Petition for Northern Rail to get more suited rolling stock

[yorksrob]

Well, you pays your money you takes your choice. Eventually our local two cars will need replacing anyway so unless somebody relaxes the rules they're going to have to build them.

 

[pemma]

And the Pacers would be easy to destroy or would Iran would to buy them?

 

[A0wen]

I still think you're under the impression that there's a period when almost all lines can have smaller units than in the morning and evening peak periods. That may be the case with 333s in West Yorkshire, it's also the case with 323s on Manchester to Alderley Edge/Crewe. From experience it's not uncommon for 80-90% of the seats to be taken on a train in the off-peak period. Hyperthetically if you ran single 153s on Chester-Manchester, Manchester-Liverpool and Hazel Grove to Preston at off-peak times instead of 2 car pacers or sprinters you'd have as many crowding problems at off-peak times as at peak times.

If 142s could be the best solution then why is a modified 170 being built for Birmingham, rather than something similar to a 142?

At a guess, the reason for building a modified 170 rather than an all new design similar to a Pacer, is one of cost. The development costs of building the 172s is minimal - they should be fairly reliable and use proven technology.

The difference 25 years ago was BR needed to replace a lot of 1st gen DMUs and fairly quickly. Consequently different designs were tried for different types of route - and you ended up with the Pacers and Sprinters.

Arguably, the "lightweight" solution the Pacers provided has been developed into the PPM which for some uses makes complete sense.

Whilst unpopular, the Pacers do actually do a reasonable job. OK there are overcrowding issues - but that's not confined to Manchester or the North - take a look at the London area where most commuter lines are suffering from overcrowding.

And in terms of rolling stock - some of the oldest and hardest worked units on the network are in use around there (313s, 315s, 317s, 455s) all of which pre-date either the Sprinters or Pacers. And the London area has always had some of the oldest stock in use - in the 00's it was the last of the 'slammers' on the Southern area and the Thumpers, in the 90s it was the 312 and 310s on the GE / LTS and in the 80s there were the EPBs, 117s on the Western, 115s out of Marylebone. The Pacers may be old, but there are older units which are probably in greater need of replacement.

 

[fgwrich]

At a guess, the reason for building a modified 170 rather than an all new design similar to a Pacer, is one of cost. The development costs of building the 172s is minimal - they should be fairly reliable and use proven technology.

The difference 25 years ago was BR needed to replace a lot of 1st gen DMUs and fairly quickly. Consequently different designs were tried for different types of route - and you ended up with the Pacers and Sprinters.

Arguably, the "lightweight" solution the Pacers provided has been developed into the PPM which for some uses makes complete sense.

Whilst unpopular, the Pacers do actually do a reasonable job. OK there are overcrowding issues - but that's not confined to Manchester or the North - take a look at the London area where most commuter lines are suffering from overcrowding.

And in terms of rolling stock - some of the oldest and hardest worked units on the network are in use around there (313s, 315s, 317s, 455s) all of which pre-date either the Sprinters or Pacers. And the London area has always had some of the oldest stock in use - in the 00's it was the last of the 'slammers' on the Southern area and the Thumpers, in the 90s it was the 312 and 310s on the GE / LTS and in the 80s there were the EPBs, 117s on the Western, 115s out of Marylebone. The Pacers may be old, but there are older units which are probably in greater need of replacement.

A0wen - Youve said exactly what ive been feeling ever since the 'pacer hater' threads came up over a month ago...

Now as he said, the Pacers do actually do a reasonable job!

 

[pemma]

And in terms of rolling stock - some of the oldest and hardest worked units on the network are in use around there (313s, 315s, 317s, 455s) all of which pre-date either the Sprinters or Pacers. And the London area has always had some of the oldest stock in use - in the 00's it was the last of the 'slammers' on the Southern area and the Thumpers, in the 90s it was the 312 and 310s on the GE / LTS and in the 80s there were the EPBs, 117s on the Western, 115s out of Marylebone. The Pacers may be old, but there are older units which are probably in greater need of replacement.

You've obviously forgotten that 101s built in 1957 were in service with Regional Railways North West, North Western Trains and then First North Western until 2003. The 101s per-date any unit you've mentioned.

All the units you've listed as still in use are set to be replaced.

The main issue with Pacers is capacity. Standing on Pacers is less safe then on any other unit I have travelled on due to the way they bounce up and down, especially on the ones with bus seats where people frequently fall over as there aren't any high back seats to fall in to.

 

[yorksrob]

And in terms of rolling stock - some of the oldest and hardest worked units on the network are in use around there (313s, 315s, 317s, 455s) all of which pre-date either the Sprinters or Pacers. And the London area has always had some of the oldest stock in use - in the 00's it was the last of the 'slammers' on the Southern area and the Thumpers, in the 90s it was the 312 and 310s on the GE / LTS and in the 80s there were the EPBs, 117s on the Western, 115s out of Marylebone. The Pacers may be old, but there are older units which are probably in greater need of replacement.

I’m always wary of using age alone to assume when a unit should be retired. These units may indeed be older than the Pacers, but are they any more unreliable or difficult to maintain? It’s for the technical experts to come up with a definitive answer on that one but I am aware that electric trains have a reputation of being both more reliable and easier to maintain than diesel ones. Certainly on most other criteria such as passenger comfort and capacity these units are still streets ahead.

That said there doesn’t seem to be much that’s really old on the network (approaching 40 yrears) in terms of shorter distance stock at the moment so any new-build should probably go towards dealing with overcrowding before replacement.

 

[pemma]

Good point. 142s aren't even Northern's oldest unit - 150/1s are older and the even older 507s and 508s in Merseyside provide a much smoother ride than the 142s.