Caledonian Sleeper

[najaB]

So Cally definitely will get me down from Fort Bill if they screw up their service? That's reassuring; it gives me a bit more confidence in booking the journey knowing I won't be risking a night on a bench in Fort Bill!

While the universe has infinite possibilities, Caledonian Sleeper are under the same obligation as any other TOC would be in that situation: either get you to where you need to be, or provide you accommodation until they can.

 

[Bill57p9]

So Cally definitely will get me down from Fort Bill if they screw up their service? That's reassuring; it gives me a bit more confidence in booking the journey knowing I won't be risking a night on a bench in Fort Bill!

CS are reservations compulsory, so ensure you book a reserved seat as soon as you book your ticket. Then they have an obligation to ensure that you aren't stranded.

 

[CumbrianSausag]

Any idea why the 66 (733) seems to just be doing alternate trips and the 73 often going alone to Fort William and back?

 

[JonathanH]

Any idea why the 66 (733) seems to just be doing alternate trips and the 73 often going alone to Fort William and back?

66733 was used to rescue 6S45 0654 North Blyth Alcan Gbrf to Fort William Alcan Gbrf on Tuesday, after a failure of 66736, leaving the 73 to do the sleeper on its own.

It did the sleeper Wednesday night / Thursday morning, but seemingly not tonight according to RTT. Does that potentially mean that 66733 is needed for the Alcan train in the morning?

 

[najaB]

Any idea why the 66 (733) seems to just be doing alternate trips and the 73 often going alone to Fort William and back?

I don't know anything for sure, but the 73 was originally supposed to do the trip by itself was it not? With the 66s only added after a period of poor performance. So maybe they don't *need* the 66 unless the conditions are expected to be particularly poor?

 

[Bill57p9]

@najaB is bang on: the original requirement that this batch of 73s were rebuilt to meet was to cover the Highlander portions solo - including Inverness. In the real world it was found that they didn't offer the expected performance and that, in particular, reliability suffered if running very hard for extended periods.
Hence the general practice appears to have been adopted to prioritise shed assistance on the Inverness (heaviest) followed by Fort William and finally Aberdeen (least demanding).
Sometimes a second 73 has been used in place of the 66 but again the shed option appears to be preferred.

 

[norbitonflyer]

If I recall correctly the Inverness was intended to be 2x73 - biggest hills and longest train.
In practice the 73s are now being used as ETS generator cars, like the old "ETHELs" used on the West Highland after the Mark 3s came in but before any locos cleared for that line were fitted with ETH

 

[JonathanH]

Seems my guess about 66733 was right. It worked 6E45 0807 Fort William Alcan Gbrf to North Blyth Alcan Gbrf with 66736 this morning. 66739 moved to Craigentinny this morning so should take over a sleeper portion in the morning, although Fort William was two 73s this morning / tonight.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Travelled on the Lowlander to Glasgow last night. The only failure was the coffee machine in the lounge at Euston.

And on my return this morning arrived at Euston 45 minutes early

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Saturday at 15:57 ==

Question:
looking at the booking engine, it seems that passenegrs for Carstairs are allocated seats in the Edinburgh portion.
Does the Glasgow portion stop in the platform? (in other words, if you had a booking for Glasgow or Motherwell and needed to bail at Carstairs for some reason*, could you do so?)

* eg late running meaning a better connection can be made at Carstairs than the one you are going to miss at Motherwell

 

[Bill57p9]

And on my return this morning arrived at Euston 45 minutes early

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Saturday at 15:57 ==

Question:
looking at the booking engine, it seems that passenegrs for Carstairs are allocated seats in the Edinburgh portion.
Does the Glasgow portion stop in the platform? (in other words, if you had a booking for Glasgow or Motherwell and needed to bail at Carstairs for some reason*, could you do so?)

* eg late running meaning a better connection can be made at Carstairs than the one you are going to miss at Motherwell

Are you sure?
Out if interest I did a search for availability Carstairs to Euston, outbound tomorrow returning Tuesday.
For both directions it listed 2 different trains with the same timings and mostly different availability, which suggests it has offered me both portions separately.


I can't recall the Carstairs platforms lengths. If 16 vehicles is too long to fit then the "off platform" part will be the west end to keep the platform starting signal clear, which will be the Edinburgh portion southbound and Glasgow northbound.

 

[SuspectUsual]

What happened to 1Y11 this morning that caused it to leave Edinburgh 147 late?

 

[jamiestuart314]

Fort william portion running 130 late, subsequent ECS then also came into polmadie extremely late, and left the Glasgow portion of the lowlander stuck in Central until 10, caused a fair bit of problems during rush hour as the 08:38 Avanti had no platform to go into and had to be cancelled.

 

[D6130]

Fort william portion running 130 late, subsequent ECS then also came into polmadie extremely late, and left the Glasgow portion of the lowlander stuck in Central until 10, caused a fair bit of problems during rush hour as the 08:38 Avanti had no platform to go into and had to be cancelled.

Could the 08 38 to Euston not have started from Motherwell?

 

[jamiestuart314]

Could the 08 38 to Euston not have started from Motherwell?

Not too sure, all I seen happen was the ECS to form it departed polmadie, got to just outside Central and then turned around as there was no empty platforms that could fit a Pendolino and went back to Polmadie, the service was initially stated to be delayed, was expected at 09:30 and then was cancelled

 

[hexagon789]

Could the 08 38 to Euston not have started from Motherwell?

The issue might have been advertising the change in time and presumably also getting a Train Manager to Motherwell in time.

As it is, the set appears to have run empty from Polmadie to Preston to take up the working from there, albeit it ran 20+ late and still hasn't departed Preston.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Fort william portion running 130 late, subsequent ECS then also came into polmadie extremely late, and left the Glasgow portion of the lowlander stuck in Central until 10, caused a fair bit of problems during rush hour as the 08:38 Avanti had no platform to go into and had to be cancelled.

Right, but do we know what actually happened at Edinburgh?

1S25 arrived on time from London, and the other two portions left at/around the right time, so what delayed the Fort Bill portion?

 

[hexagon789]

Right, but do we know what actually happened at Edinburgh?

1S25 arrived on time from London, and the other two portions left at/around the right time, so what delayed the Fort Bill portion?

Attributed as 'train fault' but no further details unfortunately.

 

[jamiestuart314]

Right, but do we know what actually happened at Edinburgh?

1S25 arrived on time from London, and the other two portions left at/around the right time, so what delayed the Fort Bill portion?

Sadly not, was just explaining the impact it then had at Glasgow this morning (quite alot!)

 

[Dfatcontroller]

Could the 08 38 to Euston not have started from Motherwell?

The set for the 0838 reversed approaching Bridge Street and headed south. Presume the Train Manager couldn't get ahead of it?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Tuesday at 15:42 ==

The issue might have been advertising the change in time and presumably also getting a Train Manager to Motherwell in time.

As it is, the set appears to have run empty from Polmadie to Preston to take up the working from there, albeit it ran 20+ late and still hasn't departed Preston.

25 late from Preston.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Fort william portion running 130 late, subsequent ECS then also came into polmadie extremely late, and left the Glasgow portion of the lowlander stuck in Central until 10,

What ECS was that? The FW portion's beds normally go to Euston, and the seats back to FW.
And why would that stop the Lowlander ECS leaving Glasgow?

 

[hexagon789]

What ECS was that? The FW portion's beds normally go to Euston, and the seats back to FW.
And why would that stop the Lowlander ECS leaving Glasgow?

I think they mean the loco running light from Edinburgh, rather than ECS as empty carriages.

I.e. the loco which takes the Highlander from Euston to Edinburgh, runs light from Edinburgh to Polmadie, then to Glasgow Central. It couples to the empty stock of the Glasgow portion of the Lowlander and then hauls it to Polmadie for servicing.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I think they mean the loco running light from Edinburgh, rather than ECS as empty carriages.

I.e. the loco which takes the Highlander from Euston to Edinburgh, runs light from Edinburgh to Polmadie, then to Glasgow Central. It couples to the empty stock of the Glasgow portion of the Lowlander and then hauls it to Polmadie for servicing.

That's right, but what's strange is that the Highlander arrived from London on time and the Aberdeen and Inverness portions left on time. Why would a delay to the Fort William portion leaving prevent the class 92 departing light engine?

 

[rower40]

Perhaps keeping the option open of cancelling the FW portion completely, and using the 92 to haul the stock to Polmadie?

 

[hexagon789]

That's right, but what's strange is that the Highlander arrived from London on time and the Aberdeen and Inverness portions left on time. Why would a delay to the Fort William portion leaving prevent the class 92 departing light engine?

Could the loco be 'blocked in' by the coaches of the Fort William portion?

 

[Dfatcontroller]

What ECS was that? The FW portion's beds normally go to Euston, and the seats back to FW.
And why would that stop the Lowlander ECS leaving Glasgow?

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C04599/2026-09-08/detailed#allox_id=0

 

[SuspectUsual]

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C04599/2026-09-08/detailed#allox_id=0

There's a light engine move in the same path, so I presume this isn't a regular ECS movement. More and more confusing!

 

[norbitonflyer]

There's a light engine move in the same path, so I presume this isn't a regular ECS movement. More and more confusing!

I understand that on some night the seated cars from FW don't go back there, but are swapped for a fresh set from Polmadie, using the otherwise light class 92 moves from/ to Polmadie. If that was such a night, the Class 92 couldn't leave Edinburgh until the FW portion arrived. And that could in turn the ECS from Central to Polmadie, if the same Class 92 is used for that working.

Or something like that

 

[SuspectUsual]

I understand that on some night the seated cars from FW don't go back there, but are swapped for a fresh set from Polmadie, using the otherwise light class 92 moves from/ to Polmadie. If that was such a night, the Class 92 couldn't leave Edinburgh until the FW portion arrived. And that could in turn the ECS from Central to Polmadie, if the same Class 92 is used for that working.

Or something like that

The up portions all arrived earlier in the night though, so the carriages would have been stood waiting

I'm baffled - we need someone in the know to help!

 

[BRX]

If there was an issue with the loco(s) for the FW portion, perhaps the 92 needed to stay attached to provide power, until it was sorted?

 

[CumbrianSausag]

That could ring true. 73970 has been taken off and one of the pair from the Aberdeen portion is now on the FW with the Aberdeen now a single 73.