My idea for Class 43's on cornish sleepers

[superkev]

With talk in one of the magazine's of modifying class 43's to haul mk 4 coaches on the Midland main line how about the Cornish sleepers. Would save all that shunting.
K

 

[nat67]

It could work but the power cars and Mk4's would need electrics to be changed and lots of changing to carriage layout. Better idea either have a more reliable loco with MK5 stock or use the MK3's already and convert the electrics and put plug doors on them. Using MK4's isn't the best solution due to cost.

 

[dp21]

Be interested to see if it would be cheaper than the £50m or so that PB were quoting to do the PRM mods on their Mk3s. Let alone those owned by Angel.

 

[HSTEd]

Well you could rewire the current sleeper stock (which is all Mark 3) into HST trailers by stripping out the motor generators and installing jumpers.

Since the formation has a 57 at both ends in the platform at paddington anyway, it doesn't cost you any train length and you can use the HST luggage compartments.

 

[jimm]

Or you could just put all the money that lot would cost towards buying some new Mk5 sleepers from CAF....

 

[superkev]

It could work but the power cars and Mk4's would need electrics to be changed and lots of changing to carriage layout. Better idea either have a more reliable loco with MK5 stock or use the MK3's already and convert the electrics and put plug doors on them. Using MK4's isn't the best solution due to cost.

You missed my point which was about hst hailed Cornish sleepers.
The proposal mentioned in modern railways was to fit each hst power car with a 3 phase to dc converter to power mk4 train heating. This was thought to be cheaper than fitting power doors etc to the Midland main line hst coaches. Presumably the same solution would work with the sleepers.
K

 

[co-tr-paul]

This topic has been done to death. The reasons why not have appeared many and often on many forums. It is now too late in the day.
With what I do, as I have previously stated in the Night Riviera thread, expect an announcement as part of the next long term franchise requirement for stock and traction change some 5 + years from start of said franchise.
but don't tell anyone..... .

 

[43096]

This topic has been done to death. The reasons why not have appeared many and often on many forums. It is now too late in the day.
With what I do, as I have previously stated in the Night Riviera thread, expect an announcement as part of the next long term franchise requirement for stock and traction change some 5 + years from start of said franchise.
but don't tell anyone..... .

As usual, though, there has been a huge missed opportunity. With only around 20 vehicles in the GWR sleeper fleet, it would have made more sense to tag on an order for their replacements onto the Caledonian Sleeper contract with CAF. Unit cost would have been reduced as a result, and it would have saved the cost currently being incurred on the refurbishment. But no, this is DfT, so they'll do it separately....

 

[Bald Rick]

Or you could just put all the money that lot would cost towards buying some new Mk5 sleepers from CAF....

Or you could give every GW Sleeper customer for the next ten years £100 cash and not bother.

 

[ac6000cw]

Or you could give every GW Sleeper customer for the next ten years £100 cash and not bother.

Quite - the ORR subsidy/premium per TOC spreadsheet here - http://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/displayreport/html/html/95218cca-408d-4047-83ce-a542c53b59e6 - indicates the subsidy for the Caledonian Sleeper TOC is 16.1p per passenger km in the 2016/2017 period. I'd imagine the effective subsidy for the GWR sleepers is around the same, so for a London - Penzance passenger that is about a £75 subsidy per single journey. The 34.8 million pounds in subsidy the Caledonian Sleepers received in 2016/2017 could surely have been better spent elsewhere on the railway...

 

[Bald Rick]

Quite - the ORR subsidy/premium per TOC spreadsheet here - http://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/displayreport/html/html/95218cca-408d-4047-83ce-a542c53b59e6 - indicates the subsidy for the Caledonian Sleeper TOC is 16.1p per passenger km in the 2016/2017 period. I'd imagine the effective subsidy for the GWR sleepers is around the same, so for a London - Penzance passenger that is about a £75 subsidy per single journey. The 34.8 million pounds in subsidy the Caledonian Sleepers received in 2016/2017 could surely have been better spent elsewhere on the railway...

I believe the subsidy on the GW Sleeper is more, as it is not as well used, nor as ‘efficient’ in the haulage, as the Cally.

 

[ac6000cw]

I believe the subsidy on the GW Sleeper is more, as it is not as well used, nor as ‘efficient’ in the haulage, as the Cally.

Quite possibly, but probably only GWR really know.

 

[jimm]

I believe the subsidy on the GW Sleeper is more, as it is not as well used, nor as ‘efficient’ in the haulage, as the Cally.

So not well used that GWR added an extra sleeping car to the Night Riviera rakes... and efficient is not a word I would apply to the many months when all manner of traction was pressed into action to keep the Caledonian Sleepers running while the 73s and 92s were not available - either Serco or GBRf or both will have had to foot a very large bill for all that.

 

[irish_rail]

I believe the subsidy on the GW Sleeper is more, as it is not as well used, nor as ‘efficient’ in the haulage, as the Cally.

Really? One big advantage of the Night Riviera is it utilises GWR drivers and doesn't need to employ it's own. Same with train managers who come from the general GWR pool also.

 

[Bald Rick]

Really? One big advantage of the Night Riviera is it utilises GWR drivers and doesn't need to employ it's own. Same with train managers who come from the general GWR pool also.

But they still need to be employed!

 

[cjmillsnun]

But they still need to be employed!

I think the point is that they would be employed by GWR as drivers and guards anyway so no extra staff required.

 

[philthetube]

extra staff would be operated but not all the additional expense of having only a small pool of staff, spare and sickness cover comes from a general pool.

 

[theblackwatch]

What plans are there regarding PRM-TSI and the Night Riviera fleet? I can't remember seeing anything mentioned about the upgrade of the slam doors on these vehicles.

 

[co-tr-paul]

This was cancelled. Funding mainly, along with various other bits including electronic destination and reservation. Drivers and TMs are general and whilst Hosts are specialist, they can operate other stock if ness.
We can discuss this all day long and go into the reasons why both for and against but this subject is to us (staff) dead and buried.
43s are not happening.

 

[SeanG]

I would not be surprised that *should* CAF Mk5 stock be ordered, then a DVT be added to each set. This would, theoretically, reduce the locos required by half, and would be useful for luggage etc (Do they still carry shellfish)?

 

[co-tr-paul]

We only have 4 locos as it is ! 1 up, 1 down, 1 ecs/spare, 1 exam. Luggage space is currently not a problem and currently, no regular parcel traffic and bikes and surfboards are no problem.

 

[Ianno87]

So not well used that GWR added an extra sleeping car to the Night Riviera rakes... and efficient is not a word I would apply to the many months when all manner of traction was pressed into action to keep the Caledonian Sleepers running while the 73s and 92s were not available - either Serco or GBRf or both will have had to foot a very large bill for all that.

How many coaches is the Night Riviera?

How does it compare to 2 x 16 coach rakes each way each night on the Cally?

Exactly.

 

[tgrb]

Hi Paul,

What is happening with the slam doors though on the Night Riviera stock... as at Paddington a few weeks ago I seem to recall the refurbished coaches (very smart!) still having slam
doors (I could be wrong!) - why weren’t plug doors or whatever fitted during refurb... is there a loop hole or dispensation or is this still to be addressed along with other requirements?

Cheers

Tim

 

[co-tr-paul]

Without wanting to go off topic, the details can be found in the Night Riviera Updates thread in the Traction section. The current formation is brake, open, buffet and 4 sleepers (72 bed configuration) with a 5th on weekend. When refurb complete, an extra sleeper will be added perminantly.
The doors were dropped not only because funding but at the time, design/production timescale and I am aware there is a dispensation of some sort but can't say details. It was originally planned to have them along with lots of other stuff but...... !
The change from FGW to GWR and franchise extensions rather than renewal also meant uncertainty and played a part in final result. Personally, i think its a half a job.....

 

[jimm]

How many coaches is the Night Riviera?

How does it compare to 2 x 16 coach rakes each way each night on the Cally?

Exactly.

Exactly what?

The proposition I was referring to was that claim that the Night Riviera is not well used - in which case, why on earth would GWR be adding an additional sleeping car to the two sets of coaches? So they could transport a lot of empty beds up and down between Cornwall and London every night? Or perhaps because, in its own context, it is quite well used?

The two services have distinct characteristics and different operating models as a result.

Break down the Scottish Lowland service into its two component eight-coach portions, each travelling not much further than the eight-coach Night Riviera, and you might be able to make some sort of comparison in a more nuanced way than 'that train's bigger then their train'.

 

[co-tr-paul]

Some obviously have no idea how busy we are. Over the past 7 years, the configuration has been changed some 4 times to increase capacity and a lack of suitable sleeper coaches meant its only now we can add extra vehicles
The last one was pulled out of a hedge ! The service from Plymouth down is also used as a commuter service which has also meant an increase in seating capacity was needed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With talk in one of the magazine's of modifying class 43's to haul mk 4 coaches on the Midland main line how about the Cornish sleepers. Would save all that shunting.
K

I must admit I was very surprised that was not done before simply to standardise things a bit. I particularly thought the removal of the Plymouth shunt was going to lead to it.

The only big issue is the ETH voltage, that could be solved by putting a motor-alternator set in each power car van area.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As usual, though, there has been a huge missed opportunity. With only around 20 vehicles in the GWR sleeper fleet, it would have made more sense to tag on an order for their replacements onto the Caledonian Sleeper contract with CAF. Unit cost would have been reduced as a result, and it would have saved the cost currently being incurred on the refurbishment. But no, this is DfT, so they'll do it separately....

CAF are still building Mk5s for TPE, and I would venture the view that the TPE LHCS sets (and possibly the MUs too, though the Class 802 26m vehicles mean those are near equivalent to a 6-car 22m train anyway) will get a sixth and possibly seventh coach in fairly short order when they find out just how much suppressed latent demand there is due to the present serious overcrowding on the Class 185 operated services. And then there's the vague possibility of son-of-XC and son-of-ATW ordering some CAF MUs based on those coaches. So they've got a while yet.

 

[jimm]

And at this point we don't know what might things be included in the new direct award franchise being discussed by GWR and the DfT, nor what options bidders may be asked to look at when it comes the Night Riviera in a subsequent franchise contest = though this won't be until 2022 at the earliest and perhaps as far off as 2024. I expect CAF would be more than happy to discuss keeping the production line running to build more sleepers and seated night coaches, should the opportunity present itself.

Whatever traction is used, the fact of the matter is that the Mk3 sleepers and day coaches are about 35 years old and counting - by comparison, the Mk1s they replaced were all less than 30 years old. Short of performing drastic surgery on the Mk3s at great expense, there is no way to provide things like showers that will soon be available to Scotland and have been offered on many sleeper services in western European and Scandinavia for years.

 

[irish_rail]

Yes I see the Scottish service is really hiking its prices up soon to appeal only to overseas tourists I suspect. I'm sure most people would prefer mk3s on the night riviera if it keeps the price of a berth down....