Mk5 Sleeper Car... And other fantasies ;-)

[NightatLaira]

Was on the deerstalker the other day and it got me thinking...

I know loco-hauled trains are very much out of fashion these days - but the Caledonian Sleeper is more popular now than ever! Made up of Mk3s from 1982 and mk2s from the 1970s! One day Scotrail will have to replace these veterans with something... they've done well refreshing the bar car and implementing disabled toilets throughout but what about the next generation of sleeper cars?

1. I thnk they need to have showers - at least in first class anyway! Europe can manage it - so can we!
2. Air conditioned - and electric sliding doors (like mk4s)
3. Channel Tunnel fire standard? Well - there's now open access operators using Eurotunnel -if Britain does't get its act together it'll be DB operating sleeper services from B'ham to Bonn.. or wherever!
4. (3x5carsx2)+(2x7carsx2) (Caledonian) + 2x9cars x2 (Riviera) = 100 mk5 sleeper cars needed to replace Britain's current sleeper fleet - that's worth a bulk order from somewhere like Hitachi, Alstom, Brush, GEC, Bombardier, etc... But when will it happen? I reckon another 10 years...

Oh! And did I mention: WiFi throughout, TVs in every berth, ice machines in the gangways, selective alarm clocks dependant on destination and basically everything that China already does...

 

[cj_1985]

interesting concept...
certainly its fair to say that, at some point in the next 5-10 years there is going to have to be a decision made about the continued operation of mk.3 sleeper carraiges in their current form...

whether the solution is a new build of specialist carraiges... or a heavy rebuild with power sliding doors like the mk.3 refurb/rebuild that chilterns seem to be pressing ahead with...

in all honesty any new carraige would be a lot heavier than the existing ones leading to problems on some of sections of route that they are used on (ie the WHL)... as well as higher track access fees (id imagine so anyway)....

new build or rebuild.. i honestly dont see showers happening, nor the station specific alarm clocks.
the reason i dont see showers as being a practical option for british carriages is quite simply the number and weight... you have showers on the trains how many do you have per train, how many per carraige, how do you provide space for a shower without cutting into passenger accomodation space.
plus your going to have to have water tanks on each carriage to cater for the showers, as well as for the toilets... and would most likely require the water to be stored in a retentian tank when its been used... so that more weight onto the carriage which will again affect track access fees, not to mention whether there would be enough space for enlarged water tanks in/under the carraiges...

building the carraiges to fit the channel tunnel specs for operating would only be usefull if the carraiges or atleast the style of carraiges were to be used for sleeper trains to europe... otherwise thats yet more special specifications that would have to be in addition to the normal NR requirements...


personally i would put my money on a heavy mk.3 rebuild...

 

[ainsworth74]

We've be down this route before regarding building sleeper carriages with all the plush fittings (like showers) and that can also run through the tunnel. To be honest it was a complete disaster as well as a waste of time and money. You can read about it here.

 

[route:oxford]

Next sleeper carriages?

Well, I'd put my money on "pods" based around the BA lie-flat beds in first class.

That way you could probably fit 14 pods around a central corridor - and cut the number of carriages required.

 

[gordonthemoron]

The DB Talgo was a fine night train, if only it had more sleeper compartments and couchettes and fewer seats

 

[jopsuk]

Showers in every compartment (even if just in 1st class) would lead to the same horrendously heavy carriages as Nightstar- but perhaps a couple of showers would be OK.
Mindyou, the nighstars were built way beyond even what they needed to be for even the channel tunnel regs, which are now a bit more relaxed. Aluminium (and perhaps even modern composite) use would help reduce the weight.

I'd suggest driving generator vans as part of the sets- highly likely that if there new build, then before too long they would become the only non-heritage loco hauled passengers services. A generator van would allow them to be hauled by non-ETS fitted freight locomotives, and a cab plus standard multiple working wiring would mean no need to run around/no need for station pilot duties.
The Airline pod idea is intriguing- perhaps "normal" cabins for First, "pods" for Standard "beds" and first class seats as now for Standard-seated?

Not sure I agree with the numbers proposed- seem to be suggesting LESS carriages for the Scottish sleepers (unless you're not including the lounge cars) and a lot more for the West Country?

 

[Aictos]

What would be ideal is for the Mk3 Sleepers to be refurbished ala Chiltern with power doors etc...and replace the Mk2s with Mk3s.

 

[Anon Mouse]

Oh! And did I mention: WiFi throughout, TVs in every berth, ice machines in the gangways, selective alarm clocks dependant on destination and basically everything that China already does...

I've travelled on a few overnight trains in China and they are not as mod con fitted as you think! Not normally TV sets, ice machines, alarm clocks or Wi-Fi!

Soft sleeper tends to consit of lockable compartments with 6 berths inside and flip down seats in the corridor for day use. In the same carriage there is an attendants compartment, a squat toilet (on more modern stock you might be lucky and find a seat toilet) and two wash basins. There is also hot water availible for all passengers to make your noodles and chinese tea. Hard sleeper, this is the way 'normal' people travel consists of a open carriage with bunks 4 high, no privicy and the odd flip down seat for day use and again, toilets, hot water and an attendants carriage. I forgot to add in China there is no segregation of sex, imagine how disapointed I was not to share a compartment with the female Olympic Gymnastic team!
Also on Chinese sleeper trains they tend to be seating coaches which look pretty grim for a 18hour journey. There is also a restaurant car and frequent trolley visits sometimes selling toothpaste and toys. Its a great way to travel but if people are used to the Caledonian Sleeper or Night Riveiera its a bit of a shock to the system, and in hard sleeper you need to get used to other peoples farts, coughs, shouts and smells! Oh and there is pipred music and adverts on PA!

Oh and my train from Chengdu to Beijing had about 3-4 loco changes, including a beast of a DF!

I am not saying there are not mod cons in Chinese stock, but I would imagine they would just be on the flash new 'white carriage' high speed sleepers, which ordinary people cannot afford to travel on!

 

[Helvellyn]

The NightStar stock could have been taken for the ScotRail Sleeper services, but was rejected on a number of reasons. I think as has been said, it's more likely to see a substantial refurbishment take place of the stock as an add-on to the HST life extension scheme. The remaining Mk2 vehicles would likely be replaced by Mk 3s at the same time.

 

[talltim]

Cross channel sleepers would seem to make perfect sense to me. Part of the trouble with sleeper services in the UK is that with higher line speeds only the longest journeys are worth it. For example a Birmingham to London sleeper would be pointless, but a Birmingham to Frankfurt sleeper wouldn't
(I have no idea whether anyone would want to travel on it,mind you!)

 

[Oswyntail]

Cross channel sleepers would seem to make perfect sense to me. Part of the trouble with sleeper services in the UK is that with higher line speeds only the longest journeys are worth it. For example a Birmingham to London sleeper would be pointless, but a Birmingham to Frankfurt sleeper wouldn't
(I have no idea whether anyone would want to travel on it,mind you!)

The competition for a sleeper service is a hotel (with prior travel means). So, to be attractive, either the facilities must be as comfortable as a hotel (for first class/ business travel) or much cheaper (for less subsidised travellers). Lovely as the Mk3s are, the facilities are not hotel standard (especially including catering) nor are they attractively cheap. But get the right business model, and long-distance sleepers to European destinations could become the chosen mode of holiday travel.

 

[NightatLaira]

The competition for a sleeper service is a hotel (with prior travel means). So, to be attractive, either the facilities must be as comfortable as a hotel (for first class/ business travel) or much cheaper (for less subsidised travellers). Lovely as the Mk3s are, the facilities are not hotel standard (especially including catering) nor are they attractively cheap. But get the right business model, and long-distance sleepers to European destinations could become the chosen mode of holiday travel.

I agree - it's all about the business model. Perhaps a future market could be found with European cities and ultra-cheap 'Megabus' style fares... I don't know. But there are three other factors that have always made the sleeper attractive, and they are often overlooked by the number crunchers.

1. People who don't like flying
2. People who can't fly (Obese / Heavily Disabled etc
3. The novelty - the overwhelming majority of sleeper passengers (excluding travellers to Fort William who pretty much have no other choice but the sleeper if they want to get to London) choose to take the sleeper over the plane/car/day train. It's a novelty - and people will always like that.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

If you replaced the Mk 2 lounge cars on the Caledonian Sleepers with Mk 3s, they won't fit in the platform at Euston any more will they? I think that's why they stuck with Mk 2s even though the Night Rivera received Mk 3s for their lounge cars a couple of years ago.

 

[cj_1985]

all this talk about first class and standard class on the sleepers...

how many of you/us have actually traveled on the "Night Riviera" or "Caledonian Sleeper"....?

as anyone who has travelled on either of them will tell you the cabins are multi purpose...
each sleeper cabin has the set lower bunk and a fold up into the wall upper bunk which is left "in the wall" if the cabin has been booked for first class... and has the bunk folded down out of the wall for dual occupancy.
beyond that.. the only difference is in what breakfast you get served with, and what amenity bag you get (soap, night mask etc) and you have some degree of control over the cabin temperature ie hot or cold.

personally having traveled on the "Caledonian Sleeper" for many years... i think the current lay out is fine... For the most part you get on and either you stay in your cabin to read or work or whatever and then sleep... or you get on, put your stuff in your cabin and walk down to the buffer/lounge car and have something to eat and/or drink then back to your cabin to sleep...

why would you need an ice machine? seriously im curious

why would you need tv monitors... surely in this modern age travelers are more likely to use their phones, laptops or Ipod type thing to watch a film or listen to music

Showers... fair enough i can see why maybe you would want that... but iirc (atleast for the caledonian sleeper) there was considerable investment in facilities at stations it serves to provide shower facilities etc

Air-con.. fair enough.. but the trains run during the night when the temperature is at its lowest so probably not needed to the same degree as a unit or carraige thats used all day during the daylight hours. id say you probably need more/better control over the temperature controls in the cabins so that they can provide temperatures to suit all passengers

 

[Rhydgaled]

I think the sleepers should be life-extended to 2035 along with the Intercity 125s. However, then we hit a problem, at the present rate of electrification either the MML or the GWML route to Plymouth won't be wired in time. I think that a new fleet of hauled tilt-capable coaches with DVTs (like the mark 4s but with seats in the DVTs), and through-corridor DBSOs to allow part of the train to continue and leave the rest behind, should be introduced from then, allowing an electric loco to haul to the end of the wires then swap for a diesel. The inital batch of coaches and locos would replace the IC125s and sleepers, and a follow-up batch would replace the IC225s several years later
(hopefully not before 2045, to give the 225s plenty of time to use their 140mph capability (I'm hopeing they'll be on an ERTMS equiped electrified GWML to Swansea from 2020)). I included tilt because it probablly would be useful in trying to get Plymouth via Westbury services up to higher speeds.

 

[sprinterguy]

Tilt on sleeper stock to allow for higher speeds is unnecessary: There is no need for high speeds on the sleeper services, as otherwise the trains would be arriving at their destinations absurdly early in the morning, rather than allowing the passengers a decent nights' sleep while they travel. Tightening up the schedules would also give no contingency for diversions due to engineering works which the sleeper services regularly have to negotiate.

I hope something comes along to replace the 225s before 2045: 55 year old 91+mark 4s? I don't fancy it.

The current mark 3 Sleepers have some life in them yet, and with modifications to include power doors and to make them more disabled friendly then I reckon they could happily outlive the HST mark 3s. But when they do finally become life expired, my thoughts for the continuation of UK sleeper services are pessimistic.

 

[rail-britain]

As far as I am aware the ScotRail sleepers cannot financially break even in their current format (hence why they were transferred from West Coast to ScotRail prior to franchising)
If the trains were of a different format then it may be possible, and that might then result in new rolling stock
However, the issue with the sleepers is the great variation in loadings from very low to full

I know at a previous meeting held by TS regarding the future of the rolling stock it was decided to wait until nearer the franchise is to be renewed
However, two proposals were put forward but based on passenger loadings over the previous 18 months neither option progressed

The next issue is that both franchises that operate sleepers are now administered by different government bodies
However, if First (or any other company) is the sole operator then it may be easier for them to make a single proposal and then proceed from there
I know First want to move away LHCS versions, and their proposal I read a long time ago suggested a high powered DMU with the engines under the seating, First Class Lounge, and restaurant vehicles, the remaining vehicles would be trailers

 

[ainsworth74]

However, two proposals were put forward but based on passenger loadings over the previous 18 months neither option progressed

What were the proposals?

 

[Rhydgaled]

I hope something comes along to replace the 225s before 2045: 55 year old 91+mark 4s? I don't fancy it.

You have to remember that Intercity 125s can last til 2035, making them 60 years old. I am being soft, suggesting retiring the 225s more than 5 years early (electrics are supposed to last a bit longer than diesels).

Tilt on sleeper stock to allow for higher speeds is unnecessary: There is no need for high speeds on the sleeper services, as otherwise the trains would be arriving at their destinations absurdly early in the morning, rather than allowing the passengers a decent nights' sleep while they travel. Tightening up the schedules would also give no contingency for diversions due to engineering works which the sleeper services regularly have to negotiate.

The current mark 3 Sleepers have some life in them yet, and with modifications to include power doors and to make them more disabled friendly then I reckon they could happily outlive the HST mark 3s. But when they do finally become life expired, my thoughts for the continuation of UK sleeper services are pessimistic.

I know that tilt isn't somthing you would want/need on a sleeper service, and wouldn't bother putting a tilt mechinisum in those coaches if it saves money (which it almost certainly would). However, your thoughts for the continuation of UK sleeper services after mark3s expire are pessimistic, so to lump the sleeper cars in with an order for new daytime express (tiliting) coaching stock I think you'd have to have tilt-profiled sleeping cars even though they would never have the tilt mechanism installed (just like the mark 4s). Lumping sleeper replacment with a new electric LHCS replacment for the 125s and eventually the 225s too is the best thing I can think of to preserve the services.

 

[ainsworth74]

Lumping sleeper replacment with a new electric LHCS replacment for the 125s and eventually the 225s too is the best thing I can think of to preserve the services.

What electric LHCS replacement? Most of FGW HSTs are being replaced by IEP, the 225s were supposed to be as well but that's been kicked way into the long grass. As for MML HSTs they are also waiting until the consultation on HS2 is finished and even if that proposes wiring (which it might not) the replacement stock will be EMUs not LHCS. Without a build of LHCS (and I don't see any being built in the next 10 years or so if ever) sleeper replacements are unlikely.

 

[SS4]

I agree - it's all about the business model. Perhaps a future market could be found with European cities and ultra-cheap 'Megabus' style fares... I don't know. But there are three other factors that have always made the sleeper attractive, and they are often overlooked by the number crunchers.

1. People who don't like flying
2. People who can't fly (Obese / Heavily Disabled etc
3. The novelty - the overwhelming majority of sleeper passengers (excluding travellers to Fort William who pretty much have no other choice but the sleeper if they want to get to London) choose to take the sleeper over the plane/car/day train. It's a novelty - and people will always like that.

I would add those for whom time is not pressing to the list. It's almost certain they would be leisure travellers who won't be as profitable as business travellers but it would be nice to see. Wouldn't luggage allowances be more generous on the train too?
As someone who falls into your first category I would like the idea of being able to take a train from Birmingham to Frankfurt (who happen to be twinned), spend a day in the latter and return that night. It would mean no

 

[Rhydgaled]

What electric LHCS replacement? Most of FGW HSTs are being replaced by IEP, the 225s were supposed to be as well but that's been kicked way into the long grass. As for MML HSTs they are also waiting until the consultation on HS2 is finished and even if that proposes wiring (which it might not) the replacement stock will be EMUs not LHCS. Without a build of LHCS (and I don't see any being built in the next 10 years or so if ever) sleeper replacements are unlikely.

I can't see wires reaching Plymouth for several decades (MML comes first I expect) so for services beyond Reading to Taunton, Devon and Cornwall in a world without Intercity 125s any other option than a new electricly-hauled LHCS fleet (with diesel locos taking over when the wires run out) is absolutlly unexceptable in my opinion. MML will probablly be EMU as you say, but if you need to make a large enough order to warrant construction of new LHCS, what if those EMUs were IEPs cascaded from Great Western by the new LHCS? I that would probablly result in more uniform fleets than new EMUs for MML, IEPs for Bristol and Cardiff (and maybe Cheltenham, Weston-Super-Mare and Cotswolds line too) and new LHCS for Taunton, Devon and Cornwall.

It would be much easier if one had a time machine and go back and make the government fork out for the most ambious of BR's electrification stratigies, but the wires that we need to replace the IC125s with EMUs aren't there so swaping locomotives between electrics and diesels at the limit of electrification sounds like the only rational desision where a change of trains is unacceptable (which is most routes). Even if we did have wires to Plymouth, we'd still need something for Carmarthen and Pembroke Dock (IEP is unacceptable, it won't go down the Pembroke Dock branch).

 

[hairyhandedfool]

To be honest, I think if the Mk3s are replaced, it would be by DMUs/EMUs. There are plenty of basic designs for them, they would fit into other build batches and could probably be an easy conversion back to regular stock if needed. Additionally, they could be easily split en route for various destinations without having to add or remove locos.

 

[w1bbl3]

The economics of LCHS with electric loco's just doesn't stack up against pure EMU's with distributed traction systems any more let alone looking 10+ years into the future.. I really can't see Dft or a TOC placing a LCHS+Electric loco order.

IMHO if the goal is to cope with OLE and on-board power whilst avoinding underfloor diesel engines then some form a generator car which could be attached beyond electricified routes and would feed the distributed traction package is possibly a better route than a traditional loco.

 

[Bald Rick]

Assuming HS2 opened in 2026, and that Glasgow and Edinburgh were then 3 - 3 1/2 hrs from London, would there still be a market worth spending multi-millions on a new fleet?

 

[SS4]

Assuming HS2 opened in 2026, and that Glasgow and Edinburgh were then 3 - 3 1/2 hrs from London, would there still be a market worth spending multi-millions on a new fleet?

I doubt the sleeper would be affected much at all. Even today there are many faster ways to get from Glasgow or Edinburgh to London than the sleeper, the sleeper is marketed more towards those who have an early start and want to get a good night's sleep and arrive refreshed

 

[Bald Rick]

Okay - but that didn't stop SNCF withdrawing sleepers to Marseille etc when the LGV opened south of Lyon. In France sleepers do still serve cities beyond the LGV, e.g. Nice, which I suppose would be the equivalent of the Highland sleepers.

Having used the sleeper several times I have yet to find the one where you get a good night's sleep and arrive refreshed though!

 

[Liam]

I use the sleeper fairly regularly. I prefer it to flying for a number of reasons.

It is far more convinient to jump on at my local station than getting to Edinburgh Airport for a flight.

You are already in London, so no need to travel from one of the airports into the city.

At shorter notice (1 or 2 weeks in advance) it is usually cheaper than flying (Super off peak return is £77.95 with a railcard) and the seated sleeper is far more comfortable than a bus which is cheaper still.

If you are on a SOP return it gives you more flexibility on when you return.

I usually sleep OK on the seats, so its not really worth the expense of getting a berth.

Also it's the sleeper, so its better than flying.

 

[Masbroughlad]

Hope I am wrong, but I wonder if when the carriages become obsolete, the overnight trains will disappear too :cry:

 

[NightatLaira]

Hope I am wrong, but I wonder if when the carriages become obsolete, the overnight trains will disappear too :cry:

That or someone will have to refurb/make a multiple unit as a sleeper set... with engines under the floors it'll be noisy as hell :cry: