Where’s the best place for Class 185s?

[Cheshire Scot]

Why not? I thought HST differentials were because the HST has superior braking compared to LHCS because the brakes are applied from both power cars and so kick in quicker, and a 185 will have superior braking to an HST.

I am not familiar with the technical details but class 185s are not passed to use HST differentials - maybe because their current routes don't have any HST differentials, and it might just require a paper exercise, but as things stand today, no ((unless something has changed recently).

Differentials need to specified on the relevant paperwork.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I am not familiar with the technical details but class 185s are not passed to use HST differentials - maybe because their current routes don't have any HST differentials, and it might just require a paper exercise, but as things stand today, no ((unless something has changed recently).

Differentials need to specified on the relevant paperwork.

Thanks. I guess therefore that if moving the 185s to Scotland it might be possible to introduce 185 differentials based on those for HSTs (but not SP ones as those are based on weight and axle load).

 

[Philip]

If they could be converted to fully electric operation then they'd be a good option for the LNWR WCML services to supplement and strengthen the 350s. Are they compatible to be attached to 350s?

Also if they're converted to a battery bi-mode train then Chiltern would be good to replace the 165s or the loco-hauled trains (if they decide to replace them).

 

[Purple Orange]

If the 185s see out their depreciable life with TPE, what would be the financial and non-financial benefits/costs of keeping them in service compared to procuring new units?

 

[skyhigh]

If they could be converted to fully electric operation...

If you had several millions spare they could be. Cutting pantograph wells in the roof would be a challenge. In reality nobody bother would given there are 350/2s going spare soon and 360/2s in store!

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you had several millions spare they could be. Cutting pantograph wells in the roof would be a challenge. In reality nobody bother would given there are 350/2s going spare soon and 360/2s in store!

Converting to EMUs would be of little value, but converting them to "mild hybrid" using smaller engines is a distinct possibility now the concept is being tested on e.g. Chiltern.

 

[bramling]

The 458 thread is drifting off on a tangent, but somehow class 185s have come up in conversation.

If they are off as reported where would they suit? I’m thinking class 158 / HST 2+4 displacement on the Penzance Cardiff corridor. Even though they’re thirsty they can’t be as bad as a HST! The only thing going against them is their seating capacity.

Unfortunately this is one of those where the logical answer is for them to remain where they are.

They were built for a specific purpose - high power combined with high top speed, so other applications are going to prove problematic.

Their other weakness is a comparatively poor seating capacity (this became evident as soon as they replaced 158s on TPE). The mitigation for this is to run as a 6-car, as they have been increasingly doing on TPE, albeit at some expense. Another good reason to leave them where they are, where 6-cars are reasonably well filled, and their hill-climbing ability is being utilised to offer some benefit to the passenger in the form of competitive journey times.

Seems like another rolling stock mess in the making. The only issue on TPE was the lack of capacity, this is now solved and there’s sufficient 185s to run as 6-cars. DFT shouldn’t keep moving their rolling stock goalposts and changing their minds in a whim.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unfortunately this is one of those where the logical answer is for them to remain where they are.

Except it's not, as DMUs under the wires are (rightly) increasingly unacceptable.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

One route which would benefit from their power is York - Leeds - Bradford - Burnley - Blackburn - Preston - Blackpool, but a microfleet just for that route isn't practical.

Maybe more suitable for Carlisle to Glasgow Central via Kilmarnock or Glasgow Central to Stranraer services

Those are quite reasonable routes for 185s. As could be the Settle & Carlisle. Under a remapped GBR run network they could be diagrammed as a single, not-so-micro, fleet

 

[D365]

I’d redeploy the 185s on EWR, albeit with the engines and fuel tanks on the centre coach removed as 2/3 engines would suffice on the flat route and to save weight and maintenance costs.

Why the centre coach specifically? I imagine that the ROSCO would need to pay for specialist engineers to assess the structural and gauging implications of removing all that mass.

 

[bramling]

Except it's not, as DMUs under the wires are (rightly) increasingly unacceptable.

That’s fine once the core of the transpennine route is electrified, but we are a long way from that point. That’s before we consider Cleethorpes, where the only electrification east of Manchester is through Doncaster station, and this will be waiting even longer for wires, if ever.

With some remapping it would work on paper to give Cleethorpes to EMR, and they get some or all of the 185 fleet to cover both Cleethorpes and Liverpool-Nottingham. But the wind seems to have blown the other way to this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That’s fine once the core of the transpennine route is electrified, but we are a long way from that point.

Even before that, fairly reasonable stretches of north TPE are wired. But the order for 80x won't be delivered straight away, and the plan for it is part of that electrification programme.

South TPE could be a home for them, though, with CLC and the Hope Valley being a long way back in the electrification queue. I agree it's bizarre the move isn't for TPE to operate both Cleethorpes and Nottingham which would, assuming all double formations, use most or all of them quite happily.

 

[bramling]

Even before that, fairly reasonable stretches of north TPE are wired. But the order for 80x won't be delivered straight away, and the plan for it is part of that electrification programme.

South TPE could be a home for them, though, with CLC and the Hope Valley being a long way back in the electrification queue. I agree it's bizarre the move isn't for TPE to operate both Cleethorpes and Nottingham which would, assuming all double formations, use most or all of them quite happily.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be TPE, but I do think there’s a case for the same operator to run both these routes, and ideally with the same traction. You could certainly get the Cleethorpes line down from three to two operators, with Northern’s only operation being the Brigg route. The other possibility is to give the whole lot to Northern, but then you have an awkward split at Nottingham.

South TPE plus Liverpool to Nottingham doesn’t take up the whole fleet though. By a very rough estimation, even allowing for 100% 6-car operation this only utilises around half of it. This then leaves Hull and Scarborough as the next two routes with the least electrification. It’s hard to see either of these getting wired in the short or medium term. There’s a certain irony that we’re talking about a unit with hill-climbing optimisation, yet Cleethorpes, Hull and Scarborough all run through some pretty flat terrain in parts!

 

[Whistler40145]

Those are quite reasonable routes for 185s. As could be the Settle & Carlisle. Under a remapped GBR run network they could be diagrammed as a single, not-so-micro, fleet

I would put 170s on the Settle & Carlisle line

 

[JonathanH]

If they could be converted to fully electric operation then they'd be a good option for the LNWR WCML services to supplement and strengthen the 350s. Are they compatible to be attached to 350s?

Is that the same LNWR that is removing 37 350s from its operation?

Also if they're converted to a battery bi-mode train then Chiltern would be good to replace the 165s or the loco-hauled trains (if they decide to replace them).

Wouldn't they seek to use the aforementioned 350s as already having electric traction?

 

[RailWonderer]

Is that the same LNWR that is removing 37 350s from its operation?

That is all about leasing costs.

Wouldn't they seek to use the aforementioned 350s as already having electric traction?

Depends who is willing to pay for 350/2s to be battery converted. They're 12 year old trains so plenty of life left in them, I'd say it would be well worth the investment.

But 185s should stay where they are, just because there is a small suplus of them, doesn't mean they have to be fully utilised, means the fleet can be more reliable and in turn, the reliability of the service will stay high (besides when TPE have driver shortage issues).

 

[JonathanH]

That is all about leasing costs.

I wouldn't like to think that conversion of 185s to electric would come in cheaper than using 350s that are already electric.

 

[bramling]

I would put 170s on the Settle & Carlisle line

Much as this would be good from a passenger perspective, could there be issues with the S&C being largely 60mph?

170s don’t seem to perform particularly happily at lower speeds, and the S&C is fairly heavily graded as well.

(That said, Southern’s 171s do a fair bit of frequent-stop work, and it doesn’t seem to have been an issue, though they probably get to top 60mph fairly often).

 

[warwickshire]

South Trans Pennine as already mentioned. Or possibly Scotrail if route cleared to allow for the replacement of Castle HSTs maybe?

 

[NoMorePacers]

Much as this would be good from a passenger perspective, could there be issues with the S&C being largely 60mph?

170s don’t seem to perform particularly happily at lower speeds, and the S&C is fairly heavily graded as well.

(That said, Southern’s 171s do a fair bit of frequent-stop work, and it doesn’t seem to have been an issue, though they probably get to top 60mph fairly often).

The route between Leeds and Carlisle does present some opportunities for 170s to get into second gear (Leeds - Skipton I'm fairly sure has stretches of 90, north of there it might be 70 as far as Settle Junction?) unlike the Harrogate Loop.

Although I don't think there's enough units that work the Harrogate Loop to provide a full service on the S&C (assuming the goal was to remove 158s completely from the route, and for 170s to remain on Hull services).

 

[nw1]

The 458 thread is drifting off on a tangent, but somehow class 185s have come up in conversation.

If they are off as reported where would they suit? I’m thinking class 158 / HST 2+4 displacement on the Penzance Cardiff corridor. Even though they’re thirsty they can’t be as bad as a HST! The only thing going against them is their seating capacity.

Anything run by 158s for the majority of the period since the early 90s would suit them I think, in some cases as an addition to rather than as a replacement for 158s. They seem to suit that kind of 'regional express' route.

So Portsmouth-Cardiff? Manchester-Cardiff?

 

[JonathanH]

Anything run by 158s for the majority of the period since the early 90s would suit them I think, in some cases as an addition to rather than as a replacement for 158s. They seem to suit that kind of 'regional express' route.

So Portsmouth-Cardiff? Manchester-Cardiff?

A 158 is a lightweight unit though. Anywhere that 185s replace 158s is going to see a significant increase in operating costs that will ultimately feed through to passenger fares.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

There have been previous discussions about what to do with 185s, even from when it was assumed that the lion's share of the fleet would stay with TPE. The discussion then centred on the weight issues, and the inability to use Sprinter or MU differential speeds.

As far as I'm aware, nothing has changed on that front. What has changed is the long-term prospects for diesel use in general, along with the route the class was designed for now getting wires. As they were designed for a specific use-case, they won't necessarily be the best option for routes that don't have similar profiles. Marginal routes such as Leeds to Carlisle are already heavily subsidised, so using a particularly expensive-to-run unit probably isn't the best plan.

As we're in the speculative section, I can think of a few possible scenarios:

1. Scotrail is pressured to accelerate the removal of HSTs, and takes 185s as a stop-gap.
2. EWR could be a possibility, particularly if something can be done about the fuel consumption and weight- although one would hope that a newly built railway wouldn't have any stringent weight restrictions!
3. Export to Ireland. IE were apparently looking to aquire additional units prior to the pandemic, including possibly GB units to be re-bogied. If their passenger numbers recover perhaps that plan will resurface. As Ireland retained (and retains) loco-hauled services, the weight and track wear stuff may be less of a sticking point. New bogies could also possibly be a more lightweight design.

 

[The Planner]

They won't go to E-W unless the HST differential is overcome. They are getting 19x last I heard.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They won't go to E-W unless the HST differential is overcome. They are getting 19x last I heard.

WMT 196s.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

But they aren't ideal for Cardiff to Taunton. They are overpowered for that route and don't have the capacity or efficient operation of a Turbo.

Turbos run Cardiff to Taunton services infrequently at best at the moment. The vast majority are Castle Class HSTs, either continuing to the South West or terminating, with the odd double 158. It's Avonmouth/Bristol Parkway - Weston-super-Mare stopping services that you'll find usually dominated by Turbos, which is naturally less suitable for a 185 or HST owing to the frequent stopping and short distance nature of the route.

 

[Bevan Price]

I think the best things to do with 185s when they become surplus would be:

1. Remove the engines, and replace them with lighter, less thirsty engines rated at around 400-450 hp.

2. Convert the first class area to standard class with more seats.

That would let them obey sprinter speed limits, and enable them to start replacing older class 15x units (for which 100 mph capability is largely unnecessary.)

 

[Greybeard33]

I think the best things to do with 185s when they become surplus would be:

1. Remove the engines, and replace them with lighter, less thirsty engines rated at around 400-450 hp.

2. Convert the first class area to standard class with more seats.

That would let them obey sprinter speed limits, and enable them to start replacing older class 15x units (for which 100 mph capability is largely unnecessary.)

It is not only the engines that make 185s heavy. They were designed with beefy underframes, bogies and suspension to carry the weight of the engines.

No way could new engines get them down to anywhere near the weight or axle load of a Sprinter.

 

[Dspatula]

Assuming TPEs plan for the 25 extra bi-modes actually happens they'd have enough alternate units to push 185s off their main routes.

I'd keep them based in Ardwick and put them on;
Manchester Airport to Barrow & Windermere in perfect world I'd have them split and join at Lancaster on platform 5 but it'd be pretty tight getting the south bound out the way of the northbound arrival. 12 units required.
The Chester, Manchester Victoria, Leeds circuit. 9 units required.
Blackpool to York, already mentioned further up. 6 units required
The Leeds, Nottingham and Lincoln circuit, would obviously need the platform issue at Leeds sorting first. 10 units required
Daily lease to TPE for Huddersfield stoppers. 4 units, although might only need half by this point anyway.

By my admittedly rough estimate that's 41 out 51 giving enough of a margin to double up the busier Calder valley services with the advantage of a unit that doesn't through a fit every time you attach or detach part of the train.
Freed up 195s can be used to replace 150s.

 

[Ex-controller]

Replacement for 156s on the West Highland Line?

Absolutely not. Far too heavy.

Those are quite reasonable routes for 185s. As could be the Settle & Carlisle. Under a remapped GBR run network they could be diagrammed as a single, not-so-micro, fleet

Scotland won’t be part of a GBR run network though. I’d expect transfer to the Northern England local franchise/concession would be the likeliest move should they leave TPE, although wouldn’t be against them replacing HST in Scotland as a stop gap until electrification, should the HSTs get withdrawn.