Rolling stock own goals

[Failed Unit]

Following on from the poor cascades anyone feel any rolling stock that we have bought which we should never have bothered. IEP

There will be others further back put for the point of debate could I suggest the following.

APT - Lots of money but it never worked. However on the positive side, the development has been fed into many trains so I doubt many people would really argue it was all money down the drain.

Pacers - Lots of money on modifications and damage to the track may make a lot of people think that they wish we had started the 150 builds earlier and bought more of them.

9 car 222 - They have turned out OK, but they could have gone down in history. MML purchased them for London - Nottingham - Leeds services, SRA says you can't run them so they stood unloved for quite a while nearly ending up in Ireland without carrying a single passenger.

67's are getting use, but not to thier full potential, I am not sure if EWS wishes they had just gone for the class 57 instead? The 92's are in the same league but hopefully will come into thier own if / when the wire go up on GWML

151's & 210's never really did much work but hey they were prototypes so can't really hold that much against them.

The winner will really be sleeper stock both mk3 and nightstar, we built too much mk3 when the market was collapsing some of it was hardly used and the nightstar was sold at a loss.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I seem to recall a massive own goal when the notorious 141s were first introduced; something about the brakes coming on every time someone flushed the toilets...

And talking of toilet problems on new stock, another thing I remember hearing about at the time was that when the Mk4s were brand new and on test, they had to reduce speed slightly through the tunnels near Grantham until the discharge valves in the retention tanks were strengthened; something to do with the pressure wave in the tunnels sometimes forcing them open and resulting in what was termed the "waterspout effect" in the toilets...



On a potentially more dangerous note, several traincrews told me when the 442s were new that if the ( Guard's ) "key" was left in on both units when they were coupled together, the keys had an alarming habit of becoming live...!! Swiftly rectified, I believe?

 

[the sniper]

I would have thought the Class 180's are a prime example!

 

[sprinterguy]

The class 141s generally were a huge own goal! They were withdrawn before a good few of the first generation units they were meant to replace.

Pacers generally though did a good job of providing a low cost train for branch line services that might otherwise have been lost. Things were different in the mid eighties with regards to line closures.

The class 67s were a very expensive blunder, brand new 125mph locos built for mail traffic just as that traffic was removed from rail, leaving them with not nearly enough work.

The Nightstar stock ended up being completely pointless, a massive gaff there, and the regional North of London Eurostars have been largely underused. And I agree that there was too much mark 3 sleeper stock built as the services were declining.

The 458s. Should have had more 375s built instead.

And what about many of the modernisation plan diesels to go a bit further back? Or the BR standard steam programme?

And I agree with the comment about the 180s.

 

[Greenback]

I would have thought the Class 180's are a prime example!

I second that!

 

[northwichcat]

Pacers generally though did a good job of providing a low cost train for branch line services that might otherwise have been lost. Things were different in the mid eighties with regards to line closures.

That excuse can be used for the West Country lines but they failed on the Cornish branch lines. In the North of England (where most Pacers have always operated) which lines were under serious threat of closure other than Penistone line and Settle-Carlisle? I don't see how lines like Manchester-Bolton-Preston and Manchester-Warrington-Liverpool were saved by Pacers and they are fairly typical of services operated by Pacers in the North West.

 

[Failed Unit]

Pacers generally though did a good job of providing a low cost train for branch line services that might otherwise have been lost. Things were different in the mid eighties with regards to line closures.

That s a very debateable point to be honest. I need to find a verifyable source but the pacers I understand cost more than the 150's after everything was done. They needed replacement engines, final drives, mods to the doors etc. Many of them were out of service for long periods of times. They also damage the track more than the 150's which can't be a good thing on branch lines. Leeds - Harrogate - York I am sure would have survived if the pacers hadn't come along, other low used lines such as Heart of Wales, Cambrian Coast, Scottish branches to Kyle, Wick and Stranrear and many in Norfolk are still here without the pacers influence. Cornwall's lines didn't all close when the pacers failed.

The 458s. Should have had more 375s built instead.

And what about many of the modernisation plan diesels to go a bit further back? Or the BR standard steam programme?

And I agree with the comment about the 180s.

The 458's work well now, a bit like the 175 which were also dogs in the early years. The 180's are getting better from what I understand. If they had got the 458's working quicker I wonder if SWT would have seen lots of German engineering on it or if it would been repeat orders.

The 155's had a lovely own goal as well, they were all withdrawn with door problems shortly after introduction.

Even the 170 had lots of engine trouble in its early days, the entire Scotrail fleet got refitted with new engines.

 

[Greenback]

I think the 153 conversions were primarily meant to secure the future of rural routes, whereas the Pacers were originalyl seen as replacements for the first generation DMU's on non electrified suburban and inter urban services. As ludicrous as it seems now, the Pacers were seen as a way of utilising cheap bus type technology for such services as those around Manchester. The Sprinters and Super Sprinters were later designs meant to replace loco hauled stock on longer distance services such as Cardiff - Portsmouth.

 

[Lampshade]

Manchester - Bolton - Preston was XC under BR and until 2007, no way was it under threat hock:

 

[Failed Unit]

I think the 153 conversions were primarily meant to secure the future of rural routes, whereas the Pacers were originalyl seen as replacements for the first generation DMU's on non electrified suburban and inter urban services. As ludicrous as it seems now, the Pacers were seen as a way of utilising cheap bus type technology for such services as those around Manchester. The Sprinters and Super Sprinters were later designs meant to replace loco hauled stock on longer distance services such as Cardiff - Portsmouth.

I think another driver for the sprinter was West Midlands PTE and Scotrail had seen the pacer in action and took the view we are not having this **** on our patch if we are funding them. I lot of pacers were PTE funded as well.

 

[j0hn0]

Dutch Railways order of Ansaldobreda "Albatross"

A brand new train, but "only" capable of 250kmh, when the line they run on will be up to 300kmh, so late its untrue, all kinds of issue in design and build, properly dutch

 

[sprinterguy]

Manchester - Bolton - Preston was XC under BR and until 2007, no way was it under threat

I didn't say that the Pacers are the saviours of every route that they operate on, far from it-they can be a nightmare on many of the services they've been allocated to. The Pacers AS BUILT were cheaper than the 150s, although of course all the various mods and changes were made a few years later. I think the Pensitone line, Colne branch and Whitby line all benefitted (ok, maybe "benefitted" isn't quite the work with regards to Pacers) from the introduction of Pacers. If the Pacers hadn't been built, just what would have plugged the gap to operate the services they operate, be it on inner city trains or the branch trains?

Although I will admit that they were a CATASTROPHIC failure on the Cornish branches. And specifying them for Manchester inner city services is sheer madness, there'd be uproar if you tried that sort of thing with a similar new train design today!

 

[northwichcat]

Manchester - Bolton - Preston was XC under BR and until 2007, no way was it under threat hock:

It was also under Northern, FNW and RRNW. Manchester to Scotland has never called at stations like Horwich Parkway, Lostock and Adlington and only called at Salford Crescent for a brief period under TPE
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the 153 conversions were primarily meant to secure the future of rural routes, whereas the Pacers were originalyl seen as replacements for the first generation DMU's on non electrified suburban and inter urban services.

Although they didn't replace all First generation units. 101s remained in operation in the Manchester area until the 175s were delivered.

 

[Failed Unit]

If the Pacers hadn't been built, just what would have plugged the gap to operate the services they operate, be it on inner city trains or the branch trains?

That is an interesting question, my understanding is BR developed the sprinter as it didn't think the pacers were good enough for some lines. The 150 is really fairly tried and tested the body had been running around for many years in the form of 317 and 455's so that wouldn't have been an issue to tool up the factories. The engine / final drive combo were used elsewhere in europe. I guess BR may have just gone straight for the sprinter. The just didn't know all the nastys the pacer was going to throw at them. The pacers did have some positives, loco haulage Just like when the 153's were built we often had a loco hauled set instead. 1623 Sheffield - Cleethorpes via Lincoln seemed to often be subsituted.

 

[Burkitt]

Dutch Railways order of Ansaldobreda "Albatross"

A brand new train, but "only" capable of 250kmh, when the line they run on will be up to 300kmh, so late its untrue, all kinds of issue in design and build, properly dutch

Pretty much anything from Ansaldobreda really.
Their IC4 trains for Denmark were delivered about six years late and have been beset by problems. The Danish government nearly refused to accept them and demand a refund at one point, and eventually accepted $400 million in compensation.
Trams for Boston repeatedly derailed and were so unreliable the MBTA called them their worst purchase ever and cancelled the last 15 vehicles, instead using their parts to get the other 85 to work.
Other trams they built for Gothenburg were also very late and unreliable, light rail vehicles for Los Angeles were three years late and three tonnes overweight, and Breda metro cars for Washington are also extremely unreliable.

 

[sprinterguy]

The pacers did have some positives, loco haulage

Haha yeah, the odd "Pacer replacer" trains on the Durham coast route as well, wish I could remember them properly, I was too young to appreciate them at the time.

my understanding is BR developed the sprinter as it didn't think the pacers were good enough for some lines.

I thought the Sprinter programme had always been on the cards in the form it took at the same time as the Pacers were announced. God forbid there were ever plans to have MORE Pacers than there are now!

 

[starrymarkb]

It was also under Northern, FNW and RRNW. Manchester to Scotland has never called at stations like Horwich Parkway, Lostock and Adlington and only called at Salford Crescent for a brief period under TPE
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Although they didn't replace all First generation units. 101s remained in operation in the Manchester area until the 175s were delivered.

Wasn't there the class 157 order which if it happened would have taken care of the 101s through cascade

 

[ChrisCooper]

Going back, a large chunk of the modernisation plan diesels would also count. Baby Deltics are a great example, never reliable and withdrawn very early, as are the Co-Bos. Whilst the 31s are considered one of the best types, as delivered their Mirrlees engines were very unreliable and were replaced by English Electric. The Class 21s with MAN engines were the same, until they got Paxmans. Also whilst no fault of the design, there were the type 1s which were never a great success not due to the design but due to the withdrawal of the types of wagon load trip workings they were intended for. The 20s were the exception.

One thing you do have to look at though when judging different types is the amount of effort put into correcting them. Some of the most sucessful types suffered serious problems initially, yet these were corrected and they went on to be reliable and sucessful with long lives. Others have been no worse, but were given up on.

 

[Oswyntail]

IIRC, the Pacers were the answer to a massive crisis. The 1st gen units were, in some areas, on their last legs, and couldn't be refurbished because of asbestos. Government remained unconvinced that rail should be retained other than from London to Manchester/Leeds/Bristol/Newcastle, and some of NSE. Whatever was purchased had to be cheap and cheerful in the extreme. The Pacers, believe it or not, not only enabled service levels in the affected areas to be maintained, but they also increased passenger usage. Without the first "green shoots of recovery" that the Pacers enabled, the Sprinter programme would probably have been cancelled, and BR reduced to the Serpell stump. [And I seem to remember that plenty of lines were under threat - Ilkley, Cleethorpes, Colne,Morecambe, Windermere, Hexham]

 

[j0hn0]

Pretty much anything from Ansaldobreda really.
Their IC4 trains for Denmark were delivered about six years late and have been beset by problems. The Danish government nearly refused to accept them and demand a refund at one point, and eventually accepted $400 million in compensation.
Trams for Boston repeatedly derailed and were so unreliable the MBTA called them their worst purchase ever and cancelled the last 15 vehicles, instead using their parts to get the other 85 to work.
Other trams they built for Gothenburg were also very late and unreliable, light rail vehicles for Los Angeles were three years late and three tonnes overweight, and Breda metro cars for Washington are also extremely unreliable.

wow, didn't realise how crap they were

 

[yorksrob]

IIRC, the Pacers were the answer to a massive crisis. The 1st gen units were, in some areas, on their last legs, and couldn't be refurbished because of asbestos. Government remained unconvinced that rail should be retained other than from London to Manchester/Leeds/Bristol/Newcastle, and some of NSE. Whatever was purchased had to be cheap and cheerful in the extreme. The Pacers, believe it or not, not only enabled service levels in the affected areas to be maintained, but they also increased passenger usage. Without the first "green shoots of recovery" that the Pacers enabled, the Sprinter programme would probably have been cancelled, and BR reduced to the Serpell stump. [And I seem to remember that plenty of lines were under threat - Ilkley, Cleethorpes, Colne,Morecambe, Windermere, Hexham]

I'd always assumed that the Sprinters came at around the same time as the Pacers. I presume if they'd spent all the money that they spent on Pacers on the 15* class there would have been fewer units built at the time, and if the 1st gen 's couldn't have been made to cover the resulting gap, leading to line closures as a result, then it would be fair to say that the Pacers have indeed saved them. If the above scenario wouldn't have been the case, then I'm inclined to think of them as an own goal. Either way it seems fairly close to call.

Regarding the 151's mentioned in another post, from the pictures I've seen, they look like excellent units - ideally suited for the urban and commuter lines which are the mainstay of the Pacers today. As I understand it, they were scuppered by a union dispute rather than any technical problems.

 

[starrymarkb]

wow, didn't realise how crap they were

There is also the midland metro - 16 unique trams that are about to go up for sale as soon as Centro can source replacements

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/...o-s-rubbish-trams-up-for-sale-97319-16460870/

 

[tbtc]

Any small class. Would make life so much easier if we just had 150s/ 156s/ 158s

Was there any need for THREE classes of Pacers in mass production, as well as the "prototype" 141s etc? - I can understand Pacers are a necessary evil, but why three flavours?

155s - why not more 156s?

Same with 175/180s - we'd have been better off with more 170s/ 220s

The 185s. Bonkers. A heaveyweight three coach train built to replace four coach 158s. Yeah, I know they planned on a fourth coach, but there's no way these diddy wee things should have been built os short in the first place

 

[yorksrob]

The 185s. Bonkers. A heaveyweight three coach train built to replace four coach 158s. Yeah, I know they planned on a fourth coach, but there's no way these diddy wee things should have been built os short in the first place

To be fair to them, from what I can remember a lot of the 158's replaced were 3-carriage anyway. Could have done with being a bit more inter-city in layout to my mind though.

 

[tbtc]

To be fair to them, from what I can remember a lot of the 158's replaced were 3-carriage anyway. Could have done with being a bit more inter-city in layout to my mind though.

A three car 185 must still have fewer seats though, but fair point

 

[yorksrob]

A three car 185 must still have fewer seats though, but fair point

Yes, I do prefer the 158's anyway to be honest!

 

[TrainBrain185]

There is also the midland metro - 16 unique trams that are about to go up for sale as soon as Centro can source replacements

http://www.birminghammail.net/news/...o-s-rubbish-trams-up-for-sale-97319-16460870/

Very interesting article.....

 

[WatcherZero]

Yeah the experience in Manchester with their older sibling hasnt been quite as bad (some niggles and poor reliability stemming more from being overused and undermaintained by previous franchise operator when it knew it wasnt getting renewed) theyve in service 20 years and expected to be after a second mid life refurbishment for another 15, but ive also heard disaster stories about ansaldo units elsewhere in the world.

Its been pointed out the units are salvagable if you rip out all the wiring and wire them again from scratch in a uniform manner (which you could never do while they were in service).

 

[Helvellyn]

APT - Lots of money but it never worked. However on the positive side, the development has been fed into many trains so I doubt many people would really argue it was all money down the drain.

Lots of money, but also not enough. Plus, remember that what was the high profile casualty was the APT-P. That P stood for Prototype, and followed on from the APT-E (Experiemntal). A lot of the technology made its way into the Class 91s and Mark 4s, while the tilt technology was further developed by other companies.

151's & 210's never really did much work but hey they were prototypes so can't really hold that much against them

Again, prototype units just like the Class 140 Railbus and Class 150/0 Sprinters. The squadron build of the Class 150/1 and 150/2 units followed the BR decision to adopt the Sprinter design, so that meant the Class 151 units lost out.

The 458s. Should have had more 375s built instead.

Class 458s were ordered by SWT to give a boost to its stock, and were initially used on Waterloo to Basingstoke and Alton outer-suburban units. If Alstom had got the units to do what they were meant to then there was a real chance that SWT's slamdoor replacement order would have been Junipers. As it was they were so disappointed with the Class 458s that Siemens were able to come in with the Desiros.

The Class 175/180 units were originally ordered by North Western Trains. Once First Group took over that company, the Class 180s were diverted to the FGW franchise. Again, Alstom never got any follow on orders for the Coradias and Adelantes because of reliability issues.

 

[northwichcat]

Was there any need for THREE classes of Pacers in mass production, as well as the "prototype" 141s etc? - I can understand Pacers are a necessary evil, but why three flavours?

The 141s weren't prototypes. The prototypes included:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:British_Rail_class_140.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lev1nnr.jpg
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Class 175/180 units were originally ordered by North Western Trains. Once First Group took over that company, the Class 180s were diverted to the FGW franchise. Again, Alstom never got any follow on orders for the Coradias and Adelantes because of reliability issues.

The 180s were built for NWT London services. When Virgin increased competition protection they couldn't be used on their intended purpose. GWT owned NWT so it may not have made any difference whether it had happened in NWT days or FNW days. I suppose the best FNW route for the 180s, after London services would have been Birmingham-Holyhead or Manchester Airport to Cumbria.