Caledonian Sleeper

[43096]

According to RTT 1M16 2045 Inverness and Fort William to Watford Junction (where it arrived at 1234) was cancelled between WJ and Euston due to trespass. But no evidence of trespass at Watford delaying anything else so CS couldn't even deliver passengers to Euston after all that delay in Scotland!!!! Appalling.......although maybe folks had decamped at Crewe for an earlier arrival and the train was by then a marie-celeste service?

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing...

The part cancellation reason is correct - it's down to the incident in Scotland, for which "trespass" is as good a code as any. There's many reasons why they'd terminate it at Watford:
- crew being at, or over, their working hours
- availability of platform 1 or 15 at Euston
- driver for the loco to take the empty stock from Euston to Wembley being unavailable as out of hours/off shift

In that scenario it is logical and sensible to PINE at Watford and run the stock empty direct to Wembley depot.

 

[JonathanH]

That, and having a long platform spare...

Yes, I note that platforms 12-16 have been under possession since 0900 which does rather complicated access together with two track railway as far as North Wembley.

 

[Bertie the bus]

It can arrive 30 minutes “early” given a clear run, ie 00:30, and thus can pick up and depart at that time as that’s what advertised to passengers. A later advertised departure time would mean needing to wait.

Why would it need to depart 30 minutes early? This 00:30 departure is fairly new. In the past I've seen it arrive at Preston early and then wait its departure time. Having nearly 30 minutes difference between advertised and actual departure time is just customer unfriendly. People will be hanging about at a time they probably don't want to be for absolutely no reason and the service is guaranteed to be delayed (using the public TT times), so hardly a good customer experience.

 

[JonathanH]

This 00:30 departure is fairly new. In the past I've seen it arrive at Preston early and then wait its departure time. Having nearly 30 minutes difference between advertised and actual departure time is just customer unfriendly.

There seems to have been a move to 'round' the arrival and departure times to increase flexibility - ie the 0800 advertised arrival at Euston when the WTT time is 0747.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Arrival time is fairly unimportant. You are on the train. Most people would not want to be hanging around Preston station for 30 minutes on a Friday night for no good reason, and having been there numerous times around then I wouldn't blame them.

 

[Falcon1200]

Someone jumped/fell off the bridge above Waverley station landing on the roof and had to be rescued. All power to the OHL was turned off while a rescue effort was carried out.

Unfortunately 'jumpers' from the North Bridge are fairly common, so much so that the section of roof at the higher end of the bridge was strengthened some years ago, so that the unfortunate person did not crash through the glass and land on the OLE/track/platform. This must have been a more difficult incident.

 

[Cheshire Scot]

Why would it need to depart 30 minutes early? This 00:30 departure is fairly new. In the past I've seen it arrive at Preston early and then wait its departure time. Having nearly 30 minutes difference between advertised and actual departure time is just customer unfriendly. People will be hanging about at a time they probably don't want to be for absolutely no reason and the service is guaranteed to be delayed (using the public TT times), so hardly a good customer experience.

Also, when the train actually runs on time the passengers waiting at Preston will get the impression the train is more than just a few minutes late (and arguably being denied about 15mins of the advertised time in bed).

In terms of departing early it may suit the signaller to let the train depart early, particularly if other trains are adrift from their booked path.

 

[Bertie the bus]

In terms of departing early it may suit the signaller to let the train depart early, particularly if other trains are adrift from their booked path.

It isn’t important what the signaler might want to do. They are employees of the railway and the job of the railway is to serve its customers, not make life easy for itself.

 

[CW2]

Might it be to cater for potential future variations in the departure time because of engineering work, single line working, etc.?

 

[zwk500]

It isn’t important what the signaler might want to do. They are employees of the railway and the job of the railway is to serve its customers, not make life easy for itself.

The job of the railway is to serve all its customers, not just one train.

 

[norbitonflyer]

In terms of departing early it may suit the signaller to let the train depart early, particularly if other trains are adrift from their booked path.

It isn’t important what the signaler might want to do. They are employees of the railway and the job of the railway is to serve its customers, not make life easy for itself.

It's not about making life easy for the signaller. But if, as Cheshire Scot says, other trains are adrift, it may help the signaller get things back on time if s/he has some flexibility in the departure time of the sleeper.

 

[Scotrail84]

Unfortunately 'jumpers' from the North Bridge are fairly common, so much so that the section of roof at the higher end of the bridge was strengthened some years ago, so that the unfortunate person did not crash through the glass and land on the OLE/track/platform. This must have been a more difficult incident.

Yep, except it wasn't the North bridge that they fell from mate, it was Waverley bridge.

 

[Falcon1200]

Yep, except it wasn't the North bridge that they fell from mate, it was Waverley bridge.

Thanks mate, I assumed it was the North Bridge because in all my time on the railway that was where people fell/jumped from, whereas I have never heard of someone coming off the Waverley bridge.

 

[AberdeenBill]

I note that the differential in price between a Classic and a Club Room (toilet and shower) seems to vary and that is probably down to a number of factors. I have only been in a Club twice (out and return) when i had booked Classic but was given an upgrade. I admit that the convenience of not having to walk down the corridor to the toilet, and the shower in the morning (albeit on one of those journeys it was stone cold) was good. It does make me want to book Club on future trips but this would be dependent on the price differential.

What do people reckon is a reasonable addition to pay for the Club Room? Taking into account the free breakfast (saves about £10 in a Cafe) i would say around £35 - £40.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But is that what CS actually do ? Or is it more likely that, as in my own area of former railway employment, they have sufficient relief cover for foreseeable circumstances such as Annual Leave, but not for multiple simultaneous issues, such as long and short term sickness, maternity leave, jury service, and global pandemics ? In which case industrial relations problems and an overtime ban are bound to cause severe difficulties.

They need to plan for multiple simultaneous issues, because those are what happens.

 

[Merseysider]

I note that the differential in price between a Classic and a Club Room (toilet and shower) seems to vary and that is probably down to a number of factors. I have only been in a Club twice (out and return) when i had booked Classic but was given an upgrade. I admit that the convenience of not having to walk down the corridor to the toilet, and the shower in the morning (albeit on one of those journeys it was stone cold) was good. It does make me want to book Club on future trips but this would be dependent on the price differential.

What do people reckon is a reasonable addition to pay for the Club Room? Taking into account the free breakfast (saves about £10 in a Cafe) i would say around £35 - £40.

Upper limit for me would be about £200, with maybe a £40 increase over Classic to be worth booking Club. I did pay £235 for my journey last week but it was the only option still available, and not too atrocious a price in the height of summer.

 

[najaB]

They need to plan for multiple simultaneous issues, because those are what happens.

But at what cost?

 

[Bletchleyite]

But at what cost?

Ensuring you employ enough staff so that overtime is only for really exceptional situations is part of the cost of running your business.

 

[RT4038]

Ensuring you employ enough staff so that overtime is only for really exceptional situations is part of the cost of running your business.

Not if those paying the bills for that cost don't want to be paying that much.

 

[Grumpy]

Interesting. When I arrived into Fort William on the sleeper from Corrour in January last year, I did a quick passenger count.

Seven. Admittedly it was midweek and I don't know if people had alighted elsewhere. But two of the 7 were in the seats from Corrour!

Make more sense to junk the FW portion and replace by a connecting coach from Dalwhinnie off the Inverness train

 

[Bletchleyite]

Make more sense to junk the FW portion and replace by a connecting coach from Dalwhinnie off the Inverness train

No, it really wouldn't. If you want to take a coach from Inverness/Glasgow to FW they already exist.

There's an argument for Oban instead, but the argument to ditch it (unless you ditch the whole thing) belongs in the 90s.

 

[MrEd]

Make more sense to junk the FW portion and replace by a connecting coach from Dalwhinnie off the Inverness train

Are you serious? Fort William is an extremely popular destination, especially between March and October; the Fort William portion is full most nights during the season. There is no way that a coach from Dalwhinnie would be sufficient in the present time (and the Fort William passengers, if forced to use this, would just use the Lowland sleeper/fly to Glasgow and get a day train from there which would be just as easy).

 

[najaB]

Make more sense to junk the FW portion and replace by a connecting coach from Dalwhinnie off the Inverness train

If any portion was to go, it would make far more sense to reduce the Aberdeen portion to two sleepers and cap it at Dundee (for the Leuchars/St. Andrews golf market) and expand the Fort William portion.

 

[Davester50]

If any portion was to go, it would make far more sense to reduce the Aberdeen portion to two sleepers and cap it at Dundee (for the Leuchars/St. Andrews golf market) and expand the Fort William portion.

Said it before, a rough East/West split with a later arrival in Aberdeen would be much better for that section.
An 05:45 arrival in to Leuchars for St Andrews is not going to be particularly attractive for the Golf market in St Andrews. And there's a lot on money in golf.

 

[JonathanH]

If any portion was to go, it would make far more sense to reduce the Aberdeen portion to two sleepers and cap it at Dundee (for the Leuchars/St. Andrews golf market) and expand the Fort William portion.

Terminating at Dundee is folly as there is no servicing facility there - it would then have to go to Aberdeen or Glasgow so it might as well run on to Aberdeen.

Aberdeen is not without tourist attractions - eg Deeside / the North East Coast.

 

[Scotrail314209]

Glasgow portion of the sleeper starting from Edinburgh due to last minute staff absence.

Replacement transport departing from Glasgow Central at 23:15, with Motherwell being collected at 23:30.

 

[najaB]

An 05:45 arrival in to Leuchars for St Andrews is not going to be particularly attractive for the Golf market in St Andrews. And there's a lot on money in golf.

It would leave Edinburgh later, to arrive c. 0800.

Terminating at Dundee is folly as there is no servicing facility there - it would then have to go to Aberdeen or Glasgow so it might as well run on to Aberdeen.

It would go to Glasgow. The additional operational expense would be made up for by centralising the servicing at Polmadie.

Aberdeen is not without tourist attractions - eg Deeside / the North East Coast.

I'm not saying it is, but reading through this thread the Aberdeen portion is reportedly running virtually empty.

 

[62484GlenLyon]

Tonight's 1B01 19.00 Fort William to Edinburgh portion appears to be in trouble according to RTT. right time away from Ft. William, 39 late away from Rannoch and 86 late away from Crianlarich.

 

[Davester50]

I'm not saying it is, but reading through this thread the Aberdeen portion is reportedly running virtually empty.

I'd suggest that the Highlander is a Premier Inn Royal Scotsman for many passengers in the summer.
If it can't make it work in a time when domestic tourism has little overseas competition, what chance has it got when holidays abroad are back in full swing?

What's to stop it waiting for longer in Edinburgh before going north?

 

[najaB]

What's to stop it waiting for longer in Edinburgh before going north?

Mainly platform utilisation, but I'm sure that could be worked around.