Should 185s be permitted to use MU speed limits and possible future use

[Bletchleyite]

Arriva’s bid proposed 4 car 180’s.

175s would have done, but 180s? Crikey, we thought we had overcrowding now, but there's a lot of wasted space in an early 2000s 125mph unit.

 

[Philip]

To go back to the original question in the thread, how about my suggestion in replacing the loco-hauled TfW stock when the time comes? The LHCS is also limited to 75mph between Crewe-Shrewsbury, so there won't be any time loss there compared with the LHCS timings even if 185s couldn't be cleared for MU running - and the superior acceleration of 185s along with door layout could speed the timings up a bit.

Other possible uses - Cross Country to replace HSTs or 170s? ScotRail or GWR to replace HSTs? Chiltern to replace 165s?

 

[dosxuk]

The 185's with their extreme bloat, only make sense for the transpennine routes, and if we're honest, only the northern one at that. They have little future prospects away from those routes due to their weight and power. It's not a paperwork issue which stops them from using higher speeds, it's a side-effect of their fundamental design. They're also extremely costly to run, with the three engines and their weight making them very fuel inefficient - so even a cascade to Northern is unlikely to be entertained when the 195s/170s are faster, cheaper and more flexible to run.

 

[Neptune]

175s would have done, but 180s? Crikey, we thought we had overcrowding now, but there's a lot of wasted space in an early 2000s 125mph unit.

Yep, it was a time when the ‘sexy front end’ (remember that?) was in fashion. I only recycled the ATN staff brief for the bid a few years ago and couldn’t believe how ridiculous the bid looked all these years on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yep, it was a time when the ‘sexy front end’ (remember that?) was in fashion. I only recycled the ATN staff brief for the bid a few years ago and couldn’t believe how ridiculous the bid looked all these years on.

Was it Arriva who proposed, years later, loco-hauling 442s on TPE? (Yay, let's get them in the thread!)

It's clear now that'd have been a stupid idea too. TPE is rubbish, but the 185s and 802s together make a decent fleet.

 

[Neptune]

Was it Arriva who proposed, years later, loco-hauling 442s on TPE? (Yay, let's get them in the thread!)

It honestly wouldn’t surprise me. Having worked for Arriva twice in my career it’s easy to see how different the 2016-2020 company is compared to the 2000-2004 company that I worked for.

They had (over)-ambition before the DB takeover, now they just feel like a desperate company ready for any quick fix to slash costs.

It's clear now that'd have been a stupid idea too. TPE is rubbish, but the 185s and 802s together make a decent fleet.

Yes 802’s on fasts and 185’s on semi fasts would more than suffice.

I’ve said it before in a fairly recent thread by the same OP asking the same question about the future of the same units that the only realistic place for 185’s after TPE electrification is for them to work on routes they are already cleared for such as Calder Valley.

 

[43096]

Was it Arriva who proposed, years later, loco-hauling 442s on TPE? (Yay, let's get them in the thread!)

It was a DfT steer towards using them in the tender docs, but not explicitly stated that they had to use 442s (think it said something like 5-car loco hauled sets). First went with new build to satisfy that requirement, which is why we have 68s+Mark 5s.

 

[Philip]

I’ve said it before in a fairly recent thread by the same OP asking the same question about the future of the same units that the only realistic place for 185’s after TPE electrification is for them to work on routes they are already cleared for such as Calder Valley.

As I said last time though, 195s are better for the Calder Valley because these are suburban units on what is a suburban route (in terms of railway geography rather than landscape). The 185s are long distance express trains, hence the choices of my route suggestions above.

 

[Neptune]

As I said last time though, 195s are better for the Calder Valley because these are suburban units on what is a suburban route (in terms of railway geography rather than landscape). The 185s are long distance express trains, hence the choices of my route suggestions above.

Oh crikey. Here we go again.

 

[RailWonderer]

What if one engine was removed from the 185s? They are meant to run in eco mode which turns off an engine though I believe activating it is up to the driver and they do not run in that mode by default.

If they could remove an engine, could a cascade to GWR or even Scotrail (despite their wish to electrify by 2035) be on the cards? I don't think there are as many MU speeds on the GWR and Scotrail network. I think Northern would be the most likely taker still, despite their being less than ideal, 185s would still be cheaper than ordering new given the cost of leasing now and the likely cost in the years coming.

 

[Philip]

Oh crikey. Here we go again.

You say that, but I do not see why you suggest removing very suitable units from the route (195s) and replacing them with higher-spec trains like 185s, which would be much better on longer and limited stop journeys; 185s use more fuel than 195s so this alone makes them less suitable for the stop-start Calder Valley route, notwithstanding that the interior of 185s is suited for long distance regional express services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You say that, but I do not see why you suggest removing very suitable units for the route (195s) and replacing with higher-spec trains like 185s which would be much better on longer and limited stop journeys; 185s use more fuel than 195s so this alone makes them less suitable for the stop-start Calder Valley route, notwithstanding that the interior of 185s is suited for long distance regional express services.

Other than the First Class and the decor (which is a matter for personal taste), the Standard interior of the 185 and 195 are almost identical in being mostly hard-ish seats in mostly table formation. Sure, I prefer Grammers, but there's as many who will prefer the Fainsa Comrail.

 

[DanNCL]

91s can use HST differentials and they're RA7. With that in mind I struggle to see why 185s at RA5 are prohibited from using them.

 

[Neptune]

You say that, but I do not see why you suggest removing very suitable units for the route (195s) and replacing them with higher-spec trains like 185s, which would be much better on longer and limited stop journeys; 185s use more fuel than 195s so this alone makes them less suitable for the stop-start Calder Valley route, notwithstanding that the interior of 185s is suited for long distance regional express services.

Please go back and read what was said on this subject last time you tried to convince us about this, for instance Calder Valley 195 services are not stop start as you infer, averaging around 10-12 minutes between stops. Perhaps you still haven’t checked this out as the facts don’t fit in with your opinion? (Cue picking out the bits of the route where the stops are closer together such as Bramley - New Pudsey and Mytholmroyd - Hebden Bridge rather than looking at the total route).

Other than the First Class and the decor (which is a matter for personal taste), the Standard interior of the 185 and 195 are almost identical in being mostly hard-ish seats in mostly table formation. Sure, I prefer Grammers, but there's as many who will prefer the Fainsa Comrail.

You’re wasting your time explaining it, a few of us tried to explain this last time but were met with fingers in ears. All you need to do is swap the FC seating with SC and refurbish to Northern style and hey presto, a very nice inter-regional unit suitable for Calder Valley services, but the OP won’t have it sadly, the 185 is and always will be an inter-city unit even if it were kitted out with mud and straw.

Anyway as I was saying earlier before being sidetracked back into 2022, if the 185’s have any future post TPE electrification (if they’re not too old by then obviously) then they would be ideal on non electrified inter-regional routes with a mix of fast running and the odd bit of stopping work on routes they are already completely or mostly cleared for close to the Siemens depots that were built for them (ie Ardwick and York) meaning Calder Valley, Hull - Halifax and York - Blackpool would be a good starting point.

 

[MattRat]

I think the only actual hope for 185s when it comes to differentials or even future routes, is if they go on a diet.

 

[Philip]

Please go back and read what was said on this subject last time you tried to convince us about this, for instance Calder Valley 195 services are not stop start as you infer, averaging around 10-12 minutes between stops. Perhaps you still haven’t checked this out as the facts don’t fit in with your opinion? (Cue picking out the bits of the route where the stops are closer together such as Bramley - New Pudsey and Mytholmroyd - Hebden Bridge rather than looking at the total route).

I've checked the Chester-Leeds and aside from Manchester-Rochdale, the majority of the route averages around 5-8 minutes between stops. The cost of running the units often comes up when the future of the 185s is discussed, well I can tell you that the Calder Valley would be one of the more expensive options - frequent stops and hilly requiring full use of the engines in a few places. I suspect routes like Cardiff-Nottingham and Manchester-Cardiff would be cheaper because they are limited stop and not as hilly.

It's down to personal opinion in terms of the quality of the interior, but I would say the 195 is like an upgraded Sprinter whereas the 185 is about half way between 158/170 and Voyager/180/HST/mk5.

 

[Neptune]

I've checked the Chester-Leeds and aside from Manchester-Rochdale, the majority of the route averages around 5-8 minutes between stops.

As I said, picking out what suits. I notice you haven’t even considered the long gaps between stops west of Manchester. How about checking out the 1Jxx services which run within the 1Dxx/1Exx Chester diagrams. Limited stop over the Pennines such as 12 mins BDI-HFX, 12 mins HFX-HBD, 10 mins TOD-RCD, 12 mins RCD-MCV.

How about Hull - Halifax with those huge gaps on the flat at the east end of the route.

What if they went on Blackpool - York? Long, long distances between stops, longer than TPE semi fasts in many places.

Picking what suits your argument and ignoring the facts that don’t fit in with it mean that you aren’t up for a debate as you’ve said in a previous thread. You just don’t want to listen or learn which puts peoples backs up.

 

[class 9]

91s can use HST differentials and they're RA7. With that in mind I struggle to see why 185s at RA5 are prohibited from using them.

HST speeds are to do with braking characteristics
Traction with disc brakes.

 

[DanNCL]

HST speeds are to do with braking characteristicsView attachment 131253
Traction with disc brakes.

Is a 185 really non compliant with that? Or is this a case of nobody’s seen fit to bother getting the paperwork done for 185s to use HST differentials?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

To go back to the original question in the thread, how about my suggestion in replacing the loco-hauled TfW stock when the time comes? The LHCS is also limited to 75mph between Crewe-Shrewsbury, so there won't be any time loss there compared with the LHCS timings even if 185s couldn't be cleared for MU running - and the superior acceleration of 185s along with door layout could speed the timings up a bit.

Other possible uses - Cross Country to replace HSTs or 170s? ScotRail or GWR to replace HSTs? Chiltern to replace 165s?

Too many differentials on the current XC 170 routes, and for the HST routes a 6-car 185 would (probably, I haven't crunched the numbers) mean a drop in capacity. It would also make a trolley service awkward, assuming such on-board "luxuries" have a future.

The Welsh idea probably has more going for it, but not by much.

 

[dosxuk]

Is a 185 really non compliant with that? Or is this a case of nobody’s seen fit to bother getting the paperwork done for 185s to use HST differentials?

My first question would be whether the 185's run anywhere that HST differentials are provided? If not, it's probably a paperwork issue that means adding them to the category has never been needed.

 

[The Planner]

91s can use HST differentials and they're RA7. With that in mind I struggle to see why 185s at RA5 are prohibited from using them.

HST diffs are more about braking rates, appendix C curves in the standards for 9% g braking. It was GKRT0075 on the RSSB site. For example trains have to be able to brake from 100mph in 2041m on level ground for appendix B passenger trains, 1341m for trains that can attain appendix C.

 

[Philip]

As I said, picking out what suits. I notice you haven’t even considered the long gaps between stops west of Manchester. How about checking out the 1Jxx services which run within the 1Dxx/1Exx Chester diagrams. Limited stop over the Pennines such as 12 mins BDI-HFX, 12 mins HFX-HBD, 10 mins TOD-RCD, 12 mins RCD-MCV.

How about Hull - Halifax with those huge gaps on the flat at the east end of the route.

What if they went on Blackpool - York? Long, long distances between stops, longer than TPE semi fasts in many places.

Picking what suits your argument and ignoring the facts that don’t fit in with it mean that you aren’t up for a debate as you’ve said in a previous thread. You just don’t want to listen or learn which puts peoples backs up.

You don't need to split hairs, the Calder Valley is a relatively slow and hilly route with frequent stops, much more 'suburban' than the Standedge route. If we're talking in terms of fuel costs then this route will be at the higher end. The 185s have more of a 'long distance' ambience to them than the 195s, perhaps this has been helped by the excellent refurbishment they had a few years ago, and the first class, but either way this factor and the issue around fuel costs means they'd be put to better use on the Manchester-Wales services. I also don't understand why you think 195s should be removed from the route, as they have proven to be an excellent unit for it.

TfW won't want to continue running LHCS if there is a suitable DMU available; within the next few years at least some of the 185 fleet will likely go off lease, so here you have a potentially excellent replacement.

 

[Neptune]

You don't need to split hairs,

So after you predictably cherry picked the tiny bits of route where it isn’t quite as express as the majority that is ’proof’ that the Calder Valley (which they are route cleared for) is an unsuitable route but when I open up the route as a whole being mainly of a regional express pattern to demonstrate it isn’t the stopping route you claim, it’s splitting hairs.

You really need to step back and think how you come across to others.

the Calder Valley is a relatively slow and hilly route with frequent stops,

Totally ignoring the semi fast Manchester - Chester, Selby - Hull and Blackpool - York part of what I suggest and ignoring the fact that none of the CV services are stoppers (ie every 2-5 minutes).

much more 'suburban' than the Standedge route. If we're talking in terms of fuel costs then this route will be at the higher end. The 185s have more of a 'long distance' ambience to them than the 195s, perhaps this has been helped by the excellent refurbishment they had a few years ago, and the first class,

Totally ignoring everything said including ripping out FC to provide more SC seats, mainly around tables as per the 195’s.

but either way this factor and the issue around fuel costs means they'd be put to better use on the Manchester-Wales services.

Show us the costings please?

I also don't understand why you think 195s should be removed from the route, as they have proven to be an excellent unit for it.

The 195’s are fine for the CV but their lower costs and better acceleration would be put to better use on class 2 local services.

TfW won't want to continue running LHCS if there is a suitable DMU available; within the next few years at least some of the 185 fleet will likely go off lease, so here you have a potentially excellent replacement.

Or they’ll just get more 197’s as sense would dictate, saves all that route clearance for a start.

 

[Philip]

So after you predictably cherry picked the tiny bits of route where it isn’t quite as express as the majority that is ’proof’ that the Calder Valley (which they are route cleared for) is an unsuitable route but when I open up the route as a whole being mainly of a regional express pattern to demonstrate it isn’t the stopping route you claim, it’s splitting hairs.

You really need to step back and think how you come across to others.

Totally ignoring the semi fast Manchester - Chester, Selby - Hull and Blackpool - York part of what I suggest and ignoring the fact that none of the CV services are stoppers (ie every 2-5 minutes).

I stand by what I say about the Calder Valley - anyone from Manchester or the NW wanting to get to Leeds quickly would use the Standedge route. Even for route clearance, the 185s would need a fair bit of this for the Calder Valley services: Todmorden to Farrington Jn, Earlestown to Chester, also possibly Wigan to Southport and Bradford Interchange branch.

If Northern are to use some of them after TPE, I suggest Manchester to Cumbria as the more suitable as this is a classic regional express route, no route clearance needed and the 185s can run at top speed without restrictions between Preston and Lancaster/Oxenholme. Leeds to Nottingham would also be a decent option.

 

[The Planner]

I stand by what I say about the Calder Valley - anyone from Manchester or the NW wanting to get to Leeds quickly would use the Standedge route. Even for route clearance, the 185s would need a fair bit of this for the Calder Valley services: Todmorden to Farrington Jn, Earlestown to Chester, also possibly Wigan to Southport and Bradford Interchange branch.

If Northern are to use some of them after TPE, I suggest Manchester to Cumbria as the more suitable as this is a classic regional express route, no route clearance needed and the 185s can run at top speed without restrictions between Preston and Lancaster/Oxenholme. Leeds to Nottingham would also be a decent option.

They are clear between Todmorden and Farrington apart from a nasty restriction at Rishton on the down.

 

[Neptune]

I stand by what I say about the Calder Valley - anyone from Manchester or the NW wanting to get to Leeds quickly would use the Standedge route.

Perhaps but plenty still do the full Leeds - Manchester on CV services due to the lower fares. Not everyone is in a rush you know. (Students are a huge market on the CV for instance).

Even for route clearance, the 185s would need a fair bit of this for the Calder Valley services: Todmorden to Farrington Jn, Earlestown to Chester, also possibly Wigan to Southport and Bradford Interchange branch.

Ignoring the fact I have never suggested Wigan - Southport (which Calder Valley services go to Southport by the way?), they’re cleared certainly to BDI, and across the East Lancs. That’s a hell of a lot less mileage than Manchester - Cardiff but I’m sure you’ll gloss over that.

If Northern are to use some of them after TPE, I suggest Manchester to Cumbria as the more suitable as this is a classic regional express route, no route clearance needed and the 185s can run at top speed without restrictions between Preston and Lancaster/Oxenholme.

That is another option but Northern are most likely going to procure bi-modes for the Cumbria services whether it be battery or diesel electrics.

Leeds to Nottingham would also be a decent option.

I agree it would be a good route for them being inter-regional in nature especially if you replace the FC area with SC seating. However you are going against everything you say about why they’re unsuitable over the Calder Valley. A very similar average between the stations and would need to interwork with the Lincoln’s which are stoppers between Sheffield and Lincoln.

Also there will need to be route clearance for those routes or is that not important unless it involves the bits of Calder Valley services they need clearance for.

 

[randyrippley]

Could they be used on Morecambe-Leeds or is the track too knackered?

 

[Neptune]

Could they be used on Morecambe-Leeds or is the track too knackered?

Overkill for that route. The 2/3 car 158’s are more than fine interworking with the S&C services.

 

[randyrippley]

Overkill for that route. The 2/3 car 158’s are more than fine interworking with the S&C services.

but it's a perfect route..........lots of hills and long gaps between stations