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

[Wheatley]

40 minutes ago, 'CHARD said:

 

That meets the required standards, so will be able to remain in service.  It's the only one.

 

2 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Didn't realise it was the only one - looked like an effective piece of work.

 

Although it can technically remain in service it will be going (from Northern at least) along with its bretheren. The 144e conversion was completed by Porterbrook just before the DfT announcement that they were all going, and as that's a franchise commitment it stands. They will all go off lease.

 

I was on it last week. The seats are awful, the disabled loo takes up half the space in the DMSL (Eastwestdivide's top photo shows nearly all of the remaining seats), the ceiling panels are going rusty already and half the swanky LED lights don't work. All the interior fittings are non-standard so you can't rob another one for spares, so I wouldn't be surprised if it went first.   

[4630]

48 minutes ago, 'CHARD said:

 

That meets the required standards, so will be able to remain in service.  It's the only one.

 

10 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Didn't realise it was the only one - looked like an effective piece of work.

 

It was a project by the unit's owner, Porterbrook, to show how the interior of the 144s could be improved and made compliant with accessibility regulations to stay in service beyond 31/12/2019.

 

Here it is at Leeds on 6th August 2015, and badged '144 evolution' all bright and shiny, before re-entry into service with Northern Rail.

 

144012 at Leeds on 6th August 2015 working 3Z01, 09.16 Leeds Neville Hill to Leeds Neville Hill via assorted local lines around West Yorkshire. 

   

[Market65]

The sooner 144012 is withdrawn the better. As stated the seats, in particular, are atrocious. Ironing boards, terrible ironing boards. No matter how I try, I just cannot get comfortable in them. Please withdraw this unit! Today, please!  And it’s just as bad riding as all the others. No better at all. My back cannot take any more.

 

Rob.

[Bucoops]

Wow a polished turd. Can you tell I hate them?

[Reorte]

I don't hate them. There's something almost pleasantly unpolished about bouncing along in one. Just as long as it's only something done infrequently. Very infrequently.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if a few end up rattling up and down preserved lines.

[Steamport Southport]

I love 'em. 

 

Funny that the "new" trains that are replacing them are just as old though, having been built in 1987.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_319

 

Or even older.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_230

 

 

Jason

[31A]

Regarding the comments about the Pacer's ride qualities I have read that the engineers who designed them were told that jointed track would be replaced by CWR in the near future (at that time); now we are in a position where that has come to pass on a large part pf the passenger network (OK I know there are exceptions!), I find the ride on welded track is usually pretty acceptable.  OK perhaps not quite so good over paintwork, e.g, at junctions.  But certain types of much more modern and 'sophisticated' trains seem to give a less comfortable ride (e.g. Voyagers).  Having worked on them as a Guard for six years I have a certain regard for them; they were easy to work on with a good view down the train to see who was getting on an off, easy to walk up and down, and not much to go wrong (especially in comparison with more modern trains full of temperamental computerised electronics).  I much preferred the 144s to 142s, the build quality and finish just seemed so much better, and a 3-car 144 seemed ideal for most of the routes I worked on, with usually plenty of room for everyone.  A pity the 144s seem to be slated for earliest withdrawal.  Nowadays retired, I ride on them as a passenger and prefer them to other kinds of 'bogie' units (especially 150s) for their big windows and good view out.  In this regard, the ones with low backed 'bus seats' are even better; although I must admit the "Merseyrail" ones with plastic 2+3 seating are an abomination!

[Sprintex]

6 hours ago, 4630 said:

There is a rumour that Northern are re-vinyling one of their 142s into a 'heritage' livery for its last year of service.

 

What? Like "Green Line" or something? 

 

 

Paul 

[31A]

A few more of the unwanted and unloved (it seems) 144012 at York in February 2016.  I think it looks quite smart on the outside, but must point out I've not been inside it since it was refurbished.

 

 

[31A]

In 2008, 144014 carried this embellishment next its car number.  I don't think it had anything to do with Abellio (nor with me!).  Selby platform 3:

 

 

 

[31A]

A 142 from an unusual point of view, with a slightly nautical flavour.

 

 

[31A]

Another 142 in a nautical situation, in August 2010; sadly a shadow of its former self.

 

 

[eastwestdivide]

Where are the last two locations? The first one's got me stumped - maybe Selby swing bridge? - and the second probably Heysham?

[31A]

Sorry, I didn't mean it to be a quiz but forgot to put where they were!  Yes, the first is Selby swing bridge, taken from the cabin stairs on an official visit.  I was trying to get both the river and the train into the picture but didn't quite pull it off.  Quite right, the second is at Heysham Harbour.

[4630]

Standing on Brighouse station earlier today to photograph the Preston Docks to Lindsey Oil Refinery 6E32 returning bitumen tanks (70805 - photo on the 'Next Batch of 70s' thread) and 1J13, 11.20 Leeds to Southport, draws into the station with 142041 on the rear.

 

[eastwestdivide]

1 hour ago, 4630 said:

11.20 Leeds to Southport

End to end 2h 43m on that through service, or alternatively, leave Leeds 2 mins earlier at 1118, for an 18-minute connection at Manchester V, to arrive Southport 20 mins before the through service.

Or better still, miss the 1120 at Leeds, and catch the 1150 to Manchester Vic, then a 17 min wait for the very same train that you missed at Leeds!

All because of the slower routing of the 1120 via the Calder Valley rather than Diggle.

[phil-b259]

On 19/02/2019 at 10:58, Market65 said:

 

Sorry but after that abominable trip to York from Hull on those ironing board seats yes! It’s terrible, the seats really hurt my back, and I was walking round York in agony. It’s just not on that such an abomination should be on the rails.

I will never change my mind and I’m not the only one to hate those units.

 

Sorry,

 

Rob.

 

Those 'Ironing board seats' are the new industry standard, as according to the DfT the offer the best protection in the event of a train crash* and are allegedly rated as perfectly comfortable by users.

 

It doesn't matter what you (or others) think - the experts from the DfT have spoken and the seats you so dislike will be fitted to every single new build train and every single refurbished train from now on!

 

If you dislike this then I suggest you get busy writing to your MP / the DfT / Chris Grayling etc and get the Government mandated standards changed

 

Ironically the original seats fitted to the Pacers (which are now non-compliant with the relevant standards) are probably far more comfortable....

 

 

* Given how safe our railways are these days and the non-ocurance of train crashes it does seem rather perverse that the DfT have prioritised this aspect rather than comfort - a measure which surely actually increases the chance of injury given that more than a few folk will decide to abandon the painful (but very safe) train in favour of the much more comfortable (but much more dangerous) motor car. I mean some might think that what with this (plus the continued freeze of fuel duty while putting up train ticket prices above inflation every year) the 'anti-railway' faction within Government are in charge again....

 

 

Edited February 20, 2019 by phil-b259

[Wheatley]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Those 'Ironing board seats' are the new industry standard, as according to the DfT the offer the best protection in the event of a train crash* and are allegedly rated as perfectly comfortable by users.

 

It doesn't matter what you (or others) think - the experts from the DfT have spoken and the seats you so dislike will be fitted to every single new build train and every single refurbished train from now on!

 

 

 

The seats fitted to Northern's 195s and 331s were specced by Northern. The refurb units will get them too eventually rather than just re-covering the originals. 

[phil-b259]

12 minutes ago, Wheatley said:

The seats fitted to Northern's 195s and 331s were specced by Northern. The refurb units will get them too eventually rather than just re-covering the originals. 

 

But Northern can only fit 'approved' seating! - and that restricts them to only a few select designs all of which combine minimal padding and high backs etc.

 

It doesn't matter that its TOCs / leasing companies which actually buy / install the seats - said seats still have to be made in accordance with what the DfT define as acceptable in safety terms - which at the moment prioritises safety in a crash over actual comfort.

 

Yet another example of DfT micromanaging which most folk are blissfully unaware of (and which is not obvious thanks to the use of supposedly 'Independent' organisations like the ORR / RSSB - which are actually nothing of the sort).

 

The fact that the 'approved' seat types are no doubt less vandal proof and cheaper to re-upholster (due to having minimal fabric / padding) is of course a side benefit.

Edited February 20, 2019 by phil-b259

[62613]

4 hours ago, eastwestdivide said:

End to end 2h 43m on that through service, or alternatively, leave Leeds 2 mins earlier at 1118, for an 18-minute connection at Manchester V, to arrive Southport 20 mins before the through service.

Or better still, miss the 1120 at Leeds, and catch the 1150 to Manchester Vic, then a 17 min wait for the very same train that you missed at Leeds!

All because of the slower routing of the 1120 via the Calder Valley rather than Diggle.

Which raises the question: is the service intended for passengers between Leeds and Southport, or, say, Leeds to Brighouse, or Brighouse to Man. Vic. and so on? It looks like using one particular set, or two coupled together, to fulfil two or three services.

[Market65]

Thanks for the informative comments about the ‘new’ seats. I’ve travelled on the refurbished class 158, 158845, which been refurbished with a very slightly thicker padding to those dreaded seats. The seat squabs have a slight bit of a profile to them, and they are overall slightly more bearable than in 144012.

So I suppose we have to grin and bear them for however long until further new regulations come into effect.

 

Regards,

 

Rob.

[Mark Saunders]

Given the amount of  work on the Northern 142’s by the leasing company on floors and suspension I can’t see them being scrapped in the near future!

[Owd Bob]

Went out to my nearest railway line and took some pics' specially for this topic. Can't say i've taken many of these things over the years, i've always ignored them or just taken them for granted. 

Crows Nest Junction, Nr, Wigan. 21-2-19.

 

[Mark Saunders]

5 minutes ago, Owd Bob said:

Went out to my nearest railway line and took some pics' specially for this topic. Can't say i've taken many of these things over the years, i've always ignored them or just taken them for granted. 

Crows Nest Junction, Nr, Wigan. 21-2-19.

 

The same goes for a lot of things especially first generation DMU's!

[eastwestdivide]

54 minutes ago, Owd Bob said:

ignored them or just taken them for granted

...said by nearly every railway photographer as they look back!