ATW to order Pacer Replacement

[Guinness]

http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2006/01/18/afx2458135.html

LONDON (AFX) - Arriva PLC is planning to order a fleet of new trains worth at least 50 mln stg for its Welsh rail franchise.

The Sunderland-based bus and rail operator has invited UK and continental European train manufacturers to tender for the contract, which AFX News understands to be for about 50 new carriages worth about 1 mln stg each.

Manufacturers are due to submit their bids in March to build the trains, which could enter service on routes in South Wales by the end of 2007.

They will replace Arriva Trains Wales' fleet of Pacer trains, reported to be the most unreliable rolling stock in the UK.

Arriva is believed to have been in talks with a number of manufacturers including Canadian rail and aerospace group Bombardier Inc, which has its main UK plant in Derby and is Britain's only remaining train manufacturer.

A Bombardier spokeswoman confirmed that Arriva had invited it to tender for the contract. Arriva was unable to comment this afternoon.

A decision to carry out the work in Derby would come as a relief to the 1,500 staff at the East Midlands plant, which is facing a 150 mln stg orders gap until it starts building new London Underground trains in 2008.

 

[Jim]

o, no. My pacers

 

[Max]

Very good news, Pacers are awful trains, and should have been replaced years ago. Surely they are not only unreliable, but also extremely unsafe?

Hopefully this will encourage Northern to order new stock too.....wait, I must have been dreaming, this will never happen :roll:

 

[Techniquest]

[Tune] Joy to the world, the Pacers are going. They're going, they're going, they're gooooing. They're going to the scrapyard, off to Booths they go...And off to Booths they go, and off to Booths they gooooo...[/Tune]

BRING ON THE EXTINCTION OF PACERS IN SOUTH WALES!

AT LONG LAST!

Maybe I'll be there on the Pacer farewell runs, if they do them, with my axe as predicted at Cardiff Central on 04/12/2005 James...

 

[Max]

[Tune] Joy to the world, the Pacers are going. They're going, they're going, they're gooooing. They're going to the scrapyard, off to Booths they go...And off to Booths they go, and off to Booths they gooooo...[/Tune]

Is that the best you could think of? :roll:

Maybe I'll be there on the Pacer farewell runs, if they do them, with my axe as predicted at Cardiff Central on 04/12/2005 James...

Maybe there should be a meet with a specific axe requirement

 

[Techniquest]

Hey, to come up with that tune was on the spot, and IMO is good for me! I'm not exactly the best at coming up with those sorts of things, that seemed good when I read it...

Regarding carrying axes on a meet when they go, just make sure you don't go through those scanners on the HEx platforms at Paddington... . I can imagine a lot of us having great fun axeing them up!

 

[Max]

Hey, to come up with that tune was on the spot, and IMO is good for me! I'm not exactly the best at coming up with those sorts of things, that seemed good when I read it...

Regarding carrying axes on a meet when they go, just make sure you don't go through those scanners on the HEx platforms at Paddington... . I can imagine a lot of us having great fun axeing them up!

Was only kidding

Maybe when they are scrapped, someone should find the scrapyard where they are located and who knows

 

[metrocammel]

It could be good news, but there again it could mean the only "decent" 1st gen workings, like the Chiltern Aylesbury route, and soon the Tiger Bay line will have enough "pacers" cascaded, so the 1st gens will be surplus to requirements. It could also mean places like the Wensleydale could invest in the plastic rubbish, replacing their 1st gen dmu's, and also any further plans for 1st gen trains, like the mooted Heart of Wales and Blaneau line could be utilising unsuitable, yet supposedly "safer" 2nd gen 142's - though if anyone rembembers Winsford, it is amazing that anyone can say a 142 is safe?!! the 87 completley telescoped 1/2 of the death wagon in on itself, yet the 87's glass wasnt even smashed!!!!

 

[richa2002]

You've got to admit though that they have a bit of character about them. Before you know it people will be running round the country to travel on the last pacers.

 

[metrocammel]

You've got to admit though that they have a bit of character about them. Before you know it people will be running round the country to travel on the last pacers.

I think I'll leave that to you!!!
But I suppose the unrefurbished Newton Heath sets, with the sliding interior doors and brown vinyl floors are OK! And I got a ATN "express-style" nodding donkey the other day on the 08:30 Ashton to Victoria, though alot comfier than the traditional Newton Heath sets, it was a hell of a lot darker, like really dim, as it was still pretty dark at 0830. But anyway, its usually the Misery Rail 142's, with their horrid back-breaking dolls-house style pathetic seats. At least the bus-style bench seats are slightly comfier, but you cant put your head back if your tired, or else it flops back onto the person behind you!

 

[Z12XE]

It could be good news, but there again it could mean the only "decent" 1st gen workings

Decent and 1st Gen??? Type Mismatch there me thinks.

though if anyone rembembers Winsford, it is amazing that anyone can say a 142 is safe?!! the 87 completley telescoped 1/2 of the death wagon in on itself, yet the 87's glass wasnt even smashed!!!!

A 101 or 108 type vehicle would fold up in a very similar way to the "142's" [sic]

 

[Tom B]

Wouldn't the 142 perform worse due to its lighter weight?

 

[Z12XE]

Wouldn't the 142 perform worse due to its lighter weight?

When it comes down to it, all 14x and all Mk1 trains should be banned from use anywhere, suitable replacements should also be found for another other stock over 25 years old.

It's 2006 not 1966

 

[metrocammel]

No, a 142 would crumple worse as it is lighter weight, plus the body is not integral to the underframe, it is simply "placed" on top, unlike mk1's, where they are integral. It was proved in 1984 that mk1's were stronger than made out, when the "peak" did the nuclear flask test, the mk1 coaches survived much better than anyone expected, though obviously the test was primarily for the nuclear carriers safety.
Sadly, Clapham Junction 4 years later gave mk1s terrible press, though tbh any train, regardless of the build would suffer in a crash such as that - but yes mk1s did have weak points, like the roof in particular which caused problems.

So the pacers are much worse than anything mk1, primarily due to their cheapness, and the "bus bodies", being used on heavy rail. At least a mk1 has a solid steel construction, but in my opinon you cannot beat a MK3 for safety, look at the potentially awful Bushey crash in 1981, 87007 goes over a cracked rail, and the whole train derails, the track completely bends and some coaches even flip on their side (which a later modification to the buck-eye prevented) but not on person died, and no one even had any particular bad injuries - that is a tribute to a good design.

 

[Techniquest]

That's a very good tribute to the geniuses of Derby back when they were working on them.

Regarding Pacers being safer than MK1s, well I doubt a MK1 would have been impossible to clean in the way that those 143s that burnt up would have been. Cleaners said it was impossible to reach some dirty areas for cleaning, so all the dirt and dust accumulated and resulted with a combination of other effects to burn up the 143s. How is something impossible to clean? I've not had that problem before. Although if there's truth to that, does such a thing apply to other stock? I should hope not.

Regarding sending Pacers to the preserved lines, well a couple will no doubt be preserved, if there is a big and strong enough 142/3/4 group to do it. More likely will be the shortsightedness of the DfT in a couple of years, as they'll order them to be scrapped due to their safety records and so forth, then they'll realise they needed them desperately. Which should be obvious now, with a severe unit shortage, it's surprising that ATW want rid of units when they're relying on loco haulage to make up for the shortfall. But then would you want doubled-up Pacers on Manchester to Holyhead...Keep the 57s for now then.

 

[Sprog]

Sounds good. BUT..........

........the pacers shouldnt be scrapped. And they wont be.

They should be put on branches and other under-used routes where they belong.

one thing Chaz:

COPYRIGHT



Copyright AFX News Limited 2005. All rights reserved.

The copying, republication or redistribution of AFX News Content,inculding by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of AFX News.

May not apply (feel free to correct me) as youve given the source, but i dont know jack about copyright laws. Im just pointing out.

 

[metrocammel]

Sounds good. BUT..........

........the pacers shouldnt be scrapped. And they wont be.

They should be put on branches and other under-used routes where they belong.

Well, true, but back in the 80's the brown / cream "skipper" units were put on the Cornish Branches, but due to their squealing flanges and poor ride quality, everybody hated them and they were sent up to Manchester (I remember some in brown & cream at Man Vic) But they were replaced with the good old 1st gen dmu, 101's & 121's, which lasted well into the 1990's when 153's were formed by splitting 155's. Now that was a retro move from 142s to 101's, but it was for the best, though I cant say the 153's are any better tbh - plus there was yet again talk in 2003 of putting the 101's that had finished in Manchester on the Cornish Branches - t'was a non starter though.

 

[B37425]

Hey, Im a new member here (Some of you may know me from other sources).

Having only just seen these article on the Internet, Im glad to see these pieces of rubbish leave. But nonetheless, I grew up travelling on these units, So here is at least 1 person on the Farewell tour (If they actually get one)

 

[Techniquest]

I'll be on the farewell runs if they happen too, if only because it'll be a proper way to say goodbye to the units. More mileage too is a nice little bonus.

Don't get me wrong, I'll be glad to see them going, but it's something that would have to be done, if only because I too grew up on DMUs (although I had the pleasure of 150s and 158s primarily). It seems like the right thing to do, as it's a proper send-off of a DMU class we'll no doubt be wanting back soon enough...

EDIT: Good to see you here Josh!

 

[TheSlash]

I'll be on the farewell runs if they happen too, if only because it'll be a proper way to say goodbye to the units. More mileage too is a nice little bonus.

They'll make up a 12 coach special - plently of back up for when they start failing during the tour

 

[Techniquest]

ROFL! True, but I'd still only be able to count the one for haulage really, unlike some bashers who count all three 377s on Southern runs. I personally count the one unit I'm in, just the carriage I'm in and not the full set. Obviously, when it comes to double-heading locos, I'd count both, as they're both hauling me by all rights and means.

 

[Max]

They'll make up a 12 coach special - plently of back up for when they start failing during the tour

I remember travelling more than once on a pacer set at least 7 cars long. It was on a Hull to Scarborough service, and if I remember rightly (don't hold me to this, was probably about 10 years ago ), it was made up of a three car WYPTE 144 and a couple of 2 car 144/2s. It only just fitted in the platform at Cottingham station

I can also recall when long pacer sets were regular on the evening Morecambe-Leeds services. When I was very young, pacers were the norm on the Yorkshire Coast Line, with the odd 150/156. Now it is virtually all 158/6s. I noticed a pacer on a morning peak service this morning, and it certainly brought back some memories

 

[Gareth Hale]

You've got to admit though that they have a bit of character about them. Before you know it people will be running round the country to travel on the last pacers.

Im well with you, if people kill off the pacer, they kill the British rail. If any are been sent to scrap, tell me, ill buy one

 

[Tom]

Pacers are life-expired. Gareth, I have a thing with 442s, you have a thing with 14x. They're all gonna go sometime...

 

[southy39]

I'll be on the farewell runs if they happen too, if only because it'll be a proper way to say goodbye to the units. More mileage too is a nice little bonus.

They'll make up a 12 coach special - plently of back up for when they start failing during the tour

the only fitting farewell to these units is to burn them beyond use that way future generations dont need to suffer them.

 

[Gareth Hale]

Pacers are life-expired. Gareth, I have a thing with 442s, you have a thing with 14x. They're all gonna go sometime...

Not going for me, ill buy one and Laugh at the TOCS when they find their new stock is terrible and slow, and more expensive to run than the Pacers


Class 150 = £2.60 a mile
Class 142 = £1.40 a mile
Class 150 Reliablity - 90%
Class 142 Reliabilty - 95%
(from the TOC Game, using REAL DATA)
You make the choice, which one makes more profit, and most reliable

 

[Gareth Hale]

Sounds good. BUT..........

........the pacers shouldnt be scrapped. And they wont be.

They should be put on branches and other under-used routes where they belong.

I personally think they suit mainline service more. I know they were designed for branch, but see it from my point of view, they have more windows, faster acceleration, bouncy to keep the jet lagged people awake, and a lot more fun than a dull ride, always something going on in the centre!

 

[Tom]

142 reliability @ 95%... err, yeah right.

TOCgame may use "real" data but it depends on the "source".

 

[Gareth Hale]

They either get them off www.therailwaycentre.com or e'mail the TOC

 

[O L Leigh]

No, a 142 would crumple worse as it is lighter weight, plus the body is not integral to the underframe, it is simply "placed" on top, unlike mk1's, where they are integral. It was proved in 1984 that mk1's were stronger than made out, when the "peak" did the nuclear flask test, the mk1 coaches survived much better than anyone expected, though obviously the test was primarily for the nuclear carriers safety.

Hi Gang!!

I've had this on other forums, so hear goes again.

Met-Camm: I'm afraid you've got it the wrong way round. Mk1's had the floor and seating attached to the undeframe and a body plonked on top. Although Pacers have separate bodyshells and underframes, the seating is attached to and contained within the bodyshell. Slam a Mk1 into something and chances are it'll come apart at the seams pretty quickly. Do the same with a Pacer and it may come off it's underframe, but at least the punters would be contained within the bodyshell rather than scattered across the scene. The Mk1's used in the nuclear flask test crash survived so well because they never really hit anything. The not inconsiderable weight of the Peak saw to that by shoving everything out of the way. Had the Peak been propelling them towards the flask they wouldn't have found much left to identify them.

Incidentally, I'm not convinced that a Cl150 or similar would have fared much better than the Pacer involved in the Winsford prang. That Cl87 had an awful lot of weight behind it.

Although Pacer bodies use bus parts, they are significantly reinforced. In order to be accepted into mainline use, they had to meet the same end loading specifications as every other item of rolling stock coming into service at that time. Therefore, a Pacer should be as strong as a Sprinter.

I believe that Pacer reliability is much better now than it ever has been. They were truly terrible when new because the Leyland TL11 engine and SCG transmission were pants, but they now have the same Cummins/Voith/Gmeinder drivetrains as Sprinters. Their problem now seems to have more to do with suitability. They are certainly preferrable to the "make do" Cl153's, as a Pacer can keep running with one engine shut down. They also carry more people and keep better time (although if a Pacer came in attached to a Cl153 I know where I'd choose to ride).

There are already 2 preserved Cl141's and the Cl140 prototype. I'm not sure we need one of every class kept, although it would be nice.

one TN