Speculation on Class 185 future

[northwichcat]

The 185s will be an imperfect solution on any other routes they get cascaded to (much like everyone's favourite units, the 442s!) so surely they should stay where they are.

They aren't a perfect solution for North TPE either! In fact given TPE will be serving stations like Marsden wouldn't doubled up 2 car DMUs be better for North TPE than 3 car 185s?

You must have been busy if you've evaluated the suitability of 185s on every possible route they could be cascaded to, there must be hundreds in total.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are the vehicles of 185s independent? If so, could there be an option to reform them to 2s and 4s?

 

[northwichcat]

Are the vehicles of 185s independent? If so, could there be an option to reform them to 2s and 4s?

I'm not sure of the answer but how would that work with eco-mode? It might increase diesel consumption significantly if it doesn't.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Are the vehicles of 185s independent? If so, could there be an option to reform them to 2s and 4s?

Theoretically I could see that working, though as there are 51 3-car units some would have to remain as 3-car, unless some cars were stored as spares much like the spare Voyager cars.

I'm not sure of the answer but how would that work with eco-mode? It might increase diesel consumption significantly if it doesn't.

I'm not an expert but surely the power/weight ratio would stay constant whatever they were formed as, as all cars are powered. Currently the engines on the centre cars are switched off when not required (on downhill runs)- a four car unit would therefore switch out one engine of the four and still have 3 engines running. Having only one engine running on a 2-car would be a risk perhaps though. I'm also not sure how much use a 2-car unit would be as there's not a lot of capacity there. It's probably more trouble than it's worth though as I'd guess the software would need tweaking.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They aren't a perfect solution for North TPE either! In fact given TPE will be serving stations like Marsden wouldn't doubled up 2 car DMUs be better for North TPE than 3 car 185s?

You must have been busy if you've evaluated the suitability of 185s on every possible route they could be cascaded to, there must be hundreds in total.

I haven't looked at every route but ideally they'd continue to work out of Ardwick so that would work against sending them to Scotland or the South. Others have commented on the issues East of Nottingham with regard to SP differentials, whereas East of Selby those problems are a known quantity.

 

[northwichcat]

I'm not an expert but surely the power/weight ratio would stay constant whatever they were formed as, as all cars are powered. Currently the engines on the centre cars are switched off when not required (on downhill runs)- a four car unit would therefore switch out one engine of the four and still have 3 engines running. Having only one engine running on a 2-car would be a risk perhaps though. I'm also not sure how much use a 2-car unit would be as there's not a lot of capacity there. It's probably more trouble than it's worth though as I'd guess the software would need tweaking.

That's the issue. If you reform them one service might be a 4 car set, then half an hour later you're using 2 x 2 cars. How would eco mode work on the latter? FC would be an issue as they are currently as 2 x 2 cars would have far too much FC provision but they are due to be refurbished in the next few years anyway.

I haven't looked at every route but ideally they'd continue to work out of Ardwick so that would work against sending them to Scotland or the South. Others have commented on the issues East of Nottingham with regard to SP differentials, whereas East of Selby those problems are a known quantity.

Yet the Hull route is one they are going to remain on so by your own omission they aren't well suited to remain where they are.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That's my point though- they're heavy units and there'll be issues in a lot of places including where they run now, but the Hull route is one where those issues are known and manageable. I'm not sure what the exact restrictions are on that route but the reduced speed sections must be short enough for the extra power to negate those delays. The same doesn't apply to long sections of the Nottingham to Norwich route and possibly many others.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

On eco mode, its not the centre car thats switched out. The TMS will always alternate the 3 engines to maintain engine hours and fuel capacity.

The brake compressor is on the DMC, theres nothing significant that Im aware of in the MS jthat would preclude removing it and creating 2 and 4 car sets. (Apart from the emergency tool cupboard which could easily be relocated!) 185's were intended to be expanded to 4 cars with the insrtion of an additional MS (the missing 52 car) hence why the existing car numbers are 51, 53 and 54 1xx

 

[sprinterguy]

hence why the existing car numbers are 51, 53 and 54 1xx

Also more pertinently because most of the 52xxx series is taken up by Sprinter vehicles (although most of the 525xx and all of the 526xx range is spare).

 

[gimmea50anyday]

521xx is free, it has been often stated internally the numbers were allocated for the additional centre cars but never used.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My thought was more that 2-car versions could replace Sprinters/Pacers on branch lines, while the 4-cars would stay on TPE. On most branch lines a 750hp unit is quite adequate so indeed one engine could be switched out on an alternating basis, or even removed completely.

 

[sprinterguy]

521xx is free, it has been often stated internally the numbers were allocated for the additional centre cars but never used.

Fifty numbers in the 521xx range are free, not much good for a fleet of 51 units.

 

[northwichcat]

My thought was more that 2-car versions could replace Sprinters/Pacers on branch lines, while the 4-cars would stay on TPE. On most branch lines a 750hp unit is quite adequate so indeed one engine could be switched out on an alternating basis, or even removed completely.

How much of an issue would it be if the one remaining engine developed a fault. Could they send another 2 car 185 on one engine to rescue it?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Fifty numbers in the 521xx range are free, not much good for a fleet of 51 units.

I don't think it was ever planned to make all 51 (or indeed the 57 that were originally ordered before DfT stepped in) units 4-car, though.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

About 30 odd if i recall correctly. 34 springs to mind. The fact the order of 57 was reduced to 51 would explain the employment of the 170's 8 from SWT with the demonstrator 399 forming the ninth unit.

Some routes cant accept 4 car units without platform lengthenings hence the retention of some units as 3 cars. Yarm springs to mind, but this would have made diagramming a nightmare as arrivals @MIA from Middlesbrough then formed a Newcastle service and likewise Middlesbrough services formed off Newcastle Arrivals.

 

[fowler9]

185's have UDB - Unit Door Blocking. Operated in the cab it means the doors will not energise behind that cab. Its not selective door as such as its whole unit only. The GOP controls in a UDB'd unit can however still be used as a local door and will still operate the doors in the non UDB active units.

The system glitches however if the driver changes ends and keys in, when the unit formation is acknowledged and UDB is active, the UDB also reverses!

Cheers mate. I think this explains the 17:47 and/or 18:47 from South Parkway to Lime Street. The front unit is all unlocked. They normally lock the rear door of the centre car of the rear unit and both doors af he rear car of the rear unit. Hope that makes sense.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What, manually? UDS cannot do that, it is all or nothing on any given unit.

 

[fowler9]

What, manually? UDS cannot do that, it is all or nothing on any given unit.

I don't know the technical answer. I am just saying what happens at Liverpool South Parkway. I have seen them lock out the doors at the rear of the rear unit. Don't know how they do it but they do.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Yes, we lock the doors manually using a T key. LPY, WAC, SEM, CLS all require either the last two or last 3 sets of doors locking out when running 6 cars. YRM requires either the rear set to be UDB, or the service will be diverted to call at EAG instead. All other north route TPE stations are long enough to accomodate 6. Cant speak for the hull branch, dont sign it!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surprised that is allowed, it would I imagine be easy to forget, and the railway doesn't generally like manual safety systems with no backup.

 

[fowler9]

Surprised that is allowed, it would I imagine be easy to forget, and the railway doesn't generally like manual safety systems with no backup.

I know that when FTPE first started stopping at Parkway it was allowed. Then it stopped for a while I believe because some paperwork hadn't been signed. No it is allowed again. Bizarre.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

If 185 doors are manually locked out of use, they will still open if an egress handle is pulled. I have tested and confirmed this on depot myself. I always believed the doors were physically locked as they are on a voyager but the door lock on a 185 is merely an electrical isolation and nothing more.

 

[Philip]

How about W&B taking the remaining 22 units and taking the centre car out of say 11 of them and putting these centre cars in the other 11 so that you'd have a fleet of 11 4-car formed 185s for use on longer distance Marches services and then use the 11 2-car units for quieter routes, or even double these up to have 5 or 6 4-car doubled up formations for use on Crewe-Holyhead via Stafford or Manchester-Llandudno?

Could also be an idea for TPE if 6-car 185s are deemed excessive..

 

[pdq]

I thought I'd read somewhere that the 185s have their equipment distributed throughout the 3 cars, so they can't be taken down to 2 car. Is this right?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

How about W&B taking the remaining 22 units and taking the centre car out of say 11 of them and putting these centre cars in the other 11 so that you'd have a fleet of 11 4-car formed 185s for use on longer distance Marches services and then use the 11 2-car units for quieter routes, or even double these up to have 5 or 6 4-car doubled up formations for use on Crewe-Holyhead via Stafford or Manchester-Llandudno?

Could also be an idea for TPE if 6-car 185s are deemed excessive..

With regards to the use of Class 185 units on the Marches Line services and the aspiration of middle-car removal and 4-car operation, you will still have no connection between both units. How many Standard Class seats will be lost as a result of such a middle car removal?

What I do like about this proposal, is that when such a 4-car set draws up at Wilmslow, ready to take my good lady wife and I to Ludlow and to Hereford, unlike the "no First Class" Class 175 units, there will be TWO sections with First Class accommodation...

 

[sprinterguy]

What I do like about this proposal, is that when such a 4-car set draws up at Wilmslow, ready to take my good lady wife and I to Ludlow and to Hereford, unlike the "no First Class" Class 175 units, there will be TWO sections with First Class accommodation...

That would be assuming that the 185s retained their first class section. As two carriage units, in their current layout they would only have 82 fixed standard class seats (to answer your first point, removing the centre car removes 72 standard class seats). A single carriage Sprinter has only ten fewer...

 

[Philip]

I was thinking in terms of taking the centre car out of some of the existing units and squeezing them into the remaining 3-car units alongside the existing centre car, to make a 4-car train. There would still be one first class section and one standard class driving car, there would just be two centre cars instead of one, without having to double up separate units.

As stated above it may not be mechanically or electrically possible to do this but if it is it seems an idea.

 

[northwichcat]

That would be assuming that the 185s retained their first class section. As two carriage units, in their current layout they would only have 82 fixed standard class seats (to answer your first point, removing the centre car removes 72 standard class seats). A single carriage Sprinter has only ten fewer...

If a 2 car 185 retained FC I imagine they would be furbished so that FC would be a small area between one of the cabs and the first set of doors, like on the TPE 170s.

 

[sprinterguy]

If a 2 car 185 retained FC I imagine they would be furbished so that FC would be a small area between one of the cabs and the first set of doors, like on the TPE 170s.

Yeah, you'd hope so.

 

[edwin_m]

Do the regulations still require that both classes have wheelchair-accessible access to an accessible toilet (as it were)? I think this was the reason for the weird layout of the composite coach of the 185.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do the regulations still require that both classes have wheelchair-accessible access to an accessible toilet (as it were)? I think this was the reason for the weird layout of the composite coach of the 185.

The regulations can't possibly require that, because otherwise the 350s (all layouts) would not have been permissible.