Pacers have a future.

[krus_aragon]

I have said this before and I will say it again. There are RailUK forum members who reside in the area of the Northern Rail franchise who have become so inured with the acceptance of the Pacer fleet, that they do not see them now for what they really are any more and actually seem to be fully accepting of the reasons for keeping them for what seems to be best described as by the term...."in perpetuity".

Does the term "Stockholm Syndrome" ring a bell with anyone..

Shurley you mean Stockport/Stockton Syndrome...

 

[HSTEd]

We are actually swimming in units more suitable to replace the 90mph Sprinters/Networker Turbos than units to replace the 75mph ones.

All those Cl319s, 365s and 317s have to go somewhere.

(Almost all of FCC's fleet will be replaced by the Thameslink programme, the Class 377s will be able to cover the remaining duties with internal cascades inside Southern to get 377/3s for the Moorgate Branch.)

 

[northwichcat]

We are actually swimming in units more suitable to replace the 90mph Sprinters/Networker Turbos than units to replace the 75mph ones.

It's not so important to have 75mph units to replace 75mph on stoppers but to have units that can accelerate quickly on leaving stations.

 

[HSTEd]

It's not so important to have 75mph units to replace 75mph on stoppers but to have units that can accelerate quickly on leaving stations.

Indeed, but we have plenty of everything.

Merseyrail 507/8 units free another 19 Class 313s from Southern, we have the vast majority of the Class 315 fleet being freed by crossrail, lots of Class 319/317/365 units being freed from FCC......

Even if every Class 313 on FCC is retained for the Moorgate service we still have more units than we will need.

EDIT:

Class 14x - 130 units - 75mph
Class 150 - 137 units - 75mph
Class 153 - 70 units - 75mph [Almost always attached to another unit]
Class 155 - 7 units - 75mph
Class 156 - 114 units - 75mph
Class 158 - 170 units. - 90mph
Class 159 - 30 units - 90mph

We have available:

Class 319 - 86 units - 100mph
Class 317/1 - 12 units - 100mph
Class 321 - 21 units - 100mph
Class 365 - 40 units - 100mph
Class 313 - 44 units - 75mph (from FCC assuming thameslink can cover Moorgate from its combined 377 strength)
Class 313 - 19 units - 75mph (from Southern)
Class 315 - 43 units - 75mph (ie the Shenfield metro fleet, assuming residual services will also be operated by Crossrail stock).

Which collapses down to 159 100mph units and 106 75mph units.

The 100mph unist should be able to cover the 90mph unit fleet between them, due to elimination of coupled working on many routes. (4x20 in place of 4x23 should not be catastrophic).

Leaving us with 106 75mph units to replace 358 75mph units (not counting the 153s).

Even though even the Class 313s are double the length of the Pacers that make up 30% of that diesel unit count, we are going to be short 75mph units and not 90/100mph units. Assuming ofcourse that the political will behind the electrification programme is not the bottleneck it is.

Although I doubt 319s appearing on SWT services in place of the Sprinters would go down very well.

Really we just need to order a lot of 3 car EMUs and accelerate the electrification programme drastically.

EDIT #2:

And we can free atleast one Class 158 by sending a Cl508 to the Lymington Branch line.
Should be better suited I think.
(And before anyone moans about repair work, they managed fine with the Heritage units didn't they?)

 

[northwichcat]

Class 153 - 50 units - 75mph [Almost always attached to another unit]

I bet some EMT passengers wished that was the case. Currently most EMT 153 diagrams are 'almost always' a single unit.

And don't ATW use single 153s on the lengthy HOW service?

Really we just need to order a lot of 3 car EMUs and accelerate the electrification programme drastically.

Not as simple as that. Do you want a cowboy company using people who aren't trained properly doing the wiring? I'm guessing not so accelerating the electrification program will require new people to be fully trained in undertaking electrification work, a proper tendering process being used for awarding the electrification work, which both takes time.

 

[Haydn1971]

Indeed, but we have plenty of everything.

It's not so much speed of units that critical here, but the timescales, as said above, accelerating the install of OHLE is much easier said than done, also, you appear to have the totals to hand, any chance of breaking that down into year by year plan that shows when EMU fleets cascade down and the knock on effect of cascaded down DMU's on the non wired lines.

I'm not trying to make a point, just really interested in seeing the dates and impact on increased seats when slotting in say a 4 car EMU into the place of a 3 car DMU for example.

Again, lots of "if's buts and maybes" make the whole idea of cascades stack up like a house of cards :-/
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Actually - I feel a spreadsheet coming on

A really big one !

 

[HSTEd]

I bet some EMT passengers wished that was the case. Currently most EMT 153 diagrams are 'almost always' a single unit.

And don't ATW use single 153s on the lengthy HOW service?

There areClass 153s used regularily coupled to 156s on the Nottingham-Skegness route (although that is admittedly the limit of my knowledge when it comes to EMT) and there are the 153s used as strengthening over on London Midland, when you look at unit counts you would only need a relative handful of units to take over all the single 153 diagrams.

Not as simple as that. Do you want a cowboy company using people who aren't trained properly doing the wiring?

The new overhead equipment is supposed to comply with TSIs right?
In that case, and as the design appears to conform quite closer to what is now typical european practice, we could perhaps recruit OLE engineers and the like from Europe to make up the numbers?

I'm guessing not so accelerating the electrification program will require new people to be fully trained in undertaking electrification work, a proper tendering process being used for awarding the electrification work, which both takes time.

Even if it takes 5 years to train a new electrification team (assuming Continental staff cannot be recruited) and assemble a new HOWT and supporting plant, that would still put it in early 2018.
Which means there is then almost two years of wiring time before this "deadline", and if there electrification is progressing as fast as possible at that point, waiting another 18 months or whatever before scrapping the Pacers is not going to be a problem.

 

[tbtc]

I think that the suggestion of filling in the gaps between Gospel Oak and Barking as a realistic cheap/easy Budget announcement next week certainly gives the impression that there's more up the sleeve of the Government/ Network Rail for the remainder of decade that will help Pacer replacement further (only eight DMUs on the GOBLIN, but every little helps...)

 

[HSTEd]

I think that the suggestion of filling in the gaps between Gospel Oak and Barking as a realistic cheap/easy Budget announcement next week certainly gives the impression that there's more up the sleeve of the Government/ Network Rail for the remainder of decade that will help Pacer replacement further (only eight DMUs on the GOBLIN, but every little helps...)

There are certainly numerous small "quick wins" as you put it earlier.

Manchester suburban certainly needs so more looking at. (Unfortunately it appears that Leeds suburban has little new potential as Harrogate requires too much wiring for the number of released units - Ironically the St Ives branch comes out ahead of it).

 

[northwichcat]

There areClass 153s used regularily coupled to 156s on the Nottingham-Skegness route (although that is admittedly the limit of my knowledge when it comes to EMT) and there are the 153s used as strengthening over on London Midland, when you look at unit counts you would only need a relative handful of units to take over all the single 153 diagrams.

Many EMT services serving Derby and Lincoln are single 153s.

There's also some single 153s Northern diagrams, especially Cumbria and Lincs but there's even one in West Yorkshire.

What is still an important factor to consider in any electrification cascade is that it's not as simple as looking at a Victoria-Lime Street stopper that's 2 x 150s at peak times and 1 x 150 at off-peak time times and saying that 2 x 150s replaced by a 319. You can't put half the 319 in service if it fails or send half of the 319 back to the depot for maintenance at the end of the peak period. Neither can you use half the train to replace a failed train on a Clitheroe diagram.

In that case, and as the design appears to conform quite closer to what is now typical european practice, we could perhaps recruit OLE engineers and the like from Europe to make up the numbers?

Any Transport Minister who suggests that in the current economic climate will be very brave. Remember all the fuss when Siemens got Thameslink? And in that case the government could claim the Siemens product is better. The government can't even argue that employing people from another country is cheaper because the more people out-of-work here, the higher the benefits bill.

 

[Chris125]

Lets not forget that the 165s and 166s are essentially already assigned to west country and that the clearence issues are already being survyed, plans bing made to rectify.

True, but that should at the very least free up some sprinters from West Country branches and local services. Problem is, we still won't have enough trains for the number of people wanting to travel!

This appears to have become something of an urban myth, Network Rail's Overarching Enhancement Plan for the necessary gauge clearance does not indicate their use on West Country branchlines.

Instead they are expected to be used predominantly on longer distance routes - Cardiff to Penzance via Bristol and Weston-super-Mare, Bristol to Portsmouth, Westbury to Weymouth, Bristol to Worcester/ Gloucester, Bristol to Severn Beach, Swindon to Gloucester and Swindon to Westbury along with various diversionary routes.

Chris

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

We are actually swimming in units more suitable to replace the 90mph Sprinters/Networker Turbos than units to replace the 75mph ones. All those Cl319s, 365s and 317s have to go somewhere.

We are also "swimming in units" (to use your phrase) in "Northern-land", but these are the Pacer fleet, which appear to be going nowhere, unlike the stocks of the Classes 317/319/365 that you mention in your posting, that appear to be seeking a new home.

How so very pleasant, to have the dilemma that you face.

 

[HSTEd]

We are also "swimming in units" (to use your phrase) in "Northern-land", but these are the Pacer fleet, which appear to be going nowhere, unlike the stocks of the Classes 317/319/365 that you mention in your posting, that appear to be seeking a new home.

How so very pleasant, to have the dilemma that you face.

I was referring to swimming in spare units, or soon to be spare units.
So no, you are not swimming in units in the same context in Northern-land.

Basically: within reasonable constraints and for the near future, electrification saves stock orders.
Thus we can use that money to partially fund electrification schemes.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I was referring to swimming in spare units, or soon to be spare units. So no, you are not swimming in units in the same context in Northern-land.

I had assumed that you were referring to the numbers of rolling-stock "of a certain age" in your own area when I made my comparison to the fact that "Northern-land" too suffers from such a problem.

It appears that your own area's rolling-stock replacement programme is far more advanced than in our area.

 

[HSTEd]

I had assumed that you were referring to the numbers of rolling-stock "of a certain age" in your own area when I made my comparison to the fact that "Northern-land" too suffers from such a problem.

It appears that your own area's rolling-stock replacement programme is far more advanced than in our area.

My local station has five trains per day calling using post privatisation rolling stock. (Class 180s operated by Hull Trains).

The last time I saw other non ex-BR stock stop was back when Hull Trains used Meridians.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

My local station has five trains per day calling using post privatisation rolling stock. (Class 180s operated by Hull Trains). The last time I saw other non ex-BR stock stop was back when Hull Trains used Meridians.

I share your pain if that be the case.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

This is why I'm unconvinced about buying a lot of new DMUs for the sake of a five year "peak" - we're still paying the price of (1980s) short term thinking

May I hark back to this matter and enquire what should be proposed for lines such as the East Suffolk line which may not see electrification for many years into the distant future. Cascadation of existing DMU stocks can only go on for a finite period of time.

 

[tbtc]

May I hark back to this matter and enquire what should be proposed for lines such as the East Suffolk line which may not see electrification for many years into the distant future. Cascadation of existing DMU stocks can only go on for a finite period of time.

Not sure why this debate had to be restarted (?), but as I've previously explained the post-privatisation DMUs (170s, 172s etc) will last beyond the date that HS2 opens, through many control periods...

We will need some new DMUs eventually because some lines aren't viable for electrification, but the idea of building hundreds of millions of pounds worth of new DMUs for the sake of a short period between the 1 January 2020 deadline for accessibility and the time around 2024 (when I expect CP6 electrification to have eliminated the need for most of the 75mph DMUs that we currently have), if some Pacers can be refurbished to last another few years.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Not sure why this debate had to be restarted (?), but as I've previously explained the post-privatisation DMUs (170s, 172s etc) will last beyond the date that HS2 opens, through many control periods...

We will need some new DMUs eventually because some lines aren't viable for electrification, but the idea of building hundreds of millions of pounds worth of new DMUs for the sake of a short period between the 1 January 2020 deadline for accessibility and the time around 2024 (when I expect CP6 electrification to have eliminated the need for most of the 75mph DMUs that we currently have), if some Pacers can be refurbished to last another few years.

Thank you for this final clarification on the very specific matter of the lines that will be those that are the most time-schedule removed from the forward plans for the electrification of the British rail network and of the DMU provision that will be needed for these, which I have been assured will be very far in the future after HS2 has become a reality. It was that far time-related distance period to which I referred to for new DMU provision, which is even further removed from the time period that you envisaged.

 

[The Ham]

Not sure why this debate had to be restarted (?), but as I've previously explained the post-privatisation DMUs (170s, 172s etc) will last beyond the date that HS2 opens, through many control periods...

We will need some new DMUs eventually because some lines aren't viable for electrification, but the idea of building hundreds of millions of pounds worth of new DMUs for the sake of a short period between the 1 January 2020 deadline for accessibility and the time around 2024 (when I expect CP6 electrification to have eliminated the need for most of the 75mph DMUs that we currently have), if some Pacers can be refurbished to last another few years.

The only reason I can think of (other than if passenger numbers grow a lot) is if more lines are reopened, however it is likely that following the precedent of East West it may well be that some would be considered for electrified from the start.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Not sure why this debate had to be restarted (?), but as I've previously explained the post-privatisation DMUs (170s, 172s etc) will last beyond the date that HS2 opens, through many control periods...

We will need some new DMUs eventually because some lines aren't viable for electrification, but the idea of building hundreds of millions of pounds worth of new DMUs for the sake of a short period between the 1 January 2020 deadline for accessibility and the time around 2024 (when I expect CP6 electrification to have eliminated the need for most of the 75mph DMUs that we currently have), if some Pacers can be refurbished to last another few years.

Out of curiosity where do you think some DUM's feed up by electrification will end up e.g. Will the 185's freed up from Transpennine North be used to strengthen other Transpennine services or could they be sent elsewhere like Scotland to free up some 156/158's?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Out of curiosity where do you think some DMUs feed up by electrification will end up e.g. Will the 185's freed up from Transpennine North be used to strengthen other Transpennine services or could they be sent elsewhere like Scotland to free up some 156/158's?

The 185s are a strange one- they're heavy and expensive to run, but they're also quick. They're fairly well-appointed inside, but the door positions mean they can be draughty on longer journeys. The doors also mean they're quick to load and unload on busy services, but they don't have the capacity of a 3-car 158 or 175. The ideal routes for the 185s would be ones broadly similar to where they currently run- Steeply-graded inter-urban routes that allow them to make the most of the extra power and where they're able to stretch their legs with a reasonable amount of 100mph-running on the longer stretches between stations. On that basis I'd say the ideal routes would be semi-fast services between Edinburgh/Glasgow and Inverness/Aberdeen, along with Cardiff-Portsmouth, regional services in the SouthWest (Bristol-Plymouth for example) or maybe the Leeds-Nottinghams.

 

[Harbon 1]

I bet some EMT passengers wished that was the case. Currently most EMT 153 diagrams are 'almost always' a single unit.

They are when its not especially busy, the train i get from nottingham to lincoln used to be a single unit, and got so busy to the point the guard on on occasion let us sit in the secondmans seat, with him using the partition to close himself in the drivers side cab. Now its always 2x153 and is rarely standing only

 

[Haydn1971]

Not sure why this debate had to be restarted

Because the debate isn't quite over - we haven't actually established that we will have enough DMU's in the future, nor established if the much anticipated electrification will happen as quickly as some expect, or indeed if there will be enough EMU's that don't hark from the 1980's to service the expectations of a currently growing customer base.

We will need some new DMUs eventually because some lines aren't viable for electrification,

Yes !!! He's seen the light, there is a need for future DMU's !

but the idea of building hundreds of millions of pounds worth of new DMUs for the sake of a short period between the 1 January 2020 deadline for accessibility and the time around 2024 (when I expect CP6 electrification to have eliminated the need for most of the 75mph DMUs that we currently have)

What you expect and what is actually done could be quite different - we have a need now for new DMU's to fill the growing demands for seats on non electrified routes and replace rolling stock that's beyond hope ! Not just Pacers, but the ageing 150's and the almost life expired 70's fleet of PEP EMU's that will inevitably end up fobbed off onto the next Northern franchise.

if some Pacers can be refurbished to last another few years.

Pacers need to be refurbished into drinks cans and razor blades

 

[ainsworth74]

On that basis I'd say the ideal routes would be semi-fast services between Edinburgh/Glasgow and Inverness/Aberdeen, along with Cardiff-Portsmouth, regional services in the SouthWest (Bristol-Plymouth for example) or maybe the Leeds-Nottinghams.

One problem with that is that it doesn't account for the two dedicated depots built for the 185s in Manchester and York. I'd be reluctant to move them away from that unless it was absolutely necessary. It's not as if there aren't other services in the North that could be operated by 185s. Leeds - Nottingham (as you mention), Blackpool - York/Scarborough and Leeds - Carlisle are a few that immediately spring to mind.

 

[Surreyman]

Because the debate isn't quite over - we haven't actually established that we will have enough DMU's in the future, nor established if the much anticipated electrification will happen as quickly as some expect, or indeed if there will be enough EMU's that don't hark from the 1980's to service the expectations of a currently growing customer base.



Yes !!! He's seen the light, there is a need for future DMU's !



What you expect and what is actually done could be quite different - we have a need now for new DMU's to fill the growing demands for seats on non electrified routes and replace rolling stock that's beyond hope ! Not just Pacers, but the ageing 150's and the almost life expired 70's fleet of PEP EMU's that will inevitably end up fobbed off onto the next Northern franchise.



Pacers need to be refurbished into drinks cans and razor blades

Roger Fords article in the April Modern Railways, Informed Sources;
page 35, where he reviews the 'Rolling Stock strategy publication" with some degree of cynicism.
"DMUS are off!"
I quote 2 paragraphs from the article.

1. "For some years now the ROSCOs have been saying that new DMUs are unfundable or at least, fundable only at uneconomic lease rentals. to its credit, the rolling stock strategy tries to put numbers on this, confirming that future requirement for DMUs will be minimal.
How minimal? Well possibly as few 400-800 vehicles over the 30 years covered by the strategy"

2. " Apart from the ROSCOs residual value concerns, current and future European Commission legislation on emissions from diesel engines will increasingly make it difficult or even impossible for to make a viable business case for DMUs with underfloor engines"

Now nothing is certain or absolute in this world but the message coming across from the railway industry seems to be No new DMUs for some years.

 

[tbtc]

Roger Fords article in the April Modern Railways, Informed Sources;
page 35, where he reviews the 'Rolling Stock strategy publication" with some degree of cynicism.
"DMUS are off!"
I quote 2 paragraphs from the article.

1. "For some years now the ROSCOs have been saying that new DMUs are unfundable or at least, fundable only at uneconomic lease rentals. to its credit, the rolling stock strategy tries to put numbers on this, confirming that future requirement for DMUs will be minimal.
How minimal? Well possibly as few 400-800 vehicles over the 30 years covered by the strategy"

2. " Apart from the ROSCOs residual value concerns, current and future European Commission legislation on emissions from diesel engines will increasingly make it difficult or even impossible for to make a viable business case for DMUs with underfloor engines"

Now nothing is certain or absolute in this world but the message coming across from the railway industry seems to be No new DMUs for some years.

That's the way that I see it.

Obviously we'll need some for the Heart Of Wales/ West Highland/ Far North etc at some stage in the long term, but we are talking minimal numbers (and replacements won't be required until the 170s/ 172s etc are life expired, which may be another twentysomething years).

Out of curiosity where do you think some DUM's feed up by electrification will end up e.g. Will the 185's freed up from Transpennine North be used to strengthen other Transpennine services or could they be sent elsewhere like Scotland to free up some 156/158's?

Leeds - Nottingham ...Blackpool - York/Scarborough and Leeds - Carlisle are a few that immediately spring to mind.

I'd echo ainsworth74's suggestion. We'll need them on the Cleethorpes service for some time to come (and possibly Middlesbrough etc too), but in the meantime the remainder could be moved onto routes like those suggested above and the Buxton line, the Calder Valley...

The problem with moving them away from "the north" is that the fleet size isn't huge (compared to most Sprinter fleets), so I don't know whether it'd be worth having a handful spread through other TOCs (e.g. they sound good for the Glasgow/ Edinburgh - Inverness services, but that certainly wouldn't need all fifty one - would it be worth having a dozen at FSR?).

 

[Haydn1971]

How minimal? Well possibly as few 400-800 vehicles over the 30 years covered by the strategy"

The Feb 2013 Rolling Stock Strategy was claiming a need of between 1259 and 1528 units by 2042 - given the short supply of DMU's built in the last decade - 153 class 185's carriages and that these will be life expired by 2042 and that about 2000 units are "expected" to be needed in 2024, 1500 in 2029 - I'm seeing a big shortfall in DMU's that will be less than the typically acknowledged near life expired age of 30 years old and well out of tune with expected emissions caps - which may well be enforced in urban areas by the local authorities well before that time just as TfL has placed limits on heavy goods and taxis with poor emissions.

Now nothing is certain or absolute in this world but the message coming across from the railway industry seems to be No new DMUs for some years.

I'm sure the ROSCO's will love having cheap 30 year old stock still running, I'm sorry I don't find it acceptable to be riding about on 30 year old tat to bolster someone else's share dividend up !

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Whilst the matter of which type of traction and which type of units are being discussed, let us always remember that these are nothing more than a transportation mode and the conveyance of rail travelling public in a 21st century modern conveyance in reasonable comfort is the sole reason why these are here.

 

[northwichcat]

I'd echo ainsworth74's suggestion. We'll need them on the Cleethorpes service for some time to come (and possibly Middlesbrough etc too), but in the meantime the remainder could be moved onto routes like those suggested above and the Buxton line, the Calder Valley...

The problem with moving them away from "the north" is that the fleet size isn't huge (compared to most Sprinter fleets), so I don't know whether it'd be worth having a handful spread through other TOCs (e.g. they sound good for the Glasgow/ Edinburgh - Inverness services, but that certainly wouldn't need all fifty one - would it be worth having a dozen at FSR?).

What has to be considered as well is internal layout. A 3 car train with only slightly more seats than a 2 car 156 isn't what the Buxton line needs but then if you refit them to have a higher density seating layout it'll make them less suitable for services like South TPE.

While we don't know which lines are likely to get 185s the current Network Rail plans for platform lengthening gives us some clues.

 4x 24m car length at Mossley Down, Greenfield Down, Marsden, Slaithwaite, Mouldsworth, Delamere, Cuddington, Greenbank, Plumley Down, Ashley Down, Hathersage and Grindleford
 4 x 23m car length at Dove Holes, Chapel-en-le Frith, Middlewood, Woodsmoor, Humphrey Park, Glazebrook Down, New Lane, Bescar Lane, Moses Gate, Hall i’th’wood, Darwen, Ramsgreave & Wilpshire, Langho, Whalley and Clitheroe
 6 x 24m car length at Liverpool South Parkway Up and Down fast platforms, Widnes, Warrington Central and Newton-le-Willows
 3 x 23m car at Bamber Bridge Up

The ones highlighted in blue are likely to get longer Sprinter trains.

The schemes highlighted in red would allow for 4 car formations of builds like the 17xs (on diesel lines) or 380s (on electric lines.)

The ones highlighted in green may see pairs of 185s as the primary traction. The inclusion of Newton-le-Willows may mean Manchester-Warrington-Chester line could be a future 185 home*, given that Liverpool-Earlestown-Manchester services will likely be 4 car electric trains.

* With proposals for Calder Vale-Chester services maybe Calder Vale as well?