CAF to build new LHCS for Caledonian Sleeper

[roger440]

And without lots of other things they had - like the small bore plumbing!

Did you mention small bore plumbing

 

If normal stock manufacturing is followed, build it then spend several years re-engineering it with a massive mod program...................... 

 

And anything involving water is always a nightmare on a train.

[newbryford]

 

 

And anything involving water is always a nightmare on a train.

 

Especially when trying to boil it to power the train............................... 

 

Cheers,

Mick

[Joseph_Pestell]

Berths already have two bunks, so no change there

The franchise also specifies the berth measurements, and the minimum is identical to present

 

There is two bunk capacity. But when used for first class, they only use the one and fold the other into the wall (or has that changed?).

 

I had sort of assumed that the en-suites were for first class.

[mjkerr]

There is two bunk capacity. But when used for first class, they only use the one and fold the other into the wall (or has that changed?).

 

I had sort of assumed that the en-suites were for first class.

I worked on the sleepers in the 1990s, so am aware of the berth setup, and confirm berths are normally setup as twins or singles in advance

I also travel a few times a year on the sleeper, always First Class

These are normally the berths nearest the Lounge Car, but depending on demand can also be mixed in the next sleeper

On an Inverness trip I had a reservation at the end of the train, six coaches from the Lounge Car, and even received an apology!

What they didn't realise was I specified that, so that so many people weren't walking past

 

I too had assumed the en-suites were First Class, sole occupancy

Looking at the fare structure either option is possible for all ticket types (berth or en-suite)

Edited March 4, 2015 by mjkerr

[Joseph_Pestell]

On an Inverness trip I had a reservation at the end of the train, six coaches from the Lounge Car, and even received an apology!

What they didn't realise was I specified that, so that so many people weren't walking past

 

 

Good move! Did the steward have to bring you your morning tea from six coaches away? Or did you get a steward to yourself?

[Ron Ron Ron]

I had sort of assumed that the en-suites were for first class.

 

I too had assumed the en-suites were First Class, sole occupancy

 

I thought the intention was that First Class as such would cease to exist by the time the new sleeper stock is introduced; being replaced by a new Business fare?

Has that changed?

 

The en-suit berths are described as "Business berths" in the Transport Scotland documentation.

 

.

Edited March 4, 2015 by Ron Ron Ron

[Joseph_Pestell]

I thought the intention was that First Class as such would cease to exist by the time the new sleeper stock is introduced; being replaced by a new Business fare?

Has that changed?

 

The en-suit berths are described as "Business berths" in the Transport Scotland documentation.

 

.

 

Whether we call it Business or First, does the affluent traveller want to play sardines with two berths in such a small compartment and use the WC after his/her sharer has soaked it with the "waterfall shower" (or something worse)?

[mjkerr]

Did the steward have to bring you your morning tea from six coaches away? Or did you get a steward to yourself?

Standard passengers get just a tray with Tea / Coffee

 

First class passengers get a tray with Tea / Coffee, breakfast item, and yoghurt

The passenger is also asked what time they want it served (forget that option, it never works), and to be served in berth or in the Lounge Car

If it is to be served in berth, then the steward has to carry any hot item to their pantry, hence the preference to have the First Class passengers as near to the Lounge Car as possible

 

On the Inverness journey I advised them I would have my breakfast in the Lounge Car, but knowing the staff anyway helps!

[mjkerr]

I thought the intention was that First Class as such would cease to exist by the time the new sleeper stock is introduced; being replaced by a new Business fare?

Has that changed?

That is partially correct

The revised fares commence September 2015 (overlap of 2.5 years)

The existing fares continue to March 2018

The new fares commence March 2018

 

Initial fare change :

* Standard Sleeper breakfast

 

Revised fares :

Standard no berth / seated

Standard plus supplement

First Class plus supplement

Standard Sleeper TOC

First Class Sleeper TOC

 

New fares :

Standard no berth / seated

Standard plus Pod

Standard plus Sleeper

Standard plus en-suite

Standard Sleeper TOC

First Class no berth / Pod

First Class plus berth

First Class plus en-suite

First Class Sleeper TOC

Edited March 4, 2015 by mjkerr

[Joseph_Pestell]

I think that potential passengers will be thoroughly confused. I know I am!

 

And just as with the complex fares structure that we now have in the multi-operator railway, that confusion will put many passengers into the arms of the airlines.

[mjkerr]

I think that potential passengers will be thoroughly confused. I know I am!

I have included all the main fare options, so what the customer sees will be much simpler, the first queston pretty much halfs the fare options

 

Does the customer already have an existing ticket : yes / no

Does the customer want : Seated / Pod / Berth / En-suite

If Berth or En-Suite, does the customer require adjoining berths : yes / no

 

The fare is then set by a matrix, almost identical to present; some are higher, some are lower

Equally, I can see some regular passengers being unhappy at the fare increases, especially on Fri / Sun, but again some will have lower fares

The biggest change is the split between Mon (BHX), Tue, Wed, Thu and Fri, Sun, Mon (BH) fares

The idea is to increase reservations mid-week

 

I personally think the biggest gamble is the volume of seats and Pods, in effect reducing the number of berths, but increasing the number of passengers

However airline passengers travelling Business class are already used to Pods (flat beds) so after some time this may be more attractive than a berth

Equally, I can see many passengers with Standard tickets being attracted by the option to upgrade to a Pod rather than a berth (especially on Fri / Sun when fully booked)

[nightstar.train]

I personally think the biggest gamble is the volume of seats and Pods, in effect reducing the number of berths, but increasing the number of passengersHowever airline passengers travelling Business class are already used to Pods (flat beds) so after some time this may be more attractive than a berthEqually, I can see many passengers with Standard tickets being attracted by the option to upgrade to a Pod rather than a berth (especially on Fri / Sun when fully booked)

I do see that as a gamble and I hope Serco haven't shot themselves in the foot. If pod people class turns out to be a runaway success they may well end up with more berths than they can sell and not enough pods. So it'll be back to CAF to beg them to make a few more pod coaches. Depends on how nice the pods are I suppose. Some of the lie flat seats on airlines are amazing, so if they can offer something similar then they should be a great success. What I think might happen is that pod class and en suite will sell out easily, but they'll struggle to shift non ensuite berths, except to families where the adjoining cabins will be a big plus.

[Reorte]

What I think might happen is that pod class and en suite will sell out easily, but they'll struggle to shift non ensuite berths, except to families where the adjoining cabins will be a big plus.

I can only speak for myself but the berth option strikes me as the best compromise. Pods might be better than a seat but I'd far rather have a room to myself (paid the single supplement whenever I've used the sleeper), but the en-suite facilities aren't something I'd particularly want to pay even more for.

[mjkerr]

I do see that as a gamble and I hope Serco haven't shot themselves in the foot

Serco (or any other winner of a franchise) doesn't have a say in the rolling stock, this is determined by the authority (DfT or TS)

There is obviously some discussion between Serco and TS before placing the order to refine some of the points, but the overall scheme remains unchanged

[mjkerr]

I can only speak for myself but the berth option strikes me as the best compromise. Pods might be better than a seat but I'd far rather have a room to myself (paid the single supplement whenever I've used the sleeper), but the en-suite facilities aren't something I'd particularly want to pay even more for.

I typically travel on the sleeper once a month

 

When I travel between (Cumbernauld to) Falkirk Grahamston and Crewe, I only book a seat

In future I would book a Pod

 

When I travel between Scotland and Euston, this is on a First Class Return and I book a berth

I also receive a £2.50 Lounge Car Voucher (which you do not receive with the First Class ALR)

 

When I travel on my First Class ALR, this is always to/from Euston, so I book a berth

I don't see the benefit in the en-suite, so will continue to book a single occupancy berth (although I would be entitled to a free Pod)

[LaGrange]

4116 at Heuston, 5/2/15 by hurricanemk1c, on Flickr

 

Renowned for poor riding, average seats and corrosion...

 

 

[mjkerr]

Renowned for poor riding, average seats and corrosion...

You get what you pay for

I would not be surprised if there is corrosion for rolling stock that is nearly 10 years old, it usually becomes an issue after 5 years

[nightstar.train]

It's interesting that, as noted further up, the stock is being designed for 125mph. This would suggest it's an extension of an existing design that is already designed for 125mph (maybe the Irish Mk4), as this seems massive over engineering. The sleepers only run at 90mph, or is it 80mph? Either that or it's a clean sheet design that CAF are hoping to sell to other TOCs in day coach variants where the 125mph running would be useful.

[Accurascale Fran]

Renowned for poor riding, average seats and corrosion...

 

Average seats is being kind. They're shocking.

[mjkerr]

It's interesting that, as noted further up, the stock is being designed for 125mph

Where?

The specification is for 110mph

[nightstar.train]

Where?The specification is for 110mph

Ah, my mistake. I guess there's very little difference in the engineering between 90mph and 110mph stock. Still, I bet CAF are hoping for follow on orders. Assuming all the major development costs are accounted for in this batch of coaches they'd be making a tidy profit on any follow on.

[Ron Ron Ron]

A bit of a diversion, but I saw these photos of a couple of sleeper compartments.

 

Ireland's Grand Hibernian

 

 

 

 

The Royal Scotsman.

 

[lmsforever]

According to latest issue of Rail DB is still going to provide 67,s for a while longer plus Serco having problems with bookings on their website due to the fact that the franchise is not live yet does not bode well for future does it.

[Talltim]

A bit of a diversion, but I saw these photos of a couple of sleeper compartments.

 

Ireland's Grand Hibernian

 

 

 

 

The Royal Scotsman.

 

The Grand Hibernian is Mk3s to be running in Ireland, while the Royals Scotsman is older Pullmans running in Scotland, so both within UK loading gauge. Just goes to show what is possible if you don't mind having fewer compartments per coach. Not to my taste, but very tasteful.

[DavidB-AU]

Not quite as luxurious but still impressive, Platinum Class on the Ghan and Indian Pacific in Australia.

http://www.greatsouthernrail.com.au/custom/files/media/Platinum_Service_Thumb.jpg

http://www.greatsouthernrail.com.au/custom/files/media/Platinum_Night.jpg

 

Cheers

David