Pacers have a future.

[tbtc]

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

The three coach 185 has one large toilet and one small toilet (I suppose it could always lose the smaller toilet if you wanted to cram in more seats).

The two coach 156 has one small toilet - if it's to meet accesibility standards then it'd presumably need a large toilet (at the cost of some seats).

 

[Spaceflower]

Surely the fact that pacers have lasted so long demonstrates just how successful they've been? They've provided a lifeline for many routes and communities. 10 years after withdrawal they'll be hailed as gods. Many books and videos will be published documenting their huge contribution to the British railway network.

I'll get my coat......

 

[northwichcat]

The three coach 185 has one large toilet and one small toilet (I suppose it could always lose the smaller toilet if you wanted to cram in more seats).

The two coach 156 has one small toilet - if it's to meet accesibility standards then it'd presumably need a large toilet (at the cost of some seats).

What I'm trying to get at is the 6 car 185 option on the Buxton line would need a lot of platform lengthening to accommodate and doesn't provide many more seats than a 4 car 156 so it wouldn't seem economically viable to carry out that platform lengthening work unless a refurbishment with a higher seating density was carried out.

Then if you refurbish some with a higher density seating pattern you'd either have two micro-fleets or make them less suitable for services like South TPE.

Removing the smaller toilet and converting FC to SC would only give you about 8 extra seats on a 185 so the refurbishment would need to remove tables, luggage racks or decrease leg room to get any real increase in seating capacity without going to 3+2 seating.

 

[HSTEd]

I remember that calculation I did that showed that scrapping the 185s and building new turbostars would actually be better value for the railway than continuing to use the 185s until end-of-life.

They are just too fuel hungry.

 

[jopsuk]

whilst fuel hungry (and route limited by weight!) the 185s are rather better at mountaineering than 170s

 

[ainsworth74]

whilst fuel hungry (and route limited by weight!) the 185s are rather better at mountaineering than 170s

I know have the image of an anthropomorphised 185 scaling Ben Nevis and a rather amusing image it makes!

 

[northwichcat]

I remember that calculation I did that showed that scrapping the 185s and building new turbostars would actually be better value for the railway than continuing to use the 185s until end-of-life.

They are just too fuel hungry.

whilst fuel hungry (and route limited by weight!) the 185s are rather better at mountaineering than 170s

Would it be possible to modify the 185s to work on diesel mountain routes in Europe?

I'm not sure if there's anywhere suitable by the time you discount electrified routes and allow for the fact that operators like Renfe already have suitable trains for mountain routes that are just as new or newer than the 185s. I went on a almost new Renfe MD R599 on recently relaid track a couple of years back and I heard a couple of people comment about the train running being quieter than anything in Britain and in my opinion it was a diesel running better than a 350 on the WCML to a similar engine noise level.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What I'm trying to get at is the 6 car 185 option on the Buxton line would need a lot of platform lengthening to accommodate

Surely the Class 185 would be far better employed on longer distance routes than the Buxton line or any similar short distance services.

 

[HSTEd]

whilst fuel hungry (and route limited by weight!) the 185s are rather better at mountaineering than 170s

Indeed 185s have superior power to weight ratio to the 170s and thus likely superior mountain climbing performance.

The latest turbostar however, the 172, has got more powerful engines and has also been made lighter than the 170 thanks to the new lightweight bogies that are now in use.

This tends to largely erase the 185s power advantage.

And then you throw in the ability to spend money currently used to keep lines rated for 100mph to keep a larger fraction of the route rated at 75SP100.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

whilst fuel hungry (and route limited by weight!) the 185s are rather better at mountaineering than 170s

That was my reasoning for sending them to Scotland to run routes across the highlands, however I forgot they have 1/3 2/3 doors which could make them unconformable on the 3 hours+ journeys from Glasgow/Edinburgh to Inverness. Shame as the 51 trains in the fleet could have freed up all 46 of Scotrails 158's + some 156's

 

[tbtc]

Surely the Class 185 would be far better employed on longer distance routes than the Buxton line or any similar short distance services.

The Buxton line is a relatively hilly route where a three coach DMU may be suited (as well as Calder Valley etc).

Which longer distance routes did you have in mind that require a three coach DMU?

 

[northwichcat]

The Buxton line is a relatively hilly route where a three coach DMU may be suited (as well as Calder Valley etc).

The problem would be at peak times the Buxton line can have 4 carriage trains that have a 250+ loading so a 3 car 185 would be a downgrade. Unless you propose a lot of platform lengthening to allow 6 car as I mentioned earlier or have unit switches at peak times and the 185s they finish up running off-peak Buxton services and, for instance, peak time Chester services then 185s won't really work considering the optional 4th car was never built.

 

[tbtc]

The problem would be at peak times the Buxton line can have 4 carriage trains that have a 250+ loading so a 3 car 185 would be a downgrade. Unless you propose a lot of platform lengthening to allow 6 car as I mentioned earlier or have unit switches at peak times and the 185s they finish up running off-peak Buxton services and, for instance, peak time Chester services then 185s won't really work considering the optional 4th car was never built.

It's just a suggestion of a route where a three coach DMU that's good at climbing hills would be okay - if anyone has a better idea for where fifty one of them would work better long term then fair enough - they have advantages and disadvantages on most lines though (they are shorter than the four coach 158s that used to provide most Leeds- Manchester "fasts")

 

[Buttsy]

185s for Devon & Cornwall perhaps?

 

[HSTEd]

Ironically the St Ives branch comes out similarly to the Rose Hill Marple branch in terms of track electrified per unit released.

But I suppose you would have to electrify all the way to Penzance TMD so then it doesn't rate very highly.

 

[northwichcat]

It's just a suggestion of a route where a three coach DMU that's good at climbing hills would be okay - if anyone has a better idea for where fifty one of them would work better long term then fair enough - they have advantages and disadvantages on most lines though (they are shorter than the four coach 158s that used to provide most Leeds- Manchester "fasts")

The difference between Calder Vale and Buxton is at peak times Buxton line is pretty much all 4 car in the peak flow direction and obviously the trains that go to Buxton in the evening peak, have to come back at some point. Calder Vale sees a mix of 2, 3, 4 and 5 car, given the 5 car ones are booked as 144(3)+144 (2) or 144(3)+142 we could simplify that to 2, 3 or 4 car for practical purposes.

Would the Calder Vale fasts be able to run as 6 car without a whole scale platform lengthening scheme?

Another idea may be given the size of the fleet is small to rework the 185s to run on 2 engines and then use the removed engines for spare parts instead of ordering what could be costly spare parts in the future to keep 185s going.

 

[rebmcr]

That was my reasoning for sending them to Scotland to run routes across the highlands, however I forgot they have 1/3 2/3 doors which could make them unconformable on the 3 hours+ journeys from Glasgow/Edinburgh to Inverness. Shame as the 51 trains in the fleet could have freed up all 46 of Scotrails 158's + some 156's

They're more comfortable than some vestibule stock, IMO, and I'd not be averse to long-distance journeys on them.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Which longer distance routes did you have in mind that require a three coach DMU?

They would be useful to allow the release of the Class 170 units on the Manchester Piccadilly to Hull service. I cannot see the line to Hull being electrified in the near future. The released class 170 units surely can be used to improve the rolling stock position on other lines where this is now required.

 

[tbtc]

They would be useful to allow the release of the Class 170 units on the Manchester Piccadilly to Hull service. I cannot see the line to Hull being electrified in the near future

That's only around five units worth of work, and Hull Trains have proposed electrification east of Selby (I'd put money on it being wired by 2024 regardless).

 

[northwichcat]

That's only around five units worth of work, and Hull Trains have proposed electrification east of Selby (I'd put money on it being wired by 2024 regardless).

Could be 10 if they get doubled up post Manchester-York electrification.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That's only around five units worth of work, and Hull Trains have proposed electrification east of Selby (I'd put money on it being wired by 2024 regardless).

Should this occur from next year, that would still give ten years of work for the Class 185 units, which is most certainly not an insignificant period of time.

 

[IanXC]

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.

I'd suggest that the future of Edinburgh/Glasgow to Inverness/Aberdeen is the 222 fleet - they have the kind of facilities that are increasingly expected by the passengers on the routes, and release many 170s and 158s which currently are required to work in multiple.

 

[notabasher]

Pacers can keep time better than a class 153, have good all-round vision for passengers, and ride very well on CWR.

On routes where there are steady but not large exchanges of passengers at intermediate stations the 3 doors per side is not an issue either.

For journeys of 30-45 minutes I think they are fine. Should be kept away from Lancaster to Leeds or Carlisle to Newcastle though.

 

[RobShipway]

I'd suggest that the future of Edinburgh/Glasgow to Inverness/Aberdeen is the 222 fleet - they have the kind of facilities that are increasingly expected by the passengers on the routes, and release many 170s and 158s which currently are required to work in multiple.

Isn't Edinburgh -Glasgow going to be electrified soon?

 

[rebmcr]

Anywhere with a lot of tunnels or close-in cuttings is just awful in a Pacer, though. It probably gets up to 80-90dB with the air pressure gusting against the bodywork and flimsy "doors". A prime example is the Hope Valley Line.

 

[ainsworth74]

Isn't Edinburgh -Glasgow going to be electrified soon?

They are suggesting Edinburgh - Aberdeen/Inverness and Glasgow - Aberdeen/Inverness services not Edinburgh - Glasgow because as you say that route is being wired in the near future.

 

[HSTEd]

On a peripherally rated note.... would an ex-Merseyrail 508 work on the Lymington Branch?

They are going to be rather simple to maintain I would have thought.

 

[northwichcat]

On a peripherally rated note.... would an ex-Merseyrail 508 work on the Lymington Branch?

They are going to be rather simple to maintain I would have thought.

I've brought up giving one or two 50xs to SWT before and releasing a 158 for strengthening elsewhere on the network and the comment has been met with widespread criticism.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

On a peripherally rated note.... would an ex-Merseyrail 508 work on the Lymington Branch? They are going to be rather simple to maintain I would have thought.

The Class 508 units were based at Strawberry Hill depot as 4-car units, so have knowledge of use on South of England lines. Would the Lymington Branch have any specific operational problems for these units ?

 

[tom1649]

Anywhere with a lot of tunnels or close-in cuttings is just awful in a Pacer, though. It probably gets up to 80-90dB with the air pressure gusting against the bodywork and flimsy "doors". A prime example is the Hope Valley Line.

Totley Tunnel on a Pacer with all the windows open is one of my favourite roller coaster rides!

To be honest though one of the good things is that you can enjoy the scenery of the Hope Valley on a Pacer, no high seat backs getting in the way.