Could a Sleeper service run to Wick?

[NotATrainspott]

It would be cheaper just to subsidise late or early flights from Inverness, Kirkwall or Sumburgh. Small planes are of comparable cost to trains and a short flight would be significantly more appealing to most people than a day and a night on a ferry and then sleeper train.

 

[Class 170101]

Maths appears to be a bit of a weak subject for Mr Roach.
Two quotes from the text:
1) He estimated that a Thurso to Edinburgh rail journey overnight would cover around 328 miles in 7hr 10min.
2) Mr Roach’s report proposed a service with two sleeper carriages and two seated carriages leaving Thurso at 7.30pm, which would reach Inverness at 11.30pm, Aberdeen at 2.30am and Edinburgh at 5.30am.
So 7 hrs 10 mins or 10 hrs, a bit of a difference there. 328 miles for Thurso-Edinburgh via Aberdeen is a tad on the low side too. I make it about 390.

I see no value in serving Aberdeen in this way. Who would want to be thrown onto Aberdeen station at 2:30am and who would would board for Edinburgh from Aberdeen at that time too?

More realistic but also more expensive would be Thurso to Inverness and then divide. A portion for Aberdeen and a separate portion for Edinburgh (and Glasgow?) via the Highland Main Line. That would make 7hrs 10 mins and 328 miles more plausible.

It should be noted that the workings on the Far North become unbalanced, according to the article, as the Down Sleeper would replace the 07:02 Inverness to Wick but where is the unit for the return working Wick to Inverness around 12:30 going to come from? The Up Working for this Sleeper is a new train.

 

[backontrack]

I feel like I want this to succeed. Any northern sleeper service means more attention for the Lentran Loop campaign.

(↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓)

 

[najaB]

More realistic but also more expensive would be Thurso to Inverness and then divide. A portion for Aberdeen and a separate portion for Edinburgh (and Glasgow?) via the Highland Main Line. That would make 7hrs 10 mins and 328 miles more plausible.

It wouldn't be *that* much more expensive if it was done using units as suggested by Neil Williams. You'd only need one extra driver.

 

[adamedwards]

Mad idea time to create units for this. Take a class 442 and removes the motors. Replace one or two cars with SLES. Buffet becomes the lounge. Seats changed to 2+1 using seats from redundant HST or Mk4s. Compartments become a couchette space in some way. Push pull power with 67s.
I'm sure it doesn't work!

 

[Clansman]

Mad idea time to create units for this. Take a class 442 and removes the motors. Replace one or two cars with SLES. Buffet becomes the lounge. Seats changed to 2+1 using seats from redundant HST or Mk4s. Compartments become a couchette space in some way. Push pull power with 67s.
I'm sure it doesn't work!

Thank christ the 442s are all going to SWT so we don't have to take proposals for their use future use seriously - no matter how little logic or humour it involves.

 

[A Challenge]

Maths appears to be a bit of a weak subject for Mr Roach.
Two quotes from the text:
1) He estimated that a Thurso to Edinburgh rail journey overnight would cover around 328 miles in 7hr 10min.
2) Mr Roach’s report proposed a service with two sleeper carriages and two seated carriages leaving Thurso at 7.30pm, which would reach Inverness at 11.30pm, Aberdeen at 2.30am and Edinburgh at 5.30am.
So 7 hrs 10 mins or 10 hrs, a bit of a difference there. 328 miles for Thurso-Edinburgh via Aberdeen is a tad on the low side too. I make it about 390.

Is 328 the figure via the Highland Main Line?

 

[Clansman]

Is 328 the figure via the Highland Main Line?

Definitely not as the HML goes from Perth to Inverness, completely bypassing Aberdeen altogether.

The route is 100% Thurso/Inverness/Elgin/Aberdeen/Dundee/Edinburgh. The only part of the route which isn't clarified is whether or not the Dundee to Edinburgh leg would be via Perth or Leuchars.

 

[takno]

Definitely not as the HML goes from Perth to Inverness, completely bypassing Aberdeen altogether.

The route is 100% Thurso/Inverness/Elgin/Aberdeen/Dundee/Edinburgh. The only part of the route which isn't clarified is whether or not the Dundee to Edinburgh leg would be via Perth or Leuchars.

That may be the case, but 328 is the mileage Edinburgh to Thurso via the HML, so if that is definitely not the route the train is proposed to take then they are definitely quoting the wrong mileage.

 

[Clansman]

That may be the case, but 328 is the mileage Edinburgh to Thurso via the HML, so if that is definitely not the route the train is proposed to take then they are definitely quoting the wrong mileage.

For as long as Dundee and Aberdeen are part of the proposal, they're mileage figures are wrong.

 

[A Challenge]

I know, but I thought they might just have not changed it, as it seems maybe they have...

 

[Class 170101]

Thank christ the 442s are all going to SWT so we don't have to take proposals for their use future use seriously - no matter how little logic or humour it involves.

Nope, SWT only taking 18 out of the 24 available.

 

[najaB]

I was in my local library and happened to look in Railway Magazine and found this in an article about the Caledonian Sleeper (my bold):

Serco is still pursuing the possibility of alternative work for the displaced Mk3s. It was during such a meeting at Inverness last year that David had mentioned the possibility of a Far North to Central Belt sleeper, which was published in a subsequent Practice & Performance article and which some magazines are still now treating as news.

Discussions have developed the idea, now referred to as the 'Night Ork', reflecting the Orkney connections and based on folklore monsters that have now entered the modern equivalent of mythology via computer games. Other routes are also being considered including if there is a market to the South-West of England as there was in the 1980s.

So it seems that there is a bit more than Internet forum wibble to the idea (though it's still highly unlikely IMO).

 

[cambsy]

I would back a Thurso-Penzance sleeper with 2x37 Thuso-Edinburgh, 87002 0r 86 Edinburgh-Birmingham, 2x50 Birmingham-Penzance, could have flat bed style seats, couchettes and berths

 

[IanXC]

If you ran a Scotland to South West sleeper as Glasgow via Edinburgh, calling principal stations to York (where a good connection could be made into, and out of, overnight TPE services), then possibly Sheffield and Birmingham, then recommence principal stations from Cheltenham to Exeter or Plymouth I think the times would be quite sensible, *and* there are no portions to worry about, no shunting and only one driver at any given time!

More seated accommodation compared to the existing CS operation would probably be wise, to pick up on these intermediate flows.

 

[BRX]

Is the implication that these extra services would run without subsidy?

 

[Bodiddly]

I would back a Thurso-Penzance sleeper with 2x37 Thuso-Edinburgh, 87002 0r 86 Edinburgh-Birmingham, 2x50 Birmingham-Penzance, could have flat bed style seats, couchettes and berths

And onboard services would include unlimited gourmet food and snacks,a wide selection of unlimited Lagers, Ales, Gins, Vodkas and Whisky, free superfast broadband and silk bedding all included in the ticket price of £30 return.

 

[takno]

And onboard services would include unlimited gourmet food and snacks,a wide selection of unlimited Lagers, Ales, Gins, Vodkas and Whisky, free superfast broadband and silk bedding all included in the ticket price of £30 return.

I'm willing to forgo the silk and lager for a small discount, but the rest of it I will certainly require. Given the train passes a number of distilleries it might be nice toast each one with an appropriate dram

 

[gingerheid]

Discussions have developed the idea, now referred to as the 'Night Ork', reflecting the Orkney connections and based on folklore monsters that have now entered the modern equivalent of mythology via computer games. Other routes are also being considered including if there is a market to the South-West of England as there wasn't in the 1980s.

I've corrected that.

Don't get me wrong; I'd love it to happen. But I remember how empty they were in the 80s, and there'd be less demand now!

 

[47271]

I've corrected that.

Don't get me wrong; I'd love it to happen. But I remember how empty they were in the 80s, and there'd be less demand now!

Quite so. The old Scotland-Plymouth sleeper was faintly sustained by Royal Navy personnel travelling between Rosyth and Devonport, a flow long since dead.

Neither of these suggested services would survive without huge subsidies, even Plymouth I suspect mainly from the Scottish Government.

If they want to blow multi millions extra on new rail services they should focus on Levenmouth as their number one priority.

 

[gingerheid]

We always travelled M-Th. We were amazed if anyone else was in the carriage, and if there were isn't was more than 2. The only time I remember a reasonable number of people on the train was when there'd been some kind of disruption during the day.

Maybe it was busier at the weekend, but even if it was; that doesn't make for a viable train service. I missed them sorely when they were gone, but... I couldn't really argue with the decision. Their continuing to operate had become a madness.

 

[Bald Rick]

I was in my local library and happened to look in Railway Magazine and found this in an article about the Caledonian Sleeper (my bold):
So it seems that there is a bit more than Internet forum wibble to the idea (though it's still highly unlikely IMO).

Oh HITRANS are quite serious about it. There is some detail, and timings, in the June Modern Railways.

However when they get the price back from Serco, they might go cool on the idea. My BoFP* estimate for operating the service they suggest, 6 nights a week, is around £6m-£9m a year. This is before any upfront costs for new stabling / servicing facilities.

Now divide those numbers by 300 nights a year, and 2 trains a night, and you will see that each train needs an average income of at least £10k-£15k to operate without subsidy. It is reasonable to assume that fare income per train would be of the order of 10% of that figure, being optimistic. (Which still requires the equivalent of about 20 people a night, new to rail ie not abstracted from existing services, doing the journey the whole way, every night).

Even on those figures, you'd be looking at a subsidy of over £500 per passenger. It would be cheaper for the government to offer free flights and a free hotel.

* Back of Fag Packet.

 

[takno]

My BoFP* estimate for operating the service they suggest, 6 nights a week, is around £6m-£9m a year. This is before any upfront costs for new stabling / servicing facilities.

* Back of Fag Packet.

Could you break down these figures a bit? The new plain packaging laws definitely allow for more detail in this area

 

[Northhighland]

Couple of points. There is a plane to Edinburgh at 5:30 form Kirkwall and Wick. Flight time 45 minutes. Main Ferry from Orkney to Caithness runs to Gills Bay, from St Margarets Hope. So train leaving from Wick with a bus connecting Thurso to Georgemas would be most sensible. However it really is a terrible idea as a regular traveller from caithness to the central belt, why would you want to do this?

Also the subsidy would be better used to try to get the existing service to run on time. Or run at all. 4hours from Wick to Inverness by train, 2 hours 10 by car. I predict trains will start and stop at Helmsdale in the next 5 years at least for the winter months. Bus to Wick. Thurso. Really nice journey for tourists from Helmsdale to Wick, not much use when you want to get somewhere.

 

[BRX]

Train/ferry can offer some things a flight can't - for example, if you want to take bicycles with you, or want to enjoy the journey and scenery on the way.

Also, not all journeys would necessarily be end-to-end; there are the intermediate stops that a plane doesn't have.

That said, I'd not put my own money on it being a viable proposal.

I'd possibly agree that subsidy might be better spent on improving the existing day service first.

 

[BRX]

On a more general note, it's really a shame there doesn't seem to be a desire to promote tourism by public transport in the Highlands.

There are initiatives like the "Far North 500" that encourage more tourism by car. Putting more cars on the roads in an area people go to escape congestion. The A9 and A96 being upgraded to make space for even more cars. Look what's happened in Skye recently - many of those problems would not exist if a higher proportion of people came by public transport.

Meanwhile we have spectacularly scenic but under-used rail lines, which are subsidised anyway. They should be heavily promoted as a way of getting around and as enjoyable journeys in themselves. Putting more tourists on trains doesn't congest the network - it makes it more viable and has the potential to allow an improvement in service that benefits locals as well. Take the opportunity to improve bus services as well, with properly regulated services that are co-ordinated with trains.

Unfortunately there just doesn't seem to be the will in the north of scotland, with everyone brainwashed by car culture.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite.

There's so much that could be done with Glacier Express style services. Yet we just soldier on with ageing 2-car DMUs. You do still get tourists, but you'd get far more with proper touristed-up services with panoramic cars etc, which could of course be 1st only to get a bit of extra income for nowt.

 

[BRX]

Quite.

There's so much that could be done with Glacier Express style services. Yet we just soldier on with ageing 2-car DMUs. You do still get tourists, but you'd get far more with proper touristed-up services with panoramic cars etc, which could of course be 1st only to get a bit of extra income for nowt.

We've actually gone backwards - the Kyle line ran an observation car up until the late 90s for example.

 

[Northhighland]

On a more general note, it's really a shame there doesn't seem to be a desire to promote tourism by public transport in the Highlands.

There are initiatives like the "Far North 500" that encourage more tourism by car. Putting more cars on the roads in an area people go to escape congestion. The A9 and A96 being upgraded to make space for even more cars. Look what's happened in Skye recently - many of those problems would not exist if a higher proportion of people came by public transport.

Meanwhile we have spectacularly scenic but under-used rail lines, which are subsidised anyway. They should be heavily promoted as a way of getting around and as enjoyable journeys in themselves. Putting more tourists on trains doesn't congest the network - it makes it more viable and has the potential to allow an improvement in service that benefits locals as well. Take the opportunity to improve bus services as well, with properly regulated services that are co-ordinated with trains.

Unfortunately there just doesn't seem to be the will in the north of scotland, with everyone brainwashed by car culture.

This is a common misconception with people who don't live in the Highlands about the love affair with the car. The North Coast 500 initiative is very successful, it really covers Wester Ross,North West Sutherland and Caithness, Starts in Inverness and finishes in Inverness. It doesn't actually include Skye. It is an absolutely stunning drive, the scenery is some of the best in Scotland.

The Highlands, if Argyll is included has a population of 330 000 people spread over a land mass that is 45% of Scotland. If you really want to get around the beautiful remote and rural parts of the area then the car is the only choice. Public transport is simply not realistic. If you want to see Cape Wrath, visit the splendour of Sandwood bay there will never ever be an economic case for a bus service, the population will never make that pay. The car is the only realistic choice for transport in this part of the world. That is not an aversion to public transport just a statement of fact.

Even in a tourist hotspot like Skye, the attractions are spread out and a public transport service would be an expensive system to run. It would not pay. the train takes hikers and cyclists and is a good way of getting to Skye if you want that type of holiday. If you need mechanised propulsion when you get to Kyle then you need a car.

All the co-ordination and integration of services possible is still going to provide at best a pretty poor service that connects few parts of the North. Buses do integrate pretty well with trains and ferries, but the geography and small population is always against you.

 

[BRX]

This is a common misconception with people who don't live in the Highlands about the love affair with the car. The North Coast 500 initiative is very successful, it really covers Wester Ross,North West Sutherland and Caithness, Starts in Inverness and finishes in Inverness. It doesn't actually include Skye. It is an absolutely stunning drive, the scenery is some of the best in Scotland.

The Highlands, if Argyll is included has a population of 330 000 people spread over a land mass that is 45% of Scotland. If you really want to get around the beautiful remote and rural parts of the area then the car is the only choice. Public transport is simply not realistic. If you want to see Cape Wrath, visit the splendour of Sandwood bay there will never ever be an economic case for a bus service, the population will never make that pay. The car is the only realistic choice for transport in this part of the world. That is not an aversion to public transport just a statement of fact.

Even in a tourist hotspot like Skye, the attractions are spread out and a public transport service would be an expensive system to run. It would not pay. the train takes hikers and cyclists and is a good way of getting to Skye if you want that type of holiday. If you need mechanised propulsion when you get to Kyle then you need a car.

All the co-ordination and integration of services possible is still going to provide at best a pretty poor service that connects few parts of the North. Buses do integrate pretty well with trains and ferries, but the geography and small population is always against you.

I know the Highlands well; I grew up there, most of my family is there and I visit regularly. I'm very aware of the realities of the transport situation. I'm also aware that Skye is not on the 500 route; I was not suggesting that it was.

It's true that reaching every corner by public transport - at least public transport as we know it now - is not feasible. However, there is massive scope for public transport to be improved. Also, a large proportion of tourists actually come and visit a set of well-known attractions which are or could be connected viably with public transport.

Although the population is sparse overall, much is concentrated in certain areas, and many people make regular journeys by car which only "have to" be by car because of the paucity of alternatives. The easiest example to give is the catchment area of Inverness, where thousands of people commute by car doing the same journey every day. Other examples exist, on smaller scales, elsewhere. In many cases there *is* a bus service - maybe with one option into town, and one back, each day. There are plenty of people who are forced to make do with that, because they can't drive, whether because they are elderly or can't afford it or various other reasons. In these cases it is entirely realistic to improve the public transport service. Maybe some of the many households which own one car per adult could at least transition to a one car per household situation.

I watch what is going on in Inverness - constant construction of bypasses and expanding road infrastructre; horrible town planning based around the car and fringe supermarkets with vast carparks. It's not unique in Britain in this, but I'm afraid the area is absolutely ingrained in car culture. I know because of the horrified looks I get when I talk about public transport and the idea that maybe we should be planning things to be convenient for those who don't have private transport and not the other way around.