Worst Rolling Stock in UK

[YorkshireBear]

Interesting. But if we are doing a crude comparison with a pacer - the 185 seats (2-2 with decent legroom and tables) are better than 3-2 cramped Merseytravel and bus bench seated pacers (which make up the bulk of the fleet on the Lancashire side of Northern). A 185 offers plenty of grab rails and wide circulation spaces to assist standing passengers. Personally, I haven't noticed much rolling on the 185s (although they do it a bit), but I think everyone notices the loudness, bouncing and shaking of a pacer - the Grindleford Tunnel is an experience!

Oh the bench seating on pacers is terrible, but generally i like them. But the fact that the 185 often makes me feel ill means for me its not a very good train, it is a personal thing i know. I can deal with up and down bouncing just not rolling.

 

[WestCoast]

So, one loco and four coaches is more flexible than two 2-car units. How? The units can run as a 4-car formation or as two 2-car formations, splitting en-route. The loco can only run with the coaches as 4, that is not more flexible. It is also a lot easier for the unit(s) to reverse direction.

I love the old days of loco-haulage and as an enthusiast appreciate those trips I had. But the services are now faster, with shorter turn around times, and more joining/splitting options than before. This is as a result of the units that have replaced them being able to run faster (due to lower axle weights, better acceleration/braking) and also some infrastructure improvements too.

The push-pull loco+double decker stock works well for DB on Regional Express services - very comfortable too!

Although I accept multiple units have many advantages!

 

[d5509]

So, one loco and four coaches is more flexible than two 2-car units. How?

I'm not saying loco hauled/propelled is suitable for everything. Nor am I suggesting shunting loose coaches around!
I meant it's the format that's flexible. That is, the train-set, is a loco(or 2) plus as many coaches of as many types as you want to suit the service.

Effectivelly, this is push-pull operation, semi-permanent formations and perhaps, crucially, some modern passenger locos.

HSTs are effectivelly top-and-tailed Mk3 sets and they have run in several lengths and with various internal layouts over the years.

 

[The Snap]

For me it has to be the Pacer variants (142s etc) and the 156s. I know 156s get a lot of praise from enthusiasts, but I find them particularly scruffy, loud and uncomfortable. The same can be said for the 150s too IMO.

I have always had a fondness of the Pendolinos so I disagree with a lot of you here. I've travelled on them four times in the last month, which was the first time for a good 3 or 4 years. The smoothness of the ride at high speed through the Trent Valley I found particularly impressive yet again, although I did notice a bit of rattling for prolonged periods (I think it was the panels surrounding the lights?), which was a shame. Standard class isn't particularly spacious I agree, hence my Weekend 1st Class upgrade . First Class is great and I found it very pleasant indeed as always.
One thing I would say about the Pendolinos though is the seeming lack of TLC with regards to the interior...7 or 8 years on from their introduction, there's plenty of wear and tear evident (for example, scuffs to the armrest paint work, chipped tables, stains on the carpets etc) which is a shame for such an impressive unit.
Those of you who feel the Pendolinos are claustrophobic...I couldn't disagree more!

Anyhow, each to their own as they say

 

[northwichcat]

Those of you who feel the Pendolinos are claustrophobic...I couldn't disagree more!

When I went on a Pendolino in 2008 for a single Stockport-London journey I finished up with a reserved seat without a window view and it was fairly busy but not overcrowded and it felt claustrophobic. I did a return journey on a Saturday in 2009 between the same points but at a table seat with a window view and the both trains were 2/3 to 3/4s empty and it was a completely different experience - not in the least bit claustrophobic.

 

[The Snap]

When I went on a Pendolino in 2008 for a single Stockport-London journey I finished up with a reserved seat without a window view and it was fairly busy but not overcrowded and it felt claustrophobic. I did a return journey on a Saturday in 2009 between the same points but at a table seat with a window view and the both trains were 2/3 to 3/4s empty and it was a completely different experience - not in the least bit claustrophobic.

I can see where you're coming from. Whilst walking through the train at Piccadilly to find an available seat, I distinctly remember thinking "well there's no way I'm sitting there" whilst walking past the windowless seat you mention!!

Having said that, if you can book online reserving a seat is always best. A trick I've found is to keep pressing F5 when you get to the seat reservation page on Virgin's website until you find a seat you fancy .

 

[northwichcat]

Having said that, if you can book online reserving a seat is always best. A trick I've found is to keep pressing F5 when you get to the seat reservation page on Virgin's website until you find a seat you fancy .

If you tick the box for table seat you usually get allocated a window view and if not as you say refresh and you'll probably get one.

 

[junglejames]

It is a light-hearted comment hinting at an incident that involved no loss of life. I wouldn't make a joke about an incident where somebody was killed.

So, one loco and four coaches is more flexible than two 2-car units. How? The units can run as a 4-car formation or as two 2-car formations, splitting en-route. The loco can only run with the coaches as 4, that is not more flexible. It is also a lot easier for the unit(s) to reverse direction.

I love the old days of loco-haulage and as an enthusiast appreciate those trips I had. But the services are now faster, with shorter turn around times, and more joining/splitting options than before. This is as a result of the units that have replaced them being able to run faster (due to lower axle weights, better acceleration/braking) and also some infrastructure improvements too.

It may be light hearted, but its a joke aimed at a rail crash, in which at some stage during the precedings, the driver of the 87 had god knows what thoughts going through his head. Am I going to get out of this alive? Is the train ahead full of passengers? In which case, my train is probably going to kill most of them. Will there be serious injury or worse to the passengers on my train?

As for loco haulage. Yes, its a lot more flexible. However flexibility is not wanted anymore because its easier and cheaper to just cancel a whole service, instead of just taking a coach out of action and delaying the service by 15mins.

 

[ainsworth74]

As for loco haulage. Yes, its a lot more flexible.

How so? I'm not going to rehash mumrar's comments on flexibility as they are spot on. How on earth can a loco hauled set provide the flexibility of an MU?

 

[sonorguy]

<sigh>

Yet another pacer-bashing thread, dressed up as something else with a clever piece of sophistry in the title, and with the usual comments from people (presumably/hopefully) too young to have any idea of what the world was like in the 1980s, and that pacers very probably saved many lines and services from closure. It is always wrong to view the past from the values and standpoint of the present. The past is a foreign country my friends.

I sure they did save many lines but the fact is that they were introduced on lines and routes where they really had no right to be. Preston to Carlisle via the Furness coast is basically three hours and whilst you'd have had to be insane to do that route, somewhere like Ulverston or Barrow to Carlisle isn't insane but would still come in at 2 hours or so.

I can also remember Carlisle to Sunderland at just over two hours, Morecambe to Leeds is similar and even worse Skipton to Carlisle on one. On a seat taken directly from a bus. There was really no excuse for that.

When I used to travel from Lancaster to Sunderland frequently in the late 80's I would pray for a 101 from Carlisle instead of a 142/2 if it couldn't be a Sprinter.

 

[d5509]

Pacers might be suited to very short feeder lines (like Leland Nationals were good on town services), and being units you can of course couple more together if the loadings look like being high or you want to split the train somewhere. But "can" for operating simplicity doesn't necessarily justify "should" if you want increasing passenger satisfaction and more people travelling by rail.

Does anyone know if any other European country still uses 4 wheel passenger stock outside of tramway or light-rail use? There were some Studenta 4-wheel rail cars running in the in Czech Republic about 15 years ago.

 

[pjh]

I have to say that I dislike travelling on class 142s. But given the political climate of the mid 80's they probably saved much of the network as we know it today especially in the north-east, north-west and south Wales all the victims of London centric polotics
Personally Iam not keen on voyagers and their offspring just feel they are too cramped inside, I think pendolino's are better but not perfect.
I actually like 158's and always happy to travel on one though an ATW one I used recently was very manky inside and out.
My personal Nirvana was 2x24 and 12 Mk1's all the way from Shrewsbury to Stirling in 1977topping Shap and Beatock at little more than walking pace will stay with me forever.

 

[northwichcat]

I have to say that I dislike travelling on class 142s. But given the political climate of the mid 80's they probably saved much of the network as we know it today especially in the north-east, north-west and south Wales all the victims of London centric polotics

How many lines were closed in Cornwall in the 1980s (an area that was supposed to get Pacers but got Sprinters intended for the North instead)? If it's none then why should lines have been closed elsewhere? The North West had 101s up until 2001, so would it have just been a case of a slower withdrawal of 101s had Pacers not been built opposed to the 'closure of lines' that some people think would have happened?

 

[d5509]

How many lines were closed in Cornwall in the 1980s (an area that was supposed to get Pacers but got Sprinters intended for the North instead)? If it's none then why should lines have been closed elsewhere? The North West had 101s up until 2001, so would it have just been a case of a slower withdrawal of 101s had Pacers not been built opposed to the 'closure of lines' that some people think would have happened?

Not sure I quite get that! If Pacers were a cheaper operational option, then transfering them to lines more at risk would help, so perhaps Cornwall wasn't so much at risk - have I misunderstood you?
What I'd like to know is, what are the actual services they did help to save.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Not sure I quite get that! If Pacers were a cheaper operational option, then transfering them to lines more at risk would help, so perhaps Cornwall wasn't so much at risk - have I misunderstood you?
What I'd like to know is, what are the actual services they did help to save.

I think the penistone line was pretty close at one point. Not sure about any others i imagine the NE there might have been a a few.

 

[sprinterguy]

Not sure I quite get that! If Pacers were a cheaper operational option, then transfering them to lines more at risk would help, so perhaps Cornwall wasn't so much at risk - have I misunderstood you?
What I'd like to know is, what are the actual services they did help to save.

It’s not so much that employing Pacers on a particular rural line guaranteed that lines’ continued survival. It’s more the case that the lower operating costs that came from Pacer operation on a number of routes, compared to operating a larger fleet of more expensive Sprinters, reduced the losses made by the Provincial/Regional Railways sector and ensured that line closures were not required in order to get close to making ends meet.

A fleet of Pacers, which were marketed as “Skippers”, were intended for and introduced on the Devon and Cornwall branchlines, but were found to be unsuitable for these lines and as such were transferred away to the north east. IIRC Heritage DMUs had to be reintroduced on these routes to plug the gap for a couple of years until thirty five class 155 Super Sprinter units had been split down into seventy class 153 single car units to allow Sprinter operation of these routes.

 

[northwichcat]

Not sure I quite get that! If Pacers were a cheaper operational option, then transfering them to lines more at risk would help, so perhaps Cornwall wasn't so much at risk - have I misunderstood you?
What I'd like to know is, what are the actual services they did help to save.

Yes you have. Pacers were intended to be used on rural routes in Cornwall and Devon but the curvy track in Cornwall meant that Pacers constantly needed wheels replacing after running Cornish routes so BR banned them from Cornwall because of that and swapped them with a smaller number of 150s in the Newcastle and Manchester areas. It was nothing to do with South West routes being less at risk, if anything it was the opposite as the North got a net gain in units through the cascade.

 

[LouJ]

So, one loco and four coaches is more flexible than two 2-car units. How?

The current fashion for emu operation means that one size fits all. The use of coaches and loco allows total felxibility with train length. Let's take a classic example - Voyagers. If locos and coaches had been used then the extension of these trains from 4 to 6 car would have been very easy. just purchase some new coaches or use existing spare stock. Lets take the Cheltenham Festival - voyagers rammed to capacity - adding a few extra coaches would alleviate this problem. The issue of Voyagers running under the wires could also be elminated with push pull operation and change of motive power en-route. Take an Edinburgh to Penzance service. Easily extended at busy periods of demand plus the opportunity to run relief trains. Quick change of motive power at York to diesel and hey presto we are not running diesel under the wires.

The other issue is extending train lengths. Four car emus can only be 4, 8 or 12 car. Loco hauled stock can be any increment from 1 to maximum platform length. I use London Midland from Stafford to Birmingham New Street with 4-car 350s. I can see a time in the very near fure where a fifth coach would be required. Not possible as we need to justify 8 ... is this flexibility?

Locos can be designed for mixed traffic operation - passenger duties during the day and freight at night - this sounds far more felexible than large fleets of emus standing idle all night.

Regular construction of new coaches would meand they could be cascaded like mu's - but and this is important - there would not be the problem of cascading third rail emus from the south to say local services in Yorkshire - the mtotive power would already be there.

OK there is the argument that having spare stock lying about is inefficient but so what. Railways are there to provide a service and are not the cash cow british governments seem to view them as.

Sadly mu operation has been chosen because it is a cheap option - we all now that cheap does not mean best!

 

[northwichcat]

I think the penistone line was pretty close at one point. Not sure about any others i imagine the NE there might have been a a few.

Penistone and Settle-Carlisle are the only lines I've heard were at risk in the North and Settle-Carlisle didn't get Pacers. The music and ale trains on the Penistone line boosted passenger numbers.

However, my point was if it was a case of Pacers or the lines close as some people make out then why did the Cornish branch lines not all close when Pacers were considered unsuitable for the track?

 

[WelshBluebird]

Time for me to wade in on the pacer debate.
Being from the valleys, I have travelled on pacers for almost my entire life. For the valley lines in south wales, they are fine. I much prefer it when we get a sprinter, but with modern seats a pacer is ok for things like that. Its when they have bench seating they are horrid (luckily ATW have modernised them all).

However, pacers are not ok for longer distances trips like Cardiff to Exeter, or for some rural areas where they are too noisy and too uncomfortable.

I do acknowledge that they saved many routes from closure, but in a time when other parts of the country are getting brand new trains, why oh why can't we have a replacement. Or at least some kind of refurbishment to the ones with bench seats!

 

[Oswyntail]

....However, my point was if it was a case of Pacers or the lines close as some people make out then why did the Cornish branch lines not all close when Pacers were considered unsuitable for the track?

IIRC, the introduction of Pacers meant that passenger numbers increased so it was realised that, with modern, more reliable stock, the lines were indeed viable. Much the same happened (again IIRC) on eg the Ilkley line in the north, which was continually under review if not actual threat until the Pacers came. At that stage, increased passengers justified first the third carriage in the 144s then electrification.

 

[d5509]

Yes you have. Pacers were intended to be used on rural routes in Cornwall and Devon but the curvy track in Cornwall meant that Pacers constantly needed wheels replacing after running Cornish routes so BR banned them from Cornwall because of that and swapped them with a smaller number of 150s in the Newcastle and Manchester areas. It was nothing to do with South West routes being less at risk, if anything it was the opposite as the North got a net gain in units through the cascade.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[phillipsalan09]

My choice has to be the 142 Pacer, the train that should really be a bus....and to top it off you are submitted to the hurrendous incessant screeching noise throughout you're journey!

At least this all ads to their character unlike thes modern eyesores with no character no noise no life and for that matter no anything! Which is why I would probably vote for the electrastar - sub class irrelevant because they are all the same!!

 

[W-on-Sea]

All I have to add is....if you think 142s are bad...do you remember the 141s? (At least they generally only left West Yorkshire very rarely) They really were extremely spartan. And even less of a pleasure to travel on than the 142s. Mostly in Iran now, apparently.

 

[Lampshade]

And even in Iran more than an hour on them is considered "a bit cruel"

 

[LE Greys]

Plain worst - Pacers (they just are)
Worst at doing the job intended - XC Voyagers (too short and cramped, no proper catering)
Worst replacement - 444 for 442 (massive step down in comfort and status, genuine MkIII-derived InterCity stock for a suburban unit with pretensions that has terrible seating)
Worst locally - 313s (nothing really wrong, just old and tired)

 

[sprinterguy]

All I have to add is....if you think 142s are bad...do you remember the 141s? (At least they generally only left West Yorkshire very rarely) They really were extremely spartan. And even less of a pleasure to travel on than the 142s. Mostly in Iran now, apparently.

Yeah the 141s were pretty atrocious. Now that they're gone, it's the 142s that have to shoulder most of the criticism, as no-one can say "ah well, at least they aren't as bad as those 141s". I note that in the same way, the 144s don't seem to be getting as much criticism levelled at them directly, only when Pacers generally are being slagged off.

The Harrogate line has really gone up in the world in the last decade: 141s to 144s to 150s.

 

[WatcherZero]

How Porterbrook describes the 144's in its rolling stock brochure

The newest and best of the “Pacer” railbus series

 

[Lampshade]

They may as well have put:

"Oh good! We've got syphillis, the best of the sexually transmitted diseases" hock:

That said, 144s are nicer to travel on than most of Northern's Sprinter fleet.

 

[prod_pep]

Northern's 150s are awful, especially in their FNW guise. The 150/1s smell, look dank and tired internally with poor choice of decor, while the 150/2s have the additional problem of pitiful legroom. Their ride quality is nothing special, but still greatly better than the 142s which are just dire by today's standards.

Another nomination for worst EMU would be the 319s. Their reliability record, especially when things turn a bit chilly, isn't great, and their FCC interiors are tired. Although FCC's 313s are much older, their interiors are still, for me, much brighter and airy.