• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

New Stock for Northern?

Status
Not open for further replies.

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,057
Location
Reston City Centre
I can just see these Chinese trains. Door opening controls too low, toilet seats too low, sinks that are too low. Ive seen it all before on ships, designed for European operators, but built in China. Everything ends up being fine for the average chinese person, but not much use for the average European

You don't think that the heights of such things would be specified in the bids?

Or do you think this is the kind of thing which would sneak past everyone and only be noticed on day one of operation?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I note on the Pulsar literature that "Sheffield" is shown on the destination board which should please tbtc, who feels that the Sheffield area is always starved of new units

:lol:

You know me well Peter ;)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
That's a surprise... Not. Well actually I thought we were getting them back but evidently we are not so I stand corrected

I think the plan was for six (?) 158s to head back to Northern when the Edinburgh - Bathgate line electrification happened (December 2011).

ScotRail wouldn't need these 158s any more as the EMUs directly replaced them.

However these units appear to have been used for capacity increases in Scotland (e.g. the Edinburgh - Cupar - Dundee service is generally run by four coach 158s).

I don't know what Northern planned to do with them if they had come back south - a moot point now, of course.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,785
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Looks like CSRE need a website maintenance guy, <sarcasm> I have no experience in this at all </sarcasm> *hangs up his old UK Hosting, Spirit IT and Schools Technical Suport Shirts*


But really, if CSRE can get two built and sent over here for evaluation, etc. And if nothings fallen off in a year, lets have some, if they can be cheaper and use the standard truck engines (that I have been told of) then why not?
 

87015

Established Member
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Messages
5,078
Location
GEML/WCML/SR
But really, if CSRE can get two built and sent over here for evaluation, etc. And if nothings fallen off in a year, lets have some, if they can be cheaper and use the standard truck engines (that I have been told of) then why not?
If CRSE are serious about hitting the European market it seems strange they have not knocked up a couple of demonstrator units, its pretty much common practise for all number of companies big and small on the continent and there shouldn't be much major stopping a demonstator for the UK also being used in Germany, Poland or wherever.
 
Last edited:
Joined
26 Sep 2009
Messages
556
Location
Bishops Stortford
If CRSE are serious about hitting the European market it seems strange they have not knocked up a couple of demonstrator units, its pretty much common practise for all number of companies big and small on the continent and there shouldn't be much major stopping a demonstator for the UK also being used in Germany, Poland or wherever.

CSRE would love to "knock up" a couple of demonstrators, but it is impossible in the UK system without an operator partner, due to the way access to the network is gained. This would involve using franchise assets at the taxpayer's expense, which invariably involves a TOC getting permission from DfT. This involves a business case and application for funding etc etc etc.

And they say that barriers to entry for new players are not high!!

The only things stopping a UK demonstrator being used in Germany, Poland or wherever are different platform height, different structure gauge, different signalling systems etc etc etc.

That said, we at CSRE are patient souls and are working through the issues, trying hard to get something on the UK network as soon as we can. Then we can prove that not all Chinese people are midgets and we can design something that British people don't have to bend down to use comfortably.

Sorry, but it's Friday and it's been a long week (rant over). :oops:
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,785
Location
Somewhere, not in London
They could however just knock them up and transport them by road onto the GCR or if ment to be going to Northernland, the East Lancashire Railway, they could be pretty well evaluated on there and well, Old Dalby belongs to Bombardier now?

Anyway, could send one or two to the East Lancashire Railway, I'm sure they'd not mind having some new toys to play with, especially since from what I can tell at the moment, they might be looking to run some GMPTE / Lancashire council funded commuter services between Bury and Rawthenstall, and if CSRE are needing to get something proven over here, the ELR could prove useful. Especially if they can be used in passenger service, with a hail of press coverage (do or die moment).

"Possible new trains for north of england on test at Bury, Leeds, Pickering?, Wensleydale? York (NRM)?
"These new trains will cost half of what is currently available and will be manufactured in (Insert northern place here) with maintenance carried out at a new depot at (insert another, possibly the same northern place here)
"The evaluation will be continuing for the next four months and we welcome all your feedback"

To be honest, I do think that CSRE should be given a chance, their kit looks reasonable if not basic, but all you need is basic. And it doesn't need to be groundbreaking, brand new and have loads of new toys on it... It needs to be a DMU that is pretty much the same as what is already out there, with a new engine underneath it and comply with everything it needs to.

I'm gonna have my coat ready for this, but how about having the body and interior designed and fitted out by Wrightbus?
Although that would only really leave the chassis rails, engine, bogies and traction gear to be designed. But Wrightbus do make nice interiors.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
CSRE would love to "knock up" a couple of demonstrators, but it is impossible in the UK system without an operator partner, due to the way access to the network is gained. This would involve using franchise assets at the taxpayer's expense, which invariably involves a TOC getting permission from DfT. This involves a business case and application for funding etc etc etc.

And they say that barriers to entry for new players are not high!!

The only things stopping a UK demonstrator being used in Germany, Poland or wherever are different platform height, different structure gauge, different signalling systems etc etc etc.

That said, we at CSRE are patient souls and are working through the issues, trying hard to get something on the UK network as soon as we can. Then we can prove that not all Chinese people are midgets and we can design something that British people don't have to bend down to use comfortably.

Sorry, but it's Friday and it's been a long week (rant over). :oops:



Shame about that. the governement wants to creat jobs, and encourage enterprise and yet there is still alot of redtape


I am sure the WAG would be interested in cheaper good quality trains if they can get the valley lines wired. As for what has been said about chineese trains, i personally cant see CSRE being that stupid on what could be a golden opportunity to get a foothold in the european rail market.
 

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
But really, if CSRE can get two built and sent over here for evaluation, etc. And if nothings fallen off in a year, lets have some, if they can be cheaper and use the standard truck engines (that I have been told of) then why not?

Why not? Well you have mentioned why not in your own post. 'Cheaper'. There is a reason its cheaper. You get what you pay for. If a builder comes along and cuts 10 grand off the next cheapest quote, you should smell a rat. Same thing goes with this sort of thing as well. OK so they may not be cowboys like the builder invariably is, but the quality still wont be there.

Anyway, arent the railways meant to be green? So you take European technology, give it to China so they can build trains, then transport it back to the UK. How will it be transported back? Ship. Have you looked at the fuel ships run on?

Its much better to take the European technology and get the train built in the UK.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Shame about that. the governement wants to creat jobs, and encourage enterprise and yet there is still alot of redtape

Very little red tape. From what Kingfisher has said, its a case of the TOCs not wanting to spend any of their own money on new trains. They want to go begging to the government for it. That is the problem.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
You don't think that the heights of such things would be specified in the bids?

Or do you think this is the kind of thing which would sneak past everyone and only be noticed on day one of operation?

If the heights of toilets and sinks are specified, then we may be OK.
Still. No thanks.
Once bitten, twice shy, so the saying goes.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,057
Location
Reston City Centre
If the heights of toilets and sinks are specified, then we may be OK.
Still. No thanks.
Once bitten, twice shy, so the saying goes.

Looking at how "picky" the railways in the UK are I'm surprised the DFT don't have a committee defining the correct diameter of plughole and whether the water should slosh clockwise or anticlockwise... :lol:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Manchester Airport - Liverpool Lime St?

Probably the best place for them

Calder Valley Fasts?

Already have 158s, but unfortunately interworked with the Grand Tour at Leeds/ Selby etc

Manchester - Sheffeild via Hope Valley?

Too much stopping and starting, wouldn't suit a 158
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Looks like CSRE need a website maintenance guy, <sarcasm> I have no experience in this at all </sarcasm> *hangs up his old UK Hosting, Spirit IT and Schools Technical Suport Shirts*

In fairness to CSRE, they aren't aiming their product at the public - the people who they are trying to sell to (train companies/ ROSCOs etc) will know who they are - although if my Euromillions numbers come up I might buy one :lol:
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
Looking at how "picky" the railways in the UK are I'm surprised the DFT don't have a committee defining the correct diameter of plughole and whether the water should slosh clockwise or anticlockwise... :lol:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---




In fairness to CSRE, they aren't aiming their product at the public - the people who they are trying to sell to (train companies/ ROSCOs etc) will know who they are - although if my Euromillions numbers come up I might buy one :lol:

I was thinking of the same thing myself
 

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
- although if my Euromillions numbers come up I might buy one :lol:

You are kidding arent you?
No chance of me spending any winnings on a Polaris! A 47 or two, now your talking! Plus a few Mk2s and 3s. Bobs your uncle, my own personal train!! I might even offer it to Northern!! lol
 

159220

Member
Joined
23 Mar 2011
Messages
158
I dont see, nor would invite CSRE trains. Nor will Health and Safetly or whoever in the Government who will protect European interests and safetly. I have travelled in China extensively and ill tell you, there trains are an awful build quality. They leave Bombardier trains looking like luxary!

Also it has been recently very well reported that the Chinese admit themselves they are not up to scratch when it comes to building a safe good train. They have started recalling a number of trainsets post a high speed rail accident.

Id feel safer in a car than a CSRE train! Saying that as i have lost two good people in car accidents and aviod cars at all cost. Still, just wouldnt want a cheap Chinese train on our network.

I trust Bombardier, Siemens, Vossloh and Hitachi but certainly not some cheap CSRE. Even Pacers are better than a Chinese train!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/12/china-bullet-trains-recalled-crash?INTCMP=SRCH
 
Joined
26 Sep 2009
Messages
556
Location
Bishops Stortford
I dont see, nor would invite CSRE trains. Nor will Health and Safetly or whoever in the Government who will protect European interests and safetly. I have travelled in China extensively and ill tell you, there trains are an awful build quality. They leave Bombardier trains looking like luxary!

Also it has been recently very well reported that the Chinese admit themselves they are not up to scratch when it comes to building a safe good train. They have started recalling a number of trainsets post a high speed rail accident.

Id feel safer in a car than a CSRE train! Saying that as i have lost two good people in car accidents and aviod cars at all cost. Still, just wouldnt want a cheap Chinese train on our network.

I trust Bombardier, Siemens, Vossloh and Hitachi but certainly not some cheap CSRE. Even Pacers are better than a Chinese train!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/12/china-bullet-trains-recalled-crash?INTCMP=SRCH

No offence, but I can remember my dad talking in a similar way about Japanese cars in the 1970s.

These days, the UK's largest, most modern and most productive car factories are.... Nissan, Sunderland (4,500 directly employed, 18,000 indirectly employed), Toyota, Derby (4,000 directly employed, 16,000 indirectly employed) and Honda, Swindon (3,400 directly employed, 13,600 indirectly employed).

Better not let those nasty foreigners in!!
 

asylumxl

Established Member
Joined
12 Feb 2009
Messages
4,260
Location
Hiding in your shadow
I dont see, nor would invite CSRE trains. Nor will Health and Safetly or whoever in the Government who will protect European interests and safetly. I have travelled in China extensively and ill tell you, there trains are an awful build quality. They leave Bombardier trains looking like luxary!

Also it has been recently very well reported that the Chinese admit themselves they are not up to scratch when it comes to building a safe good train. They have started recalling a number of trainsets post a high speed rail accident.

Id feel safer in a car than a CSRE train! Saying that as i have lost two good people in car accidents and aviod cars at all cost. Still, just wouldnt want a cheap Chinese train on our network.

I trust Bombardier, Siemens, Vossloh and Hitachi but certainly not some cheap CSRE. Even Pacers are better than a Chinese train!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/12/china-bullet-trains-recalled-crash?INTCMP=SRCH

I'm sorry, but I can't help but think that post makes you sound bigoted. You have brought up the usual stereotypes of China and it's products. Fact is the majority of electronics and machines you use daily are going to be of Chinese origin, irrelevant of where they were assembled, and work perfectly.

The Italian's don't have the best record in automotive safety and reliablity (Lancia and rust for example), same for the French, yet I don't see everyone screaming that the Class 390 is a death trap, or the 373 for that matter.

The recent crash has just been an excuse for the media to slate China and it's people without being branded racist, and it seems to be going exactly the way they want.

Do some research first. The trains being recalled are Siemen's Velaros built under contract and were approved by Siemens. The CRH380A (which is exclusively Chinese) continues to give great service and is also a technically impressive train.

CSRE will be assembling trains here with a large enough order and will be subject to the same rules and regulations as every other manufacturer.
 
Last edited:

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
The recent crash has just been an excuse for the media to slate China and it's people without being branded racist, and it seems to be going exactly the way they want.

Do some research first. The trains being recalled are Siemen's Velaros built under contract and were approved by Siemens. The CRH380A (which is exclusively Chinese) continues to give great service and is also a technically impressive train.

The train which lost power in the crash was a CRH1B designed by Bombardier built by Sifang, the tram that slammed into it was a CRH2E originally designed by Kawasaki based on the E2, basically a CRH2B with sleeper cars but built domestically rather than imported in kit form like the earlier CRH2A/B and not to be confused with the CRH2C which was an unauthorised copy of the E2-1000 series Shinkansen designed and built domestically and for which Kawasaki is suing for patent violation, like Bombardier Kawasaki had a policy of only exporting older technology so it wasnt as bad if copied Alstom has a policy of not exporting technology to China at all after they got burned when the technology they sold to South Korea 10 years earlier was copied without permission. Only Siemens has a policy of unlimited tech transfer.

The withdrawn trains are the CRH380BL, Designed by Siemens but with only 18% manufactured by them same as the earlier CRH3C, this time with Siemens only a component supplier and not supervising assembly as they did on the CRH3C.
 

asylumxl

Established Member
Joined
12 Feb 2009
Messages
4,260
Location
Hiding in your shadow
The withdrawn trains are the CRH380BL, Designed by Siemens but with only 18% manufactured by them same as the earlier CRH3C, this time with Siemens only a component supplier and not supervising assembly as they did on the CRH3C.

That's still a 5th of the train. And the point remains it's not the 380A being withdrawn.
 

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
There is n o t h i n g that a Pacer can be accused of being better than :roll:

They can be relatively comfortable, and get you from A to B!!
Whats the problem!! lol

They are just right for the job they were designed for though. Unfortunately they have ended up doing more than that. If they kept them on the lines they were designed for, they have many years left in them.
As for whether they are better than chinese stuff. Well, i have no doubt the chinese could build better (as could everybody), but if the chinese had been asked to build something to do the job pacers were built for, I reckon the result would have been worse.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
No offence, but I can remember my dad talking in a similar way about Japanese cars in the 1970s.

These days, the UK's largest, most modern and most productive car factories are.... Nissan, Sunderland (4,500 directly employed, 18,000 indirectly employed), Toyota, Derby (4,000 directly employed, 16,000 indirectly employed) and Honda, Swindon (3,400 directly employed, 13,600 indirectly employed).

Better not let those nasty foreigners in!!

There is a difference though. Japanese cars have improved dramatically.
The chinese build quality, and the way of life in china, has not improved enough.
Trains are usually ordered on the agreement of the government. Our government must not be seen to be endorsing the lack of health and safety in china, or to be endorsing the awful way the chinese government treats its own citizens.
We give enough business to china thanks to our profit orientated businesses. We should not now be branching into trains.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm sorry, but I can't help but think that post makes you sound bigoted. You have brought up the usual stereotypes of China and it's products. Fact is the majority of electronics and machines you use daily are going to be of Chinese origin, irrelevant of where they were assembled, and work perfectly.

The Italian's don't have the best record in automotive safety and reliablity (Lancia and rust for example), same for the French, yet I don't see everyone screaming that the Class 390 is a death trap, or the 373 for that matter.

The recent crash has just been an excuse for the media to slate China and it's people without being branded racist, and it seems to be going exactly the way they want.

Do some research first. The trains being recalled are Siemen's Velaros built under contract and were approved by Siemens. The CRH380A (which is exclusively Chinese) continues to give great service and is also a technically impressive train.

CSRE will be assembling trains here with a large enough order and will be subject to the same rules and regulations as every other manufacturer.

LOL LOL. You dont need an excuse to slate china and not seem racist. China hand you all the reasons you need on a plate.

Now admittedly the original post to which you replied was exagerating a little bit, regarding the trains being withdrawn. But on other points, they were spot on.
The crash highlighted the fact that china has a poor health and safety record, and continually take short cuts. Ive seen it myself, first hand.
The government does not care for its people. They see them as dogsbodies. Life means nothing to them. One dies, oh well, we will find someone else to do his job. The country is quite repressive. Better than it used to be, and improving, but not improving enough.

As for stuff that does get built in china. Usually it is just assembled in china. So there is little to go wrong. But you can usually still see that the quality is not as good, and thats when a keen eye is kept on quality.
If you dont keep an eye on what is happening, quality drops big style. I remember reading an article on shipbuilding in china, where it was admitted that you needed to keep a very keen eye on things, more so than usual, and often had to pull them up and get them to do things differently, or to replace things they had already done.

The only reason most people think there is little wrong with the stuff we get in china, is because they know no different. But invariably, quality has dropped.
 
Last edited:

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
They are just right for the job they were designed for though. Unfortunately they have ended up doing more than that. If they kept them on the lines they were designed for, they have many years left in them.

Unfortunately some of the lines they were designed for were unable to take them - in Cornwall in particular.

When Pacers were introduced the Altrincham-Deansgate Metrolink link was still heavy rail and there was no services on the Altrincham-Stockport line.

Now if the year's 1986 and demand has been proven for a new service between Altrincham and Stockport a Pacer would seem ideal on paper. In practice the Pacer has a very sharp bend to negiogate and will utilise it's top speed. But now Pacers are used on Chester-Altrincham-Stockport-Manchester services passengers doing just Altrincham-Stockport will probably comment on the unit having problems.

The two issues with the design of a Pacer (ignoring capacity) are:
1. Ability to deal with sharp bends.
2. Ride quality on non-mainline track.

And the lines they were intended for mainly had sharp bends and avoided mainline running.
 

tom1649

Member
Joined
5 Jul 2010
Messages
990
Most of the criticism seems to be aimed at the 142s. Are the 143/144s better built or just generally favoured because they have been given a thorough refurbishment? I guess we should be grateful we don't still have 141s running around West Yorkshire, although had the increase in passenger numbers been foreseen in 1997 they may well have been retained.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
Most of the criticism seems to be aimed at the 142s. Are the 143/144s better built or just generally favoured because they have been given a thorough refurbishment? I guess we should be grateful we don't still have 141s running around West Yorkshire, although had the increase in passenger numbers been foreseen in 1997 they may well have been retained.

I have found ATW's class 143's to be much nicer to travel on than their class 142's
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,435
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
They can be relatively comfortable, and get you from A to B!!
Whats the problem!! lol


Relatively comfortable....compared to what :roll:

May I enquire which route you use these Pacer units on and which of the three TOC variation stock is used. It it the one with 3 + 2 seating?

You ask "Whats the problem!". There have been literally hundreds of thread postings on this forum over numerous threads that have answered your particular question.
 

Phil6219

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2011
Messages
578
Location
Manchester, UK
Relatively comfortable....compared to what :roll:

May I enquire which route you use these Pacer units on and which of the three TOC variation stock is used. It it the one with 3 + 2 seating?

You ask "Whats the problem!". There have been literally hundreds of thread postings on this forum over numerous threads that have answered your particular question.

Well I don't have a beef with Pacers, I'm not their biggest fan but I wouldn't say I hate them either. I would like to see them gone from service though (would appreciate preserving one - look that's what we had to put up with for 3 decades :D).

Over the past 12 months I've ridden on Northern, Merseyrail and ATWs with all the variety of seating configurations and styles. I used to use them for short trips (Swinton - Salford Crescent) and long trips Preston - Salford Crescent (right after getting off a Pullman) but my longest was Sheffield - Manchester Piccadilly in a Northern with 3-2 bus seat config. It was long as hell (all those stops) but I enjoyed it, found it reasonably comfortable and a hell of a lot better experiance had I not waited the extra 10 minutes and got on the fTPE 185 which as usual is way overcrowded and has those naff seats which are just as bad as the bus seats.

Pacers are good at the jobs they were designed for, in some cases they are even managing fine on jobs they were not designed for but they struggle and get the bad reputation for being used on heavy runs for which they can not cope.

They are ideal for the Manchester - Atherton - Wigan run during the day but during rush hour they are far from suitable and yet it is the same train with the same service on the same line.

They do have some serious issues such as erm, engines falling off but a lot of these are down to them being used heavily and for longer than envisaged which allows corrosion issues and general naffness to happen.

17 years ago I used to hate getting on 101s and the like and loved getting on a shiny new pacer, they were fine machines then. They have changed but the again so has the world.
 

Kneedown

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Messages
1,837
Location
Nottinghamshire
Here I am, in the post immediately above yours. The problem with pseudonyms is that it's hard to tie people to names. My name is David Shipley and I'm the Managing Director of CSRE Limited.

If you have made an enquiry about Pacesetter (we decided to change the name based on feedback - some on here - relating to the double sensitivity of Pacemaker in connection with Pacers and medical heart stabilisers) and we have failed to respond, I apologise. The most recent data sheet for Pacesetter can be downloaded HERE.

I know the web site is a mess and it is a matter for concern. However, we genuinely are focussed on satisfying prospective customers' needs in terms of providing them with detailed information, which they intend to use in developing their future rolling stock plans. Customers always come first in my mind, but I assure you we will tidy up the site in due course.

Can i just say that both the Pacesetter and the Pulsar are both great looking designs. In recent years there seems to have been a dearth of sexy looking trains in Britain.
Regarding the Pulsar i think a bit of tweaking with the control layout in the cab might be an idea to win over Drivers. If the big handlebars are the power/brake control, may i suggest a smaller version situated on the left, operated by a single left hand?
Also, whilst more expensive in the short term, i think electric transmission would be better as the performance would be improved from any current hydraulic design, plus there would be scope to convert to ac power as more lines are wired up. This would be a big bonus on a unit with a design life of 30 years+.
Would love to see how a 4 car would perform on a Liverpool-Norwich!
I wish you well trying to get one up and running over here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top