Caledonian Sleeper

[JohnMcL7]

I saw there was another pair of 73's came up to Inverness with 12 carriages, the comments said this was a trial is that correct?

 

[Speed43125]

Have just seen it heading back south through Dunblane, load 12. There were people in the bar coach as well

 

[BRX]

Photo here (not mine)

2375; 73971+73968 5Z74 Inverness -- Polmadie car.m.u. at Plean 9.3.21

via Stirling & Edinburgh wav.

flic.kr

 

[TimboM]

I saw there was another pair of 73's came up to Inverness with 12 carriages, the comments said this was a trial is that correct?

Yes - trialling (perhaps unsurprisingly) a Load 12 train.

Next up is 5Z77 to Fort William tomorrow (Wed) which will be Load 10: Realtime Trains - 5Z77 0944 Polmadie Car M.D. to Fort William

(92006 will work the rake out to Waverley, for the two 73/9s ex-Craigentinny to then take to Fort Bill.)

 

[BRX]

Is this a precursor to dumping the Aberdeen portion or something?

 

[IslandDweller]

The FW portion sells out in the summer season (pre covid) so I could see making the FW portion longer (presumably at the expense of Aberdeen?) might be a viable idea. But does this create a problem with passing other services? The passing loops along the WHL are not particularly long. When I've been on a service train that needs to pass the Alcan freight, the service train has to wait until the Alcan freight has moved through. The passenger service can't move off first, because the rear of the freight will still be fouling the points back into single line whilst waiting at the crossing station.
In the normal timetable, the NB sleeper to FW is scheduled to pass the SB Alcan freight at Tulloch.

 

[Ianno87]

The FW portion sells out in the summer season (pre covid) so I could see making the FW portion longer (presumably at the expense of Aberdeen?) might be a viable idea. But does this create a problem with passing other services? The passing loops along the WHL are not particularly long. When I've been on a service train that needs to pass the Alcan freight, the service train has to wait until the Alcan freight has moved through. The passenger service can't move off first, because the rear of the freight will still be fouling the points back into single line whilst waiting at the crossing station.
In the normal timetable, the NB sleeper to FW is scheduled to pass the SB Alcan freight at Tulloch.

One thing Caledonian Sleeper never seem to have done is vary portions / the operation between summer and winter to match demand. That would seem to me like an "obvious" thing to do.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One thing Caledonian Sleeper never seem to have done is vary portions / the operation between summer and winter to match demand. That would seem to me like an "obvious" thing to do.

They certainly have done and still do vary the relative lengths of the FW and Aberdeen portions seasonally.

 

[IslandDweller]

"They certainly have done and still do vary the relative lengths of the FW and Aberdeen portions seasonally."
Yes, agree. But the most I've seen on the FW portion is 1x73+6xcoaches. Running 2x73+10 coaches (which is what went though today) would be quite the change

 

[Bletchleyite]

"They certainly have done and still do vary the relative lengths of the FW and Aberdeen portions seasonally."
Yes, agree. But the most I've seen on the FW portion is 1x73+6xcoaches. Running 2x73+10 coaches (which is what went though today) would be quite the change

True, but that would mean not running the Aberdeen at all. Which might make sense, but would be very politically difficult.

 

[paul1609]

Doesn't 10 coaches to Fort William imply more radical changes than simply binning the Aberdeen portion?
Do 2 x 73s plus 10 fit on the platform at Fort William by the way?

 

[Jan Mayen]

Is splitting at Cranlarich with one loco and four coaches going to Oban an option?

 

[alistairlees]

One thing Caledonian Sleeper never seem to have done is vary portions / the operation between summer and winter to match demand. That would seem to me like an "obvious" thing to do.

So obvious that it's been done every year.

 

[Journeyman]

Is splitting at Cranlarich with one loco and four coaches going to Oban an option?

The major issue with going to Oban is that currently there are no facilities for servicing the stock and making the beds, and if going to Oban on a regular basis were to become a thing, some investment would be needed. Currently when trains are diverted, they have to send a van over from Fort William with staff and supplies.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Doesn't 10 coaches to Fort William imply more radical changes than simply binning the Aberdeen portion?
Do 2 x 73s plus 10 fit on the platform at Fort William by the way?

10 would appear to be a half set plus the usual extra seated coach and lounge, so you would only have to bin the Aberdeen to get to that?

There would be a considerable benefit to having a separate seated coach for local journeys and a separate lounge to sell them lots of whisky!

 

[xotGD]

Perhaps the plan is to run two Highland services. One for Inverness, the other for Fort William and Aberdeen.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Perhaps they are exploring the art of the possible whilst they have the resources available to do so.

It is difficult to envisage the same level of demand to Fort William as to Inverness - Inverness is a much bigger tourist centre and business centre - although perhaps a split of seven sleepers to Inverness and five to Fort William might be an option. That of course would require an Aberdeen solution, and extending the Edinburgh portion of the Lowland has been suggested as a solution to that. There is of course only sufficient stock to operate 4 x 8 coach sets each night in either direction to cover both Highlander and Lowlander routes (plus of course the one additional 2 coach seated & lounge portion which runs to/from FW), although there are of course options on how the eights get split, and given the Fort William section's additional function as a day service north from Edinburgh there may well be merit in providing additional seating accommodation on that.

Is splitting at Cranlarich with one loco and four coaches going to Oban an option?

The major issue with going to Oban is that currently there are no facilities for servicing the stock and making the beds, and if going to Oban on a regular basis were to become a thing, some investment would be needed. Currently when trains are diverted, they have to send a van over from Fort William with staff and supplies.

Facilities for a permanent operation at Oban would include provision of CET - unless this is already provided for ScotRail - although if a road tanker can access the train mobile discharge could be possible.

Splitting at Crianlarich would take time - train arrive, split locos, obtain shunt token, front loco into section, split train, front portion depart, loco for second portion shunt back in, attach, brake test and away. Southbound would be more complex. If both platforms were used one loco to shunt out of station then couple to second loco & portion, then shunt out of the station again with that portion and back on top of the other portion, with shunt tokens issued for both moves. it is difficult to envisage how it would work using only one platform as both the front portion and the loco off the second portion would need to shunt forward into the same section - two trains in the section, even with special instructions unlikely to be permitted. All the moves at Carstair and Edinburgh are fully signalled, whereas at Crianlarich we are in the land of RETB. There is a lot more to it than splitting and joining Sprinters.

Having blown the timetable through the additional time required to split and join any such plan would need to developed as part of a full West Highland timetable recast.

In the pre Covid timetable there was a reasonable southbound connection from Oban and but northbound there is not. One option might be for Caley Sleeper to provide a high quality road coach connection.

 

[awsnews]

There was a coach connection provided between Oban and Crainlarich for sleeper passengers for an experimental period. In March last year Serco Caledonian Sleepers published a Prior Information Notice on the Public Contracts Scotland procurement portal for a new contract (I think the original was funded direct by Transport Scotland but cannot find any reference).
The original contract was with West Coast Motors, Irizar Y90 WCM carried Caledonian Sleeper logos for this. You can just about make them out on the first window in this view (my image)

West Coast Motors Y90 WCM at Glasgow Central Station

West Coast Motors Y90 WCM appears to be covering as many forms of transport possible. In addition to being the coach shuttle for the cruise ship just visible is the logo for the Caledonian Sleeper for the Oban coach link. Just visible in the background is the 398, the opportunity to get a shot...

flic.kr

 

[47271]

There's nothing surprising about the test trains described here.

From as early as 2016 CS managers spoke privately of a standalone Inverness service, and at the same time of the Lamington diversions to King's Cross there was talk of taking the sleepers away from Euston permanently. This would imply the end of the sort of lengthy portioned workings inherited from Scotrail.

If they were allowed to by Transport Scotland I'm sure that they would be delighted to kill off the Aberdeen and, even better, Glasgow sections. I've no inside knowledge from the past year or so, but my reading of this is that if they want to strengthen Inverness and the West Highland then they could find more stock to do that in Glasgow than in Aberdeen.

I think that they need to try harder with Aberdeen and provide a better service to a wider market by starting the section out from Inverness and taking it to intermediate stations north of Aberdeen. Inverness would still get its bigger train but via two separate routes. Okay there are problems with paths on the Aberdeen-Inverness line but surely it would be worth sorting these out to give places like Elgin and Huntly a direct London train, and to maintain a presence in Scotland's third city.

We'll see, but my money is on a reduced Lowlander that focuses on Edinburgh, and two Highlanders that are all about Inverness and a permutation of Fort William and Oban, with Aberdeen eased from franchise commitments over the next few years.

The success of all of this all presupposes a quick return of wealthy foreign tourists post Covid...

 

[Journeyman]

Certainly the current setup is based on a compromise for operational convenience, and was a last-minute fudge when the Fort William service was reprieved in the mid-nineties. It's probably a good time to look at service patterns again.

 

[popeter45]

if they killed off the glasgow portion could they retime the fort william/ potentian Oban portion to better work to still server Glasgow? e.g. aim for a 07:00 - 07:30 glasgow arival
also if rerouted via Queen street high level could also work well as the loco change point?

 

[Speed43125]

if they killed off the glasgow portion could they retime the fort william/ potentian Oban portion to better work to still server Glasgow? e.g. aim for a 07:00 - 07:30 glasgow arival
also if rerouted via Queen street high level could also work well as the loco change point?

The longest platforms at Queen Street high level accommodate 8x23m, back in the day 2+8 HSTs may have called and blocked up the station throat a little, but I seriously doubt that could be accommodated today.

 

[gingerheid]

We'll see, but my money is on a reduced Lowlander that focuses on Edinburgh, and two Highlanders that are all about Inverness and a permutation of Fort William and Oban, with Aberdeen eased from franchise commitments over the next few years.

It would make sense for the sleepers to target the highlands rather than the lowlands in so many ways, including in preparation for a world where HS2 will make life yet another little bit harder still for the lowlanders. I have a lingering feeling that if in 10 years time Mk5s aren't going to be seen in Elgin, Oban, and Kyle or Thurso then they're going to be seen in Devon and Cornwall instead!

 

[IslandDweller]

"Inverness is a much bigger tourist centre and business centre"
It absolutely is, but it has competition that FW doesn't face. Inverness has an airport, providing lots of competetion on travel to London. No airport at FW, and it's two hours (on a fast motorbike, on a clear day, with little traffic) from FW to either GLA or INV airport.

 

[47271]

"Inverness is a much bigger tourist centre and business centre"
It absolutely is, but it has competition that FW doesn't face. Inverness has an airport, providing lots of competetion on travel to London. No airport at FW, and it's two hours (on a fast motorbike, on a clear day, with little traffic) from FW to either GLA or INV airport.

Absolutely true, but don't underestimate the business generated for the sleeper by intermediate stations on the Highland Main Line in a way that doesn't really happen on the WHL, or Aberdeen sections. In normal times Aviemore, Kingussie, Pitlochry and Dunkeld all generate decent levels of business year round. Gleneagles can be surprisingly busy too, although Perth, Dunblane, Stirling and Falkirk don't produce anything like the levels of traffic that their populations would suggest.

I don't have access to any figures, but anecdotally (and commonsense agrees I suppose!) there seems to be a sweet spot for sleeper business from relatively populated areas relatively far from an airport, which of course is exactly what Speyside and Perthshire are.

 

[Journeyman]

although Perth, Dunblane, Stirling and Falkirk don't produce anything like the levels of traffic that their populations would suggest.

That'll be because pickup times going south are too late, and drop off times going north are too early, and mitigate against a decent night's sleep. You're better off using local services to connect with the Lowland at Edinburgh.

 

[47271]

That'll be because pickup times going south are too late, and drop off times going north are too early, and mitigate against a decent night's sleep. You're better off using local services to connect with the Lowland at Edinburgh.

That's right, getting on at Stirling at midnight is just about tolerable, getting off at 5am isn't!

 

[Chrism20]

Would combining the Aberdeen & Edinburgh portions be a better idea? Say nine sleeping cars for Edinburgh and three for Aberdeen.

The big issue with Aberdeen is the arrival times going North. By combining those two (Assuming a path was available) it would give Edinburgh a capacity increase (Which in normal times they could easily fill most nights) and would also give the Fife and Tayside stations a more attractive arrival time with a circa 9am arrival into Aberdeen.

Obviously that could cause problems with splitting in Waverley at that time so may cause more issues than it solves plus it also leaves the problem of what you do with the Glasgow portion.

 

[221129]

Obviously that would cause problems with splitting in Waverley at that time so will cause more issues than it solves

Fixed that for you.

 

[QueensCurve]

Photo here (not mine)

2375; 73971+73968 5Z74 Inverness -- Polmadie car.m.u. at Plean 9.3.21

via Stirling & Edinburgh wav.

flic.kr

Seeing those Class 73s under the wires, it is tempting to think that there should be a 25kV power supply module inserted into them.