Presumably most or all of the changes suggested in this brochure:
www.porterbrook.co.uk/downloads/brochures/14x Brochure.pdf
Odd choice of destination on the artist's impressions in that document: Cardiff Central. Produced before ValleyLines electrification was announced?
I also feel that refurbished Pacers would be ideal trains to allow new services to be tested.
I have wondered in the past whether Pacers could be used to trial services in the Swansea area (eg. High Street - Bynea - Ammanford - Glanaman) but would be an isolated outpost for only a handful of Pacers.
How long are we going to continue squeezing the last dregs of life out of these blasted cattle trucks? Someone at the DfT needs to grow a pair and place a large order for a new class of DMU (3 - 6-car variants) to be ready in 5 or 6 years time. Worry about financing it later... someone can do some creative accounting or something.
Every million you spend on making a pacer marginally less repulsive is a wasted million that could have gone towards a new train.
I'm not sure that's entirely wise (the bit in bold that is). Given the amount of growth the 'no-growth' franchises have seen however I do think it is borderline that we will be able to get rid of all the 142s without making crowding worse in places. I wouldn't go mad with buying lots of new diesel units to replace Pacers, but a few may be required to avoid pain. All depends how fast electrification can proceed, and where, after CP5 I guess.
Personally, if there was a surplus of DMUs I'd start to withdraw the 150s. I know they're only 30 years old and not life expired but if the last Northern example I travelled on is anything to go by, they're really not that pleasant to travel on compared to newer trains. I'd sell a number to preservation and keep a few more as reserves and spare parts.
I can only guess, but they probably were only meant to last 30yrs. That's not to say that I think they should all be got rid of now, but I find ATW's 150s about as uncomfortable as their Pacers (not sure I've ever experienced the 'bounce' others talk about, must have only ridden them on good track). Ideally, both Pacers and 150s ought to be restricted to 1hr max journies, and the Pacers and 150/1s have lack of UEGs against them too.
draughty doors - particularly bad on early/late services in winter where the service can reach 75mph.
That may be a good point. I can't speak for Pacers, but I've seen bus doors (which look very similar to Pacer doors to me) almost blow open in bad weather at a much lower driving speed than 75mph.
It's worth remembering smaller orders cost more. Apparently the SRA tried to cut down the 185 order to 46 x 3 carriage trains (the number originally proposed was 54) but when Siemens said the price per unit was higher for orders under 50 trains, they decided the solution was to order 51 and to give TPE Manchester Airport-Blackpool (which was originally going to remain with Northern) rather than pay the higher price.
Maybe my idea, replacing the SWT diesel fleet with something like a UEG-equiped bi-mode 175 to start a cascade, isn't such a good plan then, since it'd probably be 40 units or less. Although I would suggest a similar unit without the diesel engines for TPE which could help matters.
So, as one idea, because Hitachi have clearly done that work, might they be able to supply a modified IEP for regional services? 3x26m, IEP engine layout with a smaller engine, door layout per the Class 395?
26m vehicles is a problem, not nearly 'go-anywhere' enough for a regional unit. Personally, I would say 23m and keep the end-door layout and aim for the regional express sector (eg. SWT as suggested above, or Cardiff-Portsmouth). The 158s released then replace 150s on longer-distance routes and hence you have 150s to replace Pacers. I imagine that any new DMU, even if engineered on a freight wagon underframe like the Pacer, would struggle to be cheaper than a 150 or 153 thus 150s and 153s are probably a better bet for Pacer replacement and the new units are better aimed at the more-premier routes.
Yes, because there's currently no such thing as a smaller engine.
Remember also that IEP has pretty hefty performance requirements. A smaller compliant engine that produces as many horsepower as the IEP engines might even be impossible, but if you only need to accelerate like a EMU when running on electric power couldn't you get away with a less-powerful diesel engine that's just enough to keep to 158/159 timings. 158s and 159s only have 350-400hp per car, alot less than the engines under an IEP (ok, a new unit will weigh a bit more and need a bit more power, but they wouldn't weigh THAT much more would they?).
may as well just buy some bi-mode IEP for XC and cascade some Voyagers, but then you are potentially cascading some expensive trains to secondary routes.
Indeed, Voyagers are not just more expensive per-coach either but also because more coaches could well be needed to provide the same capacity because the driving vehicles have so few seats and given the short length of the units there are rather alot of driving vehicles.
Please no more Hitachi products. They're so cosmetically boring!
I actually think cosmetics (aside from Hitachi's failure to embrace European door technology, until after the 800/801 was designed) are the one thing IEP has going for it. Not in 91/90/43(IC125) territory, but better looking than a 390. The artist's impressions of the new EMUs for ScotRail don't look too promising though.
Can't you build a train that is designed from the outset to make switching to electric as cheap and easy as possible n years down the line? At least you're then covered for any projects that slip, or unforeseen cascades etc.
That's partly what IEP is, the diesel engines are removable if no longer required later in life and your just left with a standard carriage, albeit one with a slightly higher floor than an Electric carriage.
Indeed, supposed to be possible in theroy with IEP. The only thing is how long do you require to recoup the investment in the diesel powerplants themselves before it is viable to remove them.
Honestly can't remember the last time I saw anyone enter/exit the train there!
