185s - Can they run the West Highland line?

[dickdarlington]

Reading a post on here a while back, it stated that the 158s weren't powerful enough to be used on the West Highland Line. When the sprinters become life expired, would the TPE 185s (freed up when the 319s head north) be able to run on the line?

 

[185]

Yes, but be prepared for the Glenfinnan Viaduct to become a pile of rubble, and Bridge of Orchy to become demolition job of Orchy

 

[150222]

The 158's are more powerfull than 156's and 158's are not cleared due to platform fouling doors. What chance have the 185's?

 

[tbtc]

I don't know the answer, but there is a certain logic in the 185s moving to Scotland (post TPE electrification) for use on services like Edinburgh/Glasgow - Inverness and other hilly routes...

 

[dickdarlington]

I take it they are heavy then.

 

[LE Greys]

Well, nice idea, but... Anyway, I'd rather see them on the Highland Main Line. Their extra power should be very useful on the climbs up to Drumochter and Slochd, and the bridges are much more substantial. Of course, if we can free up the entire class, they would do well operating out of Exeter on semi-fasts. Dainton, Rattery and so on would be no trouble.

<EDIT> Besides, I like 156s and think they should stay. Certainly better than having 158s on the West Highland, let alone 185s.

 

[142094]

Is it not due to the different type of braking on a 156 compared to a 158 which is why 158s are not used?

 

[sprinterguy]

The North West electrification won't free up any 185s for anyone other than TPE, they are urgently needed for strengthening other existing TPE services that actually cross the Pennines.

The 185s are extremely heavy in relation to other DMUs, so it probably wouldn't be advisable to deploy them on the West Highland line without budgeting for a major increase in infrastructure costs, although now that the line has been cleared in recent years for 47s and 67s rather than being the dominant territory of the lighter 37s that may no longer be a problem.

The 158s aren't underpowered for the West Highland line, as others have pointed out, but there are clearance issues that would need to be overcome in order for them to operate the route.

 

[northwichcat]

When the sprinters become life expired, would the TPE 185s (freed up when the 319s head north) be able to run on the line?

No 185s would be freed up when the 319s head north. The 185s from the Scotland and Blackpool routes have already been allocated to strengthen other TPE services.

There are no plans to electrify the whole of TPE, despite it being high on some enthusiasts wish list's. The only proposals that have been put forward are for electrification:
* Manchester Airport to Newcastle
* Liverpool to York
* Manchester Airport to Doncaster

None of those are confirmed and by the time they are completed it will likely be time for 158s to retire, so Calder Vale and Blackpool-Scarborough (as it was be if Liverpool-Scarborough is split after electrification) may get the 185s as being cross Pennine routes near the other 185 routes.

I would like to see a new 6 car dual powered DEMU ordered for the 4 North TPE routes, South TPE and Liverpool-Norwich with more intercity style interiors, which could make use of some existing electrification as well as be ready for any future electrification and add much need capacity. However, I can't see it happening.

 

[dickdarlington]

Why are they so heavy?

Would it be possible to build a lighter version (lets call it the 186) as it would be jolly useful here in the North East on the Tees Valley and Durham Coast routes. Not to mention Whitby. Then you'll have the other areas...North or the Forth and Clyde. And down in the South West.

Harking back to my post on another thread about mass orders across numerous TOCs. Although all of the ones I've mentioned are First I think.

 

[ainsworth74]

I take it they are heavy then.

They are slightly weighty yes

A 185 vehicles comes in at about 56 tonnes whilst a 156 vehicle comes in at about 35 tonnes.

It would be a nice idea to eventually cascade the 185s away to the hilly routes in Scotland but as others have said the costs to upgrade the infrastructure to take their weight as well as to get them cleared would probably be prohibitive.

 

[Bon Accord]

<EDIT> Besides, I like 156s and think they should stay. Certainly better than having 158s on the West Highland, let alone 185s.

A good number of the travelling public don't share that view - they're getting mightily fed up with the 156s. Common complaints being they're noisy, no A/C, vibration issues, are cramped and with poor seating. Not exactly a great advertisement for tourists, the people who make up a huge chunk of passenger numbers in Summer.
Granted the aforementioned are the sort of things that could be sorted with a major refurb, but it has to be asked whether it'd be economical to do so.
It doesn't help that much of the rest of Scotland has been provided with more modern and more comfortable stock, WHL users see themselves as being left behind - after all even the Kyle/Wick/Thurso lines can boast 158s, and have done for some years.


To anyone who knows: Do the 170s have the same WHL clearance issues as 158s, i.e. externally opening doors which could foul the platform edge?

 

[185]

Some methods of weight reduction were identified, but the board threw them out in 2007. Many were sensible, some were ridiculous. These were ones I remember....

-Change of metal seating frames to plastics
-Reduction of bogies to small size voyager type
-Removal of centre car engine & underframe
-Removal of many of the overhead luggage racks and fittings

Bit after the even if you ask me. Mr Bridges knew all these problems would happen whilst putting together the (rushed) spec for them in 2003.

 

[table38]

Would it be possible to build a lighter version (lets call it the 186)

We could probably call it a 185/0 as all the current ones seem to be 185/1 for some reason

 

[WestCoast]

A good number of the travelling public don't share that view - they're getting mightily fed up with the 156s. Common complaints being they're noisy, no A/C, vibration issues, are cramped and with poor seating. Not exactly a great advertisement for tourists, the people who make up a huge chunk of passenger numbers in Summer.
.

I don't think 156s are quite that bad, the Scotrail version doesn't seem to have the best seating though. Mind you, anything seems great after a 2h30 Pacer ride (Northern's Heysham Port - Leeds). That's a touristic route in some ways.

I think a 156 would be warmly welcomed.

 

[ainsworth74]

To anyone who knows: Do the 170s have the same WHL clearance issues as 158s, i.e. externally opening doors which could foul the platform edge?

If you mean doors that swing out away from the body of the train when they open then yes the 170s also have those style of doors.

 

[Bon Accord]

I don't think 156s are quite that bad, the Scotrail version doesn't seem to have the best seating though.

The 156 was good in it's day, but the present Scotrail stock aren't much changed from BR days and compared to more modern/refurbed stock it does present them in a poor light.
Glasgow commuters have the "luxury" of 170s and newer Leckie powered stuff for short hop commutes, yet for a 3 and a bit hour journey you're stuck with a not particularly nice 156.
I've often wondered whether a buffet service could be viable in the Summer months, selling the usual hot/cold snacks but perhaps also local whiskies, beer (Colonsay IPA!), produce etc. possibly utilising the ex HT 170s (assuming they could be passed for the route).

 

[LE Greys]

A good number of the travelling public don't share that view - they're getting mightily fed up with the 156s. Common complaints being they're noisy, no A/C, vibration issues, are cramped and with poor seating. Not exactly a great advertisement for tourists, the people who make up a huge chunk of passenger numbers in Summer.
Granted the aforementioned are the sort of things that could be sorted with a major refurb, but it has to be asked whether it'd be economical to do so.
It doesn't help that much of the rest of Scotland has been provided with more modern and more comfortable stock, WHL users see themselves as being left behind - after all even the Kyle/Wick/Thurso lines can boast 158s, and have done for some years.

Interestingly, that's exactly what I level at 158s. 156s have better seats, a better ride at 60 mph, and at least an opening window is guaranteed to work (but I don't like the atmosphere produced by A/C) and seem more open and pleasant inside. I wish they'd send the blasted things (158s) back to the Midlands where they belong, and where their one advantage - higher top speed - might be useful. The Corkerhill 156s can replace them at Inverness when enough lines are electrified.

Right, I'll get off the hobby-horse now.

To anyone who knows: Do the 170s have the same WHL clearance issues as 158s, i.e. externally opening doors which could foul the platform edge?

I'm not certain, but from observation, the door-opening profile is certainly different. 170s look higher to me, about the same height as MkIIIs, which certainly operate the line safely.

 

[150222]

The 170's have differant door positions though and anyway none are RETB fitted while some 158's are.

 

[driver9000]

The 170's have differant door positions though and anyway none are ERTMS fitted while some 158's are.

That isn't a problem on the WHL as it doesn't operate under ERTMS. The WHL is operated by RETB. The only 158s with ERTMS are the Arriva sets on the Cambrian.

 

[150222]

Sorry i meant RETB.

 

[sprinterguy]

Thinking to the future, does anybody know if 170s are capable of (or could be modified to suit) being fitted with the RETB units as used by the 156s and 158s? There's always a possibility that 170s could graduate to the West Highland and the Far North lines eventually.

 

[Bon Accord]

Interestingly, that's exactly what I level at 158s. 156s have better seats, a better ride at 60 mph, and at least an opening window is guaranteed to work (but I don't like the atmosphere produced by A/C) and seem more open and pleasant inside. I wish they'd send the blasted things (158s) back to the Midlands where they belong, and where their one advantage - higher top speed - might be useful. The Corkerhill 156s can replace them at Inverness when enough lines are electrified.

Scotrail 156s have better seats than their 158s, are you serious?

Scotrail 156 Interior: http://members.madasafish.com/~dysgraphyk/156/photo/X_156450_interior_Feb07.jpg
Scotrail 158 Interior: http://www.scot-rail.co.uk/photo/scaled/628.jpg

Whilst the occasional jolly to Oban/Fort William may be an experience, for those who have to use them day in/day out on the route all through the year the experience isn't hugely pleasurable - bone shaking being an oft used term.
The perceived quality of A/C can be rather relative, but a carriage full of opening windows doesn't tend to go down well with Joe Public these days when the alternative is A/C - more and more people seem to have a lower tolerance level of such things, especially when they allow excessive noise/leaves/detritus/rain/diesel fumes etc in.
The few opening windows incorporated in the 158 design was I think particularly sensible, as if the A/C goes down then you can at least have some ventilation - a design foresight utterly lacking in almost all modern stock.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Thinking to the future, does anybody know if 170s are capable of (or could be modified to suit) being fitted with the RETB units as used by the 156s and 158s?

Can't think why not - compared to the 156/158's there's plenty of cab space to shoehorn the kit in!

 

[driver9000]

The Anglian 170s have/had RETB gear fitted so I wouldn't have thought it too difficult to fit it to other 170 fleets.

 

[LE Greys]

Scotrail 156s have better seats than their 158s, are you serious?

Scotrail 156 Interior: http://members.madasafish.com/~dysgraphyk/156/photo/X_156450_interior_Feb07.jpg
Scotrail 158 Interior: http://www.scot-rail.co.uk/photo/scaled/628.jpg

Whilst the occasional jolly to Oban/Fort William may be an experience, for those who have to use them day in/day out on the route all through the year the experience isn't hugely pleasurable - bone shaking being an oft used term.
The perceived quality of A/C can be rather relative, but a carriage full of opening windows doesn't tend to go down well with Joe Public these days when the alternative is A/C - more and more people seem to have a lower tolerance level of such things, especially when they allow excessive noise/leaves/detritus/rain/diesel fumes etc in.
The few opening windows incorporated in the 158 design was I think particularly sensible, as if the A/C goes down then you can at least have some ventilation - a design foresight utterly lacking in almost all modern stock.

There's no accounting for taste (mine or otherwise). I absolutely hate 444s (which might have more to do with them replacing 442s than anything) yet love 317s. The 158 seat design isn't as bad as the original, but then the 156s have had a massive downgrade from the original version (IC70, I think). It probably doesn't help that I've travelled on the NXEA units a lot more than the ScotRail ones in recent years. Still, I have to say that the 156 ones certainly work better for a person of my modest height than the 158 ones. Then I'm also someone who would always drive with all car windows wide open, even in midwinter. Even if the air's not particularly fresh, then it's better than recycled A/C, and it's mobile. As for the ride, that has more to do with the 158 being a fudge between a rural and a main-line unit. At 60 mph, they ride like a Citroen (guaranteed motion sickness). 156s are pleasantly firm, you feel you're on a train rather than a waterbed.

Rant over, I'll shut up now.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

No 185s would be freed up when the 319s head north. The 185s from the Scotland and Blackpool routes have already been allocated to strengthen other TPE

Calder Vale and Blackpool-Scarborough (as it was be if Liverpool-Scarborough is split after electrification) may get the 185s as being cross Pennine routes near the other 185 routes.

Perhaps some of the forum members were not aware that the cascaded 185's were already pre-allocated to strengthen the still-to-be-dieselized TPE routes after the Lancashire Triangle electrification proposals are fully completed. The hilly nature of the north of England is ideal for these units....the hills will still be there after electrification

We've got enough Pacers...and now we're getting even more:roll:

Don't take away the only decent rolling stock that we've got, which compensates us for having to suffer from "142" syndrome.

 

[WestCoast]

Don't take away the only decent rolling stock that we've got, which compensates us for having to suffer from "142" syndrome.

The "142 syndrome", I like your way of expressing that! I agree with you regarding the 185s, unfortunately or fortunately (depending on your viewpoint) there are greater priorities for their use after the completion of the appropriate electrification programmes than being cascaded to Scotrail.

 

[scotsman]

I wish they'd send the blasted things (158s) back to the Midlands where they belong, and where their one advantage - higher top speed - might be useful.

Class 158s are required at Inverness due to the higher line speeds on the Far North Line.

 

[ainsworth74]

Class 158s are required at Inverness due to the higher line speeds on the Far North Line.

How much running is there at more than 75mph on the Far North Line?

 

[Bon Accord]

Perhaps it has more to do with acceleration?