Class 139 (Parry people movers)

[P156KWJ]

London Midland have announced that the PPMs that will be used on the Stourbridge branch after the 153s demise will be designates as class 139s, other than wiki, does anyone know where I can look at train specification?

 

[Mojo]

Parry Milk Mooover's website has specifications for all of their milk floats
http://www.parrypeoplemovers.com/products.htm

 

[P156KWJ]

god they don't half look a darn site awful!! They are like a modern pacer!! Not a train, an old granny mobility scooter that's been pimped

 

[will1337]

The PPM 175 doesn't look thaaat bad would make an awesome replacement for cars if they dug up all the roads and put down some tracks in some bizzare future.

 

[P156KWJ]

The PPM 175 doesn't look thaaat bad would make an awesome replacement for cars if they dug up all the roads and put down some tracks in some bizzare future.

I take it you like sci-fi

 

[will1337]

I'm unconfirmed but The Sirens of Titan by Kurt Vonnegut is in a sci-fi vein and it's pretty beautiful.

 

[driver9000]

those things should never have been built! Sure they might save a few pounds here and there, but I fail to see how it can be up to modern standards when its essentially no bigger than a shoe!

As for a specification, think of an elastic band powering the wheels!!

 

[will1337]

These things are never going to go hurtling up the ECML now..

 

[P156KWJ]

those things should never have been built! Sure they might save a few pounds here and there, but I fail to see how it can be up to modern standards when its essentially no bigger than a shoe!

As for a specification, think of an elastic band powering the wheels!!

you might as well put a darn cattle truck on the line and get two horses to pull it!

 

[Z12XE]

These things are never going to go hurtling up the ECML now..

Given that they have a Ford Focus engine for backup, its unlikely that they will go hurtling up anything!

 

[will1337]

Given that they have a Ford Focus engine for backup, its unlikely that they will go hurtling up anything!

Hurtling down from a cliff?

 

[me123]

Well, if it provides adequite capacity, why not? It's modern, better (IMO) than a 153...

 

[P156KWJ]

Hurtling down from a cliff?

hopefully in to a bottomless pit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[will1337]

It can't be bottomless, there'd have to be 142s lining it.

 

[Z12XE]

Well, if it provides adequite capacity, why not? It's modern, better (IMO) than a 153...

Its fine for the current route, but its when some genius in the DfT decides that these things should start spreading and they get put on routes which they are unsuitable for

 

[HSTfan!!!]

Well, if it provides adequite capacity, why not? It's modern, better (IMO) than a 153...

personally I'd take the 153 lol

 

[AlexS]

We had a PPM on the GCR for a bit and apparently it would make a sailor seasick.

 

[Respite]

I seldom favour 153's but after seeing & experiencing the joy of a PPM I would say a 153 would actually be better! Imagine a pikey fairground ride, noisy & cheap........well that's what it reminds me of. Infact PPM's make a 153 feel like a prestige train. I think all this PPM & tram/train malarky is a way the DFT is using to put people back on the road so they can axe more railways, after all a proper green transport system with proper trains cost's money & they havent had the nerve to introduce sitting or standing on a train tax yet.

 

[driver9000]

is it just me or is the Parry People Mover reminisant of the old LEV vehicles that were cobbled together to develop the Pacer series?

Thankfully LEV didnt make it into full production, only its offspring did!!

 

[Respite]

is it just me or is the Parry People Mover reminisant of the old LEV vehicles that were cobbled together to develop the Pacer series?

That orrible Lev 1 thing lives not far from me in Tl4D (Telford for the non chav people). [Well the place is rammed with chavs.]

I can only imagine how much laughing our American railroad friends had when they trialled that thing over there!!!hock:hock:hock: Yay fly the flag for britain! :cry:

 

[Kneedown]

Is it just me, or does the thing have the look of a Ford Transit about it?

 

[Nym]

Well, it has a transit engine DuraTorq TDCi 2.0 130 if I'm remembering right?

 

[P156KWJ]

it doesn't have a flamin' transit engine, way too strong - probably hauled by 1001 mice fed on nothing but lucozade, steroids and speed!!

 

[Respite]

Who gives a rats arse what power's it, its utter sh*t, period! Anyone who likes these things is insane or not actually interested in trains whatsoever.


:grin::grin::grin::grin::grin::grin:


P.S. Regarding the stourbridge town branch, I've had the 153 on the deck there one morning!

 

[Nym]

how boring is that line? lol

OK, if it's a ford diesel it's still a DuraTorq, just not a TDCi 130...

 

[gingerheid]

I think they would be absolutely wonderful used in the right place. I see the right place as short branch lines that wouldn't otherwise get re-opened if they had to buy a proper train to do it.

I think these would be absolutely perfect for trying out services on a lot of routes that don't currently have services, like Cholsey - Wallingford, Thame - Princes Risborough, or even the Bramley line!

I daresay what will actually happen is that we'll see them on routes like Exmouth, after a "consultation" process that goes something like

"We're going to close the line"
"Oh, ok then, I suppose we could upgrade the service using a modern, lightweight, environmentally friendly Class 139 unit instead then"

 

[Broken Viking]

Hail All!
I initially posted this in the Train-Trams thread in NR General Discussion by mistake, so if some of this seems to be irrelevant then that is why.

Well, I had a look at the videos on the PPM website the other day, and although I think the things are a good idea for use on old, disconnected branch-lines that would otherwise go to rot (Especially as the low speed and light-weight of a PPM means that it could - Theoretically - Run safely on deteriorated lines that would be considered unsafe for heavy-rail, and even conventional light-rail vehicles), I wouldn't be happy in the slightest with the idea of those sharing the rails with mainline heavy-rail traffic. :roll:

Although they can only manage 30mph under their own steam, what one needs to consider is what would happen if a signalling/routing failure led to a Pendo hitting one head-on at it's usual 125mph. Although the Pendo might suffer little more damage than a crushed drivers cab, the PPM would be completely decimated and/or thrown off the line by such an impact...And it's passengers along with it! hock:ad:

The other issue that I have with PPMs is their flywheel kinetic storage system. Although the spinning flywheel on it's own can (Looking at the PPM site) drive one of those vehicles about 800m on average, it would take too long for the PPM to accellerate out of any potentially dangerous situation - Especially if such a situation were to arise after the thing had already travelled 500m or so. hock:

So to summerise:
If I was running things, then I would allow them to be used on old branch lines that were closed off and physically segregated (Connecting lines lifted) from mainline traffic, and they'd be fine for use as at-grade trams as well...However, I would NEVER allow the things to get anywhere near mainline railway lines, let alone share lines with heavy traffic!
We all know that the BR Mk. I was particularly vulnerable to critical damage in an accident (Compared with the Mk. III and later designs.) but if I was involved in an accident involving a PPM and a Mk. I, I'd feel MUCH safer if I was aboard the Mk. I! hock:

Farewell...
>> Death <<

 

[A0]

I think we need to be sensible about this - it's proposed usage is at present only for the Stourbridge line.

The line is less than 1 mile long and presumably has a 25 / 30 mph top speed ?

What's the problem with using a PPM on it ? A 153 is probably overkill, by the time it's accelerated it must be on the brakes again. Presumably the 153 is rarely at capacity either.

Much better to release the 153 to a route where it will be properly used - Bedford - Bletchley ?.

Given this line is a complete one-off being so short, it merits trying something different.

 

[adamp]

god they don't half look a darn site awful!! They are like a modern pacer!! Not a train, an old granny mobility scooter that's been pimped

I second those exact words.
they are awful.

...but then again what A0wen just said above does make sense.
As these things also cost less to run i presume?

 

[me123]

Its fine for the current route, but its when some genius in the DfT decides that these things should start spreading and they get put on routes which they are unsuitable for

You can just see it on the Inverness-KX runs, can't you (I hope no-one from the DFT's reading this...)