Pacers have a future.

[tbtc]

You appear to have a blind faith in electrification

...whereas you appear to have blind faith in spending other people's money.

the current situation is that whilst there is a lot of mainline electrification planed over the next 10 years, there remains massive mileage gaps in the non mainline network

I've tried to explain to you that its likely that CP6 will see the gaps filled between the main lines electrified in CP5 - at the end of CP6 we'll see DMU use fall dramatically

I will look forward to the next order of DMU's

I've mentioned that there will always been *some* DMUs (Far North line etc). But the current number of post-privatisation DMUs may be sufficient to cope with demand after 2024, which is why I think it'd be silly to build hundreds more for the sake of a few years.

Am I wrong in my assumption that the majority of those forum members who are FOR the retention of the Pacer fleet after the DDA final date are from areas where they do not have to suffer from the indignity of travelling in these on a regular basis ?

Paul you know whrre I am from.

I think he knows where I'm from too. Whilst I'd like hundreds of new trains, it'd be a short term spend that has little long term merit. We've had more than enough of those in Sheffield already!

 

[MattRobinson]

So then we have insane numbers of newbuild locomotives sent to the scrapline after a handful of years service.

Apologies, I meant new build/refurbished carriages and DVTs and refurbished locomotives.

But the money you propose spending on replacement vehicles (130 Pacers is going to need 260 carriages at minimum to replace them one to one) would, in my opinion, be better spent on further expediting the electrification programme by assembling a new HOWT and associated electrification team, to allow plans in the pipeline to be carried forward faster.
With careful selection of routes I imagine you can eliminate the Pacers and even the 20m sprinters entirely with relatively little additional work (using the Cl315 and 313 fleets freed by new Thameslink/Crossrail/MerseyRail stock).

Perhaps, but you still need the new rolling stock. This option allows the new stock to be available for passenger use sooner and reduces the impact of late running of infrastructure problems. Further, generally people prefer loco hauled to multiple units anyway- think about HSTs/Mk4 stock vs Pendilinos/Voyagers. It's the staple of many services in mainland Europe, after all.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Haydn1971]

...whereas you appear to have blind faith in spending other people's money.

That would be the taxpayers money ? Hmmm... There is no blind faith on my part, just the daily frustration of old, dirty, badly maintained trains that don't have a place in the 21st century - I'd love to be sitting on a EMU travelling to work and home daily, unfortunately, my line and countless others have no plans for electrification beyond "likely to" and "expect" and "probably" which doesn't fill me with any degree of confidence.

I've tried to explain to you that its likely that CP6 will see the gaps filled between the main lines electrified in CP5

There you go again, "likely" isn't a certainty - and you haven't explained anything at all, just thrown a few random figures and thoughts at me which don't link together in any cohesive way.

at the end of CP6 we'll see DMU use fall dramatically

Based upon what ? That "likely" statement above ?

I've mentioned that there will always been *some* DMUs (Far North line etc). But the current number of post-privatisation DMUs may be sufficient to cope with demand after 2024, which is why I think it'd be silly to build hundreds more for the sake of a few years.

You "think" ? And that's any different to my "think" ? Come on, do me a favour here, you have an opinion, it's different to mine, neither of us have any degree of evidence to back up the case either way and given the degree of passenger growth experienced in the last decade, are you really that sure we will have enough ? I think not.

 

[northwichcat]

Am I wrong in my assumption that the majority of those forum members who are FOR the retention of the Pacer fleet after the DDA final date are from areas where they do not have to suffer from the indignity of travelling in these on a regular basis ?

Paul you know whrre I am from.
However I am not for it... I just do not see an alternative UNLESS goverment step in purchase them take the commercial risk and increase subsidy. But I am pretty much 99% certain they will never do this. I would love it if they surprised me.

YorkshireBear - where are you planning on working when you leave university? Still Sheffield/Leeds area or would you be tempted by a Network Rail graduate job in say Birmingham?

 

[YorkshireBear]

YorkshireBear - where are you planning on working when you leave university? Still Sheffield/Leeds area or would you be tempted by a Network Rail graduate job in say Birmingham?

My first choice is York probably living in Leeds. Why do you ask?

 

[northwichcat]

My first choice is York probably living in Leeds. Why do you ask?

I was following on from what you said in response to Paul Sidorczuk's post. If you were planning to live somewhere else on the 31st December 2019 then extending the DDA deadline may not actually affect you that much even though you currently live in Pacer land.

I'm actually currently in the same room as someone from Yorkshire who attended a Yorkshire university and then moved out of Yorkshire soon after, so it does happen!

 

[rebmcr]

even though you currently live in Pacer land

Now there's a theme park I would never want to visit.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I was following on from what you said in response to Paul Sidorczuk's post. If you were planning to live somewhere else on the 31st December 2019 then extending the DDA deadline may not actually affect you that much even though you currently live in Pacer land.

I'm actually currently in the same room as someone from Yorkshire who attended a Yorkshire university and then moved out of Yorkshire soon after, so it does happen!

Ah that makes sense. No i will only leave Yorkshire if i absolutely have to. :P Im not planning on abandoning the land of pacers.

Although like i say i wish the government would do something but i just know they won't.

 

[northwichcat]

Now there's a theme park I would never want to visit.

Unfortunately the signposts were commissioned by Northern Rail and many people who intend to travel to Sprinter land instead get sent to Pacer land.

 

[tbtc]

That would be the taxpayers money ? Hmmm... There is no blind faith on my part, just the daily frustration of old, dirty, badly maintained trains that don't have a place in the 21st century - I'd love to be sitting on a EMU travelling to work and home daily, unfortunately, my line and countless others have no plans for electrification beyond "likely to" and "expect" and "probably" which doesn't fill me with any degree of confidence.



There you go again, "likely" isn't a certainty - and you haven't explained anything at all, just thrown a few random figures and thoughts at me which don't link together in any cohesive way.



Based upon what ? That "likely" statement above ?



You "think" ? And that's any different to my "think" ? Come on, do me a favour here, you have an opinion, it's different to mine, neither of us have any degree of evidence to back up the case either way and given the degree of passenger growth experienced in the last decade, are you really that sure we will have enough ? I think not.

Since we won't know the CP6 commitments until around 2017, we don't know what will be electrified at the start of the next decade. Some things appear to be very likely though (e.g. if there's only time to electrify from Leeds as far as Selby in CP5 then I'd put money on Hull being wired early in CP6).

What do you think will happen in CP6 then?

 

[Greybeard33]

Unfortunately the signposts were commissioned by Northern Rail and many people who intend to travel to Sprinter land instead get sent to Pacer land.

And for a lucky few, sometimes the opposite (written sitting smugly on a 156).

 

[yorksrob]

Am I wrong in my assumption that the majority of those forum members who are FOR the retention of the Pacer fleet after the DDA final date are from areas where they do not have to suffer from the indignity of travelling in these on a regular basis ?

I use pacers almost everyday, and whilst I have no objection to them being replaced. However, I would strongly object to them being withdrawn without an adequate fleet of replacements. Infact I would object to them being replaced if rolling stock provision hadn't beenmade to cope with growth or overcrowding. Unfortunately such an outcome is highly likely if you enshrine an arbitrary deadline in law.

 

[HSTEd]

Far North Line would actually be rather cheap to electrify in terms of route mileage.

Very few overbridges, low speeds and very light use allowing the whole thing to be single end fed from Inverness with autotransformers.

So it may end up being cheaper to simply wire the whole thing than bother with diesels.

Even the West Highland line with its vistas that people complain would be spoiled can be have that problem mitigated by using the fact its a single track line to put the cantilevers on the "less scenic" side of the route, changing over again and again as required.

 

[185143]

pacers have a future????



KILL ME!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think he knows where I'm from too. Whilst I'd like hundreds of new trains, it'd be a short term spend that has little long term merit. We've had more than enough of those in Sheffield already!

On the other side of the same coin, have you not also said in the past that Sheffield also had "more than enough of those" when referring to the current fleet Pacer allocation to services to and from Sheffield ?

 

[Haydn1971]

What do you think will happen in CP6 then?

Big order of DMU's about 2 minutes after someone gets there backside kicked for not doing their job right

Seriously though - we don't know for sure, nor do the people who draw up the list of things to do in each period - that's where my main problem is, without a clear forward plan over the next 20-30 years, no one can really say with any assurance what will be needed nor what will be electrified. What I do know now is that in the Yorkshire area we have a fleet of skips that need replacing, another fleet of lovely new DMU's on TPE that aren't able to accomodate the passenger demands, another fleet of EDMU's on XC that are rammed much of the day and no boots on the ground erecting OHLE anywhere in the Yorkshire region at the moment. Yes, promises have been made, but then these promises are being made by the same people that promised 140mph running on the WCML, motorway widening across vast lengths of the network, new rolling stock for Northern... The list goes on... Faith ? Ha ! Bugger all faith here

 

[HSTEd]

You may want new DMUs but they aren't going to come.
There is no business case for them.

Right now I am thinking about how much it would cost to do that traction rebuild that they are doing to that Class 317 to a PEP EMU and maybe even how much it would cost to fit one vehicle with a toilet module.

That way you can fit use all of the PEP classes (313, 314, 315 and 508s) anywhere without restriction.

That gives you all the 75mph top speed EMUs you need to send every Pacer and 20m Sprinter to the scrapline even without considering cascades of more modern stock thanks to Thameslink (freed 319s and 377s).

(And there are secondary routes like the North Downs Line that apparently have sufficiently slow linespeeds for them to be easily usable, especially if there is some sort of cut price low speed electrification to use).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

One basic question. Had the Pacer fleet been employed on non-electrified lines south of the Thames from the same time that they have been employed up in the North (and other unfortunate areas), would we still be having this DDA debate on this thread in 2013 ?

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Please not this again...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
In fact to go one further, what lines south of the Thames (I'll assume that to mean the old Southern Region) weren't juiced up by the mid-1980s? Bournemouth-Weymouth came in 1988 and the only other three I can recall are Tonbridge-Hastings, East Grinstead and Eastleigh-Fareham, which I'd say would have been completed or at an avanced stage of planning by then, making such DMU replacement obsolete. Of course, the old Slam-Door stock kept the unelectrified Uckfield and Marshlink lines going for years beyond the 1980s, and LHCS did the duties along Waterloo-Exeter. Where exactly would Pacers have been needed down there?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I'd say if anyone can come up with a reasonable, cost-effective and DDA- & Emissions-compatible diesel unit in the next few years, there may still be a market for it...

The current plan is that as routes are electrified, modern(ish) diesel trains released from those services will replace older stock. That's fine, but this may lead to increased running costs on rural routes currently operated by pacers or 150s/153s when suddenly the only stock available will be heavy, fuel-hungry 170s & 185s. Taking the Leeds-Morecambe line as an example, this is currently served by just a few trains a day with whatever Northern can find from their ragtag of 80s DMUs. The poor service has suppressed demand along this rural route but just as more rolling stock is available to increase this service, the cost of leasing and running said stock (even if the 'extra' services were more 144s or 150s, the routes where these had come from would have the extra fuel and leasing costs of 170/172/185 units), meaning extra costs either as higher subsidies or higher fares. It then becomes far harder to increase services along those 'marginal' routes.

I realise that I'm venturing into cloud cuckoo land a little here, but ideally if the DafT could order 172s (or a new lower emission variant-173 perhaps?) in sufficient numbers to replace pacers, 150s and 153/5s over the next 6 years, it may yet work out as more efficient than spending however much it will cost to eke a few more years out of a reduced-capacity pacer fleet.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It was a hypothetical scenario to show that if the problem had been in that area, matters would have been dealt with in a far different way.

 

[Haydn1971]

That way you can fit use all of the PEP classes (313, 314, 315 and 508s) anywhere without restriction.

Great, lets replace 30 year old trains with trains that are at least 5 years older !

Beggars belief :-/

 

[The Ham]

Seriously though - we don't know for sure, nor do the people who draw up the list of things to do in each period - that's where my main problem is, without a clear forward plan over the next 20-30 years, no one can really say with any assurance what will be needed nor what will be electrified.

being worked on:
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...ork\Working Group 6 - Electrification Refresh

 

[jopsuk]

Great, lets replace 30 year old trains with trains that are at least 5 years older !

Beggars belief :-/

This. I'm still not convinced that the "PEP" stock will be in any fit state to continue use (chassis fatigue must be becoming an issue) by the time they're released by Crossrail etc.

 

[sprinterguy]

That gives you all the 75mph top speed EMUs you need to send every Pacer and 20m Sprinter to the scrapline

Though we'll have to build a brand new fleet of diesel locomotives to haul them around when a new Government gets into power in 2015 or 2020, inevitably does a U-turn on current policy, and stops the forward march of overhead wires once the presently approved schemes (and a few extra in-fills perhaps) are completed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Great, lets replace 30 year old trains with trains that are at least 5 years older !

Beggars belief :-/

Indeed - Apparently the future of our "21st century railway" is built on 1970s technology and hardware
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd say if anyone can come up with a reasonable, cost-effective and DDA- & Emissions-compatible diesel unit in the next few years, there may still be a market for it...

The current plan is that as routes are electrified, modern(ish) diesel trains released from those services will replace older stock. That's fine, but this may lead to increased running costs on rural routes currently operated by pacers or 150s/153s when suddenly the only stock available will be heavy, fuel-hungry 170s & 185s. Taking the Leeds-Morecambe line as an example, this is currently served by just a few trains a day with whatever Northern can find from their ragtag of 80s DMUs. The poor service has suppressed demand along this rural route but just as more rolling stock is available to increase this service, the cost of leasing and running said stock (even if the 'extra' services were more 144s or 150s, the routes where these had come from would have the extra fuel and leasing costs of 170/172/185 units), meaning extra costs either as higher subsidies or higher fares. It then becomes far harder to increase services along those 'marginal' routes.

I realise that I'm venturing into cloud cuckoo land a little here, but ideally if the DafT could order 172s (or a new lower emission variant-173 perhaps?) in sufficient numbers to replace pacers, 150s and 153/5s over the next 6 years, it may yet work out as more efficient than spending however much it will cost to eke a few more years out of a reduced-capacity pacer fleet.

Exactly this: Even if electrification does continue to take place at it's present rate, there are still many rural and provincial routes that are highly unlikely to be electrified within the 30-year lifespan of a new DMU, if ever. There is a requirement for a new build of lightweight DMUs for these sorts of lines (and suburban routes that will not see electrification for at least another decade even in a best case scenario) to sit alongside the fuel thirsty Turbostars and 185s, which are only suited to longer distance regional work.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Great, lets replace 30 year old trains with trains that are at least 5 years older !

Beggars belief :-/

But that is just typical of the belief by those in the South of England that "Northern-land" is the very place to send those units of the age that you describe. I often think that the statement saying "If they can use the Pacer fleet on a regular basis up there that is as old as it is and full of non-compliant DDA items, then anything can be sent up there"...

"Northern-land" seems to be viewed as the rolling-stock equivalent of "The Elephants' Graveyard"...:roll:

 

[Buttsy]

You forget the main driving factor in moving old stock to the north. No MP wants to run into consitutents on a daily basis moaning about their trains only have 8 wheels and are packed...

I wouldn't like to hear the hoo-ha on national TV if a Pacer turned up on a Thames Valley peak service into London...

The country is too south east-centric in all areas.

Personally I dislike any train with 3+2 seating so actually don't mind pacers that are laid out 2+2, I'd rather sit on one of them than a 'pikey' train (165/166) or a 150 with 3+2 seating.

 

[tom1649]

Sending the PEP stock to South Wales would likely be only a stop gap measure. It's only the same as 308s being sent up to West Yorkshire in the 1990s and although it was pre internet days I don't remember many complaints about that. Despite the aged rolling stock usage did increase quite dramatically with the sparks effect coming into play.

I don't know what the obsession with age is. It is the quality that is important. I don't think there's much dispute that a refurbished 313 will be an improvement over a 142.

Why is it certain that they'll be suffering from "chassis fatigue" anyway? Is there any evidence of this?

It's a good job certain forum members don't live on the Isle Of Wight. Seeing 75 year old rolling stock in revenue earning service must seem like quite an injustice.

Rolling stock ageism is all the rage it seems.

 

[northwichcat]

I don't know what the obsession with age is. It is the quality that is important. I don't think there's much dispute that a refurbished 313 will be an improvement over a 142.

Well yes, aside from an on board toilet and the fact constant announcements from PIS aren't popular with everyone what advantages do the 1985 Merseytravel Pacers have over the 1978 Merseyrail class 507s?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

It's a good job certain forum members don't live on the Isle Of Wight. Seeing 75 year old rolling stock in revenue earning service must seem like quite an injustice. Rolling stock ageism is all the rage it seems.

You are indeed unfortunate to possess the tunnel at Ryde that only ex- London Underground rolling stock of a certain vintage is of the correct profile to enable services to keep running has been deemed suitable for those services.

Rolling stock ageism is not the only matter where travel is concerned. Almost at the age of 68, I am certainly old enough to remember the early 1950's and the non-compartment suburban carriage stocks that had their natural home of Red Bank carriage sidings and were often used on services from Manchester Victoria railway station. Looking at the ages of that particular stock, it really brings home the term "rolling stock ageism" and its implications for those passengers unfortunate to have had to travelled in these on a regular basis.