Caledonian Sleeper

[6Z09]

Can I please ask, pre covid, what happened to the locomotive off the Edinburgh lowlander. At Carstairs of course the two portions join and the Glasgow loco continues south. Did the Edinburgh locomotive wait there until 6am for the return lowlander sleeper?
I ask because having looked at what could happen with the Cally sleeper, you need 3 x 73s per night and 5 x 92s per night however I have looked at an alternative using 3 x 73s and only 4 x 92s. I don't think this is currently done since I can't find any paths in RTT for this to work logistically.
My alternative is make the loco off which does Edinburgh to Carstairs on the lowlander run back to Edinburgh to convey the highlander (and the 92 loco off the highlander which uncoupled at Edinburgh then going to Carstairs to haul the Edinburgh lowlander north to Edinburgh).

I also ask why does Cally need 3x 73s spare? A peak of 3 is needed so having 3 spare is quite extreme. Account for 3 operational and 1 in for repairs, you then need 1 spare and as has been mentioned above, it shows alternative locos can haul the sleeper so surely you should only need 2 spares rather than 3? Can anyone expand on that?

Given the subsidy that is given to the sleeper, having such a high requirement for the locomotives isn't good as they are paying to have them sat around half the day doing nothing.

Inverness and Fort William portions are double headers, 2x73s on each train.

 

[berneyarms]

Inverness and Fort William portions are double headers, 2x73s on each train.

Only the Inverness portion is a double header. Fort William and Aberdeen are single headed.

 

[6Z09]

Only the Inverness portion is a double header. Fort William and Aberdeen are single headed.

Think your wrong, Fort William has been double headed since restarting.

 

[TimboM]

Inverness and Fort William portions are double headers, 2x73s on each train.

Only the Inverness portion is a double header. Fort William and Aberdeen are single headed.

@6Z09 is correct - currently it's 2x 73/9s on each of the Fort William and Inverness portions (or a 66 + 73/9 on the Inverness as it is this week).

In "normal times" you're correct in that it's usually 1x 73/9 each on the Fort Bill and Aberdeen and 2x 73/9s on the Inverness, however can be 2x 73/9s on Fort William if required for operational reasons (e.g. Load 6, poor railhead conditions).

Anyhow, the point being 4x 73/9s are required each night, leaving one on maintenance and one spare. With a micro-fleet that's the only loco able to haul the Sleepers north of Edinburgh, 6 engines is certainly not too many by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[berneyarms]

Think your wrong, Fort William has been double headed since restarting.

Sorry, I was referring to normal times, which was what the other poster was asking about.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2020 ==

@6Z09 is correct - currently it's 2x 73/9s on each of the Fort William and Inverness portions (or a 66 + 73/9 on the Inverness as it is this week).

In "normal times" you're correct in that it's usually 1x 73/9 each on the Fort Bill and Aberdeen and 2x 73/9s on the Inverness, however can be 2x 73/9s on Fort William if required for operational reasons (e.g. Load 6, poor railhead conditions).

Anyhow, the point being 4x 73/9s are required each night, leaving one on maintenance and one spare. With a micro-fleet that's the only loco able to haul the Sleepers north of Edinburgh, 6 engines is certainly not too many by any stretch of the imagination.

Agreed on all counts!

 

[TimboM]

Can I please ask, pre covid, what happened to the locomotive off the Edinburgh lowlander. At Carstairs of course the two portions join and the Glasgow loco continues south. Did the Edinburgh locomotive wait there until 6am for the return lowlander sleeper?
I ask because having looked at what could happen with the Cally sleeper, you need 3 x 73s per night and 5 x 92s per night however I have looked at an alternative using 3 x 73s and only 4 x 92s. I don't think this is currently done since I can't find any paths in RTT for this to work logistically.
My alternative is make the loco off which does Edinburgh to Carstairs on the lowlander run back to Edinburgh to convey the highlander (and the 92 loco off the highlander which uncoupled at Edinburgh then going to Carstairs to haul the Edinburgh lowlander north to Edinburgh).

I also ask why does Cally need 3x 73s spare? A peak of 3 is needed so having 3 spare is quite extreme. Account for 3 operational and 1 in for repairs, you then need 1 spare and as has been mentioned above, it shows alternative locos can haul the sleeper so surely you should only need 2 spares rather than 3? Can anyone expand on that?

Given the subsidy that is given to the sleeper, having such a high requirement for the locomotives isn't good as they are paying to have them sat around half the day doing nothing.

Aside from the other flaws already pointed out (i.e. 7x 92s and 4x 73/9s required each night for a start) GB Railfreight are contracted to provide the traction and drivers for the Sleepers for a set amount. GB then have the number of locos available they believe they need to meet the requirements of the contract. As both GBRf and CS are commercial operations, and locomotives cost considerable amounts to reinstate, overhaul, modify and run, they'll have no more than the necessary.

They are also GBRf locos, not Caledonian Sleeper locos. Provided GB deliver the service to the required standard (e.g. within punctuality and cancellations targets) GB can use their 73/9s and 92s on other work (and do).

In short, fewer locos wouldn't mean less subsidy.

As a side note, running the Carstairs engine back to Edinburgh to work the Down Highlander (1M16) - and vice versa in the morning - is used when there's a 92 short in Scotland, or the booked engine at Waverley for 1M16 has an issue. However, it wouldn't be a Plan A as overnight possessions mean it's not always possible to run the loco back to Edinburgh and (more importantly) doing this would leave no Plan B or other options if one of the 92s north of the border has an issue. The normal diagram using four 92s north of the border (Glasgow ECS, Up Lowlander, Up Highlander and Carstairs portion) means if one sits down, there's Plans B and C that can be used to still operate the service.

 

[221129]

I also ask why does Cally need 3x 73s spare? A peak of 3 is needed so having 3 spare is quite extreme. Account for 3 operational and 1 in for repairs, you then need 1 spare and as has been mentioned above, it shows alternative locos can haul the sleeper so surely you should only need 2 spares rather than 3? Can anyone expand on that?

Doesnt one of the Highlanders often run doubles up? Not sure if it is Inverness or Fort William.

Also they tend to run doubled up in poor weather.

 

[TimboM]

Doesnt one of the Highlanders often run doubles up? Not sure if it is Inverness or Fort William.

Also they tend to run doubled up in poor weather.

See above responses...

 

[Drumtochty]

? A peak of 3 is needed so having 3 spare is quite extreme. Account for 3 operational and 1 in for repairs, you then need 1 spare and as has been mentioned above, it shows alternative locos can haul the sleeper so surely you should only need 2 spares rather than 3? Can anyone expand on that?

Given the subsidy that is given to the sleeper, having such a high requirement for the locomotives isn't good as they are paying to have them sat around half the day doing nothing.

The Inverness train requires two locos due to the terrain it goes through. That leaves one hot spare loco and one loco being out for maintenance and exams. That would seem to be a sensible number.

 

[CW2]

<snip>
I also ask why does Cally need 3x 73s spare? A peak of 3 is needed so having 3 spare is quite extreme. Account for 3 operational and 1 in for repairs, you then need 1 spare and as has been mentioned above, it shows alternative locos can haul the sleeper so surely you should only need 2 spares rather than 3? Can anyone expand on that?

Given the subsidy that is given to the sleeper, having such a high requirement for the locomotives isn't good as they are paying to have them sat around half the day doing nothing.

As explained by others, four 73s are needed for traffic each night (in the normal timetable), so 6 is a suitable sized loco pool. You could (theoretically at least) get more work out of them by using them in the daytime between sleeper duties. However in passenger terms there aren't any suitable loco-hauled trains they could work, so unless you also invest in additional rolling stock there's nothing they can do. I don't think there is any suitable freight work for them. Bear in mind too that the long distances covered by the sleepers and the Highland weather can - on occasions - result in heavy delays. So there is an inherent reliability problem in diagramming them to do something extra.
If there were more freight work on offer from Inverness, then making 1S25 / 1M16 a diagrammed 66 + 73/9 combination (as has happened recently) might allow the 66 to work some freight between passenger duties. I don't think that would represent a cost saving though - replacing a 73/9 with a 66.

 

[JohnMcL7]

I also ask why does Cally need 3x 73s spare? A peak of 3 is needed so having 3 spare is quite extreme. Account for 3 operational and 1 in for repairs, you then need 1 spare and as has been mentioned above, it shows alternative locos can haul the sleeper so surely you should only need 2 spares rather than 3? Can anyone expand on that?

Given the subsidy that is given to the sleeper, having such a high requirement for the locomotives isn't good as they are paying to have them sat around half the day doing nothing.

Which post are you referring to about alternative locomotives that can haul the sleeper? A 66 can be used in place of one of the pair of 73's on the Inverness section but the 66 can't haul the sleeper on its own.

 

[DannyMich2018]

Since the Class 73's were converted there's always been at least one way in works somewhere at any one time so never or rarely been full strength.

 

[47271]

Since the Class 73's were converted there's always been at least one way in works somewhere at any one time so never or rarely been full strength.

Quite - given the frequency of 66s appearing in combo, regular users of the Inverness section get the strong impression that there aren't enough 73s, far less that there are too many spares running around.

 

[ajrm]

The other issue is service resilience: if a 92 is used on the Carstairs portion of the Lowlander and then the Highlander as suggested then a delay on one risks being transmitted to the other. Keeping them separate makes a lot of sense.

It’s also worth remembering that it’s not unknown for 2 x 73s to appear on the Aberdeen portion (when the line is shut north of Dundee for engineering, as it is regularly at the start of each year, Sunday’s 1B16 starts at Dundee with the ECS running in from Polmadie and a loco on each end to avoid running round). Having 6 gives a little more flexibility for those sorts of moves.

 

[markymark2000]

Thank you all for explaining the locomotive situation.

 

[jopsuk]

They are also GBRf locos, not Caledonian Sleeper locos. Provided GB deliver the service to the required standard (e.g. within punctuality and cancellations targets) GB can use their 73/9s and 92s on other work (and do).

Is there any work the 73/9s do other than the sleeper? Appreciate the 92s do haul freight

 

[TimboM]

Is there any work the 73/9s do other than the sleeper? Appreciate the 92s do haul freight

Charters, loco/stock moves, Royal Scotsman occasionally, hauled the odd freight train as Thunderbirds in their time.

 

[DannyMich2018]

Quite - given the frequency of 66s appearing in combo, regular users of the Inverness section get the strong impression that there aren't enough 73s, far less that there are too many spares running around.

Maybe 6 should have been rebuilt instead of five.

 

[TimboM]

Maybe 6 should have been rebuilt instead of five.

There are six.

 

[43 302]

Maybe 6 should have been rebuilt instead of five.

There are six.

Technically GBRf have Eleven 73/9s.

 

[TimboM]

Technically GBRf have Eleven 73/9s.

Technically correct.

However, the other five used on the Network Rail trains are not identical to the six Sleeper ones (even before Dellners / CAF mods are factored in).

Driving controls are also different and a driver who signs 966-971 would need to separately learn 961-965 (and vice versa).

 

[43 302]

Technically correct.

However, the other five used on the Network Rail trains are not identical to the six Sleeper ones (even before Dellners / CAF mods are factored in).

Driving controls are also different and a driver who signs 966-971 would need to separately learn 961-965 (and vice versa).

I did not know that, presumed the only differences were the paint and the couplers. Thanks.

 

[JohnMcL7]

I did not know that, presumed the only differences were the paint and the couplers. Thanks.

There's some details of the changes for the sleeper 73/9's here:

scot-rail.co.uk » Class 73

 

[hwl]

There's some details of the changes for the sleeper 73/9's here:

scot-rail.co.uk » Class 73

Not covered in that - Throttle control setings are also different.

 

[DannyMich2018]

There are six.

Okay, maybe 7 then!

 

[BRX]

Has there yet been an instance where a service has been cancelled due to non availability of a 73?

 

[43 302]

Has there yet been an instance where a service has been cancelled due to non availability of a 73?

66s are regularly used with a 73.

 

[popeter45]

i am surprised they decided to not make the mark 5's capable of being chain hauled for emergency/depo moves
could have left the ability to use other loco's like 67's when 73's where in short supply

 

[TimboM]

Has there yet been an instance where a service has been cancelled due to non availability of a 73?

I think there's been one - out of several hundred workings. The six or seven figure sum in converting a seventh would hardly be justified for the 0.1% of times one might be required.

Unsurprisingly, the people who do this for a living rather than commentate from the armchair (with a blank chequebook) appear to have got the fleet size pretty much spot on.

66s are regularly used with a 73.

73/9s were built with the AAR multiple working system so they could work with 66s (and 67s). A 66 + 73/9 is a 'valid' combination and also isn't always because there's not another 73/9 available. For example, 66726's recent stint on the Inverness portion for driving training purposes.

GBRf's job is to get the portions from A to B (and to C and to D) - if they end up doing that on a given night with 3x 66s each hauling a 73/9 that's just providing ETH and acting as coupling translator, then it's job done and there are, by definition, "enough" 73/9s to run the service that night.

 

[43 302]

I think there's been one - out of several hundred workings. The six or seven figure sum in converting a seventh would hardly be justified for the 0.1% of times one might be required.

Unsurprisingly, the people who do this for a living rather than commentate from the armchair (with a blank chequebook) appear to have got the fleet size pretty much spot on.


73/9s were built with the AAR multiple working system so they could work with 66s (and 67s). A 66 + 73/9 is a 'valid' combination and also isn't always because there's not another 73/9 available. For example, 66726's recent stint on the Inverness portion for driving training purposes.

GBRf's job is to get the portions from A to B (and to C and to D) - if they end up doing that on a given night with 3x 66s each hauling a 73/9 that's just providing ETH and acting as coupling translator, then it's job done and there are, by definition, "enough" 73/9s to run the service that night.

I just remembered an occasion where the CS liveried 47 operated with a 73 with two drivers.