the complication of internal passengers in Scotland.
The operation of the Caledonian sleeper is probably as efficient as it can get to serve the current destinations and still requires a large subsidy. I don't see this helping things.

Yes Carstairs has had a lot of practice at splitting and joining trains over the years. You might say that's all it's good for. The matter of late night passengers from Glasgow might well pose some interesting challenges.
I think Cally Sleepers doesn't have much say in the issue of internal Scottish passengers at the moment. They aren't permitted to compete with Scotrail. Maybe if Cally Sleepers were to be integrated into the Scotrail franchise there might be a more co-ordinated approach?
Yes, it's true that Cally Sleepers are heavily subsidised. They can either seek to cut costs to the minimum by operating the simplest possible operation (i.e. pretty much as now) or they can seek to grow the market by opening up new journey opportunities. It's that second approach I've been looking at here.

 

[haggishunter]

Trying to purchase a ticket as a day passenger between Fort William and Glasgow/Edinburgh is practically impossible.

I've used the seats to Glasgow several times on the WHL several times since the new stock came in and had no issue getting a ticket with reservation explicitly for that service via the ScotRail app and website.

 

[XAM2175]

My thinking was that there are areas of Scotland with reasonably large population centres which currently have no through service to / from London, which could be served by the Cally Sleepers. Specifically I was thinking of the G&SW route, and parts of Fife. You could add the Aberdeen - Inverness line to that list, so extending the Aberdeen portion through to Inverness might also be considered.

Realistically though, how much demand is there from these areas for a direct single-train service to and from London, and how much of it is likely to be satisfied (or stimulated anew) by the sleepers given the times at which they have to run?

 

[cakefiend]

I’m not sure who would really benefit from this other than people wanting a loco hauled train?

With reopening Alloa - Dunfermline to passenger traffic, there’s little point. It’s unlikely that anyone in Alloa, Kincladie, Culross, Valleyfield, Torryburn or Newmills will actually use it. The only stop that might have any notable usage would be Dunfermline Town, which could be served easily from Edinburgh (and is only a few minutes from the existing stop at Inverkeithing).