Great Western Coffee Shop

Replacement of Pacer rolling stock once it falls foul of DDA Act
legislation in 2019.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&&sa=X&ei=0tzBTOSMKumK4galsPzUCw&ved=0CBwQBSgA&q=GREATER+MANCHESTER+INTEGRATED+TRANSPORT+AUTHORITY+REPORT+FOR+RESOLUTION+15+Oct+2010+site:www.gmita.gov.uk&spell=1 (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&&sa=X&ei=0tzBTOSMKumK4galsPzUCw&ved=0CBwQBSgA&q=GREATER+MANCHESTER+INTEGRATED+TRANSPORT+AUTHORITY+REPORT+FOR+RESOLUTION+15+Oct+2010+site:www.gmita.gov.uk&spell=1) 

Click on top link to download pdf.  It's on page 6.

I believe the same goes for HSTs.

 I think the HST may be able to get around it if the MK3 carriages have some modifications, ie if they have a accessible toilet and if they are fitted with power doors  similar to the irsh MK3 carriages.

 We will have to see what happens with the HST'S  but if pacers need to be withdrawn by 2019 then someone had better start thinking about ordering something to replace them.

FGW may be able top transfer some of the class 165's from the thames valley routes which have been replaced by DMU's but the problem is that  the class 165 loading guage will make them unsuitable for some routes

I posted this on another forum as well and someone in response has quoted from a 1995 DDA document which states that transport operators have until 1st Jan 2020 to modify or replace vehicles to be DDA complaint i.e. there has been 15 years to prepare already.

Out of interest, how do the Pacers fall foul of the DDA?  They have quite wide doors and ramps for loading wheelchairs.  On the subject of toilets, some rolling stock doesn't have them and Pacers are typically only used for short journeys, so I can't see why this is an issue?

Pacers are not used on just short journeys.  You can find them running 2.5 to 3 hour services in the Northern area.  :(

The main reason is down to the ramp used.  It's a special extended ramp which is unsuitable for narrower and lower platforms.  When 142s are in operation wheelchair passengers at Salford Crescent are made to wait for the next non-Pacer service if travelling to Manchester/Bolton/Preston/Blackpool or taxied to another station if travelling to Southport/Wigan. Salford Crescent also don't have adjacent land which could be used for rebuilding a suitable platform.

Relating to the toilet: obviously replacing it with a larger toilet and removing seats is an option for DDA compliance even if the train will leave 10 extra people waiting on the platform for the next service.  However, the door formation with 3 doors over 2 carriages creates difficulties.

There's also minor issues like door controls, brightness of external destination displays (on Merseytravel refurbished units) and lack of PIS.

Even if it was just the latter issues I mentioned and not the ramp issue it would still likely be non-economically viable to make modifications to what will by then be 35 year old trains.

Thank you northwesterntrains, that makes sense now :D

The various Pacer variants have step entrances in the doorways which cannot be eliminated due to the bodyshell design. Both variants of bodyshell are derived from step entrance buses (Leyland National 2 & Alexander P type) most of which have long since disappeared from passenger service.

It's not just Pacers that suffer from this edict, the various 15x are affected as well. Class 153 toilets cannot be made compliant with the legislation without considerable alteration of the vehicle. The No2 end vestibule was narrowed at the time of their reconstruction to allow adequate space for the driving cab at that end. Therefore there is no means of access for wheelchair bound passengers to access the toilet and even if they could the toilet is not really designed for wheelchair users or mobility impaired passengers.

The options would be therefore to relocate the toilet to the No1 end of the vehicle (where it is located on the equivalent class 156 vehicle) or to remove the toilet from the class 153's entirely, ie there is no toilet it doesn't therefore require alteration or relocation to satisfy the legislation. I understand this latter idea has already been proposed to allow class 153 to run in service beyond 2019.

Class 150 is theoretically capable of alteration to satisfy the legislation, some of you may remember the FNW 150 (150223) with a cavernous disabled access toilet compartment which was on hire to Wessex Trains a few years back. I suspect however the vehicle probably didn't satisfy the legislation due to the handrails being the wrong colour or whatever but it can be done. I understand however that Southern have already removed the toilets from their class 456 EMU's (same Mk3 derived bodyshell as class 150) as they do not wish to spend the money to bring the toilet up to specificaction required by the legislation..

Or you could ensure that a 153 is only used when attached to another vehicle.  By 2019 how many routes will have services with 75 passengers or less on it's busiest part?


The strange thing about the FNW 150s is that they would fail on the door controls, while the ATN 150s with Northern that have the original BR interiors would pass on the door controls as they've had new ones fitted.

I'm not sure if FGW have changed anything on the 142s except the seat covers but if they've not changed them too much you'll notice one of them was part of a small group of trains that only received part of the North Western Trains refurbishment and has the original brown floor opposed to a blueish grey and also the original orange poles near the doors opposed to the light blue on the others.  I wonder if that means that North Western Trains reversed something to make it less DDA complaint than it originally was.