Could a Sleeper service run to Wick?

[HSTEd]

The cost of this sleeper service would be a tiny fraction of the required capital expenditure to achieve a shorter and substantially faster FNL.

The trainsets are going to be expensive, either newbuilds or conversions of the ex Caledonian Sleeper stock to meet all the disability and other requirements.

It's going to quite a lot of money.

And it is certainly more expensive than just paying for additional flights from the Central Belt airport of your choice to Wick.

Perhaps more importantly, it is because of circumstances deliverable in the short term. Even if a huge financial commitment was made this year to modernise and shorten the FNL, it would take many years to deliver it.

It is going to take quite a while to set up given that the rolling stock is likely unusable from December.

I’m not sold on a Dornoch Firth rail crossing - if you cut out the Lairg Loop you cut off the railhead for NW Sutherland. It would only be politically acceptable if at least the Southern section of the loop was retained, with commuter services to Inverness running to/from a Lairg terminus.

THe easiest way is not to close any of it and simply detach two cars from the train at the southern end of the loop and run that the long way around.

The most cost effective way of making the FNL more useful is probably an upgrade with tilting trains and MTBs to improve linespeeds.

 

[Indigo Soup]

The cost of this sleeper service would be a tiny fraction of the required capital expenditure to achieve a shorter and substantially faster FNL.

Perhaps, but it would be a definite, permanent and very symbolic statement to Caithness that it was seen as an important region.

But who's having these mythical 9am meetings for people they know are travelling from afar? 10am is a more sensible time - as I've said before, they can then get in at 9, have a coffee, read emails, prepare the room and be ready to welcome guests at 10.

Quite regularly in my industry - by 9am, the hosts have been in the office for an hour and a half and have been ready to go for some time. But we're odd.

With the 0536 getting into Glasgow for 0911 (changing at Perth) or Edinburgh at 0917, that's realistically early enough for all practical purposes. If there was a sizeable market of people who really needed to be in the Central Belt at 0811/0817, an 0430ish train could presumably be run.

If you ran a sleeper just for this traffic, it would realistically leave Inverness very late and arrive in Glasgow or Edinburgh very early, making for an extremely unappealing service. Since the Far North sleeper would derive about 75% of its' revenue from Inverness passengers, I'd suggest that this extra-early train is worth a desktop study. If it's not worth running, the sleeper definitely isn't. In reality it would just squeeze engineering works and bugger up crew rest to carry fresh air around, but sometimes you have to pay a consultant to prove the obvious.

 

[BRX]

The cost of this sleeper service would be a tiny fraction of the required capital expenditure to achieve a shorter and substantially faster FNL.

Perhaps more importantly, it is because of circumstances deliverable in the short term. Even if a huge financial commitment was made this year to modernise and shorten the FNL, it would take many years to deliver it.

I’m not sold on a Dornoch Firth rail crossing - if you cut out the Lairg Loop you cut off the railhead for NW Sutherland. It would only be politically acceptable if at least the Southern section of the loop was retained, with commuter services to Inverness running to/from a Lairg terminus.

Also there's not necessarily any reason to assume you have to choose between the two. *If* this service was trialled, and *if* against everyone's expectations proved popular and successful then it might well strengthen the case for infrastructure improvements.

 

[class26]

According to the P&Jmy boldening)

The cost of this sleeper service would be a tiny fraction of the required capital expenditure to achieve a shorter and substantially faster FNL.

Perhaps more importantly, it is because of circumstances deliverable in the short term. Even if a huge financial commitment was made this year to modernise and shorten the FNL, it would take many years to deliver it.

I’m not sold on a Dornoch Firth rail crossing - if you cut out the Lairg Loop you cut off the railhead for NW Sutherland. It would only be politically acceptable if at least the Southern section of the loop was retained, with commuter services to Inverness running to/from a Lairg terminus.

If you had a Dornoch rail bridge I suspect that the existing route would be curtailed at Lairg for the non Thurso trains so you would still have a railhead for Sutherland

 

[Clip]

But who's having these mythical 9am meetings for people they know are travelling from afar? 10am is a more sensible time - as I've said before, they can then get in at 9, have a coffee, read emails, prepare the room and be ready to welcome guests at 10.

Lots and lots of people Neil - It doesnt matter how many times you say these things they are very rarely true - except in your own little world in which you dont seem to look out of much.

It is this reason why i stay up north 3 nights a week to enable early morning meetings because thats the best time to get work done - and we can even have a hot drink in the meeting too and maybe a croissant

 

[Chester1]

Why does the service need to be to the Central Belt?

How about an extension of the existing sleeper to Kyle of Lochalsh? The Aberdeen service is in long term decline and the Fort William service lacks capacity much of the year. Perhaps a couple of sleeping coaches could be switched to the Inverness service and be detached and joined with additional lounge and sleeping cars at Inverness? The timings would need to be altered to arrive in Inverness earlier but not too earlier for intermediate stops. Perth would probably need to be switched to the Aberdeen service to avoid stops being to late or early. It would serve both local residents and extend the options for tourists who use the sleeper. It wouldn't provide an improvement for stations north of Dingwall but 2 extra lounge cars and 2 seated cars is more realistic than a brand new service!

 

[47271]

I'm not convinced there is a viable overnight market for Edinburgh-Inverness any more than there is for London-Manchester - it's just too short a journey.

1941 (arr 2321) is the last one at present. Maybe if you added a 2041 (arr 0021) or even 2141 (arr 0121) that would be a more useful offering.

This at least is in hand - the full HST timetable (if it ever materialises) provides for an Edinburgh departure around 9pm, getting into Inverness just after midnight.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

So Kyle of Lochalsh has about 66,000 passengers a year.

Is a sleeper option of 4 low capacity, high staffing levels , with locomotive haulage (probably driving a track upgrade in the process) going to be value for money ?

One might as well argue for a sleeper service from say Shrewsbury to Fishguard via the spa towns of Central Wales and Llanelli , to connect with the Irish boat as a boost to connectivity and tourism. My own views of course.

 

[Chester1]

So Kyle of Lochalsh has about 66,000 passengers a year.

Is a sleeper option of 4 low capacity, high staffing levels , with locomotive haulage (probably driving a track upgrade in the process) going to be value for money ?

One might as well argue for a sleeper service from say Shrewsbury to Fishguard via the spa towns of Central Wales and Llanelli , to connect with the Irish boat as a boost to connectivity and tourism. My own views of course.

How many tourists going to Fort William are specifically travelling to it or somewhere near a station along the route and how many just want a weekend somewhere in the Highlands? How many annual passengers would it need to be viable? 20,000? If timed correctly it could serve as an overflow when Inverness terminating cars are full. I am not saying it's definitely viable but ordering 4 extra cars and swapping 4 sleeping cars makes more sense than renovating a fleet and launching a completely separate service.

 

[Bald Rick]

How many tourists going to Fort William are specifically travelling to it or somewhere near a station along the route and how many just want a weekend somewhere in the Highlands? How many annual passengers would it need to be viable? 20,000? If timed correctly it could serve as an overflow when Inverness terminating cars are full. I am not saying it's definitely viable but ordering 4 extra cars and swapping 4 sleeping cars makes more sense than renovating a fleet and launching a completely separate service.

How many would it need to be viable? That number does not exist, as the current sleeper shows.

 

[47271]

If timed correctly it could serve as an overflow when Inverness terminating cars are full.

If this is one of your concerns, and also you're worried that the Aberdeen section is in decline, a far better use of existing CS resources, and the enormous public subsidy currently received, would be to start the Aberdeen out from Inverness each night with a mid morning arrival back each day.

That way some serious populations could receive a sleeper and direct London service. For example, Inverurie has 0.5m entries and exits a year, or Elgin 0.3m. I'd speculate that this combined with Moray whisky tourism would generate more business than shoogling an extra 80 miles out west.

I admire your creativity though.

 

[telstarbox]

Do Caithness residents routinely travel south of the Central Belt?

Is there significant tourism into Caithness compared to Skye, Locaber etc?

 

[Struner]

There's Orkney across the Firth.

 

[mikey9]

But who's having these mythical 9am meetings for people they know are travelling from afar? 10am is a more sensible time - as I've said before, they can then get in at 9, have a coffee, read emails, prepare the room and be ready to welcome guests at 10.

If anyone is doing that they are an inconsiderate fool and need a good (metaphorical) kicking.

FWIW it'd be an awful lot cheaper to double the length of that train and put a trolley on!

I could name a small list of public sector bodies and departments (I won't but you can guess them) and conference organisers who seem to think nothing of a 9-10am start. We work on them but Shetland and Orkney and W. Isles attendees often/mostly travel the night before, Highland based and Argyll and Bute folk end up putting up with stupid o'clock starts.
I still don't want to get up at 4am (many don't live in or near Inverness) for a lengthy meeting/workshop etc and be expected to contribute lucidly - after dribbling/snoozing my way down on a 158 for 3.5 hours......after a severe lack of sleep because I know I have to be up at 4am....

I know it is only a relatively small number of people (who partially fill a 2 car 158 and the following 3 car 170 - but it doesn't mean we don't exist, the journeys don't happen or that the demand isn't there.

 

[WideRanger]

It seems that to do this, you would want to do it in a low-cost, low-risk way to start. So get the ePacer or redundant 155s, do a 'nobi nobi' conversion on it (take out all of seats, lay carpets, tell people to bring sleeping bags), and see what happens.

It might fail spectacularly, but it might work...

 

[mikey9]

The cost of this sleeper service would be a tiny fraction of the required capital expenditure to achieve a shorter and substantially faster FNL.

Perhaps more importantly, it is because of circumstances deliverable in the short term. Even if a huge financial commitment was made this year to modernise and shorten the FNL, it would take many years to deliver it.

I’m not sold on a Dornoch Firth rail crossing - if you cut out the Lairg Loop you cut off the railhead for NW Sutherland. It would only be politically acceptable if at least the Southern section of the loop was retained, with commuter services to Inverness running to/from a Lairg terminus.

The expansion of housing over the last 10 years in the Inner Moray Firth Corridor would probably justify additional services for Lairg through Tain, Invergordon, ALness (a re-opened Evanton), Dingwall, Muir of Ord and Beauly. The existing services commuter services can be well used but the spread through the day is poor. Unfortunately - as you say - a few million is not going to make a huge difference to the ability for additional services to be slotted in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I could name a small list of public sector bodies and departments (I won't but you can guess them) and conference organisers who seem to think nothing of a 9-10am start.

Well, they need to think something of it. Perhaps if it's Government bodies there should be some lobbying, as it is presumably causing unnecessary flights and car journeys.

10am is a sensible time to start.

 

[takno]

It seems that to do this, you would want to do it in a low-cost, low-risk way to start. So get the ePacer or redundant 155s, do a 'nobi nobi' conversion on it (take out all of seats, lay carpets, tell people to bring sleeping bags), and see what happens.

It might fail spectacularly, but it might work...

How fireproof are the carpets? Is it acceptable to encourage people to wrap themselves up in firetrap sleeping bags? How much worse would an impact be if there are no seats to stop people down the length of the carriage. They would never allow it on safety grounds, and for a change they would be absolutely right

 

[Bald Rick]

I could name a small list of public sector bodies and departments (I won't but you can guess them) and conference organisers who seem to think nothing of a 9-10am start. We work on them but Shetland and Orkney and W. Isles attendees often/mostly travel the night before, Highland based and Argyll and Bute folk end up putting up with stupid o'clock starts.
I still don't want to get up at 4am (many don't live in or near Inverness) for a lengthy meeting/workshop etc and be expected to contribute lucidly - after dribbling/snoozing my way down on a 158 for 3.5 hours......after a severe lack of sleep because I know I have to be up at 4am....

I know it is only a relatively small number of people (who partially fill a 2 car 158 and the following 3 car 170 - but it doesn't mean we don't exist, the journeys don't happen or that the demand isn't there.

So what would be better for Scotland? Convincing a handful of organisations to start meetings at a more sensible time, or spending millions of pounds a year on a service that will carry fresh air?

 

[Journeyman]

So what would be better for Scotland? Convincing a handful of organisations to start meetings at a more sensible time, or spending millions of pounds a year on a service that will carry fresh air?

Well, quite. Business demand for 9am meetings is only going to go downwards, as practically everyone has a vested interest in reducing the cost and time involved in travelling. There's pressure for organisations to be greener, too. I just spent 18 months working in a company with nine sites all over the UK, and the norm when dealing with people in other offices was video conferencing - if you wanted face-to-face meetings that required lengthy train journeys or flights, and possibly hotels too, you needed a bloody good reason to spend the money or it wouldn't be approved.

I live near Edinburgh. If this service was set up, I can see myself using it once for novelty value, and then never using it again.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So what would be better for Scotland? Convincing a handful of organisations to start meetings at a more sensible time, or spending millions of pounds a year on a service that will carry fresh air?

Well, quite. Someone arranging a meeting that they know people are travelling to from a long way away at 9am is just an inconsiderate person and needs to be told firmly to pack it in. 10am is a better start time even if it means finishing a little later or ordering in a working lunch instead of taking an hour out.

In London I find people do generally realise this, and the 9am meeting there is a very rare thing unless remote.

 

[Journeyman]

Someone arranging a meeting that they know people are travelling to from a long way away at 9am is just an inconsiderate person and needs to be told firmly to pack it in. 10am is a better start time even if it means finishing a little later or ordering in a working lunch instead of taking an hour out.

In London I find people do generally realise this, and the 9am meeting there is a very rare thing unless remote.

The people who do this tend to be very inflexible workaholics who sneer at everyone else for being less dedicated than they are. The sorts who bustle about huffing and puffing about how busy they are, so much so that they don't actually end up doing much work...

 

[Bletchleyite]

The people who do this tend to be very inflexible workaholics who sneer at everyone else for being less dedicated than they are. The sorts who bustle about huffing and puffing about how busy they are, so much so that they don't actually end up doing much work...

Yes, that was the type I had in mind, and they need calling on it.

 

[Journeyman]

Yes, that was the type I had in mind, and they need calling on it.

Oh, god, they really do. That's veering seriously off-topic, though - one for the general discussion, perhaps?

If you spend a single minute at work that you don't have to, you're a bloody fool!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oh, god, they really do. That's veering seriously off-topic, though - one for the general discussion, perhaps?

Probably doesn't need discussing further in and of itself - the point is that 9am meetings are a bad reason to implement an expensive sleeper service, because it's far easier just to get rid of them - even easier if it's in the public sector as you can legislate for it.

 

[Journeyman]

Probably doesn't need discussing further in and of itself - the point is that 9am meetings are a bad reason to implement an expensive sleeper service, because it's far easier just to get rid of them - even easier if it's in the public sector as you can legislate for it.

Exactly. The need for regular business travel from Caithness to the Central Belt must be absolutely minimal - who genuinely needs to do it very often, besides possibly a handful of MSPs? Almost everyone I know that lives in remote areas of Scotland has a job - or a portfolio of them - that can be done without regularly leaving the area. New technology allows a guy to supervise movements of shipping in Hong Kong from a room in his house in rural Argyll. He lives near my mother-in-law.

 

[takno]

New technology allows a guy to supervise movements of shipping in Hong Kong from a room in his house in rural Argyll. He lives near my mother-in-law.

Not sure mother-in-laws are strictly-speaking new technology, but if I wanted my business broadcast halfway round the world I imagine that might be an efficient mechanism...

 

[BRX]

Exactly. The need for regular business travel from Caithness to the Central Belt must be absolutely minimal - who genuinely needs to do it very often, besides possibly a handful of MSPs? Almost everyone I know that lives in remote areas of Scotland has a job - or a portfolio of them - that can be done without regularly leaving the area. New technology allows a guy to supervise movements of shipping in Hong Kong from a room in his house in rural Argyll. He lives near my mother-in-law.

That's not the full story though... It's a pattern everywhere, that more people are working from home, and it means that they don't have to travel to an office every day, but in many cases they do now and again, whether that's once a month or two days a week or whatever, and the non regular commute encourages people to live further from their 'base' which means that there are more people doing occasional, longer commutes alongside a reduction in people doing daily, shorter commutes.

As far as the highlands are concerned I think it's perfectly plausible that there might be a tendency towards *more* people travelling to the central belt or London. Those people previously might not have lived in the highlands at all, before technology made it possible to do part of their job from that location. Or, say, had a job in Inverness and a daily 20 mile commute, before technological changes opened up other jobs, nominally based outside of the area, to them.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

The thought of arriving into Thurso on a Mark 3 (closest to an HST!) would be better than fantastic ! Yes it would leave at Inverness at 02:54 but arriving into Inverness at 07:42 with plenty of time to see John O Groats and visit literally the most northern point in the UK (British Isles) is at the moment much more preferable than catching the 07:00 from Inverness to Thurso and having just enough time to visit the top of the UK and then catch the 16:30ish back!

 

[Journeyman]

The thought of arriving into Thurso on a Mark 3 (closest to an HST!) would be better than fantastic ! Yes it would leave at Inverness at 02:54 but arriving into Inverness at 07:42 with plenty of time to see John O Groats and visit literally the most northern point in the UK (British Isles) is at the moment much more preferable than catching the 07:00 from Inverness to Thurso and having just enough time to visit the top of the UK and then catch the 16:30ish back!

In all honesty, how often would you do this, and how many people doing that journey care about whether it's in a Mark 3, a 158, a bus, an Austin Allegro or a space shuttle?