156s on far north line: timing vs 158s?

AHBD said:

It seems(75mph max) 156s were used on far north line, in the past, so I wondered how their timings to Thurso / Wick compared to the (90mlh max) 158s?

Click to expand...

HighlandStorm said:

IIRC the Thurso first, then Wick, offering a Thurso to Wick and vice versa service begun with the 158s.

Click to expand...

The Far North Line is also severely compromised by lack of capacity for both freight and passenger
trains due to an inadequate number of passing loops. The highly regrettable 'temporary' slow down
of 25 minutes to passenger train journey times between Inverness and Wick, in force since 2005, was
due to the installation of a GB-wide safety system known as TPWS – Train Protection and Warning
System. Safety is all important, but might more have been done to adapt TPWS to our single track
lines?

The timetables have been further extended by a minute here and a minute there over the years. For
example, the 12:34 from Wick to Inverness now arrives at 17:08, 6 minutes later than in 2019. An
overall 4 hours 34 minutes. In 2012 that train took 4 hours 12 minutes and the connection at
Inverness enabled arrival in Glasgow 30 minutes sooner. In 2000 the same train was timetabled at 3
hours 48 minutes. That means that 46 minutes has been added to the journey time in the last 24
years, reducing the already slow average speed of 46 mph to a shocking 38.3 mph.

Click to expand...

HighlandStorm said:

At the time of the 158s replacing 156s it was claimed the 158s were around 15 minutes faster to Thurso - but direct comparisons are difficult, in the 156 era, trains either split at Georgemas Junction or a change to a 156s that would shuttle to Wick was required. IIRC the Thurso first, then Wick, offering a Thurso to Wick and vice versa service begun with the 158s.

There was an attempt to speed up journey times by raising line speed at points where passenger comfort rather than safety set the speed, but this was reversed, and taking the 10:41 service northbound, the timetabled time is now around 18mins slower to Thurso than the fastest average time was in 2002. If trains don't keep time, the timetable can spectacularly fall apart very quickly, so if 156s or 153s were introduced to the mix, journey times would almost certainly have to be lengthened verse what the 158s currently do as there is more services overall on the line and Googling suggests the 158s have around 22% more power per tonne than the 156s.

Click to expand...

AHBD said:

I think I read sonewhere that the 156s were lower geared hence coukd accelerate from slow sections better: is that correct in any useful way forvthe FNL?

Click to expand...