Worst Rolling Stock in UK

[northwichcat]

Not sure I quite get that! If Pacers were a cheaper operational option, then transfering them to lines more at risk would help, so perhaps Cornwall wasn't so much at risk - have I misunderstood you?
What I'd like to know is, what are the actual services they did help to save.

AFAIK Pacers saving lines is just a rumour. Considering 101s managed to stay in operation until 2001 I don't see how building new trains in 1985 to replace first gen DMUs was to save lines.

Pacers being removed from Cornwall was nothing to do with Cornish lines being safe from closure - the curvy track was causing the wheels on Pacers to wear out too quickly for BR's liking.

What happened was something like this (numbers aren't accurate):

142s in operation in Cornwall: 15 (30 carriages)
Number of 150s that were sent down to Cornwall in exchange for the 15x142s: 8 (16 carriages)
Net gain in carriages for North through 142 cascade: 14 carriages.

142s in operation in Cornwall: 15 (30 carriages)
Number of 150s that replaced 142s in Cornwall: 8 (16 carriages)
Number of 2 car 142s in Cornwall that were replaced by single carriage units (Bubble cars, then 153s): 7
Net loss in carriages for Cornwall through 142 cascade: 9 carriages.

I'd tried to explain that previously as well as I can without giving any numbers so had to invent some to try and illustrate it more clearly.

Based on what Oswyntail said in an above post about the North getting a net gain in Pacers because passenger numbers were picking up I would imagine Cornish passenger numbers continued to drop in the 1980s so they suffered from a net loss in carriages as a consequence. Replacing 142s with single carriage trains on some Cornish routes may well have saved lines there as there would have been less empty seats.

 

[yorksrob]

How Porterbrook describes the 144's in its rolling stock brochure

It's true really. The better seats and more room go a long way.

 

[Oswyntail]

...
Based on what Oswyntail said in an above post about the North getting a net gain in Pacers because passenger numbers were picking up ....

I hoped I had written that passenger numbers picked up when Pacers were introduced - meaning Pacers "saved" lines by making them more viable - and the third coaches were new, not taken from elsewhere.

 

[northwichcat]

I hoped I had written that passenger numbers picked up when Pacers were introduced - meaning Pacers "saved" lines by making them more viable - and the third coaches were new, not taken from elsewhere.

You did. Although, if the lines were really threatened with closure in the next few years the last thing BR would have done is ordered new trains for them even with Pacers having lower build costs than most trains.

Things varied between regions though. You mentioned about newly electrified lines in Yorkshire and getting 3rd cars for 144s. I imagine those two improvements are what lead to Yorkshire Pacers getting 2+2 seating, while Merseytravel crammed even more seats in a 3+2 formation in to 2 carriage Pacers.

 

[TGV]

I haven't checked this thread for a few days and I return to find 11 pages of pacer discussion under the banner "worst rolling stock". Hmmm... Where there's smoke...

 

[WatcherZero]

Hmmm... Where there's smoke...

Theres a Dry Ice machine?

 

[9K43]

My worst ride I had was in a Shark Brake Van doing 45 mph running down from a ballast site at Marsden Station.This BV had an offset Vac bag which took 2 of us to couple up to get a brake, and the ships wheel at either ends were loose.
This heap of crap was in self destructing mode as it met the curves around Slaithwaite Station to Spring wood Junction, at Huddersfield.
Sharks were meant to swim in the sea not for guards to ride in.

 

[Ministry]

I'm surprised no-one's mentioned the 508/2s ....

They were so unreliable that when Southeastern made the wise decision to replace them with Class 466s that no-one else wants them!

In fairness, the handful of 508s that SE operated were fit for purpose but they weren't looked after properly and, being a small group seperate to the main fleet in Liverpool, probably don't hold much appeal to any other TOCs on the 3rd rail network.

Personally, I think the 460s are far worse - a completely pointless microfleet which doesn't fit with any service other than the Gat Ex. What a complete waste of time and money, which could've been put towards more 377s and other useful vehicles.

 

[Greenback]

I think we may be forgetting what things were actually like in the early 1980's for secondary routes. Many lines were under threat, first generation DMU's needed replacement, demand for rial travelw as still falling, and the government were unwilling to spend more than the bare minimum on new stock.

In this context, the bus derivatives that turned into Pacers, were seen as the only option on branches that would otherwise not have seen any new stock at all. The feeling at the time was that if the older stock was not replaced, passenger numbers would continue to fall, the costs of maintaining th eold units would rise and the lines would eventually close.

Don't forget that 1983 saw the closure of the Clayton West branch and the direct section of the Huddersfield - Sheffield line. There were proposals to close the entire route!

So, Pacers did indeed help to save many lines. Fortunately BR and the governemnet realised that they were not the answer for all lines, and so the 150's were born. But I think that to say Pacers did not save lines is a fallacy, and ignores the fact that the future for for non Inter City railways at the time they were conceived was far from rosy.

 

[northwichcat]

Don't forget that 1983 saw the closure of the Clayton West branch and the direct section of the Huddersfield - Sheffield line. There were proposals to close the entire route!

So, Pacers did indeed help to save many lines.

Fortunately BR and the governemnet realised that they were not the answer for all lines, and so the 150's were born.

I'm not trying to argue that no lines were under threat, more so that not all lines that got new Pacers were under threat and that not all lines that didn't get new Pacers and instead got Sprinters weren't under threat.

141s were all based in West Yorkshire while the West Midlands never saw Pacers. Apparently this was down to Centro not being open to receiving Pacers, unlike Metro/GMPTE/Merseytravel/Synexus.

 

[ACE1888]

AFAIK Pacers saving lines is just a rumour. Considering 101s managed to stay in operation until 2001 I don't see how building new trains in 1985 to replace first gen DMUs was to save lines.

Pacers being removed from Cornwall was nothing to do with Cornish lines being safe from closure - the curvy track was causing the wheels on Pacers to wear out too quickly for BR's liking.

What happened was something like this (numbers aren't accurate):

142s in operation in Cornwall: 15 (30 carriages)
Number of 150s that were sent down to Cornwall in exchange for the 15x142s: 8 (16 carriages)
Net gain in carriages for North through 142 cascade: 14 carriages.

142s in operation in Cornwall: 15 (30 carriages)
Number of 150s that replaced 142s in Cornwall: 8 (16 carriages)
Number of 2 car 142s in Cornwall that were replaced by single carriage units (Bubble cars, then 153s): 7
Net loss in carriages for Cornwall through 142 cascade: 9 carriages.

I'd tried to explain that previously as well as I can without giving any numbers so had to invent some to try and illustrate it more clearly.

Based on what Oswyntail said in an above post about the North getting a net gain in Pacers because passenger numbers were picking up I would imagine Cornish passenger numbers continued to drop in the 1980s so they suffered from a net loss in carriages as a consequence. Replacing 142s with single carriage trains on some Cornish routes may well have saved lines there as there would have been less empty seats.

Remember the 'Skipper' fiasco well in the late 80's, the 'Motley' collection of 101/108's etc was, now looking back on it, great fun

 

[Greenback]

I'm not trying to argue that no lines were under threat, more so that not all lines that got new Pacers were under threat and that not all lines that didn't get new Pacers and instead got Sprinters weren't under threat.

141s were all based in West Yorkshire while the West Midlands never saw Pacers. Apparently this was down to Centro not being open to receiving Pacers, unlike Metro/GMPTE/Merseytravel/Synexus.

It wa sonly after the Pacers were ordered and constructed that their limitations became apparent. I dare say that many Pacers ended up where they were never envisaged!

 

[tbtc]

AFAIK Pacers saving lines is just a rumour. Considering 101s managed to stay in operation until 2001 I don't see how building new trains in 1985 to replace first gen DMUs was to save lines

A handful of the better 101s remained that late, but the vast majority were reaching the end of their life in the 1980s (when Pacers arrived).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the 460s are far worse - a completely pointless microfleet which doesn't fit with any service other than the Gat Ex. What a complete waste of time and money, which could've been put towards more 377s and other useful vehicles.

Agreed. 377s would have been fine for that route, but sadly Airport services have to be "different" (e.g. 332s, or BR deciding that Stansted passengers couldn't possibly travel on 321s and coming up with "322"s to make them stand out - as if any airport passengers would notice the difference!)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I haven't checked this thread for a few days and I return to find 11 pages of pacer discussion under the banner "worst rolling stock". Hmmm... Where there's smoke...

TBH I think we'd be better having one Pacer "mega-thread" rather than all the different discussions which end up turining into Pacer debates. Same with Voyagers. They have their plus points and their (more obvious) negatives, but we keep finding new threads to discuss them in (or hi-jack)...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It wa sonly after the Pacers were ordered and constructed that their limitations became apparent. I dare say that many Pacers ended up where they were never envisaged!

True, a lot of them are on duties unsutable to Pacer operation, whilst there are some other lines that they could work on (Lymington branch, Bedford - Bletchley, Far North/ Kyle if they had decent seats) where 75mph units aren't likely to crash into anything.

 

[Drsatan]

Sorry I haven't been on the forum for a while, but I've been revising for exams (I'm a second year uni student) and unfortunately revision has to come first!

It looks as though, judging from the content of this thread, that Pacers (especially 142s) and 390s are the most hated trains on the railways today!

 

[WestCoast]

It looks as though, judging from the content of this thread, that Pacers (especially 142s) and 390s are the most hated trains on the railways today!

I agree about the pacer bit, but I would say the Voyagers are more hated than Pendolinos, due to their length, vibrations and layout. Nevertheless, often what "regulars" are looking for is a decent ride and a reasonable seat.

 

[Lampshade]

Northern's 150s are awful, especially in their FNW guise. The 150/1s smell, look dank and tired internally with poor choice of decor, while the 150/2s have the additional problem of pitiful legroom. Their ride quality is nothing special, but still greatly better than the 142s which are just dire by today's standards.

I agree about the 150/1s, 150215 is also a bit of a dog. The seats in Northern's 150268-277 are fantastic though

 

[lm321412]

I'm not trying to argue that no lines were under threat, more so that not all lines that got new Pacers were under threat and that not all lines that didn't get new Pacers and instead got Sprinters weren't under threat.

141s were all based in West Yorkshire while the West Midlands never saw Pacers. Apparently this was down to Centro not being open to receiving Pacers, unlike Metro/GMPTE/Merseytravel/Synexus.

143001 has been tested in the West Midlands and the 140s had a fair share of Birmingham Moor St - Stratford-Upon-Avon testing.

But other than that, no Pacers have pretty much escaped the West Midlands or the West Midlands have escaped the Pacer (depends on which view you take!)

 

[northwichcat]

143001 has been tested in the West Midlands and the 140s had a fair share of Birmingham Moor St - Stratford-Upon-Avon testing.

But other than that, no Pacers have pretty much escaped the West Midlands or the West Midlands have escaped the Pacer (depends on which view you take!)

Most Pacers had the rail parts built in the Midlands and the bus parts built elsewhere so some testing in the Midlands would have been logical.

 

[Tracked]

Another vote for Pacers, seeing as they seem to be the things I've travelled on most recently (discounting the 321/9, which are merely a bit boring after 15+ yrs of being the local train), especially on the hope valley line, I always drop on the 142 these days

 

[RichmondCommu]

Are you mad!? Imagine if Virgin had 350's operating the WCML! They're slow, they're noisy, they have few toilets, some have 3+2 seating, they're cold in winter, the carriage with a toilet often smells, First Class it too small, First Class only has 2+2 seating, the list is endless....

Pendolinos aren't excellent, but are much better for InterCity services than a 350. (I only ever go on a 350 between Crewe and London when I need to travel at short notice.)

As others have said, First Class on Pendolinos can be full at peak hours, particularly on the Liverpool to London route. A main benefit of First Class is that you are almost guaranteed a seat and that it won't be too full, so it's only sensible to have a large number of First Class carriages. Most of Virgin's revenue comes from First Class passengers anyway.

East Coast do not have a significantly "better" First/Standard Class ratio, and Virgin's ratio will be fine on 11 carriage Pendolinos.

I have been in a Mark 2 carriage a few times, and have found the vestibules to be awfully loud. Pendolinos are far quieter - quiet enough so that you can make a phone call!

Pendolinos are quiet, smooth, fast, have plenty of toilets, have a gigantic kitchen and have excellent First Class carriages. Standard Class priority seats have plenty of legroom, but if that still doesn't satisfy you, just upgrade to First Class!

What a relief to see someone talking sense! How anyone can argue that a class 90 and mk3's are better than a 390 is beyond me. The fact is 390's have been a huge success because the travelling public like them! I use them regulary and they are stupid quick. This is the 21st century, not the stone age.

As for the 378's.. I use them regulary at weekends and have no problems with them. The seating arrangements are fine given the number of people who use the service and i should imagine they are a damn site easier to clean! Given the average distances travelled no one is particulary bothered about gawping out the window. And i'm sure they are a damn sight quicker to unload!

This is the NLL, not the West Highland! Wake up everyone!

 

[tbtc]

How anyone can argue that a class 90 and mk3's are better than a 390 is beyond me. The fact is 390's have been a huge success because the travelling public like them! I use them regulary and they are stupid quick. This is the 21st century, not the stone age

Agreed, but you will always get some enthusiasts stating that their favourite twenty/ thirty/forty/fifty year old trains are much better than "this modern plastic rubbish" (even though some enthusiasts were similarly scathing when Deltics replaced Steam, and then when HSTs replaced Deltics...)

 

[yorksrob]

Well, I suppose it depends if the said enthusiast backs up his/her opinions with valid points regarding the said rolling stock. For example, I find the tradicional IC style seats in Mk 3's much more comfortable than those on more modern trains which are always rock hard. As for Mark 4's, I find the quality of journey easily comparable to anything on the West Coast mainline currently. Yes, the seats are modern and therefore quite hard, but you seem to get a reasonable enough amount of legroom and there are usually a reasonable number of table seats.

As for the 378's, I'll happily tollerate longitudinal seating (which will often mean standing in reality) for short hops, but anything longer than inner suburban and I prefer a seat frankly.

 

[317653]

317's for ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[GospelOak117]

317's for ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agreed.

And 378's are fine for short hops ok.... but Hackney Central to Kew Gardens? I would like to be able to look at something in that space of time other than the people in front of or next to me. The scenery in London may not be spectacular, but I still want to be able to see it. IMO the interior of a similar 376 is perfect for this role.

 

[WestCoast]

Agreed, but you will always get some enthusiasts stating that their favourite twenty/ thirty/forty/fifty year old trains are much better than "this modern plastic rubbish" (even though some enthusiasts were similarly scathing when Deltics replaced Steam, and then when HSTs replaced Deltics...)

Well, yes, Pendolinos are completely fit for their purpose; fast, smooth, tilting and comfortable in the right seats. I am very tired of the word "plastic" being banded around.

Voyagers on the other hand are badly designed, have vibrations and are not fit for purpose. The HSTs are/were infinitely better.

 

[valenta]

Voyagers on the other hand are badly designed, have vibrations and are not fit for purpose. The HSTs are/were infinitely better.

Completely agree! Of course, I'm not biased towards HST's/Valenta's!!!

 

[Track Basher]

I thought I would join in this discussion trying to be objective.

Is the pacer a good train? It is better than when they were intoduced once proper train seating is installed. I was surprised a few weeks ago in Devon that some still had the original bus seats fitted. They are OK for short journeys but as others have said not suitable for anything over an hour, but better than nothing.

Is a pendo a good train? Yes and No. The trains are well specified for the route but the passenger compartment is a bit of an afterthought. There are a number of problems with the interior. The seats are very hard and I find I get cramp on a long journey. Voyagers have the same problem as they have the same seats. The First Class on pendos is badly though out. If I had paid a huge amount of money rather than weekend upgrade I would enjoy my view of the rubbish bin, microwave and coffee maker in the passenger saloon. Who thought that was a good idea? It could have been a good train but has been let down by attention to detail.

Voyagers are better in that respect but are still uncomfortable on a long journey.

We have not come to the worst of all the Class 139. I recently went on one for the first time a couple of weeks ago and they are horrific. It has to be seen to be believed. They are my nomination for this section.

 

[valenta]

We have not come to the worst of all the Class 139. I recently went on one for the first time a couple of weeks ago and they are horrific. It has to be seen to be believed. They are my nomination for this section.

Have been fortunate enough, seemingly, never to travel on a 139. Having watched a few videos on You Tube, i'm starting to appreciate the ride you get on a pacer, never seen anything as bumpy!

 

[317653]

My nomination for the worst train of all time is...

CLASS 377/1 & /3

 

[TomJ93]

My nomination for the worst train of all time is...

CLASS 377/1 & /3

Can't agree. I've done a return to Chichester, twice, very well suited to purpose, performs well, was comfy and had plenty of room, what more could you want?