Class 350/4

[dave59]

Why are TPX Class 350/4 still timed for 100mph and as DMU's? (realtime trains). Are their performance characteristics still not reflected in the timetable?

 

[superalbs]

Why are TPX Class 350/4 still timed for 100mph and as DMU's? (realtime trains). Are their performance characteristics still not reflected in the timetable?

I know that Class 185 sets are used on the Class 350 route sometimes, so it may be to accomodate these, that is if their diagrams are not fixed.

 

[PHILIPE]

The timings are nothing to do with diagrams. If they are intended to run at 100mph max, anything shown as 100 mph will suffice. Perhaps, as posted, because 185s are also involved.

 

[jimm]

The timings are nothing to do with diagrams. If they are intended to run at 100mph max, anything shown as 100 mph will suffice. Perhaps, as posted, because 185s are also involved.

No perhaps about it - as the 350 fleet is so small, if there is a failure, the stand-in will be a 185, hence the timings are biased on their performance, rather than that of a 350.

 

[CAF397]

350s do appear in Real Time Trains as 'Class 350 EMU'. As others have said though, 185s sometimes do deputise. Monday to Thursday the Manchester-Glasgow/Edinburgh route should purely be 350s. 185s are used on certain workings on Fridays and the weekend to allow strengthening of other 350 workings to 8-car.

Keeping the timings at 100mph also allows a certain amount of performance recovery between station stops for the 350s.

 

[dave59]

350s do appear in Real Time Trains as 'Class 350 EMU'. As others have said though, 185s sometimes do deputise. Monday to Thursday the Manchester-Glasgow/Edinburgh route should purely be 350s. 185s are used on certain workings on Fridays and the weekend to allow strengthening of other 350 workings to 8-car.

Keeping the timings at 100mph also allows a certain amount of performance recovery between station stops for the 350s.

That explains why they are all shown as DMU's at the moment - Christmas being a non standard timetable. No such slack in the system with VT so it will be interesting to see how the new CAF EMU's fit in.

 

[najaB]

The timings are nothing to do with diagrams. If they are intended to run at 100mph max, anything shown as 100 mph will suffice.

Is that necessarily so? I thought timings were based on the acceleration and dwell characteristics of the class involved as well. Comparing a path timed for a 350 to one timed for a 100mph DMU shows a few differences - a couple of minutes here and there, so they don't appear to be interchangeable.

 

[PHILIPE]

Is that necessarily so? I thought timings were based on the acceleration and dwell characteristics of the class involved as well. Comparing a path timed for a 350 to one timed for a 100mph DMU shows a few differences - a couple of minutes here and there, so they don't appear to be interchangeable.

I'm not sure to be quite honest. If based on factors such as acceleration, there are lot of details on trains wrong !!! There is one timing load 150/153/155/156 which is used and many people know that 153s hardly seem to move once they start off, the acceleration being so poor.

 

[najaB]

I'm not sure to be quite honest. If based on factors such as acceleration, there are lot of details on trains wrong !!! There is one timing load 150/153/155/156 which is used and many people know that 153s hardly seem to move once they start off, the acceleration being so poor.

That timing load would be based on the worst performer of the group - 153s I guess.