Is there demand for more sleeper services?

[SussexLad]

The lowlander which has many business people leaves too late for people to have dinner on it.

If anyone was wondering where I said it

 

[RT4038]

Though rail in general has clawed back against flying. 34% in 2019 took the train from London to Scotland, and will go down once HS2 starts reducing journey times further, though I would imagine more competitive fares would help in the meantime.

With Sleepers reappearing in the mainland surely that means there is room for couchettes, maybe less applicable in the UK.

More expensive air travel may be a sacrifice that will have to be made, even if rail travel is not subsidised further as a counterweight sadly.

The Sleepers re-appearing in Europe may only be a flash in the pan. The OBB are already saying that their economics are difficult. I recall the previous 'relaunch' of Sleepers as 'CityNightLine' and that didn't last long. Some Sleepers may have re-appeared, but at the same time the Pars-Milan-Venice Thello has been discontinued.

 

[Bald Rick]

This is why I've suggested way back any new sleepers need to leave earlier and arrive at about 7:30.

But then you have issues with pathing the long slow trains through a still busy network* and lose all the custom that choose the sleeper because they need the late night or early arrival option.

*both the Caley Sleepers require significant alterations to standard times of other services south of Crewe to fit them in today.

 

[Bald Rick]

The Sleepers re-appearing in Europe may only be a flash in the pan. The OBB are already saying that their economics are difficult. I recall the previous 'relaunch' of Sleepers as 'CityNightLine' and that didn't last long. Some Sleepers may have re-appeared, but at the same time the Pars-Milan-Venice Thello has been discontinued.

Yes it all seemed a good idea when people travelled internationally...

 

[Energy]

Staying on a hotel on wheels it is reasonable to expect hours not to be paid for.

It depends on company policy, you are still travelling while on a sleeper train even if you are sleeping so the company may need to pay you as you are technically travelling, no different to having a nap on a late night non-sleeper train.

This is why I've suggested way back any new sleepers need to leave earlier and arrive at about 7:30.

Doesn't get around the cost issue. On such a short journey businesses are likely to take the cheapest and quickest option why is usually flying with a budget airline or BA. For example if you needed to get to Edinburgh after a day of work in Canary Wharf you could take the DLR or walk to London City Airport, take a BA Cityflyer flight to Edinburgh airport (£119, 1 1/4 hours) then take the tram (£6.50) or bus (£4.50) which takes just over 20 mins to get to the city centre depending on where you need to go.

 

[Journeyman]

I think you all forget that where a business is picking up the cost of the hours spent travelling and their is a reasonably timed sleeper available they would want you to be productive so chose the sleeper.

I regularly travelled from Edinburgh to London and Bristol in my old job. The expectation was that I'd do it as cheaply and quickly as possible, and they'd make me get up at 3am for a flight rather than pay for a sleeper.

 

[xotGD]

I regularly travelled from Edinburgh to London and Bristol in my old job. The expectation was that I'd do it as cheaply and quickly as possible, and they'd make me get up at 3am for a flight rather than pay for a sleeper.

Is that why you no longer work there?

Expecting people to get up in the middle of the night, travel and then be 100% in front of clients is totally misguided and a false economy. Better to have staff fresh after a good night's sleep. If that means a few quid more in expenses, either for a hotel or sleeper train, it is money well spent.

 

[RT4038]

Is that why you no longer work there?

Expecting people to get up in the middle of the night, travel and then be 100% in front of clients is totally misguided and a false economy. Better to have staff fresh after a good night's sleep. If that means a few quid more in expenses, either for a hotel or sleeper train, it is money well spent.

Quite right, except 'a good night's sleep' and Sleeper train, are not usually in the same sentence! However, many firms (and many individuals) choose the 3am start option, irrespective.

 

[si404]

after a day of work in Canary Wharf you could take the DLR or walk to London City Airport

Walk? It's over an hour unless you walk fast! It would be a tight company to happily pay the £4.50 bus in Scotland, but not a £1.70 DLR fare! Even the £4.90 cash fare is surely in play for travelling over 3.5 miles.

My dad spent some time working in Inverness with a Inverness client. Company paid First Class rail fare when they realised he could do Monday/Friday work on the train (OK, Monday involved some work at home, and then some leisure time on the train), rather than have several hours of daytime deadtime when flying. The sleeper train (Mon night up, Thu night down) was never an idea - it was too expensive compared a First on the regular train and a Holiday Grimm.

 

[RT4038]

Yes it all seemed a good idea when people travelled internationally...

I have travelled on a lot of European Sleeping car trains (including many times on the Thello), and business travellers were very few and far between.
OBB must be doing some funny accounting, especially as they are talking about ordering new sleeping cars ..... Strange that no-one else is contemplating such things, except Sweden spreading the subsidy money around? Looks like a bit of Thunberg guilt rather than an economic proposition.

 

[SussexLad]

Quite right, except 'a good night's sleep' and Sleeper train, are not usually in the same sentence! However, many firms (and many individuals) choose the 3am start option, irrespective.

The 3 am option which includes 4 hours that the business has to pay for.

Also, the law says any hours which are not yours to do what you want with an employee must be paid for them. Including travelling to a destination which is not your normal place of work.

As you can do what you want on a sleeper train with all the facilities provided, as you do in a hotel, it means the business does not have to pay you.

 

[SussexLad]

Walk? It's over an hour unless you walk fast! It would be a tight company to happily pay the £4.50 bus in Scotland, but not a £1.70 DLR fare! Even the £4.90 cash fare is surely in play for travelling over 3.5 miles.

My dad spent some time working in Inverness with a Inverness client. Company paid First Class rail fare when they realised he could do Monday/Friday work on the train (OK, Monday involved some work at home, and then some leisure time on the train), rather than have several hours of daytime deadtime when flying. The sleeper train (Mon night up, Thu night down) was never an idea - it was too expensive compared a First on the regular train and a Holiday Grimm.

I personally think the callidonian sleeper needs to provide a quieter ride and leave earlier if it is to attract business persons.

Not syre if your experience is based on the old or new stock, but the new stock isn't that much quieter.

 

[RT4038]

The 3 am option which includes 4 hours that the business has to pay for.

Also, the law says any hours which are not yours to do what you want with an employee must be paid for them. Including travelling to a destination which is not your normal place of work.

As you can do what you want on a sleeper train with all the facilities provided, as you do in a hotel, it means the business does not have to pay you.

If it were an issue, business travellers would be queueing to ride the existing Sleeping Car services, which they are not.

 

[Journeyman]

Is that why you no longer work there?

Expecting people to get up in the middle of the night, travel and then be 100% in front of clients is totally misguided and a false economy. Better to have staff fresh after a good night's sleep. If that means a few quid more in expenses, either for a hotel or sleeper train, it is money well spent.

No, I changed jobs for other reasons. I'm just pointing out that your ideas are not feasible. Businesses value cheapness over all else, and with a likely drastic reduction in business travel, they're not suddenly going to flock to sleepers.

 

[si404]

I personally think the callidonian sleeper needs to provide a quieter ride and leave earlier if it is to attract business persons.

Not syre if your experience is based on the old or new stock, but the new stock isn't that much quieter.

It's as if you didn't read my post - everything you say is totally irreverent to what I said.

Cost was the factor not comfort or timetable (neither of which even got considered). And it was my dad, not me.

But keep on fighting the straw man, you might even manage to knock him down.

 

[AlbertBeale]

For business travel, the Sleeping Car product is inherently inferior (in all but a tiny number of cases) to the alternatives now easily available. There is no small adjustment that can be made to change this. And without business travel paying high end prices, the concept is nowhere near economical. Hence why there will be no expansion.

I think you are completely not getting the thinking of business. Sleeping car travel just does not come into it. The business I work in (and probably most others) are relying on the goodwill of staff going on these trips (not paying overtime, or granting time off in lieu), so they generally will give them the travel arrangements they prefer, within reason. Invariably this is Flight (and hotel if desired) for three reasons - cutting down travelling time (and total away time), better nights' sleep, plus the kudos of travelling by air.

The kudos of travelling by air?! Surely air travel is common enough for no-one to be so silly now? I do, however, know people who feel shame if travelling by air.

 

[AlbertBeale]

No, I changed jobs for other reasons. I'm just pointing out that your ideas are not feasible. Businesses value cheapness over all else, and with a likely drastic reduction in business travel, they're not suddenly going to flock to sleepers.

Not all business "value cheapness over all else" - thank goodness. Some actually consider ethical issues too.

 

[Energy]

Walk? It's over an hour unless you walk fast! It would be a tight company to happily pay the £4.50 bus in Scotland, but not a £1.70 DLR fare! Even the £4.90 cash fare is surely in play for travelling over 3.5 miles.

Forgot how far it is

 

[SussexLad]

Not all business "value cheapness over all else" - thank goodness. Some actually consider ethical issues too.

A growing number too.

Plus some actually pay their staff fairly, shocker. A disturbingly high frequency of "we don't / didnt get travel time" being mentioned.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have travelled on a lot of European Sleeping car trains (including many times on the Thello), and business travellers were very few and far between.
OBB must be doing some funny accounting, especially as they are talking about ordering new sleeping cars ..... Strange that no-one else is contemplating such things, except Sweden spreading the subsidy money around? Looks like a bit of Thunberg guilt rather than an economic proposition.

Indeed. The money Sweden is throwing at the sleepers is substantial.

Also, the law says any hours which are not yours to do what you want with an employee must be paid for them. Including travelling to a destination which is not your normal place of work.

This is not correct.

The law says that hours travelling to somewhere that is not your normal place of work are working hours. That does not mean you are paid for them. Pay is determined by your contract of employment. Most ‘salaried’ staff are on contracts that say something like “you are contracted to work 40 hours per week, and paid on that basis, but you may be required to work additional hours as necessary to meet the requirements of the business”.

 

[RT4038]

The kudos of travelling by air?! Surely air travel is common enough for no-one to be so silly now? I do, however, know people who feel shame if travelling by air.

I don't get it either, but I can assure you that it is still there in buckets. I am not talking rail enthusiasts here. (Arrived by Sleeping Car? ..... really? ....... much mirth - this person not to be taken seriously!). There is the odd person around with principles (rather than rail enthusiasm), but it really is odd.

 

[RT4038]

Not all business "value cheapness over all else" - thank goodness. Some actually consider ethical issues too.

Doubt it is many, and that would be afternoon/evening day train + hotel rather than Sleeping Car.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

The law says that hours travelling to somewhere that is not your normal place of work are working hours. That does not mean you are paid for them. Pay is determined by your contract of employment. Most ‘salaried’ staff are on contracts that say something like “you are contracted to work 40 hours per week, and paid on that basis, but you may be required to work additional hours as necessary to meet the requirements of the business”.

And for a lot of us on salary contracts, even with a fair number of additional hours spent going to and from airports, you're still not working enough hours to lower your average hourly wage (when calculated from your salary) below the national minimum wage, so no more pay.

I'd also guess that for a lot of us, there's extra days off in lieu, early finishes and such which makes up for some, if not all, of the time spent travelling.

 

[Clayton]

The 3 am option which includes 4 hours that the business has to pay for.

Also, the law says any hours which are not yours to do what you want with an employee must be paid for them. Including travelling to a destination which is not your normal place of work.

As you can do what you want on a sleeper train with all the facilities provided, as you do in a hotel, it means the business does not have to pay you.

In a decent job you aren’t paid by the hour, you just get a salary. I expect most people would just knock off early on Friday if they got up very early on Monday.

 

[daodao]

There a theoretical case for re-introducing a sleeper service from Scotland to Bristol and South-West England, but many on this forum seem to have dismissed the idea out-of-hand. It is possible to derive a suitable timetable, which could reduce costs by integration with the Lowland sleeper between Glasgow/Edinburgh and Carstairs, and swapping diesel/electric engines during a stop at Crewe. Approximate times could be as follows: Glasgow/Edinburgh dep 2300, Carstairs 2345, Crewe 0245/0315, Bristol 0630, Plymouth 0845, Penzance arr 1100, with the reverse timings Penzance dep 1900 and Glasgow/Edinburgh arr 0700. [That would permit use of the North & West main line via the Marches as a diversionary route between Crewe and Bristol.]

However, it is interesting to note that cross-country sleeper services (not to/from London) were mainly a BR introduction, although Glasgow to Inverness was run pre-1914, and Glasgow to Birmingham/Liverpool/Manchester routes are shown in a late LMS timetable. In general, they were not run by the "Big Four" or their predecessors, although there were overnight through carriages, e.g. from Glasgow to Bristol by a variety of routes. I suspect that the cross-country sleeper services were never profitable, and were introduced as a "service improvement" under the direction of the BTC. The case for any re-introduction would have to be based on a potential reduction in air and car travel on the route, with the "negative costs" of these travel modes factored into any economic equation. Market research would be needed, and changes in the relative costs of different travel modes and accommodation mean that one can't extrapolate from the situation 30 years ago. The situation may change over the coming years as air services from England to Scotland are gradually withdrawn; those from Cardiff to Scotland ceased pre-Covid in the last 12 months.

In reality, I don't envisage the re-introduction of sleeper services, and future acceleration of day trains between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh will threaten the continued existence of a sleeper service on this route.

 

[JonathanH]

There a theoretical case for re-introducing a sleeper service from Scotland to Bristol and South-West England, but many on this forum seem to have dismissed the idea out-of-hand. It is possible to derive a suitable timetable, which could reduce costs by integration with the Lowland sleeper between Glasgow/Edinburgh and Carstairs, and swapping diesel/electric engines during a stop at Crewe. Approximate times could be as follows: Glasgow/Edinburgh dep 2300, Carstairs 2345, Crewe 0245/0315, Bristol 0630, Plymouth 0845, Penzance arr 1100, with the reverse timings Penzance dep 1900 and Glasgow/Edinburgh arr 0700. [That would permit use of the North & West main line via the Marches as a diversionary route between Crewe and Bristol.]

What 'integration' are you suggesting with the Lowland sleeper to reduce costs? A train formed of two portions from Glasgow and Edinburgh can't then easily be split for two different portions to go to London and the West Country at Crewe with material delay and costs. It would be inherently more expensive than just running the Lowland sleeper.

You can already arrive in Bristol at 0910 using the Lowland sleeper and a GWR train from Paddington if you really wanted to use the sleeper.

The case for any re-introduction would have to be based on a potential reduction in air and car travel on the route, with the "negative costs" of these travel modes factored into any economic equation. Market research would be needed, and changes in the relative costs of different travel modes and accommodation mean that one can't extrapolate from the situation 30 years ago. The situation may change over the coming years as air services from England to Scotland are gradually withdrawn; those from Cardiff to Scotland ceased pre-Covid in the last 12 months.

Are air services from Bristol to Scotland going to be gradually withdrawn? The correct response to climate change would arguably be not to travel, not introduce a diesel hauled train from Crewe to Penzance. As pointed out in this thread, it isn't necessarily the case that a low capacity diesel hauled train has a lower carbon footprint than flying.

Frankly, if someone wanted to make an overnight leisure journey from Scotland to the West Country, they could catch the sleeper to London, have some breakfast and get a day train to Penzance from Paddington. They would only get there a few hours later than you indicate they would on a sleeper train. Staying in a cabin until 11am with small windows isn't much fun.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Frankly, if someone wanted to make an overnight leisure journey from Scotland to the West Country, they could catch the sleeper to London, have some breakfast and get a day train to Penzance from Paddington.

Or indeed day train/flight to London then the Riviera.

 

[SussexLad]

There a theoretical case for re-introducing a sleeper service from Scotland to Bristol and South-West England, but many on this forum seem to have dismissed the idea out-of-hand. It is possible to derive a suitable timetable, which could reduce costs by integration with the Lowland sleeper between Glasgow/Edinburgh and Carstairs, and swapping diesel/electric engines during a stop at Crewe. Approximate times could be as follows: Glasgow/Edinburgh dep 2300, Carstairs 2345, Crewe 0245/0315, Bristol 0630, Plymouth 0845, Penzance arr 1100, with the reverse timings Penzance dep 1900 and Glasgow/Edinburgh arr 0700. [That would permit use of the North & West main line via the Marches as a diversionary route between Crewe and Bristol.]

However, it is interesting to note that cross-country sleeper services (not to/from London) were mainly a BR introduction, although Glasgow to Inverness was run pre-1914, and Glasgow to Birmingham/Liverpool/Manchester routes are shown in a late LMS timetable. In general, they were not run by the "Big Four" or their predecessors, although there were overnight through carriages, e.g. from Glasgow to Bristol by a variety of routes. I suspect that the cross-country sleeper services were never profitable, and were introduced as a "service improvement" under the direction of the BTC. The case for any re-introduction would have to be based on a potential reduction in air and car travel on the route, with the "negative costs" of these travel modes factored into any economic equation. Market research would be needed, and changes in the relative costs of different travel modes and accommodation mean that one can't extrapolate from the situation 30 years ago. The situation may change over the coming years as air services from England to Scotland are gradually withdrawn; those from Cardiff to Scotland ceased pre-Covid in the last 12 months.

In reality, I don't envisage the re-introduction of sleeper services, and future acceleration of day trains between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh will threaten the continued existence of a sleeper service on this route.

That would be possible. Not sure weather running past plymouth is commercially viable. Also to better integrate with the early starts of the naval base in plymouth you need to arrive at 7 or 7:30 latest.

Also given the proposed merge split merge pattern already proposed I dont think integration with the calidonian sleeper would save much.

So to summarise this thread. This is the only potentially viable route in terms of demand within the UK. Big debate around the price points business's are willing to pay.

In order to attract business passengers, late departures must be avoided. Only commercial viable with cost reductions and a high average fare.

 

[Journeyman]

That would be possible. Not sure weather running past plymouth is commercially viable. Also to better integrate with the early starts of the naval base in plymouth you need to arrive at 7 or 7:30 latest.

That'll be the naval base which cut business travel to and from Scotland sufficiently to make the Sleeper non-viable 25 years ago.

So to summarise this thread. This is the only potentially viable route in terms of demand within the UK. Big debate around the price points business's are willing to pay.

Businesses aren't willing to pay anything, because there was no demand for it before COVID-19, and there certainly won't be afterwards.

In order to attract business passengers, late departures must be avoided. Only commercial viable with cost reductions and a high average fare.

So, not commercially viable. Your competitor here is EasyJet!

 

[SussexLad]

That'll be the naval base which cut business travel to and from Scotland sufficiently to make the Sleeper non-viable 25 years ago.



Businesses aren't willing to pay anything, because there was no demand for it before COVID-19, and there certainly won't be afterwards.



So, not commercially viable. Your competitor here is EasyJet!

And thats your opinion. Which has been sufficiently debated and I think its fair to say their is still an argument for this service.