Pacers have a future.

[tbtc]

I'm sure an open carriage would be cheaper than new build - that doesn't make it acceptable to use open carriages, nor does it make it acceptable to keep these truly awful Pacer units - even if they were refurbished

What's the alternative?

Nobody wants to build DMUs (even if you can meet modern environmental regulations everyone is reluctant to build vehicles with no guarantee of a lifetime of work).

We aren't going to electrify enough before 2020.

We have no spare stock at the moment and need extra trains to meet existing/ growing demand.

Few people love Pacers, but what's the realistic alternative?

 

[Surreyman]

I'm sure an open carriage would be cheaper than new build - that doesn't make it acceptable to use open carriages, nor does it make it acceptable to keep these truly awful Pacer units - even if they were refurbished

Rightly or wrongly the Dft obviously think they are 'acceptable'.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I am assuming that post 2020, the 30 Pacers in South Wales + the 8 with FGW would (having been modified) be transferred to what is currently Northern, where they would mainly be operated in service as 4 car units with existing Pacers, thereby providing extra capacity (@ 300 seats)

Why is it always assumed that "Northern-land" is always seen to be the final resting place for these arcane monstrosities rather than being given new rolling stock to operate services. I note "post 2020" is referred to, by which time the current "no growth" franchise, which gives the raison d'etre for any old rubbish to foisted upon the rail services in this region, will long be over and a more forward thinking franchise will then hopefully be in operation.

Some postings should carry a preamble health warning...
"The reading of this posting can be detrimental to those with high blood pressure and/or a nervous disposition"...

 

[northwichcat]

Im not sure they do have more capacity you know...

Even if they do have more capacity (?) you'd have to take out a few seats to fit a "universal" toilet (since the whole point of this thread is about post-2019 operation)

I was following on from the 'remove the toilet and use them on Metro services argument.' The current 172s on LO have no toilet and 120 seats in 2+2 formation. I'm aware a 3 car 144 is about the same train length as a 2 car 172 but the 144 is slightly wider and has the seats more tightly packed in.

I am assuming that post 2020, the 30 Pacers in South Wales + the 8 with FGW would(having been modified)be transferred to what is currently Northern, where they would mainly be operated in service as 4 car units with existing Pacers, thereby providing extra capacity (@ 300 seats)

Making Pacers DDA complaint and then running them all in 4 car formation seems like a poor idea as you'd finish up with a 4 car train with a similar number of seats to a 2 car 156 or 158 but with a much longer formation that you can't walk from one end to the other of.

I think running them as one complaint unit attached to a non-complaint unit breaches the requirements as well as causing an operational nightmare.

 

[sheff'd victoria]

Few people love Pacers, but what's the realistic alternative?

We seem to ship our trains overseas when we have done with them , Class 20 ,56 & 141 spring to mind, can we not get some units from overseas on the cheap just to keep us going for a few years ?

 

[jopsuk]

Making Pacers DDA complaint and then running them all in 4 car formation seems like a poor idea as you'd finish up with a 4 car train with a similar number of seats to a 2 car 156 or 158 but with a much longer formation that you can't walk from one end to the other of.

.

If you were going to run them in semi-permanent 4-car formations, would it be physically feasible (ignoring the cost!) to remove the inner end cabs and replace them with a gangway? In length, they'd be roughly equivalent to a three-car 150.

 

[tom1649]

Well we could have had the NIR 450 class I suppose, although that was only 9 x 3 car units.

 

[sheff'd victoria]

Well we could have had the NIR 450 class I suppose, although that was only 9 x 3 car units.

If their up for grabs then take them.

Im sure East Midland Trains & Northern will fight it out to who gets them due to the chronic stock shortage they have

 

[northwichcat]

If you were going to run them in semi-permanent 4-car formations, would it be physically feasible (ignoring the cost!) to remove the inner end cabs and replace them with a gangway? In length, they'd be roughly equivalent to a three-car 150.

Well yes the cost is the issue. People are already saying the cost of the proposed complaint refurbishment is too high considering the age of the trains and limited route suitability of the trains without adding more work on to it.

Then if you did that the door layout on Pacers will be even more strange than it already is!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Im sure East Midland Trains & Northern will fight it out to who gets them due to the chronic stock shortage they have

Not sure about that with them being a micro-fleet of 9 units they would probably only interest a prominently electrified franchise that requires a small number of DMUs. Similar to London Overground or Southern - not that LO would want them and they aren't a big enough micro-fleet for Southern.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

We seem to ship our trains overseas when we have done with them , Class 20 ,56 & 141 spring to mind, can we not get some units from overseas on the cheap just to keep us going for a few years ?

I think if we wanted to do that with 142s it should have been done when the current Northern franchise was formed. I think it's too late now. There was a suggestion that we could scrap the upper Leyland body and export the frame to North Africa but again we've probably left it too late for that option.

 

[sheff'd victoria]

There was a suggestion that we could scrap the upper Leyland body and export the frame to North Africa but again we've probably left it too late for that option.

I think Africa has enough problems without us sending a pogo stick on wheels to them

 

[jopsuk]

If their up for grabs then take them.

Im sure East Midland Trains & Northern will fight it out to who gets them due to the chronic stock shortage they have

They would have needed new bogies, what with Northern Ireland running on the same broad track guage as the Republic. I think most of them have been cut up.

 

[sheff'd victoria]

They would have needed new bogies, what with Northern Ireland running on the same broad track guage as the Republic. I think most of them have been cut up.

That idea has gone down the pan then

Who else runs on British Railways gauge in the world ?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That idea has gone down the pan then

Who else runs on British Railways gauge in the world ?

Most of the world uses 'Standard' gauge, the problem is the restrictive loading gauge. In any case if I recall correctly, although the NIR 450s had Sprinter-type bodyshells, part of the running gear was recycled from older stock (much like the 442s) which wouldn't help the business case of any re-gauging project.

 

[tbtc]

We seem to ship our trains overseas when we have done with them , Class 20 ,56 & 141 spring to mind, can we not get some units from overseas on the cheap just to keep us going for a few years ?

If we had the same loading gauge then I think we would have done so - frustrating that this is holding us back.

Going off topic, but I've suggested in the past converting (relatively) self-contained lines like C2C/ LTS to the wider loading gauge.

I note "post 2020" is referred to, by which time the current "no growth" franchise, which gives the raison d'etre for any old rubbish to foisted upon the rail services in this region, will long be over and a more forward thinking franchise will then hopefully be in operation

I think that this "no growth" franchsie has seen something like a 34% increase in capacity?

 

[Cliveblackpool]

What's the alternative?

Nobody wants to build DMUs (even if you can meet modern environmental regulations everyone is reluctant to build vehicles with no guarantee of a lifetime of work).

We aren't going to electrify enough before 2020.

We have no spare stock at the moment and need extra trains to meet existing/ growing demand.

Few people love Pacers, but what's the realistic alternative?

Have to agree with that one.
DDA needs some common sense applied to it!
- Phase them out over the next 20yrs, rather than having a desperate shortage of DMU's
Parry People movers ? Pacers can do all the jobs and more!!
Better to spend the money on electrification.
I'm surprised Pacer NR track access is so cheap, imo the screeching and the two single axles with a long wheelbase hammers the points and joints and probably causes above average wear compared with 150's etc

 

[northwichcat]

DDA needs some common sense applied to it!
- Phase them out over the next 20yrs, rather than having a desperate shortage of DMU's

DDA did have common sense applied to it. The fact is the common sense has been ignored for almost 20 years.

The DDA deadline was decided on in 1994 and the date of December 2019 would be when the non-complaint 158s and 159s would have reached the average life expectancy for DMUs by then. Therefore the 159s and anything older them should already have had or have scheduled in a life extension program incorporating DDA if there are plans to keep them in service after December 2019.

 

[HSTEd]

I'm surprised Pacer NR track access is so cheap, imo the screeching and the two single axles with a long wheelbase hammers the points and joints and probably causes above average wear compared with 150's etc

Pacers are so light compared to what the underframe is built for, remember the suspension is from some kind of freight wagon that has rather more weight than a bus loaded on it normally.

That mitigates against the problems caused by the long wheelbase.

 

[northwichcat]

Pacers are so light compared to what the underframe is built for, remember the suspension is from some kind of freight wagon that has rather more weight than a bus loaded on it normally.

I think it's just as much to do with the 15.5m carriage length. Pacers do put more wear on the track than Sprinters do. That high pitched squealing they do on corners doesn't do the track any favours!

A 4 car 156 (92m length) is quite a bit cheaper in track access costs than a 6 car 142 (93m length), with 142s being cheaper than 143s and 144s.

 

[Haydn1971]

What's the alternative?

Nobody wants to build DMUs (even if you can meet modern environmental regulations everyone is reluctant to build vehicles with no guarantee of a lifetime of work).

The reality is that DMU's will be required long into the future, to a time beyond when the currently new DMU's are life expired. The DfT will have to bite the bullet at some point to purchase new rolling stock, because at this time, there is no alternative to DMU's, we can't electrify all routes, battery technology isn't advanced enough, leaving holes in the floor to work trains flintstones style isn't really going to be popular

Biting that bullet now, will ensure the lessons learnt from compliance with earlier euro emissions standards on rail based diesel units don't become lost, because once that happens, time gets reset to year zero and the lessonshave to be learnt all over again. The recent ATOC report on rolling stock sets out a need for upto 2000 diesel powered units beyond 2025 and 1500 beyond 2042 - giving a need to build upto 50 units per year to just satisfy ongoing rolling stock replacements.

I've not really heard a strong arguement for not ordering new DMU's yet - yes they will cost money, but realistically, just how long can the current fleet of 14x's and older 15x's keep going ? Someone has their head buried in the sand now and will end up leading us down the path of having to spend a larger amount later to reinvent the Eco diesel wheel.

 

[HSTEd]

The existing diesel fleet can probably struggle on long enough to allow total electrification without new passenger diesels, but it would mean probably accepting Pacers not being withdrawn until 2025 at the earliest.

Unless you go for my "big bang" plan of recruiting all the OLE engineers we can find in Europe and building three more wiring trains.

 

[Surreyman]

The reality is that DMU's will be required long into the future, to a time beyond when the currently new DMU's are life expired. The DfT will have to bite the bullet at some point to purchase new rolling stock, because at this time, there is no alternative to DMU's, we can't electrify all routes, battery technology isn't advanced enough, leaving holes in the floor to work trains flintstones style isn't really going to be popular

Biting that bullet now, will ensure the lessons learnt from compliance with earlier euro emissions standards on rail based diesel units don't become lost, because once that happens, time gets reset to year zero and the lessonshave to be learnt all over again. The recent ATOC report on rolling stock sets out a need for upto 2000 diesel powered units beyond 2025 and 1500 beyond 2042 - giving a need to build upto 50 units per year to just satisfy ongoing rolling stock replacements.

I've not really heard a strong arguement for not ordering new DMU's yet - yes they will cost money, but realistically, just how long can the current fleet of 14x's and older 15x's keep going ? Someone has their head buried in the sand now and will end up leading us down the path of having to spend a larger amount later to reinvent the Eco diesel wheel.

Since when in recent times, did the Dft do sensible long term planning?
Agree with your points about ongoing emission standards issues but Dft are indifferent to those.
I have highlighted your statement re 'spending a larger amount later' etc, because that is exactly what is going to happen.
2025 onwards will literally be someone else's problem(Government & Civil Servants).
On a positive note, cynical as I am, we should be pleased at the massive electrification programme for CP5.

 

[northwichcat]

Since when in recent times, did the Dft do sensible long term planning?
Agree with your points about ongoing emission standards issues but Dft are indifferent to those.
I have highlighted your statement re 'spending a larger amount later' etc, because that is exactly what is going to happen.
2025 onwards will literally be someone else's problem(Government & Civil Servants).
On a positive note, cynical as I am, we should be pleased at the massive electrification programme for CP5.

Remember the previous government changed an order of new DMUs to a Thameslink cascade within a single term of parliament.

The next election has to be called no later than May 2015. Who knows which party will govern the next parliament and which of the current government's policies they will alter.

 

[YorkshireBear]

No ROSCO will get DMUs, is a government not for when the private sector cannot provide? Is that not something they should do. They could buy and lease the DMUs and basically through their own policy ensure continued use. (ie not allowing everything to become electrified until this set of DMUs become life expired.) Enough should be built to operate the routes that will probably not see electrification in any of our lifetimes.

 

[tbtc]

The reality is that DMU's will be required long into the future, to a time beyond when the currently new DMU's are life expired. The DfT will have to bite the bullet at some point to purchase new rolling stock, because at this time, there is no alternative to DMU's, we can't electrify all routes, battery technology isn't advanced enough, leaving holes in the floor to work trains flintstones style isn't really going to be popular

Biting that bullet now, will ensure the lessons learnt from compliance with earlier euro emissions standards on rail based diesel units don't become lost, because once that happens, time gets reset to year zero and the lessonshave to be learnt all over again. The recent ATOC report on rolling stock sets out a need for upto 2000 diesel powered units beyond 2025 and 1500 beyond 2042 - giving a need to build upto 50 units per year to just satisfy ongoing rolling stock replacements.

I've not really heard a strong arguement for not ordering new DMU's yet - yes they will cost money, but realistically, just how long can the current fleet of 14x's and older 15x's keep going ? Someone has their head buried in the sand now and will end up leading us down the path of having to spend a larger amount later to reinvent the Eco diesel wheel.

The post-privatisation DMUs should last until around the time that HS2 opens (based on the age of DMUs currently in operation).

So thats roughly a couple of hundred non-Intercity ones (168/ 170/ 171/ 172/ 175) and roughly a hundred Intercity ones (220, 221, 222). Plus all of the current Sprinters etc that will last beyond 2019.

If CP6 sees as much electrification as CP5 will, and Pacers can be refurbished to an "acceptable" standard then the economics of building new trains becomes a lot harder.

Yeah, ideally we'd build hundreds of DMUs. But I can certainly see why companies are reluctant to build new trains that may only be required for a decade, if existing ones can be refurbished sufficiently.

 

[Haydn1971]

There is of course the issue of regional ITA's buying new stock - that could be mostly EMU's, but given the ideas floating around in West & South Yorkshire at least, I'd strongly expect some new DMU's being required - now if that's refurbished stock or new, that's something I can't answer at this time.

 

[150001]

I still think that some sort of 172/378 design diesel electric would be a good solution. It could run on diesel for non electrified routes and on electrical wires where possible. Then when we eventually get to mainly OHLE, then the diesel engines can be taken out, cutting on weight and we haven't wasted money on DMUs.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think that this "no growth" franchise has seen something like a 34% increase in capacity?

Exactly the current and relevant point. Once the current Northern Rail "no growth" franchise is out of the way, the known growth factor will be factored into the NEW franchise which will then be free of the "shackles" of not being able to have a new fleet provision which the previously mentioned "post 2020" into the equation.

The "Sword of Damocles" that have been the Pacers cannot be held for ever over the head of those who hold the franchise of the Northern Rail area and will eventually have to be to be consigned to the scrap yard of railway history.

 

[WatcherZero]

Noticed this while talking about Pacers in another thread. According to Porterbrook the 5 class 143's leased to FGW are off lease on March 31st 2013 (the Arriva Wales ones are on lease until 14 October 2018). Has FGW renewed the lease recently or if not is it known where they would be going? (it also lists 4 class 57 and 8 Mk3 coachs, 10 Mk3 sleeper coachs at FGW as off lease on the 31st).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Would anyone feel that one political party would be more stringent in insisting on the compliance to the Disability Discrimination Act of Parliament than others, if elected after the next General Election ?

 

[yorksrob]

No ROSCO will get DMUs, is a government not for when the private sector cannot provide? Is that not something they should do. They could buy and lease the DMUs and basically through their own policy ensure continued use. (ie not allowing everything to become electrified until this set of DMUs become life expired.) Enough should be built to operate the routes that will probably not see electrification in any of our lifetimes.

Then you are left with the private sector cherry picking the best contracts and leaving the taxpayer with the least lucrative/highest risk investments. If ROSCO's are to have a roll at all they should be compelled to provide the mix of stock the country needs.