CAF Caledonian Sleeper LHCS

[NotATrainspott]

I just saw this link posted on scot-rail.co.uk. It's the franchise agreement, back from May 2014, and buried within it is all information (including layout diagrams) about the new CAF rolling stock.

Club car:

Cabins:

Seated:

Composite pod bed/cabins/accessible

Pod beds:

 

[Bletchleyite]

2+1 in the pods? Not quite as good as I expected.

Neil

 

[najaB]

2+1 in the pods? Not quite as good as I expected.

I think it's quite reasonable - decent chance of getting a solo pod if you're travelling alone, and couples can be side by side.

 

[bavvo]

I think it's quite reasonable - decent chance of getting a solo pod if you're travelling alone, and couples can be side by side.

I agree. In fact I'm not sure why they are even bothering with the seated coach at all, the pods look like a much better option. I would have just ordered either cabins or pod coaches, and left the lower value seated option to the likes of Megabus, who are always going to win on price anyway.

Overall quite an impressive showing, at least on paper. I am both surprised and delighted that they are building new stock, shows that someone has some confidence in its future.

 

[hurricanemk1c]

Look very similar to the 10-year old CAF Mark 4's over here!

Wathcing with interest as to how it all performs

 

[Mojo]

I think it's quite reasonable - decent chance of getting a solo pod if you're travelling alone, and couples can be side by side.

How many couples travel on the Sleeper service, and how many of them will travel in the pods as opposed to berths?

The diagram makes it look quite cramped and it's not quite clear how the person on the window seat will actually get out when the seats are fully reclined into beds. Maybe an arrangement like in British Airways Club World (image) may be more appropriate?

 

[Failed Unit]

I would agree, about 10 years ago the club world on BA did involve climbing over your neighbour (although I don't think they were flat beds back then) but as the techology exists we may as well use it.

 

[najaB]

How many couples travel on the Sleeper service, and how many of them will travel in the pods as opposed to berths?

I'd say it's not uncommon - I suppose I should say 'pairs' as opposed to couples. When I've travelled in the seated coach there's nearly always a few pairs (e.g. friends, parent/child).

 

[WatcherZero]

Well explains why we couldn't work out what the fifth coach type would be, its essentially a dedicated disabled coach with Pods and Bed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think it's quite reasonable - decent chance of getting a solo pod if you're travelling alone, and couples can be side by side.

I'd have vastly preferred longitudinal couchettes, which would have fitted in more people, been more comfortable and had better privacy with curtains. I knew that wasn't what they were going to do, though.

Like this:

http://aspiringbackpacker.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Screen-shot-2013-09-25-at-12.44.36-PM.png

They look spartan but are *very* comfortable, I'd choose them over a normal cabin because I sleep so much better when that way round, as you avoid the "blood to head, then feet, then head" thing you get when cornering on a transverse bed or couchette. I've never had as good a night's sleep on a train as when I used one of DB's old Talgo sets with these (sadly no longer in service).

Actually, mentioning Talgo - tilt on a night train (for comfort rather than speed) also enhanced the experience.

I sort of see your point, though. At least you can get the 1 seat. Though disappointingly the bays are shorter so taller people couldn't stretch out.

Anyone else notice that in the lounge car the seats are misaligned to the windows? That's a bit rubbish - you can't enjoy breakfast approaching Fort William if you can't see out!

Edit: Another thing I noticed of some interest - 22m vehicles, which is a very unusual length. Will this perhaps solve the issue of train length in a different way than the present use of 20m seated and lounge cars?

Neil

 

[najaB]

The diagram makes it look quite cramped and it's not quite clear how the person on the window seat will actually get out when the seats are fully reclined into beds.

Looking at the plans again, I think they are shown in the reclined position: there is just over 2m per pod. A standard single bed is 1.9m (I imagine these will be a little shorter) so that leaves space to get by.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree. In fact I'm not sure why they are even bothering with the seated coach at all

I'm not surprised it's there, but with pods at 2+1 (I know the pitch is much higher) I'm surprised the seating wasn't 2+2. It was on DB's Talgo sets.

the pods look like a much better option. I would have just ordered either cabins or pod coaches, and left the lower value seated option to the likes of Megabus, who are always going to win on price anyway.

Megabus of course have the pod competitor (sort-of) on the Gold services, though these are bunks and the 2 side is rather intimately close together (basically a double bed). These are quite cramped but surprisingly comfortable, and I slept quite well when I used it - so as I woke up briefly each time we turned off the motorway to pull into the services to change drivers, gives me a curious set of memories from that night - it felt like a compressed night of pulling into the services repeatedly then arriving at Glasgow! For the 25 quid I paid for it it was superb value.

Overall quite an impressive showing, at least on paper. I am both surprised and delighted that they are building new stock, shows that someone has some confidence in its future.

Despite the slight concerns noted in my other post about the slightly not-thought-through layouts in terms of window alignment and such, I certainly agree.

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Looking at the plans again, I think they are shown in the reclined position: there is just over 2m per pod. A standard single bed is 1.9m (I imagine these will be a little shorter) so that leaves space to get by.

Increasing numbers of people are taller than that, and we don't buy silly British length 6' 3" beds, but instead go for either custom made longer ones, or increasingly buy the European sizes sold by Ikea etc for a full 2m length mattress.

The pitch is 2m, but there will be the seat back taking up some of that.

OK, the 2 side will be fine for tourist traffic, but I imagine it'll be book well in advance for the 1 side for business travellers who mostly travel alone!

If they are shown in the reclined position, most of my lower leg will be off the end, in any case. Shan't be bothering if that is true - airline flatbeds tend at least to be full length.

Neil

 

[najaB]

Megabus of course have the pod competitor (sort-of) on the Gold services, though these are bunks and the 2 side is rather intimately close together (basically a double bed). These are quite cramped but surprisingly comfortable, and I slept quite well when I used it...

Proving that it's different strokes for different folks, I think that the Megabus bunk could be used as an instrument of torture - I have never had a more uncomfortable night's sleep torment and that includes nights spent on a yoga mat on a concrete floor.

If they are shown in the reclined position, most of my lower leg will be off the end, in any case. Shan't be bothering if that is true - airline flatbeds tend at least to be full length.

Thinking about it, I think they are shown in an intermediate position as they are longer than the seats in the seated carriage, but there should be less floor space if they were fully reclined.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Proving that it's different strokes for different folks, I think that the Megabus bunk could be used as an instrument of torture - I have never had a more uncomfortable night's sleep torment and that includes nights spent on a yoga mat on a concrete floor.

Indeed so - on the railway I can think of few better examples than the fGW very high back seats (I love these, and in some ways thought it a shame the First West Coast deal fell through, as there were indications that there might have been a full Pendolino refurb with a full seat replacement, which might have included these seats being fitted) vs. the East Coast ones (that do my back in to the point of being painful, so I won't travel East Coast except in First Class). Many, many people think the opposite

On the Megabus I was surprised I found it so comfortable. I was in one of the hammocks, if that makes any difference. I was a *very* tight fit (I'm 6' 4", big backside and fairly wide shoulders) but it was just the right shape. I can't sleep in a seat at all because my neck always goes into an uncomfortable position even with a pillow - so I'd never have taken the seated sleeper Megabus.

Thinking about it, I think they are shown in an intermediate position as they are longer than the seats in the seated carriage, but there should be less floor space if they were fully reclined.

Yes, if this is the case there will perhaps be just enough space to squeeze past at the end. Possibly that's why the 1 side bays are 2m and the 2 side bays are very slightly wider - the 1 side bays don't require any extra space to squeeze past, the 2 side do.

Neil

 

[cf111]

I would agree, about 10 years ago the club world on BA did involve climbing over your neighbour (although I don't think they were flat beds back then) but as the techology exists we may as well use it.

Club World does still involve clambering over your neighbour if you're in the window seat! All lie-flat now though.

 

[CosherB]

Having experienced the same Club World on a BA A380 from Los Angeles, I'd say it was more than perfectly acceptable.

 

[bavvo]

I'd have vastly preferred longitudinal couchettes, which would have fitted in more people, been more comfortable and had better privacy with curtains. I knew that wasn't what they were going to do, though.

Like this:

http://aspiringbackpacker.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Screen-shot-2013-09-25-at-12.44.36-PM.png

They look spartan but are *very* comfortable, I'd choose them over a normal cabin because I sleep so much better when that way round, as you avoid the "blood to head, then feet, then head" thing you get when cornering on a transverse bed or couchette. I've never had as good a night's sleep on a train as when I used one of DB's old Talgo sets with these (sadly no longer in service).

Neil

I think these are even better. Amtrak use these (Superliner roomettes) on their long distance services.
I crossed the US in a superliner berth like this solo a couple of years ago as part of a business trip, and I can say they are very comfy.

You get the advantage of a private cabin for one or two people, a reasonable bed at night, and a comfy chair plus table during the day.

If they used a carriage of these then you get somewhere extra for people to eat, meaning less space needed for the lounge/club car, and possibly using the carriage for a revenue earning daytime trip as well.

I tried to work it out, and I think you could squeeze 16 berths into a Mk3 sized carriage (8 per side), so 16 - 32 passengers. A slightly better ratio than the std sleeper carriages with more privacy than pods).

 

[ainsworth74]

I think these are even better. Amtrak use these (Superliner roomettes) on their long distance services.

Though they really wouldn't fit in our loading gauge! Very large those Superliner cars hence they can have very fancy accommodations for their passengers. I think Neil's got a decent point about using longitudinal couchettes as those should easily fit within a vehicle designed for our loading guage.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Though they really wouldn't fit in our loading gauge! Very large those Superliner cars hence they can have very fancy accommodations for their passengers. I think Neil's got a decent point about using longitudinal couchettes as those should easily fit within a vehicle designed for our loading guage.

That's essentially how the DB longitudinal couchettes worked - you had that arrangement on each side of the aisle with a fold-down bed. They'd easily fit the UK loading gauge - they are commonly used in Malaysia and Thailand, where their metre-gauge trains are roughly UK-sized, and the DB Talgos weren't much bigger.

Neil

 

[bavvo]

Though they really wouldn't fit in our loading gauge! Very large those Superliner cars hence they can have very fancy accommodations for their passengers. I think Neil's got a decent point about using longitudinal couchettes as those should easily fit within a vehicle designed for our loading guage.

Yes, the US Superliner cars are insanely huge!

However, the roomette itself is listed as being 106cm wide, trim that to 100cm, then you could possibly squeeze two in with a 60cm corridor in between, which might just be possible since the internal dimensions on the new stock looks like ~260cm. Or even Roomettes one side, and Pods the other (All speculation of course...)

.

 

[cf111]

Having experienced the same Club World on a BA A380 from Los Angeles, I'd say it was more than perfectly acceptable.

Oh I agree, I think I'd need to start seriously re-evaluating my life if I started complaining about business class air travel!

 

[bavvo]

I'd have vastly preferred longitudinal couchettes, which would have fitted in more people, been more comfortable and had better privacy with curtains. I knew that wasn't what they were going to do, though.

Like this:

http://aspiringbackpacker.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Screen-shot-2013-09-25-at-12.44.36-PM.png

Neil

Just thought of a flaw with that setup. Not everyone will want to lie down for the entire journey. If a departure is early evening, then it's quite likely people will want to sit down to eat, or read etc. Not easy in a fixed bunk. Same goes for the morning. Not that great if you have 'No access to the lounge car' as per Serco policy. If you do have lounge access, then they would probably need more seated lounge area, using up potential revenue earning space. Though they still look more comfy for sleeping than the reclining seats.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just thought of a flaw with that setup. Not everyone will want to lie down for the entire journey. If a departure is early evening, then it's quite likely people will want to sit down to eat, or read etc. Not easy in a fixed bunk. Same goes for the morning. Not that great if you have 'No access to the lounge car' as per Serco policy. If you do have lounge access, then they would probably need more seated lounge area, using up potential revenue earning space. Though they still look more comfy for sleeping than the reclining seats.

They aren't fixed bunks, even though it looks like they might be. The top one folds up, and the bottom one turns into a 1+1 table.

Neil

 

[Furrball]

Re Neil Williams, had not noticed that, windows alignment in lounge car is indeed awful especially given the size of the seating bays basically is that of the windows yet due to the design alignment is poor. But I suppose there will be a TV and other entertainment in the lounge car so people will not be interested in looking out of the windows. ...

 

[Mojo]

Looking at the plans again, I think they are shown in the reclined position: there is just over 2m per pod. A standard single bed is 1.9m (I imagine these will be a little shorter) so that leaves space to get by.

I thought that was quite clear from the diagram. Still not quite sure how you are supposed to get out without climbing over the person next to you, unless you de-recline? the bed though. Certainly I never get out of my bed at home by leaving from the bottom end!

 

[bavvo]

They aren't fixed bunks, even though it looks like they might be. The top one folds up, and the bottom one turns into a 1+1 table.

Neil

Ah, in that case objection cheerfully withdrawn .
A shame then that they aren't going for something like that, as it would be preferable to the seated coach for me, and not far off its capacity.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Something I have been wondering, why aren't they going for EMU stock rather than loco hauled for the new build?
I would have thought it would have had lower running costs, with London - Scotland traffic all under the wires, and the Highland portion could still be picked up as now by Diesel locos at Edinburgh. Presumably the fuel costs would be lower, you avoid the loco hire for London - Edinburgh/Glasgow (do locos have higher track charges too?), simpler ECS movements and extra platform space at Euston, and easier shunting at Edinburgh. Longer term if the wires ever extended to Aberdeen or Inverness it would improve still further.

Was it considered? Are EMU traction motors considered too noisy for a sleeper?

 

[Fishplate84]

A sleeper emu? I can see the logic but not quite the silent cosseting ride you'd want with a sleeper, with all that electric stuff whining away under your pillow. I suppose there's a lot of diversions at night too so not always under electric.

 

[sprinterguy]

A sleeper emu? I can see the logic but not quite the silent cosseting ride you'd want with a sleeper, with all that electric stuff whining away under your pillow. I suppose there's a lot of diversions at night too so not always under electric.

I don't find the whine from an electric motor on the likes of a Pendolino to be any more intrusive than the wheelset noise from a mark 3 carriage, and even at worst it would only affect a small number of cabins at the carriage ends, just the same as the "less desirable" cabins over the bogies in the mark 3s at present. With modern standards of sound proofing and more consistent levels of yaw damping possible with modern units it should not be hard to produce a sleeper EMU that is at least as quiet and comfortable as the current mark 3 stock.

You wouldn't need electric motors under every carriage anyway, with for example three out of five carriages powered on the new 5-car IEP trains, or six vehicles on a 9-cat Pendolino.

The only diversion that seems to take the Caledonian Sleeper away from the wires is when it runs via the ECML, which only constitutes a short length requiring diesel power at the London end and is not a frequent occurrence.

I know that forum member Peter Mugridge submitted a design for a 5-car Bi-mode sleeper unit to one of the railway magazines a little while back, which was published.

 

[bavvo]

Diversions would also affect the current loco haulage anyway as they are electric, so not really much different.

The noise is what I thought might be a problem. Never really noticed much motor noise when I've been on a daytime train, especially with all the other racket, but a sleeper does need to be as quite as possible.

But if you could muffle the noise adequately then I think it would be a more efficient option.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I know that forum member Peter Mugridge submitted a design for a 5-car Bi-mode sleeper unit to one of the railway magazines a little while back, which was published.

I did indeed; it can be found online on this forum somewhere and also on the TS2014 consultation report, which unusually took the step of including the entire magazine article as a part of the consultation.