Putting the 185s on a diet: Could they be made light enough for sprinter speeds?

[BMIFlyer]

Doesn’t Hull to Selby have enough non-Sprinter services that they should be sorting out higher speed limits.....or is it marginal gain for much cash?

When the resignalling was planned, it was pencilled in for the line speed to be 90-100 mph. However the line speed improvements are on hold currently due to the cost. The new signalling is laid out for higher speeds.

 

[js1000]

Direct Manchester - Chesterfield - Nottingham (without stopping at Sheffield) would be good! The trip up to Sheffield adds 10 miles to the Liverpool - Norwich route adding a lot of time to the journeys of passengers from Derby/Nottingham!

Unfortunately, I can't see how that would be feasible given the stretch between Manchester and Sheffield is always rammed and in the long term the DfT and TftN want 4 express trains per hour (up from 3) with the Hope Valley upgrade. Afterall, Manchester and Sheffield are the two biggest conurbations in Europe that aren't linked by a motorway.

 

[Townsend Hook]

Unfortunately, I can't see how that would be feasible given the stretch between Manchester and Sheffield is always rammed and in the long term the DfT and TftN want 4 express trains per hour (up from 3) with the Hope Valley upgrade. Afterall, Manchester and Sheffield are the two biggest conurbations in Europe that aren't linked by a motorway.

Surely there’s only two express trains per hour between Manchester and Sheffield as things stand? The EMT Liverpool-Norwich and the TPE MIA-Cleethorpes.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Sorry to ask a stupid question but it's one I keep wondering, what exactly required to meet sprinter timing? Am I understanding correctly the 185's have the performance but are too heavy?

 

[edwin_m]

Biggest difference I have seen is a brief 25-over-45MU speed on the Up East Lancs line between Holme Tunnel and Townley Tunnel. Only four chains long. Not that 185s have ever been over Copy Pit.

There's a 20/DMU70 between Meadowhall and Chapeltown - somewhere a 185 might credibly turn up...

 

[superkev]

Sorry to ask a stupid question but it's one I keep wondering, what exactly required to meet sprinter timing? Am I understanding correctly the 185's have the performance but are too heavy?

A 2 car 170 is allowed SP tiweighs around 90t over 8 axles which is 11.3t an axle so to match this a 185 at 14t an axle would have to shed around 2.7t a car. A bogie change and/of less fuel come to mind.
K

 

[matacaster]

A 2 car 170 is allowed SP tiweighs around 90t over 8 axles which is 11.3t an axle so to match this a 185 at 14t an axle would have to shed around 2.7t a car. A bogie change and/of less fuel come to mind.
K

I've not heard any particularly rational explanation other than 'its the rules' and they are too heavy for Sprinter dispensation. They ride very well is it

-a sprinter standard was developed years ago and has never been looked at again?
-the sprinter standard was developed when there was still a fair amount of jointed track about?
-185's are perceived to cause more track maintenance requirements?
-any other reason?

 

[Charlie Smythe]

A 2 car 170 is allowed SP tiweighs around 90t over 8 axles which is 11.3t an axle so to match this a 185 at 14t an axle would have to shed around 2.7t a car. A bogie change and/of less fuel come to mind.
K

On a loco, DMU or wagon. Is the weight spread evenly or is it not. So if a loco weighs 90 tonne is it always 15 tonne per axle or could it be 13 on one and 17 on another. Or for a 40 tonne DMU is it always 10 tonne per axle or could it be 8 on one and 12 on another.

 

[BMIFlyer]

There's a 20/DMU70 between Meadowhall and Chapeltown - somewhere a 185 might credibly turn up...

At that location a 185 can do 70, as it’s a DMU.

The differential speeds are the ones badged SP, which the 185 cannot do.


Example a 70/SP90 means 70 for the 185 and 90 for the 158/170.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

There's one or two of those SP differentials between Darlington and Dinsdale.
On a farm bridge, SP45 over 20 if I recall correctly

 

[Llama]

I've not heard any particularly rational explanation other than 'its the rules' and they are too heavy for Sprinter dispensation. They ride very well is it

-a sprinter standard was developed years ago and has never been looked at again?
-the sprinter standard was developed when there was still a fair amount of jointed track about?
-185's are perceived to cause more track maintenance requirements?
-any other reason?

Bigger kinematic envelope caused by the body length and the weight?

There are/were certain other restrictions for 185s. They are prohibited from the last ten metres of Manchester Victoria platform 2 (but bizarrely this instruction is only shown in one of the two parts (NW6005, not shown in NW7001) of the sectional appendix that overlap that location. They are also restricted to 5mph through New Pudsey in the 'down' direction (towards Bradford) and if I remember rightly they were similarly restricted to 5mph through Sowerby Bridge station platforms one way some years ago, but definitely not any more.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

Perhaps the simplest solution to the 185 problem would be to take another look at whether the (possibly excessive to well cover someones back) engineering standards that apply on the railway are really necessary and might be relaxed. There is no doubt that the 185's are quite heavy, but they have a pretty low centre of gravity, which might suggest the perceived problem is track wear or forcing track out of gauge round curves. It must be said that 185's ride extremely well at the speeds allowed on winding transpennine routes and I have never experienced any suggestion of bad riding. Are there other issues with 185's?

Apart from through Batley Station.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

Why do these trains need a "diet"? What benefit are you trying to achieve? They are good quality, reliable trains that the experts here seem to despise.

Possibly due to them not being well matched to the work they do.
Intercity services, using commuter EMUs, with diesel engines fitted.
No end gangways, and very little luggage space, considering that they are a Manchester Airport centred service pattern.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Apart from through Batley Station.

It's a long time since I rode non-stop through BTL, since I live there. I can imagine a slightly rough ride over the subway though. Biggest issue is the cant preventing the doors from opening on the up side. Mirfield on the up fast is another rough spot though.

At that location a 185 can do 70, as it’s a DMU.

The differential speeds are the ones badged SP, which the 185 cannot do.


Example a 70/SP90 means 70 for the 185 and 90 for the 158/170.

It's been said several times on this thread that 185s can't use SP or DMU speeds. For example the viaduct at Paddock near Huddersfield is 10/DMU50 so when 185s run through there on the occasional diversion they have to crawl.

 

[Spartacus]

You do start to forget how rolly they really are until you do something else along a familiar line, having a fast 158 diverted through Dewsbury vice Interchange a while ago really brought it home. Someone once suggested the problem was because they didn't do enough to take into account the engine when they were designing them, compared to the electric desiros, but the reason's academic really now.

I don't think anything ever rode particularly well over the subway at Batley, but 185s have been the worst, it was almost dangerous to any standing passengers who weren't aware before the suspension tweeks. The track wasn't in the best condition either, and got either an ESR or TSR while it was sorted as well as it could be.

 

[edwin_m]

At that location a 185 can do 70, as it’s a DMU.

The differential speeds are the ones badged SP, which the 185 cannot do.

Not according to...

They're not just too heavy for sprinter speeds; they don't qualify for "HST", "DMU" or "MU" speed either.

I seem to remember the Rule Book and the Sectional Appendix reference each other for clarification on which classes the differentials apply to.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

The "Batley bump" as we call it is still there. The sideways jolt the train makes as it passes over the subway.

Legend has it a train went through Batley hitting the bump at 70 causing Nick Donovan to spill his coffee in 1st class. A company wide 10mph reduction was imposed as a result which was withdrawn when Leo Goodwin took over.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Biggest difference I have seen is a brief 25-over-45MU speed on the Up East Lancs line between Holme Tunnel and Townley Tunnel. Only four chains long. Not that 185s have ever been over Copy Pit.

There's a 20/DMU70 between Meadowhall and Chapeltown - somewhere a 185 might credibly turn up...

The section 53mi36ch to 53mi44ch between Pulborough and Amberley is 20/75MU in the up direction (and 20/60MU in the down), presumably due to the rather rickety bridge there! Not somewhere I expect you'd ever see a 185 turn up, admittedly!

 

[BMIFlyer]

The section 53mi36ch to 53mi44ch between Pulborough and Amberley is 20/75MU in the up direction (and 20/60MU in the down), presumably due to the rather rickety bridge there! Not somewhere I expect you'd ever see a 185 turn up, admittedly!

Apologies I was thinking of Meadowhall to Moorthorpe where the 185 does line speed.

I need to get back to bed.

 

[BMIFlyer]

It's a long time since I rode non-stop through BTL, since I live there. I can imagine a slightly rough ride over the subway though. Biggest issue is the cant preventing the doors from opening on the up side. Mirfield on the up fast is another rough spot though.



It's been said several times on this thread that 185s can't use SP or DMU speeds. For example the viaduct at Paddock near Huddersfield is 10/DMU50 so when 185s run through there on the occasional diversion they have to crawl.

Sorry to tell you this but you won’t ever find a 185 going over Paddock Viaduct as it’s on the Huddersfield to penistone line.

 

[Andrew Nelson]

The "Batley bump" as we call it is still there. The sideways jolt the train makes as it passes over the subway.

Legend has it a train went through Batley hitting the bump at 70 causing Nick Donovan to spill his coffee in 1st class. A company wide 10mph reduction was imposed as a result which was withdrawn when Leo Goodwin took over.

I'd heard a member of crew was injured.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Sorry to tell you this but you won’t ever find a 185 going over Paddock Viaduct as it’s on the Huddersfield to penistone line.

I think they've run that way in the past, due to engineering diversions.

 

[DarloRich]

Possibly due to them not being well matched to the work they do.
Intercity services, using commuter EMUs, with diesel engines fitted.
No end gangways, and very little luggage space, considering that they are a Manchester Airport centred service pattern.

This is what I don't get about this board. The 185's are ideally suited to the services they run. Powerful, fast, reliable, decent environmental impact ( for a diesel), comfortable. The overhead bins are massive and will easily take a normal case, the internal standards are high, there is a good ratio of tables, there are plugs and wifi and there is adequate first class provision. They are good trains yet they are hated here. I don't get it.

The issues are obvious: insufficient carriages / insufficient units. The gangway issue isn't really an issue and would just be used by people here to complain when they run as single units!

 

[Class83]

Six car working of the units between Liverpool and Nottingham would be welcome.

If a split of the Liverpool - Norwich service ever occurs, on a joined up railway I'd like to think that with the 'spare' 185 units you could have a matrix of services centered on Sheffield that were 185 operated:

Leeds - Sheffield - Nottingham
Man Air - Sheffield - Cleethorpes
Liverpool - Sheffield - Nottingham

Though that's getting into deeply speculative territory and won't happen.

This has to be the best use for them, routes which need 6 car at peak, 3 off peak and centered around one point. Is it possible for the Hope Valley Line to be maintained to a standard where a 185 can use higher speed limits? Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds should be ok as 220/222/HSTs run on it. I'd permanently declassify/remove the 1st class section to increase capacity.

I work that out as; Leeds-Sheffield-Nottingham 4 diagrams, Airport-Manchester-Sheffield-Cleethorpes, 6/7 diagrams, Liverpool-Manchester-Sheffield-Nottingham 6 diagrams. So doubling at peak times, 34 units, though possibly a few less by reducing to 3 car east of Sheffield or squeezing times on the Airport-Cleethorpes to get it under 3 hours (it's very tight).

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Keeping on thread , the 185's could be made lighter by installing thinner windows - even if its just a millimeter thinner it all adds up. Keep the overpowered engines though as these do make the units flexible on the more faster lines.

It was either on this thread or on another where someone had mentioned that the 185's could be used on the Cardiff to Portsmouth's - using the time taken by a 158 between Trowbridge and Westbury being either six or seven minutes my reckoning that a 185 using all three engines could smash that in around three minutes by using them as they are.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Keeping on thread , the 185's could be made lighter by installing thinner windows - even if its just a millimeter thinner it all adds up.

That can work. You can also fit a smaller fuel tank and derate the engine to 500hp so it's more fuel efficient. Fitting lighter seats and smaller tables would also work.

 

[anamyd]

There's plenty of express routes that the 185's could be used for that are desperately in need of new rolling stock...even some cross country routes come to mind!

Maybe they could be used to replace some of the 2 carriage 170's that do Notts/Birmingham and Notts/Cardiff Central?

I was thinking the same thing

 

[anamyd]

Which is not suprising considering that Voyager engines were derated down to 700hp a few years ago.

Why...? First I've heard of this

 

[Andrew Nelson]

This is what I don't get about this board. The 185's are ideally suited to the services they run. Powerful, fast, reliable, decent environmental impact ( for a diesel), comfortable. The overhead bins are massive and will easily take a normal case, the internal standards are high, there is a good ratio of tables, there are plugs and wifi and there is adequate first class provision. They are good trains yet they are hated here. I don't get it.

The issues are obvious: insufficient carriages / insufficient units. The gangway issue isn't really an issue and would just be used by people here to complain when they run as single units!

You've obviously never had to travel on one that's on its way to the Airport.

 

[DarloRich]

You've obviously never had to travel on one that's on its way to the Airport.

why would you think that?