The lowest, always the lowest.
I guess that’s true. Would make sense for 350/1 + /2 or 375 + 465, but 165/0+168… not so much if that 165 could be used to strengthen other services and leaving the 168 for the faster stuff (still makes some sense though)
A number of ScotRail workings are 170+158. This is most common on local services in Fife, but there is a pair of Edinburgh/Inverness services also booked for such a combination.
Tbf 150’s can easily achieve 90
Is it for positing of a unit for later in the day?
Because often the line speed is the limiting factor. Good example is 158s on Morecambe-Leeds. They'll never hit maximum speed there, so coupling to a slower unit like a 156 would be irrelevant.
Good way to get rid of them.
I'd be impressed if you manage to get past 75 on a Rugeley stopper! They were great as everyone made a beeline for the 170 so the only people in the 153 were either cranks or fare evading!
IIRC all 350s have been upgraded to the same top speed for some time now.
It was for a similar reason that hydraulic classes 113 and 127 were given their own coupling code, although their controls had be designed to be compatible with "blue square" doesel mechanical units (all other classes from 100 to 124). There were too many incidents of a driver forgetting that he still ahd to operate the gear change if he was driving a mixed formation with a 113 or 127 leading, with consequent damage to the engines of the trailing unit as it tried to run at top speed in 1st gear.
I've heard stories that some of the 90s did indeed reach "interesting" speeds when being driven from the DVT...
It used to be a frequent sight on the "Joint" line to see freight trains with an 08 "dead in train" in the formation, on its way to or from Doncaster Works for overhaul. They always had their coupling rods removed - I assume this allowed them to be towed at higher speeds than was permitted under their own power.
Unfortunately a 465 and a 375 have different couplings so that's never going to happen. They can be coupled in an emergency but only with the attendance of a fitter with specialist equipment.
Ahem, not only when driven from the DVT!
Managed to be on a service going 85 on a 144 with a 158 on the front once. It was certainly interesting and thankfully one I never repeated.
153 behind a 170 going down the Lickey was always fun. Occasionally had a 150 behind a 170 on the evening peak that was non stop Bromsgrove.
Always used to aim for the 153 on the one Snow Hill diagram that was booked for 170+153, as it was always the quietest carriage of the train in the evening peak. I know a colleague of mine used to do the same.
Back in the day it wasn't uncommon to see a Scotrail 170 in multiple with a 150 on an Edinburgh - Dunblane service.
I seem to remember that, in the days during construction of the 156s, a demonstration run was reported in the railway press to have reached over 90mph on the run to York so working with a 158 may not be much of a problem.
I think they could run at 25 with them removed.
The accident report for that derailment can be found here: https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/MoT_RaynesPark1967.pdf
