Pacergeddon!!!

[heenan73]

You clearly are a pacer apologist, no matter how much you deny it.

That, or ...

The only safety feature in a pacer is their lack of speed; but in the unlikely even that they were struck by a fast moving train, 95% of the casualties would be in the pacer.

Just because everyone says they are unsafe doesn't mean they are not. The only inconsistency is that they survived when Mk1 coaches were banned. safe structural weaknesses. Go figure!

 

[4SRKT]

Go figure!

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

 

[HSTEd]

I thought Mark 1s were largely removed as a result of the lack of central door locking mroe than any structural issues.

 

[starrymarkb]

Coming away from bogies is normal, hell, even one of the 156's involved in the 1995 Ais gill accident came away from its bogies.
Coming away from its frames however is far from normal.

You clearly are a pacer apologist, no matter how much you deny it.

Something to bear in mind is that most modern stock doesn't have a frame. Interestingly the 142 body is the basis of the 153/155 (which is self supporting). I believe that they used the frame for ease of construction rather then to support a flimsy body.

Any unit hit by a heavier train at speed isn't going to come off well, look at the 165 vehicle that was obliterated at Ladbroke Grove

Still I'm not keen on 142s... 143s are a bit nicer...

 

[Nym]

Need I mention the masses of safety systems such as AWS, TWPS and ATP that means any two units being on the same isolated peice of track at the same time is going to take a major screw up in the first place before they even get close to 'crashable' speeds?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Two queries put forward...

1)...Was the carden shaft problem ever resolved?

2)...I am also interested in the seat comparison of the Pacers, strictly from a safety point of view. What are the advantages/disadvantages of the bus seat (low back rest) with chrome grab rails and the other more rail-related seating provision (with higher back rests), that are currently to be found in the Pacer units.

 

[4SRKT]

I am also interested in the seat comparison of the Pacers, strictly from a safety point of view. What are the advantages/disadvantages of the bus seat (low back rest) with chrome grab rails and the other more rail-related seating provision (with higher back rests), that are currently to be found in the Pacer units.

When I was on a 143 involved in a suicide incident at Wylam in 1986 I nearly smashed m teeth in on the metal handrail on the top of the bus seat in front of me when the train screeched to halt from 70mph. This didn't feel particularly safe, but then I suppose stoving in my cranium on a high seat back wouldn't be much fun either.

 

[matchmaker]

They'd better not go anywhere! I want a chance to experience the 142s first hand!

I've been on a Pacer once. I was travelling from Edinburgh to Middlesbrough. Changing at Darlington from first class in a GNER HST to a Pacer was a bit of a shock to the system!

 

[ainsworth74]

I was travelling from Edinburgh to Middlesbrough. Changing at Darlington from first class in a GNER HST to a Pacer was a bit of a shock to the system!

It is isn't it? I've done that journey several times and I've done it from the London direction as well.

I think the best instance of 'pacer shock' I've ever had was on a hot summers day at Sheffield, I'd come from London in first class on a EMT 222 with a nice big seat and lovely cool air con. Change onto a 142 that was full and standing in 20+ degree heat with no air flow. Now that was a shock to the system!

 

[Lampshade]

I thought Mark 1s were largely removed as a result of the lack of central door locking mroe than any structural issues.

Their crashworthiness was called into question after the Clapham Junction crash; the report suggested use of Mk1 coaches should end on the main line.

 

[Nym]

It also suggested the network wide introduction of AWS and TWPS for all passenger lines, and now that is in place, colisions between units are rather unlikely.

 

[ainsworth74]

It also suggested the network wide introduction of AWS and TWPS for all passenger lines, and now that is in place, colisions between units are rather unlikely.

Indeed, it seems to me that far more likely would be an accident caused by an infrastructure failure (such as Grayrigg) or an external source (such as a car on a level crossing).

Though of course the basic cause of Clapham Junction was a piece of loose wire that hadn't been cut back and tied down. So even if the approaches to Clapham Junction had ATP (which the report recommended be fitted) it wouldn't have prevented the accident as the signal would still have given a green aspect to the driver.

 

[Nym]

Yep, I know full well that that was the fault of pepole like me making mistakes or cutting corners, that doesn't happen any more hopfully (and certanly wouldn't happen on MY shift if I end up working for NR or a contractor of them)

 

[WestCoast]

I've been on a Pacer once. I was travelling from Edinburgh to Middlesbrough. Changing at Darlington from first class in a GNER HST to a Pacer was a bit of a shock to the system!

The worst is when you are expecting a 5-car Northern 180 and a Pacer turns up to cover the diagram! :cry::cry:

The funniest moment was when I raced past a crammed 142 on the WCML slow lines around Euxton, from my First Class table of four on a Pendo on the fast line. You could see the misery on peoples' faces! Never have I been more glad to be on a Pendolino...

 

[142094]

Coming away from bogies is normal, hell, even one of the 156's involved in the 1995 Ais gill accident came away from its bogies.
Coming away from its frames however is far from normal.

You clearly are a pacer apologist, no matter how much you deny it.

Ah yes, and you must be a rolling stock safety inpsector with 40 years service under your belt.

 

[507 001]

Ah yes, and you must be a rolling stock safety inpsector with 40 years service under your belt.

No I'm not, and I would be very surprised if you are considering that you believe pacers are crash-worthy.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

When and where was the most serious collision in which a Class 142 Pacer was involved and what was the outcome?

 

[northwichcat]

When and where was the most serious collision in which a Class 142 Pacer was involved and what was the outcome?

See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/383785.stm

 

[starrymarkb]

Given the impact it's done pretty well, passenger compartment is intact even if the cab and doors are gone. I suspect a 150 would have suffered less damage. Of course with the bodyshell separating it's hard to know if the floor would have been compromised (but it seemed they are designed to sheer to absorb energy)

A Mark 1 would have disintegrated. Just look at the Cowden DEMUS... The Pacer Shell may not be the strongest but it's not as bad as some make out.

 

[northwichcat]

Given the impact it's done pretty well, passenger compartment is intact even if the cab and doors are gone. I suspect a 150 would have suffered less damage. Of course with the bodyshell separating it's hard to know if the floor would have been compromised (but it seemed they are designed to sheer to absorb energy)

A Mark 1 would have disintegrated. Just look at the Cowden DEMUS... The Pacer Shell may not be the strongest but it's not as bad as some make out.

Mark 1s were withdrawn for safety reasons.

The main safety concern is using them on the same lines as Virgin Trains, East Coast, East Midlands Trains (London services) and XC services run on. If the heaviest thing that could hit them while in service is a Sprinter then it's much safer.

As has been said before the safest way to use Pacers would be to not use them on services that involve running on a mainline. To allow this to happen Pacers need to be more equally split around Britain. FGW and ATW would need a larger share of them, while Scotrail, EMT, London Midland and maybe even Southern and SWT would need to take on some Pacers.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Given the impact it's done pretty well, passenger compartment is intact even if the cab and doors are gone. I suspect a 150 would have suffered less damage. Of course with the bodyshell separating it's hard to know if the floor would have been compromised...

There are quite heavy container trains these days and I wonder if the impact damage to a Pacer in a collision with such a train be worse than a passenger train. I am not very technically minded, so don't laugh too much at this query, please...

 

[northwichcat]

There are quite heavy container trains these days and I wonder if the impact damage to a Pacer in a collision with such a train be worse than a passenger train. I am not very technically minded, so don't laugh too much at this query, please...

I think freight is a concern. However, freight generally travels slower than intercity trains which should give it a better chance of stopping before crashing in to the back of a Pacer or if not stopping at least crashing in to the back of one at low speed. There's also generally a less frequent service with freight so less freight trains to collide with.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think freight is a concern. However, freight generally travels slower than intercity trains which should give it a better chance of stopping before crashing in to the back of a Pacer

Thanks for that. I understand that the container trains that use the Styal line do travel at quite a speed when en route to the Trafford Park containerbase and the locomotives that are used on these trains are somewhat massively constructed and very heavy in their own right.

 

[507 001]

I think freight is a concern. However, freight generally travels slower than intercity trains which should give it a better chance of stopping before crashing in to the back of a Pacer or if not stopping at least crashing in to the back of one at low speed. There's also generally a less frequent service with freight so less freight trains to collide with.

they may travel slower but that doesn't mean that they stop quicker, remember they weigh much much more!

 

[sprinterguy]

Thanks for that. I understand that the container trains that use the Styal line do travel at quite a speed when en route to the Trafford Park containerbase and the locomotives that are used on these trains are somewhat massively constructed and very heavy in their own right.

If I remember correctly, Freightliners and similar container trains are limited to 75mph maximum. The 66s certainly are a substantial lump of metal, though only puny compared to GMs' offerings to the North American market: I'd hate to see one of those massive beasts have an altercation with a Pacer!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Given the impact it's done pretty well, passenger compartment is intact even if the cab and doors are gone. I suspect a 150 would have suffered less damage. Of course with the bodyshell separating it's hard to know if the floor would have been compromised (but it seemed they are designed to sheer to absorb energy)

It seems to be the case in the major collisions Pacers have been involved in (Find a pic of 142059 after its' argument with the buffer stops at Lime Street if you have time): The cab and vestibule area gets decimated, but the bodywork surrounding the passenger saloon remains intact, albeit getting shoved back a couple of metres. How dangerous that would be in such a collision involving passengers would, I suspect, be quite dependant on what internal fittings are attached to the bodyshell and which to the frame, and the potential for these to cut through passengers if the bodyshell gets pushed along the frame.

 

[142094]

No I'm not, and I would be very surprised if you are considering that you believe pacers are crash-worthy.

Well until you are, or find some actual information to show that Pacers are unsafe, then I can't accept your views.

 

[caliwag]

Haven't read all this thread, but as I type there is an article on radio 4 'You and Yours' with a Modern Railways correspondant re the end of Pacers by 2019 because of lack of disabled facilities.

Listen again later!

 

[northwichcat]

Haven't read all this thread, but as I type there is an article on radio 4 'You and Yours' with a Modern Railways correspondant re the end of Pacers by 2019 because of lack of disabled facilities.

Listen again later!

That information was made public by GMPTE/TfGM earlier this year.