8 years left for Pacers?

[hwl]

Yippppeeeeeeeeee no more bouncing up and down the lines of Lincolnshire & South Yorkshire

Don't start celebrating too soon...

Plans for CP6 (2019-24) electrification etc should be put forward in 2017 and firmed up in 2018 at that point they will "publicly" realise they need some non -complaint DMUs to stay in service for another few years till a route is electrified (with or without caseades) and the SoS will happily agree in a limited number of cases. i.e. all 150 and 156s get made compliant but some 142s etc will survive for a couple of years unmodified after the deadline until they join on the scrap line.

Logically there would be another small DMU order in 2018 but they would be sized for long term needs based on CP7 onwards electrification and older DMU retirement profile rather than CP6 shortages.

 

[tbtc]

Wheelchair accessible is not the same as accessible.

There is usually a 'stopping' sign which lights up when the 'stop' button is pressed on the upstairs of double deckers buses. This benefits the deaf and hard of hearing who can go upstairs but might not hear the bell.

Having a Pacer attached to an accessible 172 would not provide the visual part of the PIS in the Pacer unit.

How is a deaf person supposed to know which unit they have to board to benefit from the PIS?

The step onto a Pacer is a fairly insurmountable problem, but it should be fairly easy to solve the lack of DDA grabrails/ information screens etc onto any stock, so presumably anyone deaf could continue to use a Pacer (as long as it had a working PIS) post 2020.

 

[northwichcat]

The step onto a Pacer is a fairly insurmountable problem, but it should be fairly easy to solve the lack of DDA grabrails/ information screens etc onto any stock, so presumably anyone deaf could continue to use a Pacer (as long as it had a working PIS) post 2020.

Remember if they are working in multiple with other types of units then the PIS in one unit needs to communicate with the one in the other. Apparently that has caused problems on the 377s which have had software updates at different times, so I don't know how it would be supposed to work with a Pacer operating in multiple with different types of Sprinter stock.

 

[tbtc]

Remember if they are working in multiple with other types of units then the PIS in one unit needs to communicate with the one in the other. Apparently that has caused problems on the 377s which have had software updates at different times, so I don't know how it would be supposed to work with a Pacer operating in multiple with different types of Sprinter stock.

I don't know, but it should be a lot easier to do this than to tackle the step issue.

One good thing about the Pacers is that they are fairly lo-tech (compared to more modern trains with complicated computer systems), so it may be easier to do this?

 

[Buttsy]

Remember if they are working in multiple with other types of units then the PIS in one unit needs to communicate with the one in the other. Apparently that has caused problems on the 377s which have had software updates at different times, so I don't know how it would be supposed to work with a Pacer operating in multiple with different types of Sprinter stock.

Pacers and Sprinters (to at least 156 build) were built to be able to work in multiple with each other with no real issues.

 

[northwichcat]

Pacers and Sprinters (to at least 156 build) were built to be able to work in multiple with each other with no real issues.

Neither were built to have a PIS system in operation when working in multiple. I think if two Merseytravel 142s (which have the most basic type of PIS) operate in multiple the PIS' have to be activated in both units.

 

[Buttsy]

Neither were built to have a PIS system in operation when working in multiple. I think if two Merseytravel 142s (which have the most basic type of PIS) operate in multiple the PIS' have to be activated in both units.

Fair enough, the 80s were a long time ago which is where most of my traction knowledge resides. Time & technology move on...

 

[starrymarkb]

You could argue that the sprinter successor has ended up being closer to the Class 210 than the Class 150.

So what does a Pacer successor look like?

Something like this?

 

[northwichcat]

Something like this?

That provides just 100 seats and has just two sets of door on either side so it is more likely a direct replacement for the 153s than a replacement for trains which have over 100 seats currently and many services they operate need extra capacity.

Also isn't there some requirement for the driver to have access to his/her own door on modern stock which passengers cannot access?

 

[starrymarkb]

That provides just 100 seats and has just two sets of door on either side so it is more likely a direct replacement for the 153s than a replacement for trains which have over 100 seats currently and many services they operate need extra capacity.

Also isn't there some requirement for the driver to have access to his/her own door on modern stock which passengers cannot access?

I was more meaning the concept... but I'm sure if someone asked Stadler they'd knock something up to UK Spec... There are 3 car versions available as well as diesel or electric (various strange and bizarre voltages), they tend to be low cost - £1.5-2m per unit and seem pretty well built

 

[transmanche]

That provides just 100 seats and has just two sets of door on either side so it is more likely a direct replacement for the 153s than a replacement for trains which have over 100 seats currently and many services they operate need extra capacity.

How about Bombardier's AGC, as used on SNCF? OK, a 2-car diesel version is twice the weight of a 142 - but you can have bi-mode versions. And a diesel/1.5kV DC/25kV AC version would be perfect for the Durham Coast Line!