Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
*Disclaimer: I’m not sure if this is the right place for this thread, so mods, please feel free to move it to a more appropriate thread if so.*
Something dumb I’ve been wondering lately is how would the HST, Adelante and the Voyager/Meridians would all hypothetically stack up against each other in a race lol. Like a race between the York and Darlington stretch of the ECML. No restrictions on speed so all of them could reach their absolute max speeds. Which one would win in a straight up race?
*Disclaimer: I’m not sure if this is the right place for this thread, so mods, please feel free to move it to a more appropriate thread if so.*
Something dumb I’ve been wondering lately is how would the HST, Adelante and the Voyager/Meridians would all hypothetically stack up against each other in a race lol. Like a race between the York and Darlington stretch of the ECML. No restrictions on speed so all of them could reach their absolute max speeds. Which one would win in a straight up race?
Electric available: 802 (810 close behind)
Diesel: My guess is 810. They were specified to be faster than a 222 on diesel. And I suspect the 222s are the fastest out of the non-810 options
Reality: whichever has all engines operational and a driver willing to use the full performance available
If you went "has operated in passenger service" then a two car HST is possible, they occasionally subbed for 158s in the late 90s. I never got on one but allegedly they went like absolute stink.
Electric available: 802 (810 close behind)
Diesel: My guess is 810. They were specified to be faster than a 222 on diesel. And I suspect the 222s are the fastest out of the non-810 options
Reality: whichever has all engines operational and a driver willing to use the full performance available
Assuming the 8xx are running on dieawl, a class 220/222 would be fastest followed closely by a 180. Despite the 800/802 having a slightly faster initial start, the 810 is third on the list.
If we are to include short formation HSTs, the 2+4 and 2+5 sets come in slightly behind the 220/222 but quicker than a Class 180. HST 2+8 and 2+9 formations would normally beat an Class 800/802 - again despite a slightly slower start.
180s with all engines working I think would beat all other diesels. They were definitely faster than voyagers/meridians from standing start, and HSTs were slow off the mark. Otherwise, 802s on electric.
This is, if we are talking about a drag race situation, acceleration is key. If you had a short HST and enough miles, it would probably win on Diesel as they have done in excess of 140mph, but if you removed the limiters from other classes then this all just goes out the window.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
My last point however, whether a 180 might break down before reaching top speed might also be taken into consideration
If we are taking this into consideration then there is a high chance that none of the three Voyagers mentioned will have full traction power available, and the 810 will fail on depot
I must admit I do have a soft spot for 180s. They are fantastic trains that are built for pure speed and nothing else. They're wonderful to drive.
180s with all engines working I think would beat all other diesels. They were definitely faster than voyagers/meridians from standing start, and HSTs were slow off the mark. Otherwise, 802s on electric.
This is, if we are talking about a drag race situation, acceleration is key. If you had a short HST and enough miles, it would probably win on Diesel as they have done in excess of 140mph, but if you removed the limiters from other classes then this all just goes out the window.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
My last point however, whether a 180 might break down before reaching top speed might also be taken into consideration
I have been on several 180's with all engines running and have the GPS data to prove that none of the 180's I ever travelled on beat the performance delivered by a Class 222 despite the 222 being derated to 700bhp per engine.
As car drivers are learning , electric drive seems to deliver better performance and no worries about power losses through the hydraulic transmissions. My best runs were recorded while the 189's were still with GWR. By the time they moved the 180a to Hull Trains and then EMR, engine / transmission issues were the norm.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
If we are taking this into consideration then there is a high chance that none of the three Voyagers mentioned will have full traction power available, and the 810 will fail on depot
I must admit I do have a soft spot for 180s. They are fantastic trains that are built for pure speed and nothing else. They're wonderful to drive.
I have been on several 180's with all engines running and have the GPS data to prove that none of the 180's I ever travelled on beat the performance delivered by a Class 222 despite the 222 being derated to 700bhp per engine.
Is there much of a difference between a 221 and 222? I've never signed 222s but have driven Voyagers and 180s on the same routes and timed the speeds against the DSD alarm. A good 180 is definitely quicker to 125.
As a side note an engine running on a 180/Voyager doesn't mean it's delivering traction power. It's quite normal for it to be supplying aux power only if there is some fault.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Is there much of a difference between a 221 and 222? I've never signed 222s but have driven Voyagers and 180s on the same routes and timed the speeds against the DSD alarm. A good 180 is definitely quicker to 125.
As a side note an engine running on a 180/Voyager doesn't mean it's delivering traction power. It's quite normal for it to be supplying aux power only if there is some fault.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
When I talk about all engines running, I mean all providing traction. The data doesn't lie. The good sets produce acceleration and therefore running times that are remarkably consistent. Losing an engine or suffering transmission failure hits the acceleration significantly.
What I would say about the Class 180's is that they seem more fragile. It might be my own bad luck but the percentage of class 180 runs with engine / transmission issues is much higher than Class 222.
Sadly Alstom budget cutting is to blame for the 180s ending up a train that has proved to require a lot more TLC than other units.
Unsurprisingly, Class 22x have at times achieved really high reliability levels - way above other diesel and some electric units - as reported in Modern Railways. And despite various operators hopes of fixing them, the 180's have always been a disappointment.
Going back to the OP question, if we were to talk about trains that are only designed for 100mph maximum speed, the class 185's would be quite high on the list for diesel trains probably closest to Class 222. I've not timed a class 175 to more than 70mph but in practice they accelerate to that speed slightly quicker than a 2+4 HST.
In electric mode the class 810's are quicker than a class 222 displaying appx 10% more power at rail. But it seems the super light Stadlers would be quickest - Class 755/3, 755/4 and 745 would be in the top four of fastest accelerating 100mph trains. Somewhere in amongst them would be the two versions of Class 331.
The fastest electric train would be Class 395 Javelin units. Very quick acceleration off the mark and have been tested to 150mph+ but only on 25kv. On 750v DC, the 395's are left standing by Class 375's.
Class 91 is officially the fastest UK electric train having achieved a top speed of 162mph but it's acceleration is slothful compared to the latest generation of units and would need a fair distance to catch up the other trains before it's superior top speed would eventually surpass them.
Whether it qualifies for this list or not is subject to debate, but the Eurostar Class 373 sets are officially the absolute fastest trains operating within the UK with a 186mph top speee and a UK record of 208mph. But those speeds are only achieveable on dedicated high speed lines with the correct pantograph and power setting.
With the pantograph set for UK standard 25kv , they don't deliver enough power to achieve high speeds -but neither do they need to on 'classic' routes where 125mph is the maximum speed. In fact the sets leased to GNER had to be limited to 110mph over some sections of track due to their huge power draw.
Also their acceleration from rest is relatively slow compared to a Class 395 Javelin.
If we are talking about a drag race up the west coast main line observing existing speed limits, then nothing beats a Class 390 Pendolino.
In a fight I am going with the Derby Destroyer. Big, heavy, diesel unit with old schools skills will be too much for Japanese contender stepping up a weight class. Yes ,they might have the new fangled bi mode training and all that but it just wont be enough. OBVIOUSLY faster footwork but just can't take a punch. Glass jaw imo.
HST in 3 rounds. Knockout.
TBH the Voyager/Meridian shouldn't even be talked about in the same breath. Took the frankly worthless MML crown when the HST vacated the belt to focus on bigger things. Shows how far the heavyweight championship has fallen if there are serious conversations about a shot at the title. Ludicrous. Welterweight at best.
Is there much of a difference between a 221 and 222? I've never signed 222s but have driven Voyagers and 180s on the same routes and timed the speeds against the DSD alarm. A good 180 is definitely quicker to 125.
A 220 has a better power to weight ratio than a 221,
I think the (now unused) tilt equipment and heavier bogies added 8 tonnes to 221 on some vehicles
The 222s have had engine derate since built, so not as fast as they once were. But they aren't carrying the deadweight of a tilt system. So difference is not massive between a 221 and 222
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
That's because they were designed to accelerate quickly and cruise at 140mph.
They are currently limited to 124mph (200km/h) or 125mph (different sources say different things), and that seems to be based on a 30-40 year old decision regarding sighting signals, where cab signalling is needed over 125mph, which dates from days of filament bulbs, rather than brighter LED signal heads. I have wondered if 130-135mph should now be possible where signal heads upgraded, bearing in mind 30 years development of brakes too so trains stop faster.
They are currently limited to 124mph (200km/h) or 125mph (different sources say different things), and that seems to be based on a 30-40 year old decision regarding sighting signals, where cab signalling is needed over 125mph, which dates from days of filament bulbs, rather than brighter LED signal heads. I have wondered if 130-135mph should now be possible where signal heads upgraded, bearing in mind 30 years development of brakes too so trains stop faster.
Not an engineer nor involved in the railway, so only my opinion, but....
The decision to limit to 125 on traditional signals came after the trial of the Intercity 225s (225kph ~= 140mph) at 140 at various points on the ECML using flashing green lights aspect for 140mph permission. As you have rightly said, but to add to it the unique "flashing" aspect made it hard to see the signal at that speed. Whilst you are probably right that modern lights may changed things, this would unfortunately require being tested, and I think it is probably a better goal to test for in-cab signalling via something like ETCS using speed profiles. Not only would that allow increased speeds at the right places, but the other benefit is the increased capacity that can be possible, especially during disruption, where trains can be run closer together (possibly at a lower set limit) safely to help clear backlogs and maintain throughput.
A 220 has a better power to weight ratio than a 221,
I think the (now unused) tilt equipment and heavier bogies added 8 tonnes to 221 on some vehicles
The 222s have had engine derate since built, so not as fast as they once were. But they aren't carrying the deadweight of a tilt system. So difference is not massive between a 221 and 222
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
That's because they were designed to accelerate quickly and cruise at 140mph.
They are currently limited to 124mph (200km/h) or 125mph (different sources say different things), and that seems to be based on a 30-40 year old decision regarding sighting signals, where cab signalling is needed over 125mph, which dates from days of filament bulbs, rather than brighter LED signal heads. I have wondered if 130-135mph should now be possible where signal heads upgraded, bearing in mind 30 years development of brakes too so trains stop faster.
Not an engineer nor involved in the railway, so only my opinion, but....
The decision to limit to 125 on traditional signals came after the trial of the Intercity 225s (225kph ~= 140mph) at 140 at various points on the ECML using flashing green lights aspect for 140mph permission. As you have rightly said, but to add to it the unique "flashing" aspect made it hard to see the signal at that speed. Whilst you are probably right that modern lights may changed things, this would unfortunately require being tested, and I think it is probably a better goal to test for in-cab signalling via something like ETCS using speed profiles. Not only would that allow increased speeds at the right places, but the other benefit is the increased capacity that can be possible, especially during disruption, where trains can be run closer together (possibly at a lower set limit) safely to help clear backlogs and maintain throughput.
If LED signals had been available in the 1990s, of tbe quality that exist today, you have to wonder if rather than Flashing Green they would have gone for Double Green assets to.denote clearance for 140mph running.
Would these be allowed to run at top speed? I don't know if this still applies, but I remember reading some locos were limited with running light or with only a few carriages due to reduced braking force.
Of course, we are probably assuming signals will be green all the way for this 'test'.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
