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

[northwichcat]

Just thinking about the original question - Northern are set to take on 16 x 170s and are supposed to be acquiring a further 32 unspecified diesel carriages by 2022. Maybe a logical solution would be to add on a further 2 x 3 car units to the CAF order and for them to take on the released 185s and to leave the 170s for operators which already have 170s in their fleets?

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Related question, will this weekend's 1C51 0916 Blackpool North to Barrow-in-Furness be 185 traction?

 

[northwichcat]

Related question, will this weekend's 1C51 0916 Blackpool North to Barrow-in-Furness be 185 traction?

According to RTT it's still timed for a 100mph DMU so I imagine it's very likely to be a 185.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

According to RTT it's still timed for a 100mph DMU so I imagine it's very likely to be a 185.

Great - I can use it to top up my tablet this weekend

 

[Greybeard33]

Just thinking about the original question - Northern are set to take on 16 x 170s and are supposed to be acquiring a further 32 unspecified diesel carriages by 2022. Maybe a logical solution would be to add on a further 2 x 3 car units to the CAF order and for them to take on the released 185s and to leave the 170s for operators which already have 170s in their fleets?

But what would be in this for Arriva? Would not 185s be more expensive to operate than 170s in lease, track access and fuel costs? And more new 195s more expensive still?

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Just thinking about the original question - Northern are set to take on 16 x 170s and are supposed to be acquiring a further 32 unspecified diesel carriages by 2022. Maybe a logical solution would be to add on a further 2 x 3 car units to the CAF order and for them to take on the released 185s and to leave the 170s for operators which already have 170s in their fleets?

Agreed the 185's would have been much better suited to Northern routes and services crossing the Pennines than any potential routes they could be cascaded too (weight issues in East Anglia for EMT's Liverpool Norwich for example). They could have continued to be maintained alongside their TPE sisters at Siemans Ardwick depot.

The more versatile 170's could then have been split between the New East Anglia and London Midland franchises to boost services and allow both franchises to replace their 153's.

 

[fgwrich]

How many Class 170s are ScotRail set to retain? Thought about this in a brief 5 minutes at work earlier, would 22 185s be sufficient to replace the remaining ScotRail 170s? That way ScotRail would be able to release all 170s to an operator and the 185s (albeit possibly slightly de-rated a little) could manage the Scottish climbs better than the sluggish 170s.

 

[Clansman]

How many Class 170s are ScotRail set to retain? Thought about this in a brief 5 minutes at work earlier, would 22 185s be sufficient to replace the remaining ScotRail 170s? That way ScotRail would be able to release all 170s to an operator and the 185s (albeit possibly slightly de-rated a little) could manage the Scottish climbs better than the sluggish 170s.

Scotrail are retaining 34 Class 170s for use on local services on the Fife Circle, Perth/Dundee to Edinburgh, Arbroath/Dundee to Glasgow, Aberdeen Crossrail, Inverness Crossrail and on the Borders as well as complimenting the 385s around the Central belt before they are fully delivered. So by 2018 they will no longer be doing express journeys which they are definitely not suitable for in my opinion.

Interesting idea but Scotrail are getting the HSTs by late next year or 2018 so it wouldn't be worthwhile for the 185s to replace them on the highly climbs which would only probably constitute the Highland Mainline. It definitely wouldn't be worthwhile to replace the entire 170 fleet because there would be no real benefit other than a few more horsepower acceleration as well as a better first class facility, which would decrease 1 less seat anyway. Plus, with the new Hitachi 385s coming in next year, that would eliminate the need for 185s to replace the 158s, which are being shifted onto both West and Far North Highland Lines. I would agree that Transport Scotland should look into getting the 185s but with the circumstances surrounding the HSTs, would be better replacing the 156s on Glasgow to Stranraer/Dumfries/Carlisle/Newcastle routes. As someone who used to commute between Gretna and Glasgow during last Summer, I found it a rather long and gruelling journey on the 156s, and found myself going to Carlisle to change onto Gretna which was much more pleasurable. A 185 on that route would definitely improve journey times and add greater comfort as well as providing first class provision and improved toilet facilities. In my opinions, that route would be perfect for the 185s.

 

[northwichcat]

But what would be in this for Arriva? Would not 185s be more expensive to operate than 170s in lease, track access and fuel costs? And more new 195s more expensive still?

We don't yet know for certain that the additional DMUs arriving post-2019 will be cheapish to operate 150s even though there are rumours that the next GWR franchise will off-load their remaining 150s. Those additional DMUs could end up being more 195s which you say could be more expensive than 185s.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

We don't yet know for certain that the additional DMUs arriving post-2019 will be cheapish to operate 150s even though there are rumours that the next GWR franchise will off-load their remaining 150s. Those additional DMUs could end up being more 195s which you say could be more expensive than 185s.

195s may well have higher leasing costs than 185s down to being newer, but I'd be shocked if they weren't more fuel efficient and a good deal less lardy, thus lower access charges.

 

[The Ham]

195s may well have higher leasing costs than 185s down to being newer, but I'd be shocked if they weren't more fuel efficient and a good deal less lardy, thus lower access charges.

It also depends on how efficient the CAF units are in terms of maintenance costs, as the Desiro City units have maintenance costs of about 2/3's that of the original Desiro units.

 

[northwichcat]

It also depends on how efficient the CAF units are in terms of maintenance costs, as the Desiro City units have maintenance costs of about 2/3's that of the original Desiro units.

I imagine the Civity got selected over Stadler's FLIRT because it was the cheaper option.

 

[WatcherZero]

And the potential delay in getting articulated stock approved for use.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And the potential delay in getting articulated stock approved for use.

Do we know they actually bidded an articulated version? Given how flexible the platform is, and given that regular bogies are needed for the outer ends, and given that they also make LHCS, could they have bidded a more traditional version?

After all, CAF's UK DMUs/EMUs appear to be much more traditional than the Euro-version.

 

[Mordac]

Do we know they actually bidded an articulated version? Given how flexible the platform is, and given that regular bogies are needed for the outer ends, and given that they also make LHCS, could they have bidded a more traditional version?

After all, CAF's UK DMUs/EMUs appear to be much more traditional than the Euro-version.

What's so innovative about the euro version?

 

[northwichcat]

What's so innovative about the euro version?

Well The UK one is not a double decker or a model designed to operate in the very cold Scandinavian winters: http://www.caf.net/en/productos-servicios/familia/civity/descripcion/solucion-integral.php

 

[Bletchleyite]

What's so innovative about the euro version?

Low floor and articulated.

 

[The Ham]

As I understand it, the problem with the 185's (like most units with short unit lengths and first class seats), is that there is a limit in what you can do to increase the number of seats.

Thinking "on screen" if you reformed them so they were a 4 coach units with first class and standard only 2 coach units you could then get better seating capacity (the 4 coach units would only need one standard loo, so could gain 4 seats straight away).

In doing so it could be possible to run them as 10 coach trains, possibly with a similar number of seats as SWT's 158's/159's. In doing so it could release some of the existing SWT's fleet, either to give away and/or to swap with 2 coach 158's to enable more 10 coach running.

You would be left with more 2 coach 185's than were needed to form 10 coach trains, however a number of them could be used (either on their own or in pairs) to run the Salisbury 6 services.

They could also be used to run extra services.

If electrification to Exeter was a long time coming, then they will slot in between EMU's better than the current fleet.

 

[anti-pacer]

The 170s from SWT still had 2 first-class sections for a few weeks after they moved North, one being declassified. A shame that within a few weeks First replaced SWT's nice interiors with their garish purple!

Ideally there'd be NO first-class on TPE until they manage to provide adequate capacity overall. It was bad enough when Northern Spirit introduced it onto already crowded 158s but to then have approximately 1/5th of each 185 sitting mostly empty was and is ridiculous. First-class is all well and good but it is a luxury not an essential.

Every time I see a TPE 185 the FC always looks full.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Every time I see a TPE 185 the FC always looks full.

Almost every time I travel on one, the only empty seats are first class ones!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As I understand it, the problem with the 185's (like most units with short unit lengths and first class seats), is that there is a limit in what you can do to increase the number of seats.

Thinking "on screen" if you reformed them so they were a 4 coach units with first class and standard only 2 coach units you could then get better seating capacity (the 4 coach units would only need one standard loo, so could gain 4 seats straight away).

In doing so it could be possible to run them as 10 coach trains, possibly with a similar number of seats as SWT's 158's/159's. In doing so it could release some of the existing SWT's fleet, either to give away and/or to swap with 2 coach 158's to enable more 10 coach running.

You would be left with more 2 coach 185's than were needed to form 10 coach trains, however a number of them could be used (either on their own or in pairs) to run the Salisbury 6 services.

They could also be used to run extra services.

If electrification to Exeter was a long time coming, then they will slot in between EMU's better than the current fleet.

There's not much you could do to get a 185 to match 159 capacity without compromising legroom or disability provision. They also don't have end gangways, so a 6-car Salisbury service made up of 3x 2-car 185s would be a nightmare to operate- AIUI the lack of gangways was one of the reasons SWT got rid of the Turbostars.

 

[387star]

when does the refresh start on the TPE 185s?

 

[The Ham]

There's not much you could do to get a 185 to match 159 capacity without compromising legroom or disability provision. They also don't have end gangways, so a 6-car Salisbury service made up of 3x 2-car 185s would be a nightmare to operate- AIUI the lack of gangways was one of the reasons SWT got rid of the Turbostars.

The suggestion was to run as 4+4+2 (London to Salisbury) 4+2 (beyond Salisbury) or 2 or 2+2 (Salisbury 6 services - being Salisbury to Southampton and round to Romsey).

You are right that there is a lot of under used space in the end units (the disabled provision). However, a two coach all standard class seating would give you 108 seats. Reconfigure and end coach to all first class and you'll get 27 first class seats, 2 middle coaches (only one with a loo in) and the other end coach as is and you'll get 212 standard seats. Over a 10 coach train that's 532 standard and 54 first class seats.

To compare that a 9 coach train formed of 159's has 516 (-16) standard seats and 72 (+18) first class seats. However, there's scope to remove a luggage rack or two on the 4 coach units to gain 4 or 8 seats, before you even look at squashing the existing layout.

Yes it's not going to beat the 10 coach 15x's that run at present, but it may not need to. As by us the 185's on some services you can do more swaps to enable the use of more 10 coach 15x trains.

Then when electrification reaches Salisbury use trains like the 444's for most of the London peak hour services with the odd 185 running between.

 

[Prestige15]

I would say it be better suited on XC Stansted airport-Birmingham and Cardiff - Nottingham, Perhaps work alongside the 170's or replace them. BUT. 185's 169 seats vs 170's 200 seats, unless more runs in 6 car, hmm

 

[Philip Phlopp]

I would say it be better suited on XC Stansted airport-Birmingham and Cardiff - Nottingham, Perhaps work alongside the 170's or replace them. BUT. 185's 169 seats vs 170's 200 seats, unless more runs in 6 car, hmm

It'll need route upgrade work - Class 185s can't run at Sprinter, MU or DMU speed differentials. Point to point timings, even with their superior acceleration, is an issue.

 

[PHILIPE]

They have their own Maintenance Depot, owned by Siemens, at Ardwick, Manchester, so it wouldn't be appropriate on the XC 170 routes or Waterloo routes as has been suggested. The most suitable would be to go to ATW, or whatever follows it in the new franchise in 2018, as they would be easily accessible to the North Wales Coast or the Marches. This has already been posted somewhere..

 

[Prestige15]

It'll need route upgrade work - Class 185s can't run at Sprinter, MU or DMU speed differentials. Point to point timings, even with their superior acceleration, is an issue.

Yup that aswell, Just like on the Leeds - Hull and Hope Valley line as a perfect example

 

[61653 HTAFC]

They have their own Maintenance Depot, owned by Siemens, at Ardwick, Manchester, so it wouldn't be appropriate on the XC 170 routes or Waterloo routes as has been suggested. The most suitable would be to go to ATW, or whatever follows it in the new franchise in 2018, as they would be easily accessible to the North Wales Coast or the Marches. This has already been posted somewhere..

In this very thread, I believe!

 

[The Ham]

They have their own Maintenance Depot, owned by Siemens, at Ardwick, Manchester, so it wouldn't be appropriate on the XC 170 routes or Waterloo routes as has been suggested. The most suitable would be to go to ATW, or whatever follows it in the new franchise in 2018, as they would be easily accessible to the North Wales Coast or the Marches. This has already been posted somewhere..

Siemens have a maintenance depot in Southampton (admittedly for EMU's), so the works involved in changing that to also cope with 185's would likely be cheap enough to justify moving them, especially if the lease is for a long enough period.

Anyway, given that SW wouldn't need all the 185's there is still scope for the Welsh franchise to gain some units.

Let's say that SW took 16 (enough to reform into 8*4 coach units and 8*2 coach units) that would be enough (with spares) to run the Yeovile to Waterloo half of the timetable (i.e. not the services to Exeter) as 10 coach units and the Salisbury 6 services as a 2+2 coach trains.

That would leave 5 units for Wales to have and could release 159's to release 158's, either direct to Wales and/or to another TOC to release other units to Wales (I.e. ones that could be useful in the Welsh Valleys).

How would they be used on the North Wales Coast services and what would that mean for the 175's and their depot(s)?

Just as an aside, 5*185's would enable the 15*175's that run the North Wales services to be run in pairs on 1/3 services. That could well mean that rather than running a 3 coach unit they run a pair of 2 coach units and use the three coach unit for services currently run by a 2 coach unit, which could mean an uplift in capacity over several services. The problem is, if the 185's are needed to replace 3 coach version of the 175's then even if you change them to all standard class seats your looking at about 188 seats (185) vs about 202 seats (175), so you'll be reliant on more 185's running in pairs to increase capacity. However, as the 185's are likely to be more expensive to run the franchise holder would be resistant to do so, a lot more so than running pairs of 175's (which could be 2*2 and still increase capacity over the 3 coach versions) which would be able to better match capacity requirements (2,3,4,5 or 6 coach long trains rather than 3 or 6 coach trains with the 185's).

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Siemens have a maintenance depot in Southampton (admittedly for EMU's), so the works involved in changing that to also cope with 185's would likely be cheap enough to justify moving them, especially if the lease is for a long enough period.

Anyway, given that SW wouldn't need all the 185's there is still scope for the Welsh franchise to gain some units.

Let's say that SW took 16 (enough to reform into 8*4 coach units and 8*2 coach units) that would be enough (with spares) to run the Yeovile to Waterloo half of the timetable (i.e. not the services to Exeter) as 10 coach units and the Salisbury 6 services as a 2+2 coach trains.

That would leave 5 units for Wales to have and could release 159's to release 158's, either direct to Wales and/or to another TOC to release other units to Wales (I.e. ones that could be useful in the Welsh Valleys).

How would they be used on the North Wales Coast services and what would that mean for the 175's and their depot(s)?

Just as an aside, 5*185's would enable the 15*175's that run the North Wales services to be run in pairs on 1/3 services. That could well mean that rather than running a 3 coach unit they run a pair of 2 coach units and use the three coach unit for services currently run by a 2 coach unit, which could mean an uplift in capacity over several services. The problem is, if the 185's are needed to replace 3 coach version of the 175's then even if you change them to all standard class seats your looking at about 188 seats (185) vs about 202 seats (175), so you'll be reliant on more 185's running in pairs to increase capacity. However, as the 185's are likely to be more expensive to run the franchise holder would be resistant to do so, a lot more so than running pairs of 175's (which could be 2*2 and still increase capacity over the 3 coach versions) which would be able to better match capacity requirements (2,3,4,5 or 6 coach long trains rather than 3 or 6 coach trains with the 185's).

Would it be worth SWT having an extra 185 on top of that to use on the Lymington branch, then a 450 could instead be used to strengthen services elsewhere?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would it be worth SWT having an extra 185 on top of that to use on the Lymington branch, then a 450 could instead be used to strengthen services elsewhere?

Would be better finding an EMU from somewhere than using a DMU on an electrified branch. Give one of the depots a couple of 319s as depot "pets" or something.