What do we want from the "New" Caledonian Sleeper

[Butts]

I don't see that it should be possible (or see the reason why it should be). If you are on a plane for 8 hours (or even 6 hours with an hour at each end for arrivals/departures) you wouldn't be able to smoke so would that mean that you'd only fly to destinations that are within "smoking range"?

Spoken like a true non-smoker

It would be easier to make provision on a train than a plane (see Finland post)

I bet you'd even object to people having a smoke on the platform when the sleeper makes stops :cry:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This reminds of a sleeper I took in Finland last year. The train had a smoking compartment (room) in the carriage next to the buffet. This smoking room had no seats and was packed like sardines with a mixture of heavy metal fans and oaps. There was so much smoke in there that you couldn't see the ceiling

A bit of "wacky baccy" being enjoyed no doubt

 

[The Ham]

I'm with other posters in believing that stacked bunks or perhaps couchettes would be best for the leisure market keeping the price down while trying to get a reasonable number of passengers into a limited train length. These might have curtains to each bunk for a measure of privacy plus lockers for valuables. I'm less sure about the airline first class bed idea, as compared to an airliner the staff to passenger ratio will be lower and there is also the issue of disturbance at intermediate stops.

Something like the Capsule hotel's in Japan could work as you'd then only need to access the berth from the end. This would then mean that less space was needed for accessing the births with the saved space could be used for lockers, changing facilities and extra berths.

If nine current compartments were converted to such a system you could probably fit 28 capsules and two changing room with lockers compared with 18 berths. Although not a big increase in numbers the cost per person would be 65 points compared with 100 points for the current set up, which would be VERY attractive compared to paying for a single supplement for loan travellers.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Originally Posted by Bald Rick
Fly up, either after 2000 night before, or 0700 next day. Hotel as required. Simples!

Very fair comment.

How many current sleeper travellers would be happy with this?

So is there actually a market for the sleeper, or are we just paying out all these £m of subsidy to pander to the scottish voters?

Which country will pay if scotland devolves?

I like flying, but I wouldn't do that. It's too much hassle, plus it adds in the cost of a hotel. All in all, the Sleeper is far more cost efficient as well as convenient. Not forgetting it is a city centre to city centre operation.

 

[Beveridges]

What linespeed are the sleepers timed at on the WCML ?

When the class 90 passed me it looked like it was going slow. Probably about 50mph. All signals in front were green.

Does this service really need a 90 ? What's to stop it from being 67-hauled so that it can call in at Manchester before the electrification is even done ?

What's to stop it from being 66-hauled with a genny van providing the ETS ?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

They're timed at 80mph*, which rules out the 66 + generator van ( as does lack of space - you'd need to take one other carriage out of the rake to make room for the van ).

About 20 years ago the Glasgow / Edinburgh at least was booked via Manchester Piccadilly and the Bolton line and would have a 47/8 throughout; ironically enough it did not actually call at Manchester! I did it several times in those days - that was also before they started leaving the lights on all night in the seated portion. Once they started leaving those lights on I booked berths only from then on...


*The Highlander is booked - and usually will do - 100mph south of Rugby in the up direction. It's certainly done this every time I've been on it. I've had such speeds about 80% of the time on the Lowlander on the same section, but I'm not sure if that one is actually booked to do that speed - I have known it, more than once, to reach Euston an hour early...

 

[marks87]

What's to stop it from being 67-hauled so that it can call in at Manchester before the electrification is even done ?

67s don't have a high enough ETS index for the whole 16 carriage rake.

 

[dailyrail]

First post on here, the sleeper train to Scotland (I've travelled on both the lowland and highland) are really fun to travel on, but if anything needs to be changed maybe better sound proofing? It can be pretty noisy at times.

 

[nathanclass323]

Personally, I would like to see bi modal MUs run the service. Something like a 442/444 with a proper restaurant car. I'd like to see rooms which are like the Amtrak Roomettes on the Superliners. WiFi should be free and plug sockets should be provided. Soundproofing should be good and people in wheelchairs should be able to board with ease. There could also be a family carriage with three or four bed roomettes. A pass-com should be in every room. I'd like the restaurant car to have loose seating and be in a 2+1 seating layout with good seat/window alignment. I personally think the seated cars should be as a separate MU coupled to the restaurant/lounge/roomette carriages so they can also be used on another service and they aren't specialised to the Caledonian (no idea what though with it coming out of the ScotRail franchise)

 

[Beveridges]

67s don't have a high enough ETS index for the whole 16 carriage rake.

Whenever the Sleepers have been diverted via Manchester in the past they have used a 67 on the 16 carriage rake with a 90 DIT

 

[edwin_m]

Probably reckoned they could run without ETS for that distance and nobody would notice. Happened to me behind a class 40 in 1983!

 

[marks87]

Whenever the Sleepers have been diverted via Manchester in the past they have used a 67 on the 16 carriage rake with a 90 DIT

Mk3 coaches have batteries (I assume the Mk2s are the same).

Porterbrook have an interesting brochure on how Mk3s fit into a "modern railway", which has some high-level technical specs - http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/Mk3 Brochure.pdf

 

[D6975]

Don't forget, the highland sleeper operation is up for review soon.
There's no reason to assume that the new operators will run the same services. The use of 2 very long rakes may change.
(there will be an obligation to serve certain stations of course, but serving additional stations is a possibility, especially as it makes the bid more attractive to those who make the decisions on who runs what)

 

[Norther Monkey]

What I would like from the Caledonian Sleeper is a bed!! Four out of the last six times I've used it I have not been able to get a supplement. I thought that the service struggled to fill its berths.

 

[jopsuk]

I belive Thursday and Friday night northbound and Monday night southbound are usually very busy?

Still difficult for a full train to mkake much money; the capacity is very low. After all, a standard class SLE accomodates only 26 (24 in a SLEP isn't it?), and 13/12 for 1st class.

 

[Altnabreac]

I feel the sleeper should be taking best practice from other transport modes.

I travelled on the Megabus Sleeper Coach a few months ago from Glasgow to London. You get both a regular seat and a small flat bunk bed with a curtain. A bit like the capsule hotel suggestion but side accessed rather than end on so less claustrophobic.

I got an excellent night's sleep, much better than you get on the seated Caledonian sleeper and would use it again in preference to a seated overnight rail journey.

For the premium product look to something like the lie flat business class beds on modern airliners. With an entertainment system, at seat refreshments and privacy divides, these would provide a great premium product but at a higher passenger density than existing cabins.

Both these technological solutions would be able to use a standard build coach or multiple unit, keeping construction costs down and with higher passenger density should reduce ticket prices / subsidies as well.

 

[Essexman]

I'm very happy with almost everything about our current sleepers.

In terms of the train I'd like less noise (soundproofing & rattles).

In terms of schedules I'd prefer an earlier start on the lowland to give more sleeping time and perhaps a slower run through the curves north of Preston.