• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Caledonian Sleeper

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,734
I just remembered an occasion where the CS liveried 47 operated with a 73 with two drivers.
Yes, 47727 worked one 1S25/1M16 return trip with 73971 on 8th November (2019).

The following day S25/M16 ran with a solo 73/9. Enough said about the 47's contribution to proceedings on that particular foray to Inverness!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Peter Sarf

Established Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
9,588
Location
Croydon
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.

Would GBRF be temped to convert more 73s to 73/9s if any are available AND could be used on other workings. Answer probably no as GBRF seem happy to use 66s in place of one half of a pair of 73/9s where needed.
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,734
Would GBRF be temped to convert more 73s to 73/9s if any are available AND could be used on other workings. Answer probably no as GBRF seem happy to use 66s in place of one half of a pair of 73/9s where needed.
Not sure what would tempt them? As above, six would appear to be sufficient (supplemented by 66s if needed) and each conversion costs a lot of money and takes a long time to do (not like it'd roll out of Brush next week ready to start repaying the investment). Also as mentioned previously, not a great deal that could be found for them to do at Aberdeen, Inverness and/or Fort William during the day.

Worth remembering that the locos also do the ECS shunts after the trains arrive in the morning and before they leave in the afternoon/early evening, together with taking them through the cleaning facilities etc. and refuelling. After all that's taken into account there's not much time left for the locos to be used elsewhere.

Not really very tempting for a commercial business operating in a world of very tight margins to pay a lot of money for something they don't need and would take a good while to appear.

Incidentally GB do have a couple of 'spare' 73s in store / used as spares donors - 73101 and 73139 at Eastleigh and the bodyshell of 73134 at Brush.
 

jfisher21

Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
218
Good catch up last night for the down highlander, 54 late leaving Watford but on time at Preston, almost seems too fast for a 92!
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,593
Good catch up last night for the down highlander, 54 late leaving Watford but on time at Preston, almost seems too fast for a 92!

It didn’t stop at Crewe, which would have saved it 8-10 mins. Also not looped at Brinklow which saved it another 5-7mins. Add in 23 mins of timetable allowances, and a 4 min late arrival at Preston, and it didn’t pick up that much in pure running.
 

route101

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,244
It didn’t stop at Crewe, which would have saved it 8-10 mins. Also not looped at Brinklow which saved it another 5-7mins. Add in 23 mins of timetable allowances, and a 4 min late arrival at Preston, and it didn’t pick up that much in pure running.

Why did it not stop at Crewe?
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,734
It didn’t stop at Crewe, which would have saved it 8-10 mins. Also not looped at Brinklow which saved it another 5-7mins. Add in 23 mins of timetable allowances, and a 4 min late arrival at Preston, and it didn’t pick up that much in pure running.
Skipping Crewe wasn't an accident, though - required planning/co-ordination from CS Control, GB Control, NR Control, the driver and the Train Manager, as did other arrangements to give it as clear a run as possible and leave Preston on time. Weather was appalling too, so not exactly ideal running conditions. Decent effort by all involved.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,593
Skipping Crewe wasn't an accident, though - required planning/co-ordination from CS Control, GB Control, NR Control, the driver and the Train Manager, as did other arrangements to give it as clear a run as possible and leave Preston on time. Weather was appalling too, so not exactly ideal running conditions. Decent effort by all involved.

Oh yes, I know that. Good effort as you say. It would have been earlier if 1D19 hadn’t got in the way!
 

InOban

On Moderation
Joined
12 Mar 2017
Messages
4,537
And anyway there are no seated passengers, and BTW the current arrangements (no seats, no Glasgow or Aberdeen portions) continue for another month (at least)
 

Bungle965

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
2 Jul 2014
Messages
3,374
Location
Calder Valley
Obviously this is entirely theoretical now, but isn't this based on an assumption that there would be no one at Crewe waiting to board the sleeper wanting to buy a ticket on the train.
The website states (or at least used to) that you could buy on board with the risk that there may not be any room left.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
27,161
Location
Bolton
Obviously this is entirely theoretical now, but isn't this based on an assumption that there would be no one at Crewe waiting to board the sleeper wanting to buy a ticket on the train.
The website states (or at least used to) that you could buy on board with the risk that there may not be any room left.
I was thinking that. Presumably they simply assumed nobody would be.
 

TimboM

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2016
Messages
3,734
Obviously this is entirely theoretical now, but isn't this based on an assumption that there would be no one at Crewe waiting to board the sleeper wanting to buy a ticket on the train.
The website states (or at least used to) that you could buy on board with the risk that there may not be any room left.
As noted above, the seats aren't in use and I doubt walk-up berth fares would be entertained in the current climate with a lot of the services running with high occupancy.

Also, at its scheduled departure time, 1S25 was still south of Stafford, so it'd have been pretty straightforward to check with the Avanti station staff at Crewe that no-one was waiting and get the message to the driver in plenty of time.

The train was routed straight through on the Down Fast, rather than a crawl through P6 over the TPWS magnets, so it was evident that it was confirmed in advance the service wasn't stopping.

I was thinking that. Presumably they simply assumed nobody would be.
No assumptions required - the wonders of modern technology!
 
Last edited:

jfisher21

Member
Joined
21 Mar 2011
Messages
218
Fort William sleeper is full tonight and tomorrow ( I am booked on it tonight) so it may have been full earlier in the week too
 

Drogba11CFC

Member
Joined
15 Sep 2009
Messages
926
If I buy an all-line rover with a 26-30 railcard, would I be able to get the £100 supplement?

I was going to travel up next Wednesday, but I booked on a 16-25 Railcard on the assumption that it covered 26-30 as well. Fortunately I was able to rectify it before I came a cropper at Euston. Am now breaking my journey overnight in Crewe instead.
 

route101

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,244
If I buy an all-line rover with a 26-30 railcard, would I be able to get the £100 supplement?

I was going to travel up next Wednesday, but I booked on a 16-25 Railcard on the assumption that it covered 26-30 as well. Fortunately I was able to rectify it before I came a cropper at Euston. Am now breaking my journey overnight in Crewe instead.


Dont think they would notice.
 

FQTV

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2012
Messages
1,067
The Caledonian Sleeper website now notes that the seated carriage is unavailable until 2nd October (previously 1st September).

I can’t find a notice regarding the Club carriage.

However, also:

Caledonian Sleeper has a unique offering in the UK rail industry by allowing guests to book up to 12 months in advance. Throughout 2020 and into 2021, the UK rail industry will commence a transition project to a new reservation system and a result this has temporarily reduced our ability to offer a 12-month booking window.

Services are currently available to book up to and including Friday, 26 March 2021. This date will remain the last travel date available to book until October 2020, based on the current project timeline from the new reservation system provider.

We appreciate the understanding of our guests at this time and advise those looking to make reservations for dates from Sunday, 28 March 2021 onwards, to check back in October 2020 for the release of these dates.
 

_toommm_

Established Member
Joined
8 Jul 2017
Messages
6,292
Location
South West London
The Caledonian Sleeper website now notes that the seated carriage is unavailable until 2nd October (previously 1st September).

I can’t find a notice regarding the Club carriage.

However, also:

This might be worthy of a new thread, but 'a transition project to a new reservation system'... does that imply we may start doing compulsory reservations on some services permanently?
 

alistairlees

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2016
Messages
4,380
This might be worthy of a new thread, but 'a transition project to a new reservation system'... does that imply we may start doing compulsory reservations on some services permanently?
No, it means NRS is being replaced by RARS2. (RARS2 = Rail Availability and Reservation System, from a Dutch company called Sqills).
 

MrEd

Member
Joined
13 Jan 2019
Messages
599
The Caledonian Sleeper website now notes that the seated carriage is unavailable until 2nd October (previously 1st September).

I can’t find a notice regarding the Club carriage.

I believe that the changes to the catering offering (including the suspension of all catering in the evenings until further notice) are detailed on the website under the ‘Covid-19 changes’ heading. It does not give a specific date for when evening catering or the Club Car will return, but the suggestion is that the Club Car is suspended until further notice. I’m getting the impression that it is unlikely to be reinstated any time soon (as physical distancing will still be needed for the foreseeable future, and the Club Car becomes entirely uneconomical/practically impossible to run if physical distancing is needed in it). I’m not one for speculation, but I would be very surprised if we saw a Club Car open to the public before the summer of 2021, if not later. Of course, CS may decide to make further changes to the catering offering in the meantime- perhaps, for instance, they may keep the simpler breakfast offering (which makes things a *lot* easier for the crew, and means that those daft menu cards can be done away with), or they might decide to come up with a simpler evening menu (perhaps more like the sort of buffet menu that you’d have got on LNER or Greater Anglia Norwich services pre-Covid) that is relatively easy to deliver to passengers in their rooms. It depends how long the Covid restrictions last, I suppose, and how annoyed/inconvenienced passengers are by the lack of evening catering at the moment. I must say I personally found the new Club Car somewhat soulless whenever I used it, and I would not be likely to miss it if I needed to use the sleeper during these times, but I do feel that on a journey of this length, some evening catering provision (even if it is just a very pared-down room service buffet menu) ought to be made, especially as evening meal options at or around Euston are currently also restricted. Perhaps simplifying the on-train catering provision might not be a bad thing- before Covid, it always struck me that the dinner and breakfast service in the Club Car had become quite labour intensive by modern railway standards, far more so than it had been in First Group days.

As for the seated coach, CS have said that this will remain out of action until the end of September/beginning of October but they may well extend this date further. I think that they simply review their Covid policy at the end of each month, and that the end of September is simply when they will review it next. I don’t personally see the issue with reopening the seated coach but it may be the case that it is not an attractive option for as long as face coverings remain mandatory, or perhaps physical distancing is difficult due to the seated coach layout?
 
Last edited:

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
4,477
I also don't see why the seated coach needs to be treated as some sort of special case set apart from other rail services or public transport in general. Especially as it would seem quite feasible simply to allow only a certain proportion of seats to be occupied.
 

haggishunter

Member
Joined
25 Aug 2016
Messages
349
The situation with the seated coach not accepting day passengers on the WHL is unacceptable when there’s so few trains and little capacity between Ft William and Glasgow as it is.

I can sort of understand why they’d prefer not to have people sleeping / doing a full overnight journey in the seats when there are berths available. But the WHL trains are getting busier, and running the seated sleeper coach with no passengers is completely against the message for people to socially distance onboard the limited service.
 

MrEd

Member
Joined
13 Jan 2019
Messages
599
The situation with the seated coach not accepting day passengers on the WHL is unacceptable when there’s so few trains and little capacity between Ft William and Glasgow as it is.

I can sort of understand why they’d prefer not to have people sleeping / doing a full overnight journey in the seats when there are berths available. But the WHL trains are getting busier, and running the seated sleeper coach with no passengers is completely against the message for people to socially distance onboard the limited service.

I agree entirely. The FW seated coach could easily be reinstated for day passengers between Edinburgh and Fort William; it can‘t be too hard for CS to find a way of issuing reservations for this to ensure that social distancing is complied with (and day passengers will not take issue with the need to wear masks). The cynic within me is wondering whether CS are trying to find an excuse not to run the Fort William seated coach as a day service (which they have been trying to find since 2015, as their management clearly see it as something of a nuisance). It certainly looks that way at the moment.
 

Leisurefirst

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2013
Messages
466
I agree entirely. The FW seated coach could easily be reinstated for day passengers between Edinburgh and Fort William; it can‘t be too hard for CS to find a way of issuing reservations for this to ensure that social distancing is complied with (and day passengers will not take issue with the need to wear masks). The cynic within me is wondering whether CS are trying to find an excuse not to run the Fort William seated coach as a day service (which they have been trying to find since 2015, as their management clearly see it as something of a nuisance). It certainly looks that way at the moment.
Yes, they are wanting to stop having to let day passengers on apparently.
I was told so by a member of CS staff in 2018.
 

Top