Everything wrong with Pacers

[PacerTrain142]

It seems like you are incapable of clicking on links to other websites and using google. I sent you two links with info in the orders in one of my earlier posts but you obviously didn't bother or were unable to use them. :roll:

I don't recall you sending me any links, other than that rail magazine one that I'm reading now.

Just type in class 195 and/or class 331. I can't help you any more. Also, how many times do we have to say that there are no 230 orders for Northern?

Well they were definitely talking about getting the D Stock to replace the Pacers...

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/fl...il-ready-to-start-converting-first-lu-d-stock

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...mind-doors-manchester-commuters-could-8645131

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u...lling_stock_with_Tube_trains/#comments-anchor

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u...lling_stock_with_Tube_trains/#comments-anchor

http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...seeking-value-for-money-in-rolling-stock.html

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues/january-2015-online/back-on-the-rails/

I doubt this. You seem rather ignorant, the trains have to be built before they can be used, y'know. :roll:

Well they better getting building them then... Only 3 years and 4 months to go until 2020! And anyway, since when does the North get new trains. We get the cast-offs when the South has had enough of them, and then use them for another 30 years or so... That's how it works, right?

No it isn't. Why would any bus operator do this when they could order new buses or buy older ones, such as Leyland nationals?

I thought the Leyland Nationals were de-commisioned now? Anyway, just like the D Stock, it could be turned into a nice new bus with modern seats and heating etc, with features such as the windows, doors and vents retained.

 

[Harbornite]

I don't recall you sending me any links, other than that rail magazine one that I'm reading now.

Looks like the answer is no... :roll:

I'll help you out, seeing as you don't know what you're talking about...

http://bfy.tw/7VlJ

http://bfy.tw/7VlL
.

I sent you that a few pages back.

The rest of your post is gibberish which I've come to expect from you. It seems like you have a chip on your shoulder but you can drop the crap about the North not getting new trains, it does happen but you were incapable of using Google to find out for yourself. :roll: Why is it that you can't find any articles from 2017, everything you've sent is out of date.

since when does the North get new trains. We get the cast-offs when the South has had enough of them, and then use them for another 30 years or so... That's how it works, right?

Well if you did some research you would know that this has only been the case for a few years. The north received plenty of new dmu orders in the 1960s, not to mention the stock ordered by the LMS, LNER and pre grouping companies.

 

[sprinterguy]

I wonder if, when pacers are life expired, they could be converted to weedkilling trains such as the 141s were for a short time

Only one 141 was converted to a weedkiller, and it was relatively shortlived: The more modern MPVs that Network Rail operate seem far more suited to the task, augmented by a few loco-hauled rakes as required.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The trick is to have several pints of strong ale before boarding, as your alcohol-induced swaying will counterbalance the bounce and sway of the Pacer.

That's always my preferred method of counteracting the Pacer "experience". The Sheffield tap is ideally placed for the consumption of a few pints of strong ale in the midst of something of a Pacer stronghold.

 

[J-2739]

Well they were definitely talking about getting the D Stock to replace the Pacers...

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/fl...il-ready-to-start-converting-first-lu-d-stock

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...mind-doors-manchester-commuters-could-8645131

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u...lling_stock_with_Tube_trains/#comments-anchor

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u...lling_stock_with_Tube_trains/#comments-anchor

http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...seeking-value-for-money-in-rolling-stock.html

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues/january-2015-online/back-on-the-rails/

Outdated! :roll:

Well they better getting building them then... Only 3 years and 4 months to go until 2020! And anyway, since when does the North get new trains. We get the cast-offs when the South has had enough of them, and then use them for another 30 years or so... That's how it works, right?

Great, so now we get new trains, it's your time to complain, isn't it? I suppose it's hard breaking away from tradition, you know?

I thought the Leyland Nationals were de-commisioned now? Anyway, just like the D Stock, it could be turned into a nice new bus with modern seats and heating etc, with features such as the windows, doors and vents retained.

Why make something that literally ZERO will buy?

 

[sprinterguy]

Well....my first Pacer this evening.

I will never be so harsh about my regular 321s and 315s again.

Absolutely terrible.[emoji12]

Once they get up to speed on continuous welded rail, I don't think that they're too bad. Anywhere else though and their deficiencies show clearly: The most stark example I can recall is one becoming stuck on the Gateshead curve, as the combination of a standing load and a sharp radii curve proved too much! The resigned way that the guard announced these difficulties over the PA system suggested that this wasn't an unusual occurrence, either.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And anyway, since when does the North get new trains.

I have more than a few quibbles with them (although there's another thread that they'd be more suited to), but what about all those class 185 units that are regularly traversing the Pennines? They replaced 158 units which were only around 15 years old at the time that the 185s were introduced, and many of the 185s will themselves be replaced by new stock at a similar point in their existence.

There is a point to be made that many of the local services in the north are still served by the same stock as they were thirty years ago, but this is because the Provincial sector made a "big bang" investment in swathes of Pacer and Sprinter units within a five year period (when the South East had to continue with comparatively dated slam door stock for many years more), so it's a cyclical thing.

 

[Harbornite]

I have more than a few quibbles with them (although there's another thread that they'd be more suited to), but what about all those class 185 units that are regularly traversing the Pennines? They replaced 158 units which were only around 15 years old at the time that the 185s were introduced, and many of the 185s will themselves be replaced by new stock at a similar point in their existence.

There is a point to be made that many of the local services in the north are still served by the same stock as they were thirty years ago, but this is because the Provincial sector made a "big bang" investment in swathes of Pacer and Sprinter units within a five year period (when the South East had to continue with comparatively dated slam door stock for many years more), so it's a cyclical thing.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant. The south had never had slamdoors and the north has never received new trains like 150s, 158s, 170s, 185s, 321s, 333s etc...

On a serious note, it is boring when whingey northeners complain about a lack of new trains without acknowledging that there's plenty of fairly modern stock being used up the and both northern and TPE have ordered more.

Pacertrain142 seems to have a strange attitude because one minute he was going on about how he loves pacers and doesn't want to see them go, then he's complaining about the lack of new stock in the north, and yet northern's new stock will spell the end for the northern 142s

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Only one 141 was converted to a weedkiller, and it was relatively shortlived: The more modern MPVs that Network Rail operate seem far more suited to the task, augmented by a few loco-hauled rakes as required.

I thought more had been changed over, but happy to be corrected. Looking through the fleetlist, all of them are still officially in existence except for 141104 which had a nasty accident with a 156 and lost as well as a trailer from 141110. Wiki also notes 141101 is scrapped but I can't find any details really on where it was scrapped and for what reason - anybody know why? I know a couple of the ones in Iran still exist as my partner, who is from the country, visited relatives there a few months ago and mentioned seeing an odd looking pacer. Showed her some pictures of the type and she pointed to the 141

 

[PacerTrain142]

Accessibility for the non-able bodied is more then getting them on the train: making sure there is a door near to their space; making sure a toilet is close by to them; making sure there are help points near them.

Pacers can easily be modified to meet this requirement.

Partially blind people may not be able to see the bus doors properly as they may not contrast with the train as good as say, a plug door.

Oh so it's pick on the Pacer time is it? Any reason to get them removed for elf n safety it seems.... Ooooooh dear, some blind person may walk into the doors, because yellow handles don't show up well to blind people.. People with sensitive hearing might sue because of damage to their hearing from the screeching on the bends... And lets not forget the bouncing may cause an elderly or unstable person to fall over Can't have that.... The liabilities would run into the millions..... Oh wait..

Heritage trains are subject to grandfather rights, so no, do not need such modifications.

Why not put the pacers out of service and put them on the heritage lines then? They could then run more frequent, faster services and would cost a lot less than a 1st gen dmu or a steam train.

So why aren't Porterbrook continuing with the 144e project then?

Because their lazy buggers who can't be bothered to spend the money.

You've literally just admitted that Pacers are not sustainable for the growing future. Most of these branch lines you're talking about are not having the same usage as say, 1985. It's only best if they get newer stock or at best, a higher capacity cascaded rolling stock.

Most branch lines can still cope fine with a 2 car 100 seater train so I don't know what you're talking about. Yes usage has gone up, but thats mostly for the intercity and suburban routes.

We're not living with an underfunded railway these days.

Yes we are. If we weren't, then why is the North of England still mostly using trains from 30 years ago?? You know the Tory Government only cares about London and perhaps a few more affluent towns in the South East so stop getting your hopes up. That's where all of the (greatly reduced) budget is going..

I TOLD you it was outdated. Came from the 25th August 2014!

Two years ago isn't that outdated to me...

 

[class387]

Oh so it's pick on the Pacer time is it? Any reason to get them removed for elf n safety it seems.... Ooooooh dear, some blind person may walk into the doors, because yellow handles don't show up well to blind people.. People with sensitive hearing might sue because of damage to their hearing from the screeching on the bends... And lets not forget the bouncing may cause an elderly or unstable person to fall over Can't have that.... The liabilities would run into the millions..... Oh wait..

This is discrimination.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

This is discrimination.

And people think I am mad for defending the noble machines of the pacer type...

PacerTrain142, you might want to tone things down a little

 

[PacerTrain142]

This is discrimination.

No, it's not....

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Well they were definitely talking about getting the D Stock to replace the Pacers...

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/fl...il-ready-to-start-converting-first-lu-d-stock

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...mind-doors-manchester-commuters-could-8645131

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u...lling_stock_with_Tube_trains/#comments-anchor

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.u...lling_stock_with_Tube_trains/#comments-anchor

http://www.railjournal.com/index.ph...seeking-value-for-money-in-rolling-stock.html

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/issues/january-2015-online/back-on-the-rails/

May I offer some well-meant advice to you. If you have links that will enhance any posting submission on this website, please ensure that these links are the most up-to-date ones that refer to the points that you wish to make. A little pre-posting research goes a long way.

I note that other website members have had recourse to respond to some of your other postings on this particular thread in a similar vein.

 

[class387]

No, it's not....

Why isn't it? To say that a certain group of people should not have the ability to travel like we do is discrimination.

I think it might be time for locking actually.

 

[Harbornite]

May I offer some well-meant advice to you. If you have links that will enhance any posting submission on this website, please ensure that these links are the most up-to-date ones that refer to the points that you wish to make. A little pre-posting research goes a long way.

I note that other website members have had recourse to respond to some of your other postings on this particular thread in a similar vein.

He's hopeless, pacer142 hasn't bothered reading the links I sent him which contain up to date info as he'd rather dig up old, out of date info to suit his point of view.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oh so it's pick on the Pacer time is it? Any reason to get them removed for elf n safety it seems.... Ooooooh dear, some blind person may walk into the doors, because yellow handles don't show up well to blind people.. People with sensitive hearing might sue because of damage to their hearing from the screeching on the bends... And lets not forget the bouncing may cause an elderly or unstable person to fall over Can't have that.... The liabilities would run into the millions..... Oh wait..

You seem like a lovely person. :roll: Your trainspotter wibble isn't really helping your case here.

Why not put the pacers out of service and put them on the heritage lines then? They could then run more frequent, faster services and would cost a lot less than a 1st gen dmu or a steam train.


Because their (sic) lazy buggers who can't be bothered to spend the money.

Or maybe because the general public who pay to travel on steam trains on heritage lines do not want to travel on a crappy little railbus from the 1980s. :roll:

Yes we are. If we weren't, then why is the North of England still mostly using trains from 30 years ago?? You know the Tory Government only cares about London and perhaps a few more affluent towns in the South East so stop getting your hopes up. That's where all of the (greatly reduced) budget is going..


Two years ago isn't that outdated to me...

I'm starting to think you're either a troll or a moron. Are Class 333s, 185s, and 350s 30 years old? Do you struggle at maths or something?

As for your last remark, that just proves why you're wrong. Two years is quite a while in rail terms and quite a bit has happened since then such as... Northern and TPE ordering NEW trains.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

He's hopeless, pacer142 hasn't bothered reading the links I sent him which contain up to date info as he'd rather dig up old, out of date info to suit his point of view.

The PacerTrain142 mention of the Class 230 units going to Northern is one that he could well have been avoided by looking at the long running thread about the Class 230 units on this very website which makes very interesting reading.

It would also convince him that I have not a shred of remorse about those heartless and scathing postings that I usually make on that particular thread, but even allowing for that, he would still be brought up to date on matters actually so existing in real life.

 

[J-2739]

Pacers can easily be modified to meet this requirement.

It's not all Lego, you know. Some of these parts could actually be integrated into the chassis.

Oh so it's pick on the Pacer time is it? Any reason to get them removed for elf n safety it seems.... Ooooooh dear, some blind person may walk into the doors, because yellow handles don't show up well to blind people.. People with sensitive hearing might sue because of damage to their hearing from the screeching on the bends... And lets not forget the bouncing may cause an elderly or unstable person to fall over Can't have that.... The liabilities would run into the millions..... Oh wait..

Like others have pointed out, this is discriminating, and nothing more than an aimless rant.

Why not put the pacers out of service and put them on the heritage lines then? They could then run more frequent, faster services and would cost a lot less than a 1st gen dmu or a steam train.

Why would you need to replace heritage DMUs or steam trains with track omnibuses (aka Pacers)? They are heritage for a reason. :roll:

Because their lazy buggers who can't be bothered to spend the money.

No, because there is virtually zero market for dated Pacers to be converted to e standards. You can't just go out and produce something, you've got to have a business case for that. And given the amount of units that are being ordered by 2020 compounded with electrification and the amount of cascaded units available on the market soon that are heaps better than the 'bus on wheels', I'd give the business case rating a .5/10.

Most branch lines can still cope fine with a 2 car 100 seater train so I don't know what you're talking about. Yes usage has gone up, but thats mostly for the intercity and suburban routes.

Ok, now you've given me a proper reason out now. Pacers are being used on commuter routes which are beyond capacity, so are going to be released by the upcoming CAF units. Because the the branch lines 'cope fine', you have no need to cascade Pacers to those routes, right? But then products have a time when their life is ending. This point is valid for Pacers. And since Pacers were only meant for a stop gap solution, then keeping them for a longer period would look a bit silly, wouldn't it?

Yes we are. If we weren't, then why is the North of England still mostly using trains from 30 years ago?? You know the Tory Government only cares about London and perhaps a few more affluent towns in the South East so stop getting your hopes up. That's where all of the (greatly reduced) budget is going..

Do stop the weeping, you've just said you want to keep the Pacers, and then this? THIS!?
And yes, even London and the South East were depriving in the 1980s in terms of railways,even under a Tory Goverment! They were almost worse with all the slam door stock they inherited. Thank goodness we live in a time with extra investment into the rail sector. Whether or not this has to do with privatisation of '94 is debatable, but we already have a thread for that.

Two years ago isn't that outdated to me...

Uh, yeah it actually is. So much is changing in the railways, I'll give you a few for example:
Announcement of Crossrail stock
Construction and introduction of 700s
Electrification of Northwest lines
Thameslink project well underway
And of course, Northern and TPE new train announcements (as Harbonite has pointed out)

I could give you a few more, but you know, you have a mouse 'n key. You know what you have to do...

 

[PacerTrain142]

Why isn't it? To say that a certain group of people should not have the ability to travel like we do is discrimination.

I think it might be time for locking actually.

I never said that. I said a train should not be scrapped purely on the basis of not being disabled-friendly. Anyway, take a look at the 144e, beautiful refurbishment, well done Porterbrook. It's all modern like a new train yet still retains some of it's pacer characteristics. You can't get more disabled-friendly than that. Lets hope all the 144s, 143s and 142s get this rufurbishment.

 

[najaB]

I never said that. I said a train should not be scrapped purely on the basis of not being disabled-friendly.

Agreed. However, if they don't comply with legislation, are 30 years into a 10 year design life, are slow, uncomfortable and don't provide enough capacity, with a replacement on order then why insist on keeping them?

 

[PacerTrain142]

Why would you need to replace heritage DMUs or steam trains with track omnibuses (aka Pacers)? They are heritage for a reason. :roll:

If they are taken out of service they will become "heritage trains" just like class 117's and 101's. They could also be used to open new lines. Have a look at the planned North Somerset Railway, there planning to open it soon and run class 117s on it: http://www.northsomersetrailway.com/

If the Pacers were preserved some of them could be used to re-open more lines like this.

And of course the existing heritage trains won't last forever, we'll eventually need new heritage trains to replace them.

No, because there is virtually zero market for dated Pacers to be converted to e standards. You can't just go out and produce something, you've got to have a business case for that. And given the amount of units that are being ordered by 2020 compounded with electrification and the amount of cascaded units available on the market soon that are heaps better than the 'bus on wheels', I'd give the business case rating a .5/10.

The 144e cost around a 1/3 of a new dmu, and as you can see from these pictures, looks like a very new, very passenger friendly train: https://paulbigland.wordpress.com/2015/06/27/porterbrook-unveil-the-class-144e-pacer-refurbishment/

I fail to see how that is not a good thing.

Ok, now you've given me a proper reason out now. Pacers are being used on commuter routes which are beyond capacity, so are going to be released by the upcoming CAF units. Because the the branch lines 'cope fine', you have no need to cascade Pacers to those routes, right? But then products have a time when their life is ending. This point is valid for Pacers.

Pacers already run on many branches. More trains cascaded from other places are great but we could really do with using them as well as Pacers here in the North due to overcrowding. If we only use them to replace them, then we're not adding anymore much needed capacity. Remember, Pacers can always be doubled where capacity is not enough and they can also pair them with Sprinters so anyone who doesn't like a Pacer can't complain.

And since Pacers were only meant for a stop gap solution, then keeping them for a longer period would look a bit silly, wouldn't it?

No, as with the D Stock project and the 144e project, it has been proven that an old train can be made into a new one. It's a bit like decorating and putting brand new furniture into an old Victorian house.

Do stop the weeping, you've just said you want to keep the Pacers, and then this? THIS!?
And yes, even London and the South East were depriving in the 1980s in terms of railways,even under a Tory Goverment! They were almost worse with all the slam door stock they inherited. Thank goodness we live in a time with extra investment into the rail sector. Whether or not this has to do with privatisation of '94 is debatable, but we already have a thread for that.

Yes I do want to keep the Pacers, but you gotta admit the government have and still do put most of the money in the South East. This is not just in the rail sector but for nearly everything else too.

Uh, yeah it actually is. So much is changing in the railways, I'll give you a few for example:
Announcement of Crossrail stock
Construction and introduction of 700s
Electrification of Northwest lines
Thameslink project well underway
And of course, Northern and TPE new train announcements (as Harbonite has pointed out)

I could give you a few more, but you know, you have a mouse 'n key. You know what you have to do...

I haven't looked into those things because frankly I'm not bothered because none of those things affect my local line. All I know is that Pacers and Sprinters still run and will hopefully continue to run along my local route.

I could get my hopes up and go into into fantasy land dreaming of fast, electric, 1st class, air conditioned trains with free wifi and a buffet service running every 15 minutes on my locale but lets be honest in East Lancashire it's not gonna happen...

I'll believe all the hype when I see it.

 

[CosherB]

If they are taken out of service they will become "heritage trains" just like class 117's and 101's. They could also be used to open new lines. Have a look at the planned North Somerset Railway, there planning to open it soon and run class 117s on it: http://www.northsomersetrailway.com/

If the Pacers were preserved some of them could be used to re-open more lines like this.

And of course the existing heritage trains won't last forever, we'll eventually need new heritage trains to replace them.




The 144e cost around a 1/3 of a new dmu, and as you can see from these pictures, looks like a very new, very passenger friendly train: https://paulbigland.wordpress.com/2015/06/27/porterbrook-unveil-the-class-144e-pacer-refurbishment/

I fail to see how that is not a good thing.


Pacers already run on many branches. More trains cascaded from other places are great but we could really do with using them as well as Pacers here in the North due to overcrowding. If we only use them to replace them, then we're not adding anymore much needed capacity. Remember, Pacers can always be doubled where capacity is not enough and they can also pair them with Sprinters so anyone who doesn't like a Pacer can't complain.



No, as with the D Stock project and the 144e project, it has been proven that an old train can be made into a new one. It's a bit like decorating and putting brand new furniture into an old Victorian house.




Yes I do want to keep the Pacers, but you gotta admit the government have and still do put most of the money in the South East. This is not just in the rail sector but for nearly everything else too.






I haven't looked into those things because frankly I'm not bothered because none of those things affect my local line. All I know is that Pacers and Sprinters still run and will hopefully continue to run along my local route.

I could get my hopes up and go into into fantasy land dreaming of fast, electric, 1st class, air conditioned trains with free wifi and a buffet service running every 15 minutes on my locale but lets be honest in East Lancashire it's not gonna happen...

I'll believe all the hype when I see it.

Just what planet do you live on? I know East Lancashire and it's a very different place to the one you seemingly inhabit. And it's full of friendly, tolerant and knowledgable people, unlike yourself.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Just what planet do you live on? I know East Lancashire and it's a very different place to the one you seemingly inhabit. And it's full of friendly, tolerant and knowledgable people, unlike yourself.

I am not often lost for words, but since other posters including myself have tried to answer some of the outright ridiculous statements that still emanate from PacerTrain142 and have been totally ignored, I can only assume that PacerTrain142 is attempting to be the latest troll to cause annoyance for annoyances sake.

I wonder what our moderators make of the current situation?

 

[class387]

I never said that. I said a train should not be scrapped purely on the basis of not being disabled-friendly. Anyway, take a look at the 144e, beautiful refurbishment, well done Porterbrook. It's all modern like a new train yet still retains some of it's pacer characteristics. You can't get more disabled-friendly than that. Lets hope all the 144s, 143s and 142s get this rufurbishment.

Other than a 700, 345, 321 Renatus etc. Also a refurbished '150e' would be much better, both for the disabled and the general public.

The 142s aren't being scrapped because of the DDA anyway. It is because they are awful trains.

 

[D365]

I wonder what our moderators make of the current situation?

I have made use of the "Report Post" feature to suggest that this topic be closed. If you have not done so already, I believe that this is the best way to address it.

 

[class387]

I am not often lost for words, but since other posters including myself have tried to answer some of the outright ridiculous statements that still emanate from PacerTrain142 and have been totally ignored, I can only assume that PacerTrain142 is attempting to be the latest troll to cause annoyance for annoyances sake.

I wonder what our moderators make of the current situation?

As I suggested on the last page, locking is probably what they are thinking. A shame as this started out as a perfectly sensible thread.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I have made use of the "Report Post" feature to suggest that this topic be closed. If you have not done so already, I believe that this is the best way to address it.

Agreed and done.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I have made use of the "Report Post" feature to suggest that this topic be closed. If you have not done so already, I believe that this is the best way to address it.

Indeed I have already used the report button in the hope that all this trolling nonsense will be terminated.

 

[ainsworth74]

I think that is quite enough of that. Everyone has more than enough opportunity to put their feelings across and I think there is little left to be gained by continuing. If anyone has anything to add, which is substantially new, to the discussion feel free to contact a member of the Staff Team via PM or by reporting this post. Consideration will be given to reopening in that case.