• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Pacers off the rails

Status
Not open for further replies.

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
39,247
Location
Yorks
I hope that when they finally go the replacment isn't just more 2car units with a massive bog and bike space taking up most of one vehicle!

It'll be either that or (heaven forbid) trams with no toilet at all I'm afraid.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
974
Location
Blackpool south Shore
It'll be either that or (heaven forbid) trams with no toilet at all I'm afraid.

According to DDA rules in future
A train with no toilets is legal :(
A train with only a standard toilet/s is illegal.
A train with a ballroom size bog suitable for wheelchairs is legal.
They should have a warning in the timetable if there is no bog, to avoid drinking a large coffee before departure!
If I had a choice of a new train with no toilet, or a Pacer with toilet, it would be a Pacer for me every time!
I assume BOJ for a toilet stop would be ok?
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
According to DDA rules in future
A train with no toilets is legal :(
A train with only a standard toilet/s is illegal.
A train with a ballroom size bog suitable for wheelchairs is legal.
They should have a warning in the timetable if there is no bog, to avoid drinking a large coffee before departure!
If I had a choice of a new train with no toilet, or a Pacer with toilet, it would be a Pacer for me every time!
I assume BOJ for a toilet stop would be ok?

A train with no toilet should only be used on lines with a frequent services where the main stations en route have a toilet.

If there's a train every 5 minutes, alighting at a station with a toilet and boarding the next train won't cause much of a delay. Now imagine if one station on the Hope Valley line had a toilet and there were no toilets on board, you could add 2 hours to your journey time if you needed the toilet!

A 'common sense' exemption order can be granted by the secretary of state for transport. This could be to allow use of a train with a toilet but no DDA toilet on a metro style service only advertised as not having toilets or if a new build of train is recalled for safety reasons to allow non-accessible trains to fill in for the shortage.
 

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
The Pacers actually also look like they would be amazing for disability if the platforms were rectified so following these renovations, the Island Line 1938s can go back to London to work heritage and Pacers take over after a big renovation (provided it's cost efficient) and maybe they could start an Isle of Man line...

Sorry but once again there are some serious flaws here. Never mind the IL being electrified, hence the 1938 Stock running on it - the Ryde tunnel is too low for most stock to fit through it. This is why ex-LUL stock is used, and why it will remain this way. They are thought to be hoping for 1973 Stock when that becomes available (someone else will surely be able to confirm/deny this).
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,561
Location
UK
Sorry but once again there are some serious flaws here. Never mind the IL being electrified, hence the 1938 Stock running on it - the Ryde tunnel is too low for most stock to fit through it. This is why ex-LUL stock is used, and why it will remain this way. They are thought to be hoping for 1973 Stock when that becomes available (someone else will surely be able to confirm/deny this).

Thanking about it, the 1981 stock could have been perfect for the island line....
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
The Pacers actually also look like they would be amazing for disability if the platforms were rectified so following these renovations, the Island Line 1938s can go back to London to work heritage and Pacers take over after a big renovation (provided it's cost efficient) and maybe they could start an Isle of Man line...

So spend millions of pounds rebuilding platforms to suit Pacers when they are pretty much life expired and unsuitable for most services when the millions of pounds could be used to buy new suitable accessible stock.

You do realise that accessibility is not simply about loading and unloading a wheelchair. The double step on a Pacer is also an issue.
 

VTPreston_Tez

Member
Joined
26 Jan 2012
Messages
1,159
Location
Preston
Sorry but once again there are some serious flaws here. Never mind the IL being electrified, hence the 1938 Stock running on it - the Ryde tunnel is too low for most stock to fit through it. This is why ex-LUL stock is used, and why it will remain this way. They are thought to be hoping for 1973 Stock when that becomes available (someone else will surely be able to confirm/deny this).

I've heard about that. I forgot about the tunnel and wouldn't support electrification, that's why I chose pacers.
When I also look at the double step, I feel lucky that I have only rode ones with what I deem step-free to the platform (at Preston and Burnley Barracks anyway)
It has minimal potential but even that is a problem with that painstaking tunnel. I think I mentioned the lack of potential but if I didn't, that's where the problem lies in the Island Pacer idea.
Surely there will be a use somewhere, maybe summer on the Cumbrian Coastliner could warrant one or two?
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
I feel lucky that I have only rode ones with what I deem step-free to the platform

But it's still not step free access between the platform and the passenger saloon.

Surely there will be a use somewhere, maybe summer on the Cumbrian Coastliner could warrant one or two?

There's only two viable options for the long term future of Pacers:
1. Heritage/Preserved Lines.
2. Export.
 

talltim

Established Member
Joined
17 Jan 2010
Messages
2,454
DDA compliant!!
I hope some dispensation will be given, so as not to cause a shortage of Rolling stock.
Probably cheaper to pay for taxis to ferry the wheelchair users around, and keep 'em Pacers running!!
Better still build a load of new stock!

They wouldn't be able to be DDA compliant because there isn't room for a disabled toilet. Taxis don't have toilets. How would that be a proper solution?
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
They wouldn't be able to be DDA compliant because there isn't room for a disabled toilet.

If you were to look at putting an accessible toilet in a Pacer it would need to be at the front or back of the train, so you're adding a lot of expense to simply change the location of the toilet - never mind actually fitting an accessible toilet.

Taxis don't have toilets. How would that be a proper solution?

A taxi could stop at a public toilet en route though. Not that the taxi driver would be too impressed with loading and off-loading a disabled passenger twice.
 

VTPreston_Tez

Member
Joined
26 Jan 2012
Messages
1,159
Location
Preston
But it's still not step free access between the platform and the passenger saloon.

I've never seen these steps.

There's only two viable options for the long term future of Pacers:
1. Heritage/Preserved Lines.
2. Export.

In the future, that would be true. It seems only fair but then again considering Northern own a bunch of Pacers, you don't know what to expect. (I tend to make my ideas Northern-like when they're not viable)
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
I've never seen these steps.

You must use the step without noticing as you'd go up or down one every time you board or alight a Pacer.



considering Northern own a bunch of Pacers, you don't know what to expect.

Northern Rail don't own a single train. They are leasing Pacers off a leasing company called Angel Trains until the end of the franchise.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,591
Location
Glasgow
Well, stock without toilets is hardly uncommon on some shorter routes, is it? None of LU's stock has toilets, and neither do the Merseyrail 507s/508s. If you needed to go to the toilet on the latter, you'd have to get off and wait up to 15 or possibly 30 minutes to get back on.

There aren't always going to be toilets everywhere - I think you have to be realistic. You can go for quite some distance on a motorway or primary A road without seeing toilet facilities.

I certainly think more toilet facilities is a good thing, but I don't think we should go over-the-top about these things.
 

Anon Mouse

Established Member
Joined
20 Mar 2011
Messages
1,274
Well, stock without toilets is hardly uncommon on some shorter routes, is it? None of LU's stock has toilets, and neither do the Merseyrail 507s/508s. If you needed to go to the toilet on the latter, you'd have to get off and wait up to 15 or possibly 30 minutes to get back on.

There aren't always going to be toilets everywhere - I think you have to be realistic. You can go for some distance on a motorway without seeing toilet facilities.

or the passengers can do what the dirty git at rush hour was doing at Gateshead Stadium under the ramp and get your ding dong out and slash on the platform <D

Pity he couldnt do it on the Merseyrail and get his todger zapped
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,591
Location
Glasgow
or the passengers can do what the dirty git at rush hour was doing at Gateshead Stadium under the ramp and get your ding dong out and slash on the platform <D

Pity he couldnt do it on the Merseyrail and get his todger zapped

Well quite, but there's a reason why metros/trams/buses/urban trains don't have toilets, because they would get wrecked!

The answer to the problem is clear: www.railway-technology.com/news/newsdutch-national-railways-to-introduce-bag-toilets/:lol:
 

Anon Mouse

Established Member
Joined
20 Mar 2011
Messages
1,274
Well quite, but there's a reason why metros/trams/buses/urban trains don't have toilets, because they would get wrecked!

you are 100% correct of course, I can just imagine the state a toilet on the Metro would end up in although the toilets on the Pacers Northern use are normally acceptable (can't say the same for their 156's mind)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm surprised TOC's here have not mooted removing toilets to get more bums on seats and replace them with a stock of those bags in the emergency tool cupbards. I'm also surprised Ryanair have not looked into them (charging them 5 euros each of course)
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,591
Location
Glasgow
I'm surprised TOC's here have not mooted removing toilets to get more bums on seats and replace them with a stock of those bags in the emergency tool cupbards. I'm also surprised Ryanair have not looked into them (charging them 5 euros each of course)

CrossCountry could certainly get some more seats in by removing all but one of those cavernous disabled toilets that they currently have in each Voyager carriage. Then replace them by stocking some Travel John bags just in case the one toilet fails!
 

Anon Mouse

Established Member
Joined
20 Mar 2011
Messages
1,274
CrossCountry could certainly get some more seats in by removing all but one of those cavernous disabled toilets that they currently have in each Voyager carriage. Then stock some Travel John bags just in case!

never say never! :lol:
 

VTPreston_Tez

Member
Joined
26 Jan 2012
Messages
1,159
Location
Preston
You must use the step without noticing as you'd go up or down one every time you board or alight a Pacer.

I actually haven't!

Northern Rail don't own a single train. They are leasing Pacers off a leasing company called Angel Trains until the end of the franchise.

Oh right, thanks. Maybe Angel Trains could perform the upgrades and do swapsies then if such a thing is needed? (I think it's all fine for now)
 

Anon Mouse

Established Member
Joined
20 Mar 2011
Messages
1,274
I actually haven't!



Oh right, thanks. Maybe Angel Trains could perform the upgrades and do swapsies then if such a thing is needed? (I think it's all fine for now)

Swapsies? lol its not a 00 layout! :lol:

Mind you maybe they should swap some 14x's for 159's to give Northern some comfort and SWT the 'pleasure' of Pacers! :lol:
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
neither do the Merseyrail 507s/508s. If you needed to go to the toilet on the latter, you'd have to get off and wait up to 15 or possibly 30 minutes to get back on.

The weekday daytime frequency is now 15 minutes services on all but the Ellesmere Port service. Some of the intermediate stations on the Wirral get a much higher frequency to Liverpool given that a few different services stop at the same stations.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
39,247
Location
Yorks
Well, stock without toilets is hardly uncommon on some shorter routes, is it? None of LU's stock has toilets, and neither do the Merseyrail 507s/508s. If you needed to go to the toilet on the latter, you'd have to get off and wait up to 15 or possibly 30 minutes to get back on.

There aren't always going to be toilets everywhere - I think you have to be realistic. You can go for quite some distance on a motorway or primary A road without seeing toilet facilities.

I certainly think more toilet facilities is a good thing, but I don't think we should go over-the-top about these things.

You do get the benefit of greater operating flexibility with toilets though. For example, Networkers seem to get further out than 455's which don't have toilets.

Infact it used to fill me with rage when South Western went through a phase of putting 455's on weekend Reading services, particularly when there were perfectly good VEP's in the sidings. (used to irritate a friend of mine as well due to the lack of toilets and he only lives in Twickenham).
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
CrossCountry could certainly get some more seats in by removing all but one of those cavernous disabled toilets
I seem to remember that they wanted to but were unable to due to the structure of the train. I'm also not sure you'd be able to remove all except one as I'm not sure if there is a requirement for there to be a disabled toilet in First Class. If there is then you'd need to keep two of them.
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
11,072
Location
Macclesfield
I seem to remember that they wanted to but were unable to due to the structure of the train. I'm also not sure you'd be able to remove all except one as I'm not sure if there is a requirement for there to be a disabled toilet in First Class. If there is then you'd need to keep two of them.
An article in Modern Railways contemporary with the construction of the Voyagers; so in about 2000-2001; stated that the decision to install disabled accessible toilets throughout the train was solely on grounds of cost: It saved money only installing one type of toilet rather than having to create a design of standard "cupboard" style loo as well.

I suppose it might be possible to refit the Voyagers so that they just have disabled toilets in the driving vehicles, so that there would be one for first class and one for standard class. This is the arrangement that EMTs' Meridians are fitted with, although they do have smaller toilets in some of the intermediate vehicles. At the very least, you could use the space freed up to re-install a proper shop and buffet counter on the Crosscountry units even if no more seats are added due to the lack of additional windows.

The 180s seem to get by just fine with only one disabled toilet (In one of the driving vehicles), and even EMTs' seven carriage 222s only have two as I mentioned above.
 

Crimson_Quiff

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2011
Messages
406
Location
Mount Dubious
I went for a bash on the 142s yesterday, not had a good old Pacer bash in while! The last proper one I did was in early 2012, then the trams in Blackpool restarted and that kind of took priority with them being in their last year.
Yesterday, I got to experience what I first loved about the 142s and that is the bouncing beat of the short length jointed rail! Mainly on the Preston-Ormskirk branch. The Southport line is still short length in places but the ride on 142057+142033 yesterday was rubbish as we were riding the yellows. So the journey was rather slow up to about Parbold then it were flat out!

The opinion of 'rubbish ride' etc, agreed they are old and falling to bits! Plus they were never built to conform to the nice ride everyone craves, but from an enthusiasts point of view I love their character. You don't get that with most modern trains. It's as if modern units are built on a convayor belt, lined up and made to work and look the same.
Nah, sorry but for me you just can't beat riding on the old bouncy 'rubbish' pacers! ;) I am blessed to have them on my local line so I get to go from A to B on them as well as purposly going out for a bash!

Despite everything I have said about the good points, I would say withdraw them and put them out of their misery. They are frowned upon by many so I say withdraw them and let the people have what they want. Leave the Pacers to those who appreciate them, in Preservation.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
27,803
Location
Redcar
An article in Modern Railways contemporary with the construction of the Voyagers; so in about 2000-2001; stated that the decision to install disabled accessible toilets throughout the train was solely on grounds of cost: It saved money only installing one type of toilet rather than having to create a design of standard "cupboard" style loo as well.

I'm sure Roger Ford said at around that time in his column in Modern Railways that the reason for so many toilets is that Virgin planned on having three classes with each therefore requiring a disabled toilet. However by the time they changed their minds the construction was already under way and the costs of changing the design mid-construction would have been prohibitive.
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,693
Location
Northwich
I'm sure Roger Ford said at around that time in his column in Modern Railways that the reason for so many toilets is that Virgin planned on having three classes

But there are 3 classes:
1. First Class
2. Standard Class with view.
3. Standard Class without view.
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
11,072
Location
Macclesfield
I'm sure Roger Ford said at around that time in his column in Modern Railways that the reason for so many toilets is that Virgin planned on having three classes with each therefore requiring a disabled toilet. However by the time they changed their minds the construction was already under way and the costs of changing the design mid-construction would have been prohibitive.
That's probably a more accurate analysis of the reasons behind it. That doesn't explain why a 221 has four though, so it's probably a combination of both sets of factors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top