22 class 185 units being released by TPE - Where could they go?

[Roose]

Amused by earlier implication that there are no hills to climb between Liverpool and Norwich...

And the 185s manage flat routes ok, eg between the airport and Barrow/Windermere/Blackpool.

 

[Rich McLean]

Personally I think they could be well suited to the following routes on GWR.

Cardiff to Paignton/Plymouth/Penzance:
1tph calling at Newport, Severn Tunnel Jn, Patchway, Filton Abbey Wood, Bristol Temple Meads, Nailsea & Backwell, Yatton, Worle, Weston-Super-Mare, Highbridge & Burnham, Bridgwater, Taunton, Tiverton Parkway, Exeter St Davids, Dawlish, Teignmouth, Newton Abbot
Then
1tp2hr to Torre, Torquay & Paignton
1tp2hr to Totnes, Ivybridge & Plymouth with 7tpd calling at:
Liskeard, Bodmin Parkway, Par, St Austell, Truro, Redruth, Cambourne, St Erth & Penzance
For Penzance connections from the terminating London train, this would have a long dwell in Plymouth to enable connections.

Plymouth to Penzance
1tph Calling at Devonport, St Budeaux Ferry Road, Saltash, St Germans, Menheniot (3tpd), Liskeard, Bodmin Parkway, Lostwithiel, Par, St Austell, Truro, Redruth, Cambourne, Hayle, St Erth & Penzance.

The units available makes this possible. Only problem being a new maintenance base required. Also these units would make easy work of the Devon Banks

 

[158722]

The current hourly pattern of Liverpool-Nottingham requires 6 diagrams to cover the services (LLS 0647> NOT 0927/0947 > LLS 1231, etc), so 185s in pairs would see 12 occupied with say 2 spare - a pool of 14.

Running Norwich-Nottingham requires 7 diagrams (6 if some slight readjustment of the timetable could be arranged).

Those displaced 158s from the Liverpool-Nottingham leg would no doubt allow some Norwich services to go to 4-car and end up cascading on to 156s turns and to almost see off the EMT 153s.

That said, I thought DfT had now ruled out the option of splitting the service at Nottingham?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The unreliable air conditioning does get constant criticism. The seating isn't liked by all but the same is true of 185 seating as well.

How difficult would it be to install new and car more comfortable seating pads and new upholstery in the Class 185 units and how long would it take each unit to be refurbished in this manner?

 

[RobShipway]

You beat me to it! Heavy and powerful units may be what is required for this route which is notorious for leaf fall and winter adhesion problems, with which the 165/166s are terrible at coping. Serious timekeeping problems occur every year with these relatively lightweight units.

The North Downs Line could do with being electrified with overhead wiring as has been suggested according to Rail Magazine by Surrey County Council, which if it went ahead would mean that you would probably see class 387's rather than the 165/166 units.

Once the GWML electrification is complete and class 387's have replaced the 165/166's on local routes, you will probably then just be seeing class 166's on the North Downs Route as I believe all the class 165 are going to Exeter to replace the class 158/150 units and then those are going further west to replace the pacers.

 

[WatcherZero]

Amused by earlier implication that there are no hills to climb between Liverpool and Norwich...

And the 185s manage flat routes ok, eg between the airport and Barrow/Windermere/Blackpool.

TBH there would be no flatter route other than purely East Coast/East Anglian routes.

http://i.imgur.com/LQxOZfP.jpg

 

[The Planner]

Surprised no one hasn't mentioned that they are fat gits (unless I've missed it), so routes with a substantial amount of differentials wouldn't be ideal.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Surprised no one hasn't mentioned that they are fat gits (unless I've missed it), so routes with a substantial amount of differentials wouldn't be ideal.

I'm skinny, actually

 

[MatthewRead]

The North Downs Line could do with being electrified with overhead wiring as has been suggested according to Rail Magazine by Surrey County Council, which if it went ahead would mean that you would probably see class 387's rather than the 165/166 units.

Once the GWML electrification is complete and class 387's have replaced the 165/166's on local routes, you will probably then just be seeing class 166's on the North Downs Route as I believe all the class 165 are going to Exeter to replace the class 158/150 units and then those are going further west to replace the pacers.

Don't you mean Bristol?

 

[158722]

Personally I think they could be well suited to the following routes on GWR.

Cardiff to Paignton/Plymouth/Penzance:
1tph calling at Newport, Severn Tunnel Jn, Patchway, Filton Abbey Wood, Bristol Temple Meads, Nailsea & Backwell, Yatton, Worle, Weston-Super-Mare, Highbridge & Burnham, Bridgwater, Taunton, Tiverton Parkway, Exeter St Davids, Dawlish, Teignmouth, Newton Abbot
Then
1tp2hr to Torre, Torquay & Paignton
1tp2hr to Totnes, Ivybridge & Plymouth with 7tpd calling at:
Liskeard, Bodmin Parkway, Par, St Austell, Truro, Redruth, Cambourne, St Erth & Penzance
For Penzance connections from the terminating London train, this would have a long dwell in Plymouth to enable connections.

Plymouth to Penzance
1tph Calling at Devonport, St Budeaux Ferry Road, Saltash, St Germans, Menheniot (3tpd), Liskeard, Bodmin Parkway, Lostwithiel, Par, St Austell, Truro, Redruth, Cambourne, Hayle, St Erth & Penzance.

The units available makes this possible. Only problem being a new maintenance base required. Also these units would make easy work of the Devon Banks

Actually quite a decent suggestion for a fleet of 22 units - probably around 18 required to cover that kind of service pattern - and units are well equipped for the banks in terms of hp, as you say, plus I doubt there are any great problems with their weight, route/speed restrictions. Doubt will happen as in the 'too sensible' category!

 

[greaterwest]

You beat me to it! Heavy and powerful units may be what is required for this route which is notorious for leaf fall and winter adhesion problems, with which the 165/166s are terrible at coping. Serious timekeeping problems occur every year with these relatively lightweight units.

The 185s could be used on the Thames Valley branches where there will be no electrification too, 2 coaches for Marlow.

 

[43074]

Actually quite a decent suggestion for a fleet of 22 units - probably around 18 required to cover that kind of service pattern - and units are well equipped for the banks in terms of hp, as you say, plus I doubt there are any great problems with their weight, route/speed restrictions. Doubt will happen as in the 'too sensible' category!

Enables you to keep '158s' on Cardiff to Portsmouth/Brighton as well, which are much better suited to that route than high density 165+166 combinations proposed.

 

[jopsuk]

Surprised no one hasn't mentioned that they are fat gits (unless I've missed it), so routes with a substantial amount of differentials wouldn't be ideal.

Such as Peterborough-Norwich, for example? Think they'd basically sink in the Fens

 

[northwichcat]

The 185s could be used on the Thames Valley branches where there will be no electrification too, 2 coaches for Marlow.

Reforming 185s would require too much work to be worth doing.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

<snip>
Also apparently First are still keen on the idea of the TPE franchise taking over Liverpool to Nottingham using 185s when the EMT franchise comes to an end.

assuming works take place east of Nottingham to allow the 185s to run at Sp speeds rather than the heavy stock speeds that kept 170s on some tpx work and has kept 170s on XC on the services headign east of the ECML

 

[Kite159]

Would the 185s be able to run at 100 mph on the SWML between Waterloo & Basingstoke to stop the drivers of the 444s moaning about the slow running diesel in front?

(Not like they will be suitable for Exeter services, lacking gangways and having less seats per set, and being massively overpowered & heavier than the 159s)

 

[Deepgreen]

The North Downs Line could do with being electrified with overhead wiring as has been suggested according to Rail Magazine by Surrey County Council, which if it went ahead would mean that you would probably see class 387's rather than the 165/166 units.

Once the GWML electrification is complete and class 387's have replaced the 165/166's on local routes, you will probably then just be seeing class 166's on the North Downs Route as I believe all the class 165 are going to Exeter to replace the class 158/150 units and then those are going further west to replace the pacers.

There's a separate thread for NDL electrification. In short - it won't happen for a very long time indeed - way beyond the life of any current rolling stock.

 

[The Ham]

Would the 185s be able to run at 100 mph on the SWML between Waterloo & Basingstoke to stop the drivers of the 444s moaning about the slow running diesel in front?

(Not like they will be suitable for Exeter services, lacking gangways and having less seats per set, and being massively overpowered & heavier than the 159s)

I could see that by using some 185's to replace some 159's which then are swapped with 158's (2 coaches) it would be possible to run more 10 coach trains into/out from Waterloo during the peaks and some more 9 coach (rather than say 6 coach trains) formed of 185's in the peaks in the opposite direction to the main flow.

In doing so it would mean that overall there were more seats and could increase capacity elsewhere by swapping their two coach 158's with SWT's 159's (WIRC is to all intents and purposes a 3 coach 158).

 

[Kite159]

I could see that by using some 185's to replace some 159's which then are swapped with 158's (2 coaches) it would be possible to run more 10 coach trains into/out from Waterloo during the peaks and some more 9 coach (rather than say 6 coach trains) formed of 185's in the peaks in the opposite direction to the main flow.

In doing so it would mean that overall there were more seats and could increase capacity elsewhere by swapping their two coach 158's with SWT's 159's (WIRC is to all intents and purposes a 3 coach 158).

Just need to sort out Whitchurch & Overton so they can handle 10 (23m) coaches without unit deselect

 

[Rich McLean]

Actually quite a decent suggestion for a fleet of 22 units - probably around 18 required to cover that kind of service pattern - and units are well equipped for the banks in terms of hp, as you say, plus I doubt there are any great problems with their weight, route/speed restrictions. Doubt will happen as in the 'too sensible' category!

As soon at the base timetables (the official ones) are published post 80x introduction, from there I should be able to create some mock timetable
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Unfortunately, these will not be heading to GWR in any way shape or form, unless the DfT say its that or nothing, having spoken to someone "in the know"

To be honest, I can see them heading to Wales to work the North Wales Coast, leaving 175s to double up and work Manchester - Milford Haven/Carmarthen or vice versa, but they wouldn't be suited anywhere else. EMT requires a lot of SP differential stock, and the same applies for AGA.

They are not suitable for SWT due to lack of corridor connections

 

[Chris125]

What about Cross Country - they could free up the 170s, though one wonders if there might be some Voyager-worked services where 100mph would be sufficient.

 

[Harbornite]

What about Cross Country - they could free up the 170s, though one wonders if there might be some Voyager-worked services where 100mph would be sufficient.

There's no point in replacing the XC 170's with 185's, they wouldn't offer any real improvements and the 170's manage to cope with the Lickey incline. Anyway, XC have more than 22 170's on their books.

 

[RobShipway]

There's no point in replacing the XC 170's with 185's, they wouldn't offer any real improvements and the 170's manage to cope with the Lickey incline. Anyway, XC have more than 22 170's on their books.

I would think that the class 170's with XC, would at some point in time in the future get replaced by class 801's or similar hybrid train rather than being replaced by class 185's.

 

[43074]

I would think that the class 170's with XC, would at some point in time in the future get replaced by class 801's or similar hybrid train rather than being replaced by class 185's.

Why? The 800's are completely unsuitable for any of the services the XC 170s are used on currently. If anything new 80x units would be built for current Voyager routes to trickle down to release a few 170s at the bottom (i.e. introduce new 80x units to replace 221s to Nottingham - Cardiff, which then releases a few 170s).

 

[Bevan Price]

Why not the East Midland Liverpool to Norwich route. Let`s face it the 158`s are coming in for constant criticism on this route. Seems to make sense but who knows.

Bad idea. 3 car 185 has over 100 fewer seats than the 4 car 158 formations used between Liverpool & Nottingham, and running 6 car 185 formations would probably be too expensive.

Likewise, replacing a 3 car 175 by a 185 would lose about 40 standard class seats - on ATW trains that are often overcrowded already. Getting rid of 1st class would not fully solve that problem.

 

[edwin_m]

There's no point in replacing the XC 170's with 185's, they wouldn't offer any real improvements and the 170's manage to cope with the Lickey incline. Anyway, XC have more than 22 170's on their books.

How about eliminating just the 2-car 170s, which are probably too short for most of the XC workings?

185s would then be used on Nottingham-Cardiff and some Nottingham-Birmingham, the routes where there are no Sprinter differentials. The 3-car 170s would remain on Birmingham-Leicester/Stansted and the rest of the Nottingham-Birminghams.

 

[Philip]

The obvious choice is the new Wales and Border franchise (as will be by the time the 22 are to free to leave TPE). It all depends on what happens with this new franchise, buta good plan may be to put them on Holyhead-Birmingham via Crewe and Stafford, Manchester/Liverpool-North Wales and free up 175s to cover and strengthen Marches services and free up 158s for Cambrian services.

 

[The Planner]

I assume Holyhead to Birmingham via Crewe and Stafford is a new service then? additional or removal of the current one via Wrexham?

 

[northwichcat]

The obvious choice is the new Wales and Border franchise (as will be by the time the 22 are to free to leave TPE). It all depends on what happens with this new franchise, buta good plan may be to put them on Holyhead-Birmingham via Crewe and Stafford, Manchester/Liverpool-North Wales and free up 175s to cover and strengthen Marches services and free up 158s for Cambrian services.

I'm not sure that is an obvious choice as the franchise would then have three types of DMUs which aren't compatible. I would have thought if ATW take on 185s they'll release 175s.

 

[Philip]

I'm not sure that is an obvious choice as the franchise would then have three types of DMUs which aren't compatible. I would have thought if ATW take on 185s they'll release 175s.

Unless ATW plan on taking on more 158s then they will be left short of units by replacing the 175 fleet with 22 185s.

I believe Holyhead-Birmingham via Stafford will resume upon the new franchise, as it used to be until the early 2000s.