Bolton/Preston line

[Philip]

Does anyone know why this route up from Manchester to Preston is limited to 75 mph? As a line used by 100 mph express units and a diversion route for Voyagers/Pendolinos, I thought it'd be at least 90.

The track is in good condition, the roaring rail that used to plague this line has been smoothened out and it seems strange that 185s are seriously limited to sprinter speeds on an important line for commuters and long-distance.

Are there any plans to up the linespeed in the next few years?

 

[driver9000]

Hi.

The linespeed of 75mph will be the speed decided upon by p/way & signalling engineers regardless of the type of traffic using the line. class 185 DMUs are not permitted to run at the 'special' speeds laid down for MU, DMU, SP, HST etc differential speeds (a good example is between Kirkham & Poulton where the linespeed is 60/70MU, class 185s must stick to 60mph making NorthernRail class 14x & 15x units quicker along this section) .

As for upgrading the Euxton Jn-Bolton line there have been rumblings of electrifying the line, however I dont think a raise in linespeed will be forthcoming anytime soon.

Im sure if anyone knows more they will post the inofrmation on here soon enough.....

 

[Nym]

Hi.

The linespeed of 75mph will be the speed decided upon by p/way & signalling engineers regardless of the type of traffic using the line. class 185 DMUs are not permitted to run at the 'special' speeds laid down for MU, DMU, SP, HST etc differential speeds (a good example is between Kirkham & Poulton where the linespeed is 60/70MU, class 185s must stick to 60mph making NorthernRail class 14x & 15x units quicker along this section) .

As for upgrading the Euxton Jn-Bolton line there have been rumblings of electrifying the line, however I dont think a raise in linespeed will be forthcoming anytime soon.

Im sure if anyone knows more they will post the inofrmation on here soon enough.....

The Freight RUS and NorthWest RUS both mention Electrification of Liverpool and Bolton lines in the CP4, 2011 - 2015

there are also roumers of some new trains in the NW area to enhance the electric services, 4 carrages at guide bridge for example, the platforms arent long enough for 2 323s together, so they could be reciving some of the 321s from London Midland for WCML and Other Busy Services, this is just me thinking, but when London Midland get their new 350s they might cascade the 321s back into Northern

The drivers are already trained, they'll be going cheap, no problems with route clearence

 

[driver9000]

Its only Leeds & Doncaster(?) crews that sign the 321 - we dont have them over in xFNW land. If they did end up in Manchester, it wouldnt take long to train crews up on the traction - 323s are a week long course from scratch.

I hope that the Bolton line does get electrified as it would fill a gap missed by BR when it was going through its WCML electrification program in the 60s & 70s, might even create some new services between Preston & Manchester to cope with the growing commuter traffic - they might even get their finger out and wire Blackpool Nth too

 

[Philip]

The Chat Moss route to Liverpool will be electrified soon as far as I've heard.

Why are the 185s restricted with the special speeds? Is this eventualy going to be sorted out? It seems strange a 100 mph unit not being able to take advantage of the differential speeds - I think Chinley-Dore holds the same problem for the 185s.

 

[87015]

The Chat Moss route to Liverpool will be electrified soon as far as I've heard.

Why are the 185s restricted with the special speeds? Is this eventualy going to be sorted out? It seems strange a 100 mph unit not being able to take advantage of the differential speeds - I think Chinley-Dore holds the same problem for the 185s.

185s are far too heavy as far as I know to be allowed to do 'sprinter' speeds - a great bit of design specification...:-?

 

[yorkie]

The design specification for 185s was something like this:
- No need to take HST differential speeds
- No need to take SP differential speeds
- Guzzle as much fuel as possible
- Be as heavy as possible
- Damage track as much as possible
- Provide as few standard class seats as possible
- Provide a toilet large enough for a sumo wrestler (or someone who eats burgers 24/7) that takes up about a quarter of the train
- The route has very little uptake of FC, therefore FC needs to be disproportionatley large and fancy, so as to annoy 98% of passengers.

Umm... I think that's it!.... Are they compatible with the couplings on existing DMUs? If not that's another for the list!

 

[Tom]

The Desiro probably wasn't the best choice of train for the Transpennine routes, however, the toilet issue is a DDA thing so you can't really avoid that, as few standard class seats as possible is also due to the DDA!

And with the 'disproportionately' large FC - TOCs are allowed to try and stimulate demand are they not?

 

[driver9000]

As far as Im aware the 185 can only work in multiple with another 185 as is becoming common on Britains railways it seems to be a case of restricting units to working within the TOCs fleet only.

The 185 has a paltry First Class section so as firstGroup could originally pick up a cut of the First Class revenue generated on routes where other TOCs provide a much better service. As FC provision doesnt have a minimum specification FirstGroup went with the one that had the least outlay.

As for them operating at differential speeds, speaking with TPE drivers they think they will be given clearence to work to DMU or MU speeds sometime this year.