Those wreched nodding donkeys...

[CosherB]

Those horrible 4-wheel nodding-donkey bus-bodied Pacer things - how much longer are they going to be around?

I can maybe just about understand how a severly cash-strapped BR sank so low as to purchase them in the first place, but how much longer do we have to put up with them on today's non-BR modernised railway, with so much new stock around?

There seem to be a lot of them here in the North West, not least on the lovely Mid-Cheshire line. That delightful railway deserves better!

 

[HSTfan!!!]

problem is there isn't "so much stock around" as such, in fact TOC's are short of units, hence the return of loco hauled passenger workings, I don't think we'll be seeing the back of any pacers for a fair few years yet.

 

[ukrob]

Those horrible 4-wheel nodding-donkey bus-bodied Pacer things - how much longer are they going to be around?

I can maybe just about understand how a severly cash-strapped BR sank so low as to purchase them in the first place, but how much longer do we have to put up with them on today's non-BR modernised railway, with so much new stock around?

There seem to be a lot of them here in the North West, not least on the lovely Mid-Cheshire line. That delightful railway deserves better!

Yes, you are totally right. I say scrap them all the Class 142s tomorrow. After all, we have all this new stock around we could use instead.

 

[Phoenix]

Yes, you are totally right. I say scrap them all the Class 142s tomorrow. After all, we have all this new stock around we could use instead.

What stock ? if you can name replacements for every single pacer I will bow down and agree with you.

 

[daccer]

I think the fact that the Pacers are still around after 25 years is both a shame and a terrible oversight by the Govt. Billions are being pumped into the railways - stations, new stock, electrification, HS2 and major redevlopments are everywhere and yet no Pacer replacement is imminent. By my reckoning they have at least another decade left before they are gone and if the electrification programme stalls it could be even longer. In what is an ever improving railway they are a sad reminder of the days of BR frugality and they really have served their purpose now. How many buses are still in every day use after 25 years of hard slog?

 

[Donny Dave]

As far as Yorkshire and Humber goes, the RUS for the area says all pacers and sprinters will go by 2019. So about 10 more years is my estimate.

 

[MCR247]

What stock ? if you can name replacements for every single pacer I will bow down and agree with you.

I think he was joking

 

[ukrob]

Yes, you are totally right. I say scrap them all the Class 142s tomorrow. After all, we have all this new stock around we could use instead.

What stock ? if you can name replacements for every single pacer I will bow down and agree with you.

Whoosh!

What was that noise?

 

[Crossforth]

I'll have one for preservation

Get it to match my model

 

[fgwrich]

I'll have one for preservation

Get it to match my model

Personnaly i like 142s but only if there in the right hands with the right TOC, running in lines that are suitible enough for them...Example Being First Great Western, Who use them largley on the Devon Metro service from Exmouth to Paington...Which is a good use for them...and the reason why is the internal layout is good for said services, because its basically a short hop service, plus the 142s offer good lugguage space for commandos boarding or alighting at Lympstone Commando or Bycyles for that matter, Have enough standing space and in fact 142s, despite having the original 'bus' type seats...They have more seats than the Refurbished 143s, and roughly 4O odd seats more than a Class 153...

In fact, theres one bone i really have to pic with a few of the current TOCs...Take Northern for Example...Complain as they want to about having the 142s...Why, despite the TOC being around for 5 years...Why have they done nothing to look at replacing them themselves with New DMUs...

Ok, so they were promised new units by said Goverment, but as thats now not happening, Why dont they do something themselves for once...rather than just sitting there and complaning that they havent got anything new to replace the old / 142 & 143s with???

At least FGW has done the best they can in hiring in the 142s and ATW 150s by refurbing all of there local lines fleet and bringing in the loco hauled set...so if they can do it, why cant others take example?

There seem to be a lot of them here in the North West, not least on the lovely Mid-Cheshire line. That delightful railway deserves better!

It might deserve better, but if Northern actually considerd putting the right trains in the right places, Or actually botherd to look into other rolling stock options like L&C or new units, then you could get your better trains for that route...unless you want to fund a new fleet of units for them?

Afterall...There is a set of unwanted Mk2s sitting around somewhere...wonder who owns them again...oh yeah, Arriva...

 

[ukrob]

In fact, theres one bone i really have to pic with a few of the current TOCs...Take Northern for Example...Complain as they want to about having the 142s...Why, despite the TOC being around for 5 years...Why have they done nothing to look at replacing them themselves with New DMUs...

Ok, so they were promised new units by said Goverment, but as thats now not happening, Why dont they do something themselves for once...rather than just sitting there and complaning that they havent got anything new to replace the old / 142 & 143s with???

Do you have any idea how stock is managed in the UKs rail system? Or the rail system in general regarding franchises?

Why would Northern want to buy stock that they would NEVER recoup the cost of before their franchise ends?

 

[fgwrich]

Do you have any idea how stock is managed in the UKs rail system? Or the rail system in general regarding franchises?

Why would Northern want to buy stock that they would NEVER recoup the cost of before their franchise ends?

Yes i pretty much understand...But then again it seems northern would rather take the just sit there and do nothing approach...

As for Units that would never recoup the costs...Theres several units like that like Scotrails Class 170s for example...

But Northern still have just over 3 years on there franchise left, so out of a Eight Year franchise, why havent they dont much to increase capacitiy out of there franchise, apart from take other units from places where there also heavily needed...

Afterall, in the last year of Arriva Trains Northern, although not new stock exactly, they did buy out a couple of Mk2s and hire in EWS 37s for S&C services...

 

[ukrob]

Yes i pretty much understand...But then again it seems northern would rather take the just sit there and do nothing approach...

As for Units that would never recoup the costs...Theres several units like that like Scotrails Class 170s for example...

But Northern still have just over 3 years on there franchise left, so out of a Eight Year franchise, why havent they dont much to increase capacitiy out of there franchise, apart from take other units from places where there also heavily needed...

Afterall, in the last year of Arriva Trains Northern, although not new stock exactly, they did buy out a couple of Mk2s and hire in EWS 37s for S&C services...

I think you have just demonstrated that you don't . I don't mean to sound rude or patronising, but do you know that the TOC's don't generally own any stock?

What you are saying is that you think Northern should outright purchase stock for a 8/9 year franchise? Could you explain how they will recoup the cost of this?

 

[Swift-Deere]

Come on Guy Pacers aren't that bad there quite nice and spacious

 

[royaloak]

The stock is owned by the leasing companies, they lease the trains to the Train Operating Companies, the amount of stock leased is dictated by the DaFT, who also stipulate the services the TOCs run with the stock.
Now the TOCs have NO say in any of this, the TOCs bid for the franchises on this basis, if the TOCs want to run more services then this is done on an open access arrangement (Arriva Wales to Marylebone) which also has to be approved by DaFT.

The Northern franchise was let on the principles of zero growth, but passenger numbers are going through the roof, Northern are subsidised by the DaFT and cannot just ask for more stock as the extra leasing costs would not be picked up by the DaFT and Northern don't make enough money from the passengers to cover the costs and cannot raise fares either.

There are no "spare" units around so the TOCs cannot just lease more stock when needed, the lead time for new units is about 3-4 years, so if Northern wanted to order the stock when they found out about the change of heart by the DaFT it would have been delivered after the franchise had ended.
These are some of the issues with the current franchising fiasco, oops sorry current franchising system.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, theres a lot that can be said about the situation.

Firstly, there should be a train manufacturing industry building all the time to replace stock as and when when it becomes life expired so that we don't end up with large gluts of rolling stock which need replacing at the same time. That way any slack in the system can be used to increase the total amount of stock gradually when needed.

Secondly, money should not be squandered replacing perfectly serviceable non-life expired rolling stock which although not as safe as newer stock still represents one of the safest forms of transport in the country (yes, I'm talking about the Mark 1's). These should have been replaced gradually when due and the money used instead to increase the total amount stock. This second error was due almost entirely to meddling from outside of the railway industry.

Thirdly, why do we have companies leasing rolling stock at a premium which under any other system would have been paid for years ago. If we must have franchising the franchises should be long enough tor the franchisees to own and buy their own trains.

 

[Old Timer]

...I can maybe just about understand how a severly cash-strapped BR sank so low as to purchase them in the first place......!

The answer is in your own words.

In the early and mid 1980s with the economy contracting, and with a world recession, BR like all Industries both public as well as private was under severe economic pressure to find a way of maintaining and running the system at a lower cost. The classic DMU fleet was in many cases coming to the end of its useful life and a more cost-effective solution was needed if new trains were to be constructed.

The Pacers represented efforts by BR / BREL and others to see if lightweight units based on conventional bus bodies could be used.

There is no doubt that they have allowed many branch lines to survive to a point where they are no longer under threat, and it is doubtful if some would still be here had there been no Pacers.

Whilst there is no doubt that more robust units would have been preferrable, the economy by 1979 had been totally destroyed and the UK was living on borrowed money from the IMF simply to stay liquid, as the UK was technically bankrupt. As the saying goes, he who pays the piper (in this case the Treasury) calls the tune.

Criticising those who did their best in such circumstances is somewhat harsh.

 

[yorksrob]

"There is no doubt that they have allowed many branch lines to survive to a point where they are no longer under threat, and it is doubtful if some would still be here had there been no Pacers."

Well maybe, although the ones in Cornwall which couldn't take the Pacers managed to survive.

 

[Old Timer]

I believe that Pacers were tried on the Cornish branches but were unsuitable because of the tight radius curves.

The removal of branches in Cornwall was never I believe a serious option for all sorts of reasons.

 

[yorksrob]

Well, thats true, though presumably some of those reasons would have applied to other branches elsewhere. It just strikes me that there seem to have been a few places with a basic railway which have never resorted to Pacer transport. The fact that they can't cope with tight curves makes me think that perhaps they were never fit for purpose.

 

[Old Timer]

At the end of the day, they were an experiment to see if they could be used in service, and the fact that they lasted so long has to say something, although I fully concur that ride-wise they were absolutely awful.

But given that or nothing ?

I have to say they were a very useful way of showing people how lightweight vehicles and wagons respond to track conditions.

Anyway, all these people who protest about Pacers have never had the joy of riding a BR brakevan on a freight at 45 mph (or even 60 mph !).

 

[mbonwick]

With regards to what's been said about ROSCOs charging a premium to lease stock, the Competition Commission are actually investigating the whole procuement -> delivery -> leasing of railway rolling stock.

So far I believe they've concluded that the leasing isn't fair....and they will be reporting back with recomendations.

 

[djw1981]

They said that the DfT model was not fair, but exonerated the ROSCo's of profiteering as I recall.

 

[mbonwick]

http://www.competition-commission.org.uk/inquiries/ref2007/roscos/index.htm

Unfortunately I can't open pdf files on here to check what the CC actually did.

 

[yorksrob]

I totally agree, rather a Pacer than nothing

I just wonder whether if they'd tried their prototype out in Cornwall and decided against production, we'd just have had some clapped out heritage units being made to last a bit longer, with a somewhat slower replacement by a few more of each of the following DMU types rather than large numbers of branch closures.

Actually it's more the cramped interior I dislike about Pacers rather than the ride - many of my beloved Mk ones could be somewhat lively in this respect though the interiors were positively luxurious.

60 mph in a brake van - now theres something I'd like to try

 

[Swift-Deere]

I totally agree, rather a Pacer than nothing

Actually it's more the cramped interior I dislike about Pacers rather than the ride

I think Pacers are quite spacious, when i get of a pendolino and straight onto a pacer am like wow this is so spacious!!!

 

[Old Timer]

Had Labour in Opposition under Bliar and Brown not lied about their intention to re-nationalise the railways, I believe that we would probably have had a different rolling stock regime to that which was hurriedly implemented.

I recall however that the rolling stock leasing market was built around opportunities for foreign railways to offer their options to the UK.

Hysterical and totally unnecessary "safety" restrictions, and needlessly bureaucratic acceptance criteria, intended more to keep the Safety Taliban consultants and staff in work rather than bringing anything constructive to the party put paid to interest from overseas.

I find it quite amazing that trains can operate perfectly safely on the Continent, entering a whole variety of different Countries and railway networks, with any of the fuss here which is necessary to allow even an ECS movement on a short route not historically "cleared" in the UK.

These various Railway Safety Cases and Acceptance Criteria do nothing more than arse cover those who are too scared to make an engineering judgement, but instead pander to the desire of the HSE and the legal profession to have everything written down so that everyone can always show a piece of paper to prove they were not responsible should something go wrong :roll::roll::roll::roll:

There are whole reams of Procedures and processes designed to "prevent" people being killed on the track, not one of these systems has actually prevented a fatality, and when someone does get killed all that happens is that everyone produces lots of paperwork to prove it was not down to them.

The fact that these processes and procedures were ignored at ground level is irrelevant to the system because it has all the paperwork it needs to prove that the accident could never happen !

The fact that much of the paperwork is useless, meaningless and ignored appears to count for nothing.

Similarly all the various rolling stack acceptance criteria have done is to introduce rolling stock which is intrinsically doomed to fail in service because of all the so called "vital" safety systems, and computerised management and control systems these things now seem to need.

They are not even built robustly, because even a simple fatality these days seems to disable a train half the time, something which older rolling stock never suffered from.....and if I had a £ for every time I have heard of a train or traction unit having to stop and be rebooted, I would have retired a millionaire long since !

 

[yorksrob]

I think Pacers are quite spacious, when i get of a pendolino and straight onto a pacer am like wow this is so spacious!!!

haha, you should try a CIG while you've still got the chance - you won't know what to do with yourself

I think for me it's got a lot to do with the fact that a two car set is so much shorter than any other two car train and I often catch them at peak times so the comparison is generally unfavourable compared to other units.

 

[Swift-Deere]

haha, you should try a CIG while you've still got the chance - you won't know what to do with yourself

I think for me it's got a lot to do with the fact that a two car set is so much shorter than any other two car train and I often catch them at peak times so the comparison is generally unfavourable compared to other units.

lol yeh to be fair i catch them at off peak times so i get a seat to my self and the trains only about a 1/4 full

 

[royaloak]

I totally agree, rather a Pacer than nothing

I just wonder whether if they'd tried their prototype out in Cornwall

They did, the 140 was used all around the country in 1979/80.