What will replace Pacers?

[30mog]

The Pacers have to go by 2020!

This being the case. What will replace them? I can imagine such as Blackpool/Liverpool/Manchester electrification making some 185s available. These may well cascade to routes with Sprinters. In turn cascading them for Pacer replacement. Likewise, electrification in South Wales should have a similar effect. But is all this happening this side of 2020. And will there be enough stock to cascade?

I can't help thinking the tram-train trial might be with one eye on Pacer replacement. Furthermore, if successful tram trains could also release platforms at busy stations by terminating in city centres instead. Releasing, the platforms for more longer distance services, or, don't underestimate it as a possibility, release parts of stations to be sold off for re-development?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I wonder if some of the longer distance services now operated by the Pacer fleet would really be suitable for tram-train operation.

 

[starrymarkb]

Wasn't one of the ROSCOs looking at a sort of GTW-UK according to MR?

 

[30mog]

I wonder if some of the longer distance services now operated by the Pacer fleet would really be suitable for tram-train operation.

Like Sheffield-Bridlington? Should be at least a Sprinter. But maybe Sheffield-Adwick could go tram-train. But then they might get away with it on the basis they do runs like Adwick/Huddersfield-Lincoln to aid productivity issues while expecting few if any passengers to do the whole journey.

 

[anthony263]

Something like that GTW-UK would be good to replace the class 153's on the heart of wales line services depending on them being fitted with an acessible toilet and then how many seats will be available.

Stardlers trams on the London tramlink are pretty nice to travel on so perhaps a deal could be done to trial such a vehicle in the uk.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Like Sheffield-Bridlington? Should be at least a Sprinter. But maybe Sheffield-Adwick could go tram-train. But then they might get away with it on the basis they do runs like Adwick/Huddersfield-Lincoln to aid productivity issues while expecting few if any passengers to do the whole journey.

I like your Sheffield to Bridlington run being used as an example of the point that I was making. I have heard that the Pacers have sometimes run the Newcastle-Carlisle service, but have been fortunate not to have made such a long cross-country journey in them.

 

[transmanche]

I have heard that the Pacers have sometimes run the Newcastle-Carlisle service, but have been fortunate not to have made such a long cross-country journey in them.

I've done one of those runs on a winter's evening. Cold and draughty doesn't cover it

 

[brompton rail]

Like Sheffield-Bridlington? Should be at least a Sprinter. But maybe Sheffield-Adwick could go tram-train. But then they might get away with it on the basis they do runs like Adwick/Huddersfield-Lincoln to aid productivity issues while expecting few if any passengers to do the whole journey.

Sheffield - Bridlington / Scarborough trains are normally 158 operated.

If MML electrification goes ahead, and must surely include Sheffield - Doncaster / South Kirkby junction, then Sheffield - Adwick would be operated by electric units (most likely through to Leeds).

Tram-Train conversions are really only suitable for joining existing tramways to short branches (like the Rotherham trial).

 

[SeanG]

When the pacers have to go, there will be much more freed up stock about, or about to be freed up.

222s will be free with the electrification of the MML
221s will be released from West Coast by the 'Baby Pendos'
221s/220s also released from fully electric XC services to Reading, though I think that they will just strengthen other XC services.

If you think at where pacers operate too:
Northern - the Northern hub will lead to them being replaced through cascade etc.

Welsh Valleys - electrification as above.

South West - other DMUs will be made free for cascading

 

[northwichcat]

Like Sheffield-Bridlington? Should be at least a Sprinter.

I thought they were all booked to be 158s and that Pacers aren't allowed on the Yorkshire Coast route or is it just Bridlington-Scarborough that's kept Pacer free?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Tram-Train conversions are really only suitable for joining existing tramways to short branches (like the Rotherham trial).

You don't have to convert anything to use tram-trains on the NR network. Tram-trains can be ordered that won't require DC electrification, track modifications or platform heights being altered. However, if they are also to run on street running sections with low platforms and DC overheads then this needs to be taken in to consideration.

There is also a 'heavy tram' option which would have similarities with Tyne and Wear Metro trains but be too heavy for street running. TfGM have apparently evaluated using these on Marple services.

 

[SeanG]

I thought they were all booked to be 158s and that Pacers aren't allowed on the Yorkshire Coast route or is it just Bridlington-Scarborough that's kept Pacer free?

I've seen a pacer at Scarborough before

 

[northwichcat]

I've seen a pacer at Scarborough before

And it definitely arrived via Beverley and not via York?

 

[yorksrob]

What they need is a modern equivalent of a 150. Better seating than the original but suitable for slower suburban runs and longer branches. A good all rounder like the FGW 150's.

 

[anthony263]

What they need is a modern equivalent of a 150. Better seating than the original but suitable for slower suburban runs and longer branches. A good all rounder like the FGW 150's.

Maybe we could ask the chinese to build us some very cheap dmu's.
I am sure I read somewhere that they could potentially build new class 150's (Not to sure if they could considering how much designs and safety standards have changed although they maybe able to find a way around it)

 

[yorksrob]

Maybe we could ask the chinese to build us some very cheap dmu's.
I am sure I read somewhere that they could potentially build new class 150's (Not to sure if they could considering how much designs and safety standards have changed although they maybe able to find a way around it)

Well, we could do, but I'd rather said units were built here.

 

[tbtc]

There's certainly a Pacer booked on a teatime service from Sheffield to Hull - never seen one going to Scarborough though.

As for the maths, there's roughly 140 Pacers - CP5 electrification should replace just under half that number of 75mph DMUs (maybe fortysomething 75mph DMUS required on the Valley Lines plus Ebbw Vale/ Maesteg), so not enough to allow all Pacers to be withdrawn by the end of the decade. Most of the CP5 electrification is on main lines and will replace 100/125mph trains (GWML, MML etc).

There's also various "wishlist" ideas for where any "spare" DMUs could go (just look at all of the fantasy suggestions on here, like giving infrequently served stations like Denton and Brigg a regular service...).

BUT, if CP6 fills in the gaps of CP5 electrification (e.g. Sheffield to Doncaster, once the MML south of Sheffield is wired) then we are going to be able to withdraw plenty of 75mph DMUs which means any "newbuild" DMUs may not be required after 2024 (which will make it hard to justify building more).

So, do we build new units for the sake of just five years? Or do we spend a few quid refurbishing the best Pacers to keep them on the rails until 2024?

(the "tram train" argument seems fairly irrelevant here - in terms of Pacer replacement it'd be as "token" as 139s - plus people use "tram train" to describe anything from "simple DMUs" to "Diesel Electric Trains" to "simple EMUs" to "trams that can extend onto electrified NR lines like the Rotherham plan")

 

[43067]

Maybe we could ask the chinese to build us some very cheap dmu's.
I am sure I read somewhere that they could potentially build new class 150's (Not to sure if they could considering how much designs and safety standards have changed although they maybe able to find a way around it)

Wasn't there something a couple of years ago about the chinese offering something called "the polaris" as a HST replacement that was supposed to of being going on test here last year. obviously that didn't happen. and also in the offering were a DMU if i recall rightly.

 

[CC 72100]

What they need is a modern equivalent of a 150. Better seating than the original but suitable for slower suburban runs and longer branches. A good all rounder like the FGW 150's.

As long as when you refer to the FGW units you've got 150/2s in mind, then I agree

On a serious note they are fantastic workhorses - built for slower suburban runs and longer branches, but they can try their hand at pretty much anything which requires a DMU! I can't see us having a true 'go anywhere' DMU, used by so many TOCs across the country again. Too much focus on getting the right train for the right job, which means that you lose flexibility but get something that is very good at one, intended purpose.

 

[43067]

found this post i put up this time last year. it has been locked but the final reply makes interesting reading, as it quotes Pacer replacement. http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=65138&highlight=csre

 

[yorksrob]

As long as when you refer to the FGW units you've got 150/2s in mind, then I agree

On a serious note they are fantastic workhorses - built for slower suburban runs and longer branches, but they can try their hand at pretty much anything which requires a DMU! I can't see us having a true 'go anywhere' DMU, used by so many TOCs across the country again. Too much focus on getting the right train for the right job, which means that you lose flexibility but get something that is very good at one, intended purpose.

Possibly true. I do feel that's a bit of a strategic mistake in the long run. As well as the decision not to build new DMU's as well tbh.

 

[HSTEd]

I've got my doubts that the Pacers will go in 2020.

Since all the Secretary of State for Transport has to do to keep them is write a note explaining that he wants to keep them.

 

[anthony263]

I've got my doubts that the Pacers will go in 2020.

Since all the Secretary of State for Transport has to do to keep them is write a note explaining that he wants to keep them.

I think Angel are right about the 142's being withdrawn after 2020 however the class 143/144's I suspect will as Poterbrook have suggested continue on to 2030 at least especially since they have stood the test of time far better than the 142's (Well at least that is the case with Arriva's)

So I suspect Arriva's and FGW's class 143's could find themselves a new home after being displaced between 2016 and 2020. Portebrook have done their homework I suspect

Just to annoy those living there how about we give a couple to Greater Anglia for use on some of the branches in the East Anglia region

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I've got my doubts that the Pacers will go in 2020. Since all the Secretary of State for Transport has to do to keep them is write a note explaining that he wants to keep them.

That view seems somewhat unfair on the people who will be the subject of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, but never mind, they are just human beings with an unfortunate lot in life who do not appreciate the nuances inherent in Government departments. Were those people really foolish to actually believe the story that was told to them when that Act was passed. Perhaps a day trip to view "Newton Heath's finest" could be arranged for them in terms of compensation for their disappointment. Surely the matter of mechanically propelled transportation units are far more important and the time period of 14 years between the passing of the Act and the 2019/2020 compliance date was never going to be long enough in the first place...

Oh dear, my cynicism level has just ratcheted upwards alarmingly...

 

[SeanG]

And it definitely arrived via Beverley and not via York?

Yeah went Brid - Scarborough on it mid 2000s

 

[tbtc]

That view seems somewhat unfair on the people who will be the subject of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995

Two points:

If you want to do righteous indignation then the Act you should be talking about is this one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act_2010 (it replaced the DDA)

As has been explained, Porterbrook are showing how a Pacer could be modified to be sufficiently accessible (for a cost)

 

[route:oxford]

The Pacer will be replaced by a last minute compromise.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If you want to do righteous indignation then the Act you should be talking about is this one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act_2010 (it replaced the DDA)

This I have been aware of since 2010, but I wanted to stress the 1995 Act as this gave a truer picture of the number of years from the enactment of the DDA Act to its supposed year of compliance.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Porterbrook are showing how a Pacer could be modified to be sufficiently accessible (for a cost)

But what official acknowledgment has been made that these modifications will be effected in time to meet the year of compliance ?

 

[edwin_m]

You don't have to convert anything to use tram-trains on the NR network. Tram-trains can be ordered that won't require DC electrification, track modifications or platform heights being altered. However, if they are also to run on street running sections with low platforms and DC overheads then this needs to be taken in to consideration.

There is also a 'heavy tram' option which would have similarities with Tyne and Wear Metro trains but be too heavy for street running. TfGM have apparently evaluated using these on Marple services.

Tram-trains require extra train protection on shared sections to compensate for their reduced structural strength. This could lead to the need to move signals and a loss of capacity. It is also necessary to modify pointwork on shared sections to accept the different wheel profile. They are also more expensive per seat than standard trains, not surprising as they have extra features for street running.

For these reasons a tram-train is only worthwhile if it can exploit these features by running through onto a light rail network, and bring some benefit by doing so for example bypassing a heavy rail passenger bottleneck or taking passengers somewhere they want to go but can't get to by train.

Tram-train is not a universal solution for Pacer replacement, though it is possible that they will replace Pacers on a few routes.

 

[SprinterMan]

Just to annoy those living there how about we give a couple to Greater Anglia for use on some of the branches in the East Anglia region

Given the current shortage, that would be welcome tbh :P

 

[MCW]

the way the economy is, Pacers are more likely to be replaced by Horse and cart.