Is there demand for more sleeper services?

[Journeyman]

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

It's not opinion, it's fact. And no, there's no argument for it.

 

[RT4038]

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 The situation may change over the coming years as air services from England to Scotland are gradually withdrawn; those from Cardiff to Scotland ceased pre-Covid in the last 12 months.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.

The Cross-country sleeper service in its previous incarnation was in a completely different world to now. I don't think it was ever a complete train of Sleeping cars, just a few coaches attached to train(s) that were running already mainly in connection with mail and sundries traffic (both of which have long since disappeared), using locomotives which were in pool with daytime services. With much of the costs already covered, the bar of 'profitability' was much lower. I suspect that the service started, not as a 'service improvement' under the direction of the BTC, but by an enterprising BR manager faced with a surplus of Sleeping Cars. Maybe someone on this forum knows the answer! I think latterly, for a fairly short period, there was a car from Glasgow to Bournemouth too.
This disappearance of the mail and sundries traffic, plus the introduction of (faster) fixed formation daytime passenger trains, meant that all the costs of running the Sleeping Cars (and any day cars that went with) had to be borne by passenger fares, and were instantly uneconomic.

Technically, I am sure it would be possible to operate such a service, much in the lines of your suggestion. Economically - impossible (at least not without some pretty seismic changes in the economics of the alternative modes, as you point out).

 

[SussexLad]

It's not opinion, it's fact. And no, there's no argument for it.

Don't brand it as a fact, its your opinion.

Earlier there is the maths for the market size this service would compete in and a business strategy similar to eurostar. Not cheap but would create a profitable service.

As previously discussed, when it comes to paying employees a sleeper has a massive advantage over air travel. Air travel consumes 4 hours each way of staff time.

So again, YOUR OPPINION is not a fact. Neither is mine but at least my post was a neutral summary.

 

[SussexLad]

The Cross-country sleeper service in its previous incarnation was in a completely different world to now. I don't think it was ever a complete train of Sleeping cars, just a few coaches attached to train(s) that were running already mainly in connection with mail and sundries traffic (both of which have long since disappeared), using locomotives which were in pool with daytime services. With much of the costs already covered, the bar of 'profitability' was much lower. I suspect that the service started, not as a 'service improvement' under the direction of the BTC, but by an enterprising BR manager faced with a surplus of Sleeping Cars. Maybe someone on this forum knows the answer! I think latterly, for a fairly short period, there was a car from Glasgow to Bournemouth too.
This disappearance of the mail and sundries traffic, plus the introduction of (faster) fixed formation daytime passenger trains, meant that all the costs of running the Sleeping Cars (and any day cars that went with) had to be borne by passenger fares, and were instantly uneconomic.

Technically, I am sure it would be possible to operate such a service, much in the lines of your suggestion. Economically - impossible (at least not without some pretty seismic changes in the economics of the alternative modes, as you point out).

Interesting. Mail services could about to go through a revival under orion service proposals. I wonder if you could add mail cars to a sleeper service? Or would that not meet health and safety standards?

The economics are tricky to balance but we have done to death how you could make this service work. I doubt their is any other domestic uk service where it could work.

 

[Journeyman]

Don't brand it as a fact, its your opinion.

Earlier there is the maths for the market size this service would compete in and a business strategy similar to eurostar. Not cheap but would create a profitable service.

As previously discussed, when it comes to paying employees a sleeper has a massive advantage over air travel. Air travel consumes 4 hours each way of staff time.

So again, YOUR OPPINION is not a fact. Neither is mine but at least my post was a neutral summary.

What isn't factual about the following?

• Scotland to South West services were axed because they were uneconomic, due to a large drop in military travel.
• Since the service was axed, air services have improved, become much cheaper, and allow business people to travel from Scotland to Bristol and back in one day, which I've done regularly.
• Booking hotels is cheaper and easier than it was, and many business travellers prefer a night in a hotel than a night on the move.
• Business travel is likely to plummet drastically in the aftermath of COVID-19.
• Caledonian Sleeper is only feasible because the subsidies are enormous, and there's a question mark over the Lowland when HS2 opens.
• The operating economies you propose for Caledonian Sleeper aren't feasible.

 

[SussexLad]

Random thought, could an 800 as a 7 car or maybe 9 car be converted to a sleeper? Maybe 2 x 5 (10) cars down start in Cardiff. 2 x 7 (14) cars start in plymout. And a 5 car and 7 car (12 cars) start at both Glasgow and edinbrugh

 

[SussexLad]

What isn't factual about the following?

• Scotland to South West services were axed because they were uneconomic, due to a large drop in military travel.
• Since the service was axed, air services have improved, become much cheaper, and allow business people to travel from Scotland to Bristol and back in one day, which I've done regularly.
• Booking hotels is cheaper and easier than it was, and many business travellers prefer a night in a hotel than a night on the move.
• Business travel is likely to plummet drastically in the aftermath of COVID-19.
• Caledonian Sleeper is only feasible because the subsidies are enormous, and there's a question mark over the Lowland when HS2 opens.
• The operating economies you propose for Caledonian Sleeper aren't feasible.

Just read the thread. This is about a new sleeper not the calidonian sleeper.

All can be addressed with effort in a quality product. The point about business travel is invalid because if you think about it for a long time most of the travel people do on business is optional. They prefer it face to face so do it that way through choice. I dont believe their will be any significant and meaningful change in business travel. How people travel might change due to climate change which a sleeper can capitalise on.

 

[Journeyman]

Just read the thread. This is about a new sleeper not the calidonian sleeper.

All can be addressed with effort in a quality product. The point about business travel is invalid because if you think about it for a long time most of the travel people do on business is optional. They prefer it face to face so do it that way through choice. I dont believe their will be any significant and meaningful change in business travel. How people travel might change due to climate change which a sleeper can capitalise on.

Nope, I'm sorry. I'm as pro-rail as anyone, but you're being utterly clueless here.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Not cheap but would create a profitable service.

It wouldn't. It would create another subsidy heavy service.

Serco's Caledonian Sleeper operation had, for 2018-19, a subsidy of £23.390m on a turnover of £47.444m, and there was a loss of £3.083m. Ticket sales and catering sales (£24.054m) don't even cover half of the total cost of running the service.

 

[SussexLad]

It wouldn't. It would create another subsidy heavy service.

Serco's Caledonian Sleeper operation had, for 2018-19, a subsidy of £23.390m on a turnover of £47.444m, and there was a loss of £3.083m. Ticket sales and catering sales (£24.054m) don't even cover half of the total cost of running the service.

We're not talking about the calidonian sleeper. The propose south west and south wales would have higher ticket prices as its a longer journey. Raise it by the correct amount and pinch some money through orcats and you could make a profit. A comparison to the calidonian sleeper is not fair

 

[Journeyman]

We're not talking about the calidonian sleeper. The propose south west and south wales would have higher ticket prices as its a longer journey. Raise it by the correct amount and pinch some money through orcats and you could make a profit. A comparison to the calidonian sleeper is not fair

How on earth do you make that out? Do you know anything about supply and demand?

You can't raid ORCATS revenue that isn't there. As I said before, your competitor is EasyJet.

 

[SussexLad]

How on earth do you make that out? Do you know anything about supply and demand?

You can't raid ORCATS revenue that isn't there. As I said before, your competitor is EasyJet.

I worked it out through the whole threads discussion. There are cost benefits to a business by sending someone on a sleeper train like not paying their hours which yes does not apply to every company but it does apply to many.

Further your competitor cannot offer the time savings to the business that a sleeper can as bristol to glassgow or edinbrugh would require 4 paid man hours of effort to fly or about half an hour paid to get to and from the station for a sleeper.

Also, lots of people travel between say Bristol and Plymouth, just as an example. So their are many ORCATs pots you could take from.

 

[Journeyman]

I worked it out through the whole threads discussion. There are cost benefits to a business by sending someone on a sleeper train like not paying their hours which yes does not apply to every company but it does apply to many.

Further your competitor cannot offer the time savings to the business that a sleeper can as bristol to glassgow or edinbrugh would require 4 paid man hours of effort to fly or about half an hour paid to get to and from the station for a sleeper.

But businesses don't pay for travel time, and they care about cost. On a couple of occasions I asked if I could use the Sleeper on business travel to London but was refused because the cost of a flight and hotel was cheaper!

 

[SussexLad]

But businesses don't pay for travel time, and they care about cost. On a couple of occasions I asked if I could use the Sleeper on business travel to London but was refused because the cost of a flight and hotel was cheaper!

Thats your company, not every company. I know someone that was on a tight schedule that in the past used the sleeper from london, from an office in Hampshire. Because we get paid travel time. Although at the moment you wouldnt catch many doing that as its not a very competitive offering (loud and rocks a lot plus a reputation of breaking).

 

[Philip Phlopp]

We're not talking about the calidonian sleeper. The propose south west and south wales would have higher ticket prices as its a longer journey. Raise it by the correct amount and pinch some money through orcats and you could make a profit. A comparison to the calidonian sleeper is not fair

I'm afraid, for those of us who work on the railway and understand the sunk costs that exist before a vehicle turns a single wheel in revenue service, a comparison with the Caledonian Sleeper is absolutely fair.

You've not got the first idea about the operations, safety cases, traction and route knowledge, route clearance, track access agreements, possession planning, diversionary route planning/route knowledge/conductance that has to exist and which burns through vast sums of money before you've welcomed your first passenger aboard.

Your geography is as catastrophically lousy as your attempt to devise a profitable railway business. Glasgow to Bristol is 380 miles, 21 miles less than London Euston to Glasgow Central. Inverness to London Euston is 570 miles, Aberdeen and Fort William are both around 525 miles. That's comparable distance to Portsmouth and Penzance from Edinburgh and Glasgow. There's no way you're going to manage to double the ticket revenue for a sleeper service on that particular route given the distances involved and the competition from the airlines on the exact same routes.

Just trust us when we say, if there was a profitable way to run a sleeper service in the UK, open access operators would be doing it by now.

 

[SussexLad]

.

I'm afraid, for those of us who work on the railway and understand the sunk costs that exist before a vehicle turns a single wheel in revenue service, a comparison with the Caledonian Sleeper is absolutely fair.

You've not got the first idea about the operations, safety cases, traction and route knowledge, route clearance, track access agreements, possession planning, diversionary route planning/route knowledge/conductance that has to exist and which burns through vast sums of money before you've welcomed your first passenger aboard.

Your geography is as catastrophically lousy as your attempt to devise a profitable railway business. Glasgow to Bristol is 380 miles, 21 miles less than London Euston to Glasgow Central. Inverness to London Euston is 570 miles, Aberdeen and Fort William are both around 525 miles. That's comparable distance to Portsmouth and Penzance from Edinburgh and Glasgow. There's no way you're going to manage to double the ticket revenue for a sleeper service on that particular route given the distances involved and the competition from the airlines on the exact same routes.

Just trust us when we say, if there was a profitable way to run a sleeper service in the UK, open access operators would be doing it by now.

Well considering the service wouldnt start in Bristol your wrong. It would start in plymouth and Cardiff which is definitely longer.

Someone has to be tue first to try it. And given the just trust us mentality I am not surprised industry havent done it.

I know their is a lot of sunk costs and I dont know the specifics but efficencies are nearly always possible with the will power. Non unionised staff is a start.

 

[SussexLad]

I will just say, I support unions generally but on the railways they seem a bit bullish to me. Thats another discussion tho.

 

[swt_passenger]

But businesses don't pay for travel time, and they care about cost. On a couple of occasions I asked if I could use the Sleeper on business travel to London but was refused because the cost of a flight and hotel was cheaper!

Especially this hypothetical military (ie Navy) demand from Plymouth to Scotland. No overtime rates for them. The sleeper just takes far longer so more subsistence allowance is due. But the navy has probably halved in size since the SW sleeper service last ran, whatever demand there might have once been it will have shrunk considerably in favour of hire cars and internal air.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

It would start in plymouth and Cardiff which is definitely longer.

Someone has to be tue first to try it. And given the just trust us mentality I am not surprised industry havent done it.

I know their is a lot of sunk costs and I dont know the specifics but efficencies are nearly always possible with the will power. Non unionised staff is a start.

Edinburgh/Glasgow to Cardiff Central is 383 miles and Plymouth to Glasgow Central is 520 miles.

That's still not enough mileage to justify vastly increased ticket prices which will allow the service to operate without a substantial subsidy of between 35% and 50%.

The other things we need to introduce you to are the concept of track access charges and electricity consumption charges (should your hypothetical service run with an electric locomotive) so whilst the ticket price you're hoping to charge will be higher, the actual cost of operating the service will increase.

 

[Starmill]

But I continue to hope that most people can behave less selfishly without being coerced.

Your experience of reading this forum should inoculate you against this...

 

[SussexLad]

Especially this hypothetical military (ie Navy) demand from Plymouth to Scotland. No overtime rates for them. The sleeper just takes far longer so more subsistence allowance is due. But the navy has probably halved in size since the SW sleeper service last ran, whatever demand there might have once been it will have shrunk considerably in favour of hire cars and internal air.

True that the navy in general has shrunk but it is not only the navy that works in naval bases. They have large defence company presences. Given the small number of navy personnel, time surely becomes more critical?

Edinburgh/Glasgow to Cardiff Central is 383 miles and Plymouth to Glasgow Central is 520 miles.

That's still not enough mileage to justify vastly increased ticket prices which will allow the service to operate without a substantial subsidy of between 35% and 50%.

The other things we need to introduce you to are the concept of track access charges and electricity consumption charges (should your hypothetical service run with an electric locomotive) so whilst the ticket price you're hoping to charge will be higher, the actual cost of operating the service will increase.

Yes the variable costs would increase but the fixed costs remain the same. So this sliding scale would slowly tip. The premium product (by that I mean doing the carriages up to a high spec), justifies paying extra as well.

Not to mention the actually convention timings proposed.

 

[Starmill]

The more of us who do make choices such as travelling by rail "all the way" to Prague [you make it sound a hassle; when I went to Prague a few years back the rail journey was easy, efficient, and pleasant - it would never have occurred to me to travel any other way

Manchester to Prague took two full travelling days, was enormously expensive at several times the price of flights available at the time, and was plagued by delays which resulted in missed connections. I enjoyed it, but it was stressful and if I didn't know a little about how railways worked I would have found it impossibly anxiety-inducing.

The best value long distance international train journey I've ever had was Berlin to London at €69. That price has increased now significantly because through ticketing is no longer possible. And journey time is still approx 9 hours and 2 changes of train are required.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Yes the variable costs would increase but the fixed costs remain the same.

What you think are variable costs and what we know are truly variable costs are two different things.

The true variable costs are significant - more carriages requires more staff and more maintenance, more destinations requires more staff, more locomotives, more shunters and more depot access agreements, longer journey times requires more staff and can bring into play additional traincrew issues such as overnight stays away from home, as well as the need for additional rolling stock if maintenance can't be completed during vehicle downtime.

The only way you can make money running an open access sleeper operation is charging VSOE money.

 

[Starmill]

Yes the variable costs would increase but the fixed costs remain the same. So this sliding scale would slowly tip. The premium product (by that I mean doing the carriages up to a high spec), justifies paying extra as well.

I don't think the current Cal Sleeper arrangement could be described as a "premium product"...

 

[Energy]

Where would the stock for the SW to Scotland sleeper be maintained and by who? Alstom maintain the mk5s which is fine as they already had depots on the WCML for the Pendolinos, they also maintain TPE's mk5as which gives a larger fleet allowing for economies of scale to reduce the cost of maintanence. But Alstom do not have any maintenance depots in the south west so someone else will have to maintain the mk5s. There will be an expensive maintanence contract for a new depot for such a small fleet and maintenance will cost more as you don't have the economies of scale as much as you would with Alstom.

 

[SussexLad]

I don't think the current Cal Sleeper arrangement could be described as a "premium product"...

I know, its awful. Thats part of my point. You wouldnt pay more for that. The new Night Jet carriages on order, potentially.

What you think are variable costs and what we know are truly variable costs are two different things.

The true variable costs are significant - more carriages requires more staff and more maintenance, more destinations requires more staff, more locomotives, more shunters and more depot access agreements, longer journey times requires more staff and can bring into play additional traincrew issues such as overnight stays away from home, as well as the need for additional rolling stock if maintenance can't be completed during vehicle downtime.

The only way you can make money running an open access sleeper operation is charging VSOE money.

What are you on about? I thought we were looking at this operation in isolation so carriages would be fixed costs as they don't increase with longer distance journeys. Maintenance does slightly.

You can get around train crew problems by switching crews at the split and join points. Therefore returning them to their home in the morning. All could be done with clever scheduling.

Further, this arrangement is to reduce the amount of locomotives compared to the calidonian sleeper.

 

[SussexLad]

Where would the stock for the SW to Scotland sleeper be maintained and by who? Alstom maintain the mk5s which is fine as they already had depots on the WCML for the Pendolinos, they also maintain TPE's mk5as which gives a larger fleet allowing for economies of scale to reduce the cost of maintanence. But Alstom do not have any maintenance depots in the south west so someone else will have to maintain the mk5s. There will be an expensive maintanence contract for a new depot for such a small fleet and maintenance will cost more as you don't have the economies of scale as much as you would with Alstom.

Good point. Could consolidate the wales and plymouth maintenance needs into one in or around the Bristol area. Is that any better?

 

[Journeyman]

The only way you can make money running an open access sleeper operation is charging VSOE money.

...and by providing VSOE luxury, which hardly makes it an everyday product!

 

[Journeyman]

I know, its awful. Thats part of my point. You wouldnt pay more for that. The new Night Jet carriages on order, potentially.

How do you plan on fitting those in the UK loading gauge?

 

[Starmill]

...and by providing VSOE luxury, which hardly makes it an everyday product!

Indeed. VSOE isn't principally a public transport service, it's a luxury experience that happens to take you from one place to another, in the same way that a preserved railway is a tourist attraction rather than public transport.