Transport Scotland Rail 2014 consultation

[sprinterguy]

Im suprised it has lasted this long after Privatisation really, it was only a matter of time before it was withdrawn.

Luckily I have already been able to travel to both Lowland destinations.

I think the future of the Caledonian Sleepers is reasonably secure within the operational lifespan of the rolling stock. Beyond that, I seriously doubt that the sleeper service will remain in the form that we see now. The sleeper network was much more extensive in the eighties to justify a new build of mark 3 sleeper stock, and even then many of those new sleeper vehicles saw very little use as the overnight Intercity network contracted in the late eighties. Plus, the rail network is so fragmented under privatisation that it is highly unlikely that the two remaining sleeper operations would specify a standard type of rolling stock at the same time, unlike how things were done under BR.

I think that it'll require a much more entrepreneurial approach to justify retention of sleeper services beyond the lifespan of the mark 2 and mark 3s when they account for such a small operation. Personally, I see the possibility for a fleet of EMUs as part of the West Coast franchise that would be a roughly 50:50 mix of seated accomodation and four berth couchettes (divided down the middle with a curtain): During the day, the seated accomodation would form the standard class section of the train, and the bunks in the couchettes would fold into the walls, two to each side, to reveal first class accomodation in compartments. This would ensure maximum utility from the new sleeper sets.

 

[Nym]

Personally I'd see new sleeper stock as a three tier class structure, proberbly based on a standard 5 car EMU with doors at the ends...

1st would be private en suite births, and on board shower, 8 in a 23m carriage
Standard pretty much as is now, sleep 20 - 24 in a carriage, sinks in each birth, shared with two bunks.
Economy, I recon you could fit 60 bunks in one carriage, I'm thinking in the form of Tokyo one night hotel things, where you could stack births three high and have everything within it, would proberbly fit 50 - 60 in one carrage with 4 toilets with large sinks, and luggage lockers shared between the births.

100mph EMUs at 5 6 or 7 car formation, with a proper kitchen buffet thing for the 1st and standard passengers, economy would eat in their births or in a seated carrage.

Formed up like...

1st - Resturant - Seated - Standard - Economy for a 5 car formation EMU, diesel generators in some coaches for the highland sleepers. Maybe up to 7 or 8 car formations, fixed, based on a 'current' EMU build.

 

[sprinterguy]

Personally I'd see new sleeper stock as a three tier class structure, proberbly based on a standard 5 car EMU with doors at the ends...

1st would be private en suite births, and on board shower, 8 in a 23m carriage
Standard pretty much as is now, sleep 20 - 24 in a carriage, sinks in each birth, shared with two bunks.
Economy, I recon you could fit 60 bunks in one carriage, I'm thinking in the form of Tokyo one night hotel things, where you could stack births three high and have everything within it, would proberbly fit 50 - 60 in one carrage with 4 toilets with large sinks, and luggage lockers shared between the births.

100mph EMUs at 5 6 or 7 car formation, with a proper kitchen buffet thing for the 1st and standard passengers, economy would eat in their births or in a seated carrage.

Formed up like...

1st - Resturant - Seated - Standard - Economy for a 5 car formation EMU, diesel generators in some coaches for the highland sleepers. Maybe up to 7 or 8 car formations, fixed, based on a 'current' EMU build.

That's still based on units making only one return trip in 48 hours.

Would such units be able to be dragged by locos off the wires? If not, then the lowland sleepers would only account for four trains, and say one additional unit as a maintenance spare. A total fleet of only five purpose built units.

If they are able to be hauled by locos (Which needs to include the cost of maintaining, and possibly even building, a small fleet of, say 5, compatible locomotives) to cover the Highland sleeper legs, then that's still only ten units, say twelve with maintenance spares.

 

[Blindtraveler]

it may be viable to simply power door the
MK3 stock cuppled with a major refit?

 

[sprinterguy]

it may be viable to simply power door the
MK3 stock cuppled with a major refit?

That'd be a reasonable medium term solution, but not much use once the integrity of the frame begins to degrade.

 

[HSTEd]

Well if they are 100mph capable.... you could get maybe 800 miles in a night, how many different places can you get to?

If we assume that they would be Chunnel capable the list of destinations increases considerably.

 

[sprinterguy]

Well if they are 100mph capable.... you could get maybe 800 miles in a night, how many different places can you get to?

If we assume that they would be Chunnel capable the list of destinations increases considerably.

True, but you'd still be limited as to how many destinations each train could serve. Firstly by the number of berths available, and secondly because (as an example) I don't think passengers from London would be keen on being dropped off in Edinburgh at 3am from a train going onto Aberdeen/Inverness, or passengers from Edinburgh being dropped off in London at a similar time if the sleeper is going on to Paris.

 

[tbtc]

The Caledonian Sleeper services provide an alternative to air travel, particularly to and from the North of Scotland. However the services are likely to face increasing competition in the next few years due to:

■passengers having higher expectations of the facilities and services available, and therefore alternatives such as budget hotels and sleeper bus services become more attractive

Thanks for the link - the highlighted part is the reason why I don't think that the Sleeper (in any guise) will survive in the medium term.

In the '90s, when there was last a big argument about the Sleeper, there weren't many hotels other than the top-end ones, and any cheaper accommodation tended to be as comfortable as a Youth Hostel/ B&B (maybe a shared bathroom?). The only "Frill" would have been use of a Corby Trouser Press.

Now we have mass market hotel chains, you can get a bed for a decent price, you expect a power shower/ wifi/ half a dozen plugs/ room service... maybe you pay a couple of quid more for the "frills", but the standard has moved on considerably.

The train seems like something from fifty years ago, in comparison. Other than enthusiasts (like myself) or the older passengers who are used to such "sparse" travelling environments (a shrinking market), what hope is there?

 

[Blindtraveler]

wel we already know that megabus are
tackling the sleaper market, a fact proved by my total lack of luck in getting a cheep ride to try it out!
Wil NX or Greyhound try it next? how many could be fitted into a dubble decker with the only 2 seats being the one for the driver and the one on the toilet?

 

[Invincibles]

Get in contact with China and order some of their inter city sleeper stock, similar to those that run the night service from Shanghai to Beijing.

I imagine they have plans to build more when the Beijing - Guangzhou option is completed as that will be a perfect market for overnight trains.

Some gauging issues admittedly, but if we can look at Polaris for the day trains...

 

[HSTEd]

True, but you'd still be limited as to how many destinations each train could serve. Firstly by the number of berths available, and secondly because (as an example) I don't think passengers from London would be keen on being dropped off in Edinburgh at 3am from a train going onto Aberdeen/Inverness, or passengers from Edinburgh being dropped off in London at a similar time if the sleeper is going on to Paris.

I was thinking largely about increasing the order size by building additional sets, and what are loadings currently like on the sleeper?

Could you potentially solve this problem by decoupling teh Edinburgh portion in the platform as it would be a self contained multiple unit.

 

[junglejames]

Of course, the other option, if the SNP want to go stupid, and isolate Scotland, is to help them out.
We wouldnt want so called English companies doing an ORCATS raid on any Scottish station, so services from London will terminate at Berwick and Carlisle.
Oh, and the Scotiish franchise is now no longer allowed into England either (what the SNP can do, Westminster can also do). So the furthest south they can go is Dunbar and Lockerbie. Passengers will have to make their own way across the border.

I dont suggest doing this, and its nothing against Scotland. Just showing how we could do an SNP. Suggesting such a thing would be a good way of making the SNP back track. Thats for sure!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Funnily enough, about two months ago I wrote a full length article ( which I submitted to one of the railway magazines ) suggesting a Sleeper Multiple Unit, the difference is mine is bi mode with a diesel at one end ( luggage space at that end ) and electric at the other end ( seated accomodation in that end ) with three Sleeper cars in between, sized so that four of these five car sets would occupy the same length as a loco + 16 Caledonian rake. No power axles under the sleeping accomodation in it either.

 

[Blindtraveler]

and a luggage compartment with the deezol although theoretically this could be used as a catering/buffet area also?
Would win with me as wouldnt want power generating equipment under my bed!

Seriusly though, the sleaper network I think should be expanded again with perhaps an ABD - PNZ calling0Dundee, Edinburgh, Newcastle, York, Leeds, Sheffield, Birmingham, Bristal and Plymouth and perhaps a BHM - INV calling Crewe, Preston, Carlisle, Edinburgh, Perth and Inverness and a GLC - Cardiff via Manchester? also if0a multiple unit as your suggesting were to be used then reroute the Glasgow lowland via Kilmarnock and Dumfries offering a direct service to London with the lowland portions joining/splitting at Carlisle.


If new stock with better more modern facilities were used and tikets reasonably priced I think it would be popular particularly as the budget airlines are pulling a lot of routes at present. Peter what intirior spec is your idea? I'd have said wifi and plugs for all and full ensuites in FC?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
james I like your thinking!

 

[sprinterguy]

Funnily enough, about two months ago I wrote a full length article ( which I submitted to one of the railway magazines ) suggesting a Sleeper Multiple Unit, the difference is mine is bi mode with a diesel at one end ( luggage space at that end ) and electric at the other end ( seated accomodation in that end ) with three Sleeper cars in between, sized so that four of these five car sets would occupy the same length as a loco + 16 Caledonian rake. No power axles under the sleeping accomodation in it either.

That sounds like a pretty good idea.

 

[Blindtraveler]

next job is for him to make a longer one for daytime trains!

I do wonder though if they have looked at rollingstock propperly though? If these crazy proposals along with indepemdence come into being who is to say DFT woant want X BR stuff elsewhere? There goes all the sprinters. Other BR built stock was0designed for Scotland so would probs be ok but there would be large gaps without 156s/8s

 

[marks87]

It's too simplistic to talk in terms of the DfT "taking" units from ScotRail, because in the event of independence, there would be a complex settlement ranging from this kind of thing, to Scotland's share of the national debt.

 

[Blindtraveler]

agree but just wondering if they had thought of it!

 

[Nym]

Remember most stock is owned by 'English' ROSCOs

 

[marks87]

Remember most stock is owned by 'English' ROSCOs

British

I know you said it in jest, but figuring out exactly what Scotland has a "stake" in will probably never be done accurately, because there's thousands of other examples out there. So in this instance, although the ROSCOs are based in England, the taxes they've paid have gone into the central pot from which Scotland has benefited (and so on).

For the record, I'm on the fence but teetering towards "naw".

 

[Peter Mugridge]

and a luggage compartment with the deezol although theoretically this could be used as a catering/buffet area also?


If new stock with better more modern facilities were used and tikets reasonably priced I think it would be popular particularly as the budget airlines are pulling a lot of routes at present. Peter what intirior spec is your idea? I'd have said wifi and plugs for all and full ensuites in FC?

First point - no, because you'd put the bar area at the seated end wouldn't you? Which in fact I have done...

Second point - I did not write down in any detail about specifications such as wifi as I would expect this would either go without saying or the technology would have all changed again by 2014 anyway... But I did remark on en-suites by suggesting no because it would be much cheaper and easier to upgrade the facilities at the termini. I did suggest a shower unit could be installed in a specific location of the train, though. This would be in place of one of the two disabled toilets my sketch shows at the diesel end of the unit. ( That still leaves two disabled toilets per unit, plus two normal sized ones ).

As to the cabins themselves, I came up with a way of making more usable space within the same dimensions as the existing Mk3 cabins, but I will not detail those on here just yet, pending possible publication elsewhere.

But as I posted my outline design sketch on this forum a year ago, there is no reason why I cannot post that again here. Attached.

 

[Blindtraveler]

think your rite about the ensuits peter, not needed its good to see that someone believes in the service that much that they make the effort to do something like this!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Remember most stock is owned by 'English' ROSCOs

The ROSCOs are not really very 'English'.

Current owners are:

Eversholt: 3i/Morgan Stanley
Angel: Babcock & Brown and others (was Royal Bank of Scotland!)
Porterbrook: Deutsche Bank/Lloyds TSB/BNP Paribas (was Abbey/Santander)

 

[northwichcat]

The ROSCOs are not really very 'English'.

Current owners are:

Eversholt: 3i/Morgan Stanley
Angel: Babcock & Brown and others (was Royal Bank of Scotland!)
Porterbrook: Deutsche Bank/Lloyds TSB/BNP Paribas (was Abbey/Santander)

What are the registered addresses of the leasing companies though?

Arriva are registered as a company based in the North East of England despite being German owned now.

 

[Nym]

As to the cabins themselves, I came up with a way of making more usable space within the same dimensions as the existing Mk3 cabins, but I will not detail those on here just yet, pending possible publication elsewhere.

But as I posted my outline design sketch on this forum a year ago, there is no reason why I cannot post that again here. Attached.

Looks like a reasonable amount of cabins to have, would a kitchen/buffet be incorporated into the bar?

Personally I'd have 10F,20S,40T cabins, with the T cabins being of the japanise kind, but I don't know the sleeper market well enough to say weather this would work or not, if it where a budget cabin at a budget price, I'm thinking <£40/single lowland and <£60/single highland, there could be a good market there, especially with how well the 'bargin births' currently do. But this would literally be a bunk bed with mod cons in it and a shared space with everyone else, youth hostel style, but an enclosed jap style bunk.

And for those who say this would be a special run of units, it wouldn't, it would be an add on order to whatever LDPE EMU is currently in run, it could even be a follow on to the 380 style units, or somthing else that comes about at the time with doors at the ends. It doesn't NEED a diesel generator on board per ce, but having one would remove the need for loco haulage north of Edinbrugh, but theres nothing to stop it being part of the order for units that will have compatable locos anyway.

 

[LE Greys]

Cutting the Aberdeen/Inverness-London services would be a complete pain in the backside for me. I'm typing this from Aberdeen University, yet my nearest major station is Stevenage. It's already bad enough having to change at Peterborough or York with luggage, changing at Edinburgh as well would absolutely take the biscuit. All the trains are heavily loaded through Edinburgh, not just on either side. I reckon that terminating them short would put off a lot of people. Fine if they want to reduce overcrowding, but not if they don't want more people to fly. EasyJet already have a busy service to Luton, and it just might get busier.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Looks like a reasonable amount of cabins to have, would a kitchen/buffet be incorporated into the bar?

Personally I'd have 10F,20S,40T cabins, with the T cabins being of the japanise kind, but I don't know the sleeper market well enough to say weather this would work or not, if it where a budget cabin at a budget price, I'm thinking <£40/single lowland and <£60/single highland, there could be a good market there, especially with how well the 'bargin births' currently do. But this would literally be a bunk bed with mod cons in it and a shared space with everyone else, youth hostel style, but an enclosed jap style bunk.

And for those who say this would be a special run of units, it wouldn't, it would be an add on order to whatever LDPE EMU is currently in run, it could even be a follow on to the 380 style units, or somthing else that comes about at the time with doors at the ends. It doesn't NEED a diesel generator on board per ce, but having one would remove the need for loco haulage north of Edinbrugh, but theres nothing to stop it being part of the order for units that will have compatable locos anyway.

Nym,

I don't see why not regards the food.

True, it doesn't need a diesel ( note - it's not a generator but a full engine ) per se, but one point of doing this EDSMU idea is to cut costs by eliminating loco haulage and by simplifying the joining / splitting of trains, which also increases flexibility allowing for a modest expansion of Sleeper routes.

Could it be adapted from the 380s? Well, the bodyshell would be rather different especially as it is articulated, so probably not easily but the maths I came up with showed that even on a like for like replacement basis the number of vehicles required would be reasonable enough for a production run and if even part of the modest expansion was done, the figures improve dramatically.

Again, I can't g into further detail because it's all in the submitted article I'm afraid.

 

[route:oxford]

the roscos are not really very 'english'.

Current owners are:

Eversholt: 3i/morgan stanley
angel: Babcock & brown and others (was royal bank of scotland!)
porterbrook: Deutsche bank/lloyds tsb/bnp paribas (was abbey/santander)

eversholt rail holdings (uk) limited
210 pentonville road
london
great britain
united kingdom
n1 9jy

angel trains limited
portland house
bressenden place
london
sw1e 5bh

porterbrook leasing company limited
ivatt house 7 the point
pinnacle way pride park
derby
united kingdom
de24 8zs

lloyds banking group plc
the mound
edinburgh
eh1 1yz

 

[LE Greys]

eversholt rail holdings (uk) limited
210 pentonville road
london
great britain
united kingdom
n1 9jy

angel trains limited
portland house
bressenden place
london
sw1e 5bh

porterbrook leasing company limited
ivatt house 7 the point
pinnacle way pride park
derby
united kingdom
de24 8zs

lloyds banking group plc
the mound
edinburgh
eh1 1yz

Assume that the latter will relocate to London to avoid being cut off from the City - unless President Salmond <shudder> decides to make Scotland a tax haven, which would annoy the EU. It might also mess up the "Tartan Pound" idea (pegging the Scottish currency to Sterling) that I've heard of.

 

[Blindtraveler]

oo what a thought. In response to your
earlier post on ABD loadings I agree with you and think the shuving of an HST load of pacs onto a single 170 complete with eggy smelling toilet would be the best advert for NX/Megabus ever known!