Caledonian Sleeper to Kings Cross

[ABB125]

I have read that this is likely to be happening in the future. However, platforms at Kings Cross are only long enough for 12car trains, rather than 16cars as at present. Moving would require another train to run per night in each direction.

As such, would it be possible for the Fort William sleeper to have seated coaches all the way from London, rather than being added at Edinburgh and passengers having to get up in the middle of the night?

Also, would it be slightly inconvenient for 3 platforms at Kings Cross to be occupied by Caledonian Sleeper at the start of the morning peak? And in the evening?

 

[najaB]

I have read that this is likely to be happening in the future. However, platforms at Kings Cross are only long enough for 12car trains, rather than 16cars as at present. Moving would require another train to run per night in each direction.

I don't believe they did so during the disruption caused by the closure of the WCML while the Lammington Viaduct was being repaired.

 

[Poggs]

I have read that this is likely to be happening in the future

Where did you read it?

 

[Ianno87]

I don't believe they did so during the disruption caused by the closure of the WCML while the Lammington Viaduct was being repaired.

Given it was winter, they could get away with tunning a slightly shorter formation than usual during the Lamington disruption to fit in platforn 1 at the 'Cross

 

[ABB125]

Where did you read it?

Today's Railways UK (arrived today).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Apparently, passengers preferred KX to Euston, and it has better facilities and connections.

 

[jopsuk]

Even once some trains are headed down Thameslink, the aspiration for KGX is to use the platforms freed up for additional long distance high speed. East Coast IEP fleet size, Hull Trains 802s and GC taking more 180s is in support of this. KGX is tight on platforms at peak time and it would mean permanently shortened trains or running more trains.

 

[Flying Snail]

Presumably this is planning for HS2 works rather than a handful of dates or other blockades?

Unless CS permanently cut the train lengths then you would need 4 platforms plus 4 extra engines and the extra paths, it all sounds rather unlikely in the morning peak, the evening departures would be less of an issue.

Has the idea of diverting CS to Waterloo Int via West London Line been binned? That seemed like the only workable alternative to Euston.

 

[47271]

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=118802

Existing speculation around both King's Cross and Waterloo is covered in around post 1490 onwards in the main Cal Sleeper thread above.

 

[The Planner]

Waterloo didnt work and they also wanted a Euston Rd terminus.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Waterloo didnt work and they also wanted a Euston Rd terminus.

Some nice long platforms at St. Pancras...

 

[Flying Snail]

Some nice long platforms at St. Pancras...

...and not exactly intensively used either. Eurostar could run their schedule from 4 platforms, they might have to not leave sets sitting idle in platforms for hours on end though.

I'm sure there would be some security theatre excuse for not allowing CS use of a pair of platforms 07.00-09.00 and 20.00-00.00

 

[MrB]

...and not exactly intensively used either. Eurostar could run their schedule from 4 platforms, they might have to not leave sets sitting idle in platforms for hours on end though.

I'm sure there would be some security theatre excuse for not allowing CS use of a pair of platforms 07.00-09.00 and 20.00-00.00

Slightly OT but I've always found it ridiculous how Eurostar have so many platforms and just leave trains lying around all day!

 

[ABB125]

Some nice long platforms at St. Pancras...

That seems a better idea than KX. Are the platforms at STP long enough for 18 coaches?

 

[jopsuk]

using the International platforms (which are long enough, they accommodate 400m Eurostars) at St Pancras is a non-starter. No way UK Border Agency would be happy with that. Even if Scotland goes independent I forsee a Common Travel Area agreement as with Ireland being in place, passport checks for cross border trains to be the same as on the Belfast-Dublin Enterprise.

 

[najaB]

using the International platforms (which are long enough, they accommodate 400m Eurostars) at St Pancras is a non-starter. No way UK Border Agency would be happy with that.

It would require some sort of segregation of passengers on the international platforms from the platforms used by the sleeper.

It wouldn't necessarily have to be a permanent physical barrier but it would need to reliably deter and detect people crossing between the two areas.

 

[The Planner]

The border controls issue is a big stumbling block with St Pancras.

 

[gazr]

Wasn't there talk of reopening the East bore tunnel at Kings X? This would do away with the sidings for the Thunderbirds and allow platform 0/1 extension. Maybe I'm just imagining that

 

[TEW]

Has the idea of diverting CS to Waterloo Int via West London Line been binned? That seemed like the only workable alternative to Euston.

Waterloo International is now being rebuilt for SWT Windsor Line services as part of the Waterloo Capacity Improvement Project so there won't be any space for Caledonian Sleeper services. Trying to get paths in to Waterloo in the morning would probably be impossible anyway.

 

[sng7]

Surely at st Pancras its just a case of someone stumping up the money for the construction of some gates etc to split two of the international platforms off from the rest.....

 

[Clansman]

Surely at st Pancras its just a case of someone stumping up the money for the construction of some gates etc to split two of the international platforms off from the rest.....

Would certainly be cheaper than extending the platforms at Euston surely?

Which platform would you use for the sleeper? I'm not sure on the numbers, but the International platform nearest the EMT services would seem like a good choice in my opinion. Nearest the Domestic concourse, and it would only be a case of constructing a glass barrier between the adjacent platform across the island. The only issue would be how would you get the Sleeper down to the WCML - North London Line? Reversal at Wembley would be the other option, and would work out considering it takes 2 locomotives to get the Sleeper from Wembley Depot to the station anyway. Would just be a case of getting an 86/87 to lead out of St.Pancras and having the 92 on the back, so the latter takes the set on to Scotland after the reversal.

 

[Flying Snail]

The border controls issue is a big stumbling block with St Pancras.

Like I said; security theatre.

It would be simple: block escalators and turn off lift on P5/6, put barrier behind buffers blocking p5/6 from rest of E* platforms and open existing gate in glass partition behind p5/6 giving access to 5/6 from platform level.

Some movable barriers to be made and installed and a couple of signs to direct CS passengers to new 5/6 entrance, in the grand scheme of HS2 neither expensive nor difficult do do unless you are looking for an excuse not to do it for other reasons.

It would also enable 5/6 to be available for use for MML services should the need arise in the future for emergency use or service expansion

My guess is that E* would push hard against any such proposal because they like the operational convenience of having 6 platforms to play with despite only having c3 tph to deal with.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why do Euston platforms need extending? Two of them, 1 and I think 15, are already long enough.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Flying Snail]

Would certainly be cheaper than extending the platforms at Euston surely?

The issue is the reduction of capacity at Euston with HS2 construction.

Platforms at Kings Cross are too short and at least until GN services start using Thameslink.

Also there is access to KX, CS will have to use ECML or go to Hornsey and reverse to access Kx from WCML.

The only issue would be how would you get the Sleeper down to the WCML - North London Line?

Yes, the connection to WCML slows via Primrose Hill would be more direct but NLL via Gospel Oak is the route past NLL diversions have used.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Waterloo International is now being rebuilt for SWT Windsor Line services as part of the Waterloo Capacity Improvement Project so there won't be any space for Caledonian Sleeper services. Trying to get paths in to Waterloo in the morning would probably be impossible anyway.

So despite having 5 extra platforms than they have coped with for years they won't have enough room, where are all these extra trains using Waterloo coming from?

It is 2 paths with one being before 7 am on a four-track route, sorry have to call BS on that one as well.

There are things that can't be done, things that are difficult to do, things that are a bit of a pain to do and things that people don't want to do so will make excuses that blow the difficulty of doing them out of all proportion.

Accommodating CS in either Waterloo or St. Pancras falls into the latter of these categories.

 

[Clansman]

Why do Euston platforms need extending? Two of them, 1 and I think 15, are already long enough.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Currently they are long enough, but to the limit. The new Mk5 carriages coming next year are slightly longer than the Mk2s used for the buffet and seated coaches, so the platforms would need extending to accommodate the extra length.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Currently they are long enough, but to the limit. The new Mk5 carriages coming next year are slightly longer than the Mk2s used for the buffet and seated coaches, so the platforms would need extending to accommodate the extra length.

The 'Mk5' carriages are a consistent 22m long, so the total length of the train will remain the same at Euston.

The classic side of Euston will remain relatively untouched until 2026 when the Phase 1 HS2 service begins, so there's no longer any real need to worry about accommodating the Sleeper.

 

[Clansman]

The 'Mk5' carriages are a consistent 22m long, so the total length of the train will remain the same at Euston.

The classic side of Euston will remain relatively untouched until 2026 when the Phase 1 HS2 service begins, so there's no longer any real need to worry about accommodating the Sleeper.

Apologies - Forgot the Mk5s were 1m shorter than the Mk3s

 

[The Planner]

in the grand scheme of HS2 neither expensive nor difficult do do unless you are looking for an excuse not to do it for other reasons.

If it is money you can find a way of not spending then that is the way it will go.

 

[Flying Snail]

If it is money you can find a way of not spending then that is the way it will go.

You mean like not tunnelling through open countryside to appease NIMBYs?

If they are expelled from Euston what is the alternative?

Besides if money is the only concern then there are a number of cheap (but ugly) options readily available that are commonly used in construction and roadworks.

 

[welshpax]

Like I said; security theatre.

It would be simple: block escalators and turn off lift on P5/6, put barrier behind buffers blocking p5/6 from rest of E* platforms and open existing gate in glass partition behind p5/6 giving access to 5/6 from platform level.

Some movable barriers to be made and installed and a couple of signs to direct CS passengers to new 5/6 entrance, in the grand scheme of HS2 neither expensive nor difficult do do unless you are looking for an excuse not to do it for other reasons.

It would also enable 5/6 to be available for use for MML services should the need arise in the future for emergency use or service expansion

My guess is that E* would push hard against any such proposal because they like the operational convenience of having 6 platforms to play with despite only having c3 tph to deal with.

Actually this makes a lot of sense, there is even a connection from STP to the NLL.

it could be done pretty cheaply as well, as infrastructure goes, all it needs is removable glass barriers that can be closed at locked at the top of the escalators in the early morning and again late at night. For CS passengers to gain access to the platforms they could do it through the glass barriers at the end of the platform.

A quick security sweep when the CS has left the platforms and they would be able to be used by Eurostar the rest of the time.

I guess this is too simple a solution though.

 

[The Planner]

You mean like not tunnelling through open countryside to appease NIMBYs?

If they are expelled from Euston what is the alternative?

Besides if money is the only concern then there are a number of cheap (but ugly) options readily available that are commonly used in construction and roadworks.

Who said they were being expelled? From what is doing the rounds they want to move from Euston regardless.