Least appropriate use of Pacers?

[Tetchytyke]

They were cheap to build, they are cheap (ish now) to maintain, they offer a cheap route for the ROSCO to make a fortune and they help to keep fares down in the north.

They were cheap(ish) to build, but if you factor in the door and gearbox mods the 142s needed it'd have been cheaper to buy 150s.

I don't really have a problem with Pacers on commuter routes, they are good for short commuter lines or for rural branch lines. Refreshed properly they could be good trains- ATW's 142s are nice for short commuter journeys, and the 144s are really very pleasant trains.

The problem is that they end up anywhere and everywhere, on some very inappropriate routes. They should not be on the Calder Valley trains via Bradford, nor should they be on Southport or Blackpool to Manchester trains, nor should they be on the Tyne Valley.

I don't mind it when a 142 is subbing for a broken down train- it's better than a cancellation- but there are plenty of diagrammed moved on these lines for Pacers.

 

[northwichcat]

Seamer is the change station for the Yorks coast, Bridlington Filey etc. Neither of them are 'shacks'.

Seamar still gets 91,500 entries and exits per year (which doesn't include interchanges) which isn't bad for a village with a population of 4,335 with an hourly service.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They should not be on the Calder Valley trains via Bradford, nor should they be on Southport or Blackpool to Manchester trains, nor should they be on the Tyne Valley.

For Calder Vale which would you rather have - as it used to be with 2tph and pretty much Pacer free, or as it is with 3tph and Pacers operating some services? (Some of the peak services are 5 car Pacers so more capacity than a 155 or 158)

One issue with Preston/Blackpool services is the diagrams which contain a Buxton service must be kept Pacer free, which means Victoria-Blackpool is more likely to see a 142 than Hazel Grove-Preston.

 

[BantamMenace]

As a regular user of the Leeds to Lancaster service between Crossflatts and Lancaster i'd much rather a pacer is used than the frequency decreased. Very few that are on the train before I board at Keighley continue all the with the Lancaster. Most alight at gargrave, hellifield and bentham. The use of pacers is more than enough and i believe the diagrams tie in with Lancaster to Barrow runs.

 

[yorksrob]

As a regular user of the Leeds to Lancaster service between Crossflatts and Lancaster i'd much rather a pacer is used than the frequency decreased. Very few that are on the train before I board at Keighley continue all the with the Lancaster. Most alight at gargrave, hellifield and bentham. The use of pacers is more than enough and i believe the diagrams tie in with Lancaster to Barrow runs.

Agree that the service frequency on this route needs to be maintained (preferably enhanced). Definately needs to be 144 or better as in my experience, the vast majority past Skipton go all the way to Carnforth and beyond.

 

[Tetchytyke]

For Calder Vale which would you rather have - as it used to be with 2tph and pretty much Pacer free, or as it is with 3tph and Pacers operating some services? (Some of the peak services are 5 car Pacers so more capacity than a 155 or 158)

There's only 3tph+ at Hebden Bridge, Todmorden and Rochdale. Everywhere else still has 2tph.

The trains via Bradford should be a minimum of a 155. The trains via Brighouse can probably justify a Pacer.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

There's only 3tph+ at Hebden Bridge, Todmorden and Rochdale. Everywhere else still has 2tph.

The trains via Bradford should be a minimum of a 155. The trains via Brighouse can probably justify a Pacer.

The problem is you'd need to reorganise the diagrams to keep pacers off the Bradford services. Also, despite being slow, there's a fair few on each of the services via Brighouse that run through from stations at the Eastern end. I did BTL-MCV last Friday and I was far from the only one doing that run or similar (as an aside, this was the evening peak run formed of 142+158, one of which was unsurprisingly much busier than the other!).

 

[muz379]

There's only 3tph+ at Hebden Bridge, Todmorden and Rochdale. Everywhere else still has 2tph.

The trains via Bradford should be a minimum of a 155. The trains via Brighouse can probably justify a Pacer.

There are more than 3tph at Hebden Bridge , you also have the york services that pass through there .

There are also 4TPH at Todmorden and Rochdale because you have the local Todmorden to Wigan service as well .

That being said I do agree services via Bradford should be 150/155
Although it can get quite busy on the brighouse services as well , especially in the morning when you wouldn't want less than a 158 . The 3 car 144's they used to have on there where alright though .

 

[northwichcat]

There's only 3tph+ at Hebden Bridge, Todmorden and Rochdale. Everywhere else still has 2tph.

The trains via Bradford should be a minimum of a 155. The trains via Brighouse can probably justify a Pacer.

Hebden Bridge, Halifax, Bradford, New Pudsey and Leeds are also linked by the Blackpool-York service, which is almost exclusively 158s. That service is also the fastest service between Hebden Bridge and Leeds.

 

[PHILIPE]

The longest regular route on ATW is Maesteg to Cheltenham but any instances of passengers doing end to end journey would be rare.
FGWs Pacers stick to the Devon Metro, Paignton, Exmouth and Barnstaple. They worked a trip from Exeter to Bristol in the Summer but these sorties were more frequent when they worked in the Bristol area.

 

[berneyarms]

I'd think that using them on the Fishguard boat train wouldn't exactly be the best use myself.

 

[PHILIPE]

I'd think that using them on the Fishguard boat train wouldn't exactly be the best use myself.

They do deputise occasionally. There was one booked for Saturday Summer strengthening but an alternative unit to ride in (158 or 150)

 

[CC 72100]

And yet for those of us in Devon where they make up a large chunk of services they continue to be inappropriate on most services where the majority of passengers will be going end to end from Painting/Barnstaple Exeter Central which is on average, an hours journey plus change.

Just because you have more of the things doesn't mean you get to have the sole claim on whinging about 'em.

^^ what he said.

Although I must confess that I actually find them perfectly acceptable for the routes that they're used on when doubled-up, yes the ride quality is questionable, yes the bus doors don't make them the warmest, but their (simple) interiors are in fairly reasonable nick and the crew down here are all of a good bunch.

Plus, get rid of Pacers and you paralyse Devon's local network...

 

[deltic08]

The investment money for Yorkshire/Humberside and the Northeast goes on maintaining hugely uneconomic services.
You can have the investment funding but it will come at the cost of drastically reduced operational subsidies.

NO IT DOESN'T AND STOP THESE MALICIOUS COMMENTS.

Even if it was for uneconomic services, the North should have an equal spend per head to the Southeast and London. Services in the South must be heavily subsidised if 9x more is spent per head than in Yorkshire.

Subsidy at Northern has been recalculated by Campaign for Better Transport to be one fifth of what was thought. Check it out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They were cheap(ish) to build, but if you factor in the door and gearbox mods the 142s needed it'd have been cheaper to buy 150s.

I don't really have a problem with Pacers on commuter routes, they are good for short commuter lines or for rural branch lines. Refreshed properly they could be good trains- ATW's 142s are nice for short commuter journeys, and the 144s are really very pleasant trains.

The problem is that they end up anywhere and everywhere, on some very inappropriate routes. They should not be on the Calder Valley trains via Bradford, nor should they be on Southport or Blackpool to Manchester trains, nor should they be on the Tyne Valley.

I don't mind it when a 142 is subbing for a broken down train- it's better than a cancellation- but there are plenty of diagrammed moved on these lines for Pacers.

I didn't realise 142s subbed in Hemel Hempstead.

 

[DarloRich]

NO IT DOESN'T AND STOP THESE MALICIOUS COMMENTS.

Even if it was for uneconomic services, the North should have an equal spend per head to the Southeast and London. Services in the South must be heavily subsidised if 9x more is spent per head than in Yorkshire.

Subsidy at Northern has been recalculated by Campaign for Better Transport to be one fifth of what was thought. Check it out.

Are you being serious? Are you quite sure you understand the reasoning behind the distribution of investment money, population density, the varied employment marker and respective fare levels?

BTW i get a 153/150 to work every day in the south east. Perhaps we should have new trains to?

 

[yorksrob]

BTW i get a 153/150 to work every day in the south east. Perhaps we should have new trains to?

A 153/150 ? Luxury

On a serious note, I think the argument that the North can't have investment because it's investment money goes on subsidising "hopelessly uneconomic services" isn't really a workable strategy, not least if we're serious about public transport. It's tantamount to saying that because the universal postal service is hopelessly uneconomic in sparsely populated rural areas, they should only have their mail collected and delivered by horse and cart, or because it's more expensive to provide water to people outside of cities, they should rely on pumps and buckets.

I'm sure I saw that a pacer vehicle costs £2000 per annum to lease (without maintenance costs). That suggests that around half a million will have been paid to ROSCO's over the past twenty or so years per carriage. Perhaps if the ROSCO's coughed up this investment and the Government match funded it, we might have a better case for some new trains.

The transport per head argument is an interesting one. It's absolutely sensible that transport investment overall should be higher in the South East due to there being more people there, but transport investment spend per head should be expected to be a bit more even, as the so many pounds per person in London are compressed into a smaller area.

Investment per head will be higher in London due to the unique congestion problems associated with so many people living in the same place, but should this be by the magnitude we see between London and the North East for example ? This disparity seems a bit big, particularly given the North East will also have unique transport problems associated with people being more spread out.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Cardiff - Taunton (not sure if it is now 143) - would be a real "turn-off" for a genuine Inter City /"International" link ...

 

[180zephyr]

Possibly FGW's attempt at Paignton to Paddington on a 142 (Stopped at Swindon because Control didn't want a 75mph unit clogging the fasts during the am peak!)

Okay, I vote for that. that is just outrageous. trying to get to London on what you would expect to be a 7 car HST and get a cr*py dmu that will get critically overcrowded by taunton!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Cardiff - Taunton (not sure if it is now 143) - would be a real "turn-off" for a genuine Inter City /"International" link ...

I think its 150,153 or 158. I hear theres going to be a 57+mk2 from December on that route.

 

[Statto]

Possibly FGW's attempt at Paignton to Paddington on a 142 (Stopped at Swindon because Control didn't want a 75mph unit clogging the fasts during the am peak!)

That would have been some sight, can imagine the look of passengers faces on a Paddington run, plus passengers trying to find reserved seats. lol

Shame it was cancelled at Swindon, wonder what the thoughts of those boarding at Reading when they saw a 142 turn up instead of the HST.

 

[PHILIPE]

Okay, I vote for that. that is just outrageous. trying to get to London on what you would expect to be a 7 car HST and get a cr*py dmu that will get critically overcrowded by taunton!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I think its 150,153 or 158. I hear theres going to be a 57+mk2 from December on that route.

No 143s on Cardiff to Taunton now but talk of a Loco Hauled Set has all gone quiet lately. Worked by 150, 158/0 double 153s and 150/9 with 153s used for strengthening

 

[deltic08]

Are you being serious? Are you quite sure you understand the reasoning behind the distribution of investment money, population density, the varied employment marker and respective fare levels?

BTW i get a 153/150 to work every day in the south east. Perhaps we should have new trains to?

Explain to me then why London and Southeast rail investment is £2700 per head and in Yorkshire only £305 per head over a similar timescale. What has population density and fare levels got to do with it if it is per head expenditure?

 

[HSTEd]

NO IT DOESN'T AND STOP THESE MALICIOUS COMMENTS.

Even if it was for uneconomic services, the North should have an equal spend per head to the Southeast and London. Services in the South must be heavily subsidised if 9x more is spent per head than in Yorkshire.

There are many types of subsidy.
The South recieves its subsidy in the form of investment capital.
The 'North' recieves its subsidy in the form of operational payments.

Taking capital investment for the metric is disingenous and drastically understates spending in the North.
I might as well take the per-head spend on railway fuel oil in the north and south-east and use it to show that the South-East is massively hard done buy.

And the CBT report is horrifically flawed.
It attempts to weight the operating costs of the railway such that pacers come out far cheaper than Pendolinos.

If you were to do a proper marginal cost analysis where you compared today's costs and revenues with the costs and revenues required if Northern was entirely abolished and the infrastructure was rationalised accordingly you will come out with a subsidy figure even larger than the DfT figure.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Feel free to correct my comparative view upon matters, noting that it appears to be an established fact that the Pacer fleet was introduced on branch lines to save operating costs in comparison to normal DMU stock, but harking back to times historical, it appeared that the railway companies brought railmotor services in to perform the same function.

The difference in comparison perceived by me is that these railmotor services were never ran on services on main lines in the same way that the Pacer fleet have been used.

 

[DarloRich]

Explain to me then why London and Southeast rail investment is £2700 per head and in Yorkshire only £305 per head over a similar timescale. What has population density and fare levels got to do with it if it is per head expenditure?

it really isn’t worth it as you have shown that you are incapable of grasping a concept! :roll:

 

[Sapphire Blue]

York to Paignton may be a bit of a stretch.

 

[starrymarkb]

Okay, I vote for that. that is just outrageous. trying to get to London on what you would expect to be a 7 car HST and get a cr*py dmu that will get critically overcrowded by taunton!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I think its 150,153 or 158. I hear theres going to be a 57+mk2 from December on that route.

That would have been some sight, can imagine the look of passengers faces on a Paddington run, plus passengers trying to find reserved seats. lol

Shame it was cancelled at Swindon, wonder what the thoughts of those boarding at Reading when they saw a 142 turn up instead of the HST.

To be fair it was subbing for a broken down via Bristol HST in the very early morning. Between Exeter and Taunton passengers for London were transferred to the following HST Via Westbury with the 142 mopping up passengers on the Great Way Round

 

[deltic08]

it really isn’t worth it as you have shown that you are incapable of grasping a concept! :roll:

Well if I am, so are dozens of Northern MPs. MPs in the Northeast are spitting blood over it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There are many types of subsidy.
The South recieves its subsidy in the form of investment capital.
The 'North' recieves its subsidy in the form of operational payments.

Taking capital investment for the metric is disingenous and drastically understates spending in the North.
I might as well take the per-head spend on railway fuel oil in the north and south-east and use it to show that the South-East is massively hard done buy.

And the CBT report is horrifically flawed.
It attempts to weight the operating costs of the railway such that pacers come out far cheaper than Pendolinos.

If you were to do a proper marginal cost analysis where you compared today's costs and revenues with the costs and revenues required if Northern was entirely abolished and the infrastructure was rationalised accordingly you will come out with a subsidy figure even larger than the DfT figure.

Whether subsidy is in capital investment or operational payments, the Southeast is nine times more per head than Yorkshire. Non of my critics have given a rational reason for the difference.

 

[DarloRich]

Well if I am, so are dozens of Northern MPs. MPs in the Northeast are spitting blood over it.

Whether subsidy is in capital investment or operational payments, the Southeast is nine times more per head than Yorkshire. Non of my critics have given a rational reason for the difference.

Because it is dog whistle for people like you! Strangely, despite “spitting blood”, at least in public, they haven’t changed anything? Why is that? The sadly missed fact is the chronic lack of a mature approach from northern MPs to making a case for the kind of investment the north badly needs, not only in transport infrastructure.

Having lived in the north east for almost all of my life I am well aware of the problems there and I used to be very similar in approach to you before I moved south and experienced the difference. The reason why investment in the railway infrastructure is higher in the South East is obvious to anyone prepared to look. Your view, that investment should be the same level for every person in the country is frankly naïve. To offer any justification will simply lead to rejection as you are unwilling to consider any approach other than equal for all.

 

[Tetchytyke]

There are more than 3tph at Hebden Bridge , you also have the york services that pass through there .

There are also 4TPH at Todmorden and Rochdale because you have the local Todmorden to Wigan service as well .

That's why I said 3+tph.

Not that the Blackpool North service is a lot of use if you're off to Manchester, as a lot of people from that end of the Calder Valley are.

I didn't realise 142s subbed in Hemel Hempstead.

Yeah, they stand in for 321s all the time.

 

[rishton82]

There was one on the 09:38 Preston York service on 20th September.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Cardiff - Taunton (not sure if it is now 143) - would be a real "turn-off" for a genuine Inter City /"International" link ...

At one point the extension of that service to Paignton was run by a pacer too. Not fun!