Is it good to replace Northern 150s with spare 158s?

[Greybeard33]

There was a previous thread, now closed, that discussed clearance of 195s on the Cumbrian Coast. The conclusion, back in 2020, was that they are cleared for Barrow to Maryport, but not (yet) for Maryport to Carlisle.

Class 195 and Cumbrian Coast Line Loading Gauge compatibility

Are the new Class 195 trains compatible with the Cumbrian Coast line's loading gauge given the very low loading gauge of the line between Maryport and Carlisle which prevents a lot of stock using the line.

www.railforums.co.uk

It does not necessarily follow that, just because 158s don't fit, 195s won't either. Clearance to arched overbridges depends on the curvature of the carriage roof, when viewed in cross section. Has there yet been any attempt to gauge clear 195s between Maryport and Carlisle?

An alternative to infrastructure changes might be speed restrictions, to reduce dynamic sway under the bridges where clearance is marginal.

 

[Neptune]

There was a previous thread, now closed, that discussed clearance of 195s on the Cumbrian Coast. The conclusion, back in 2020, was that they are cleared for Barrow to Maryport, but not (yet) for Maryport to Carlisle.

Class 195 and Cumbrian Coast Line Loading Gauge compatibility

Are the new Class 195 trains compatible with the Cumbrian Coast line's loading gauge given the very low loading gauge of the line between Maryport and Carlisle which prevents a lot of stock using the line.

www.railforums.co.uk

It does not necessarily follow that, just because 158s don't fit, 195s won't either. Clearance to arched overbridges depends on the curvature of the carriage roof, when viewed in cross section. Has there yet been any attempt to gauge clear 195s between Maryport and Carlisle?

An alternative to infrastructure changes might be speed restrictions, to reduce dynamic sway under the bridges where clearance is marginal.

195’s have a flatter roof than 158’s so may be fine.

 

[bramling]

All of the overbridges? There's looks enough of them that the whole section would have to be single with passing places at the stations.
If so that would be getting on for problematic/expensive enough to replace the bridges or have dedicated stock.

I’m not sure if it’s all of them, but certainly a good number. Viewed from the front of a train they really are very narrow. Not sure if there are any other infrastructure issues, but this in itself is a big enough issue.

 

[Greybeard33]

195’s have a flatter roof than 158’s so may be fine.

I think a flatter roof likely makes clearance worse. The gauge upper corners stick out more, closer to the bridge arch. What is needed is a curved roof, like the BR Mk1 coach (which is pretty much "go anywhere").