Even an extra 3 minutes is hardly a reason to withdraw otherwise servicable trains.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Those wreched nodding donkeys...
- Thread starter CosherB
- Start date
- Status
Even an extra 3 minutes is hardly a reason to withdraw otherwise servicable trains.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
northwichcat
Veteran Member
Cascading them off one line isn't the same as withdrawing them.
True, but there has been a lot of 'scrap 'em all!' chat on this thread.
adamp
Member
They do the job they were built to do. Maybe not in the most comfortable or quiet way, but as long as they keep doing their job there not going anywhere for atleast a few more years yet.
There not THAT bad. Its better than walking!
There not THAT bad. Its better than walking!
Seconded!
There good for short hop metro style services FGW use them on, Exmouth - Exeter - Paignton all on CWR...
Exmouth to Exeters only roughly 30 mins eitherway...
Although i will except there not good for the barnstaple branch though....bounce bounce bounce.....
Hardly a sensible point. Trains aren't competing with walking, they're competing with cars and domestic flights and buses.
Ok, I concede that,
The unspecified build and running cost savings of the Pacer units, MAY, as part of a much larger raft of savings and economy measures, have improved the overall financial situation of the railway to such an extent as to contribute, along with the political controversy surrounding line closures, to the case against the withdrawal of some marginal services under threat at the time.
Thats as much as youre going to get out of me as far as the saviours of the branch lines argument is concerned.
Now, can we find someone to flog em to because they re the worst unit type in the country for all of the reasons mentioned above.
The unspecified build and running cost savings of the Pacer units, MAY, as part of a much larger raft of savings and economy measures, have improved the overall financial situation of the railway to such an extent as to contribute, along with the political controversy surrounding line closures, to the case against the withdrawal of some marginal services under threat at the time.
Thats as much as youre going to get out of me as far as the saviours of the branch lines argument is concerned.
Now, can we find someone to flog em to because they re the worst unit type in the country for all of the reasons mentioned above.
Muttley
Member
- Joined
- 17 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 247
Re
Ts 12.05 post, don`t want to quote it all because of its size. As ever with you, its a well reasoned argument and well worth reading. But...
...what you`ve outlined is actually the accountants dream. Moving bits of paper from one pot to another, when taken overall,its all from the same budget (BR Board).
Pacers were bought because they were cheap. End of, no argument. But how cheap were they when you factor in new engines, gearboxes, doors, brakes etc. For this extra money we could have had proper trains.
Did they keep lines open ? No, of course not. The accountants can prove that any line is loss making. Look at the S&C, cut its trains to a 2car every 2.5hrs and suddenly nobodys travelling. As has been said on this thread already, socio-political concerns are far more likely to keep a branch open. And re:the Bradford triangle now worked by 333s, it could be argued that the pacers actually dulled profits, so worsening the situation.
Ts 12.05 post, don`t want to quote it all because of its size. As ever with you, its a well reasoned argument and well worth reading. But......what you`ve outlined is actually the accountants dream. Moving bits of paper from one pot to another, when taken overall,its all from the same budget (BR Board).
Pacers were bought because they were cheap. End of, no argument. But how cheap were they when you factor in new engines, gearboxes, doors, brakes etc. For this extra money we could have had proper trains.
Did they keep lines open ? No, of course not. The accountants can prove that any line is loss making. Look at the S&C, cut its trains to a 2car every 2.5hrs and suddenly nobodys travelling. As has been said on this thread already, socio-political concerns are far more likely to keep a branch open. And re:the Bradford triangle now worked by 333s, it could be argued that the pacers actually dulled profits, so worsening the situation.
Old Timer
Established Member
Muttley
You make good points but the flaw in your argument (in my opinion at least) is that whilst it was overall BRB money, the money was divided up amongst the Regions insofar as operational running was concerned. The BRB directed the major budgets and agreed to the level of money to be used for "investment", such as CWR which was always classed by the Treasury as investment !
It was the responsibility of the Regional management to achieve the budgets that had been set, and any overspending by say one Area or Division would result in the other parts of the Region having their budgets cut back.
That is how it was and I grew up on cut back after cutback. Stopping overtime when we ran out of money, closing boxes and running with long sections to save signalling wages, cutting back on cleaning items, etc. Even closing depots and moving maintenance.
The costs of keeping the classic DMUs running in many areas was becoming prohibitive and train service performance was being affected.
The Pacers were introduced using "investment" money, which was separated from the ordinary operating accounts. The costs of using the Pacers therefore meant that money which would have been used to keep units running was simply deployed elsewhere.
As for new engines, gearboxes, etc. What do you mean by this ?
By the way unless you were there in those years how do you justify so strong an opinion to suggest that they did not keep lines open ???
You make good points but the flaw in your argument (in my opinion at least) is that whilst it was overall BRB money, the money was divided up amongst the Regions insofar as operational running was concerned. The BRB directed the major budgets and agreed to the level of money to be used for "investment", such as CWR which was always classed by the Treasury as investment !
It was the responsibility of the Regional management to achieve the budgets that had been set, and any overspending by say one Area or Division would result in the other parts of the Region having their budgets cut back.
That is how it was and I grew up on cut back after cutback. Stopping overtime when we ran out of money, closing boxes and running with long sections to save signalling wages, cutting back on cleaning items, etc. Even closing depots and moving maintenance.
The costs of keeping the classic DMUs running in many areas was becoming prohibitive and train service performance was being affected.
The Pacers were introduced using "investment" money, which was separated from the ordinary operating accounts. The costs of using the Pacers therefore meant that money which would have been used to keep units running was simply deployed elsewhere.
As for new engines, gearboxes, etc. What do you mean by this ?
By the way unless you were there in those years how do you justify so strong an opinion to suggest that they did not keep lines open ???
Muttley
Member
- Joined
- 17 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 247
The Pacers were re-engined, had Voith boxes put in as afters, had the 4-ply doors replaced with twin panels, had the cable brakes replaced with air units...
Come on OT, thats not an argument, that you had to be there. As i say, looking from a UK PLC point of view the pacers did offer terrible value for money. The political will of MPs in potential swing constituencies are the main reason branches survived. (Not that i disagree with anything you`ve put.)
The Pacers also offer the clearest example of whats wrong with privatisation as it was done. ROSCOs are charging between £120k-£180k pa (depending on whose figures you believe) per Cl142, when they were handed over with a balance sheet value of......£0. And why such a low figure-because they were deemed to be/very close to being life expired. And there still out there 15 years on with no sign of replacement.
Now whos kidding who here about their cheapness/value for money. They were crap new, they cost a fortune to get "right", and they`re crap now. At no point have they offered any form of value or quality.
Old Timer
Established Member
Well I certainly remember the threat of closure hanging over the Joint Line, and I remember the hard decisions we had to make to keep the job going whilst staying within budgets.
You do not credit the fact that the whole of the UK was in economic recession as indeed was the world. As such there was nothing so sacred that it could not be closed.
We were losing / refusing traffic, and the miners / steelworkers strikes destroyed a good amount of traffic which was stolen by T&GWU members who broke picket lines. The majority of this traffic never came back because the road hauliers enforced long term contracts as part of the deal.
I remember after the Strikes, watching F/Liner trains which had previously been full running with short sets and running practically empty. Some F/Liner terminals closed as a result.
At the end of the day whilst promises had been made, when you are in a recession there are NO promises that cannot be broken.
My point is to illustrate exactly HOW tight things were, something which with respect I do not think you know, and to suggest that Pacers were both a bad option and did not help to save lines, is quite frankly something I cannot accept from the fact I was working on the Railways at the time.
I would not disagree with most of what you write but I must admit to finding this whole thread, as with many which seem to develop on here, frustrating when people, many of whom were maybe not even born in the times that are spoken of will insist on making observations and putting their opinions across as fact, when those who were there and lived those times have their views cast aside almost as a child would cast a broken toy away.
I continually say that there is no definitive proof available to ME that Pacers saved lines from closure but what I CAN say is that many lines including the Joint and the S&C were a hairsbreadth away from full closure.
Everything that we did to reduce costs went in its own way to helping out the larger pot, and certainly keeping those lines open.
Personally I have no doubt in my mind as to how close a run thing the retention of the network at its then mileage was during the early and mid 80s, and despite promises made, I have no doubt that had it come to the closure of a hospital or a little used rural railway, which one would be closed.
I don't make this post personally to you as such, but some of the points I make bear consideration.
Another good post OT. I'm also unhappy about the idea that's being put across that closure wasn't a risk during the 1980s. It's a matter of record that the Wharfedale/Airedale lines were considered, along with others. Huddersfield-Sheffield survived by the skin of its teeth the funding row between WYPTE, SYPTE and Provincial Services, and of course Clayton West didn't survive.
They were very different times from now. True, there was recession, but people didn't travel such long distances to work as they do now. For example, now someone with no job in Keighley can commute to Leeds or Bradford, where there are relatively more jobs. Back then, the sort of jobs that have made Leeds prosperous didn't exist in any number, so far fewer people would have made the daily trek by any mode. The railway was in decline, with not just rural branch lines under threat (remember Serpell, younger posters?) and cheaper trains must have helped the situation. Today's commuting and other travel patterns are a direct consequence of the massive structural shifts in our economy that occurred during the 1980s.
They were very different times from now. True, there was recession, but people didn't travel such long distances to work as they do now. For example, now someone with no job in Keighley can commute to Leeds or Bradford, where there are relatively more jobs. Back then, the sort of jobs that have made Leeds prosperous didn't exist in any number, so far fewer people would have made the daily trek by any mode. The railway was in decline, with not just rural branch lines under threat (remember Serpell, younger posters?) and cheaper trains must have helped the situation. Today's commuting and other travel patterns are a direct consequence of the massive structural shifts in our economy that occurred during the 1980s.
poshbakerloo
Member
Because its like the main reason why people hate them...
Travelling on them for short distances, you wouldn't care or notice...
Old Timer
Established Member
Thank you, Old Chap.
However when I look over what we now have become, especially within the last 10 years, it is with sadness.
Oh yes indeed. Not everything has been progess
I'm a bit uncomfortable with the idea that I may be coming across as a bit of an old git myself. I don't feel old, although maybe being able to remember vividly and with relish the delights of class 40s in real life suggests that maybe I'm actually knocking on a bit!
Last edited:
Old Timer
Established Member
Then pity the poor Old Timer who not only remembers them on Class 1s but working into Euston along with Duchesses and Princes Royals !
And I still cannot get on with these new fangled colour light distant signals, which don't have an arm !!!!!
And I still cannot get on with these new fangled colour light distant signals, which don't have an arm !!!!!
Well, no, I'm not that old! My earliest railway memory is of a green livered Peak pulling southbound into Belper station. My father tells me that this was the only loco-hauled train of the day that stopped there, and that it was a NESW working. I suppose this makes it more likely to have been a class 46. This would have been in 1974. We moved to York in 1974 (when I was 3), and Deltics became the main source of interest for the next 7 years.
poshbakerloo
Member
142 urg.
It is hard to believe you are 18/19 sometimes.
Well, on Saturday I saw a 142 bouncing though Saltaire on a Morecambe-Leeds working, and, whilst I was ever so slightly glad not to be on it, I did get a twinge of nostalgia for the railways of my yoof. Not much from that era remains to remind me of the glory days.
I was in a 142 yesterday evening with automated announcements. Which is rare enough in itself for them to be turned on, on the ex-Merseyrail 142s.
But I wasn't in a Merseyrail 142. I was baffled to say the least.
I remembered a few hours later it was a 4 car service, the other one must have been a Merseyrail one
And no, it wasn't working properly, just a 'This service is for Liverpool Lime Street' every few minutes. Whilst sat waiting to depart Lime Street. And when arriving at Edge Hill. Etc etc.
But I wasn't in a Merseyrail 142. I was baffled to say the least.
I remembered a few hours later it was a 4 car service, the other one must have been a Merseyrail one
And no, it wasn't working properly, just a 'This service is for Liverpool Lime Street' every few minutes. Whilst sat waiting to depart Lime Street. And when arriving at Edge Hill. Etc etc.
Old Timer
Established Member
They operated at up to 60 mph, and the bogied ex SR ones (Queen Marys') ran at up to 75 mph.
poshbakerloo
Member
Well I have my reasons...
They are awful, its not as if anyone can deny it...
"Ooh these doors are broken you have to get on at the back", I just roll my eyes...
On the way to Lincoln, "Ooh the front engine has broke, thats why we are going 30Mph max"...I roll my eyes again...
...I hear a loud screeching noise, ooh must be a 142,3,4...
And when they get some speed up (60Mph) don't even think about standing, even tho its standing room only most of the time...you get thrown about...
Well, at least if there's lots of people standing, you're all holding each other up.
To be honest, if I was looking at the situation as a member of Joe Public who is using the train everyday for his/her commute, I would say get rid of them straightaway. I used to get the 08.27 York - Leeds everyday, usually a 142 or 144, yes the doors rattle a bit but on the welded track along the ECML I didn't really notice too much bounce or noise. If travelling by a Pacer means that ticket prices and taxes stay a bit lower (instead of going up to pay for the investment) then that is fine by me.
Compared to 150s (anyone done the Huddersfield - Man Vic on a Saturday?) they are much better; more room, more seats and better legroom. Nothing worse than having to wedge yourself in when your over 6ft.
I've done quite a lot of journeys on Pacers, Tyne Valley, Durham Coast and Darlo to Saltburn. Darlo to Bishop Auckland was always a good one, mostly jointed track all the way. The Esk Valley line also much of the same thing.
I might try the mother of them all one day, the 06.56 Middlesbrough to Carlisle. 3 hours straight on a Pacer.
Compared to 150s (anyone done the Huddersfield - Man Vic on a Saturday?) they are much better; more room, more seats and better legroom. Nothing worse than having to wedge yourself in when your over 6ft.
I've done quite a lot of journeys on Pacers, Tyne Valley, Durham Coast and Darlo to Saltburn. Darlo to Bishop Auckland was always a good one, mostly jointed track all the way. The Esk Valley line also much of the same thing.
I might try the mother of them all one day, the 06.56 Middlesbrough to Carlisle. 3 hours straight on a Pacer.
- Status