A totally speculative thread Today’s celebration of the the class 166 references the types’ utilisation on the Chiltern line, nested within extensive commentary on the Great Western Railway network… we obviously have the updated GWE enhancements released in the last week, which could tie in… but anyone else thinking this could be some forecasting for the 166 being utilised in a new route? Using the Chiltern licence Hope so!
Hate to spoil the party but the 165s operate on the Chiltern mainline with Chiltern railway and GWR not the 166.
There’s an article on Dovetail Live. One of those ‘secret’ articles that isn’t mentioned on the forum’s DTL article page but advertised on social media.
It is nice they have wrote an article but it doesn't seem entirely correct! "The 166's most notable advantage over its visually similar predecessor is its increased top speed - being able to run at 90 mph rather than the 75 mph limit of the Class 165" The class 165 wasn't the class 166's predecessor! Being pedantic the class 166's predecessors were the class 47's and class 50's and rakes of mark 1 carriages. The class 165 and 166 were introduced around the same time and were intented to run alongside each other. The class 165 replacing the class 117's and class 121's and other first generation DMU's and the class 166 to replace the loco hauled trains on the express services. The article also asserts the both BR and Network South East used the class 165's, well Network South East was part of BR not a separate entity! "The Turbos, as they would come to be known, began with the Class 165 used by both BR and the popular Network SouthEast brand as part of their Chiltern operations" It is little wonder that the class 166 was chosen instead of the much more suitable, mainly due to being much more numerous, class 165, for GWE.
Not quite true from what I've seen and read. The 165s defnitely came first in design and order and were built and rolled out first, but the 166 came almost as a continuation of the 165 and were a "progression" from them rather than a complete new model. Of course they were also an offspring of the Networker 2000 program which aimed to replace not only Mk1 and loco hauled on the GWR mainline and on the route to Birmingham from Marylebone, but also routes in Kent, Sussex and after that on the Anglia lines as well, but that never happened So really, the 165,166,365,465,466 series replaced a heck of a lot of things that came before them, including but not limited to the 47,50, 4EPBs etc etc The thing which wiped those out on the CML and PDL was the electrostars and 450s but that's a different story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_165 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_166
I was referring in particular to the class 165/166 as that was what the article was referring to. The class 165 was not the predecessor of the class 166. The class 166 did not in any shape or form replace the class 165.
Oh absolutely, the 165 was designed and produced before the 166 so I can see why they might have got the word wrong though.
I see nothing wrong with "predecessor" in this case. The word does not necessarily imply replacement, merely that something came first
Also that's not entirely correct. The 165/0s used by Chiltern ARE limited to 75mph, however the 165/1s used by GWR are perfectly capable of 90mph, and I've experienced it routinely on them, especially on the Cardiff to Portsmouth services when working in multiple with 166s. It's not very good when DTG can't get facts about their own trains right.
