Caledonian Sleeper

[Cheshire Scot]

In recent but pre-Covid summers the split was 4 to Fort Bill and 2 to Aberdeen.

Logic would almost dictate the Aberdeen became a portion off the Lowland as that would offer far more realistic arrival times in Fife and Dundee than present and might increase it’s custom.

Does that imply 4 Aberdeen for the rest of the year or 3 + 3 or a mixture of both? Fort William is certainly the one which has grown whilst all the others have shrunk.

Good point about Fife and Dundee, probably approaching 50% of the potential market for that portion, and still get to Aberdeen not long after ten (subject to pathing).

in the early 1960's there were no less than 15 Scottish sleeper services leaving London termini on most evenings

And into the 1980s there were still 11, and with a fair chunk of seated accommodation too.

 

[CW2]

In recent but pre-Covid summers the split was 4 to Fort Bill and 2 to Aberdeen.

Logic would almost dictate the Aberdeen became a portion off the Lowland as that would offer far more realistic arrival times in Fife and Dundee than present and might increase it’s custom.

I believe the timing of the Aberdeen portion was driven largely by the demands of oil crews flying via Dyce airport. That may now be less important, and the timings could be altered as you suggest.

 

[MrEd]

Does that imply 4 Aberdeen for the rest of the year or 3 + 3 or a mixture of both? Fort William is certainly the one which has grown whilst all the others have shrunk.

Good point about Fife and Dundee, probably approaching 50% of the potential market for that portion, and still get to Aberdeen not long after ten (subject to pathing).


And into the 1980s there were still 11, and with a fair chunk of seated accommodation too.

I don’t think that the Aberdeen section has seen 4 sleeping cars for a very long time, probably not since Serco took over in 2015. It was quite common in the later years of the Mk3s for Serco to shorten the sets in winter so that sleepers could be swapped out for maintenance at Polmadie. This meant that between 2016 and 2019, the winter Highlander typically left Euston as a 14-coach train (rather than 16), with 5 sleepers, a lounge and seats for Inverness, then typically 2 sleepers, a lounge and seats for Aberdeen and 3 sleepers for Fort William. Sometimes, as short formations due to stock faults became ever more common, the formation of the front portion of the train was just 2 sleepers to Aberdeen and 2 to Fort William (as well as the Aberdeen lounge and seats). In the summer, since 2017, there have been 6 sleepers to Inverness, 2 to Aberdeen and 4 to Fort William.

It’s sad to say, but the Aberdeen section cannot currently support more than 2 sleeping cars at any time of the year (and could not even before Covid- even back in 2016/17 this was the case). CS have to provide it as it‘s part of their franchise commitment but it’s becoming increasingly clear that they see it as a bit of a nuisance. Even though there was almost a month between the end of lockdown in Scotland and the Stonehaven accident last summer, CS were in no rush to reinstate it (whereas Fort William was reinstated on the same day that hotels reopened to tourists, 15 July). The fact that CS axed it during the lockdowns suggests to me that it’s not a vital service for key workers these days.

If CS/Transport Scotland are serious about this section’s long-term future (I have my doubts for some reason), it needs to be retimed so that it has sociable arrival times in Fife and Dundee which are where I think its core market is (as a previous poster has suggested); another suggestion might be to extend it westwards towards Elgin, but these destinations are probably equally reachable from Inverness, so I‘m not sure whether this would help. Certainly the good folk of the East Coast deserve a sleeper service but CS might want to think about one that best meets their needs and which also attracts leisure travel- I worry that the present day Aberdeen service runs too early in the morning and too late at night to be attractive to this market.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

I don’t think that the Aberdeen section has seen 4 sleeping cars for a very long time, probably not since Serco took over in 2015. It was quite common in the later years of the Mk3s for Serco to shorten the sets in winter so that sleepers could be swapped out for maintenance at Polmadie. This meant that between 2016 and 2019, the winter Highlander typically left Euston as a 14-coach train (rather than 16), with 5 sleepers, a lounge and seats for Inverness, then typically 2 sleepers, a lounge and seats for Aberdeen and 3 sleepers for Fort William. Sometimes, as short formations due to stock faults became ever more common, the formation of the front portion of the train was just 2 sleepers to Aberdeen and 2 to Fort William (as well as the Aberdeen lounge and seats). In the summer, since 2017, there have been 6 sleepers to Inverness, 2 to Aberdeen and 4 to Fort William.

That is interesting to know, I was certainly aware in the latter years Mk3s were often one sleeper short in both 'halves' of the train, and it demonstrates the growth on the Fort William leg.

re 4 to Fort William (plus seated and service vehicles), I note the timing load is D210 which implies 5 vehicles at Mk5 weights and double heading for six - less of a problem for a powerful cl67 in the previous era.

CS might want to think about one that best meets their needs and which also attracts leisure travel- I worry that the present day Aberdeen service runs too early in the morning and too late at night to be attractive to this market.

From this thread it seems to be very much a case of growth in the leisure market and decline in the business market. I'd guess air will have the lions share of the Aberdeen - London business market whereas from the central belt rail must have a decent proportion.

 

[MrEd]

That is interesting to know, I was certainly aware in the latter years Mk3s were often one sleeper short in both 'halves' of the train, and it demonstrates the growth on the Fort William leg.

re 4 to Fort William (plus seated and service vehicles), I note the timing load is D210 which implies 5 vehicles at Mk5 weights and double heading for six - less of a problem for a powerful cl67 in the previous era.



From this thread it seems to be very much a case of growth in the leisure market and decline in the business market. I'd guess air will have the lions share of the Aberdeen - London business market whereas from the central belt rail must have a decent proportion.

I think that a single 73/9 can manage load six over the WHL just fine (with Mk2s and Mk3s) after all, single 27s managed it (and more) with Mk1s in the 70s and these are considerably less powerful. I think though that in the Mk5 era, whenever the Fort William sleeper has loaded to six vehicles, a pair of 73s has been provided. Not sure if this will continue in high summer this year but it’ll be interesting to see.

The 67s might have produced 3200hp at the crankshaft but most Highland drivers thought they were useless on the Fort William sleeper turn (‘class 67‘, ‘skin’ and ‘rice pudding’ often featured in the same sentence), and I don’t think the Inverness men thought much to them either. A pair of 73/9s has 3200hp too but would leave a 67 standing on all the notorious gradients (eight powered axles as opposed to four, and much higher tractive effort). Even a single 73/9 keeps the West Highland schedule better than a 67 as long as it’s on good form- being RA6, it can traverse all the viaducts at line speed (or near line speed) without being subject to severe speed restrictions. A single 73 is helped greatly on the 1 in 69 climb from Achallader to Gortan by the fact that it can take the viaduct at 40mph and get a run at the bank. A single 67 (which doesn’t have much tractive effort considering its power rating) has to slow to 10mph to take the viaduct and then take an age just to get back up towards 40mph. Many was the morning in autumn or winter when the 67 slowed to walking pace to cross the Auchtertyre viaduct just outside Tyndrum then suffered severe wheelslip accelerating away on the 1 in 60 and lost a couple of minutes as a result. Lots of us were sceptical of the 73s at first but now that they have bedded in they strike me as a massive improvement. (You probably would want to pair them up on a load 6 in poor railhead conditions, though- the WHL is a tough route).

I think, as you rightly say, the sleeper’s primary market is now leisure passengers- this is partly because of Serco’s marketing and partly because business travellers (who are not really interested in the sleeper ‘experience’) have lots of more cost-effective options for getting to where they need to be in Scotland (which is generally an urban centre), including a range of day trains and flights. Lamented though this strategy is, it makes economic sense (outwith lockdown) to target the well-heeled leisure market who can be sold the ‘sleeper experience’ and for whom the late arrivals are an irritation rather than a day’s work ruined or a crucial appointment missed. Punctuality has become a lot better since the pandemic hit, interestingly enough.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

I think that a single 73/9 can manage load six over the WHL just fine (with Mk2s and Mk3s) after all, single 27s managed it (and more) with Mk1s in the 70s and these are considerably less powerful. I think though that in the Mk5 era, whenever the Fort William sleeper has loaded to six vehicles, a pair of 73s has been provided. Not sure if this will continue in high summer this year but it’ll be interesting to see.

Whilst a single cl73 can without doubt handle 6 coaches on the West Highland, with a load of around 250 tonnes on a 210 tonne timing there should be at least in theory some loss of time on most sections (other than downhill Glen Douglas to Arrochar and Corrour, Tulloch, Spean) in acceleration and climbing.

The 06.00 from Queen St was timed for load 9 - 315t, whilst all of the other trains were either 280 or 245t, consequently booked running time from Queen St to Crianlarich was around ten minutes longer than for the 16.38 timed for 245.

On one occasion a single 27 took the up summer Saturday sleeper forward from Corrour around 90mins late with load 11 following the failure of both 27s on that train, over 400t including the 4 sleepers which came close to the maximum permitted tonnage for a freight train. Progress on the uphill sections would have been slow but it would get there .

 

[paul1609]

Whilst a single cl73 can without doubt handle 6 coaches on the West Highland, with a load of around 250 tonnes on a 210 tonne timing there should be at least in theory some loss of time on most sections (other than downhill Glen Douglas to Arrochar and Corrour, Tulloch, Spean) in acceleration and climbing.

The 06.00 from Queen St was timed for load 9 - 315t, whilst all of the other trains were either 280 or 245t, consequently booked running time from Queen St to Crianlarich was around ten minutes longer than for the 16.38 timed for 245.

On one occasion a single 27 took the up summer Saturday sleeper forward from Corrour around 90mins late with load 11 following the failure of both 27s on that train, over 400t including the 4 sleepers which came close to the maximum permitted tonnage for a freight train. Progress on the uphill sections would have been slow but it would get there .

Ive been waiting in the pub at Garelochhead for the up West highland Sleeper with a 73/9 and 6 mk2/3s. It was I hr 20 late leaving Fort William due to rolling stock issues. I was watching its progress on RTT, you don't want to be standing on Garelochead station for an hour in June as its midge central! By the time it arrived at Garelochead it had recovered to 40 late, on arrival at Edinburgh it was 13 late and the combined train left for Euston on time. If the train hadn't been stuck behind a train in the Airdrie area it would most likely arrived at Edinburgh on time. Some of the time recovery is due to the fact that many of the intermediate stations don't have any passengers but the 73/9s are perfectly adequate for the service.
Ive not experienced it but I understand that on at least one occasion a single 73/9 has taken the 8 coaches of the Lowland Edinburgh portion to Carstairs and only dropped a few minutes on the schedule.

 

[AberdeenBill]

Punctuality has become a lot better since the pandemic hit, interestingly enough.

I have read a number of comments on bad punctuality but my experience in recent (pre-pandemic) times has been different. Out of my last say, 10 single journeys to Aberdeen, only 1 qualified for Delay Repay and that was due to a fatality in the Euston area that delayed departure by over 2 hours, although some time was made up en-route. Otherwise, generally the arrival is usually about 5 mins early (which presumably they make up from Stonehaven) but i know that my luck will probably run out soon.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Ive been waiting in the pub at Garelochhead for the up West highland Sleeper with a 73/9 and 6 mk2/3s. It was I hr 20 late leaving Fort William due to rolling stock issues. I was watching its progress on RTT, you don't want to be standing on Garelochead station for an hour in June as its midge central! By the time it arrived at Garelochead it had recovered to 40 late, on arrival at Edinburgh it was 13 late and the combined train left for Euston on time. If the train hadn't been stuck behind a train in the Airdrie area it would most likely arrived at Edinburgh on time. Some of the time recovery is due to the fact that many of the intermediate stations don't have any passengers but the 73/9s are perfectly adequate for the service.
Ive not experienced it but I understand that on at least one occasion a single 73/9 has taken the 8 coaches of the Lowland Edinburgh portion to Carstairs and only dropped a few minutes on the schedule.

Sounds like the train is very slackly timed to make that sort of recovery.

It just seemed odd that if Serco planned to run 6 coaches they would put it on a timing load for 5. Perhaps they have kept the previous Scotrail timings which took account of all the 10mph viaduct restrictions for cl67 which must mount accumulate a significant number of minutes. As stated previously I don't doubt the haulage capability of the 73, just the discrepancy between planned and timing load.

If I remember correctly double heading would incur a 40mph maximum on the various stretches on the northern part of the line where 50 mph is permitted if single headed, although with more power uphill this reduced speed impact might be minimal, as indeed it would be on slack timings.

Traditionally 210 was the timing load for 6 based on an average weight of 35t per vehicle based on Mk1 / Mk2 daytime stock whereas Mk5s are much heavier vehicles, and in the modern era I would expect trains to be timed for actual planned maximum weight.

in the past significant recovery of lost time was possibly but mainly through very liberal interpretation of speed limits. I have one particular former Eastfield driver in mind but he was not the only one, just the one that took the most liberal approach.

 

[JModulo]

Ive not experienced it but I understand that on at least one occasion a single 73/9 has taken the 8 coaches of the Lowland Edinburgh portion to Carstairs and only dropped a few minutes on the schedule.

I've had one with 8 coaches from Carlisle to Glasgow up the GSW and it ran on time/early.

 

[InOban]

Sounds like the train is very slackly timed to make that sort of recovery.

It just seemed odd that if Serco planned to run 6 coaches they would put it on a timing load for 5. Perhaps they have kept the previous Scotrail timings which took account of all the 10mph viaduct restrictions for cl67 which must mount accumulate a significant number of minutes. As stated previously I don't doubt the haulage capability of the 73, just the discrepancy between planned and timing load.

If I remember correctly double heading would incur a 40mph maximum on the various stretches on the northern part of the line where 50 mph is permitted if single headed, although with more power uphill this reduced speed impact might be minimal, as indeed it would be on slack timings.

Traditionally 210 was the timing load for 6 based on an average weight of 35t per vehicle based on Mk1 / Mk2 daytime stock whereas Mk5s are much heavier vehicles, and in the modern era I would expect trains to be timed for actual planned maximum weight.

in the past significant recovery of lost time was possibly but mainly through very liberal interpretation of speed limits. I have one particular former Eastfield driver in mind but he was not the only one, just the one that took the most liberal approach.

You're correct. The WHL timetable has not been adjusted to take account of elimination of the 10mph restrictions.

 

[paul1609]

Sounds like the train is very slackly timed to make that sort of recovery.

It just seemed odd that if Serco planned to run 6 coaches they would put it on a timing load for 5. Perhaps they have kept the previous Scotrail timings which took account of all the 10mph viaduct restrictions for cl67 which must mount accumulate a significant number of minutes. As stated previously I don't doubt the haulage capability of the 73, just the discrepancy between planned and timing load.

If I remember correctly double heading would incur a 40mph maximum on the various stretches on the northern part of the line where 50 mph is permitted if single headed, although with more power uphill this reduced speed impact might be minimal, as indeed it would be on slack timings.

Traditionally 210 was the timing load for 6 based on an average weight of 35t per vehicle based on Mk1 / Mk2 daytime stock whereas Mk5s are much heavier vehicles, and in the modern era I would expect trains to be timed for actual planned maximum weight.

in the past significant recovery of lost time was possibly but mainly through very liberal interpretation of speed limits. I have one particular former Eastfield driver in mind but he was not the only one, just the one that took the most liberal approach.

I don't have any detailed knowledge of the individual class speed limits but i think a Fort William to Dalmuir class 156 is timed at around 3 hrs 27 mins and the sleeper which has two stops as request stops and doesn't have to attach at Crianlarich like the DMU is timed at just over 4 hours. Once you have reached Craigondoran I imagine pathing has more importance through to Glasgow and Edinburgh rather than differential speed limits. Id agree that the train is timed leisurely.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

I don't have any detailed knowledge of the individual class speed limits but i think a Fort William to Dalmuir class 156 is timed at around 3 hrs 27 mins and the sleeper which has two stops as request stops and doesn't have to attach at Crianlarich like the DMU is timed at just over 4 hours. Once you have reached Craigondoran I imagine pathing has more importance through to Glasgow and Edinburgh rather than differential speed limits. Id agree that the train is timed leisurely.

Loco hauled trains are subject to the line speeds from the 1980s but Sprinters can take advantage of differential speed limits, without looking at the detail perhaps typically 10mph/15mph faster, but including two or three sections where 70mph is permitted.
No differentials on the electrified network but as you say pathing will be the key issue there.

 

[Highlandspring]

There are a series of severe speed restrictions specifically for class 67 locos over various structures on the WHL as per InOban’s post above. That’s one reason why the sleeper timings are slack, as they haven’t been changed since the class 67 days.

 

[MrEd]

You're correct. The WHL timetable has not been adjusted to take account of elimination of the 10mph restrictions.

That’s right. When the sleeper was 37 hauled its arrival time in the morning was 09:43 at Fort William, and it left at 19:55 each night- so 1Y11 was twelve minutes faster with a 37 than a 67, and 1B01 about five minutes faster or so. I suspect that southbound it’s probably best to leave the 1B01 schedule as it is because of patching restrictions between Helensburgh and Edinburgh, but I wonder if they will change the schedule for the northbound 1Y11 north of Helensburgh? Only problem then is that it gets rid of some very useful recovery time, and would probably get in the way of the southbound Oban-Glasgow (which the sleeper currently passes at Arrochar, which did not exist before 2006 I don’t think) and the southbound Mallaig-Glasgow (which the sleeper currently passes at Rannoch at 08:45). I suppose they might tighten it up north of Rannoch to give an 09:50 arrival rather than 09:55?

 

[221129]

I suppose they might tighten it up north of Rannoch to give an 09:50 arrival rather than 09:55?

Is it worth it though?

 

[43096]

The 67s might have produced 3200hp at the crankshaft but most Highland drivers thought they were useless on the Fort William sleeper turn (‘class 67‘, ‘skin’ and ‘rice pudding’ often featured in the same sentence), and I don’t think the Inverness men thought much to them either. A pair of 73/9s has 3200hp too but would leave a 67 standing on all the notorious gradients (eight powered axles as opposed to four, and much higher tractive effort). Even a single 73/9 keeps the West Highland schedule better than a 67 as long as it’s on good form- being RA6, it can traverse all the viaducts at line speed (or near line speed) without being subject to severe speed restrictions. A single 73 is helped greatly on the 1 in 69 climb from Achallader to Gortan by the fact that it can take the viaduct at 40mph and get a run at the bank. A single 67 (which doesn’t have much tractive effort considering its power rating) has to slow to 10mph to take the viaduct and then take an age just to get back up towards 40mph. Many was the morning in autumn or winter when the 67 slowed to walking pace to cross the Auchtertyre viaduct just outside Tyndrum then suffered severe wheelslip accelerating away on the 1 in 60 and lost a couple of minutes as a result. Lots of us were sceptical of the 73s at first but now that they have bedded in they strike me as a massive improvement. (You probably would want to pair them up on a load 6 in poor railhead conditions, though- the WHL is a tough route).

The 67's lack of tractive effort is down to them being geared for 125mph. If they had been geared for 100mph they'd actually be really rather more useful locos - it's a shame EWS/DB Cargo have never modified them in that way.

 

[adrock1976]

Were the 67s banned from running to Oban if the line north from Crianlarich - Fort William was closed for engineering works?

 

[InOban]

Paths through Glasgow shouldn't be a problem. The southbound train runs just after last sub train through Queen Street and the northbound passes through Airdrie just ahead of the first departure.

 

[Highlandspring]

Were the 67s banned from running to Oban if the line north from Crianlarich - Fort William was closed for engineering works?

Yes.

 

[TimboM]

Ive been waiting in the pub at Garelochhead for the up West highland Sleeper with a 73/9 and 6 mk2/3s. It was I hr 20 late leaving Fort William due to rolling stock issues. I was watching its progress on RTT, you don't want to be standing on Garelochead station for an hour in June as its midge central! By the time it arrived at Garelochead it had recovered to 40 late, on arrival at Edinburgh it was 13 late and the combined train left for Euston on time. If the train hadn't been stuck behind a train in the Airdrie area it would most likely arrived at Edinburgh on time. Some of the time recovery is due to the fact that many of the intermediate stations don't have any passengers but the 73/9s are perfectly adequate for the service.
Ive not experienced it but I understand that on at least one occasion a single 73/9 has taken the 8 coaches of the Lowland Edinburgh portion to Carstairs and only dropped a few minutes on the schedule.

A single 73/9 once took an 8 coach portion plus two dead-on-rear 92s from Polmadie to Edinburgh (via the Sub). That's an extra 252 tonnes in tow, or the equivalent of a Load 14. It dropped a few mins but was only single-digits late on arrival at Edinburgh - and there's some climbs on that route too.

On occasion a single 73/9 has powered the Inverness portion solo with Load 8 (+ ETH) and a dead class-mate in tow. Again, a few minutes dropped but nothing major.

As mentioned above, it's the poor railhead conditions that make things tricky (for any loco) but at those times of year the loadings will be typically less on the WHL anyway.

 

[paul1609]

Paths through Glasgow shouldn't be a problem. The southbound train runs just after last sub train through Queen Street and the northbound passes through Airdrie just ahead of the first departure.

The timetable must have changed then, there used to be one train to Airdrie that ran just after the sleeper through Queen Street LL. I used to be amused as it was a real trainspotting moment when the sleeper with its malt quaffing tourists arrived at QS with the platform full of Buckfast fuelled neds trying to get in the lounge car with their kebabs. (no offence intended Im pretty pro Scotland)

 

[MrEd]

Is it worth it though?

Probably not, which is probably why they’re not too bothered about changing the schedule. The service has been worked by 73/9s since 2017 so if they wanted to change the schedule they’d have done it by now.

The 67's lack of tractive effort is down to them being geared for 125mph. If they had been geared for 100mph they'd actually be really rather more useful locos - it's a shame EWS/DB Cargo have never modified them in that way.

That’s true. It’s often been suggested that they should have been built as CoCos geared for 95mph just like the 47s they were meant to replace; I wonder if they’d have worked a lot better that way? Presumably then you’d have had an RA6 (or even RA5?) loco with a good power-to-weight ratio and a reasonably high tractive effort. Would certainly have worked a lot better on the sleeper routes where hill-climbing ability is far more important than top speed.

 

[cambsy]

I have noticed, while following the Caledonian Sleeper on Real Time Trains, that sometimes North Bound, it will show the train not stopping at Crewe or Preston, and the passing times, just before and after the stations, corroborate it not stopping, 1S25 on Friday 5th March showed this happening, it left Euston 21.16 and few seconds, then arrived Carlisle 01.38, making it a 4hr 22 min run, with brief stop at Watford Junction.

I know there is thread about the Caledonian sleeper crewing diagrams, and that its driven by GBRF drivers, which rules are different to T.O.C drivers, so are there any rosters where the driver is booked Euston-Carlisle? If there is, the scenario is, The driver arrives at loco, reads his schedule,sees no Crewe or Preston stop tonight, and is booked through to Carlisle, can he refuse do it non stop ,as its very long without any break? if need loo break etc or a break can he ask for one, and get stop inserted? Though legal is this frowned upon as its very long time without break or stop? .

Do Caledonian Sleeper and GBRF liaise about stops? So when the sleeper has no passengers at Crewe or Preston, they can sort out crewing, so have driver booked through to Carlisle, so he can run with out the stops, or is first thing known about it, is when driver arrives at booking in point or the loco? And if so can crew change be changed? If not then is the crew change done anyway as booked, as i presume the driver cannot just go on beyond booked crew change? Is it just down to everything aligning on the night, as to wether one gets a Watford Jct to Carlisle non stop run?

 

[Hooligan]

I have noticed, while following the Caledonian Sleeper on Real Time Trains, that sometimes North Bound, it will show the train not stopping at Crewe or Preston, and the passing times, just before and after the stations, corroborate it not stopping, 1S25 on Friday 5th March showed this happening, it left Euston 21.16 and few seconds, then arrived Carlisle 01.38, making it a 4hr 22 min run, with brief stop at Watford Junction.

I know there is thread about the Caledonian sleeper crewing diagrams, and that its driven by GBRF drivers, which rules are different to T.O.C drivers, so are there any rosters where the driver is booked Euston-Carlisle? If there is, the scenario is, The driver arrives at loco, reads his schedule,sees no Crewe or Preston stop tonight, and is booked through to Carlisle, can he refuse do it non stop ,as its very long without any break? if need loo break etc or a break can he ask for one, and get stop inserted? Though legal is this frowned upon as its very long time without break or stop? .

Do Caledonian Sleeper and GBRF liaise about stops? So when the sleeper has no passengers at Crewe or Preston, they can sort out crewing, so have driver booked through to Carlisle, so he can run with out the stops, or is first thing known about it, is when driver arrives at booking in point or the loco? And if so can crew change be changed? If not then is the crew change done anyway as booked, as i presume the driver cannot just go on beyond booked crew change? Is it just down to everything aligning on the night, as to wether one gets a Watford Jct to Carlisle non stop run?

At moment drivers change at Crewe and Carlisle so nobody booked to run Euston to Carlisle, the Sleeper staff change over at Lockerbie currently, so no lodging away for them.

 

[MrEd]

At moment drivers change at Crewe and Carlisle so nobody booked to run Euston to Carlisle, the Sleeper staff change over at Lockerbie currently, so no lodging away for them.

There was talk of the Lockerbie crew stop becoming permanent after the first lockdown, as the arrangement remained well into the summer even when the stay at home order was long gone and hotels were back open to the public, although there was a very brief period from mid-September to the end of October (before the second lockdown in England) when lodging turns for the sleeper hosts returned. Certainly when I used the train in July and August they were still doing the swaps. I wonder if they’ll still be doing the Lockerbie swaps this summer even if lockdown eases?

I suppose it will save CS a considerable amount of money on overnight accommodation and also mean that the crews get to sleep in their own beds at the end of every shift, which is always a bonus. That said, it entails a serious risk to punctuality- if the northbound is late arriving at Lockerbie, this will make the southbound late, and vice versa. Is it worth it? Do the crews necessarily prefer it? Some on-board hosts that I’ve spoken to since Covid would like it to be permanent, but that doesn’t account for everyone.

 

[Ianno87]

That said, it entails a serious risk to punctuality- if the northbound is late arriving at Lockerbie, this will make the southbound late, and vice versa. Is it worth it?

Could that be solved by using a contingency plan - if the northbound is late, then the crew changes happens at Carlisle instead.

Though less clear cut if the southbound is late, the next station northward isn't until Kirknewton!

 

[TimboM]

I have noticed, while following the Caledonian Sleeper on Real Time Trains, that sometimes North Bound, it will show the train not stopping at Crewe or Preston, and the passing times, just before and after the stations, corroborate it not stopping, 1S25 on Friday 5th March showed this happening, it left Euston 21.16 and few seconds, then arrived Carlisle 01.38, making it a 4hr 22 min run, with brief stop at Watford Junction.

I know there is thread about the Caledonian sleeper crewing diagrams, and that its driven by GBRF drivers, which rules are different to T.O.C drivers, so are there any rosters where the driver is booked Euston-Carlisle? If there is, the scenario is, The driver arrives at loco, reads his schedule,sees no Crewe or Preston stop tonight, and is booked through to Carlisle, can he refuse do it non stop ,as its very long without any break? if need loo break etc or a break can he ask for one, and get stop inserted? Though legal is this frowned upon as its very long time without break or stop? .

Do Caledonian Sleeper and GBRF liaise about stops? So when the sleeper has no passengers at Crewe or Preston, they can sort out crewing, so have driver booked through to Carlisle, so he can run with out the stops, or is first thing known about it, is when driver arrives at booking in point or the loco? And if so can crew change be changed? If not then is the crew change done anyway as booked, as i presume the driver cannot just go on beyond booked crew change? Is it just down to everything

With the current reduced service (one train each way only) south of Carlisle the driver turns are (numbering for ease of reference only):

1. Euston-Crewe (1S25)
2. Crewe-Carlisle (1S25) / Carlisle-Crewe (1M16)
3. Crewe-Euston (1M16)
(Plus 2x other drivers who work the evening and morning ECS shunts at the Wembley/Euston end.)

Turns 1, 2 and 3 are invariably drivers from Crewe (or Liverpool) at the moment.

Depending on rostering its either three drivers for 1, 2 and 3 or 1 and 2 can be combined (i.e. Euston-Carlisle (1S25) and back to Crewe on 1M16). This is within the permitted time for a single shift and it also has the required break time(s) in too, e.g. there's 54 mins between 1S25 arriving at Carlisle and 1M16 leaving - as you'd expect the diagram is within regulations.

With the reduced numbers travelling, there's also quite often no passengers to pick up at Crewe and/or Preston. Note CS is reservations only, so CS know in advance whether there's anyone to board at these stops or not.

Hence if it's a driver who's doing the "1 + 2" shift and CS know there's no passengers boarding at Crewe and/or Preston the various controls (CS, GBRf and Network Rail) might confer and agree to send 1S25 through non-stop at Crewe and or Preston. The driver (and CS Train Manager aka Guard) will be informed of this either before or during the run depending on when it's decided.

The rostering is organised in advance - it's more taking the opportunity of not having to stop on the night if it's not required, rather than something planned in advance. (The advanced plan is the timetable - i.e. stops at Preston to pick up passengers and Crewe to pick up passengers and change drivers. (Passengers can book up to 20:00 on the day I think, so CS will only know for sure once this window has closed that there definitely aren't any passengers at X or Y stops.)

Generally speaking the drivers are happy carrying on - they want to get to Carlisle for a breather and then back home to Crewe ASAP. They get far more peeved arriving at Crewe South Junction 20 mins early, then having to sit there to wait for the random empty TfW unit to get out of Platform 6 so they can get in and pick up no passengers... and then probably end up being late departing Crewe. If you're a driver, keeping going and being ahead of schedule is a good thing - not something they'd be complaining about..!

That said, any driver can ring the signaller at any point and request a stop if he needs a PNB (Personal Needs Break) or has any other issue to attend to (say a dirty windscreen). You'll probably notice that the network isn't littered with trains parked up with drivers having a quick loo stop or cleaning their windscreens, though, so would seem these highly-qualified and experienced drivers are quite adept at keeping their trains moving from A to B as per the timetable.

 

[MrEd]

Could that be solved by using a contingency plan - if the northbound is late, then the crew changes happens at Carlisle instead.

Though less clear cut if the southbound is late, the next station northward isn't until Kirknewton!

I think the former (Carlisle changeover instead of Lockerbie) has happened previously, perhaps in the first lockdown, although the Lockerbie swap is a familiar arrangement as it’s often done at Christmas to make sure that the crews all get back to their home base on Christmas Eve and Hogmanay, even in non-Covid times.

I am fairly sure that the latter has never happened. If anyone knows of a Kirknewton crew swap then sing out! Would be a nightmare as the platform would not fit even half the train, so not very practical for getting crew to or from the rear portion.

If an ECML diversion is required then it’s an Alnmouth crew swap I believe (Berwick or Newcastle could also be used in case of late running, I doubt Morpeth or any of the small stations in Northumberland are suitable). I don’t think the ECML crew swap had ever happened before the first lockdown in 2020, when several months of Sunday ECML diversions coincided with full lockdown.

 

[Highlandspring]

I am fairly sure that the latter has never happened. If anyone knows of a Kirknewton crew swap then sing out! Would be a nightmare as the platform would not fit even half the train, so not very practical for getting crew to or from the rear portion.

Kirknewton is impractical as the access between platforms is via the level crossing only. In practice the M16/S25 changeover would be carried out at the Waverley if things went seriously awry.