Pacer better than a 153?

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'll agree with that. The pacers may be seen as a rather 'naff' item of rolling stock, but when they're put on what is effectively a DMU metro type service such as the Devon Metro (Exmouth - Exeter - Paignton) then they do seem to cope rather well - wide doors and better luggage space than a Sprinter. Whereas 153s do cope relatively better on the more branch line type services, like the Barnstaple branch for example, where they do offer more of a compromise - not so though if you have bikes or Surfboards on board though!

You reiterate the reasons put forward for the types of branch line that the Pacers were originally intended to service. However, I will cite the example of Southport to Manchester Airport as an example of what cannot be described as a branch line in the North-West England area.

I am sure that forum members from the other side of the Pennines and from the North-East England area will have no difficulty whatsoever in citing similar non-branch line examples from their own areas.

 

[D365]

I've always wondered if the 144s will be the longest surviving of the fleet when Pacers are eventually phased out due to their ambience & slightly better ride quality over a 142 - especially as more routes are electrified & stock is reshuffled.

Sorry to be hijacking the thread but why the different classifications for 143 and 144 Pacers? As far as I can tell, they're near-enough identical!

 

[Dunc108]

You reiterate the reasons put forward for the types of branch line that the Pacers were originally intended to service. However, I will cite the example of Southport to Manchester Airport as an example of what cannot be described as a branch line in the North-West England area.

I am sure that forum members from the other side of the Pennines and from the North-East England area will have no difficulty whatsoever in citing similar non-branch line examples from their own areas.

You're right there Paul, I'd say 142s often dominate Manchester - Southport services! One trip to Southport in June found a full line up of Pacers at the bufferstops....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Sorry to be hijacking the thread but why the different classifications for 143 and 144 Pacers? As far as I can tell, they're near-enough identical!

Well, throw in 143s aswell! I always seem to forget about them, probably as they've not been regulars in the NW & NE for a number of years.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Sorry to be hijacking the thread but why the different classifications for 143 and 144 Pacers? As far as I can tell, they're near-enough identical!

If I remember correctly, it's something to do with different engines, and different companies did the final 'putting-together' of the bits. Can't remember who did what though. 10 of the 144s have a centre car of course, but that's not a factor as far as class-numbers are concerned.

 

[The Crab]

Pardon me for appearing pedantic, but the dictiionary definition of the word "train"
1. a self-propelled, connected group of rolling stock.
2. a series or row of objects or parts.
3. a line or procession of persons, vehicles, animals, etc., traveling together.
Strictly speaking, a Class 153 operating by itself, unattached to any other rail vehicle, cannot be called a train. Railcar or Diesel Rail Unit might be more accurate.

Ah yes, but now "locomotive" and "train" have now become synonyms (even for some enthusiasts).

I was explaining to my wife the other day that "Flying Scotsman" was a locomotive but "The Flying Scotsman" was a train. Oh dear - doesn't work any more.

I was at the Midland Railway, Butterley some time ago and they were running some superbly restored vintage carriages pulled by an industrial tank engine. I remarked to the the old gent next to me "What a magnificent train!" He replied "Yes, and the carriages are good too." Oh dear!

 

[sprinterguy]

If I remember correctly, it's something to do with different engines, and different companies did the final 'putting-together' of the bits. Can't remember who did what though. 10 of the 144s have a centre car of course, but that's not a factor as far as class-numbers are concerned.

Class 143: Alexander bodies, Barclay underframes.
Class 144: Alexander bodies, BREL underframes.

The engines fitted to both are identical these days, although I think that they were different originally.

 

[47802]

I have to admit that the refurbed FGW and Arriva 143's are not too bad certainly better than the northern 142's thats for sure, and of course the problem with the 153's is that they can end up on a service where a single car unit is totally in adequate. eg Noted a Norwich to Lowestoft working in august the single 153 was packed solid some 15 mins before departure.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Pardon me for appearing pedantic, but the dictiionary definition of the word "train"
1. a self-propelled, connected group of rolling stock.
2. a series or row of objects or parts.
3. a line or procession of persons, vehicles, animals, etc., traveling together.
Strictly speaking, a Class 153 operating by itself, unattached to any other rail vehicle, cannot be called a train. Railcar or Diesel Rail Unit might be more accurate.

Personally, since 2x 153 in multiple IS a train, I sometimes call a single 153 'half a train'.

Section 83(1) of the Railways Act 1993 defines "train" as:
a) two or more items of rolling stock coupled together, at least one of which is a locomotive; or
b) a locomotive not coupled to any other rolling stock.

The same section defines "locomotive" as:
“locomotive” means any railway vehicle which has the capacity for self-propulsion (whether or not the power by which it operates is derived from a source external to the vehicle);"

So a 153 counts as a train, as it is a locomotive not coupled to any other rolling stock.

What a load of rubish, stupid railways act. A 153 is a multiple unit, not a locomotive.

Yup, there was that well reported incident...which I can't remember where and when now. Was it in Wales?

EDIT 2: http://www.luxsoft.demon.co.uk/village/hst.html Ah, this is it! Now there'll be people saying it's a power car, not a locomotive. :P

Interesting. A IC125 power car is a locomotive though (or perhaps you could argue that, because it only has one end that can lead, it is half a locomotive, since 2x class 43 can definately act as a locomotive).

I am sure that forum members from the other side of the Pennines and from the North-East England area will have no difficulty whatsoever in citing similar non-branch line examples from their own areas.

How about south-west Wales? Pembroke Dock to Whitland, possibly even to Carmarthen, could be called a branch. But Pembroke Dock to Swansea? No.