They were formed by splitting a number of units and using the vehicles to add to other sets - as well as the Far North, other 3-car sets ran on the S&C for a while. There is a more detailed history at http://members.madasafish.com/~dysgraphyk/156/class156_misformed.htm
A 3 car 156 style train would be ideal for some routes these days. IMO 156s are better than 185s in terms of comfort and ride, although a newer design of 156s would be needed.
Ah I see, thanks for that - it just got me thinking that when the order for the 156s got placed just maybe they should have been ordered as both 2 and 3 car sets.
That's too logical and simple!Still, it cannot really be too difficult to couple a 153 to a 156 on a semi-permanent basis to create a 3-car Super Sprinter formation
That's too logical and simple!
All too often I see Class 153 units coupled up with a Class 170 rather than a Class 156, but it really depends on what units were at the depot at the time!
I do agree though, the Class 153 makes a great strengthening unit to provide a 3 car unit, where a 4 car unit is too much
Typical though I suspect the wrong TOCs have the 153s!
There are issues over three car units, over running two / four car unitsAs we get cascaded units we should be taking this opportunity to expand existing trains to three car units
Anyone remember the tadpoles?
Spot on, excellent units and great workhorses, i work them nearly all the time. Very few instances of a failure with them nowadays, from personal experience of course.
AFAIK, the Class 210 DEMUs were intended to be 4-car and 3-car units for 90mph operation, basically the same remit that the 158 eventually fulfilled.
I wish they'd put a vigilance on em though. On some units it's such a fine line between pedal depressed and not, you can drop the DSD as soft as anything!
Failed with one a few weeks back. Little kiddywink pulled passcom in the toilet and it wouldn't reset. EBS job and everybody off at next station. Someone was popular that morning!
A DMU has an anticipated lifespan of 35 to 40 yearsWhat are the expected operational lifespans of the 156 and 158 fleets?
there was some talk of them finding their way onto the BedPan route where they could work in multiple with the Cl317's as far as the end of the wires at Bedford and then continue on towards Kettering alone
That would be a very good idea.
Is there a limit to the length of additional (diesel) coaches an EMU can haul? Obviously platform lengths would be an issue, but what about the electronics?
Why don't we do this on more lines? Stick a Lincoln - Peterborough 153 onto the FCC Peterborough - London service? Replace the Corby Meridian with a DMU tagged onto the Bedford FCC service? Tag a Pacer/ Sprinter onto the Leeds - Skipton service as a way of providing services to Settle/ Lancaster etc.
Yep, one of the main factors stopping this is that the DMUs and EMUs have different couplers. The only DMU I can think of that could potentially work with an EMU is the class 171s ability to work with a 377, as they both have Dellner couplers. Plus, once you add the deadweight of a dragged diesel unit onto an EMU service, you start to increase acceleration times and slow down journey times. If it were possible to have a compatible EMU that could provide electric power to the traction motors of the DMU, then that could be quite clever.I don't think it would work now. But it would of worked with 317s and 210s because they are basically the same, but a 153 probably couldn't couple to a 365 etc
Funny how it is nearly always the passcom in the toilet that gets pulled! !
Yep, one of the main factors stopping this is that the DMUs and EMUs have different couplers. The only DMU I can think of that could potentially work with an EMU is the class 171s ability to work with a 377, as they both have Dellner couplers. Plus, once you add the deadweight of a dragged diesel unit onto an EMU service, you start to increase acceleration times and slow down journey times. If it were possible to have a compatible EMU that could provide electric power to the traction motors of the DMU, then that could be quite clever.
Cheers for the answers guys.
Is there any reason for why different couplers evolved? Like was so much easier in Hornby days when everything had the same couplers!
Cheers for the answers guys.
Is there any reason for why different couplers evolved? Like was so much easier in Hornby days when everything had the same couplers!