4 ms·

Are night trains relevant? No-one builds a railway to run night trains, but once you have the route built for the daytime services, running an extra train at ni

Are night trains relevant? No-one builds a railway to run night trains, but once you have the route built for the daytime services, running an extra train at night on an otherwise-empty track must be very low cost business. Some UK train franchises even lay on so-called 'ghost trains' [1], services that are on useless routes and useless timetables, simply so that they can make up the numbers to hit their service agreements (and so not lose their franchises). This strongly implies that the cost of rolling an extra train along the tracks is relatively small. [1] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/the-hunt-for-britains-ghost-trains-6279103.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/the-hunt-f...

linker3000 13y ago
The Newhaven Marine ghost service in East Sussex is a fascinating example too: http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/other-sites/70397-newhaven-marine-ferry-terminal-station-east-sussex-april-2012-a.html http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/other-sites/70397-newhav...
- Gravityloss 13y ago
  That is mind boggling.
saalweachter 13y ago
Does the UK have dedicated passenger train tracks? In the US, most train tracks (in my experience, at least) are used for both freight and passengers (and frequently owned by the freight companies, who shaft the passenger trains to keep the freight running on schedule, but that's another rant). The freight trains could easily be crowding out the night passenger trains.
- vidarh 13y ago
  There is some separate track, but a lot of the freight and passenger traffic go over the same track.
- pjc50 13y ago
  The UK network prioritises passengers over freight in almost all circumstances. Much of the freight is "bulk" that can tolerate delay quite happily. You don't see a lot of freight going past while waiting on a passenger platform or at a level crossing. There are some freight-only lines mostly for coal to power stations.
- blibble 13y ago
  sure, the fast lines on any 4 track section
lmm 13y ago
> No-one builds a railway to run night trains, but once you have the route built for the daytime services, running an extra train at night on an otherwise-empty track must be very low cost business. The operators find them unprofitable (at least in the UK). AIUI they can be very disruptive to track maintenance (particularly given modern safety regulations[1]); they also require paying staff, keeping stations open during the night, leasing nonstandard carriages that can't be used for anything during the day (which in turn means either dedicated locomotives or careful scheduling and shunting, something that modern railways try to eliminate as much as possible). Certainly the sleeper train to Scotland is heavily subsidized and I believe the one to Cornwall is as well (less confident of that though). With Eurostar, AIUI the government even bought and fitted out sleeping carriages in the early days of the channel tunnel, before they turned the whole thing over to a private company to operate - which then concluded that night services would be uneconomic, and sold the carriages off cheaply to Canada. The ghost trains you link to are more about a legal obligation; even if they cost the relevant companies a lot of money to run, they don't have any alternative. (And honestly an off-peak daytime service, when the trains are already out and the staff already on shift, isn't really comparable). [1] Which are not unreasonable IMO - people have been killed by e.g. a train on the track next to the one they were working on.
vidarh 13y ago
It's not about making up the numbers, but because closing a line is an expensive and lengthy affair due to the amount of consultation that is required under the Transport Act 1962 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_train http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_train

linker3000 13y ago

The Newhaven Marine ghost service in East Sussex is a fascinating example too: http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/other-sites/70397-newhaven-marine-ferry-terminal-station-east-sussex-april-2012-a.html http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/other-sites/70397-newhav...

Gravityloss 13y ago
That is mind boggling.

saalweachter 13y ago

Does the UK have dedicated passenger train tracks? In the US, most train tracks (in my experience, at least) are used for both freight and passengers (and frequently owned by the freight companies, who shaft the passenger trains to keep the freight running on schedule, but that's another rant). The freight trains could easily be crowding out the night passenger trains.

vidarh 13y ago
There is some separate track, but a lot of the freight and passenger traffic go over the same track.
pjc50 13y ago
The UK network prioritises passengers over freight in almost all circumstances. Much of the freight is "bulk" that can tolerate delay quite happily. You don't see a lot of freight going past while waiting on a passenger platform or at a level crossing. There are some freight-only lines mostly for coal to power stations.
blibble 13y ago
sure, the fast lines on any 4 track section

lmm 13y ago

> No-one builds a railway to run night trains, but once you have the route built for the daytime services, running an extra train at night on an otherwise-empty track must be very low cost business. The operators find them unprofitable (at least in the UK). AIUI they can be very disruptive to track maintenance (particularly given modern safety regulations[1]); they also require paying staff, keeping stations open during the night, leasing nonstandard carriages that can't be used for anything during the day (which in turn means either dedicated locomotives or careful scheduling and shunting, something that modern railways try to eliminate as much as possible). Certainly the sleeper train to Scotland is heavily subsidized and I believe the one to Cornwall is as well (less confident of that though). With Eurostar, AIUI the government even bought and fitted out sleeping carriages in the early days of the channel tunnel, before they turned the whole thing over to a private company to operate - which then concluded that night services would be uneconomic, and sold the carriages off cheaply to Canada. The ghost trains you link to are more about a legal obligation; even if they cost the relevant companies a lot of money to run, they don't have any alternative. (And honestly an off-peak daytime service, when the trains are already out and the staff already on shift, isn't really comparable). [1] Which are not unreasonable IMO - people have been killed by e.g. a train on the track next to the one they were working on.

vidarh 13y ago

It's not about making up the numbers, but because closing a line is an expensive and lengthy affair due to the amount of consultation that is required under the Transport Act 1962 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_train http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_train