Pace Yourself - photos of the final(?) Pacer countdown

[DavidLong]

Some snaps taken today at Hag Fold station in Atherton while out to photograph the Wilton to Knowsley binliner*

 

142034 at 13.54 on the 13.15 Kirkby to Manchester Victoria

 

 

Then 142066 and 142014 at 14.08 on the 13.36 Manchester Victoria to Wigan Wallgate

 

 

 

David

 

* https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/106139-a-working-from-knowsley-freight-terminal-to-wilton-flt-on-real-time-trains/page/2/

 

[mpb56125]

Poster in Sofia, Bulgaria taken in October 2015. Same poster was still up in October 2018.

 

Mark

 

[YesTor]

Looking at all of these great photos and why am I suddenly feeling all gooey over Pacers?     

 

 

Edited April 16, 2019 by YesTor

[eastwestdivide]

11 hours ago, YesTor said:

Looking at all of these great photos and why am I suddenly feeling all gooey over Pacers?     

 

Possibly because you're only looking at photos, and not actually travelling in a 142 with a leaky roof, deafeningly squealing wheels and a light fitting held on by duct tape? Only a theory.

[Reorte]

11 minutes ago, eastwestdivide said:

Possibly because you're only looking at photos, and not actually travelling in a 142 with a leaky roof, deafeningly squealing wheels and a light fitting held on by duct tape? Only a theory.

I wouldn't want to travel on them for all that much of a distance, or regularly, but in a time where there's a tendency to polish everything too smooth I like the occasional bit of their rough and ready nature.

[60091]

Newcastle April 12th..

142084 departs for Middlesbrough at 12 41 with a service from Hexham.

 

142091 stands at platform 1

 

...and one from the archives

142093 at Carlisle. 11th March 2010. The last 142 in the old Arriva livery?

 

[31A]

Yes I believe so.  I took this picture of it at York on 27th March 2010; that was the reason I took it.  Sorry it's not a very good picture - taken on a contemporary smart phone!

 

[eastwestdivide]

A couple of days out over the Easter weekend...

 

First, to Knaresborough via York, outward using the twice-a-day Sheffield-Pontefract Baghill-York service, a 2-car 144, reasonably well filled with York day trippers from S Yorks:

 

I sat next to the doors at the inner end of the unit. Ride could have been worse, a few bad lurches at speed, but it was noticeable how smooth the subsequent 150 (noisy) and the return 170 (quiet as the grave) were between York-Knaresborough, even over a section of jointed track near Poppleton which would have had a Pacer nodding like the dog in those car insurance adverts.

 

Dual-purpose sign on the door. Mind the gap between the train and the platform, but the sun also showed the gap under the doors where a howling gale comes in:

 

Next day, Rotherham-Leeds on the Dearne Valley stopper, 144s both ways.

Again, the ride wasn't too bad apart from over pointwork. However, as my return train pulled out of Leeds, I noticed how quiet it was - the rear coach of the 3-car 144 was without power. So we left Leeds right time, but lost time all the way. The slog up the long hill to the watershed between the Aire and the Calder was pretty painful. The driver stopped briefly near Copley Hill to try and restart the engines, and again at Sandal & Agbrigg. Despite repeated peering underneath and poking at switches, the service lost over 10 minutes on the journey home, which wasn't as bad as I'd feared. At least it was 2 cars powered out of 3, rather than 1 out of 2.

 

That same coach with the engine trouble also had a "non-standard" repair with a bit of plywood:

 

 

 

[Northmoor]

Whether we are developing a rose-tinted nostalgia for these or not, that is the sort of train I would expect to see in some basket case Eastern European or Third World country, not a member of the G7.  At least it's not covered in graffiti.

Thanks Pacer for all you've done, but it's time to go now.

[Market65]

Well, to compare interiors, heres the doors and luggage section of the DMSL car of 142011 on the 17.18 Hull to Bridlington service on Easter Saturday, 20th, April, 2019. I’ll let you make up your own minds on how this one is, but it’s looking passable for a bit longer even if the door controls do not meet current standards. It nodded violently over the pointwork on leaving Hull, but then settled down to a ride which was acceptable.

 

 

 

 

Best regards,

 

Rob.

 

 

[sir douglas]

its really odd to me the way the buttons are positioned away from the doors like that

[eastwestdivide]

9 hours ago, sir douglas said:

its really odd to me the way the buttons are positioned away from the doors like that

The number of times I've shouted down the carriage "press the button!", gesturing towards the buttons. People don't see them when they're standing ready to get off.

[Joseph_Pestell]

4 minutes ago, eastwestdivide said:

The number of times I've shouted down the carriage "press the button!", gesturing towards the buttons. People don't see them when they're standing ready to get off.

 

No matter where you put them, some people won't see them.

 

People often knock on our glazed front door. When I ask them why they didn't ring the bell, they say that they did not see a bell. It's that large brass thing that used to be on a ship.

[eastwestdivide]

35 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

No matter where you put them, some people won't see them.

I know what you mean, but with the 142 door buttons, the decision to mount them facing away from the typical user's location is just poor.

[adb968008]

If a pacer had a plugdoor, that step could become a ramp and thus make them disabled compliant ?

 

just seems odd that one of the most reliable pieces of legacy equipment is being bean canned for a basic reason ? The bit i’m missing is you need a ramp to board any rail equipment from Platform to coach floor level anyway, very little stock exists that doesnt need this... i’m missing something ?

 

ive always liked 142’s myself.

Edited April 23, 2019 by adb968008

[Reorte]

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

If a pacer had a plugdoor, that step could become a ramp and thus make them disabled compliant ?

 

just seems odd that one of the most reliable pieces of legacy equipment is being bean canned for a basic reason ? The bit i’m missing is you need a ramp to board any rail equipment from Platform to coach floor level anyway, very little stock exists that doesnt need this... i’m missing something ?

 

ive always liked 142’s myself.

One was altered (there are some pictures of it in this thread), I suppose it was decided it wasn't worth the expense for trains that most people want to see the back of anyway. Although it's always a bit eye-rolling when still usable things get thrown out due to rule changes.

[Coryton]

On 23/04/2019 at 12:51, Reorte said:

One was altered (there are some pictures of it in this thread), I suppose it was decided it wasn't worth the expense for trains that most people want to see the back of anyway. Although it's always a bit eye-rolling when still usable things get thrown out due to rule changes.

 

I think the political decision that they had to go in the new Northern franchise didn't help.

 

Getting a wheelchair on and off isn't the only problem - they also need an accessible toilet taking up a fairly large chunk of one of the coaches...or of course for the toilet to be removed. (Or maybe locked out of use? Don't know if that makes it OK).

 

Of course there is a bit of a difference between their crash-worthiness and what is required of new trains, though that in itself doesn't seem to be considered a problem.

 

I do wonder how much safer they are than the Mk 1 based units that had to go because they were no longer considered safe enough. 

 

I don't know if they would be permitted to strengthen compliant trains, maybe with the addition of electronic displays but keeping the existing toilet and difficulty of getting wheelchairs on. (Though I'm not sure what that difficulty is - I've seen wheelchairs get on and off Pacers plenty of times using ramps from a station or on board the train).

[Wheatley]

11 hours ago, Coryton said:

 

Getting a wheelchair on and off isn't the only problem - they also need an accessible toilet taking up a fairly large chunk of one of the coaches...or of course for the toilet to be removed. (Or maybe locked out of use? Don't know if that makes it OK).

 

Of course there is a bit of a difference between their crash-worthiness and what is required of new trains, though that in itself doesn't seem to be considered a problem.

 

I do wonder how much safer they are than the Mk 1 based units that had to go because they were no longer considered safe enough. 

 

I don't know if they would be permitted to strengthen compliant trains, maybe with the addition of electronic displays but keeping the existing toilet and difficulty of getting wheelchairs on. (Though I'm not sure what that difficulty is - I've seen wheelchairs get on and off Pacers plenty of times using ramps from a station or on board the train).

 

Getting the wheelchairs on and off isn't the issue, all trains require ramps and there is plenty of room to manouevre once on board a14x provided you get on at the end doors. Low platforms are slightly more faff as you need both parts of the ramp but still do-able. The issue is purely toilets and politics - even on the refurbed units with 2+2 seating you can't get from the wheelchair space to the toilet because the aisles and the toilet doors are too narrow, and the toilet is too small. If you fit a compliant toilet (as on the 144e), you lose half the non-disabled accommodation in that vehicle. Taking the toilet out altogether makes you compliant (if the service isn't provided at all it doesn't need to be accessible) but that is not acceptable either politically or practically - with no toilet on a train full of revellers/football fans you just turn the whole train into a toilet.

 

The 153s are not PRM compliant either (toilets again) and they will be remaining in traffic after Dec18 but only if coupled to a compliant (and gangwayed) 15x.

[Mark Saunders]

10 hours ago, Wheatley said:

 

Getting the wheelchairs on and off isn't the issue, all trains require ramps and there is plenty of room to manouevre once on board a14x provided you get on at the end doors. Low platforms are slightly more faff as you need both parts of the ramp but still do-able. The issue is purely toilets and politics - even on the refurbed units with 2+2 seating you can't get from the wheelchair space to the toilet because the aisles and the toilet doors are too narrow, and the toilet is too small. If you fit a compliant toilet (as on the 144e), you lose half the non-disabled accommodation in that vehicle. Taking the toilet out altogether makes you compliant (if the service isn't provided at all it doesn't need to be accessible) but that is not acceptable either politically or practically - with no toilet on a train full of revellers/football fans you just turn the whole train into a toilet.

 

The 153s are not PRM compliant either (toilets again) and they will be remaining in traffic after Dec18 but only if coupled to a compliant (and gangwayed) 15x.

 

How does Transport for London and Tyne and Wear Metro manage without toilets and never have done so!

[woodenhead]

12 minutes ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

How does Transport for London and Tyne and Wear Metro manage without toilets and never have done so!

Carry this and hope it's not a Number 2

[Market65]

Regarding the Tyne and Wear Metro and Transport for London, I’m wondering how many stations have toilets. Here, in Yorkshire it’s very limited with most of them having no toilets. Therefore, when needed, the toilet on the train must be used. I cannot think of any other way.

The toilet, as stated  before, is very small, just a window long and two seats wide on either a class 142 or 144 unit. Tiny is a much more apt description. So it is a very awkward situation to say the least. So why not have new units instead of the south of England?

We’ve been second  class for far too long. Time to upgrade to first.....

 

Regards,

 

Rob.

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, Market65 said:

So why not have new units instead of the south of England?

We’ve been second  class for far too long. Time to upgrade to first.....

I’m not sure that argument stands up...  313,314,315,455,507/8 are the oldest units on the network... they arent native to Yorkshire, and represent 700 vehicles.

 

Transpeninnes fleet is either new or nearly new.. indeed they are even replacing 7/8 yr old EMUs with even newer ones soon.

 

2019 is unprecedented in the amount of new rolling stock entering the network, with new stock for GA, GWML, ECML, TP, ScR, Northern.  

 

Southern / SWR really hasnt much new to come, the 158’s will get older, and no plans to replace the 455’s, by 2020 most of the passenger network stock will be post 2000 construction.. scary but there it is... 150/156/158 will be “old”, Pendolinos will be amongst the older parts of the “inter city” network, alongside whats left of HSTs.

 

Edited April 25, 2019 by adb968008

[Coryton]

12 hours ago, Wheatley said:

 

Getting the wheelchairs on and off isn't the issue, all trains require ramps and there is plenty of room to manouevre once on board a14x provided you get on at the end doors.

 

I'm not disagreeing, but I've seen it said more than once that Pacers don't allow wheelchair access at some stations (whereas a more modern train would).

 

12 hours ago, Wheatley said:

Taking the toilet out altogether makes you compliant (if the service isn't provided at all it doesn't need to be accessible) but that is not acceptable either politically or practically - with no toilet on a train full of revellers/football fans you just turn the whole train into a toilet.

 

Well maybe....but so far as I know in South Wales the intention is to replace Pacers on some routes with brand new "tram-trains" which don't have toilets. (Although they won't be replaced directly as the new trains won't be delivered before the Pacers have to go.)

 

Maybe it's OK if you get the word "tram" into their name?

 

If toilets and politics are the only issues, I don't understand why Pacers wouldn't be staying in Wales until the new trains come. Unlike the North of England, Pacers haven't been used here as a political football. Now supposedly more stations will be equipped with toilets before the new trains come...but which would be easier - finding replacements for the Pacers for a few years, or getting temporary toilets installed in a few stations?

 

 

[Wheatley]

The only answer I can think of to that is that TFW have made the decision not to specify any requirement for toilets on certain services in their new franchise, and are presumably happy with that. 

 

Where the long ramp is used directly onto the top step on a 14x the higher floor makes the ramp gradient steeper than using the 2 part ramp, but many stations are outside the PRM requirement for ramp gradient anyway, 142 or not. Narrow platforms are more of an issue - a 6ft ramp on a 6ft wide platform leaves no room to manoeuvre but that applies to all units with long ramps. 

[stewartingram]

The pocket map available at all Underground stations, specifies which stations have toilets for public use. They are mainly (if not totally) on the stations above ground. I don't have one to hand so can't take a look. 

 

Stewart