Possible fleet reorganisation for new Northern franchise

[WatcherZero]

Ive heard similar, but the main reason Dft said no was not origin but because Rolling Stock replacement wasnt in Northerns Franchise commitments and Dft were not willing to pay for its introduction or operation or reduce the franchise payments. They would have been cheap but they would still have had higher running costs than Pacers and Dft were penny pinching.

 

[atomicdanny]

Why cant FGW have all the bloody pacers? Why not LM? Why not ATW? Why not Scotrail? Why cant the elcetric trains in the North West be brand new ones? Why cant the Southern types have the second/third/fourth hand stuff?

Why is it we get palmed off with all the crap! It really makes my blood boil

So you would rather the south never had the new trains to replace the older slam door stock (which was for the most part older than the pacers...) then? :roll:

 

[DarloRich]

So you would rather the south never had the new trains to replace the older slam door stock (which was for the most part older than the pacers...) then? :roll:

And which were much better, more comfortable, more popular and much better designed and built than the Pacer will ever be. You should try travelling on one every day. Squeak,bounce squeak, squeel,rock,bounce, squeak,squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel etc ad infinitum!

And clearly you would much rather have the new stock down south. Why should we be the dumping ground for all the sh*t - why cant the south have the crap for a change? Lets transfer a few of those 171's from the Oxted or Marsh link lines and let them have a few pacers for a bit. They are ideal lines for Pacers, yet they have nice new shiny stock! Lets stick a few of the Pacers on LM services, the Marston Vale line or the St Albans or the Coventry-Nuneaton Line line.

See how long it takes for a riot to start! The Pacers would be withdrawn asap! Yet Saltburn-Bishop or Middlesbrough -Newcastle or Leeds- Manchester or Manchester-Liverpool are ok for a Pacer? Anyone see a discrepancy here? Is it just me?

 

[northwichcat]

So you would rather the south never had the new trains to replace the older slam door stock (which was for the most part older than the pacers...) then? :roll:

The North West also had 101s until 2003 and a mk2 set until the end of the FNW franchise. The replacements were 175s but the Welsh Assembly got their paws on them.

The issue with Pacers isn't just their age. Merseyrail have an average fleet age of around 32 years old and their stock is better to ride on than Pacers.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

See how long it takes for a riot to start! The Pacers would be withdrawn asap! Yet Saltburn-Bishop or Middlesbrough -Newcastle or Leeds- Manchester or Manchester-Liverpool are ok for a Pacer? Anyone see a discrepancy here? Is it just me?

And those aren't the worse routes. The following past and present services have seen Pacer operation:
* Holyhead-Manchester
* Manchester Airport to Cleethorphes
* Middlesbrough to Carlisle
* Blackpool to Chester via Stockport
* York to Manchester Airport

 

[sprinterguy]

My argument is not based on North v South, but more a concern that flooding a single operator with the majority of a type of train that is widely accepted to be of a poorer quality than comparable offerings, whilst taking away the better quality trains in exchange, is rather unfair, when spreading the Pacers around the country helps to keep them thinner on the ground and “level the playing field”.

The Slammers on the Southern were a heck of an age when they were withdrawn and were all of a similar vintage, so it’s understandable that there has been an explosion of investment in new trains across the Southern commuter network over the last decade. The sheer number of passengers commuting into London each day requires repeated investment in swathes of new trains, the number of which would be completely superfluous in many other areas of the country.

Given that Pacers and Sprinters are all of a similar age, I hope that later in this decade and into the next the North will see some serious rolling stock investment that mirrors that which has been seen in the south in the last decade, as the Pacers and Sprinters become life expired just as the older Slammers on the Southern did before them.

 

[Nym]

Who needs R+D for a new train to replace pacers and supliment 150s / 156s

Theres a nice lightweight, gearable to 75 or 100mph, built in Derby. Pick up the phone and tell a ROSCO to bloddy well order some...

 

[tom1649]

Does WYPTE still own the 321/9s? Are there plans to sell these?

 

[northwichcat]

Does WYPTE still own the 321/9s? Are there plans to sell these?

Any units WYPTE own are likely to be sold as the government will be cutting funding so they'll probably have no choice but to sell.



Here's some videos for people who don't understand why people are desperate for Pacer replacements to watch and listen to:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJHwbgk3ynU (go to 4:00 in)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Ft-IXn7S4&feature=related

 

[atomicdanny]

And clearly you would much rather have the new stock down south. Why should we be the dumping ground for all the sh*t - why cant the south have the crap for a change? Lets transfer a few of those 171's from the Oxted or Marsh link lines and let them have a few pacers for a bit. They are ideal lines for Pacers, yet they have nice new shiny stock! Lets stick a few of the Pacers on LM services, the Marston Vale line or the St Albans or the Coventry-Nuneaton Line line.

I have been on those pacers (lots of times and think that they are horrible and should be blown up...) so please don't make things up...No offence but southern were forced to have 313s over 377s and took 442s over 460s. Most people in the south moan about the 375s / 377s. but since apparently the whole south has newer stock... so Class 313s, Class 455s, Class 456s, Class 442s, Class 315s, 317s... these aren't exactly newer stock you know.

The slam door stock in the south had to be replaced, and there were a lot more of those than the pacers. I liked the slam door stock far more than the plastic stock there there is now though.

As for the comments for the pacers, trust me a lot of people in the south moan about how bad the Electrostars / Desiros are so I don't think that they would like pacers that much more, . Also I think that Class 376s are worse than pacers though, the seats are practically made of plastic with almost nothing on them!

(it wouldn't work when you replace a 4 car or even 6 car Turbostar (4+2) into a 2 - 3 car pacer though would it... and it wouldn't work either because they don't have the same couplers)

Note: I may live in the south but just don't like it when I'm told that I would rather the newer trains are kept down in the south, I have my own opinions. If I had my way I would replace all the pacers, and the 150s with something like the 172s or similar but then again who would pay for something like that then? (if anyone argues about the newer stock then how is it fare that southeastern gets the highest fare increases in the whole country then... upto 14% and more)

 

[northwichcat]

As for the comments for the pacers, trust me a lot of people in the south moan about how bad the Electrostars / Desiros are so I don't think that they would like pacers that much more,

We have some Desiros in the North as well the problem is they are not suitable for the routes they are used on. 4 hours of a being sat on a seat only slightly softer than a rock, together with a severe shortage of seats is not good. However, if these were used on the commuter runs that Pacers and 150s are used on then a lot of people would be very happy.

 

[jopsuk]

By my reckoning, ignoring the electrics and the 158 fleet, but including the 180s (which are unsuitable in reality), to replace Northern's diesel fleet you're looking at 414 vehicles minimum.

However, I'd advocate further- replace the Pacers (including, yes, the three car), 150s and 153s with 2-car 172s:
138 units (276 vehicles)
156s, 155s with three car:
53 units (159 vehicles)
total: 435 vehicles
Plus, for the 158s and 180s, 3-car 170s:
51 sets, 153 vehicles

All with 377-style gangway end cars?

Off the shelf modular designs, of either already-proven or having-bugs-ironed-out-as-we-speak designs, built in Derby, with increased capacity and a fair amount of parts-similarity across the fleets. And when the electrics come along, don't cascade, strengthen. Make with SDO-operation and platform lengthening.

Plus, perhaps, for the electrics- rather than castoffs, a fleet of 379s both for new services and to replace the 332s (I'm sure somewhere else woudl have them) 321 and 323 fleets.

Fantasy stuff of course- insterad it'll continue to be a dumping ground for a good while yet.

 

[tbtc]

(it wouldn't work when you replace a 4 car or even 6 car Turbostar (4+2) into a 2 - 3 car pacer though would it... and it wouldn't work either because they don't have the same couplers)

Well, the 170s Southern got didn't have the same couplers, but they put "EMU compatible" ones on, and made them 171s. I'm sure they could make Pacers have compatible couplers to the EMUs...

Seriously though, we "age" of stock can be a distraction here. Some stock was built to last longer than others. EMUs are built to last longer than DMUs. So 1980s Pacers need replacing before 1970s EMUs (stick new seats on an old EMU and you have a unit as good as new - whereas with a Pacer you need level floors/ new engines etc etc)

I'd be happy if the Pacer replacement was some electrification and some thirty year old EMUs (from the Thameslink cascade), personally - I'm not insisting The North has brand new trains, just that it has bigger ones able to cope. At the moment only Lancashire is getting electrification in the next decade.

 

[northwichcat]

By my reckoning, ignoring the electrics and the 158 fleet, but including the 180s (which are unsuitable in reality), to replace Northern's diesel fleet you're looking at 414 vehicles minimum.

However, I'd advocate further- replace the Pacers (including, yes, the three car), 150s and 153s with 2-car 172s:
138 units (276 vehicles)
156s, 155s with three car:
53 units (159 vehicles)
total: 435 vehicles
Plus, for the 158s and 180s, 3-car 170s:
51 sets, 153 vehicles

Really Northern needs units that are 3 car, suited to stop-start services as well as being able to run at 100mph on faster sections of track where there are less stops. A larger order matching the specifications of the LM 172 order would be ideal.

 

[tbtc]

The following past and present services have seen Pacer operation:
* Holyhead-Manchester
* Manchester Airport to Cleethorphes
* Middlesbrough to Carlisle
* Blackpool to Chester via Stockport
* York to Manchester Airport

I think we need to be fair here. The routes you are listing may have had Pacers on them in the last decade, but you need a clear distinction between "ordinary/ daily" and "rarely/ emergency".

Taking the same logic, there have been journeys of over 100 miles by Class 150, every type of unit has been on journeys that were unsuitable, pressed into service due to lack of spares etc
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Really Northern needs units that are 3 car, suited to stop-start services as well as being able to run at 100mph on faster sections of track where there are less stops. A larger order matching the specifications of the LM 172 order would be ideal.

I think 100mph is a bit ambitious for the kind of work Northern do - better to concentrate on acceleration/braking (if that means a lower top speed, then so be it)

The units aren't scheduled to travel at high speed, the track certainly isn't suitable (apart from a few stretches of the WCML/ECML which Northern operate over), why 100mph?

Two or three car units would be fine, as long as they have a corridor connection. A two car 172 would still be on a par with a three car 144 anyway, and offer an increase over a 142.

 

[starrymarkb]

And which were much better, more comfortable, more popular and much better designed and built than the Pacer will ever be. You should try travelling on one every day. Squeak,bounce squeak, squeel,rock,bounce, squeak,squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel etc ad infinitum!

And clearly you would much rather have the new stock down south. Why should we be the dumping ground for all the sh*t - why cant the south have the crap for a change? Lets transfer a few of those 171's from the Oxted or Marsh link lines and let them have a few pacers for a bit. They are ideal lines for Pacers, yet they have nice new shiny stock! Lets stick a few of the Pacers on LM services, the Marston Vale line or the St Albans or the Coventry-Nuneaton Line line.

See how long it takes for a riot to start! The Pacers would be withdrawn asap! Yet Saltburn-Bishop or Middlesbrough -Newcastle or Leeds- Manchester or Manchester-Liverpool are ok for a Pacer? Anyone see a discrepancy here? Is it just me?

There is no conspiracy - though you are sounding suspiciously like M.Bell of Middlesborough - Should HS2 have a megastation at Middlesborough? Should cities in the North and Midlands merge into 'Ringby' to challenge London dominance.

Alternativly you could just remember that the Pacers are going to be replaced before the current stock in the South which was replaced when older then the pacers.

313s are the oldest stock in service - those don't come futher north then Peterborough and arn't going anywhere soon.

If stock was being replaced on basis of age 313s and HSTs would come before Pacers.

 

[tbtc]

313s are the oldest stock in service - those don't come futher north then Peterborough and arn't going anywhere soon

Honestly, I'd rather have a 313 than a Pacer

 

[Failed Unit]

Honestly, I'd rather have a 313 than a Pacer

But the 314s are not much younger and they are north of Peterborough as are the 507/508 (not sure on the age but they are PEPs)

Age is not the important is quality that matters, hence why people are happier to see a HST on XC rather than a new Voyager (unless they smile because they think they may get a seat )

 

[ainsworth74]

There is no conspiracy - though you are sounding suspiciously like M.Bell of Middlesborough - Should HS2 have a megastation at Middlesborough?

Well can't say I'd complain if HS2 did run to Middlesbrough

As has been pointed out yes 313s and their ilk are older than a Pacer, but they are still a superior train to said Pacer and being EMU's they have a longer intended service life anyway so it is natural that they would be replaced after shorter lived DMUs. Also as Failed Unit points out quality is important as well, whilst I've not travelled on a 313 before I'd be willing to put a small wager on it providing a better ride and experience than a Pacer.

 

[northwichcat]

313s are the oldest stock in service - those don't come futher north then Peterborough and arn't going anywhere soon.

If stock was being replaced on basis of age 313s and HSTs would come before Pacers.

As I pointed out above 507s provide much better ride quality than 142s despite 507s being 7 years older. 313s are basically a slightly older dual voltage version of the 507s.

The life expectancy for an EMU is around 10 years longer than a DMU meaning the 142s and 150s should be replaced a couple of years before the 313s.

The 313s at least have 2+2 high back seating and air conditioning. The only air conditioning on a Pacer is the doors which don't close properly.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Lets face it, as a British person, I hang my head in shame when I think about the fact that we ever had pacers anywhere in Britain.

I have travelled on Pacers quite a few times. I honestly prefer them to brand new 378s though because these have ALL seats with their backs to the windows (i.e. facing inwards) so why bother with windows on them. How many brand new trains dont have toilets by the way ?. Makes me think that 378s (or a diesel variant) would be the replacement for pacers. They are awful for journeys from West Croydon to Canary wharf (about one hour) and, despite it being a new service, I have failed to get on them in the evening rush "hour".

The reason we are stuck with the pacers, I suspect, is that they are cheap to run, not very old and any replacemenmt will have to be cheap to build. If the feelings of the passengers really mattered then there would be nicer, longer and more frequent trains everywhere in Britain. Oh and more lines.

The way to eradicate pacers is to electrify enough routes that can justify (hopefully) electrification so that the cascaded 150s-170s can replace pacers. A second hand sprinter is hopefully cheaper to rent and better than a replacement pacer. In reality electrification wont happen fast enough and/or demand will continue to grow. Thus the pacers will soldier on for the un-forceable future.

Pacers would cause problems on the Southern as a lot of the 171s work through to London bridge and a slower train would slaughter line capacity. I can see the point in saving money by giving depots fewer types of train to support but this gets hard to bear when there are so many unloved pacers to find a home for !.

 

[Z12XE]

Cant have those things running about down south now can we. Just give them to the dirty northern monkeys

Just 4 posts in and it managed the subject managed to move onto North/South issues.

New record needed me thinks

 

[Failed Unit]

The 313s at least have 2+2 high back seating and air conditioning. The only air conditioning on a Pacer is the doors which don't close properly.

The 313s isn't much better - hopper vents However unlike the Pacer they do keep warm in the winter or during gales!

 

[northwichcat]

Taking the same logic, there have been journeys of over 100 miles by Class 150, every type of unit has been on journeys that were unsuitable, pressed into service due to lack of spares etc

Scarborough to Holyhead used to be a booked for 6 car 150s.

I think 100mph is a bit ambitious for the kind of work Northern do - better to concentrate on acceleration/braking (if that means a lower top speed, then so be it)

The units aren't scheduled to travel at high speed, the track certainly isn't suitable (apart from a few stretches of the WCML/ECML which Northern operate over), why 100mph?

Maybe you should look at what happened when Northern used 142s to fill in for a 323 shortage between Stockport and Manchester. The services were timetabled to take 3 minutes longer and yet they delayed following trains because they didn't clear Stockport-Manchester fast enough.

Considering there are pathing problems over the Stockport viaduct why shouldn't all diesels between Stockport and Manchester be 100mph stock?

Two or three car units would be fine, as long as they have a corridor connection. A two car 172 would still be on a par with a three car 144 anyway, and offer an increase over a 142.

If you didn't have 3 car units you'd need a 6 car 172 to replace a 4 car 156 or 180 in terms of capacity when a 5 car 172 could do the same job.

 

[Failed Unit]

Considering there are pathing problems over the Stockport viaduct why shouldn't all diesels between Stockport and Manchester be 100mph stock?

I thought that the 323s were 75mph.

Anyway doesn't alter my next point, 75mph is good enough if the gearing is right. To me that would be more important 75mph with good start stop times rather than top speed! The 158s are slow than the 156s in Scotland on some routes for this reason the 158s never use the top speed and the 156s can beat them off the blocks.

 

[northwichcat]

I thought that the 323s were 75mph.

No they're 90mph.

Anyway doesn't alter my next point, 75mph is good enough if the gearing is right. To me that would be more important 75mph with good start stop times rather than top speed! The 158s are slow than the 156s in Scotland on some routes for this reason the 158s never use the top speed and the 156s can beat them off the blocks.

But aren't the non-London Overground 172s going to get the best of both worlds - fast acceleration and 100mph top speed?

 

[Failed Unit]

No they're 90mph.



But aren't the non-London Overground 172s going to get the best of both worlds - fast acceleration and 100mph top speed?

There is always a comprimise. But remember that both LM an Chiltern have long stretches where they can use that top speed. The Hereford route would probably get in the way if they were not 100mph whereas Northern really have very small number of routes where 100mph running is need that are not going to be electrified anyway (or have 158s aready)

 

[northwichcat]

There is always a comprimise. But remember that both LM an Chiltern have long stretches where they can use that top speed. The Hereford route would probably get in the way if they were not 100mph whereas Northern really have very small number of routes where 100mph running is need that are not going to be electrified anyway (or have 158s aready)

The following routes are ones I can think of which have sections of line where they could exceed 75mph and aren't going to be electrified and use 75mph DMUs:
1. Manchester to Chester via Altrincham
2. Buxton to Manchester
3. Manchester Vic to Huddersfield
4. Huddersfield to Leeds
5. Wakefield to Leeds via Huddersfield*
6. Manchester Airport to Southport
7. Manchester Vic to Southport
8. Manchester Vic to Leeds (multiple routes)*
9. Leeds to Sheffield*
10. Adwick to Lincoln
11. Sheffield to Hull*
12. Carlisle/Barrow to Lancaster/Preston

* = does see 158s but also sees 75mph units like 144s and 155s.

Note: no 158s will be displaced by electrification as they are not used on North West routes.

 

[Failed Unit]

But they would cost a lot of money to upgrade for what timesaving? Take the Lincoln route yes you could upgrade to 100mph but there is not a single stretch where the distances between stations are more than 10 miles. A high accelerating DMU is what is needed for that route. I think many of the others you mention are the same unless an express service happens. Many of the routes you mention are sub 75mph!

 

[northwichcat]

But they would cost a lot of money to upgrade for what timesaving? Take the Lincoln route yes you could upgrade to 100mph but there is not a single stretch where the distances between stations are more than 10 miles. A high accelerating DMU is what is needed for that route. I think many of the others you mention are the same unless an express service happens. Many of the routes you mention are sub 75mph!

AFAIK all the routes I listed have at least part or all of the line is faster than 75mph some are even 110mph or 125mph. Yes there are parts that are below 75mph, for instance, Manchester-Chester via Altrincham is 15mph round the sharp bend at Skeleton Junction (if a Pacer did it any faster the passengers would be deaf from the squealing.) However, it's mainly 75mph or faster between there and Manchester Piccadilly, approximately 25 minutes journey time with 75mph stock and only one intermediate station.

I'm not talking about upgrading lines. However, I'm aware many lines could have the line speed raised at minimal or virtually no cost and the only reason they haven't is because most of the stock that travels on them has a 75mph top speed.

Also remember higher train speeds could prove very useful for early morning ECS runs especially where there aren't that many 75mph paths available.

 

[Failed Unit]

I am not so sure. Look at Cleethorpes - Manchester airport 90mph stock for years and heavy freight. The have not upgraded it. Not saying it should not be done it is just any line speed improvements to regional services are low priority.

I know saving time can be very useful on diagrams. Lincoln - Sheffield is the only line listed I know well and on the faster sections (Doncaster - alwick) the stops are too frequent to get above 75mph. On the Lincoln - Retford section I don't think 75mph is even possible.

Remember for a 30 mile non-stop journey the difference is less than 6 minutes between 100mph and 75mph providing the units can keep to the top speed. Not many northern routes operate non-stop for that distance.