Class 350/2 110mph

[oversteer]

When did the 350/2s get cleared to 110mph?
Was it all of them or just a subset?

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

All are now cleared. I don't know when exactly they were cleared but it was within the past few months AFAIK.

 

[oversteer]

Shame they’re getting rid of them !

 

[Railperf]

That will be helpful because a number were rostered on 110 mile an hour services but limited to 100 miles an hour which has a knock on effect on Virgin 125 mile an hour services only a few minutes behind

 

[Bletchleyite]

That will be helpful because a number were rostered on 110 mile an hour services but limited to 100 miles an hour which has a knock on effect onlVirgin 125 mile an hour services only a few minutes behind

Not to mention knackering connections. I am genuinely surprised they were allowed to run the 100mph units onto services where this would cause issues rather than having to cancel.

 

[BlyRF]

Do these trains have the potential to achieve 125 mph or even 140 having had a quick look at the drivers cab images of the mph gauge? (If ever their speed limiter was removed?)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Do these trains have the potential to achieve 125 mph or even 140 having had a quick look at the drivers cab images of the mph gauge? (If ever their speed limiter was removed?)

Crashworthiness would be an issue, I suspect.

 

[BucksBones]

Not to mention knackering connections. I am genuinely surprised they were allowed to run the 100mph units onto services where this would cause issues rather than having to cancel.

What is the procedure in this situation? Does the TOC have to put the unit number for the diagram into some sort of system, and if so does the top speed of the unit get automatically flagged in any way? Would a signaller necessarily know that a 110mph diagram was being operated by a 100mph unit without being specifically told? Probably silly questions, I’m just intrigued!

 

[sd0733]

The 350/2 modification programme took place over the last few months when they were due maintenance. A lot for example were fitted with the modified pantograph head months ago but even though they could do 110 they were sent back into service as 100mph units until all 37 were fully modified.
They were all made 110mph allowed en-masse on 31/12/18, that being the first day of 110 operation for the entire fleet.

 

[185]

Proper wibbly wobbly some of them at full whack. Lost a coffee or two recently.

 

[sd0733]

Do these trains have the potential to achieve 125 mph or even 140 having had a quick look at the drivers cab images of the mph gauge? (If ever their speed limiter was removed?)

One would have been tested at 121mph (110+10%) as part of the approval for the 350 fleet so it must be possible but unless you had a good downhill run I can't see them running that far beyond that. They aren't exactly the most aerodynamic units in the world, I wonder if there are any other 'square gangway fitted units anywhere that are passed beyond 110.

 

[sd0733]

Proper wibbly wobbly some of them at full whack. Lost a coffee or two recently.

Yes they definitely are very bouncy compared to a /1 or 3! There's a noticeable difference. They are a bit lighter I believe so may explain this and why they do seem to get to 110 quicker.

 

[zn1]

one suspects the 350s can do a bit more if pushed, as said pan aerodynamics, traction motor gearing etc and of course crash worthiness comes in to the issue.

in old days there were quite a few unofficial speed records for 317, 321 as could the old reps were more than capable when pushed

the ac slammers could happily break their booked max speeds when pushed,

A good driver who knows his unit, loco llimits , the road, the can coax every Ounce of power to the rail

 

[Bletchleyite]

Proper wibbly wobbly some of them at full whack. Lost a coffee or two recently.

I find them smoother at 110 than 100, which is supposedly true of Mk4s (140 vs 125) too.

If you're bothered about the rough ride, sit in the middle of the coach, it's noticeably better there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They were all made 110mph allowed en-masse on 31/12/18, that being the first day of 110 operation for the entire fleet.

I wonder how the random unit generator is going now?

 

[mallard]

As well as crashworthiness and their own ride quality at high speeds, you've also got to account for the effect their aerodynamic properties will have on other trains... It's all very well having a "brick" running a 125mph, but if the aerodynamic wake knocks over empty freight wagons when it passes them, it's not going to be allowed! I believe this is the primary reason why the Cl91 is limited to 110 running blunt-end-first.

 

[computerSaysNo]

If a 3-car version had been produced, would it be able to operate at 110mph as well, or would there be other factors limiting it to 100mph or 90mph? I'm relating this to the 385s, if the 4-car trains were ever modified to run at 110mph would this be possible on the 3-car units as well?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If a 3-car version had been produced, would it be able to operate at 110mph as well, or would there be other factors limiting it to 100mph or 90mph? I'm relating this to the 385s, if the 4-car trains were ever modified to run at 110mph would this be possible on the 3-car units as well?

I can't see any reason for any such restriction based on train length for an EMU. There were restrictions on speed based on train length of LHCS, but that was because locomotives had relatively weak brakes compared with coaches and so you'd need a certain number of coaches to provide the locomotive with adequate brake force.

 

[Railperf]

I guess the gangway connection does not help aerondynamics over 110mph. A Class 360 though has a smoother front end and looks barely less aerodynamic than a FLIRT 3 design which is 125mph capable.

 

[Railperf]

I can't see any reason for any such restriction based on train length for an EMU. There were restrictions on speed based on train length of LHCS, but that was because locomotives had relatively weak brakes compared with coaches and so you'd need a certain number of coaches to provide the locomotive with adequate brake force.

But some locos such as Class 67 generate a higher brake force and can therefore still run a much shorter consist at 100/110mph than a Class 47 for example.

 

[Railperf]

Proper wibbly wobbly some of them at full whack. Lost a coffee or two recently.

I think that is more down to lack of track maintenance.

 

[nat67]

That will be helpful because a number were rostered on 110 mile an hour services but limited to 100 miles an hour which has a knock on effect on Virgin 125 mile an hour services only a few minutes behind

Mainly on the Euston-Crewe via Weedon which I have happened to see many times a Rugby for the xx:42 mins past and is expected out xx:44 or even xx:47. The Virgin behind tends to end up going through at only 70-80 mph on the down fast rather than 125.

 

[sd0733]

I wonder how the random unit generator is going now?

If it's possible even more random. On the Trent the other day, 5:21 and 6:52 ex Crewe both had a 2 in the pair and the 7:55, 9:02, 10:02, 11:02, 12:02, 15:02, 17:02, 18:02 ex Crewe were all 2s. On the same day were at least 2 /1s and a 3 on the wolves-walsall.

 

[sd0733]

Duplicate post

 

[hwl]

Crashworthiness would be an issue, I suspect.

It is indeed, the crash requirements change at about 115mph hence 110mph as the max speed. The big hit would be losing the front 1/3 of each driving car to non passenger use!

 

[driver_m]

The 350/2's have had their pans changed as well to match the rest of the fleet, so presumably that was because they weren't 110 capable....

 

[edwin_m]

If a 3-car version had been produced, would it be able to operate at 110mph as well, or would there be other factors limiting it to 100mph or 90mph? I'm relating this to the 385s, if the 4-car trains were ever modified to run at 110mph would this be possible on the 3-car units as well?

3-cars running in multiple might be restricted due to pans being too close together (as were 4-cars for a while).

I would have thought with the design already having been pushed out from 100 to 110 there wouldn't be that much "stretch" to go faster, either in terms of components being incompatible with a higher speed or of simply having enough power to get there. That's in addition to the extra crashworthiness standards at higher speeds.

 

[Railperf]

Mainly on the Euston-Crewe via Weedon which I have happened to see many times a Rugby for the xx:42 mins past and is expected out xx:44 or even xx:47. The Virgin behind tends to end up going through at only 70-80 mph on the down fast rather than 125.

Yes..the Pendolinos are capable of running ahead of the schedule, while a 100mph 350/2 would lose a few minutes. Last time i used a 350/2 on the LNWR fast calling at Watford and Milton Keynes only. No sooner had it pulled out of MK the Pendo came trundling through on caution signals!
It seems as though LNWR were having trouble rostering the 110mph units to the 110mph services! It makes common sense to have a unified fleet really. What took them so.long? The 350/1s and 359/4s have been 110mph for ages. As for their replacements - these should really have been 125mph capable - with a review of where 125mph could be allowed without TASS. Probably most of the current non EPS 110mph sections look like they could allow 125mph easily. No tilt required.

 

[AM9]

... As for their replacements - these should really have been 125mph capable - with a review of where 125mph could be allowed without TASS. Probably most of the current non EPS 110mph sections look like they could allow 125mph easily. No tilt required.

But that would mean larger passenger-free zones behing the cabs reducing their capacity.

 

[Railperf]

But that would mean larger passenger-free zones behing the cabs reducing their capacity.

True. Yes...but you could free up another 125mph path and fill it with a 10 or 12 car unit.
The 14.46 Eus to Crewe today was inadequately a 4-car 350 with no workjng loos and was allowed a 5 minute loo stop at Rugby