Stock cascade of class 150s

[whole diary]

[northwesterntrains]

I would go with a "derailment" being where a train comes off the track, and a "crash" as being a colloquial term for a collision, whether it's a collision with summat else on the track, or with something that's not on the line where the train should have been going following on from a derailment.

I would agree with that.  There's been two very different examples of accidents with 323s in the past couple of years which has resulted in a unit being out-of-service for a number of months:
1. A 323 running ECS^▸ (Empty Coaching Stock) after running a Manchester-Alderley Edge service derailed. 
2. A Landrover left at the top of a hill near a railway line collided with a 323 running a Manchester-Stoke service.

Number 1 was just a derailment with no collision, number 2 was a collision which I think also lead to a derailment.

[vacman]

but in the one (and hopefully only) crash involving a Pendo the design proved to be VERY crashworthy, wheras similar crashes involving MKIII and IIII have ended somewhat more tragic. (Hatfield, Ufton Nervert)

But was that crashworthyness anything to do with window size? And wasn't the Pendo writen off? At least some vehicles of the crashed 225 are still in service. Also, Hatfield was refered to as a crash but in everything I've heard about the Pendo incident it was refered to as a de-railment, which sounds like it was a less severe accident anyway.

both were derailments, who cares if some of the coaches from the 225 set are back in service, the main point is that quite a few people lost their LIVES in Hatfield, wheras only 1 died on the Pendo and I believe she only died from shock rather than from injuries as a direct result of the "Accident".

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

back to the voyagers, the technology of the Voyagers had not been used before in that combination (computer-controlled high-power underfloor engines powering a variable-voltage/variable-frequency three-phase drive) on the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) network ^ adding a pantograph car would have increased the technical complexity and risk and in some cases there are  also issues of route clearance ^ specifically signalling immunisation (which doesn^t affect DEMUs^▸ (Diesel Electric Multiple Unit) as their traction packs are effectively electrically isolated from the infrastructure) ^ which would/will trigger a major signalling immunisation project, thus you could still end up with EDMUs running on diesel under the wires because of the signalling.

[northwesterntrains]

I think the bottom line with both Voyagers and 185s is that they have disadvantages over the units they replaced.

If you compare Pendolinos with the older Eurostar trains you have 140mph capable trains and 186mph capable trains with the latter having the larger windows and smaller window pillars.

[JayMac]

I think the bottom line with both Voyagers and 185s is that they have disadvantages over the units they replaced.

And some advantages.

[northwesterntrains]

I think the bottom line with both Voyagers and 185s is that they have disadvantages over the units they replaced.

And some advantages.

But it's the disadvantages that people don't like and some of the advantages aren't properly utilised e.g. the 221 tilting facility which allows up to 125mph running on the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) and the out-of-use stereo system on the XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) Voyagers.

[inspector_blakey]

I'm sorry...? You're seriously suggesting that 185s are a retrograde step compared to the old and increasingly rat-infested 158s that they replaced on TPEx? Presumably you'd prefer it if those services were still operated by lumbering old class 45s dragging steam-heated mark I stock around.

[northwesterntrains]

I'm sorry...? You're seriously suggesting that 185s are a retrograde step compared to the old and increasingly rat-infested 158s that they replaced on TPEx? Presumably you'd prefer it if those services were still operated by lumbering old class 45s dragging steam-heated mark I stock around.

I said 185s have disadvantages over the units they replaced and the fact is they do:

1. The 3 car 185s replaced 2 and 3 car 158s on North and South TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express) routes that can be overcrowded throughout the day.  A 3 car 158 had more seating than a 185.  The fact that they are all 3 car meanings less flexibility:  when they had 158s there were 2,3,4,5,6 and 8 car workings now it's 3 or 6 on 185 routes and 2 car 170 diagrams replaced some of the old 2 car 158 diagrams.

2. The 185s are naturally less fuel efficient than 158s.  This led to TPE installing a GPS system so that engines automatically cut out when on negative gradients to save money.

3. The 185s were intended to decrease journey times.  However, they proved to be too heavy so had to run to lower speed limits so journey times remained the same overall - faster on some sections but slower on others.

4. More commuter style interiors which leads to numerous disadvantages for long distance travellers.

5. Also note 185s replaced Voyagers on Manchester-Scotland.  If I start listing disadvantages of a 185 over a Voyager we'd be here all day.

If you look at the above posts I'm one a few people who's posted on here who hasn't slated Voyagers - I've actually said I prefer them to other stock but I accept that they don't have certain features that HST^▸ (High Speed Train) stock had e.g. buffets, which is why I later said they had disadvantages as well.

So if they were rat infested 158s do you have the numbers of rats that TPE cascaded to South West Trains and First Great Western when they sent the 158s down?

[Zoe]

I think the bottom line with both Voyagers and 185s is that they have disadvantages over the units they replaced.

The Voyagers are clearly superior to the 47s and mark 2 coaches they replaced though.

[Timmer]

The Voyagers are clearly superior to the 47s and mark 2 coaches they replaced though.

Superior to a class 47 regards motive power. Not superior to the comfort of a mark 2 coach though IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).

[The Tall Controller]

I traveled on a 185 from Edinburgh to Lockerbie last weekend and it was one of the most uncomfortable journeys I've ever had. I was sat on the floor for the whole of both journeys with overcrowded trains. They were both 1 hour trips. Wouldnt like to spend much longer in that situation! 

[Rhydgaled]

2. The 185s are naturally less fuel efficient than 158s.  This led to TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express) installing a GPS system so that engines automatically cut out when on negative gradients to save money.

3. The 185s were intended to decrease journey times.  However, they proved to be too heavy so had to run to lower speed limits so journey times remained the same overall - faster on some sections but slower on others.

So if they were rat infested 158s do you have the numbers of rats that TPE cascaded to South West Trains and First Great Western when they sent the 158s down?

Alphalines (158s) are great trains for regional work. 90mph top speed, corridor connections at unit ends (giving lots of flexibility), air conditioning, trolley service (not normally available on lesser Sprinters), doors where they should be for trains on limited stop services and a much lower weight than new DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) (giving reduced fuel comsuption and track maintanence costs).

[northwesterntrains]

Alphalines (158s) are great trains for regional work.
[/quote]

The term Alphaline doesn't refer to all 158s.  The type of 158s that Arriva Trains Wales have are Alphaline units but the TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express) ones were of a different type with a different (supposed to be better) type of engine.

[DanielP]

Having recently done Cardiff to Southampton on a 150/2, I would say an arguement over the long term comfort of a 185 vs Voyager are pretty academic. I was hopeful that we would get a transfer to a 158 at Bristol, but no, another 150/2. Could have been worse- there was a chance of a 150/1.

Actually, my preferred option for Cardiff to P'mouth would be a 170 series (but one with a quiet interior that didn't ride like tank and rattle like a bus) or a 185 (without the bum wiggle on points and rough track!!) with the cabin comfort of a 175. I definately think it would have to have 1/3 and 2/3 doors though to cope with the sections where commuter "crush loading" is likely to occur.

Nice to see the 150/1 have arrived though- they look smart. Is there going to be a 2x2 seat upgrade, or just new uphostery and lick of paint?

Daniel

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

2x2 would decrease seated capacity so I doubt it