Caledonian Sleeper

[Scotrail84]

Trying to thread the sleeper through New Street is a whole different challenge to getting it to run via Bescot and Aston.

Agree, however that route via Bescot and Aston is a tad slow in places and a bit of a bottleneck with plenty freight to contend with as well. The diamond crossings at both Bescot Stadium and Coventry stations are extremely loud and bumpy at line speed.

 

[alistairlees]

I don't dislike the sleeper, I just personally would never use for business or leisure travel unless I had no other option.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Nov 2024 ==


Yes, I'm well aware of that.

Flight connections are absolutely relevant. Why else would they choose to serve Int station and not New Street then? It's pointless if they don't have flight connections in mind. Its obvious that they feel theres a market for people travelling by air from Birmingham.

It's got nothing to do with the flights. It's the catchment area of people who live nearby and can drive to / from there.

 

[jfollows]

The other thing about Crewe is that while the northbound call is late but acceptable, the southbound is at about 4am which most people won't accept. Brum would be about an hour and a bit later which is still early but not as ridiculous.

Also presumably Preston is staying, not a long distance from Crewe?

That said I can't see why they can't fit in both.

The southbound call was fine when I last used it (Mark 3, so a few years ago) and gave me a short wait into the first train home to Wilmslow. To be honest I’d be more likely to catch the down service from London as I did then also, but the up call at Crewe was ideal. If the up Crewe call went, I’d be even less likely to use the service than I already am.

EDIT Booked 05:30 arrival into Crewe and there’s a 05:45 to Wilmslow, seems good to me. The other sleeper, from Glasgow & Edinburgh, passes Crewe around 4am but that’s not what we’re talking about here is it?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's got nothing to do with the flights. It's the catchment area of people who live nearby and can drive to / from there.

Also a less time consuming/expensive double back for those who see the Crewe or Preston timings and go "I'm not staying up to/getting up at that time". At present London is the only option for that and can be pricey in the morning peak.

 

[Scotrail84]

It's got nothing to do with the flights. It's the catchment area of people who live nearby and can drive to / from there.

So they will be basing this on postcodes on booking then. Madness imo.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So they will be basing this on postcodes on booking then. Madness imo.

Potential custom too. Birmingham is a big place.

 

[zero]

There are basically no long-haul flights from BHX except for Emirates / Qatar, and a handful of TUI transatlantics. I can't imagine very many Scottish residents wanting to spend several hundred £ on a 5-hour train trip just to connect to a 2-3 hour Ryanair flight, when many of the same destinations are likely served from EDI and GLA. In the sleeper seats, maybe if you were desperate but I doubt anyone would consider it as their first choice.

Americans visiting Scotland might have considered this route but there are no flights that would serve them.

If a long-distance train is scheduled to arrive at 6am I wouldn't want to connect to a flight any earlier than 10am. And if I lived in Scotland and the only option to fly somewhere was from BHX, I would probably just get a flight from Scotland the previous day or take an afternoon train and stay overnight. That way if there were problems with the first flight or train I could still drive.

I know people in the north of England occasionally drive to Heathrow rather than use a more local airport because of the wider range of destinations, but the same isn't true of BHX airport. As a London resident the only times I've used other UK airports for a non-UK flight, were to go to the Faroe Islands as the only UK flight is from EDI, and MAN when Qatar had a business class deal to New Zealand for £1400, in both cases I went the day before to reduce the risk.

 

[The exile]

Suspect that “at least it’s not Rugby” is more appropriate than “why not New Street”. International offers more diversionary opportunities than New Street and presumably has better parking and road access (which given the times concerned is probably more relevant than the city centre location of New Street).

 

[norbitonflyer]

I have used sleepers to connect with flights. Penzance to St Marys, and Inverness to Kirkwall.

 

[BRX]

The original plan was to drop Crewe as a passenger stop and replace it with Birmingham International. Whether this is still the case, or indeed if Birmingham is still going to happen remains to be seen.

Where did you get the impression that dropping Crewe was part of the plan? I don't see it mentioned in any reporting from the time.

There's info here, and it only seems to talk about adding BHI as a stop.

It also includes an outline of their reasoning:

4.1 Benefits: please set out what specific benefits the proposal will achieve. Please describe the
benefits to passengers and any impact on other operators, including freight operators.

Continuation of Caledonian Sleeper service provision beyond the current TAC for a period aligned
with the Transport Scotland/SRH Grant Agreement.
Calling at Birmingham International benefits– better serving a large current/potential target market for
our Highlander services generating additional revenue, patronage and improved connectivity between
the Scottish Highlands and Midlands. Analysis of existing passenger data suggests there are already
significant numbers of travellers originated from Birmingham, who currently require to board the
Sleeper at Crewe. This change will significantly improve access to our service for passengers based
in Birmingham and onward connectivity to locations served by Birmingham. The target market from
Birmingham International will include business travellers, who will benefit from this additional
connectivity and will also enhance patronage during the periods where there is more spare capacity
on our services (e.g. mid-week and outwith summer).
There are no direct rail services between the Highlands of Scotland and the Midlands, so this will
represent a significant enhancement which encourages modal shift from air and therefore delivers
significant environmental benefits.
Delivering this timetable enhancement is therefore aligned with our Grant Agreement obligations to
Transport Scotland and Scottish Rail Holdings, which requires to optimise our timetable based on
demand and maximising the revenue, patronage and tourism benefits generated by our services. We
know from previous discussions that this proposal is strongly supported within Scottish Government
and would be regarded as a significant enhancement. We believe it would also be similarly welcomed
at the political level within the West Midlands.

 

[35B]

Flight connections are absolutely relevant. Why else would they choose to serve Int station and not New Street then? It's pointless if they don't have flight connections in mind. Its obvious that they feel theres a market for people travelling by air from Birmingham.

Because it doubles as Birmingham Parkway. It is 5 minutes drive from the M6/M42 interchange, has a huge car park, and easy access to a large catchment. That use has slackened a bit as Chiltern's service has developed, but I've known plenty who've used it as a P&R for trains to London, coming from as far away as Worcester. People who, as corporate policies focus more and more on carbon usage, are likely to be looking towards rail rather than air.

I'm making no comment on whether that catchment is larger or smaller than Crewe's (remember, they overlap); the idea that the northwest is worth serving and the Midlands not just strikes me as bizarre.

 

[A S Leib]

What would happen if Birmingham International had to be diverted around? Do Nuneaton or Tamworth have long enough platforms, or would passengers just be sent to Euston or Crewe?

 

[jfollows]

What would happen if Birmingham International had to be diverted around? Do Nuneaton or Tamworth have long enough platforms, or would passengers just be sent to Euston or Crewe?

International’s platforms aren’t long enough either, anyway, it’s just about being OK to hang off the end.

 

[Scotrail84]

What would happen if Birmingham International had to be diverted around? Do Nuneaton or Tamworth have long enough platforms, or would passengers just be sent to Euston or Crewe?

It wouldn't be able to stop at any of these places unless the stations are staffed for dispatching and crews are given appropriate knowledge of the station like signalling etc.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Nov 2024 ==

Where did you get the impression that dropping Crewe was part of the plan? I don't see it mentioned in any reporting from the time.

There's info here, and it only seems to talk about adding BHI as a stop.

It also includes an outline of their reasoning:

Specifically mentions people boarding a Crewe who (may) have originated from that area. The info I have is that B/ham happens, then Crewe will be dropped as a passenger stop.

 

[BRX]

The info I have is that B/ham happens, then Crewe will be dropped as a passenger stop.

What info is that?

The CS statement is simply that they are aware of customers/potential customers in the Midlands who currently need to use Crewe but would be better served by Birmingham. They aren't saying that this applies to all Crewe customers, and therefore the Crewe stop would become redundant.

As you say, they'll still need to do a Crewe stop for staffing reasons anyway so I don't see why there'd be any benefit in dropping it as a passenger stop, unless they somehow employ staff at Crewe that need to be there to facilitate it as a passenger stop - and they would move them to Birmingham?

 

[Bald Rick]

Flight connections are absolutely relevant. Why else would they choose to serve Int station and not New Street then? It's pointless if they don't have flight connections in mind. Its obvious that they feel theres a market for people travelling by air from Birmingham.

It is nothring to do with flight connections, as others have said.

Agree, however that route via Bescot and Aston is a tad slow in places and a bit of a bottleneck with plenty freight to contend with as well. The diamond crossings at both Bescot Stadium and Coventry stations are extremely loud and bumpy at line speed.

The sleeper already goes that way on diversion. And it already crosses multiple diamond crossings on the WCML at low speed and high speed anyway.

So they will be basing this on postcodes on booking then. Madness imo.

Basing a commercial decision on evidence that shows there will be net customer benefit and will drive additional revenue is madness?

 

[ABB125]

I live in Birmingham. The Crewe stop is currently pretty useless going north, I'd have to arrive just before 2300 for a 2345 departure. I don't really fancy standing around in Crewe station for 45 minutes, particularly at that time of night when there's nothing to do. Whereas, a stop in Birmingham International would be so much more convenient. More trains to choose from, I don't need to waste so much time changing trains, and it's quicker in general to get there.
I've used the sleeper northbound 3 times, and each time started in London. It's easier, and better value.
Coming south, the Crewe stop is more useful in that it connects slightly better, but it is rather early. BHI will be much more convenient. And London is a no, as I'd then have to buy a peak-time ticket back to Birmingham.

 

[Tazi Hupefi]

Part of the CS representations to ORR/wider industry about calling at Birmingham International is that their booking data shows that the majority of customers boarding at Crewe have a postcode from the West Midlands/Birmingham area and apparently it is one of the most common remarks received by their customer relations.

As I understand it, Birmingham International is in addition to Crewe on the Highland, not instead of. However, it obviously removes the ability to divert via Stafford/Stoke/Macclesfield/Manchester without affecting passengers at Crewe.

Further, a nice slice of the Birmingham to Scotland ORCATS revenue, however small the % for CS is not to be sniffed at by the Scottish government.

I suspect it also has an aviation angle to make it sound more attractive to the powers that be, although no idea if there's such thing as a Birmingham to Scotland flight since the end of Flybe.

 

[JamesT]

I suspect it also has an aviation angle to make it sound more attractive to the powers that be, although no idea if there's such thing as a Birmingham to Scotland flight since the end of Flybe.

Easyjet have been doing Birmingham to Edinburgh/Glasgow since 2020.

 

[BRX]

If you live in the Birmingham area, maybe the sleeper from BHI to Inverness could tempt you away from going to Manchester to fly from there, whereas the sleeper from Crewe can't.

 

[Mordac]

If you live in the Birmingham area, maybe the sleeper from BHI to Inverness could tempt you away from going to Manchester to fly from there, whereas the sleeper from Crewe can't.

Loganair had to cancel their flights to Inverness, so I imagine any demand for this is minuscule. On the other hand, there are 3 flights a day to Aberdeen.. That might be more relevant.

 

[Scotrail84]

Loganair had to cancel their flights to Inverness, so I imagine any demand for this is minuscule. On the other hand, there are 3 flights a day to Aberdeen.. That might be more relevant.

Aberdeen is popular with offshore workers so that in itself probably justifies 3 x flights a day. Its also a hour compared to 6 or 7 on 2 trains.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2024 ==

Part of the CS representations to ORR/wider industry about calling at Birmingham International is that their booking data shows that the majority of customers boarding at Crewe have a postcode from the West Midlands/Birmingham area and apparently it is one of the most common remarks received by their customer relations.

As I understand it, Birmingham International is in addition to Crewe on the Highland, not instead of. However, it obviously removes the ability to divert via Stafford/Stoke/Macclesfield/Manchester without affecting passengers at Crewe.

Further, a nice slice of the Birmingham to Scotland ORCATS revenue, however small the % for CS is not to be sniffed at by the Scottish government.

I suspect it also has an aviation angle to make it sound more attractive to the powers that be, although no idea if there's such thing as a Birmingham to Scotland flight since the end of Flybe.

Given that a few top brass at CS are ex airlines it would seem likely that an airline angle is definitely something they thought about too.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Nov 2024 ==

I live in Birmingham. The Crewe stop is currently pretty useless going north, I'd have to arrive just before 2300 for a 2345 departure. I don't really fancy standing around in Crewe station for 45 minutes, particularly at that time of night when there's nothing to do. Whereas, a stop in Birmingham International would be so much more convenient. More trains to choose from, I don't need to waste so much time changing trains, and it's quicker in general to get there.
I've used the sleeper northbound 3 times, and each time started in London. It's easier, and better value.
Coming south, the Crewe stop is more useful in that it connects slightly better, but it is rather early. BHI will be much more convenient. And London is a no, as I'd then have to buy a peak-time ticket back to Birmingham.

Whats about the sleeper pricing is that the last time I looked the price of a berth from Preston to Inverness is the same price as London to Inverness. That just doesn't seem fair or good valuer for money. It should get cheaper the further I not the journey you board the train.

So if Birmingham did happen, it would be say £300 from London to you destination but also £300 from Birmingham. That doesn't seem right to me.

 

[JamesT]

Whats about the sleeper pricing is that the last time I looked the price of a berth from Preston to Inverness is the same price as London to Inverness. That just doesn't seem fair or good valuer for money. It should get cheaper the further I not the journey you board the train.

So if Birmingham did happen, it would be say £300 from London to you destination but also £300 from Birmingham. That doesn't seem right to me.

If you're taking up a berth on the sleeper then that berth is unavailable for the entire night. There's no opportunity for someone to occupy it for the part of the journey you're not, unlike a day train.
You don't generally find hotels pricing differently depending on whether you turn up at 4pm or midnight to check in.

 

[35B]

Aberdeen is popular with offshore workers so that in itself probably justifies 3 x flights a day. Its also a hour compared to 6 or 7 on 2 trains.

An industry in decline, and with corresponding falls in demand on the sleeper.

If you're taking up a berth on the sleeper then that berth is unavailable for the entire night. There's no opportunity for someone to occupy it for the part of the journey you're not, unlike a day train.
You don't generally find hotels pricing differently depending on whether you turn up at 4pm or midnight to check in.

There are some. But I don’t think CS are in the “by the hour” market…

 

[jimm]

An industry in decline, and with corresponding falls in demand on the sleeper.

It isn't quite dead just yet - and there will still be plenty of years of work after production ends to dismantle and remove rigs, etc, so I think the Aberdeen sleepers - whether via Birmingham International or straight up the WCML - will be doing good business for a while yet. Along with Loganair's flights between BHX and ABZ.

 

[CW2]

In a parallel universe, the answer would be to plan fast connecting services from all directions to reach Crewe after 2300 (including Euston via Birmingham), and to provide through reservations and ticketing. A decent sleeper reception lounge at Crewe would make the wait and train change seamless.

Not going to happen given the current state of the industry.

 

[greatkingrat]

In a parallel universe, the answer would be to plan fast connecting services from all directions to reach Crewe after 2300 (including Euston via Birmingham), and to provide through reservations and ticketing. A decent sleeper reception lounge at Crewe would make the wait and train change seamless.

Not going to happen given the current state of the industry.

The Sleeper has very limited capacity, and most of that is filled up by people joining at Euston. The idea there is enough traffic from Crewe to justify running multiple connecting trains is ridiculous.

 

[CW2]

The Sleeper has very limited capacity, and most of that is filled up by people joining at Euston. The idea there is enough traffic from Crewe to justify running multiple connecting trains is ridiculous.

Most of the trains already run, it's just a question of coordinating them, and providing through ticketing with guaranteed connections.

If there's no spare capacity as you allegedly, then what's the point in the proposed stop at Birmingham International?

 

[JonathanH]

If there's no spare capacity as you allegedly, then what's the point in the proposed stop at Birmingham International?

Economic theory would suggest that increasing demand may allow prices to be (further) increased even though the supply is fixed.

 

[Clansman]

If anything a lounge at Crewe is not unreasonable to ask. I've used the sleeper at Crewe a few times this year, and by my estimates there's always a solid 15-25 passengers each time - more than what I have experienced at Leuchars, which also has a lounge, and Dundee & Perth where I have been the only one on several occassions heading northbound.

As for overall capacity to expand the service, it is ironic that while the bulk of the demand is London, that Euston station's design is the very thing preventing the service expanding even more since the sleeper sells out more often these days - though I would I argue that the Mk5s design reducing the capacity vs an Mk3 is partly to blame!

If Euston had longer platforms once upon a time, then I'd bet on there being at least 20 coaches leaving Euston a night.