Class 185 a good train?

[bramling]

I'll give you rattly, the German build quality is better on the 185. But the 170 rides better (350s ride appallingly as well, but the good track quality on the south WCML prevents this being an issue) and I find is actually less noisy, particularly the aircon but also the engines.

Agree with all this. Despite the rattles and the slightly inferior quality of internal fixtures compared to the 185, and the inferior acceleration, for some reason I prefer to travel in a 170.

 

[crehld]

I'll give you rattly, the German build quality is better on the 185. But the 170 rides better (350s ride appallingly as well, but the good track quality on the south WCML prevents this being an issue) and I find is actually less noisy, particularly the aircon but also the engines.

Totally agree with the aircon: it's is excruciatingly loud on all Desiro models.

 

[BurtonM]

Oh, 185s...

I don't particularly like TPE and my local station is Stalybridge. I use 185s almost daily to head to Piccadilly or Oxford Road for university.
I don't like 185s for a lot of reasons, mostly those already mentioned.

-Not big enough.
-I personally find the seats to be absolutely awful, way too hard and worn-out looking.
-You never know which way round a unit will be so I often end up having to wheel a bike the length of the train to go to the cycle storage, only to find a pram, several suitcases and a person or somesuch occupying it. And TPE don't let you put your bike in the disabled area, even if nobody else needs it. But people can sit in the cycle storage area if that's not needed...
-Folding seats in the cycle storage.
-Disabled access ramp storage nowhere near the doors (by cab behind toilet), so the staff bump it off the walls etc of the train and the area looks very shabby.
-Is a trolley really necessary? At least make it static.
-Not a fan of the interior colours.
-It's far too easy to set the passcom off by accident, so much as lean on it the wrong way and the train comes to a halt.
-If you're stuck standing in the middle of the vestibule there's nothing to hold on to, despite there seemingly being space for a central ceiling-mounted rail.
-Insufficient luggage storage, the cycle storage and vestibules are often full of oversize suitcases.
-Very noisy if the engine's on (and it can get very grating when they're hunting at idle). I do concur that they're almost completely silent with the engine off though.

As for the CIS, the voice is awful - and the same goes for the CIS at TPE-managed stations (don't get me started on that disjointed mess, and it replaced Phil Sayer over in Hud...). There's a reason it sounds so bad - I remember hearing somewhere that the voice actors aren't professionals, they were done in-house for some reason (cheaper?). It's probably just whoever they could find with a 'good enough' voice reading off a sheet.

I vastly prefer 170s and 158s. They're both a lot more comfortable and nicer places to be in general.

 

[northwichcat]

As for the CIS, the voice is awful - and the same goes for the CIS at TPE-managed stations (don't get me started on that disjointed mess, and it replaced Phil Sayer over in Hud...). There's a reason it sounds so bad - I remember hearing somewhere that the voice actors aren't professionals, they were done in-house for some reason (cheaper?).

Apparently TPE asked employees to nominate fellow employees who they thought had 'friendly voices.' Apparently the voice at Huddersfield is someone called Rob who management at TPE thought had a friendly voice.

 

[lejog]

Yes, I think this understates the point many people are making. Basically a good train, or better than 150s, 153s & 156s, but unfit for purpose on busy regional and intercity routes.

It is essentially only a 2 car suburban unit as far as standard class is concerned after taking into account first class and disabled access etc.

The high power rating is not normally used by TPE as they try to operate them for fuel economy, coasting along to slack timings at least on TPE North.

They would be good for routes like Manchester-Buxton or the Calder Valley line but even then might be overcrowded at peak times unless run in multiple.

My view is that they should convert the first class saloon to standard and redeploy them as soon as alternative stock can be found for TPE.

I'm always a little bemused by suggestions that 185s may be switched to the Calder Valley line, which is typically served by 2 car trains off-peak, strengthened to 4 car during the rush hour (with just the occasional 3 car 158). A service based on 3 car 185s would represent a cut in capacity at peak times and few of the stations (Bradford Interchange, Halifax maybe?) could accommodate 6 car trains.

So not only the wrong length for TPE services.

 

[DarloRich]

Oh, 185s...

I don't particularly like TPE and my local station is Stalybridge. I use 185s almost daily to head to Piccadilly or Oxford Road for university.
I don't like 185s for a lot of reasons, mostly those already mentioned.

-Not big enough.
-I personally find the seats to be absolutely awful, way too hard and worn-out looking.
-You never know which way round a unit will be so I often end up having to wheel a bike the length of the train to go to the cycle storage, only to find a pram, several suitcases and a person or somesuch occupying it. And TPE don't let you put your bike in the disabled area, even if nobody else needs it. But people can sit in the cycle storage area if that's not needed...
-Folding seats in the cycle storage.
-Disabled access ramp storage nowhere near the doors (by cab behind toilet), so the staff bump it off the walls etc of the train and the area looks very shabby.
-Is a trolley really necessary? At least make it static.
-Not a fan of the interior colours.
-It's far too easy to set the passcom off by accident, so much as lean on it the wrong way and the train comes to a halt.
-If you're stuck standing in the middle of the vestibule there's nothing to hold on to, despite there seemingly being space for a central ceiling-mounted rail.
-Insufficient luggage storage, the cycle storage and vestibules are often full of oversize suitcases.
-Very noisy if the engine's on (and it can get very grating when they're hunting at idle). I do concur that they're almost completely silent with the engine off though.

As for the CIS, the voice is awful - and the same goes for the CIS at TPE-managed stations (don't get me started on that disjointed mess, and it replaced Phil Sayer over in Hud...). There's a reason it sounds so bad - I remember hearing somewhere that the voice actors aren't professionals, they were done in-house for some reason (cheaper?). It's probably just whoever they could find with a 'good enough' voice reading off a sheet.

I vastly prefer 170s and 158s. They're both a lot more comfortable and nicer places to be in general.

Lots of these issues can be easily fixed though. Paint a stripe on the front to indicate cycle storage etc Personally I would ban cyclists. You can carry 3 humans for each bike

In all the times i have used a 185 i have never know the pass com be set off. I must be lucky.

I find the overhead bins will easily take a normal sized suitcase although i agree the luggage storage for an airport service is poor, especially as everyone seems to have to travel these days with suitcases bigger than some houses i have lived in! ( what are they carrying?)

As for the CIS I prefer it to the bland, dull, sameness of Phil Sayer. What is this boards obsession with recorded announcements btw?

Why does making the trolley static help in any way?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I find the overhead bins will easily take a normal sized suitcase

I have a very large trolley case (90cm high) which fits the 350/185 overheads with ease. It's often that people *think* their stuff won't fit, or can't be bothered putting it up (or can't put it up, but aren't willing to ask for help, or others aren't willing to offer help), rather than that it actually won't.

As for the CIS I prefer it to the bland, dull, sameness of Phil Sayer. What is this boards obsession with recorded announcements btw?

Dunno, I just find the accent rude and annoying. I'm happy with most of the others, e.g. the "Sathern" one, or the softer London Midland one, or indeed I quite like the Scottish one used by ScotRail. How's about using a softer Yorkshire or Lancashire accent? Actually, this would be a nice touch emphasizing the North's wide and interesting range of accents - each station in the one relevant to the locality? (I like stuff like that, e.g. the way DB's new regional stock plays the first few notes of the Bundesland's anthem as the announcement tone - anything that gives a feeling of local ownership of a regional rail or bus service is great in my book).

Why does making the trolley static help in any way?

Indeed, not convinced by that one.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

A lot of complaints about the cycle space and disabled space, it seems. It isn't perfect but it's probably the best it could be in the circumstances. If the plan for some to be made 4-car had gone ahead it would be better, but very few stations could take a 7-car formation.
The trolley can be a pain when it's busy (most of the time!) so making it static would mean people squeezing past rather than a trolley. Hopefully the post-wiring stock will be fixed formation 6-car EMUs with 2/3 first-class (including a wheelchair space) in one of the driving cars, with the inner third being the accessible standard space, along with the accessible toilet. The next intermediate should have a mini-buffet counter and the trolleys could be dispensed with. The rest of the train being standard class of a similar quality as the 185s, with 2 or 3 small toilets throughout the train and cycle space in one of the two middle cars to avoid having to run the whole length of the platform. Ideally the disabled spaces should be central but that would involve first being in the middle too, or no wheelchair access to first class.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suspect RVAR wouldn't work with it, but how about *only* having the wheelchair space in First Class, and allowing free upgrades for, say, the user and 2 companions?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I suspect RVAR wouldn't work with it, but how about *only* having the wheelchair space in First Class, and allowing free upgrades for, say, the user and 2 companions?

I'd guess that would be fine from a legal point of view as it's an upgrade rather than a downgrade (though there might be issues for wheelchair users who have needlessly paid the extra for first-class!). Certainly better than the current situation which I imagine leaves wheelchair users feeling like a bit of an afterthought.

 

[BurtonM]

Paint a stripe on the front to indicate cycle storage etc

That's already done in a sense as it's not the First Class end, which marked by a yellow bar on the coupler. So you have to look for the all-black coupler and go to the inner set of doors on that carriage which has a rather small bike sign on one of the doors.

 

[ainsworth74]

That's already done in a sense as it's not the First Class end, which marked by a yellow bar on the coupler. So you have to look for the all-black coupler and go to the inner set of doors on that carriage which has a rather small bike sign on one of the doors.

Though it's a bit on the small size plus can be nearly impossible to see when the headlights are blazing and it's dark.

 

[387star]

Can't bikes be banned from trains unless they fold up? They are a pain on the proverbial

 

[ainsworth74]

Can't bikes be banned from trains unless they fold up? They are a pain on the proverbial

I would retreat to the nearest bunker you have access to as I'm sure there will be a few bikers lobbing rather large artillery shells in your direction shortly

 

[scotsman]

Why does making the trolley static help in any way?

It doesn't. People want food and drink at their seats, and they don't expect to have to look for it on a train the size of a 185. And few people like to go in to first class, either.

 

[BurtonM]

Can't bikes be banned from trains unless they fold up? They are a pain on the proverbial

:roll:

I feel the same way about prams.
I'm not buying a folding bike just for everyone else's sake.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think bicycles are fine provided proper dedicated accommodation (without tip-up seating) is provided for them, and while they are presently free I wouldn't object as a cyclist to having to pay a fee for that space. Hanging them vertically per the Voyagers is a good use of space.

 

[Crossover]

I haven't had time to do more than scan the thread but I think most of the salient points have been covered.

One thing I hadn't thought of was how they don't sound 10 years old, so certainly well screwed together, although yes, the seats look a bit knackered in parts

I do believe that on the economy front, they are locked out of notches 2 and 7 (top) so they could certainly do more. The noise of them doesn't bother me - I quite like the roar to be honest! QSK19 engines which are the same as the 220/221's

They are definitely too short and don't have enough storage space really, given they are on the Airport runs, but not much that can be done there. Given they are semi-regularly doubled up, they'd have been better with corridor connections, but I suspect the drivers enjoy a relatively draught free cab!

The other thing is when an engine drops into eco, all aux power to the coach is lost until the feed is balanced from the other coaches - I have had it before where the engine went into eco mode a few times in quick succession and there were a load of phones beeping as a result of the disconnections/connections to a power source

All in all, I do like them

I think the class 185 has won a best DMU of the year award before? TPE is definitely one of the better first group companies.

Twice I believe (if not more) - a second sticker on the cab ends of some units has appeared recently

 

[Bletchleyite]

I haven't had time to do more than scan the thread but I think most of the salient points have been covered.

One thing I hadn't thought of was how they don't sound 10 years old, so certainly well screwed together, although yes, the seats look a bit knackered in parts

The LM 350s don't seem as old as they are either - German build quality means almost no rattles. The seats are very worn, though, so they are long overdue a green LM makeover.

 

[Crossover]

The TPE 350s are nice too, though they've naturally not had the test of time yet

I've travelled First Class on the 185s a couple of times too, and find that ok too

As an aside, a couple of years ago I had an entire day on 185's - the itinerary was something like the following:
Dewsbury - Manchester - Edinburgh (via Coatbridge, a diversion) - Manchester (via ECML) - Dewsbury. Felt none the worse for wear after, and all in Standard

That does remind me though, the other bugbear is how often the toilets end up out of service - often one but occasionally two. On the aforementioned journey via Newcastle, one toilet was OOU from Edinburgh whilst the other gave up somewhere around Prestonpans. It went all the way to Manchester Airport (at least!) in that state. They did attach another unit during an extended stop at Newcastle bit that was of little consolation to those on our unit who couldn't get to the other!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think someone who invented a CET that is actually reliable under harsh railway operating conditions would make a fortune.

 

[Crossover]

I think someone who invented a CET that is actually reliable under harsh railway operating conditions would make a fortune.

I believe part of the problem on 185's may be down to over sensitive sensors, more than anything

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I think someone who invented a CET that is actually reliable under harsh railway operating conditions would make a fortune.

Maybe development of a diesel engine that can also be fueled by sewage...

 

[scotsman]

I believe part of the problem on 185's may be down to over sensitive sensors, more than anything

It is. They had a tendency to get blocked by drops of fluid pieces of toilet paper. Source: conversations with cleaners on turnarounds.

 

[387star]

The LM 350s don't seem as old as they are either - German build quality means almost no rattles. The seats are very worn, though, so they are long overdue a green LM makeover.

With regard the 350/1s Rail magazine reported several years ago they were to be refreshed with LM house colours obviously that never happened or was an editor's error

 

[northwichcat]

With regard the 350/1s Rail magazine reported several years ago they were to be refreshed with LM house colours obviously that never happened or was an editor's error

LM have said the 350/1s won't get any internal work done during the current franchise but may get refreshed during the Direct Award period.

 

[superkev]

Difficult to see how a train that weighs in at almost a ton a seat can be counted as good.
I'm with Ian Walmesly of modern railways who rated the 158 (36 tons a car) as the pinnacle of dmu design despite its narrow doors and original temperamental air con. Pity they can't be upgraded to the scotrail scenic dmu spec with the later 400hp engines and better air con.
K

 

[Bletchleyite]

Difficult to see how a train that weighs in at almost a ton a seat can be counted as good.
I'm with Ian Walmesly of modern railways who rated the 158 (36 tons a car) as the pinnacle of dmu design despite its narrow doors and original temperamental air con. Pity they can't be upgraded to the scotrail scenic dmu spec with the later 400hp engines and better air con.
K

The 158 is a truly excellent unit. The only problems (as an express unit) with the original were the seat design (being low, raked back and having thick supports means almost no legroom - when replaced with modern seats the legroom is decent) and that they were built too short. ISTR the aircon was fine when used with CFCs for which it was designed.

As for the absolutely superb ride quality even on very bad track, in the UK only the weighty 221 beats it. Nothing else ever has.

 

[yorksrob]

The 158 is a truly excellent unit. The only problems (as an express unit) with the original were the seat design (being low, raked back and having thick supports means almost no legroom - when replaced with modern seats the legroom is decent) and that they were built too short. ISTR the aircon was fine when used with CFCs for which it was designed.

As for the absolutely superb ride quality even on very bad track, in the UK only the weighty 221 beats it. Nothing else ever has.

Indeed, but I'd rather they kept the original seats, removed a set and spread them out a bit, as I find them one of the plus points.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, but I'd rather they kept the original seats, removed a set and spread them out a bit, as I find them one of the plus points.

Problem is that then you would lose the window alignment, which on the original layout is 100% perfect. In the original layout not one seat is misaligned to a window.

If they were to do that, they'd have been better building them with 8 bodyside windows rather than 9, and spacing accordingly.