Porterbrook to create Pacer demonstrator (now unveiled)

[gazthomas]

Lucky us. Why many bus companies can refresh their fleets but we're stuck with these old (rail)buses! What's the point of leases if they go on for ever (I know, cost of refurbishment investment...)

 

[edwin_m]

Lucky us. Why many bus companies can refresh their fleets but we're stuck with these old (rail)buses! What's the point of leases if they go on for ever (I know, cost of refurbishment investment...)

Buses have long production runs of standard designs and share some components with other road vehicles. Many designs are also in use in several countries, give or take variations for left and right hand drive. So the costs per vehicle of designing and getting approval are tiny, and manufacturers can buy components in bulk and run an efficient production line.

Trains, particularly in the UK, are procured in much smaller batches and have a far more complex approval process, so there is significant design and approval cost attached to each vehicle. The small order size means that the production process is also less efficient. Possibly as a consequence of this and perhaps also because of having to be built to stricter standards, trains also have a much longer design life.

 

[WatcherZero]

Buses tend to have an average operating life of 10 years too, a third that of a train. They also tend to move around spending the first half of their life somewhere like London or a major city then the second half somewhere quieter. So that's why they appear to be refreshed more often.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Wouldn't it make sense to add a third car onto these Super Pacers if capacity is not increased?
I have been looking at the PPM newsletter and published data for ages now. They have very interesting concepts for lightly used rail lines. And also cheap tram/pretend heritage ideas which would make new rolling stock affordable.

As much as I want to see the Super Pacer I think it's time for new railbuses for Northernland and Devon.

One one of the previous threads discussing the future of Pacers, it was suggested that the 143s and 2-car 144s be merged into 4-car sets, with the inner cabs removed and gangways provided. I have no idea what technical difficulties this might present, but it might be worth looking into, given that passenger numbers are continuing to rise even in an economic downturn. Likewise, rejoining the 153s seems to be a no-brainer (condition permitting) but there might even be case for merging them into 3-car sets rather than 2.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Buses tend to have an average operating life of 10 years too, a third that of a train. They also tend to move around spending the first half of their life somewhere like London or a major city then the second half somewhere quieter. So that's why they appear to be refreshed more often.

10 years = 1/3rd of trains life.
So why are Pacers being refitted to last another 20years or be replaced by old D-Trains?
It wouldn't be acceptable for road bus.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

10 years = 1/3rd of trains life.
So why are Pacers being refitted to last another 20years or be replaced by old D-Trains?
It wouldn't be acceptable for road bus.

££££££££ :roll:

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Imo converting Pacers is spending good money after bad.
(Other than refreshing interiors and scheduled maintenance)
The date for compliance is a little optimistic as rail vehicles have a much longer life than road vehicles, and the lack of funding for new trains.
Speeding up electrification is the most cost effective in the long term.
Sorry if this link has already been posted. Published 25/01/15
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmtran/257/25708.htm
51. By refusing to give a date for when the Pacer trains will be taken out of service and simply saying that he "hopes" they have had their day, the Secretary of State has suggested that he does not have the powers to ensure a decent quality of train for passengers in the North and South West of England or in Wales. Alternatively, his admission that he would not like to be held to account for the Pacers' withdrawal suggests that he does have these powers, but is unwilling to match his rhetoric with action. We find it concerning that the rolling stock operating company Porterbrook is prepared to spend £800,000 refurbishing the Pacer to extend its use on our network. It is unacceptable that Pacer trains—built in the mid-1980s and of questionable safety—are still in use on busy rail lines. We recommend the Secretary of State uses his franchise specification powers to require the removal of Pacer trains from the rail network by 2020 at the latest.

 

[Bletchleyite]

10 years = 1/3rd of trains life.
So why are Pacers being refitted to last another 20years or be replaced by old D-Trains?
It wouldn't be acceptable for road bus.

Trains typically last longer than buses. The main reason for this, I would think, is that they are more expensive, so much larger repairs are economically viable than for a bus (and in turn larger repairs are economically viable for a bus than a car).

Neil

 

[northwichcat]

Buses tend to have an average operating life of 10 years too, a third that of a train.

An average of 10 is probably an underestimate. There's plenty of buses from the early 00s still in daily service and even some as old as Pacers and 150s used occasionally on school contracts even if not in regular use.

Operators like First and Arriva tend to hang on to buses as long as they can keep them in service for, while Stagecoach tend to sell off older buses which then get taken on by other operators.

If operators have an unreliable bus in their fleet then it tends to get canabilised.

 

[WatcherZero]

Thats why its an average.

 

[WillPS]

For that to be a working average, there would have to be as many buses scrapped at 8 years old as at 12 years old. Doesn't check out in my mind. Unless we're not talking about the mean here?

 

[The Ham]

For that to be a working average, there would have to be as many buses scrapped at 8 years old as at 12 years old. Doesn't check out in my mind. Unless we're not talking about the mean here?

Not quite true, all buses scrapped before the average would have to equal the diffence to the average as all those after the average.

For instance there could be a fleet of 10 buses which all get scrapped aged 11, except for 1 which is written off after 1 year of service and is replaced by a bus which is then scrapped aged 10.

The average age is still 10, however 9 make it to 11, 1 to 1 and one to 10.

 

[WatcherZero]

Cant find an official statistics for average retirement age, but is a Government official statistic for average age, you would expect average age to be more than half retirement age depending on how quickly fleets are replaced and buses written off before reaching end of life:

London 5.9 years (risen from 4.6 a decade ago)
Metropolitan areas 7.8 (fallen from 8.4)
Non Metropolitan areas 8.5 (fallen from 8.8)
England 7.7 (unchanged)
Scotland 8.2 (fallen from 8.7)
Wales 8.2 (fallen from 9.6)

Number of buses in service has risen slightly from 41,800 to 42,200

In the US buses are retired at 12 years (as there is a federal grant to replace them when they reach that age). In the UK for tax purposes a bus is depreciated over 5 years.

 

[Qwerty133]

Buses tend to have an average operating life of 10 years too, a third that of a train. They also tend to move around spending the first half of their life somewhere like London or a major city then the second half somewhere quieter. So that's why they appear to be refreshed more often.

Where do you live, here in a major city the newest double deckers until recently were from 2008, and there are still some from the late 1990s about (S/T reg). In fact the newest bus I'm likely to get is from 2002 which is 13 years old this year, and some of them have not received a single refresh from new, and some of the older ones don't even have heating.
I should also add I get the sense these 12+ year old buses will still be operating in 5 years time, with the timetables giving more and more time as these buses deteriate even further. Some of these buses are already overdue scrapping (4778-4809, 4707-4745 4025, and 4027 are specific examples Im thinking of, 4778-4709 physically can't get above 15MPH, 4707-4745 are always breaking down and have never received a proper refurb so feel their age, although certain ones are worse than others (for example I believe drivers have been told how to work round a irreparable problem with 4712 which means it often doesn't start properly), 4025 never seems to start and 4027 has a window that has been refusing to stay shut for over a month.).

 

[samuelmorris]

It is quite amusing to see here on the local bus route, finally getting the 'new' buses that were introduced when I was at school over a decade ago, now slowly falling to bits. Even in London though I still see plenty of 55/06 buses, and even a handful of Y/51s - 10 years is definitely suitable, 15 years is doable. The issue here is the fact that we're not starting with ground-up new vehicles are we?

 

[northwichcat]

London 5.9 years (risen from 4.6 a decade ago)

Does that mean retirement age or the age they are moved off London routes? First Group were still using some ex-London area double decker buses which had L registrations in West Yorkshire only a few years ago.

 

[73001]

Does that mean retirement age or the age they are moved off London routes? First Group were still using some ex-London area double decker buses which had L registrations in West Yorkshire only a few years ago.

It was the average age of the fleet in service, so some older, some younger. As you say, the London age is skewed as the buses aren't life expired when they go... They ship them off for another 5-10 years somewhere else. We still have X-reg buses doing full days here in Liverpool (which is some going considering how bad the roads used to be). Anyway, back to topic... I'm quite looking forward to the refurb pacer but with the reduction in seating they might not be as useful as the Vivarail option (which I have to confess I thought was a bit of a joke initially).

 

[47802]

Does that mean retirement age or the age they are moved off London routes? First Group were still using some ex-London area double decker buses which had L registrations in West Yorkshire only a few years ago.

First group still seem to have some old crap around West Yorkshire although I did notice quite a lot of new single deckers around Huddersfield the other day, but the vast majority or Arriva buses where I live are fairly new.

Anyway this is somewhat irrelevant the railbus situation, certainly I think the upgraded 143/144's are worthy of consideration, as is the Vivarail unit, until you have actually seen and tried both of these revised units I don't think they should be criticised.

As I have said many times Railbuses actually serve the purpose quite well the problem is they still turn up on long distance runs, but if the intention is to get rid of the 142's by 2020 which are by far the biggest fleet then the number of railbus journeys would be vastly reduced even if 143/144's are retained.

 

[northwichcat]

It was the average age of the fleet, so some older, some younger. As you say, the London age is skewed as the buses aren't life expired when they go... They ship them off for another 5-10 years somewhere else. We still have X-reg buses doing full days here in Liverpool (which is some going considering how bad the roads used to be).

Oh yes I missed it was average age of buses, not average retirement age.

It must be difficult to work out average age by those categories. For instance, GHA Coaches purchased 4 new 64 reg Enviro 200s for the 88 Knutsford-Wilmslow-Altrincham route last year.

Given Altrincham is in a Metropolitan area and Knutsford is in a non-Metropolitan area which category do they come under?

Those new buses, while route branded for the 88 route have appeared on the T3 route in North Wales and belong to an operator with a head office in Wrexham, so could they actually be treated as Welsh in working out the average ages?

Incidentally GHA Coaches are acquiring some further new buses which are set to get 15 registrations but then they've purchased a number of R reg buses from Brighton & Hove, so I think the two will cancel each other out when working out updated ages.

At the moment it seems any low-floor bus which is reliable enough is being kept in service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Anyway this is somewhat irrelevant the railbus situation, certainly I think the upgraded 143/144's are worthy of consideration, as is the Vivarail unit, until you have actually seen and tried both of these revised units I don't think they should be criticised.

On the routes I've been on a 144 on they do seem to provide a better ride quality than the 142s (although that doesn't exactly mean a lot in itself.)

With regards to the converted D78s we have been given some facts by Vivarail - such as top speed, length of train, width of train and possible seating arrangements. This means we can say some routes they certainly won't be suitable for, routes which they should be suitable for (subject to the project being successful and clearance being obtained) and routes they may or may not be suitable for.

 

[WatcherZero]

Seen renders of the new interior in Rail, its snazzy but the capacity issue still remains. Loses more than a quarter of its seats (92-24 to 68) And while per carriage it may be cheaper than a 2 car dmu It doesnt really compare to the opportunity for three or four car dmu which would have far more seats and probably even price competitive on a per seat basis.

For a start it would be staff inefficent in multiple and able to potentially earn less revenue.

 

[northwichcat]

Seen renders of the new interior in Rail, its snazzy but the capacity issue still remains. Loses more than a quarter of its seats (92-24 to 68) And while per carriage it may be cheaper than a 2 car dmu It doesnt really compare to the opportunity for three or four car dmu which would have far more seats and probably even price competitive on a per seat basis.

For a start it would be staff inefficent in multiple and able to potentially earn less revenue.

Like I've suggested before. The refurbished 143/4s will be no good for their current services but would provide a possible class 153 replacement for some lines - obviously not HOW though!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Seen renders of the new interior in Rail, its snazzy but the capacity issue still remains. Loses more than a quarter of its seats (92-24 to 68) And while per carriage it may be cheaper than a 2 car dmu It doesnt really compare to the opportunity for three or four car dmu which would have far more seats and probably even price competitive on a per seat basis.

For a start it would be staff inefficent in multiple and able to potentially earn less revenue.

It might have been ideal for the demo unit to have been one of the 3-car units, but maybe Northern could easier manage being 2-cars down rather than three.

 

[northwichcat]

It might have been ideal for the demo unit to have been one of the 3-car units, but maybe Northern could easier manage being 2-cars down rather than three.

Maybe it was a 2 car one on purpose?

There's only 10 x 3 car 144s (which could be shortened to 2 car), while there's 23 x 2 car 143s and 13 x 2 car 144s (which can't be lengthened to 3 car) so they probably want to judge whether there's a market for the 36 x 2 car Pacers.

 

[The Ham]

Maybe it was a 2 car one on purpose?

There's only 10 x 3 car 144s (which could be shortened to 2 car), while there's 23 x 2 car 143s and 13 x 2 car 144s (which can't be lengthened to 3 car) so they probably want to judge whether there's a market for the 36 x 2 car Pacers.

Also, there will be less of a reduction (in percentage terms) in the total number of seats for the 3 coach versions, so they would be easier to find a home for. As even if the reduction was too much to still be used on the routes they currently serve the reduction would be fine for other routes currently being used by two coach sets.

 

[WatcherZero]

They did the two car over the three car purely to limit the cost of the pilot conversion.

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Maybe it was a 2 car one on purpose?

There's only 10 x 3 car 144s (which could be shortened to 2 car), while there's 23 x 2 car 143s and 13 x 2 car 144s (which can't be lengthened to 3 car) so they probably want to judge whether there's a market for the 36 x 2 car Pacers.

What about stripping a few former Miseryrail class 142's down, cut the cabs off and modify it so that it can be used as a centre coach for the 144's to beef them up to four car units?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What about stripping a few former Miseryrail class 142's down, cut the cabs off and modify it so that it can be used as a centre coach for the 144's to beef them up to four car units?

Or just run them in pairs (as time passes, ticketing is increasingly coming off the train with more and more comprehensive TVMs, and my view is that Northern will eventually go for a Penalty Fares system except a few very rural lines). But as others have said, 153s will become 155s again, and these will replace 153s.

Neil

 

[northwichcat]

What about stripping a few former Miseryrail class 142's down, cut the cabs off and modify it so that it can be used as a centre coach for the 144's to beef them up to four car units?

Those are owned by Angel not Porterbrook. Although at present it sounds like Angel would have happy to sell them as scrap come 2019. Although whether that would work is a different matter.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Rail magazine has a different design for internal seating shown than the Porterbrook leaflet. It appears the lounge style seating, overhead handbars and luggage rack won't be added now.
Also the toilet is now near the drivers cab in one car and can retain waste for 4 days.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Rail magazine has a different design for internal seating shown than the Porterbrook leaflet. It appears the lounge style seating, overhead handbars and luggage rack won't be added now.
Also the toilet is now near the drivers cab in one car and can retain waste for 4 days.

Given the state of Northern's fleet in general (and the fact that at Newton Heath I'd be surprised if they have tanking facilities as nothing allocated there has tanks!), they might need to!