Passed through Sheffield Midland without booked stop at 0615142 092 / 021 / 026 are on their way to Newport this morning.
Passed through Sheffield Midland without booked stop at 0615142 092 / 021 / 026 are on their way to Newport this morning.
I'll let you all try and work that out. It sounds to me if the toilet on the 142 fails the train can run, but if only the PRM toilet goes OOU the unit should be failed. But if both toilets are OOU the unit can still run.????????????????????
This will start off topic but should go back on.
If the 195s (3 car) had been built with two toilets one PRM com. one not. If the non Com. one goes OOU the unit could still run but if the PRM one goes OOU the unit has to be failed. But if the unit only has one toilet and it goes OOU IIRC it's up to the guard to decide whether to fail the unit or not.
I'll let you all try and work that out. It sounds to me if the toilet on the 142 fails the train can run, but if only the PRM toilet goes OOU the unit should be failed. But if both toilets are OOU the unit can still run.????????????????????
The lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.
This will start off topic but should go back on.
If the 195s (3 car) had been built with two toilets one PRM com. one not. If the non Com. one goes OOU the unit could still run but if the PRM one goes OOU the unit has to be failed. But if the unit only has one toilet and it goes OOU IIRC it's up to the guard to decide whether to fail the unit or not.
I'll let you all try and work that out. It sounds to me if the toilet on the 142 fails the train can run, but if only the PRM toilet goes OOU the unit should be failed. But if both toilets are OOU the unit can still run.????????????????????
Alas not quite! It also doesn't have Passenger Information System, deafening door sounders, bright yellow handrails...So actually 150209 is “PRM upgraded” because it doesn’t have a toilet!
Be cool if it's true. I seem to remember reading it was the first one to receive Regional Railways livery.I did hear from a roumer that I think a ex-skipper 142 Pacer 142023 is destined for someplace in Devon England does anyone know this roumer?
So what’s 144012s problem? I’m sure it has all of thatAlas not quite! It also doesn't have Passenger Information System, deafening door sounders, bright yellow handrails...
I think even the "PRM modded" Pacer is technically non-compliant, might be the step...So what’s 144012s problem? I’m sure it has all of that
A wheelchair ramp can still fit on the step, old people have said they find it easier boarding pacers as they are 2 steps up rather than one large step. I don’t understand why new trains aren’t being built to the exact height of the palatform? Merseyrail are doing it with there 777s and it would make wheelchair access so easyI think even the "PRM modded" Pacer is technically non-compliant, might be the step...
I believe it's all about whether or not there's discrimination.This will start off topic but should go back on.
If the 195s (3 car) had been built with two toilets one PRM com. one not. If the non Com. one goes OOU the unit could still run but if the PRM one goes OOU the unit has to be failed. But if the unit only has one toilet and it goes OOU IIRC it's up to the guard to decide whether to fail the unit or not.
I'll let you all try and work that out. It sounds to me if the toilet on the 142 fails the train can run, but if only the PRM toilet goes OOU the unit should be failed. But if both toilets are OOU the unit can still run.????????????????????
You'd struggle to find anything built up to the early 2000's that was 100% compliant; there are RVAR exemptions in place for Pendolinos, Turbostars and more.I think even the "PRM modded" Pacer is technically non-compliant, might be the step...
There is this however I don’t quite understand itYou'd struggle to find anything built up to the early 2000's that was 100% compliant; there are RVAR exemptions in place for Pendolinos, Turbostars and more.
To put this one to bed, 144 012 (aka the 144e) has a dispensation from complying with certain parts of PRM-TSI; the issues at hand are mostly technical non-compliances which are present in many other units that have had PRM treatment (for example, this version which covers certain 150s).
142092 142021 142026 apparently on the Newport docks scrap move today.
https://live.rail-record.co.uk/train?c=K00008&d=14/01/2020
Shame they weren’t 14 years early at the scrapyard.That's how good Pacers are...
14 early at the scrap yard!
They areShame they weren’t 14 years early at the scrapyard.
They are
If you think they are still fit for purpose now then you are wrong. Very wrong.They are
Just because they are all we have doesn’t make them fit for purpose. They should have been replaced long ago with sufficient replacement vehicles. To suggest otherwise is just an enthusiast view of the world where old = good.They are indeed.
The anti Pacer brigade
Seem to think they have more common sense than the rest of us who just want a train home!
Enjoy your short forms and cancellations in the name of sheer lunacy!
Just because they are all we have doesn’t make them fit for purpose. They should have been replaced long ago with sufficient replacement vehicles.
Just because they are all we have doesn’t make them fit for purpose. They should have been replaced long ago with sufficient replacement vehicles. To suggest otherwise is just an enthusiast view of the world where old = good.
Never meant they were 14 years early just that they are early. Northern have been struggling a lot more ever since they started chucking them outIf you think they are still fit for purpose now then you are wrong. Very wrong.