the problems with pacers

[whole diary]

[cereal_basher]

FGW^▸ (First Great Western) did say they were going to improve the mechanical side of things at the refurb as well as the interiors.

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

end of the day if you drop a brick onto a cardboard box what happens? two bricks would be better!

[northwesterntrains]

letter from john pugh http://www.lep.co.uk/news/MP-says-trains-in-area.4987178.jp

A lot of users of this forum may not understand why the Southport MP has recently spoken out against Pacers when they have been in the north of England since the early 1980s.

One of the reasons for this is as of December 2008 Northern were required to run an additional  Manchester to Preston and Manchester to Manchester Airport service every hour, as well as extending their Manchester to Macclesfield service to Stoke-on-Trent.  In order to run these services Northern got back 5 142s which they had sub-leased to First Great Western and sub-leased 3 180s from National Express East Coast, which NXEC^▸ (National Express East Coast) planned to bring in to operation for the December 2010 timetable.

Prior to December 2008 Manchester Airport to Southport services were mainly 150 operated and Manchester Victoria to Southport services were mainly 142 operated.  (Manchester Airport to Southport being the fast service between Manchester and Southport.)  However, the 150s from Manchester Airport to Southport were cascaded to provide the extra Preston service, leaving 142s to run both Southport services.

Recent derailments of Northern Rail services (the most notable being when a Land Rover was parked without the hand brake applied and roll down a hill to a train line seriously damaging a 323 running a Manchester to Stoke-on-Trent service), together with the unreliability of the 180s has usually meant all 68 of Northern's 142s are in operation at peak times, which is more than two years ago when 142s were sitting around spare.

At the start of the Northern franchise there was talk of Northern ordering 100 new trains built by a Chinese company, as 142 and 144 replacements.  DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) said they wouldn't allow that as the Chinese engineers won't have experience of building for the British network and that the work mustn't go outside the EU^» (European Union - about).  Northern abandoned that idea based on EU costs being more and said they aimed to get all Pacers replaced by cascaded Sprinter units by 2011.  It now looks unlikely that they will all be replaced before the end of the Northern franchise in 2014.

[eightf48544]

It all goes to show what a horlicks DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) have made of rolling stock procurement and lack of electrification.

Manchester to Liverpool (L&M line) Southport (L&Y) and Preston/Blackpool (L&Y) are prime candidates for electrifcation.

[northwesterntrains]

Another MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) has now said Pacers should be scrapped:

http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/news/4474050.Trains____should_be_scrapped____says_MP/

Although he could be referring to 150s as well in that statement as he said 'some of the overcrowded trains serving Bolton should be scrapped'

[matt473]

Why scrap overcrowded trains as this would not solve the problem of overcrowding? Lets face it, despite not liking Pacers, they are needed regardless as scrapping them reduces capacity. I would much rather additional stock to be in addition to pacers to help eliminate overcrowding. Also, Pacers can be fantastic units if used on the right services so maybe it would be better for Northern to use them on more suitable services.

[northwesterntrains]

Why scrap overcrowded trains as this would not solve the problem of overcrowding? Lets face it, despite not liking Pacers, they are needed regardless as scrapping them reduces capacity. I would much rather additional stock to be in addition to pacers to help eliminate overcrowding. Also, Pacers can be fantastic units if used on the right services so maybe it would be better for Northern to use them on more suitable services.

The issue is Northern have about 90 Pacers and very few routes that don't get crowded by commuters and/or school/college kids.  They need to have some swapped with other operators' non-Pacer units to only use Pacers on suitable journeys.

Also as Pacers and 150/1s have to be joined together without corridor connectors it means that either two conductors are needed when trains are joined together or people in the front unit can escape paying fares.  Not to mention everytime Northern join two 142s together the doors only open on one unit and the conductor has to spend two or three minutes trying to get the doors on both trains open.

[devon_metro]

Not to mention everytime Northern join two 142s together the doors only open on one unit and the conductor has to spend two or three minutes trying to get the doors on both trains open.

Why?

Exeter TMD^▸ (Traction Maintenance Depot) cope fine with them!

[dog box]

DM ..think it called lack of maintainence.....i have noticed now that the refurb 143s are now a lot quieter and the doors shut with a little tap instead of the usual thud

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

think its fair to say that fgw now has the best examples of these units anyone got i list of recent fails?

[dog box]

they are the ideal unit for the severn beach line...long will they continue

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

they are the ideal unit for the severn beach line...long will they continue

your rite! me thinks it should have the 142's tho hehe so we can have the 143

[tramway]

Had the pleasure of 143613 (I think) this morning, unusal now since the stock swap, but it was very well turned out. Has this just finished a refurb?

All seats clean, doors smooth and quiet engines. Also floors had been recently washed and paintwork was shiny. Nothing wrong at all.