Could a Sleeper service run to Wick?

[najaB]

I would be significantly more perceptive to this idea if a 37 was situated at either end of the train.

Interestingly, 37s (or at least 97/3s) are one of the few locomotives currently cleared for Georgemas Junction to Wick/Thurso.

 

[Agent_c]

I remain to be convinced that this will ever happen, for a start the ferry argument doesn't hold water (fnarr fnarr). If you wanted to head south from Orkney or Shetland it makes far more sense to go to Aberdeen where you could be on a train to London in a couple of hours.

The ferry from Orkney to Aberdeen is every other day though. The Stromness ferry is multiple times every day.

 

[class26]

It so happens that I have. However, the grant wouldn't be increased to pay for this service so the Scottish Government would have to cut spending elsewhere or use their revenue-raising powers since, as I said, rail transport north of the border is a devolved matter.

And, just so you know, the Barnett allocation comes out of the UK Government's revenue, rather than from 'English taxpayers'.

Maybe but it doesn`t alter the point that roughly 85 - 90% of the UK`s population is the English so that means it is largely English money going to subsidise Scotland

 

[Agent_c]

Never heard of the Barnett formula ? It is Westminster giving money to Edinburgh. Now given that the population of England is 10 times that of Scotland it simply stands to reason that the majority of that money comes from the English tax payer.

No... To make that assertion you'd have to show the allocation to Scotland was vastly greater than the tax revenue raised from scotland, over twice as much. Now, it is true that once you include UK government spending on UK wide issues that all spending from Scotland is greater than revenue, its by no means an amount that would establish that "the majority of the money came from the English Taxpayer" - its maybe 10-20%.

Otherwise you'd have to accept that Scottish resources and money are being wasted outside of Scotland. Do you think that this is fair?

 

[najaB]

Maybe but it doesn`t alter the point that roughly 85 - 90% of the UK`s population is the English...

It's 84%.

 

[najaB]

As an aside, it's interesting how discussion of the Barnett formula from some circles always focuses on 'England subsidising Scotland' - ignoring the fact that the Barnett formula is used to determine funding for all the devolved governments and that Northern Ireland receives a larger share-per-head than both Scotland and Wales.

Anyway, back to topic - a sleeper would have to run to loco timings rather than Sprinter. Looking at RTT it's about five hours from Georgemas Junction to Inverness, so what times would it make sense for a Sleeper to run? Leave Georgemas around 9pm, arrive Inverness 2am, into Aberdeen for 5am and Edinburgh for half-seven?

 

[class26]

As an aside, it's interesting how discussion of the Barnett formula from some circles always focuses on 'England subsidising Scotland' - ignoring the fact that the Barnett formula is used to determine funding for all the devolved governments and that Northern Ireland receives a larger share-per-head than both Scotland and Wales.

Anyway, back to topic - a sleeper would have to run to loco timings rather than Sprinter. Looking at RTT it's about five hours from Georgemas Junction to Inverness, so what times would it make sense for a Sleeper to run? Leave Georgemas around 9pm, arrive Inverness 2am, into Aberdeen for 5am and Edinburgh for half-seven?

Last comment as it is off topic but this whole thread is about a Scottish service, not Welsh or N Irish and that is why we are discussing English taxpayer subsidising Scotland. I wouldn`t give this service 5 minutes after any independence vote as I wouldn`t for free higher education, free care for the elderly etc, etc

 

[Greenback]

Can we keep to discussing the service and steer clear of subisdy and Barnett? Not that I think such a service would be profitable, but I'd like to avoid the thread turning into a discussion on Barnett and how it affects all of the UK countries if at all possible!

 

[gordonthemoron]

Perhaps the Sleeper could have two portions, one to/from Thurso for Orkney and another to/from Kyle for Mull, joining/separating at Inverness or Dingwall?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Perhaps the Sleeper could have two portions, one to/from Thurso for Orkney and another to/from Kyle for Mull, joining/separating at Inverness or Dingwall?

Kyle for the Isle of Skye surely? Mull's just across the water from Oban! I doubt either would have the footfall to make it viable; any increase in patronage from Kyle and Skye would probably be offset by the extra staff costs.

 

[cf111]

How would this make you more perceptive?

Receptive...

 

[GusB]

I had assumed that any sleeper from Wick would have headed down the HML, but if it is proposed to run via Aberdeen, wouldn't it have some benefit for people who live in the far north and work offshore?

It might be a better option for people who would normally have to travel by train much earlier the day before, and then have to spend a night in a hotel before their helicopter flights.

 

[najaB]

I had assumed that any sleeper from Wick would have headed down the HML, but if it is proposed to run via Aberdeen, wouldn't it have some benefit for people who live in the far north and work offshore?

It might be a better option for people who would normally have to travel by train much earlier the day before, and then have to spend a night in a hotel before their helicopter flights.

That's why I suggested running via Aberdeen. It would provide an early/late Edinburgh-Aberdeen service as well.

 

[class26]

That's why I suggested running via Aberdeen. It would provide an early/late Edinburgh-Aberdeen service as well.

But it would be going through Aberdeen in the middle of the night, probably about 03.00 I would estimate soutbound

 

[eastdyke]

If the Scottish government pay for this, they need to be locked up. Subsidy would probably be nudging £1000 per passenger.

You're gonna need a bigger prison .

 

[Bevan Price]

I know! Convert the 442s to sleeping accommodation and run them with a 73 in the middle.

It would be cheaper to rewire a couple of sleeper coaches and insert them in a HST.

 

[najaB]

But it would be going through Aberdeen in the middle of the night, probably about 03.00 I would estimate soutbound

I'd delay it at Aberdeen so it was leaving around 5am. Which would still allow a 7:30-ish arrival into Edinburgh.

 

[Bald Rick]

You're gonna need a bigger prison .

Maybe that's the answer, what with the 'prisons crisis'.

Run the old sleepers around the network 24/7 as prison trains. Some of the more burly sleeper attendants could become screws. No booze in the lounge coach though, and the food would have to improve.

Noting that some forum members would be likely to offend just to get on board. However to discourage this it would just be routed round and round the Fife circle.

 

[GW43125]

Noting that some forum members would be likely to offend just to get on board. However to discourage this it would just be routed round and round the Fife circle.

Not seeing the issue

 

[Jonny]

Operationally this (locomotive hauled) train would have to run to and from Wick because if it ran to Thurso the loco would have to be run around at Georgemas Junction both northbound and southbound or a second locomotive would have to be stabled there and coupled to the Thurso/Inverness end of the train on arrival at Georgemas.

Well, an AAR-fitted DVT and Loco (or any other same-system for that matter) could handle the turn-around at Georgemas and Thurso with relative ease. However, the problem with Wick is that there are currently no ferries and it is highly doubtful if the harbour could even deal with them, so Thurso for Scrabster is probably the best option.

 

[Clansman]

If the whole service's existence is based purely based on whether it would make a turn over, then you'd be battling with the rail and ferry fares from Aberdeen/Thurso (Scrabster) to truly make this economically viable for folk in from way up North.

Let's see...assuming we book 1 adult from Edinburgh to Orkney on Wednesday 22/03/17 under the cheapest conditions currently:

via Aberdeen

Edinburgh to Aberdeen: £24.50
Aberdeen to Kirkwall: £30.50
Total: £55.00

via Scrabster (Inverness and Thurso)

Edinburgh to Thurso: £30.00
Thurso to Scrabster: £1.20
Scrabster to Stromness £16.25
Total: £46.25

So given the current prices for a single adult from Edinburgh to Orkney, could a Sleeper be able to compete with these prices, because no one's going to bite to a sleeper fare in excess of £100 in my opinion. This is where a deal would probably have to be reached with Northlink Ferries to try and get a discount for sleeper passengers if it means that Sleeper fares will be able to be maximised to try recoup the running costs. Without Orkney and Shetland passengers, I can't see a financial case for the service iteself. But, the potential economic impacts such a service could have on both the Far North and Orkney/Shetland economies could tip such a service in favour of operation.

Could this work?
With appropriate planning, yes

Will it happen?
You never know

 

[trc666]

Would there be any merit in combining this with one of the Highland Sleepers from London to enable a through service, perhaps splitting at Edinburgh?

 

[Clansman]

Would there be any merit in combining this with one of the Highland Sleepers from London to enable a through service, perhaps splitting at Edinburgh?

I don't think there is for a couple of reasons;

• According to the OP, the Sleeper would use Mk3 Sleepers, which wouldn't be compatible with the Mk5s
• If the OP is correct, then it's a Scotrail idea, so Serco would be out of the equation if it were to be stand alone from the rest of the Caledonian Sleeper
• Given the current timetable of the Highland Sleeper, the Southbound would need to leave Thurso/Wick at around 4pm (arriving at Wick/Thurso around 11am Northbound), which would render it a day service thus interfering with existing services
• Huge knock on effects on the entire Highland Sleeper in the event of any delays
• Would require more locomotives to run it, thus increasing operation cost
• Platforms at Inverness not long enough to support more than 2 Mk3 coaches from what it can currently handle with the sleeper
• Time constraints would affect overall usage, especially if you're trying to integrate it into the Highland Sleeper if there is more demand for Edinburgh/Glasgow
• Platforms at Inverness would mean reversal just South of the station which would be a hassle

 

[cf111]

Would there be any merit in combining this with one of the Highland Sleepers from London to enable a through service, perhaps splitting at Edinburgh?

The layout of Inverness station would cause difficulties if the train was to split/join again there. You can't access platforms 1, 2, 3 and 4 (and thereafter the lines to Aberdeen and Perth) from the north without a reversal at Welsh's Bridge. If, as others have suggested, there was a DVT, this would be far easier. The weekly Kyle-Elgin train makes this movement.

Well, an AAR-fitted DVT and Loco (or any other same-system for that matter) could handle the turn-around at Georgemas and Thurso with relative ease. However, the problem with Wick is that there are currently no ferries and it is highly doubtful if the harbour could even deal with them, so Thurso for Scrabster is probably the best option.

There is no facility for a ro-ro passenger ferry to dock there, it would also add a good 45 minutes on to the journey. Ignoring that I'm not convinced the Hamnavoe would make it through the harbour entrances.

 

[Clansman]

Thurso would be a far more practical destination, but obviously you'd want to run it to Wick first, otherwise there'd be no point in running the service as you've killed potential demand before it's even commenced.

Thurso overall provides far more opportunities both through connectivity and economically, as Scrabster Port is only a mile away, so a bus link could easily be established to connect the Sleeper to the Northlink Ferry terminal.

Although if the sleeper came to fruition it would really need a DVT to make it work efficiently and cost effectively.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Although if the sleeper came to fruition it would really need a DVT to make it work efficiently and cost effectively.

That or top and tail through-wired 73s. But there'll be plenty of DVTs available once Anglia get their FLIRTs anyway.

 

[Clansman]

That or top and tail through-wired 73s. But there'll be plenty of DVTs available once Anglia get their FLIRTs anyway.

True.

The fact that Scotrail are getting Mk3s anyway would mean that maintenance wise, it would work out in their favour. Plus it's not like our railways are gonna be strapped for demand of Mk3s as there will be a wad going free by 2018.

For Scotrail, it'd just be a case of acquiring/leasing;

3 x Mk3 DVTs (1 spare)
2 x Passenger Compatible Locomotives (such as 47/57/67/68 etc)
10 x Mk3 Sleepers (2 Disabled, 2 spares)
3 x Mk3 FOs (converted to TFCs with buffet like Scotrail HSTs)

Running possibly in the formation of: DVT + SLE + SLE + SLED + TFO + Loco

Given their HST program, I guess stock wise it would work out in their favour as said.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd add one more TFO for a seated car, one assumes the other one would be a lounge-buffet. You'd attract fewer people without a lounge car. (The loss of restaurant cars was in my view a key part of the death knell for CityNightLine - they do give an overnight journey a civilised edge)

 

[Bletchleyite]

True.
Given their HST program, I guess stock wise it would work out in their favour as said.

4 more HST power cars and a bit of power supply conversion (motor-alternator set in the power car van area would do it) and make a Sleeper-HST? (Something I've always been surprised GWR didn't do).

 

[GusB]

Just for information, here's the link to the article in the John O'Groats Journal that was posted in the main Caley Sleeper thread (I think it was Clansman that posted it originally):

http://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/News/Rail-sleeper-plan-between-Caithness-and-Edinburgh-17042016.htm

Caledonian Sleeper managing director Peter Strachan said they would be prepared to discuss the proposed route.

But he also stressed it would need the backing of the Scottish Government to become a reality.

He said: "We are always looking for new opportunities for the service and we would be happy to work with HITRANS to look at the feasibility of a possible new sleeper route between Wick/Thurso and Edinburgh.

"However the current franchise is only for the routes we operate today and we cannot see this changing without Transport Scotland's support."

So Serco CS could be interested, but it's outwith the scope of their franchise agreement. Would Scotrail be able to do this as an additional service on existing routes?