West Highland Sleeper

[dickdarlington]

With the reopening of the Airdrie-Bathgate line, would it not make more sense for the Fort William portion of the sleeper to stop at either Queen Street or Central low levels instead of at Westerton?

 

[4SRKT]

Yes. It'd be nice to see it strengthened with an extra mk II standard seated coach, and pushed as part of the normal Glasgow > Fort William service. It could also form a new earliest working from Edinburgh to Queen Street, which could possibly leave Edinbugh a little later (05:00?) if it didn't have to meander all over the place to get to Westerton.

Just to make it clear, in no way is my desire to have this rerouted motivated by the fact that I require the Cowlairs North Curve, only used by the sleeper in the up direction, and its conversion to a Red Bit in the rail atlas would reduce its status for me from 'compulsory' to 'nice to have'.

 

[Failed Unit]

I am not sure if it would make the route any quicker to be honest. It currently goes via Falkirk High on a fairly direct route. Interesting Idea, maybe even stop some stations on the Bathgate route. I am sure Livingston has as much demand as Falkirk.

 

[dickdarlington]

Its not to speed up the journey, its to give access to central Glasgow as lets face it, Westerton is hardly central.

The added bonus (as 4SRKT states) would be an early morning direct link out of Glasgow to Fort William. Ideal for those wanting to bag a munro or two.

And the service doesn't have a scheduled stop between Glasgow and Edinburgh, so there is no concern over inconveniencing passengers over changing the path.

 

[4SRKT]

I am not sure if it would make the route any quicker to be honest. It currently goes via Falkirk High on a fairly direct route. Interesting Idea, maybe even stop some stations on the Bathgate route. I am sure Livingston has as much demand as Falkirk.

I thought in the down direction it went via Grahamston, Cumbernauld, Springburn and Cowlairs? Even so, having a 10 minute later departure from Edinburgh is a tiny benefit, the main benefits being a departure at 04:50 or 05:00 from Edinburgh to Glasgow Queen St, and a direct service from Glasgow to FW in the morning. Let's start refurbishing a couple of mk II TSOs to strengthen this train straightaway!

 

[Failed Unit]

No it normally goes via Falkirk High, It can go via Cumbernauld for diversion purposes.

I agree that using QS LL would help provide Glasgow with better connections for Fort William. Diesel's use the station at times so I can't see if that is a problem.

 

[rail-britain]

I thought in the down direction it went via Grahamston, Cumbernauld, Springburn and Cowlairs?

Yes, that is correct; via Falkirk High southbound and via Falkirk Grahamston northbound

The Fort William sleeper may travel via Airdrie during engineering and/or blockades
There are no plans to change the route, although it is being considered but the service would not call at Glasgow QS LL (and certainly not Glasgow Central LL)

Westerton currently serves as an emergency loading point for passengers that miss the Glasgow sleeper
The sleeper is then held at Westerton until the passengers taxi arrives
I've seen it a few times

 

[cle]

Yes, that is correct; via Falkirk High southbound and via Falkirk Grahamston northbound

The Fort William sleeper may travel via Airdrie during engineering and/or blockades
There are no plans to change the route, although it is being considered but the service would not call at Glasgow QS LL (and certainly not Glasgow Central LL)

Westerton currently serves as an emergency loading point for passengers that miss the Glasgow sleeper
The sleeper is then held at Westerton until the passengers taxi arrives
I've seen it a few times

So if someone misses the Glasgow to London sleeper due to official connections being late, they're dispatched to Westerton? That's helpful, but surely the same could occur at Glasgow QS (and save on taxis).

Might the opposite occur in London - if you missed the train to Westerton due to offical connection delays, would they put you on the Glasgow sleeper?

Anyway, I think this is definitely a good idea, and an intelligent use of the A/B line, not to mention the new local journeys it creates. They could market the additional Glasgow stop too.

 

[Geezertronic]

Yes. It'd be nice to see it strengthened with an extra mk II standard seated coach...

I didn't think that could happen as the completed train was already at its maximum length (to be able to fit into a Euston platform anyway)?

 

[cle]

I think it would probably need to be added somehow at Edinburgh?

 

[gordonthemoron]

I didn't think that could happen as the completed train was already at its maximum length (to be able to fit into a Euston platform anyway)?

I presumed they meant from Edinburgh as isn't the FW seated coach added at Edinburgh already?

 

[4SRKT]

I presumed they meant from Edinburgh as isn't the FW seated coach added at Edinburgh already?

Yes, that is what I meant. The lounge car and seated sleeper coach are added at Edinburgh. Just add a mk II TSO to these for non-sleeper passengers.

 

[Geezertronic]

I presumed they meant from Edinburgh as isn't the FW seated coach added at Edinburgh already?

Yes, that is what I meant. The lounge car and seated sleeper coach are added at Edinburgh. Just add a mk II TSO to these for non-sleeper passengers.

So the extra coach wouldn't go near Euston then?

 

[tbtc]

I agree that using QS LL would help provide Glasgow with better connections for Fort William. Diesel's use the station at times so I can't see if that is a problem

Stopping at the Low Level station may be a problem for ventilation though? Different to just passing through? Dunno...

Maybe if the "Lowland" and "Highland" sleepers were run by different TOCs there'd be an incentive for the Fort William portion to stop somewhere more central in Glasgow?

 

[Failed Unit]

Stopping at the Low Level station may be a problem for ventilation though? Different to just passing through? Dunno...

Maybe if the "Lowland" and "Highland" sleepers were run by different TOCs there'd be an incentive for the Fort William portion to stop somewhere more central in Glasgow?

They do have the 156s in the low level when engineering work / blockages dictiate. But I am not sure what the proceedure is and if the need to stop in a certain place to minimise the fumes.

Interesting about the taxi to Westerton for the Glasgow passengers, I guess Edinburgh passengers just wait for the Highland to show up if thier connections are delayed.

 

[dickdarlington]

Not sure that they would need the additional carriage anyway.

As a sporadic traveller on the line, when I am up there I usually get the sleeper at Crianlarich/Tyndrum to Fort William (heading back on the QS service later in the same day). I know I could drive and it would be more convenient, but given the choice, is there anyone on here who would take the car over the chance of an early morning up at Rannoch?

Anyway, I digress, when I use the service, its normally empty. But then I suppose that's becuase it needs a reservation.

 

[PaulLothian]

They do have the 156s in the low level when engineering work / blockages dictiate. But I am not sure what the proceedure is and if the need to stop in a certain place to minimise the fumes.

There is a short piece of track open to the sky at each end of Queen Street Low Level for ventilation. Would need precise braking and some walking through train to be adjacent to platform for passengers joining or leaving there. Don't suppose there are many residents left around there to be disturbed by noise.

 

[cle]

They do have the 156s in the low level when engineering work / blockages dictiate. But I am not sure what the proceedure is and if the need to stop in a certain place to minimise the fumes.

Interesting about the taxi to Westerton for the Glasgow passengers, I guess Edinburgh passengers just wait for the Highland to show up if thier connections are delayed.

Actually, ironically I think they'd be more buggered with no alternative. It doesn't officially stop at Edinburgh - I'm not even sure all the jiggery pokery with the engines and so forth happens in a platform road or not.

 

[Failed Unit]

There is a short piece of track open to the sky at each end of Queen Street Low Level for ventilation. Would need precise braking and some walking through train to be adjacent to platform for passengers joining or leaving there. Don't suppose there are many residents left around there to be disturbed by noise.

I can't imagine the noise beign much worse that the High Level station, which you can normally hear anyway on the low-level. I guess as not many trains per day do the route anyway it would not have cause too many problems.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Actually, ironically I think they'd be more buggered with no alternative. It doesn't officially stop at Edinburgh - I'm not even sure all the jiggery pokery with the engines and so forth happens in a platform road or not.

Yes the shunting takes place in the platforms, the last time was on it they used 7 and 11. I was on the Inverness portion which turned up on 7 and shunted back onto the Aberdeen portion on 11. It is an offical stop for the Fort William portion.

 

[4SRKT]

Not sure that they would need the additional carriage anyway.

As a sporadic traveller on the line, when I am up there I usually get the sleeper at Crianlarich/Tyndrum to Fort William (heading back on the QS service later in the same day). I know I could drive and it would be more convenient, but given the choice, is there anyone on here who would take the car over the chance of an early morning up at Rannoch?

Anyway, I digress, when I use the service, its normally empty. But then I suppose that's becuase it needs a reservation.

I wonder how much of the train's emptiness is down to its not stopping at Queen Street? When I first went on the West Highland the morning departure was from QS at 05:50, and it was well loaded. As well as the sleeping cars and standard mk IIs portioned off the Inverness sleeper at Mossend, 3 non-aircon coaches were also added at QS for the run. A lot more seating capacity than today's 31 seats on the Caledonian Sleeper, and possibly indicative of what could be achieved if this service was marketed properly by ScotRail. Likewise I don't think an early morning Glasgow > Edinburgh would be a bad idea either (and after midnight in the other direction) using this working.

 

[EltonRoad]

Wonder if they've considered splitting the train at Carstairs rather than Edinburgh. Then you'd have a 60 - 90 minute saving to Fort William, and it could call at QS LL, and the Westerton <-> QS connection could cease. Don't know what the implications are in terms of staffing, shunting, food supplies etc. But if they can do it for the Lowland, why not the Highland?

 

[jopsuk]

There's a lot more shunting, including the extra coaches for Fort William. When the lowland splits, all that has to happen is that the copling in the middle is detached and the Edinburgh loco attached to the "back" of the main formation. When the Highland splits, the Inverness and Aberdeen portions get Class 67s, the Fort William a 67 plus seated and lounge car, and the 90 has to get out the way. I'd guess a lot more staff are involved in that operation!

 

[4SRKT]

Wonder if they've considered splitting the train at Carstairs rather than Edinburgh. Then you'd have a 60 - 90 minute saving to Fort William, and it could call at QS LL, and the Westerton <-> QS connection could cease. Don't know what the implications are in terms of staffing, shunting, food supplies etc. But if they can do it for the Lowland, why not the Highland?

You don't want to save any time here. If you split at Carstairs you'd be at Queen Street at about 4:00, and either have to hang around for ages or go on to FW waaaay too early. Sending it to Edinburgh makes sense as you can run the seated train through from there, and pick up at Glasgow (Westerton) at a more sensible time.

 

[rail-britain]

Sadly stopping at Glasgow QS LL is not likely
Equally, routing via Glasgow QS LL is not likely until 2013 when electrification between Glasgow QS and Edinburgh commences

I didn't think that could happen as the completed train was already at its maximum length (to be able to fit into a Euston platform anyway)?

That wouldn't be an issue as the RLO and BUO only operate between Edinburgh and Fort William, with the Class 67 loco
The 2 or 3 sleepers operate the entire route (depending on day)

Adding 1 additional TSO in the summer is certainly a good idea
This would then take the train to 6 or 7 coaches (depending on day)
A Class 67 should be able to cope with that (the InterCity sleeper in the 1990s was often 7 or 8 coaches) however there may be weight limits due to the higher RA

Interesting about the taxi to Westerton for the Glasgow passengers, I guess Edinburgh passengers just wait for the Highland to show up if thier connections are delayed

There shouldn't be any Edinburgh passengers
The Fort William seated passengers get kicked out on arrival at Edinburgh

The Glasgow sleeper departs at 23:40 (Monday to Saturday)
The Westerton sleeper departs at 23:56
It usually happens once or twice a week
I believe the cutoff is 10 minutes
Equally, I have seen it where a passenger has turned up to find their sleeper was double booked
They are then sent to Westerton by taxi, presumably they receive compensation for the later arrival into Euston

Northbound it isn't an issue
If a passenger misses the Inverness / Aberdeen / Fort William they can often swap to the Glasgow / Edinburgh

 

[Failed Unit]

There shouldn't be any Edinburgh passengers
The Fort William seated passengers get kicked out on arrival at Edinburgh

The Glasgow sleeper departs at 23:40 (Monday to Saturday)
The Westerton sleeper departs at 23:56
It usually happens once or twice a week
I believe the cutoff is 10 minutes
Equally, I have seen it where a passenger has turned up to find their sleeper was double booked
They are then sent to Westerton by taxi, presumably they receive compensation for the later arrival into Euston

Northbound it isn't an issue
If a passenger misses the Inverness / Aberdeen / Fort William they can often swap to the Glasgow / Edinburgh

You are missing my point, if passengers who miss the Glasgow portion are taken by taxi to Westerton, I assume that passengers that miss the Edinburgh portion which also departs at 2340 will wait at Waverley for the Highland portion. I expect if double booking happens it is also likely to be an issue on the busier Edinburgh portion.

I have alway wondered myself what would happen if my 20 minute connection into Waverley got delayed (I normally take the one before for safety) Would they put me on the Highland or would I be sleeping at Waverley and waiting for the 0550 East Coast service.

 

[EltonRoad]

I've often wondered if they could get an extra coach on at Euston by avoiding the inbound '90' resting on the blocks. How about detaching the leading loco just outside the station, then reverse into the platform using the loco on the north end? Then you could run a separate seated coach to all three destinations. (I've no idea whether this is feasible!)

 

[Geezertronic]

I've often wondered if they could get an extra coach on at Euston by avoiding the inbound '90' resting on the blocks. How about detaching the leading loco just outside the station, then reverse into the platform using the loco on the north end? Then you could run a separate seated coach to all three destinations. (I've no idea whether this is feasible!)

I would assume that such a manouvre would cause delays to traffic coming into and out of Euston as it would block at least one line (two for the run around getting rid of the 90) and I assume some platform access as a result. Performing this at Wembley would leave a long reverse which I believe would not be allowed either way.

 

[MCR247]

I've often wondered if they could get an extra coach on at Euston by avoiding the inbound '90' resting on the blocks. How about detaching the leading loco just outside the station, then reverse into the platform using the loco on the north end? Then you could run a separate seated coach to all three destinations. (I've no idea whether this is feasible!)

I'm not sure that would be possible in the morning rush hour! But possibly at 9 o'clock at night

 

[matchmaker]

There is a short piece of track open to the sky at each end of Queen Street Low Level for ventilation. Would need precise braking and some walking through train to be adjacent to platform for passengers joining or leaving there. Don't suppose there are many residents left around there to be disturbed by noise.

I can assure you it was a lot more smokey in steam days than any diesel could manage.................

 

[Striker]

Just to make it clear, in no way is my desire to have this rerouted motivated by the fact that I require the Cowlairs North Curve, only used by the sleeper in the up direction, and its conversion to a Red Bit in the rail atlas would reduce its status for me from 'compulsory' to 'nice to have'.

The Cowlairs North Curve IS red in the latest Baker atlas.